Thread: Be afraid. Be very afraid

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 72
  1. #11  
    Autofocus is for sure one of the first things that will make dsmc2 cameras feel old. I would use it almost all the time if I had it. It would also dictate what lenses I would use etc.

    But I think ACs will not be without work but maybe they will be called focus programers or such in the future. ;) As I think the capabilities of AI driven focus systens can and will go very deep for the professional cinema market. So there will still be need for someone on set to be dedicated to picture focus.

    Touchscreen driven finger point focus with smooth transisions when pointing at a new object etc. When such stuff becomes available then I think people will adapt it and ask for more.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    Shockingly Autofocus is a tool and a quickly advancing one for motion these days. It's honestly not needed for much of my work narrative or otherwise, but I 100% see applications where it shows it's advantages.

    No need to have a war against it. It's been around for a long time and getting better ever 3-9 months or so.
    A while back I did stills with a Century Canon 150-600 Zoom no autofocus for a local footy game. Out of the 300 shots I reckon 3 shots were sharp... so many almost sharp shots. Autofocus is a godsend for stills :)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member AndreeMarkefors's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    815
    Quote Originally Posted by James Falco View Post
    AF as Auto Focus, means the a mechanism is deciding what is the focus.
    That's a really basic way of looking at it.

    In some situations, what you say is true. But with the new AF-technologies you need to think about it more as 'auto focus distance tracking'. What is being tracked (or focused) can be decided by an operator. Sometimes you just want to identify a face on the screen and tell the camera to track that. Or you can have 'live' tools that allow the operator to move the tracking area around the screen in real time with a joystick or similar.

    The problem AF wants to solve is really setting the lens' focus distance correctly. In full auto the camera might want to decide what the relevant focus plane is, but with more sophisticated tools that were developed specifically for film cameras, it's reasonable to assume that the operator controls what's being tracked. Since, you know, the people making the cameras know that's what you might want?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member Bérenger Brillante's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    1,854
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Sauve View Post
    Buying a full frame Nikon Z6 with AF revolutionized my gimbal and handheld shooting on corporate run and gun shoots. Excited to see how far this tech can be pushed.

    Right tools for the job. I group the anti-AF guys with the anti-8K guys. So much to gain from either with the right job.

    I still think compact lightfield tech is coming and will make AF that's any better than what we have now unnecessary (except for live applications).

    Same here. Anybody who have worked with a perfect AF (like the z6) will immediatly get a change of mind.
    AF doesn't mean full AF all the time, but it works 99% of the time and simply turn it off when it's a narrative driven focus.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    I can see this as a tool but also can see plenty of cases where it simply won't work and if you build an environment that relies on AI detection i think most productions will end up a nightmare.

    I'm writing some image processing based around face recognition and deep learning so actually right now i'm seeing the sharp end of that world. And this is being processed on multicore workstations, not low power camera hardware.

    In controlled environments it's fine. Add some smoke or haze into the scene. Some stark lighting where you can only see the glint of an eye. Rapid lighting changes. Fast motion. Oblique angles. Many faces, occlusion, unusual camera angles (upside down, sideways) and watch it all fail. A lot of focus is also about anticipation, moving into focus. Using focus creatively, focusing through reflections, dirty frames - that's the reality of drama production. I think we're a long way off this working in a practical way.

    Now talking heads, interviews and documentary work - sure, i can see those cases it all being invaluable.

    As a layer of information on a screen that could be useful but not actually driving focus. TBH depth information is more useful, or tracking RFID tags in a scene.

    But you're not going to replace a human who you can talk creatively about how to pull focus for certain scenes and dramatic impact.

    My IMHO

    cheers
    Paul
    -------------------
    insta: @paul.inventome
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,184
    Focus-where-you-look would be a neat kind of auto-focus, ie. Track the 'focus-pullers' eyes as they look at the scene on a screen, and translate what they look at into what the camera/lens focuses on. Even better if the tracking can be done by looking at the real-life scene itself instead of a screen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    Autofocus is for sure one of the first things that will make dsmc2 cameras feel old. I would use it almost all the time if I had it. It would also dictate what lenses I would use etc.

    But I think ACs will not be without work but maybe they will be called focus programers or such in the future. ;) As I think the capabilities of AI driven focus systens can and will go very deep for the professional cinema market. So there will still be need for someone on set to be dedicated to picture focus.

    Touchscreen driven finger point focus with smooth transisions when pointing at a new object etc. When such stuff becomes available then I think people will adapt it and ask for more.
    Useless for scripted work.

    No one wil wait on the set for doodling the camera algorythms to mimic a human hand and perfectly adapt to shot rythm and context according to director's intent.


    "Everybody on the set wait 'till I set this thing up".

    /money rolling away, actors stuck in emotion on hold/

    "Thank you bye bye"

    /Enters AC ninja hitting focus without the monitor/


    Also, when you tap on the focus point you are already late.
    Focus pulling is predictive. Focus puller has to follow action, anticipate and adapt in real time. There is no stuff to program, actors, camera and scene change and improvise on the go.

    Eye tracking, cat tracking, whatever tracking is useless if you have a rack focus from eyes to a cat to whatever, exactly at the right moment depending on a/b/c otherwise shot context changes, shot is not editable, shot makes less sense on none at all.
    Analog > Apollo wooden handgrip http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Primers - professional image transformation tools http://omeneo.com/primers

    imdb


    "Como delfines en el fondo del oceano
    volamos por el universo incentivados por la esperanza"

    "L'esperanza", Sven Väth
    "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards"
    Jung/ Carol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    91
    Who should be afraid?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto & Vancouver
    Posts
    3,769
    I'm really interested in and intrigued by the FX9's "nudge" focus. (E.g. if it's buzzed, it auto-corrects to tack.) That's almost more impressive to prioritized faces to me (which has been around since at least the a6300).

    I have a feeling a lot of people poo-pooing on continuous AF haven't actually used it thoroughly (for the most part it's been on consumer mirrorless, not digital cinema cameras). Now that it's making it's way to "real" cameras -- C500, FX9 (hesitant to put Komodo here, because Canon and Sony have been doing it for years and have a dozen cameras/iterations between them) -- I suspect quite a few people to be pleasantly surprised/eat crow.

    I'd also argue that features like this are what's worth upgrading for these days. After a point, resolution and DR spec increases don't add as much value (certainly don't make your job/post any easier or make your work much better). Whereas being able to quick release a 2lbs camera with AF onto a gimbal and have it maintain focus without having to waste time/energy/money setting up, troubleshooting, and powering additional focus/monitoring tools, actually enables production. Or at the very least, speeds it up.

    Just my 2 pennies.
    Last edited by Mike P.; 12-05-2019 at 10:51 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Senior Member Bob Gundu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Toronto, ON Canada
    Posts
    9,904
    Embrace it. Fear not.
    ___________________________

    VFX, Cinematographer, Photographer
    10 frame handles
    Vimeo
    Instagram
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts