> Fortunately, I've been white balancing cameras since 1985-ish. I don't > expect too many problems on that front but I do appreciate the thought > behind the advice.
Grey and white cards are a fully reborn tool in digital camera times indeed. > Where I do expect problems is convincing people to hire > me!!! If it were just your own, exclusive problem, then the rest of us would be enjoying our money at this very moment and not writing to this ( or any ) forum trying to learn more skills. > If you have time, go here: > http://www.e-pixel.co.uk/cinematogaphy/index.htm Great grabshots Shangara. Perhaps you are the one who can solve my million dollars question no one has been able to respond properly : Why is it that images shot on conventional video ( including digital video) have this "domestic" look, this Home video look as compared to film cinematography, and much worse yet, compared to digital photography, in which images look so much like film?? Is it the chip, the processing of the data in the electronics or what?? Digitised 35 or 16mm film does not look like video, it looks like film. I guess I can tell which frames in your site were shot on video, but I can see the search for "cine-like" look in the lighting and filtration ( I have also shot videos , but mostly for low budget fashiony TV commercials, which lend themselves for excess filtering and post processing without any major problem regarding color balance), but when things have to be precise, then the domestic look is quite difficult to remove from video. What is going on here? I have heard of people looking to put CMOS chips, and more recently some are thinking that the Foveon chip may be a whole new revolution in video cameras, will this make a change in the quality of the visuals?? Thanks All the best. Jorge Parra APA/ASMP www.jorgeparra.com =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
