วีดีโอ

Turns out that God is the most original content creator.

Less content, more art please

Same

We already have too much content

Very thought provoking

You touched on a point that I've never been able to put into words. I stood in a kitchen looking at a soon to be tiled wall behind the stove. After hearing my request the designer turned to me and explained how I need to think about the art. ( Think about the art? I didn't want to think, I wanted step #3 of a step by step plan how to build cool. Only years later did I realized imagination doesn't work like that ) tHanks for the video.

I find that the current popular forms of media are destructive. I associate the word “content” with these forms: youtube, short-form videos, mini-docs, ted talks, online commentary, etc. As a consumer of these I feel I have never learnt anything, I’ve never been inspired, I feel only that I have been anaesthetised and as you say “sucked in”. That word “consume” says it all. Product, consume, content creation. Such market language, the language of capitalist consumption i.e. don’t live your life just watch this (and the ads). I see the essential difference between art, literature, philosophy, photography, nature (on the one hand), and those more recent forms of content I’m criticising (on the other) as a difference between being active and being passive. I can stare at my phone watching “good” content for hours (years if I’m honest with myself) and I feel I’ve lost brain cells, I’m more stupid, I feel nothing - I don’t care if it’s an apparently informative documentary about black holes. Or I can challenge myself to be present and read 10 pages of a book and in those 10 pages, I learnt more, felt more, thought more than I did with 20 years of online content. Just my 2 cents

Very gentle and inspiring video. Thank you for making this and now I will think about you for a little while when I pay attention to my surroundings. Haha and then someone else will come and inspire me (:

Very interesting, thought provoking, and unexpected content! Hopefully this will inspire me to go finish editing a “how to” video for YT I taped a few weeks ago. And quit consuming so much other YT, lol. Thanks for that message!

No link to the DST You talked about

you lost my attention after 42 seconds bro

Somehow off topic: your video is extremly well crafted! Nice Storytelling underlined by on point b-roll (e.g. the handwritten notes) as well as careful music selection and timing, very good editing! With other words: very inspirational!

Love the video and thanks for sharing your knowledge. So what lenses are your favourite to shoot on?

Your approach to film photography is HYBRID. Not analog. And that's perfectly fine. And I get it, these days, working with colour film in classic way is too cumbersome. But If you really want to unleash your full potential in black & white film photography, you should already have a darkroom with enlarger. You can always scan that wet print later on any $20 home scanner later. Just saying...

I’m from Mississippi too! Great video.

Photography is an art form, and at the end of the day art is subjective. End of story. Great video🙏

Yes ! Sir! Perfect !

Digital files generally look over-sharpened and over-saturated, but these are choices people don't have to make. The most important thing for me, is the outcome is on a tangible, holdable object like a print or a book. Something that doesn't become virtual the moment you scroll off the file. The act of printing feeds back into the taking of a photograph, and the choices we make.

I tested the digital and film quality theory on a trip I took last year. I hauled my film camera and my digital camera with me and I ended up shooting a couple of subjects with both my cameras. I have all Nikon gear so I even used the same lens on both cameras for the test. From a technical standpoint, the digital camera is the clear winner. It’s sharper, I got more details in the highlights and shadows, and there’s very little noise so it looks smooth. HOWEVER, every person I’ve shown the images to - an admittedly small sample size - has preferred the film photo. It’s not technically better, but it has more character. It’s more dramatic. It’s more memorable. Modern-day digital cameras can do some amazing things, but that doesn’t always result in amazing images. Great video!

Its what feels best that matters.. They are both good.

Hi great video. I know it's been awhile but I wanted to know does the display on the bmpcc shows "full 100%" if the NP battery is "full" or does it only show the power available in the bmpcc internal battery and just extends the time? Hope I explained that ok :)

You said a couple of times that once you develop your film you have to scan it anyway. Some of the commenters below me have said the same. My walls are covered with my prints (B&W and color), and, I can assure you not a single one of them has been digitized. I don't own a digital camera (besides my phone, I guess) or even have a way of digitizing my negs (besides sending them to a lab, I guess). There's really no reason to compare digital and film unless one is full digital and one is full analog. Once a negative is digitized it's a digital image. I'm not saying one is better than the other, even though I think you can guess which I prefer. Anyway, you're going to need to find a darkroom to do a fair comparison. Cheers!

It's like comparing watching a TV show on my old 13" color TV vs on my 60" 4k flat screen...

I love what you’re doing. Your hand writing is awesome, andI could watch a stationary a camera channel. lol Great motivation for me, thank you.

Each has their look. But I’m betting with high quality lenses most would get it wrong on print what is what.

Does film look better than digital? Depends who’s looking. Is digital of a higher quality than film? Depends on the qualities you are looking for.

I'm a hobbyist. I grew up with film but we only had point and shoot cameras back then. There were no settings to change other than to turn the flash on or off. I've been shooting digital for a little over 7 years. I would say from a clinical stand point that digital is cleaner and technically looks better. Especially at higher ISO. I took some pictures at a dirt track race back in April. A couple of shots were around 28,500 ISO. After using denoise in Lightroom you can't tell the ISO was anywhere near that high. I was using my z8 and 180-600mm lens. But as good as digital is it still doesn't give you the same look as film. It's the tonality. It has to do with the RGB sensor and filters on it. Fujii cameras have a lot of film simulations put in their cameras but even their photos don't look exactly like the colors in film. I recently got back into shooting film. I've even started developing black and white film and I'm about to start developing color. I just got my kit in the other day. If you want the true film lol you'll have to do your own prints in a dark room with an enlarger. You may not see it as much with 35mm film but you'll see it with medium format film. I said I wasn't getting back into film because u didn't want to start buying another set of lenses and stuff. Then I said I'll shoot film but I'm not going to develop my own film. I'm not going to say that I'm not going to buy an enlarger and ask the other stuff and set up a dark room in my house because as soon as I say that I'll be buying all the stuff for it. I'm just shooting film for the fun of it and for the look. But I'm not giving up digital.

Digital will look better, perfect even but film simulations are all the rage and the difference.The moment you get into attempting to simulate an analog process where everything from how warm your water to how much you move the film while developing can play a roll in the final look is a whole other thing.

Film and digital both have their upsides but "looking better" isn't something you can determine objectively. For me, film is the only option worth considering, not only because I like the resulting images more but because I like the process. It's the same reason why I prefer vinyl records compared to Spotify (even though that's how I mostly listen to music nowadays), the ritual of taking the record out of its sleeve while admiring the album art, putting it on the platter, carefully dropping the needle and hearing that first crackle. Then listening to the whole album without skipping tracks, only having a meditative pause to change the side. When I shoot film, there is a similar process. I can't just take out my camera and shoot pictures at any settings I please at machine gun speeds. I have to savor the moment and be mindful of what I shoot and how. It usually takes me a while to fill up a whole roll, so when I get it developed, it's like Christmas morning because I've already forgotten what pictures I've taken. If this wasn't just a hobby for me I'd probably welcome the convenience of digital though, just like I do with Spotify when I want to listen to music on a commute or while taking a walk etc.

Well, I’m with you. I love shooting film and print it in a darkroom on silverhalide paper. And I think. They look better that way. Rather then scanned and printed digitally. But digital. Is convenient. Fast. And looks just as good. Although, printing is still not as sharp still. But that’s pixel peeping and I think technology will improve and catch up. I’m of the mind set. Shoot analog, print analog. But without digital. There is no sharing it on the innerwebs.

I do portraits directly on photographic paper with my 11x14" large format camera. That is unique art, like a painters painting, which I also sign. You can't emulate this with a digital camera.

the secret is that because of the way human psychology works whichever you think looks better, will end up looking better to you. anyway I prefer digital for the workflow and have given up trying to have an objective take on the quality argument, personally.

Wow, this is stunning, how did you get it and what software did you use it for it ?

I Can absolute relate to this. I do both and it is mostly about the proces but the end result does also reflect that proces, so does it look better? Often, when we nail it, but not from a technical point of view but from a Visual feeling. I only shoot 35 mm. On my leicas I Can use High quality and fast glas. Medium formats are old and slow glas, so therefore I didnt those that format. An important benefit to my leica M is that I Can use a much slower film speed or time, than on my slr`s because of the lack of mirror Shake. Leicas are quiet. Try the silky smooth Leica M7 or a mechanical Leica MP ❤

Its kind of impossible to ever know if digital is better or worse than film because you always have to digitize the film to compare.

Wow very underrated video, only people who been through this phase would understand. Very well done, it is always okay to take a break and refocusing on yourself my friend. This will make us love and enjoy life more everyday. It is okay.

Im just starting to get into content creation again and this was such a refreshing video to watch. Have a blessed day!

I'm noticing right now that your videos I enjoyed the most are no longer there, it's a pity you took them down...

Glad to see you back, was missing your old videos with that peculiar personal intimate touch. And here you are again, loved this new video!

I use a VMount Nano battery in my bag with a cable to power the camera. I dont think BMPCC OG looks good with another gadget in the camera

Here is some solution for better audio straight out of the camera th-cam.com/video/k1A7rTi60O0/w-d-xo.html

I set mine up like this. I think it’s a much better option than having the battery on the back.

Q: If the 35mm becomes (effectively) 105mm how practical is this lens for filmmaking? Or does the anamorphic factor make it less 'telephoto' somehow?

What firmware of the lens is it? I can't get the lens ois to work. Thanks

What is the name/model of that cool viewfinder you have attached to the LCD screen of the C100?

so nows its 2024 - you found anything better then Feelworld MA5 to power your bmpcc? setup still the same? thx

is there a battery solution that does NOT require a cage to work? thanks...this is for bmpcc og

Smallrig makes a new power adapter that looks exactly like yours, except you don't have to turn it on, and it doesn't have the battery level indicator. Plus it is only cost about 25 bucks. The NPF batteries seem to last forever, so I figured I wouldn't miss the battery level indicator. With the money saved, I bought more batteries.

Do the original BMPCC and original BMMCC take the same type of battery?