Web Analytics
   Date   

Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Steve Shaw
 
Edited

Just so every one really has the correct information...

The Panasonic TX-65EZ952B uses the LG WOLED screen, as does every large format 'OLED' out there.
The graphs I posted are actually FROM the Panasonic TV.

All WOLEDs suffer exactly the same issues - and more, when you start looking at thermal instability too.

It is simple colour science fact that using a 'white' pixel will compromise volumetric colour capability, as the RGB pixels will always run out of range (brightness) before the white pixel.

The truth is WOLEDs work ok up to about 100-200 nits, where the white pixel has no effect/benefit, and may as well not be there.
Above that range, the white pixel causes huge volumetric issues, as can be seen in the graphs I posted, so may as well not be there...

WOLED is a home TV technology simply to make 'bright' pictures.
It has no place in the professional world.
(And I would never have one at home either...)

Steve
Light Illusion


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Joseph Goldstone <jgoldstone@...>
 

On May 30, 2018, at 8:31 AM, Kevin Shaw <kevs@...> wrote:
[…]
For about the same or less than the LG  combo, and still less than the FSI XM65 and Panny TX, you could look at Eizo CG318-4k which supports HLG and PQ, but is only 350 nits, so definitely not a mastering monitor.

Is it possible you meant the recently-announced CG319X here, instead of the CG318-4K?

I have the latter, which did not ship with PQ and HLG support, and there is no firmware update on the EIZO site that could enable it (assuming such a capability could even be added as a firmware upgrade). For me, for R&D work, the CG318-4K is a great monitor, but at 350 nits I would not call it HDR. 

On the other hand, the CG319X is listed on their website as being new, and it does claim to support HLG and PQ. But it’s hard to call this an HDR monitor either; even the UHD Alliance Premium Certification provision for less-bright HDR monitors “not 1000 nits, but really deep blacks” can’t be used to make it HDR either: that path requires 540 nits and an ability to go down to 0.0005 nits. (The more-bright path to UHDA PC requires 1,000 nits but only requires you to go down to 0.05 nits.)

I think we’ll see monitors casually mentioning their HDR-ness much as we saw monitors casually mentioning their Rec2020-ness, when what was really happening with the latter was that the monitor would accept a Rec2020-encoded signal, not that the monitor could accurately display all valid Rec2020-encoded values.

Best—
—joseph

Image Science Engineer
ARRI, Inc. SBD (Burbank) / ARRI Cine Technik IS (München)







This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it from your system; you may not copy this message or disclose its contents to anyone. Please send us by fax any message containing deadlines as incoming e-mails are not screened for response deadlines. The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed on the Internet.




This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast.
For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Kevin Shaw
 

I’ll summarise my experience with HDR screens

AFAIK Dolby approve monitors for Dolby Vision rather than certify them as such. 
The Sony x300, and Eizo CG3145 are both approved for Dolby Vision mastering. 
They are quite different technologies as has been pointed out, but both rated at 1000 nits though the Eizo has no dimming. Of the two, my preference is the Eizo which is easier to use and better  to calibrate (I have calibrated both). The Sony is definitely not calibrated out of the box - typically the white point color temperature is too high and the blacks a bit low. 

Dolby Monitors are not available to buy (but very nice to work on)

The FSI xm310k is stunning and much better than either of the above (at least twice as bright), but not yet shipping and quite a bit more expensive

The FSI XM65OU is a very nice monitor but because of its WOLEDs is not approved for Dolby Vision, and I accept Steve's comments on using it for HDR mastering. I would recommend it over the Panasonic TX-65EZ952B but it is more expensive. The FSI xm65OU, and Panasonic TX-65EZ952B are really better as QC monitors rather than critical mastering. 

The LG OLED 65C8 needs a  LUT box and HDR flag capable input device such as AJA Hi5 4k plus to do what these monitors do (they are all white OLED) but I am not saying it is in the same ball park, just it is an option. 

For about the same or less than the LG  combo, and still less than the FSI XM65 and Panny TX, you could look at Eizo CG318-4k which supports HLG and PQ, but is only 350 nits, so definitely not a mastering monitor.

For the record I agree with Phil's blog, but it is only fair to point out that he works for a company that sells Eizo. 

Bottom line, it is expensive to get into HDR mastering, and no one knows how long it will be before the prices tumble.
Postium showed a very nice 31” 4k 1000 nit display at NAB, but it cost the same as the FSI xm310k, making the FSI desirable and great value!
Canon, Atomos and Boland also come up in conversation and they have their uses, but in my mind they are better on set than in the grade. Just my opinion, don’t hate me for that.

My 2 cents anyway
Kevin

Kevin Shaw, CSI :
colorist, instructor and consultant
t +44 7921. 677  369 
e
 kevs@...

finalcolor: www.finalcolor.com  ICA:          www.icolorist.com      
twitter:      www.twitter.com/kevscolor    linkedIn:    www.linkedin.com/in/kevscolor
------------------
This message was sent by Kevin Shaw of Finalcolor Ltd. and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorised to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. It is believed, but not warranted, that this e-mail, including any attachments, is virus free. However, you should take full responsibility for virus checking. Thank you for your cooperation.
------------------






On 30 May 2018, at 14:00, Dado Valentic <dado@...> wrote:

Also the only screens that can be used for Dolby mastering are those made by Dolby.


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Riza Pacalioglu
 

Panasonic screen I am referring to is using WRGB (LGD) OLED panels and does not have problems described in the previous post.”

 

Steve’s post has the caption ‘WRGB’ on the test image, hence showing errors of the type of panel Panasonic uses. Have you missed that or do you disagree with Steve? If the latter maybe you can explain more.

 

Thank you.

 

 

Riza Pacalioglu B.Sc. M.Sc. M.A.

Producer

South of England

 

 


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Dado Valentic
 

This blog post is making false claims.
The image on this post is coming from Spectracal calibration report and is not Netflix certificate. Netflix does not certificate screens.
Also the only screens that can be used for Dolby mastering are those made by Dolby.

Dado Valentic
colour scientist
London/LA


The blog post also has interesting things to say about the X300 that's relevant to this thread.

- patrick​

_


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Dado Valentic
 

Just to get facts straight. Panasonic screen I am referring to is using WRGB (LGD) OLED panels and does not have problems described in the previous post.



The Panasonic issues (and any other WOLED display) are obvious.



Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Steve Shaw
 

To add some factual data to the 'Panasonic' display issues, this is a direct comparison on the Panasonic compared to an 'ok' LCD HDR display, both profiled in HDR mode, but with a power law gamma, to minimise any EOFT issues (roll-off for example), with the profile matched to itself.
(Adding the EOTF into the mix would further kill the Panasonic accuracy.)

The 'white lines' are tangent lines showing the display accuracy errors.
(The coloured point, which is also colour coded to show the level of accuracy, shows the actual measurement, while the other end of the tangent line shows where the colour point should be.)
A 'perfect' display would show zero errors when tested like this.

The Panasonic issues (and any other WOLED display) are obvious.



The errors cannot be 'corrected in any way, as the display just can't make the required colours.
(Calibration can only subtract from what a display can natively do, not add to it.)

Steve
Light Illusion


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Patrick Inhofer
 

The Eizo Prominance CG3145 is certified for HDR mastering, and suffers none of the issue the Sony X300 has,


“Certified” by whom?

​According to this blog post, certified by Dolby and Netflix:


The blog post also has interesting things to say about the X300 that's relevant to this thread.

- patrick​


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Jacques Mersereau
 

I have received some more info to update what we know on the Sony BVM X300

<<ASP (street) price is $34K. this monitor has RGB oled not White OLED that will the competitors who do have OLED.  

There is a big and expensive difference in the production of these monitor.  

It takes two-three days just to QC one monitor before it gets the seal of approval on it.>> 


 



On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 1:21 PM, Michael Most <mdmost@...> wrote:


On May 28, 2018, at 12:37 AM, Steve Shaw <steve@...> wrote:

The Eizo Prominance CG3145 is certified for HDR mastering, and suffers none of the issue the Sony X300 has,



“Certified” by whom?

Mike Most
On Location Services Director
Technicolor
Los Angeles, CA.




--
^^^^^^^^^^^^

Jacques Mersereau
The Duderstadt Center 
University of Michigan
Video Studio Managing Producer
2281 Bonisteel Blvd.
Ann Arbor, MI  48109
< jacmer@...>
734 647 6336


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Dado Valentic
 

From professional perspective every grading studio is using  only OLED HDR and it is nice that we have standardised and that we all use the same monitor and that is  Sony BVM X300. There is no industry body that approves monitors for grading it just the fact that this monitor stands out.
We love the fact that it comes calibrated out of the box. In 2018 this is the least one should expect. When we need it to be checked Sony takes care of it. I don't change oil in my car myself and I don't know why should I calibrate my monitor myself - so totally support Sony's decision not to allow any 3rd part to access internal calibration.

However, we needed something bigger and something that perfectly matches X300 and this is exactly what I was working with Panasonic to achieve. To take a consumer screen to the next level.

It is great to see that in small pro circles this monitor has astablished itself already.

Here is why Stephan Nakamura uses Panasonic OLED HDR.



It could be something that you are looking for. Not expensive but at pro performance level.


Dado Valentic
Colour Scientist
London/LA


Re: Alexa mini anamorphic scaling settings

hraedlein@...
 

I would go for the ProRes 2.39 2K Ana setting, as you will then have 120 fps and no hassle in post.

Downside is that you do not have space for repositioning horizontally which you would have in pure 4:3 mode. And you stick to a 2K DCP, but with very nice image quality due to downscaling from higher pixel count.

Of course you need the 4:3 license.

Kind regards

Henning Rädlein

 

 

http://www.arri.com/camera/alexa_mini/camera_details/alexa-mini/subsection/license_options/

ALEXA Mini 4:3 License Key
This license, enabled by ALEXA Mini SUP 4.0, provides three new ProRes recording modes that access the full 4:3 sensor area and support the use of anamorphic lenses. The first mode records the highest 4:3 resolution possible, while the other two de-squeeze and re-scale the recorded images in-camera for an efficient, specialized workflow. Monitoring paths for all 4:3 modes offer SDI setups featuring dual 1.5G or 3G outputs.

  • ProRes 4:3 2.8K records the full 4:3 sensor area (2880 x 2160) and can be used with anamorphic or spherical lenses. It offers frame rates up to 50 fps and an optional 2x anamorphic de-squeeze for the EVF and SDI monitoring paths.
  • ProRes 2.39:1 2K Ana. records a 2.39:1 standard 2K format (2048 x 858), which does not require any cropping or scaling in post. Due to the in-camera scaling the data rate is reduced, allowing recording speeds up to 120 fps.


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Michael Most
 



On May 28, 2018, at 12:37 AM, Steve Shaw <steve@...> wrote:

The Eizo Prominance CG3145 is certified for HDR mastering, and suffers none of the issue the Sony X300 has,



“Certified” by whom?

Mike Most
On Location Services Director
Technicolor
Los Angeles, CA.


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

alister@...
 

We've been doing so many display/TV evaluations lately it can be rather difficult to keep track without referring to notes.
(I will make sure I refer to them next time!)

I spent ages trying to get figure out why I couldn’t find the HDR transfer curves on an X300 very recently - a PVM-X300 which is the SDR LCD model.

As current consumer TV’s also run into average peak power issues I find the ABL warning light on the BVM-X300 quite a handy reminder that I’m going too far with my average brightness.

Alister Chapman

DoP - Stereographer
UK Mobile +44 7711 152226
US Mobile +1(216)298-1977


www.xdcam-user.com    1.5 million hits, 100,000 visits from over 45,000 unique visitors every month!  Film and Video production techniques, reviews and news.


Re: HDR mastering monitorsing dering for a buy this year, or

Steve Shaw
 

You are correct - it has ABL/Power saving issues, not haloing.
My bad!
It is other LCD displays (mainly home TVs) that have limited backlight zones.
We've been doing so many display/TV evaluations lately it can be rather difficult to keep track without referring to notes.
(I will make sure I refer to them next time!)

Steve


Re: Alexa mini anamorphic scaling settings

Argyris_Theos_cml
 

Oh, since you are in Kiev
I recall they had good lab about 5 or 6 years ago. You may screen there perhaps


Argyris Theos, gsc
DoP, Athens Greece,
theos@...
+306944725315
Skype Argyris.Theos
www.vimeo.com/argyristheos
via iPhone

29 Μαΐ 2018, 7:58 πμ, ο/η Bruce Alan Greene <bruce@...> έγραψε:

iev (for now)


Re: Alexa mini anamorphic scaling settings

Argyris_Theos_cml
 

An idea might be to burn a minute or less to dcp via any of the free programs. Then screen it at a local theater. 

My 2 Eurocents 

Argyris Theos, gsc 
DoP, Athens Greece,
+306944725315
Skype Argyris.Theos
via iPhone

29 Μαΐ 2018, 7:58 πμ, ο/η Bruce Alan Greene <bruce@...> έγραψε:

Testing is not so easy as I’m on location with only a laptop and no proper 4K display to view scaling on. Hence my request from others with experience shooting anamorphic with the Alexa.

Bruce Alan Greene
DP Los Angeles / Kiev (for now)


On May 29, 2018, at 07:00, Argyris_Theos_cml <cml@...> wrote:

a)       Test test test

b)      Input Scaling in Resolve does it and can be batch applied to all clips in seconds

c)       Prefer the assistance of a competent colorist, they know a thing or two

d)      Test test test

 

Argyris Theos, gsc

DoP

Athens Greece

+306944725315

skype Argyris.Theos

www.vimeo.com/argyristheos

 

From: cml-raw-log-hdr@... [mailto:cml-raw-log-hdr@...] On Behalf Of Bruce Alan Greene
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2018 11:17 PM
To: cml-raw-log-hdr@...
Subject: [cml-raw-log-hdr] Alexa mini anamorphic scaling settings

 

This was originally a kind of Resolve/post question, but I'm really interested in the best camera settings.  The question below refers to RroRes settings in the camera, but perhaps recording RAW might solve this issue in post?

I'm not sure of the post production / color corrections issues of working from full frame RAW and the amount of computing power necessary to work with this.  I suspect that I will be doing color post on this myself eventually, or perhaps with an independent colorist who might not have the most powerful computer and RAID set up.  So that is a consideration in this workflow.  I don't really care about RAW for the color aspect of it, I'm just concerned with computer overhead.  For me, ProRes is fine for color as I don't mind setting the color temp in the camera and recording Log.

We're about to begin a feature film shooting with Alexa mini and Cooke 2x anamorphic lenses.

My question is about the best way to shoot and set the camera.

The camera records 2880x2160 pixels in ProRes. But, to get to 2.39:1 aspect ratio, we will need to crop to 2578 pixels wide. So, essentially, the master image will be 2160x2578.

I have a choice: I can set the camera to 2k and it will scale the image to 2048x858 pixels in camera. 
If I don't scale to 2k, I will record the situation above, which, will eventually need to be scaled to 2k for DCP.

I've been looking in the Resolve settings, and I can't see any way that resolve will deal with the 2880x2160 image and crop it correctly to 2160x2578. The only way I can see is to set each and every clip to stretch the horizontal by 2x and let the sizing be set to no resize, center crop. But this means selecting each and every clip and changing the width by 2x. 

Is there any standard way to deal with this set up? In other words, to get the correct aspect ratio and cropping and work in a timeline of 5156x2160 (no resize except width stretch to de-anamorphasize. (is that a word?) It would seem non-optimal to scale to 4k and then re-scale to 2k which would add an additional scaling operation.

Or, is it best to just have the camera do the scaling to 2048x858 and be done with it?

Thanks guys. Will be shooting a teaser on Friday so I must decide for the teaser soon!

 

Bruce Alan Greene
DP Los Angeles 


Re: Alexa mini anamorphic scaling settings

Bruce Alan Greene
 

Testing is not so easy as I’m on location with only a laptop and no proper 4K display to view scaling on. Hence my request from others with experience shooting anamorphic with the Alexa.

Bruce Alan Greene
DP Los Angeles / Kiev (for now)


On May 29, 2018, at 07:00, Argyris_Theos_cml <cml@...> wrote:

a)       Test test test

b)      Input Scaling in Resolve does it and can be batch applied to all clips in seconds

c)       Prefer the assistance of a competent colorist, they know a thing or two

d)      Test test test

 

Argyris Theos, gsc

DoP

Athens Greece

+306944725315

skype Argyris.Theos

www.vimeo.com/argyristheos

 

From: cml-raw-log-hdr@... [mailto:cml-raw-log-hdr@...] On Behalf Of Bruce Alan Greene
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2018 11:17 PM
To: cml-raw-log-hdr@...
Subject: [cml-raw-log-hdr] Alexa mini anamorphic scaling settings

 

This was originally a kind of Resolve/post question, but I'm really interested in the best camera settings.  The question below refers to RroRes settings in the camera, but perhaps recording RAW might solve this issue in post?

I'm not sure of the post production / color corrections issues of working from full frame RAW and the amount of computing power necessary to work with this.  I suspect that I will be doing color post on this myself eventually, or perhaps with an independent colorist who might not have the most powerful computer and RAID set up.  So that is a consideration in this workflow.  I don't really care about RAW for the color aspect of it, I'm just concerned with computer overhead.  For me, ProRes is fine for color as I don't mind setting the color temp in the camera and recording Log.

We're about to begin a feature film shooting with Alexa mini and Cooke 2x anamorphic lenses.

My question is about the best way to shoot and set the camera.

The camera records 2880x2160 pixels in ProRes. But, to get to 2.39:1 aspect ratio, we will need to crop to 2578 pixels wide. So, essentially, the master image will be 2160x2578.

I have a choice: I can set the camera to 2k and it will scale the image to 2048x858 pixels in camera. 
If I don't scale to 2k, I will record the situation above, which, will eventually need to be scaled to 2k for DCP.

I've been looking in the Resolve settings, and I can't see any way that resolve will deal with the 2880x2160 image and crop it correctly to 2160x2578. The only way I can see is to set each and every clip to stretch the horizontal by 2x and let the sizing be set to no resize, center crop. But this means selecting each and every clip and changing the width by 2x. 

Is there any standard way to deal with this set up? In other words, to get the correct aspect ratio and cropping and work in a timeline of 5156x2160 (no resize except width stretch to de-anamorphasize. (is that a word?) It would seem non-optimal to scale to 4k and then re-scale to 2k which would add an additional scaling operation.

Or, is it best to just have the camera do the scaling to 2048x858 and be done with it?

Thanks guys. Will be shooting a teaser on Friday so I must decide for the teaser soon!

 

Bruce Alan Greene
DP Los Angeles 


Re: Alexa mini anamorphic scaling settings

Argyris_Theos_cml
 

a)       Test test test

b)      Input Scaling in Resolve does it and can be batch applied to all clips in seconds

c)       Prefer the assistance of a competent colorist, they know a thing or two

d)      Test test test

 

Argyris Theos, gsc

DoP

Athens Greece

+306944725315

skype Argyris.Theos

www.vimeo.com/argyristheos

 

From: cml-raw-log-hdr@... [mailto:cml-raw-log-hdr@...] On Behalf Of Bruce Alan Greene
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2018 11:17 PM
To: cml-raw-log-hdr@...
Subject: [cml-raw-log-hdr] Alexa mini anamorphic scaling settings

 

This was originally a kind of Resolve/post question, but I'm really interested in the best camera settings.  The question below refers to RroRes settings in the camera, but perhaps recording RAW might solve this issue in post?

I'm not sure of the post production / color corrections issues of working from full frame RAW and the amount of computing power necessary to work with this.  I suspect that I will be doing color post on this myself eventually, or perhaps with an independent colorist who might not have the most powerful computer and RAID set up.  So that is a consideration in this workflow.  I don't really care about RAW for the color aspect of it, I'm just concerned with computer overhead.  For me, ProRes is fine for color as I don't mind setting the color temp in the camera and recording Log.

We're about to begin a feature film shooting with Alexa mini and Cooke 2x anamorphic lenses.

My question is about the best way to shoot and set the camera.

The camera records 2880x2160 pixels in ProRes. But, to get to 2.39:1 aspect ratio, we will need to crop to 2578 pixels wide. So, essentially, the master image will be 2160x2578.

I have a choice: I can set the camera to 2k and it will scale the image to 2048x858 pixels in camera. 
If I don't scale to 2k, I will record the situation above, which, will eventually need to be scaled to 2k for DCP.

I've been looking in the Resolve settings, and I can't see any way that resolve will deal with the 2880x2160 image and crop it correctly to 2160x2578. The only way I can see is to set each and every clip to stretch the horizontal by 2x and let the sizing be set to no resize, center crop. But this means selecting each and every clip and changing the width by 2x. 

Is there any standard way to deal with this set up? In other words, to get the correct aspect ratio and cropping and work in a timeline of 5156x2160 (no resize except width stretch to de-anamorphasize. (is that a word?) It would seem non-optimal to scale to 4k and then re-scale to 2k which would add an additional scaling operation.

Or, is it best to just have the camera do the scaling to 2048x858 and be done with it?

Thanks guys. Will be shooting a teaser on Friday so I must decide for the teaser soon!

 

Bruce Alan Greene
DP Los Angeles 


Alexa mini anamorphic scaling settings

Bruce Alan Greene
 

This was originally a kind of Resolve/post question, but I'm really interested in the best camera settings.  The question below refers to RroRes settings in the camera, but perhaps recording RAW might solve this issue in post?

I'm not sure of the post production / color corrections issues of working from full frame RAW and the amount of computing power necessary to work with this.  I suspect that I will be doing color post on this myself eventually, or perhaps with an independent colorist who might not have the most powerful computer and RAID set up.  So that is a consideration in this workflow.  I don't really care about RAW for the color aspect of it, I'm just concerned with computer overhead.  For me, ProRes is fine for color as I don't mind setting the color temp in the camera and recording Log.

We're about to begin a feature film shooting with Alexa mini and Cooke 2x anamorphic lenses.

My question is about the best way to shoot and set the camera.

The camera records 2880x2160 pixels in ProRes. But, to get to 2.39:1 aspect ratio, we will need to crop to 2578 pixels wide. So, essentially, the master image will be 2160x2578.

I have a choice: I can set the camera to 2k and it will scale the image to 2048x858 pixels in camera. 
If I don't scale to 2k, I will record the situation above, which, will eventually need to be scaled to 2k for DCP.

I've been looking in the Resolve settings, and I can't see any way that resolve will deal with the 2880x2160 image and crop it correctly to 2160x2578. The only way I can see is to set each and every clip to stretch the horizontal by 2x and let the sizing be set to no resize, center crop. But this means selecting each and every clip and changing the width by 2x. 

Is there any standard way to deal with this set up? In other words, to get the correct aspect ratio and cropping and work in a timeline of 5156x2160 (no resize except width stretch to de-anamorphasize. (is that a word?) It would seem non-optimal to scale to 4k and then re-scale to 2k which would add an additional scaling operation.

Or, is it best to just have the camera do the scaling to 2048x858 and be done with it?

Thanks guys. Will be shooting a teaser on Friday so I must decide for the teaser soon!
 
Bruce Alan Greene
DP Los Angeles 


Re: Venice camera test

Mark Sasahara
 

Alfonso,

Thanks for posting your lovely footage. The market with it's colors and all those wonderful faces, was stunning.

It was really great to see how the camera handles different skin tones in various real life scenarios with natural light. The camera seems to handle extreme contrast quite well: the two women on the balcony with the dappled sunlight, walking through the rooms and balcony and the market at sunset/deep shadows, people's skin looked really good.

The sun, at sunset seemed to hold more highlight and color detail.

Best,

-Mark Sasahara, DP, NYC


Mark Sasahara
  marksasahara@...
   718-440-1013
    http://msasahara.com


On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 7:03 PM, alfonso parra <info@...> wrote:
Dear colleagues, in the link you can see the tests we did with the VENICE camera in Cartagena de Indias in Colombia.
https://vimeo.com/272088733
In  Cinegear I will comment my experience during the shooting with the camera.

DATE: Saturday June 2, 2018

TIME: 11:30 am to 12:30 pm

LOCATION: Screening Room 5

I hope it's of your interest.
Best regards
Alfonso Parra AEC, ADFC
www.alfonsoparra.com


1341 - 1360 of 2002