Video

I worked in the golden age of TV. You know how long it took to produce a 30 min TV show after the script was done? 30 min. No tape, no film, it was done LIVE. Cameras went on and 30 min later they went off and everyone went home...

I'm very curious, how to edit a movie that shot in film?

I have a 40 square meter living room. What do you think about Samsung Q990D soundbar or home theater system?

Brown Barbara Taylor Deborah Miller Frank

Hall Cynthia Lee Steven Clark Edward

I bought a soundbar with surround Bluetooth speakers because I was renting a house at the time so couldn’t run wires through the wall. My setup cost me a fortune. All together it’s was close to $2k. The sound is mediocre compared to a traditional 5.1 receiver. I’ve even had beginner receivers that sounded better.

I have connected my Sony bravia tv to Cambridge CXA80 amp using an optical cable and playing the audio in 2 JM Lab cobalt 816 speakers. Now i have got 3 options in my Sony tv for audio output, 1. Auto 2. PCM 3. Passthrough. When i select 'Auto' or 'passthrough' and device as 'audio system', the sound is playing only in youtube but not in other apps like Netflix. However, the sound is playing fine in all apps when i choose PCM. Would you be able to help me understand what is the right setup i should choose here? Thanks

Films are not for newbies

Long story short... Those who shoot with film can. Tarantino can do whatever he wants, working with the rare few who still know how to work with film. Otherwise, Movies are shot DIGITALLY. :-) Film has no advantage and only produces cost overruns. :-) Film, filming, and filmmaking are the most misused and MIMICKED words in the industry. 🙂 Digital Video and film require different skill sets. Having DIFFERENT historical and TECHNOLOGICAL timelines spanning 150 years. Have PRIDE and KNOWLEDGE of the gear we use including the words that describe what we do. Our tools are Digital Video, Non-linear, and CGI. We are moviemakers, not filmmakers and we do what film wishes it could. We are Videographers directors and/or cinematographers. Using the word film lacks originality, creativity, and a poor understanding of the craft. 🙂 We video or are videoing, we do not film. That's the other RARE professionals who know how to use film (such as KODAK COLOR NEGATIVE 35MM 500T) and film cameras, like an ARRIFLEX 435 Panavision R-200 and Steenbeck flatbed film editors. Know the difference and have a better understanding of the craft. You will also stand out in an industry polluted with point-and-shoot "pros". Respect to you.✌♥ This is film. :-) czcams.com/users/shortsbXZOaDa2ZGQ?si=FqX_xMa-PuWHWkIn And this... czcams.com/video/bYuKhMltKxs/video.htmlsi=xa9j_K8q_jZd0Y1l

So crap audio design because they are too lazy to fix it for home watching with stereo speakers?? This is know issue for years audio designers are crap at their job!

I feel bad for deaf people who put on subtitles on this video

I only recommend watching in IMAX (even though it’s LieMax) if the movies were FILMED for IMAX. Because not only you would get an expanded screen, the audio in the movie would be specially made for IMAX theatre.

70mm IMAX film is incredibly expensive. If money doesn't matter that much, then I would say it depends on the director's vision. Is that what they want the movie to look like?

I recommend a traditional home theater. The sorround sound iz awsome which comes from my samsung 7,1 home theater with two wireless rear speakers and is in the lounge. Itz a 1400watts output better than a Sony 5.1 channel i use in my bedroom

0.59 and I'm nope I'm done

Lol. I've actually rented from the Blockbuster in Ketchikan, Alaska, when I lived there. It wasn't the last one at that time, though.

Considering IMax 70mm film is like 16K resolution, Film is future proof for a good while. And the files never "get out of date". Hell 35mm film is 5.6K equivalent. With that being said the movoes can be remastered in the future and make more $$$ where with digital not so much. You can shoot in 8k or 10k and rendernout in 4K but 8K is already becoming a thing so...

I would say it largely depends on how good your TV is. But let's not forget, Blu-ray already looked plenty good to start with.

This is a useless video.

Unfixable. I've tried all the solutions. I watch TV holding a remote to adjust volume ... most of us do these days.

That’s also Portland Oregon

The cinemas max 19 the chairs move like a simulator

In my theaters in Spokane and also in Portland they all recline

To me it is

Aren’t basically all movies filmed at 24fps anyways lol

I purchased the A5+ and the S8 subwoofer based on this (and other) reviews, and I can honestly say that they are an amazing experience for a Gaming System / Music setup. I would almost buy another set for my TV however I think the lack of a center speaker for watching movies on might be a drawback.

so its not my audio systems fault but the disc it self !

I think "feel" is very subjective. Its why guitarists own so many guitars.

Would please help me to get a job as a actor

Am I a millionaire? Nope.

Useless.

6:48: So, it is a Netflix on esteroides. For all that money I would rather spend on the setup itself and be subscription free.

Just a home audio enthusiast here. From reading many of the comments, I feel the pain from the people who are having issues getting clear sharp dialog without being blown away by the music score/sound effects. I learned something that is hard to find here in the comments. If using a simple 2 speaker setup, or just the built-in TV speakers, be sure to choose stereo sound track if available. For those of us using 5.1 or higher, try to use the biggest center channel speaker possible. Biggest issue if user has nice big tall floor L & R speakers, and a little say, dual 3" w/a tweeter center channel box. The sound could be washed out even if the center level is maxed out. Don't crank up the surround channels to max just because you don't think you are hearing enough programming from them. IMO, those surrounds are just for filling in stuff that goes on in back or the sides. I think it's silly that most big box off the shelf receivers boast like 125 watts on every channel! Really? I know that's not true, but really, only like 20 watts of power is enough for those dedicated surround channels. Another thing that really irks me is that I have to really crank up the master volume when receiver is set to just about any surround mode. I have super sensitive speakers too. The mains are all horn driven, so like 5 watts is loud. Anyway, sometimes I notice the level indicated by the amp display around say -8db just for a realistic sound level from the speakers! -8db down equates to nearly 3/4 up the scale where as 0db is wide open/max volume. If I go into just stereo mode like old skool, I can get good audio levels at around -15 to -22 down. It's like the decoded audio in surround mode is not pre amped enough before it hits the output stage. I have had several surround receivers in the past and all have had the same issue! Any body agree? Thanks.

All hail the majestic DTS! Atmos sucks! DTS is similar to Bell Canada; it delivers! Atmos is Rogers; all words and emtpy fluff!

On your regular flat telly common everywhere, the European / British format of 1.78:1 fills the whole screen, whereas 1.85:1 leaves a thin pair of bars, and 2.39:1 leaves behind such an entitled pair of bars (2.75:1 and upwards of Ben-Hur makes us wonder why...just why). If they could rescan and release more video at top and bottom (James Cameron did that with Titanic's 3D - the most picture it has ever had), that would be awesome. And if a full-screen / 1.33:1 would still give more video for an IMAX film on widescreen telly, just release it that way on Blu-ray / 4K because 2.39:1 or even 1.78:1 widescreen in this case means cropping out more from top and bottom. Simple common sense or visual sense but it seems to be lacking with folks who release home media and director (what that crackpot Canadian did with both his Dunes on Blu-ray / 4K were spectacular monstrosity of the worst kind).

Fantastic video. Liked and subscribed. Thank you for this gem!

Watching 4k netflix on an oled vs kaleidescape on a projector? The oled wins and I save thousands.

Thanks, Isaac. I have an Anthem AVM 90 and am lamenting that it does not have auro 3d nor DTS X pro.

Dude get to the point. Don’t fill your video with fluff to make it longer. Quality content over quantity.

I still use a high-end ED betamax to record off the streaming services with a google chromecast and upload my old PAL beta tapes to my plex server

Film definitely has advantages. That being said, the presenter got the dynamic range part technically incorrect. The ARRI Alexa S35 now has confirmed 17 stops of dynamic range - far more than film, but not IMAX 70MM Film. That still remains king of the castle.

I'm actually gonna be hosting a movie night with the 3D conversion of Jurassic Park with some friends in a movie theater world in VR Chat, but to complete the experience I decided to grab a copy of the old DTS theater logo just so I could play it before the movie starts. And since the theater can simulate surround sound, I had to find a copy of it in 5.1.

The seating doesn’t look any better

I hope movie theatres and streaming services die out. Humanity has been addicted to celluloid long enough. I'm doing more dnd, more mtg, meeting and interacting with more irl people than ever before after cinema's decline and I'm having loads of fun with the adventures we make ourselves. Turns out we never needed Hollywood to entertain ourselves, we can do it ourselves and irl people are so much better than celluloid.

Curious how this would do if I added it to my 600 series soundbar 🤔

I'm looking to build a dolby atmos theatre in my new home build but it will be a dual use space. It will be office + PC gaming and then plex media home theatre with stadium seating. I'm trying to decide if its worth the extra cost to go with a full system over a high end soundbar.

I don't see the point. Dolby Digital and DD+ can already provide great sound quality and it's just a way for them to sell you more gear.

I have to imagine part of it is licensing costs. The same reason why they dropped support for DTS on their TVs a few years ago. But they were also the primary proponent of HDR10+. I see no reason to push that anymore vs just using Dolby Vision. Nearly everything supports HDR10 and DV. It would be like trying to push DTS when everything supports Dolby and PCM.

It's because many of these directors just like the aesthetic of film better. That and I think some of those digital cameras are not as reliable in extreme weather conditions, problems with batteries and whatnot. But I've seen quite a few movies shot on ARRI Alexa 65s and those look really nice even compared with large 65/70mm film print. Film is a lot more expensive too and slower editing process vs digital.

I wish I could say I prefer film. I shot film for 40 years. I prefer digital.