Jump to content
Matthew Allard ACS

Why don’t we see more ENG/EFP form factor digital cinema cameras?

Recommended Posts

The digital video market is huge and seemingly still growing while the stills side has plateaued or is in decline, thanks to mobile phones. To that end, I think people want more versatile video gear, an ENG style camera is more of a single use tool.

Many want cameras that you can easily move from the shoulder to hand held, to gimbal, to tripod, to slider etc. I'm not sure that an ENG camera is suited to these sorts of options. They are after something versatile, a Jack of all trades so to speak.

The price of ENG cameras is another factor, you're selling these to a diminishing market. You can't start off with an inexpensive body and a few components and start videoing, you need the whole enchilada from the very start. Not many can afford such luxuries.

Plus, where people are tending to shoot ie the biggest market for video cameras, an ENG camera will stand out like a nudist at a tailors convention. There's absolutely no chance of being discrete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what’s been said above and on the discussion under the article. 

I also want to add that another problem eng style cameras have is that they’re not part of a logical camera buying or operating progression for most people now. 

If you’ve not used a shoulder mount camera before and you’re coming from a dslr, mirroless or something like an fs5 or c100 form factor, then putting a camera on your shoulder seems quite odd. 

I’ve used an fs7 and arri alexa rigged up for shoulder mounting because the productions required that, and ended up really liking it. But I wouldn’t have chosen to go that way on my own. It’s a catch-22. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should also have added that ENG cameras are really only for shoulder use, you get one and one perspective only, everything at eye level, unless you crouch. Other styles of cinema/video cameras allow greater variability with greater ease, up high, mid-level, low all in one smooth movement. The versatility and ease of movement leave an ENG camera well behind. Not saying it can't be done, but it's no where near as easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Australian Image (Ray) said:

I should also have added that ENG cameras are really only for shoulder use, you get one and one perspective only, everything at eye level, unless you crouch. Other styles of cinema/video cameras allow greater variability with greater ease, up high, mid-level, low all in one smooth movement. The versatility and ease of movement leave an ENG camera well behind. Not saying it can't be done, but it's no where near as easy.

That’s not entirely true. Shooting from the hip is really popular with that style of camera - especially in live studio environments on entertainment/challenge/sports/music shows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nezih said:

That’s not entirely true. Shooting from the hip is really popular with that style of camera - especially in live studio environments on entertainment/challenge/sports/music shows.

Agreed .. you can only use an ENG camera on your shoulder ?  what ever gave you that idea Ray..  its not as comfortable for long periods than being on your shoulder .. but actually probably less discomfort than holding any of these small handy cam form cameras in any position..  as it has the size to tuck under your arm..  I must have done tens of thousands of shots with ENG cameras not on my shoulder ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The business has just changed. I started shooting with Ikegami’s in Adelaide in 1984...I’ve owned a bunch of Sony EFP and Panasonic cameras...things are just different now. The business model for documentary guys like me is different now. I bought a standard definition digital PAL betacam in 2000 for $58,000. And I made a lot of money with that camera....but it was a time when folks called me and asked whether I was available and that was it....they didn’t ask what camera I was using (they knew) and they didn’t ask for specific lenses...it’s a different world now. Currently I own four pro cameras to satisfy my market and they barely amount to that one PAL camera...but I still make a decent living! I think cameras like the FS7 and now the FX9 are the betacams of the day for the doc world and I say that regretfully....folks that have grown up in this S35 world for documentaries have been denied an awesome platform...we have not continue to follow the natural progression from 16mm for docs to the 2/3rds inch sensor...despite the fact that Sony does still make a great 2/3rds inch camera that shoots slog etc.... I need to turn cameras over every four years now...I got eight years from my Varicam and probably close to that with my Digibeta. Can’t do that anymore...producers want the next new shiny thing....so buying something for $12000 gives you an opportunity to make some money before you have to turn around and buy the new thing. But in saying all this....small cameras are great for cars and all the crazy small places I find myself. The cameras are all of such incredible quality now....I don’t care who makes them....they are all great...if you know what you’re doing you can make them all look good..

The days over spending $30000 per lens and $60000 on a camera body is something few can make work financially anymore I believe.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kris Denton said:

The days over spending $30000 per lens and $60000 on a camera body is something few can make work financially anymore I believe.

Whilst I agree with everything you say, this conversation began with ergonomics. Full size ENG/EFP camera ergonomics doesn’t inherently have to be linked to price.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Australian Image (Ray) said:

I should also have added that ENG cameras are really only for shoulder use, you get one and one perspective only, everything at eye level, unless you crouch. Other styles of cinema/video cameras allow greater variability with greater ease, up high, mid-level, low all in one smooth movement. The versatility and ease of movement leave an ENG camera well behind. Not saying it can't be done, but it's no where near as easy.

That is totally not right. You only get one perspective?? As someone who used ENG cameras for more than 20 years I can tell you that is so untrue. I just don’t get people who have never used cameras like that making blanket statements about how they work. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You can get a lot of shots with an ENG style camera, true, but it can be very cumbersome in some cases compared to a tiny DSLR-sized camera. I think that was his point. ENG cameras are designed to be on your shoulder, that's where they feel most comfortable. But trying to rig an Amira inside of a car? No thanks, I'd rather use something smaller.

Edited by Julien
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2021 at 9:48 AM, Nezih said:

That’s not entirely true. Shooting from the hip is really popular with that style of camera - especially in live studio environments on entertainment/challenge/sports/music shows.

Fair enough. I haven't ever seen anyone using an ENG camera use it in any other position than the shoulder. Mind you, I've only ever seen them outdoors or on TV news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 1/3/2021 at 11:37 PM, Matthew Allard ACS said:

That is totally not right. You only get one perspective?? As someone who used ENG cameras for more than 20 years I can tell you that is so untrue. I just don’t get people who have never used cameras like that making blanket statements about how they work. 

It was an observation that I've made from what I've seen over many years in predominantly outdoor situations.

That said, every discussion that I've seen/read about ENG cameras vs 'the others' revolves around the comfort, ease of use, whatever, of being able to hold it on one's the shoulder for long hours and be able to use the exceptional EVFs. ENG cameras are designed to be predominantly shoulder mounted, me thought.

What is one to assume when you see, read and hear nothing different? How about some examples of the versatility of an ENG camera shown in the article, compared to the others?

I've actually shown how versatile one of my run & gun rigs is when it comes to all manner of shooting options. I doubt very much that any ENG camera could compete.

As a footnote, I just came back from a week's camping in our High Country. It's not 'high' in comparison to what to what you get in say NZ, Europe or the US, but the term arose from the English settlers as they explored the land. Anyway, I took my rig along, with a Crane 3s gimbal, and I'd love to see a typical ENG camera, as depicted in the article, on such trips.

Edited by Australian Image (Ray)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Australian Image (Ray) said:

It was an observation that I've made from what I've seen over many years in predominantly outdoor situations.

That said, every discussion that I've seen/read about ENG cameras vs 'the others' revolves around the comfort, ease of use, whatever, of being able to hold it on one's the shoulder for long hours and be able to use the exceptional EVFs. ENG cameras are designed to be predominantly shoulder mounted, me thought.

What is one to assume when you see, read and hear nothing different? How about some examples of the versatility of an ENG camera shown in the article, compared to the others?

I've actually shown how versatile one of my run & gun rigs is when it comes to all manner of shooting options. I doubt very much that any ENG camera could compete.

As a footnote, I just came back from a week's camping in our High Country. It's not 'high' in comparison to what to what you get in say NZ, Europe or the US, but the term arose from the English settlers as they explored the land. Anyway, I took my rig along, with a Crane 3s gimbal, and I'd love to see a typical ENG camera, as depicted in the article, on such trips.

Again if you have no experience using cameras like that it’s hard to make any type of comment about them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course smaller cameras are/can be more versatile... but that doesn’t inherently mean ENG cameras are not. Yes, they can be large and cumbersome. But the fact that they balance well and sit comfortably in the shoulder without an elbow pinch point is a big deal for news gathering and documentary work.

Here’s an example of how they’re commonly used under slung. Ok, this is a studio camera, but essential the sabe form factor (although some of these are slightly smaller and lighter): Screen-Shot-2018-09-26-at-11.12.47.png

A good example was quite hard to find a photo of! But it is a common technique.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Matthew Allard ACS said:

Again if you have no experience using cameras like that it’s hard to make any type of comment about them. 

Experience comes for observation. It's what I've observed. When the only thing that you see and hear about ENG cameras is shoulder mount applications, what other deduction is one to make? I recently read this comment:

Quote

There are good reasons why 2/3″ B4 mount ENG/EFP cameras feature a form factor that hasn’t changed in decades. This form factor works really well for shoulder-mount shooting and you have a self-contained solution that doesn’t need to be built-up to work.

So that brings me back to the question, why haven’t we seen more digital cinema cameras that have the same form factor as a traditional ENG/EFP camera? It isn’t like there is no market for cameras like this. 

In fact, the entire article is about shoulder mounting. If these cameras are so versatile in all manner of applications, why isn't this more broadly discussed? Not just in one article, but everywhere? Perhaps buyers and manufacturers are also of the opinion that ENG 'style' cameras are purely for shoulder mount applications, given that it's the only application that's ever discussed, and examples of other uses are hard to find. 

I shall now get back in my box, close the lid, and hope that 2021 is a better year than the last.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Australian Image (Ray) said:

Experience comes for observation. It's what I've observed. When the only thing that you see and hear about ENG cameras is shoulder mount applications, what other deduction is one to make? I recently read this comment:

In fact, the entire article is about shoulder mounting. If these cameras are so versatile in all manner of applications, why isn't this more broadly discussed? Not just in one article, but everywhere? Perhaps buyers and manufacturers are also of the opinion that ENG 'style' cameras are purely for shoulder mount applications, given that it's the only application that's ever discussed, and examples of other uses are hard to find. 

I shall now get back in my box, close the lid, and hope that 2021 is a better year than the last.

Ray .. Ive observed thousands of air craft and flown in many too... but I wouldn't start telling pilots about the attributes or short comings of various models ... 

Edited by Robin Probyn
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, Robin Probyn said:

Ray .. Ive observed thousands of air craft and flown in many too... but I wouldn't start telling pilots about the attributes or short comings of various models ... 

Someone opened the box.

I'm not a trained mechanic, nor a trained IT specialist, nor a trained chef, nor a trained metal worker, nor a trained carpenter (to list a few things). However, I've worked in all of those fields (for want of a better word) and have experience in cars, IT, cooking, metal working, carpentry. I'm a professionally trained photographer. I've worked in the news media. I'm now very interested in documentary video and so have looked into every nook and cranny available learning about the field.

I think there's a vast difference between someone who has hands on skills in any profession/trade, or an amateur with intense interest, making comment on something closely or directly related to those skills, to someone who has never laid a hand or had any interest in such things. For example, are you one to deny some of the most surprising astronomical discoveries, made by amateur astronomers, because they weren't professionals in their field?

You don't always have to be a trained professional in any field to make valid observational comment about aspects of that field. More often than not, experts become so narrow-minded, lost in a bubble, that they can no longer see beyond what they believe to be their world and their truths. Call me the small boy who cried out... "But the Emperor has no clothes!"

I just wanted to add. I have a friend who is the general manager of a helicopter company and while he doesn't have a pilot license, he can tell you just about anything about 'the attributes or short comings of various models'.

Edited by Australian Image (Ray)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Australian Image (Ray) said:

Someone opened the box.

I'm not a trained mechanic, nor a trained IT specialist, nor a trained chef, nor a trained metal worker, nor a trained carpenter (to list a few things). However, I've worked in all of those fields (for want of a better word) and have experience in cars, IT, cooking, metal working, carpentry. I'm a professionally trained photographer. I've worked in the news media. I'm now very interested in documentary video and so have looked into every nook and cranny available learning about the field.

I think there's a vast difference between someone who has hands on skills in any profession/trade, or an amateur with intense interest, making comment on something closely or directly related to those skills, to someone who has never laid a hand or had any interest in such things. For example, are you one to deny some of the most surprising astronomical discoveries, made by amateur astronomers, because they weren't professionals in their field?

You don't always have to be a trained professional in any field to make valid observational comment about aspects of that field. More often than not, experts become so narrow-minded, lost in a bubble, that they can no longer see beyond what they believe to be their world and their truths. Call me the small boy who cried out... "But the Emperor has no clothes!"

I just wanted to add. I have a friend who is the general manager of a helicopter company and while he doesn't have a pilot license, he can tell you just about anything about 'the attributes or short comings of various models'.

Yes sure you can have your opinion , but in this case, what you said was totally and empirically  wrong , and you were informed thus by professional camera people who have used these cameras for decades .. and the new ones ..why not just leave it that .. its ok to be wrong and corrected by people actually working in the profession .. you could even thank those that have taken the time to correct your inaccurate claims to save you any embarrassment with a potential employer in the future ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Robin Probyn said:

Yes sure you can have your opinion , but in this case, what you said was totally and empirically  wrong , and you were informed thus by professional camera people who have used these cameras for decades .. and the new ones ..why not just leave it that .. its ok to be wrong and corrected by people actually working in the profession .. you could even thank those that have taken the time to correct your inaccurate claims to save you any embarrassment with a potential employer in the future ..

You only fixated on my second comment about shoulder use, not my first comment that covered more important issues. If I'm empirically wrong, then 'Why don’t we see more ENG/EFP form factor digital cinema cameras?'

I guess all the comments in the article itself, where they more or less reflect what I've noted, are empirically wrong as well.

This photo already tells the vast majority of people that ENG cameras are not for them, for the reasons I stated:

spacer.png

Yes, I'm well aware that you can do waist level shots, low level shots, over the head 'Hail Mary' shots etc with an ENG camera, but how many buy one with all of that in mind? Perhaps these people are also empirically wrong? And one should never dismiss an outside point of view; sometimes these can highlight the obvious that is often missed.

 
Quote

 

Kristian H. Nielsen 4 days ago

I do miss some aspects of the classic formfactor, but my spine do not miss the weight. I love being able to achieve a lot with less.

 

 
Edited by Australian Image (Ray)
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Australian Image (Ray) said:

You only fixated on my second comment about shoulder use, not my first comment that covered more important issues. If I'm empirically wrong, then 'Why don’t we see more ENG/EFP form factor digital cinema cameras?'

I guess all the comments in the article itself, where they more or less reflect what I've noted, are empirically wrong as well.

This photo already tells the vast majority of people that ENG cameras are not for them, for the reasons I stated:

spacer.png

Yes, I'm well aware that you can do waist level shots, low level shots, over the head 'Hail Mary' shots etc with an ENG camera, but how many buy one with all of that in mind? Perhaps these people are also empirically wrong? And one should never dismiss an outside point of view; sometimes these can highlight the obvious that is often missed.

 
 

Well no .. pretty much all you said was wrong ..really its wiser to have used the cameras before making sweeping comments on their use, than based on TV crews you have seen in the street or on TV..this is empirically true 🙂   .. the reason we don't see ENG type cameras is most likely because a small box is cheaper to make.. but then the buyer has to make them useable . your statement " greater variability with greater ease,"..also Im afraid not correct..its much harder to hold a small camera out in front of you than a larger camera on your shoulder ..  its a camera forum, so of course people with experience are going to flag up your comments that are not accurate .. no point digging a hole for yourself .. accept and move on .. everyone has been wrong its not a crime 🙂 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Robin Probyn said:

Well no .. pretty much all you said was wrong ..really its wiser to have used the cameras before making sweeping comments on their use, than based on TV crews you have seen in the street or on TV..this is empirically true 🙂   .. the reason we don't see ENG type cameras is most likely because a small box is cheaper to make.. but then the buyer has to make them useable . your statement " greater variability with greater ease,"..also Im afraid not correct..its much harder to hold a small camera out in front of you than a larger camera on your shoulder ..  its a camera forum, so of course people with experience are going to flag up your comments that are not accurate .. no point digging a hole for yourself .. accept and move on .. everyone has been wrong its not a crime 🙂 

I think you may be of the mind set where 'this is the way we've always done it' and therefore nothing else will be considered. The times they are a changing. It's not simply cost, but that's a major factor whether you're an independent or a company. Why is the RED Komodo so popular one may ponder? Cost, form-factor, size, weight, functionality, options available, accessories available etc.

You appear to assume a lot from what I've said regarding my knowledge of camera gear. When it comes to stills photography, I've shot with every conceivable camera type from large format to very small point and shoot cameras. So I have a pretty good idea of what size and weight means when it comes to hand holding a camera and keeping things steady.

My current run & gun rig weighs 4.1kg, something that many baulk at as being way too heavy, and I stick that on my Crane 3s which brings the total weight up to 8.3kg. My earlier rig weight 9.1kg on it's own. 4.1kg is just about right. Try placing your ENG camera from your shoulder onto a gimbal, then a slider or maybe a car rig. I think that you'll find the versatility I spoke of isn't so applicable to the photo I posted.

And you are using that old argument from authority basis:

Quote

An argument from authority, also known as an appeal to authority, is an argument that relies on the status of the person cited instead of their ideas. There is always a chance that any authority can be wrong, that's why the critical thinker accepts facts provisionally.

I think that you are wrong.

And why don’t we see more ENG/EFP form factor digital cinema cameras? Because the manufacturers are right.

And in case you don't think I have any idea about cinema cameras etc, here's my latest and most favourite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC_boIGYPY8.

 

Edited by Australian Image (Ray)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Australian Image (Ray) said:

I think you may be of the mind set where 'this is the way we've always done it' and therefore nothing else will be considered. The times they are a changing. It's not simply cost, but that's a major factor whether you're an independent or a company. Why is the RED Komodo so popular one may ponder? Cost, form-factor, size, weight, functionality, options available, accessories available etc.

You appear to assume a lot from what I've said regarding my knowledge of camera gear. When it comes to stills photography, I've shot with every conceivable camera type from large format to very small point and shoot cameras. So I have a pretty good idea of what size and weight means when it comes to hand holding a camera and keeping things steady.

My current run & gun rig weighs 4.1kg, something that many baulk at as being way too heavy, and I stick that on my Crane 3s which brings the total weight up to 8.3kg. My earlier rig weight 9.1kg on it's own. 4.1kg is just about right. Try placing your ENG camera from your shoulder onto a gimbal, then a slider or maybe a car rig. I think that you'll find the versatility I spoke of isn't so applicable to the photo I posted.

And you are using that old argument from authority basis:

I think that you are wrong.

And why don’t we see more ENG/EFP form factor digital cinema cameras? Because the manufacturers are right.

And in case you don't think I have any idea about cinema cameras etc, here's my latest and most favourite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC_boIGYPY8.

 

I didnt say anything about stills cameras , by your admission you have never used ENG cameras ??  I don't think I was assuming anything more you yourself had stated ..no ?..  and sorry but what you said was "wrong" there is no other word ..  of course an ENG camera wont fit on a small gimbal ..not many cameras will let alone ENG .. you would need another camera for that or a steadi cam .. not sure what your point is there ..  the same reasons you put forward its also why I wouldn't try to debate you after I had made an incorrect statement about a certain stills camera , I have no experience with them and so would keep my mouth shut ,or at least accept I was wrong , .. your really digging a hole now sir ... 

Edited by Robin Probyn
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Robin Probyn said:

I didnt say anything about stills cameras , by your admission you have never used ENG cameras ??  I don't think I was assuming anything more you yourself had stated ..no ?..  and sorry but what you said was "wrong" there is no other word ..  of course an ENG camera wont fit on a small gimbal ..not many cameras will let alone ENG .. you would need another camera for that or a steadi cam .. not sure what your point is there ..  the same reasons you put forward its also why I wouldn't try to debate you after I had made an incorrect statement about a certain stills camera , I have no experience with them and so would keep my mouth shut ,or at least accept I was wrong , .. your really digging a hole now sir ... 

I never said I'd used ENG cameras, my reference to stills cameras was in response to your assumption that I know nothing about how camera weight assists in stability. The physics apply in stills photography as they do in video.

I'm not digging a hole, you are lobbing grenades, being obnoxious and making personal attacks. Had you responded in a more affable manner, debating my points, rather than calling me ignorant, I would have done so in return. 

But since you decided to go on the attack, I returned fire. You can continue the attacks and I will continue to return fire, make no mistake about that. I am not one to back down simply because one person insists that I do so.

The comments that I made at the beginning still stand and no one has yet provided any evidence to refute them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Australian Image (Ray) said:

I never said I'd used ENG cameras, my reference to stills cameras was in response to your assumption that I know nothing about how camera weight assists in stability. The physics apply in stills photography as they do in video.

I'm not digging a hole, you are lobbing grenades, being obnoxious and making personal attacks. Had you responded in a more affable manner, debating my points, rather than calling me ignorant, I would have done so in return. 

But since you decided to go on the attack, I returned fire. You can continue the attacks and I will continue to return fire, make no mistake about that. I am not one to back down simply because one person insists that I do so.

The comments that I made at the beginning still stand and no one has yet provided any evidence to refute them.

Oh boy, I give up...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Matthew Allard ACS said:

Oh boy, I give up...........

Don't give up, just debate what I said in my first post. Don't get wrapped around the axles over my second post (even though it's mostly true in practical terms).

Why don’t we see more ENG/EFP form factor digital cinema cameras? Because the market doesn't want them.

Pick your reasons why the market doesn't want them, but if they were likely to be popular, they would be available.

Even in this thread people ostensibly agree with what I have said, yet I seem to be the target of ongoing vitriol.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • New Posts

    • Hi Nezih its a nice review of Ergorig as Run& Gun has mention that the current version of Ergorig is not having  the roll adjustment for the top plate, is very sad. as this option of roll adjustment will definitely helps the operator to balance the camera accordingly. why at the first place they took out this roll adjustment? now if anyone wants the old model of ERGORIG with roll adjustment how to get it. one more thing when the camera is resting on your shoulder what ever vibration due to operations( like running on a rough patch) are taken care by the shoulder, i mean shoulder acts as cushioning and counters the vibration to some extent. but here the camera is resting on a metal part where the body vibrations are directly transferred to camera . what's your say on this? thank you
    • Hannes Farima, I use My F3 with an Atomos Samurai, via SDI, and it works very well. Which recorder did you use? /Nicklas
    • Yeah its an interview / general lighting style I like and learnt ,as an assistant , from a guy who has now been Oscar nominated .. Barry Ackroyd BSC..  less is more as he says .. Europe has embraced this more natural style alot earlier than the US.. I would often get some push back from US directors who wanted back lights, fill lights,  hair lights , eye lights and lights under the chin..  !!  everywhere .. and it seems when I look at the forums on line ,the US still is generally using so many lights for a simple HS shot .. but the more "natural" look has at last taken off as it seems every Netflix doc is now done like this ..  with the larger sensor ,I have fx9 and shoot FF , interviews F1.8 or 2.8 ish .. there is often no longer any need to light up the BG much either ..
    • Gotcha.  Yeah, the V1 PSU/Ballast set-up is super janky. You sound like a man after my own heart.  I've always been a "no-fill" guy.  I like shadows in the right places.  One of the long running, very popular doc series I used to shoot for was a single light on the subject.  No hair or edge and no fill.  Just the key.  But we lit the HELL out of the background.  I can just imagine if we were shooting that same series today, instead of ~20+ years ago.
×
×
  • Create New...