Norway Cinematic Video

Very slick. Nicely done. I liked those cool transitions but I like even more that you didn’t over use them. Tasteful. Where did you get them? I presume they weren’t hand crafted. I’ve seen some like that on the FCPeffects site. I also noticed that you appear to have used a 2.35:1 widescreen mask. I’m also a big fan of that look.

 

Stunning video..exceptional editing...very professional looking!

 

Thanks much! I’ll check them out.

 

Beutifull scenery from a beautiful country captured by a talented drone pilot!

 

Andy: I stopped watching before the end. Why? I was having to see the same building structure (which was not exactly up to the standard of the Houses of Parliament or Edinburgh Castle, let alone the Taj Mahal) for the nth time. Earlier, I was able to get past the gimmick transitions - which are rarely, if ever, a substitute for interesting content - because your overall filming and speed of editing was good. I’m sure you’ve heard of “less is more” because you’re part way there, but I’d be much harder on what should really be left unseen or on the proverbial cutting room floor if I were you.

I’m commenting - constructively - in the hope that you realise the huge benefits of error-focused learning. Whereas it might be stretching the meaning of the word “error” here, you’d never see a BBC documentary making such basic mistakes. For every few seconds of a David Attenborough wildlife film, for example, most people would be shocked at how much excellent footage - usually obtained under the most difficult circumstances - remains unseen/unused. Their editors really understand “less is more”.

I hardly ever comment on videos posted on this excellent forum because the general standard is very poor when you consider the brilliant drone technology and editing software available. I’m not sure most people really want any honest feedback - even if the same people would probably moan and groan at having to sit through a viewing of yet another holiday video shot by a friend. 007 (as I call him) is an obvious exception. The fact I’m commenting here should be taken as an overall positive.

To anyone else reading this, I would make a general plea: Why can’t the standards of hobby films - aerial or otherwise - not be better? The camera quality is nowadays not a limiting factor. And everyone who watches TV has endless examples in front of them of how to film and edit something visually interesting and watchable. So is there really a valid excuse for not doing better - or much better?

 

Andy: Thank you for taking my comments in the spirit they were intended.

Editing yourself does require being really hard on yourself, especially as “you were there” with all the associated feelings and memories. But it certainly can be achieved and practice makes it second nature.

Professional editors - whether for film, stills photography, print, or other - have the luxury and training of detached independence.

One of the tricks is to push hard for getting really good content. Even then, apply “less is more”.

I learnt mainly with stills photography. Even when all of my team were pleased with the results, I’d often disagree and aim to do better. Then I’d achieve the improved results.

In my opinion, the importance of editing should be placed at the top of the list - just under safety. Then composition, exposure, etc.

 

Nicely done.

 

Wow what a great footage you got there nice man keep it up!

 

Andy: We waited for years until the camera quality reached a certain level or standard before getting a drone: the P4P+. We haven’t been disappointed at all. In the UK, we were easily able to get 10% off as standard, plus a good backpack thrown in for free - from one of the main reputable sellers.

 

Check out this post. The second video linked to has the real detail on the image quality comparison.

Phantom 4 Pro Camera vs Mavic Pro 2 Camera

 

Green,

I think I saw in one of your tutorials that you shoot in d-log. Bear in mind that the P4P will force the ISO to be 500 in d-log. You can’t go lower. I like to shoot at ISO 100 for lower noise. So I only shoot in d-cinelike now.

 

Andy: I’ve just emailed my logistics colleague in the UK for the answer. I’ll get back to you soon.

Meanwhile, I would really encourage you to upgrade as your footage warrants it. What the P4P camera can do is impressive for the price in terms of quality and manual control.

 

Ditto. We also use d-cinelike.