|
This thread is for the discussion of film and video, be it film making, hardware, or general knowledge. Or why a 32 gig card for an HVX costs over $1400 for 80 min of footage. I mean, what the hell panasonic?
|
#
?
May 29, 2009 02:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 11:27 |
|
|
I just picked up a Canon XH-A1, and I'm wondering first of all what the best fisheye/wide angle lens would be for it. I'd like to shoot some skating with my camera, and that would be the fisheye's primary use. Also, if anyone has any suggestions for the op, I'd be happy to add them.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2009 02:40
|
|
|
And cue cricket chirps.. No idea about your fish-eye. You could probably hit up B&H and see what's recommended for your camera model. To keep the conversation going, here's a link to my final project for my school's tv/film program: http://www.vimeo.com/4792004 If you want, I'd like to hear anyone's thoughts after viewing, good or bad. Either way, enjoy.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2009 02:45
|
|
|
Slim Pickens posted:Or why a 32 gig card for an HVX costs over $1400 for 80 min of footage. I mean, what the hell panasonic? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/618135-REG/Panasonic_AJ_P2E064XG_P2_MEMORY_CARD_64GB.html  Anyway, full-time shooter checking in.. I shoot mostly HD and use Panasonic, though I have shot with everything from the RED to the Phantom HD to the Iconnix HD system. I primarily work between broadcast documentaries and corporate/commercial gigs. Never really had an interest in shooting features, I'm way to addicted to the travel and randomness that's thrown at me on a weekly basis from these other gigs. That's about all I've got to add for now. Anyone else? What's everyone working on?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2009 02:56
|
|
|
That's kind of a bargain, but the price of P2 cards is one of the many reasons I went with a Canon XH-A1 instead. Non-linear video capture sounds great, but I don't have the extra 3 grand for the convenience. How'd you like the RED camera? I hear they're the poo poo. The Affair posted:http://www.vimeo.com/4792004 I thought it was pretty well shot and edited, although some parts seemed to drag on a little longer than I'd prefer. The audio would spike every once in a while, too, like when the music in one of the scenes came on. It didn't hold my interest, but then again I'm not one of the students or parents of the film. Just for future documentaries, do something unique that'll keep the audience interested. Overall, though, job well done. I'll post up my own stuff once I start making it, probably sometime in the fall when I start school. Slim Pickens fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Jun 1, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2009 03:51
|
|
|
Yeah, on the prosumer/camcorder side of things, Panasonic isn't making it easy for people on a budget at all. The E series P2 cards will be useful for me, but will still make it tough for someone starting out. My HVX-200a package has been slowly growing since I bought it last year, but I've sunk more thank $12k into it at this point. Fortunately I get enough corporate work that it's already paid for itself. Otherwise I wouldn't have purchased any camera last year at all and just bummed my friend's Varicam or bugged one of the 3 other filmmakers in my city that have HVX packages ready to go at any time. High-end commercial and documentary work doesn't shoot with cameras at this level due to network snobbery, but if you can get yourself on some corporate gravy-train for a few years like I'm doing, it will help you build a great kit so you can work on your own stuff on the side, or move on to bigger and better things when the opportunity presents itself. It helps that I'm in a fairly corporate-rich market (Connecticut) and that I'm close enough to New York City to be on it's radar for some bigger jobs, but the same basic principle applies anywhere really. And for the RED - kickass camera.. I think it's really at a point where it can be considered a serious solution for a lot of different types of shoots. I had a green screen job last week that shot on a stage in NYC - we had previously been shooting with Panasonic HDX-900's but found limitations when shooting full-body action on green screen in 720 or 1080. The budget was modest, but not a $100 million Hollywood production, so we opted to give the RED a try. We shot with a set of Arri prime lenses - amazing quality, a RED camera is at it's best with a good set of cine primes. We shot full 4k, which even at the maximum settings, only barely filled up a 320gb drive by the end of the day. The on-set data management workflow was really simple - as easy if not easier than P2. We ended up sending the footage to a DI shop in Manhattan for a high-end color correct, also a critical component to shooting RED if you're at all serious about quality. In the end that only cost us about $800 which, if you're familiar with online editing in NY, is a bargain. Opening the 4k footage in After Effects and pulling a key is just insane, but in the end the RED proved itself and then some - and it only slightly raised the budget versus shooting with Panasonic or Sony. Unfortunately, I think a RED camera package is still going to be out of reach of the average low-budget production due to all of the above.. it may have a cheaper price tag than the high-end Panasonic or Sony gear to start, but when you really begin to price things out and factor in all the post-related issues, it becomes just another moderately expensive tool. I would still recommend getting your hands on one if you ever have the chance - totally worth it even if you're just playing around, it's a fun camera!
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2009 04:59
|
|
|
So... let's keep it moving, shall we? What has everyone been working on lately? For one of those online video production companies that only hire you if you own your own gear, I shot for a popular men's magazines: "Hometown Hotties" yesterday. Only got hassled by the cops a little. I used a friend's JVC GY-HD200. Wonderful HDV camera, absolutely more than I could ask for quality wise. I still love my XL2, though. This is the first time a client's requested HD footage. Last weekend for a local cable company I shot an induction ceremony to the woman's basketball hall of fame on really, really ancient DVCAM cameras, switched live. I like broadcast quality cameras, but boy do I hate the bulk sometimes. Coming up I've got some low-paying gig for the local convention center, pulling cable and setting up big screens. Should be a hoot. In the immediate future I'm going to try and get going my next documentary and start shooting a friend's new YouTube series. Sadly both of those are free endeavors.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2009 21:09
|
|
|
I'm about to shoot a short that I wrote and a friend of mine is producing. I'm really excited about it. Related: Does anyone have good ideas for a no budget way to make it look like someone gets hit by a car? I want him rolling up the hood, so I was thinking of cutting from a shot of him turning his head to see the car to an interior shot of him on the hood. What are the odds it will look like garbage if I have him roll down the hood and reverse the footage?
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 03:05
|
|
|
Rogetz posted:I'm about to shoot a short that I wrote and a friend of mine is producing. I'm really excited about it. shot of the car approaching the guy getting hit shot from inside the car of dude rolling up over windshield, real quick cut shot of the guy laying on the road with the car driving off away from the camera (and guy) should be pretty straightforward.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 03:47
|
|
|
He can get hit and not get hurt. If it's shot from the interior, it'll look more dramatic I think, even if it's only 5 mph. I think reversing the rolling down the hood would look crap, since it would look like he rolled up onto the hood from the ground. I'll work on improving the OP with some tips for beginning film makers or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 03:47
|
|
|
Unfortunately, I'm not working on anything at the moment. At least, nothing that isn't very, very early pre-production or post-production.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 03:53
|
|
|
Yeah I was thinking of just doing it carefully as a stunt. An afternoon of practice shooting should nail it down pretty well. Now I have to decide on going handheld or building a rig for inside the car. I can probably get away with handheld for such a quick cut but I do love building poo poo and figuring out the best way to use it. On a somewhat related note - anyone know how expensive it would be to rent studio space around the Denver area? It would be nice to have an equipment and prop laboratory and storage space. Probably an editing suite as well so I don't get distracted when working on projects like I do at home.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 04:14
|
|
|
Just chiming in to say Ron Fricke is god incarnate and I cannot wait for Samsara to finally come out. Also, did some homework, and here's a list of 70mm or the updated version, SDS-70 (which runs 70mm at 96 images per-second) theaters in the US which would be capable of showing Samsara in it's full glory: Phoenix, AZ - Scottsdale 101 (Cine-Capri auditorium) Vancouver, BC - Granville Corte Madera, CA - Cinema Hollywood, CA - Grauman's Chinese Theatre or Cinerama Dome Newport Beach, CA - Big Newport San Francisco, CA - Any multiplex with side-masking (or a palace that shows movies) San Jose, CA - Century 21 Denver, CO - Continental or the Northfield Wasington, DC - Uptown Miami, FL - Dolphin Mall Calumet City, IL - River Oaks #9 Chicago, IL - Showplace at Roosevelt Collection Oak Park, IL - Lake Kansas City, KS - Legends at Village West Baltimore, MD - Senator Boston, MS - Fenway Minneapolis, MN - Block E St. Louis, MI - Esquire New York, NY - Ziegfield New York, NY - Lincoln Square Columbus, OH - Crosswoods UltraScreen Toronto, ON - Any theater with a large screen with side-masking (Sorry AMC 24) Philadelphia, PA - Franklin Mills Montréal, QC - Banque Scotia or the Marche Central Dallas, TX - Galaxy Houston, TX - Grand Palace Stadium Seattle, WA - Cinerama Brookfield, WI - Majestic UltraScreen These theaters can upgrade to 70mm DTS with very little cost. For SDS-70, the owners would lease the equipment for the duration of the movie's run. Support your local 70mm projection houses, people!! more info: http://www.in70mm.com/workshop/index.htm http://www.superdimension70.com/ dorkasaurus_rex fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Jun 22, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 04:19
|
|
|
Slim Pickens posted:This thread is for the discussion of film and video, be it film making, hardware, or general knowledge. Or why a 32 gig card for an HVX costs over $1400 for 80 min of footage. I mean, what the hell panasonic? This is why I am planning on getting the XH-A1 when I finally save up enough money to buy an HDV camera. I've shot on the HVX-200 (all we had were 8gb P2 cards  ) for school, but my friend has an XH-A1 and I also used it to shoot an event for a local cable station. That and I'm partial to Canon (the XH has an L series lens  ).What does everybody use for post-production? I'm a final cut pro 6 man myself, though I have dabbled in Avid and Premeire Pro. I have very little experience in After Effects, though I am taking two post-production classes next semester. *edit* Slim, if you have the money you can try to get a 35mm adapter for the XH-A1 (something like the Red Rock) or make one yourself. Find some cheap, manual focus wide lenses and stick one of those on. Of course...there are probably cheaper alternatives but this is one way to do it. pr0digal fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Jun 22, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 19:25
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:
Currently using Final Cut Studio 2 myself. I wanted to learn Avid last semester, but I got called in for an emergency four-days-before-the-student-film-festival edit (almost from scratch), so I didn't have time to learn it. Oh, and a DOF adapter is money well spent. Our films were shot on an HVX-100 (b, I think), and the M2 adapter works wonders.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 21:01
|
|
|
FCP editor, After Effects animator. We were required to learn Avid for my program, but I haven't touched (nor will, hopefully) since. The XH-A1 is a beautiful camera. Say what you will about the ease of solid state recording, there's nothing more comforting than a physical backup on with a little size to it. My dream camera would be something made by Canon that does all the bells and whistles, records to tape, and employs the 5DMK2 sensor and EOS lenses. It would also be lovely if it were the general size and price of an XH-A1 I'd also like a pony.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 22:06
|
|
|
On the topic of camera owning love, just want to throw in my bias towards my Sony EX-1. Although the EX-3 is certainly lovelier in terms of shooting with, I haven't felt the need to upgrade my EX-1 for that realm of gigs where producers are looking for shooters with their own camera. And while SxS cards (Sony version of P2) are still mighty expensive, a 16 gig SxS gets you just shy of an hour of footage at 1080 / 24p. Granted for doc work where you may shoot up to four hours a day, I think the good HDV cameras are the way to go. Although the massive chore of capturing tape is something I am very eager to leave behind forever. Th Red is a great system, but as it stands with the Red One, it is much more of a film style of shooting. With that nice big sensor and nice prime lenses, you're probably going to want a good focus puller working on your crew. Also with batteries and drives bolted on, the camera is best suited on a tripod or an elaborate handheld rig that balances the thing with a 2nd AC standing by to hold it. The image the Red gets is very nice, I just wouldn't consider it the right camera for the low/no budget run and gun shoot. Maybe that will change with the new Scarlet system coming out whenever that comes out. Maybes and don't knows. I've also operated on a short with a pair of 5D mark 2s... It was a very frustrating experience because of the now moot point of no manual shooting mode. It would be a much more pleasant experience after the recent firmware update. Still, I would choose to shoot an EX-1 over a 5D for most projects because the camera is much friendlier to the way a motion operator works. But with that full frame sensor and some really fantastic still lenses, I could see doing some very very cool things with the 5D. But whether professional snobbery or producers wanting to stick to the workflows and systems they are comfortable with, I have never seen nor heard anyone looking for a shooter with a 5D outside of student or experimental stuff (in other words, unpaid.) Just want to give my support to a SA cinematography thread, though I'm mostly a griptrician and a gaffer on student shoots. For anyone looking for other online groups, the other forums for the cinematographically inclined I'm aware of are: https://www.reduser.net which does skew technical and Red centric (although I highly recommend the Ask David Mullen anything thread (http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2714) https://www.cinematography.com a good source with some very knowledgeable professionals And I would love to link to Roger Deakins forum which was utterly brilliant and amazing and sadly gone forever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 22:32
|
|
|
As a still photographer with an interest in trying motion picture, I have to say the 5d MkII is looking amazing, just from looking at people's demos on youtube. Mostly as an opportunity to shoot mp with existing (and cheap) primes and a platform I'm familiar with, as opposed to learning to shoot with a different physical setup. Of course it's far out of my pricerange, and since I'm a Nikon guy (investment in lenses sucks), it's doubly frustrating since their video performance isn't as impressive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2009 22:59
|
|
|
I'm all about that 5DMk2, just waiting for some more features to be resolved. 24P (and 25 for our PAL friends) and the ability to record to an external harddrive or laptop would about seal the deal. Rolling shutter solution would be nice too. Come to think of it, has ANY camera company made progress on getting around that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 03:20
|
|
|
The Affair posted:I'm all about that 5DMk2, just waiting for some more features to be resolved. 24P (and 25 for our PAL friends) and the ability to record to an external harddrive or laptop would about seal the deal. It would be amazing if they released a firmware update to allow the 5D MKII to shoot in 24P (well 23.98 :p). I know the XH-A1 has an L series lens. But imagine throwing a 50mm 1.2 on a FF camera that could shoot 1080 24P, the bokeh would be goddamn amazing. Of course..shooting at 1.2 could cause some issues if your focus point was off the slightest bit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 03:33
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:It would be amazing if they released a firmware update to allow the 5D MKII to shoot in 24P (well 23.98 :p). I know the XH-A1 has an L series lens. But imagine throwing a 50mm 1.2 on a FF camera that could shoot 1080 24P, the bokeh would be goddamn amazing. Of course..shooting at 1.2 could cause some issues if your focus point was off the slightest bit. The Full Frame sensor really isn't necessary to get some seriously shallow DOF. "Let The Right One In" shot by Hoyte van Hoytema was shot on Super 35 (for the photogs reading this, Super 35 is very close to APS-C cropping the top and bottom to a 2.40:1 aspect ratio) on Zeiss Distagons which open to a T1.3. American Cinematographer did an article on it http://www.theasc.com/magazine_dynamic/December2008/LettheRightOneIn/page1.php When the eye is in focus and the end of the eye lash is noticeably out of focus, then I think you have achieved as shallow a depth of field as you want on a person's face. I'm kind of negative on using the 5DMark2 as a motion camera, but that is comparing it with purpose built film and video cameras, most of them costing ten to fifty times what the 5D does. It is a pretty amazing tool available to a whole group of people that didn't really have a powerful HD camera in their hands before. I really like what photographer Clayton Cubitt is doing with it in what he calls long portraits. NWS http://claytoncubitt.tumblr.com/search/long+portrait NWS. Edit: going to change my "might be NWS" on that Clayton Cubitt link to a more emphatic NWS. Carefree Koala fucked around with this message at 05:49 on Jun 23, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 05:40
|
|
|
drat, this thread got a lot of replies since last time I checked. I agree the video on the 5Dmk2 looks great, but I can't imagine trying to make movies on it, mostly due to the one frame rate and no way to improve on-board audio, although you could record audio separately and sync it in post. I haven't ever played with the camera, though, so maybe spending some time with it would change my mind. I think it'd work for someone like Reichstag, but if you get more into film making I think it would make the whole process more cumbersome. Edit: I'll look into that red rock and other 35mm adapters, but just from looking at the redrock page my first thought is "holy poo poo I bet that's expensive as all hell". And it is, nearly 7 grand for a complete setup. But god drat does it take some awesome footage. http://www.redrockmicro.com/lensadapter/ Slim Pickens fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Jun 23, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 06:26
|
|
|
Yeah, the Red produces some amazing goddamn stuff. Question: My friends and I are thinking of shooting a short film this summer (if we ever finish writing it), is it feasible to do it on next to no budget with only the following equipment available? -Sony VX2100 -2 wireless mics and one auxiliary (could handmake a boom for it I'm sure) -Laptop (not to imply processing power is an issue) with Vegas 7 365 Nog Hogger fucked around with this message at 09:40 on Jun 23, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 07:58
|
|
|
Sure it is. I'm not too familiar with sony camcorders, but if the mics can hook up to it, you've got a better audio setup going then a lot of people. Just storyboard it out and plan your shots accordingly. Vegas 7 is pretty good for how cheap it is. If the laptop sucks you might have issues rendering the video, but I don't think I've had any issues with vegas on a $900 acer laptop.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 09:13
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:Yeah, the Red produces some amazing goddamn stuff. Yeah, it is. The only thing you might need is an XLR Adapter (I am not sure of the technical term) to screw on to the bottom of the VX and allow you to use XLR mics. Of course, that hinges on whether or not your mics are XLR based. Unless of course, your mics are mini-plug based. I'm not sure of the exact model you'll need as I haven't used a VX2000 since my freshman year.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 14:11
|
|
|
Thanks to my friend/producer who works at the local access TV station we now have access to a small but complete lighting kit (mini spotlight, two fills and a couple of large bounce boards) AND we may get to use this project to test out the new HD camera(s) that they have coming in next week. Things are falling amazingly in to place. Aside from speeding up and slowing down footage, does anyone have any good examples of Directors/DPs playing around with framerates? I'm planning on shooting in 24p but I think the new cameras that the station is getting have the option of going higher or lower than that and I was thinking it might be fun to experiment during the car stunt. Also, Cinematography.com has a list of 40 or so recommended books found here: http://astore.amazon.com/cinematographyco?node=1&page=3 Anyone read any of these that can comment? Might be good to have a reading list in the OP. I have two of them so far: The Five C's of Cinematography by Joseph V. Mascelli - Extremely comprehensive look at the classic Hollywood style of cinematography and blocking. It's pretty dry and reads a bit like a technical manual because, in a way, it is one. Great especially for newbies. Film Lighting by Kris Malkiewicz - An indispensable book with not only descriptions of each type of lighting set-up, how they work, and why, but it's also loaded with interviews from people working in the field. I'm also picking up Digital Cinematography, The Filmmaker's Handbook, and Master Shots. They should be shipping today or tomorrow. And finally a slight derail, anyone know of any must have books that deal with directing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 16:54
|
|
|
Rogetz posted:Thanks to my friend/producer who works at the local access TV station we now have access to a small but complete lighting kit (mini spotlight, two fills and a couple of large bounce boards) AND we may get to use this project to test out the new HD camera(s) that they have coming in next week. Things are falling amazingly in to place. Not to toot my own horn here, but 24P looks pretty drat cool slowed down. However, the general rule is to "overcrank" when you want to slow down. That is on a film camera, shoot at a higher framerate so that when you play it back at the normal framerate, its all slow (if I am incorrect here, a film goon correct me please) The issue with changing the framerate, say going from 24P to 30P, means that you lose that "film look" and I can tell you from experience that cutting with footage from both "video look" and "film look" is a massive pain in the rear end. As far as slowing down 24P goes, I have an example to show you from one of my student projects. We shot on the HVX-200 at 720P 24PN. I forget exactly how much I slowed it down, but it shows the effect quite well. http://vimeo.com/2570833 <---starts around 2:44 and doesn't last too long but I think it gets the idea across. Another pretty nifty editing effect is putting a crossfade between a normal clip and a sped up/slowed down clip. Creates some ghosting effects which, while a bit campy, can be used in certain situations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 17:19
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:Not to toot my own horn here, but 24P looks pretty drat cool slowed down. However, the general rule is to "overcrank" when you want to slow down. That is on a film camera, shoot at a higher framerate so that when you play it back at the normal framerate, its all slow (if I am incorrect here, a film goon correct me please) You're right in that over cranking means shooting at a higher frame rate which results in slow motion on playback. Under cranking means shooting at a lower frame per second number resulting in jerky sped up motion (think Silent Era Chaplin and Buster Keaton movies.) Eventually under cranking becomes time lapse. The terms have migrated from film to video regardless of format (they originated in the days when film cameras had to be physically cranked by the operator before motors were integrated to advance the film.) Don't confuse the frame rate you are shooting at with the frame rate you are playing back at. The 24p "film look" versus the 30p "video look" is only associated with the playback speed. And since most of your shots will be at normal speed, that means your shooting frame rate will match your playback frame rate most of the time. A shot filmed at 48fps and played back at 24 will be the same length and have the same apparent slow motion as a 60fps shot played back at 30. The only difference will be that hard to quantify "film vs video look." In fact, with some experimentation with your editor, you can film shoot in 30p and then change it in post (if your project is going to be at 24p at the end of the day) which will give you a smoother slow motion effect than just shooting 24p and using frame bending or other post effects to slow the shot down. Although, as long as you aren't getting ridiculous, Final Cut and Vegas can do a pretty decent job slowing down footage shot at normal 1:1 speed as pr0digal said. Definitely check out Christopher Doyle's work with director Wong Kar Wai. In The Mood for Love and 2046 come to mind for a whole heaping of over cranking for a very dream like lyrical effect. Also, love him or hate him, Michael Bay knows how to use over cranking for action sequences if that is the style you are looking for.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 17:49
|
|
|
Carefree Koala posted:
Ahh thank you. You did a better job of explaining that than I did (well, you just went much more indepth.) I want to be an editor/work in post-production when I get out of college so I need all the tips I can get
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 18:54
|
|
|
http://vimeo.com/4378163?pg=embed&sec= speaking of the 5dmkII, here's one of the nicer pieces of video I've seen shot on it yet
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 20:08
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:http://vimeo.com/4378163?pg=embed&sec= speaking of the 5dmkII, here's one of the nicer pieces of video I've seen shot on it yet What did you use for the mic? One of the gripes I have heard about the 5DmkII is the onboard mic isn't the greatest in the world. Also, what lens were you shooting with?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 20:16
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:http://vimeo.com/4378163?pg=embed&sec= speaking of the 5dmkII, here's one of the nicer pieces of video I've seen shot on it yet I don't want to dwell to much on the 5DMk2 in this thread, but I think this video highlights most of my criticisms of the camera and a good scenario where it shouldn't be used. Don't take this as a slam against what is a fun video, but a critique of the camera techniques inherent in the 5D and what they are baking into the images. Shallow depth of field is not your friend. Most of these shots are of a very deep crowd of people shot from within the crowd. That feeling of being there is directly at odds with having a shallow depth of field which isolates the object of focus from everything else in frame. Artistically, I think this would benefit more from a deep focus where the viewer can choose what they are looking at, let their gaze roam around the ever present crowd. This criticism is compounded massively because the depth of field is too shallow to hold. Things are popping in and out of focus, very annoying, very distracting. There is a very real problem of eye fatigue in your viewer. Watching on a windowed vimeo screen might be okay, but full screen it and really get in close to watch it. If the video is filling your field of view, your own eyes are going to start fighting against the changing focus. Projected on a theater size big screen, this is going to cause a great deal of physical discomfort in your viewers. The effect on editing: Perhaps this was a stylistic choice, the quick cutting to different people and different shots, but I am also willing to bet that having a handheld camera, and that focus going all over the place is going to really hamstring you in post to where you HAVE TO edit with quick cuts because your shots can only contain a few seconds of usable footage before some bad jiggle or focus renders it totally unusable. Once the flashes start popping in the big fight, the rolling shutter artifacts are just a nightmare. I would guess the camera went to a 1/30th frame rate, which means it is going to catch almost every one of those flashes and garble it into a light blob over half the frame. Also, a limitation of most still lenses is breathing. It isn't too too bad in these, but it is enough to further strain the viewer's eyes along with the wildly racking focus. (breathing is when a lens slightly zooms in or out while focusing, mostly immaterial in still and a big big issue in motion with focus racks.) I don't want to seem too harsh, but I really think this obsession with shallow depth of field is bordering on gimmicky. There needs to be a reason for it. Film history is riddled with great movies that went to enormous lengths to get deep focus (Citizen Kane.) As a cinematographer, even just a student or just playing around, don't approach it with the mindset of "I want shallow depth of field because that is what real movies have" but ask "what do I want to achieve visually, what feelings and impressions do I want to impart on the audience and how will my selected depth of field achieve that?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 20:39
|
|
|
^^one of the things that I think should be stressed with 5D MKII shooting is: you need a tripod, hands down. If you want to do any sort of shooting with the 5D MKII (or really any camera) you really need a tripod. I know that it's documentary style but it got a little jarring by the end with all the quick cuts and focus pulls. If I had the chance, would I buy a MKII? Certainly. But the video capabilities would be secondary to me as I also do photography. For purposes of video, I would go with an XH-A1 over a 5D MKII. Because the XH-A1 is devoted to capturing 1080P while in the MKII its just a side feature.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 21:08
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:http://vimeo.com/4378163?pg=embed&sec= speaking of the 5dmkII, here's one of the nicer pieces of video I've seen shot on it yet Ouhh, it was a mistake to watch this with a migraine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 21:50
|
|
|
Rogetz posted:And finally a slight derail, anyone know of any must have books that deal with directing? Steven D. Katz's book 'Film Directing: Shot by Shot' is fantastic. http://www.amazon.com/Film-Directing-Shot-Visualizing-Productions/dp/0941188108/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b His other book 'Cinematic Motion' is good too. Check them both out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 22:10
|
|
|
"pr0diga"l posted:one of the things that I think should be stressed with 5D MKII shooting is: you need a tripod, hands down. If you want to do any sort of shooting with the 5D MKII (or really any camera) you really need a tripod. I think it can be more generalized to, shooting with a shallow depth of field really necessitates a tripod, not just the 5D. Think about shooting with a very shallow dof on a still camera where you end up with a lot of missed focus shots. In motion, you can’t just cut out the offending missed focus moments, you have to hold that extremely precise distance between the camera and the subject or your AC needs to be spot on pulling focus. A tripod is going to eliminate one of those variables making it much easier to achieve. I’m trying to think of some other notable depth of field movies. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly comes to mind, which had a large number of shots done on a Lensbaby, shot by Janusz Kaminski (has shot all of Spielberg's movies since Schindler’s List I believe.) Almost all of Kurosawa’s movies have a very deep depth of field. They aren’t really jarring or noticeable, but many times this shooting style was a tremendous burden on the production and the actors (requiring massive hot lights blasting to shoot at a high f-stop.) The Dark Knight has an often distractingly shallow depth of field, especially if you watch it on an IMAX screen. This was probably less of an artistic choice than a technical hurdle. It was shot on anamorphic 35 and Hasselblad medium format lenses, both formats requiring longer focal lengths to maintain a field of view you would otherwise get on a shorter lens. Personally, I found it distracting when an establishing wide shot of the Chicago Skyline in IMAX from a helicopter, some really beautiful razor sharp high res city landscape images, would then slam into a very shallow depth of field character shot. (http://www.ascmag.com/magazine_dynamic/July2008/TheDarkKnight/page1.php) Rogetz posted:Also, Cinematography.com has a list of 40 or so recommended books found here: http://astore.amazon.com/cinematographyco?node=1&page=3 For a very basic lighting introduction, I highly recommend Matter of Light & Depth by Ross Lowel. In fact, the Lowel.edu page has all sorts of good beginner stuff. http://www.lowel.com/edu/ Edit: I totally forgot to mention Visions of Light which is a must watch documentary for anyone interested in cinematography. Carefree Koala fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Jun 23, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2009 22:44
|
|
|
That 5D stuff looks a lot like red footage, though something about it really screams still camera. Maybe its the nikon lenses - they have a very defined style to them. That said I turned it off after 5 seconds. If it ain't lit then I don't want to watch it. I think ASC had an article in the magazine about two/three months ago covering a feature shot on the 5DMKII. It looked gorgeous, but the moral of the story was that even though it wasn't a professional cinematographer who shot the movie it was still a photographer with a great eye. The camera isn't a short cut to greatness - you still need to know what you're doing. Carefree Koala posted:On the topic of camera owning love, just want to throw in my bias towards my Sony EX-1. Although the EX-3 is certainly lovelier in terms of shooting with, I haven't felt the need to upgrade my EX-1 for that realm of gigs where producers are looking for shooters with their own camera. And while SxS cards (Sony version of P2) are still mighty expensive, a 16 gig SxS gets you just shy of an hour of footage at 1080 / 24p. Speaking as a professional of sorts, the best possible thing anyone can do to learn cinematography is to be on set. A book isn't going to tell you how to light - it can only give you terms. You need to see someone work in the field to understand them. Craigslist's 'crew' section will have gigs in most cities. Even unpaid PA work can be worth it some times (though be careful who you work for). The big thing for me though is it establish the motivating light source of the scene. I want to see it - if its a window or practical etc. I try to throw as many different practicals and whatever in a room as I can - they look great and help light the scene. Then all you do is augment what is already there and bam - movie magic. Roger Deakins is a master of this - watch his stuff edit: also - low budget film makers: china balls are your friend. I did reshoots for a feature last week. I had to match Red footage with nothing but my EX-1, two china balls and my cars headlights. After some post work (crush the blacks mostly, and a slight gaussian blur to match the lens) it looked almost exactly the same. Only difference was the depth of field, but I lit it so that the background would be murky anyway - and for a 30 second scene i doubt anyone will notice. Work lights are also nice if you need to light space. SwedeRacer fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Jun 24, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2009 04:11
|
|
|
What do you use china balls for? The only lighting I've ever done was with a couple desk lamps and some wax paper.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2009 07:34
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:What do you use china balls for? The only lighting I've ever done was with a couple desk lamps and some wax paper. China balls are good sources of soft lighting. Really good for people's faces.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2009 13:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 11:27 |
|
|
pr0digal posted:What did you use for the mic? One of the gripes I have heard about the 5DmkII is the onboard mic isn't the greatest in the world. Also, what lens were you shooting with? That's the onboard mic and I didn't shoot it, but that guy uses one of the nicer L-series lenses, iirc. It's a Canon 24-70 mm f/2.8 L (I'm pretty sure, anyways) Carefree Koala posted:I don't want to dwell to much on the 5DMk2 in this thread, but I think this video highlights most of my criticisms of the camera and a good scenario where it shouldn't be used. Don't take this as a slam against what is a fun video, but a critique of the camera techniques inherent in the 5D and what they are baking into the images. Yeah, but it's a discreet video camera that works well in low light, and is very sharp and has a distinct style. It was some of the nicer video shot of that event, imho. I don't really think you could've gotten away with shooting a proper video camera, as it would've been too ostentatious, and not all of them would've been able to adapt to shooting when it got dark. Admittedly, it's far from a pro camera, you can't really manually change settings or anything while shooting, it's very small so it's not steady at all, etc etc, but I think it's got a certain look to it that's quite cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2009 19:09
|
|