Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«92 »
  • Post
  • Reply
SquareDog
Feb 7, 2004

silent but deadly

It all depends on the situation, really. For instance, what if you don't need a genny?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Dr. Fishopolis
Aug 31, 2004

ROBOT

SquareDog posted:

It all depends on the situation, really. For instance, what if you don't need a genny?

how else are you going to get 150 amps on an EXT NIGHT location?

full CTB drops tungsten efficiency down by about 3/4. 10kw tungsten gelled with full CTB is effectively 2.5k, the same output as a single 750w HMI. now which one is cheaper to rent?

edit: i'm bored let's run some numbers

let's assume you don't have to gel your tungstens because they're the only source. let's also assume you have a magical tie-in close enough to your location to actually run 10K off the grid.

3 phase, 300 amp camlock to stage pin distro - 20/day
either 2 babies or a tenner - around 90/day
total 110

versus

2500w arri hmi - 180/day

you save 70 bucks. pretty good!

now let's get real because you are probably never going to do an ext night within 50 feet of a 300 amp tie in. a blimped 5k genny is around 165 a day. you would max out two of them to run your tungstens. you would need one of them at half load to run your HMI. now the HMI is cheaper by 95 bucks a day not even counting fuel, plus you have 2500w left over to play with.

Dr. Fishopolis fucked around with this message at Nov 14, 2009 around 20:06

SquareDog
Feb 7, 2004

silent but deadly

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

how else are you going to get 150 amps on an EXT NIGHT location?


Last week we lit the poo poo out of a large night EXT without a genny, not that you're "wrong" or I'm "right", just saying is all.

Mozzie
Oct 26, 2007


SquareDog posted:

Last week we lit the poo poo out of a large night EXT without a genny, not that you're "wrong" or I'm "right", just saying is all.

it likely looked like muddy poo poo with the faces barely reaching 30 IRE unless it was a parking lot, near a stadium or only a series of close ups with the light just off frame.

SquareDog
Feb 7, 2004

silent but deadly

It looked fantastic! DP is an AFI graduate. Large park/garden on the side of a mansion. The mansion is probably why we didn't need a genny. Shot on the Red with Red primes.

Dr. Fishopolis
Aug 31, 2004

ROBOT

SquareDog posted:

Last week we lit the poo poo out of a large night EXT without a genny, not that you're "wrong" or I'm "right", just saying is all.

you can do just about anything if you have power and the g+e guys to make it work, lord knows i've done enough exteriors with tungsten because that was what i had to work with. all i'm saying is that HMIs are a better, cheaper way to do exteriors in almost every reasonable scenario.

Mozzie
Oct 26, 2007


read this: live it.

http://www.wired.com/rawfile/2009/11/video-dslr

I swear the next time I see some loving hipster prick take out his faggy D7 on a set I'm going to go Kayne and smash it to bits. They can take it out of the production insurance.

gently caress all of your HD video. 7219/5219 motherfuckers.

link included for all you DVRebel cretins

Mozzie fucked around with this message at Nov 22, 2009 around 05:19

SquareDog
Feb 7, 2004

silent but deadly

They're good for weddings and behind the scene footage at least.

Walnut Crunch
Feb 26, 2003



That there Wired article is full of inaccuracies. The biggest one is "shoots in 30 fps" which means you have to do pull down to edit.

Editing programs don't care what fps you shot in. They'll edit in it. It's film types that care. They say 30fps looks too video, so to get that filmy thing you have to convert to 24fps from 30fps which is a royal pain.

Anyone that thinks DSLRS are going to make for better movies, clearly missed the result of word processing. Not everyone became a great author once they used it.

File size on DSLRS is tiny, processing need is huge. Those codecs (particularly h.264 from the Canons) crush processors.

I've also always felt Laforet is a fraud. I never believed his whole "I saw a strange prototype camera and I asked to borrow it, and Canon said yes, then I shot Reverie"

His whole schtick reeks of marketing.

mobot
Apr 19, 2003


DSLRs are just another tool. I purchased a 7D two weeks ago on a whim. I already had a bunch of Canon glass, and my older Canon DSLR was a few generations out of date, so it wasn't a completely random purchase. But, in two weeks I've shot four paid days with the camera shooting HD, and now it's paid off in full. I've never had an equipment purchase work quite like that before.

The two projects I was shooting for, one external video for a Fortune 500 company and one short film both happened to be great projects to experiment with the technology. The corporate video had enough of a budget to shoot with a second HD camera as backup in case the Canon poo poo itself. The short film was a simple concept that involved few locations and plenty of time to beat on the camera and see what bugs needed to be worked out.

I have to say, in both cases, the Canon really impressed me. In the corporate video, simple talking head footage shot side by side with a P2 Varicam yielded interesting enough results that the client chose to go with the Canon footage for the final piece. The aesthetics of the image were different enough for me to do a double take at what would normally be a typical boring talking head video and actually say "hey that looks pretty cool" Aside from a few extra hours of post transferring the h.264 to something useful, the process was no different than any other corporate project I've done this year.

For the short film, the results may not be too different from what a lot of people have seen posted around the internet, visually anyway. It had its issues. A few shots came out in jello-vision. The 20 hours of h.264 files are going to be a bitch and a half to get to the editor 5000 miles away on a different continent in a format that he can deal with. But yet how we were able to use the Canon as a tool to aid the whole process of filmmaking was pretty neat.

Being stuck in the small kitchen of a 100 year old carriage house in Manhattan and having to make the location work is going to be tough no matter what the medium. I was certainly refreshing to be able to say to the director "no problem" when he wanted to flip things around and get a reverse angle that would have previously had us smashing a hole through the wall into the basement of the building next door. The space was just too drat tight. The solution? Put the DSLR 1" away from the wall on top of a tissue box and a wadded up kitchen towel used as a makeshift saddle bag and operate the camera using a hand held bathroom mirror to see the LCD screen from under the table the rig was sitting on. This gave me enough distance to shoot the reverse angle at 22mm, not all that much wider than the first angle.

Does it make me an awesome filmmaker now that I've been able to set up and shoot a shot with a tissue box? No, it's still a low-budget project, just as it would have been if it was shot on an HVX-200 or an EX3 with a Letus or film or whatever. I personally think the concept was solid and the Canon was merely a tool that helped us execute that concept efficiently and creatively.

Am I going to give up the main cameras I shoot with for most of my jobs and go all DSLR? Hell no.. but it's a nice tool to have in the bag.

Momonari kun
Apr 6, 2002
Yes, you needed video.

Yeah, I've pretty much decided to shoot my next film on a GH-1 for a number of reasons. The biggest is low light and low visibility, as in, so we don't get caught shooting where we aren't supposed to. We need the shallow depth of field, but doing this in low light is quite difficult with other HD camcorders in my price range as well.

I've scoured over problems with the GH-1 and while the camera won't do any magic, it will help us achieve the look we're looking for. We have a scene at a club where we're going to rent the HVX for a day, because strobes and fast movement kill CMOS sensors.

It's all about the content. We've been working on this script for a long time, and we've got some great talent, so I hope everything comes together.

Snap Your Fingers
Dec 16, 2006
I've been insightful for about 17 years.

I've started doing some freelance video work, but really with only one company. How do you guys list freelance work on your resume?

NeuroticErotica
Sep 9, 2003

Perform sex? Uh uh, I don't think I'm up to a performance, but I'll rehearse with you...



Momonari kun posted:

Yeah, I've pretty much decided to shoot my next film on a GH-1 for a number of reasons. The biggest is low light and low visibility, as in, so we don't get caught shooting where we aren't supposed to. We need the shallow depth of field, but doing this in low light is quite difficult with other HD camcorders in my price range as well.

I've scoured over problems with the GH-1 and while the camera won't do any magic, it will help us achieve the look we're looking for. We have a scene at a club where we're going to rent the HVX for a day, because strobes and fast movement kill CMOS sensors.

If you have other options, I'd look into them. I shot a couple of quick projects on it and while it's nice for avoiding permits and stuff, I'm just not a big fan. Plus if you're looking to rack or pull focus, most DSLR lenses are just going to be way to slow or stiff to do a decent job.

Steadiman
Jan 31, 2006

Hey...what kind of party is this? there's no booze and only one hooker!

silly sevens

Snap Your Fingers posted:

I've started doing some freelance video work, but really with only one company. How do you guys list freelance work on your resume?
I just put down individual credits/gigs in a long list. Though as you get more work you'll have to become more selective about all the credits you put down, the list can grow pretty fast. As an alternative you can also just say, or add, that you've done various jobs/are experienced in X genre (music videos, drama, etc).

Momonari kun
Apr 6, 2002
Yes, you needed video.

NeuroticErotica posted:

If you have other options, I'd look into them. I shot a couple of quick projects on it and while it's nice for avoiding permits and stuff, I'm just not a big fan. Plus if you're looking to rack or pull focus, most DSLR lenses are just going to be way to slow or stiff to do a decent job.

Well, the options we have are as follow: GH-1 with SLR lenses, 7D/5D with SLR lenses, EX-3 with or without a Letus, HVX with or without a Letus, or a Red. The Red is probably impossible on our budget, and the EX-3 is pushing it. I've shot with the EX-3 quite a bit and like it a lot, but there are things that I wish were better. For the next shoot, I want shallower depth of field, better low light, and (lowest on the list) more straight forward post production.

Rogetz
Jan 11, 2003
Alcohol and Nicotine every morning

Right now I'm working as a Camera Op on a low budget feature, and doing some G/E Swing work as well. We're going to be getting IMDb credit from this, and the producers are willing to give me an additional credit for the stuff I've done outside of the camera department. I'm wondering, though, if that would make my Camera credit look weaker than if it were my sole credit on the project, since it "detracts" from my focus on camera (I've only had to do this stuff on a couple of days that were really hectic, we had a skeleton crew, or G&E wasn't able to show up).

It's probably a silly thing to worry about, I should take the additional credit and be happy about it, but my focus is in the camera department and I don't want something weird like that making it just a little harder to find my next project.

SwedeRacer
Aug 2, 2004


Rogetz posted:

Right now I'm working as a Camera Op on a low budget feature, and doing some G/E Swing work as well. We're going to be getting IMDb credit from this, and the producers are willing to give me an additional credit for the stuff I've done outside of the camera department. I'm wondering, though, if that would make my Camera credit look weaker than if it were my sole credit on the project, since it "detracts" from my focus on camera (I've only had to do this stuff on a couple of days that were really hectic, we had a skeleton crew, or G&E wasn't able to show up).

It's probably a silly thing to worry about, I should take the additional credit and be happy about it, but my focus is in the camera department and I don't want something weird like that making it just a little harder to find my next project.
don't worry about it - its better to be multidimensional. Also, who the world is going to look at your IMDB and decide not to hire you because you've done more things?

Only list camera op on your resume though so you can get the focus across where it actually matters

SquareDog
Feb 7, 2004

silent but deadly

I have three credits on the last feature length I worked on, not including the several times I was an extra.

Dr. Fishopolis
Aug 31, 2004

ROBOT

Everyone ends up wearing a lot of hats on small features, it's not uncommon. Unions might raise stink about it but unless you're building your hours nobody will care.

Frost
Dec 6, 2003
Don't let the Frost bite you

I think once you get to reasonably well-paid jobs, people are hiring you as an expert in your department, and multiple credits on the same shoot might indeed weaken your outlook, if a production is looking solely at your CV. You didn't put a 100% into the job you were hired for is the way it might seem, or worse, you don't know what you really want to do. Camera? Catering? Grip? Lights? Extra?

With productions where you end up by recommendations and reputation this doesn't count.

On small productions, the more you make known you are the jack of all trades, the more it will be expected of you, plus you are breaking job opportunities for others. Why hire another lighting technician for a big day when you know the camera department will spend their idle time helping out?
I always help out when the need arises, but I don't advertise it.

The Affair
Jun 26, 2005

I hate snakes, Jock. I hate 'em!



So while I was acting as a human weight for a light stand supporting a HMI twenty feet up in the air while about sixty feet away a helicopter took off and landed over and over again, I realized I haven't checked up on this thread recently.

What've all you been up to?

The Affair fucked around with this message at Dec 7, 2009 around 06:36

SquareDog
Feb 7, 2004

silent but deadly

Oh, you know, looking gigs. You got one for me?

The Affair
Jun 26, 2005

I hate snakes, Jock. I hate 'em!



Nah, famine season is starting. I've now shot all the holiday parades I've had lined up, and nothing new freelance wise till the new year.

Which sucks.

How do the rest of you freelance people survive during this 'joyous' season?

Andraste
Oct 22, 2005


SquareDog posted:

Wouldn't it have been cheaper to use Tungsten lights with CTB for night shots? HMI's are way more expensive to rent.

Sorry I'm ages late in responding to this.

But we get our equipment from the school, we are lucky enough to have a tight-knit, small quantity of people film department with tons of equipment.

So we didn't have to rent our HMIs and the EXT was a backyard of a house that we could run stingers to.

As far as using tungsten to light EXT, I worked on an AXE Body Wash commercial overnight last night (and haven't slept yet unfortunately); and we used a combination of 10k tungsten and some smaller ones. We shot the whole thing on a Panasonic HVX500 and if I do say so myself it looked fantastic.

On Saturday/Sunday I did another shoot, school related using the RED, and I'm stoked to start editing after a good nap.

NeuroticErotica
Sep 9, 2003

Perform sex? Uh uh, I don't think I'm up to a performance, but I'll rehearse with you...



The Affair posted:

How do the rest of you freelance people survive during this 'joyous' season?

Unemployment. Your job ended, if you paid in you qualify.

CRKramer
Aug 29, 2006

Oh lord its doing it on the carpet.

What books (or any other resources) would y'all recommend on cinematography and/or lighting?

Rogetz
Jan 11, 2003
Alcohol and Nicotine every morning

Film Lighting

Wrapping up the feature this weekend, just finished the first draft of a web series that I'm going in to pre-pro for early next year, have a feature script to finish up, and I plan on participating in DVXuser.com's BetrayalFest. And I'm going to talk my friends who are in bands in to letting me shoot music videos for them. I don't want a day to go by in 2010 that I'm not working on a project in some capacity.

Andraste
Oct 22, 2005


CRKramer posted:

What books (or any other resources) would y'all recommend on cinematography and/or lighting?

If you want a basic intro book that is really easy to read,

http://www.amazon.com/Bare-Bones-Ca...o/dp/0960371818

Bare Bones Camera Course

FordTimelord
Aug 11, 2004



Andraste posted:

If you want a basic intro book that is really easy to read,

http://www.amazon.com/Bare-Bones-Ca...o/dp/0960371818

Bare Bones Camera Course

Just seconding this. I got it years ago in Film 1 and I've lent it out to every friend who's ever shown an interest in what I do.

Also, another beginner book is "Light: Science and Magic". It's for photo work, but for a basic understanding of light a lot of it is applicable to video and film as well.

Edit: Oh yeah, Rogetz' suggestion is a good one as well. Another one you'd probably have to buy in any first year film class.

CRKramer
Aug 29, 2006

Oh lord its doing it on the carpet.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll probably get all of those. I have some experience with video cameras (I can use manual settings and such) and cinematography, but I'm pretty sure that I lack a lot of basic knowledge. If there are any other good books, whether basic or advanced, feel free to throw them out because I love reading about film and such.

Andraste
Oct 22, 2005


Another excellent basic film book is The Grip Book,

http://www.amazon.com/Grip-Book-Thi...60784741&sr=8-1


And if you want an easy read and inspirational book, check out

Rebel Without a Crew

http://www.amazon.com/Rebel-without...60784884&sr=1-1

it's only $10 on Amazon

it's more or less journal entries of Robert Rodriguez who made a feature for 7 grand at age 23.

He then went on to make Spy Kids, Sin City, Planet Terror, and has a new movie, Machete coming out (was a ridiculous trailer for it during grindhouse).

Andraste
Oct 22, 2005


For my current class we had one last small project to do, a one page camera exercise.

This is about the only thing finished that I can show people due to shorts being submitted to festivals and what not.

So here it is, written, directed and starring a friend of mine is a parody of the Dexter intro titled, "Good".

I gaffed, and we had one other crew member as our DP.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBH4Y4SV7Ik

be gentle on the critiques, we shot this in 3 hours, I'd love to the hear them though.


EDIT: oh man, so sorry for the double post; I'm an idiot.

SquareDog
Feb 7, 2004

silent but deadly

looks good, not much to say. What was it shot on?

Andraste
Oct 22, 2005


SquareDog posted:

looks good, not much to say. What was it shot on?

Thanks, we shot it on a Canon 7D

SquareDog
Feb 7, 2004

silent but deadly

Would have guessed as much.

CRKramer
Aug 29, 2006

Oh lord its doing it on the carpet.

I liked how the shots took advantage of shooting of a 7D. I think a lot of times when people use video on DSLR they don't pay enough attention to their shots and just use it like any other camera, just with a really shallow depth of focus. It seemed like your angles and shots were a lot more photographic (that really doesn't mean anything, but oh well). The shots were ones that worked well with shallow DoF and the DSLR feel. If you pause the movie at almost any point, it looks like a well planned photograph.

I wasn't a huge fan of the title screen, but that may just be me. I get that it's a parody of Dexter (which I admittedly have never seen), but I think the font put me off a little. Is the shower shot in slow motion? It seems like it, and to me it doesn't really fit with the rest of the movie. I also think the flow would be improved by staying on the shot with the blood falling on the shower floor a little longer. It cuts away kind of quickly. Other than that, I thought maybe the focus felt a little weird in the shot when he wipes away the jelly, but it works as is. These are really little things. On the whole I thought it was shot wonderfully, and was a great little short that kept my attention for every second. I loved the shot of the plate in the sink.

This isn't a critique, but what was up with that glass? Looks like someone beat the poo poo out of it.

Magic Hate Ball
May 6, 2007

ha ha ha!
you've already paid for this


What're some good tricks for use during shooting? I'm thinking of things like using mirrors in a cramped environment to get a shallow focus shot (this being on the scale of student film).

The Affair
Jun 26, 2005

I hate snakes, Jock. I hate 'em!



Looks great, Andraste, you guys did very well.

Andraste
Oct 22, 2005


Thanks for the feedback guys.

I think we did shoot the shower in slow motion, and I don't really like the way that shot turned out; but I'm not the director either, and it may have been just what he wanted.

As for the glass, that's just the shape of it, there were four indents, one on each side.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

365 Nog Hogger
Jan 19, 2008

by Shine


I just saw Avatar last night and I don't know where else to post this, so let's talk 3d itt for a moment.

As far as I can tell, if 3d is adopted, it's a death knell for 'film style' photography. I don't mean because of any sort of resolution/editing/workflow type deal either. Watching the movie I just felt that there are so many components of traditional framing and composition that are just broken when presented in 3d.
The most glaring to me is the use of depth of field in 3d. As I see it, the main benefit of 3d is immersion, pulling the audience into a scene. As such, anything that pulls them out of the illusion is bad, right? The single most distracting visual element throughout the movie was oof elements in the foreground. In a 2d image, oof foreground elements are part of a single plane and are an abstracted element of composition which can be used a number of helpful ways. In 3d however, you have to deal with giant abstract shapes being projected into the audiences' lap, which is certainly not subtle.
Even mild separation between background and subject in closeups was distracting, because the dof in the shot does not mirror what the human eye would naturally create.

The most impressive and useful 3d shots in the entire movie, to me, those that presented a scene with actual feelings of depth. One in particular had the head scientist in a corridor, doing something important in the foreground, behind her was the corridor. That is what I was looking at the whole time, the sense of depth there, in a non-jumper scene, was more immersive than any projected snowflakes in my lap or animal claw lashing out from the screen.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«92 »