|
The Affair posted:Any of yous guys been using third party plugins for slow-motion? I've gotten okay results out of Timewarp in AE, but I wonder if any of you have had good experiences with Twixtor. Twixtor has saved my rear end more times than I can count. It's effectively the same thing as the optical flow built into Motion, so if you already have final cut studio, try that first. Spaceman's right about cross motion, it can be a big problem with complex backgrounds and deep DOF, but for almost everything else it's magically wonderful.
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 01:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 20:05 |
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I gotta echo squaredog's confusion, how on earth could not having an on-set tutor affect whether you go to festival or not? Are you the producer on the project? I'm curious too. I shot all the kids in one day on a Saturday. Got the parents to sign waivers and everything, and I'm square as rain for festival submission. Working with the kids was interesting. Though I will admit that I had a kickass AD who managed them mostly. My two little leads were really cool and very on the ball. They were off book when they showed up on set, and I had only met them once before. Thank God for insane parents, I guess. I cast the two little leads and then I went and talked to a local casting agency who was eager to help me because I was a student. Didn't cost me a dime and they did the leg work. They pulled together the age group and number I needed. Worked out quite well in the end. All the parents showed up, chilled out in the next room while we shot and were really cool all around. Parents of child actors are sort of crazy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 05:46
|
|
|
I did produce the short. I think we are actually submitting to a few festivals, and most likely nothing will come of us not having a studio teacher. Maybe it varies from state to state, but in California, if you have a minor on a film set you need to have a state registered studio teacher, who has all the rights of the parents on set, even if the parent's were on set, the studio teacher makes the calls. Being a student film, and that our set was inside a private residence, and the little girl was the sister of a classmate, we just winged it. I guess the fear is that if you're short turns out really good, and gets recognized at festivals and lets say someone wants to buy it or something, they will want to see ALL of the paperwork including the studio teacher paper trail, if they find out you broke state law, you could be in trouble. edit: unfortunately if you want to play by the rules you have to pay that person to be on set, I think it's anywhere from 250-600 a day.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 06:04
|
|
|
Just put it out there and don't sweat the details, this is your film you worked hard for, you're not going to jail.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 06:28
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Twixtor has saved my rear end more times than I can count. It's effectively the same thing as the optical flow built into Motion, so if you already have final cut studio, try that first. Spaceman's right about cross motion, it can be a big problem with complex backgrounds and deep DOF, but for almost everything else it's magically wonderful. I wouldn't pay money for Twixtor, I've had better results with just Motion's optical flow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 07:27
|
|
|
Andraste posted:Worse things have happened on a film set, and if it's good enough that someone wants to buy it I doubt they'll care whether you had a state-registered studio teacher.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 07:46
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:It's like that rule in some festivals where you need the have the festival be the debut of your piece. Unless your piece is very widely known, they're never going to check to see if it's been shown elsewhere before. I work in programming for a pretty decently sized festival and can assure you that we check into everything we even consider playing. Everything, from no-budget shorts to the big stuff. We only require a regional debut, but screening history does have an impact on our programming decisions. As for the whole on set tutor thing, I've never even remotely heard of that. No festival is even going to be aware of that, especially involving a student work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 08:56
|
|
|
zeroordie posted:I work in programming for a pretty decently sized festival and can assure you that we check into everything we even consider playing. Everything, from no-budget shorts to the big stuff. We only require a regional debut, but screening history does have an impact on our programming decisions. Interesting. Just curious, but what if said film is already on the internet, be it Youtube or Vimeo. Does that count against it for your festival? I ask because I'm going to be submitting a short film to festivals soon (which I have never done before) and I was hoping to have it online as well. Are films rejected because of that? I've also heard that short films over 10 minutes are usually rejected, I feel like this couldn't be true but I heard so I thought I'd ask.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 09:19
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:Interesting. Just curious, but what if said film is already on the internet, be it Youtube or Vimeo. Does that count against it for your festival? I ask because I'm going to be submitting a short film to festivals soon (which I have never done before) and I was hoping to have it online as well. Are films rejected because of that? I've also heard that short films over 10 minutes are usually rejected, I feel like this couldn't be true but I heard so I thought I'd ask. Well, first of all, I can only speak from my own experience. Other festivals may have different ways of looking at things, but I will say that I do have experience with some of the programmers for Sundance, as well a few other festivals around the country. The internet thing is rapidly changing. Two years ago, if the film was available to watch online (or purchase), it was an instant disqualifier. Now, not so much. It's becoming more and more acceptable to see shorts online. I have seen festivals ask a filmmaker to take a short down until after it's screened in the festival, though. There are of course exceptions to this; for example, Western Spaghetti. It screened at Sundance last year, well after it had garnered a couple million views on youtube. I think we're in a period of transition for this sort of thing, so it's difficult to tell how a festival will react one way or another. I would hope that if a festival were interested in your work, they would contact you before outright rejecting the film. You never know though. One thing I'm seeing more and more of is a filmmaker hosting their film in a hidden link online. The idea being that if they need someone to see it, they can send them a link and they have it instantly. The filmmaker can spread it around as need be, while maintaining a level of exclusivity. The time limit thing is tricky. The quick, easy answer is that as long as the runtime is supported by the film and it works, then it doesn't matter. That's seventy-five percent true. I will say that we rarely program a film over the eighteen minute mark unless it's really, really good. It's all dependent on what the selection of films we're working with is like. Hypothetical situation: we have room for one more short film in our last block. The block is already 95 minutes long and we've narrowed the final decision down to two films. One is seventeen minutes long, one is seven minutes long, and both films are just as good as the other. The seven minute long film wins by default, simply because it fits in to our remaining slot better. The situation could theoretically work in the opposite direction too, but that probably happens less frequently. In the end, it really comes down to the film itself. If the seventeen minute short is significantly stronger, then we'll go out of our way to make it work. I hope that helps a little bit. Sorry for how weird some of the writing is, it's late but I wanted to get this posted before crashing. (Also, sorry for derailing the cinematography thread! Feel free to contact me if you'd like to continue this discussion elsewhere, my email is in my profile.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 10:26
|
|
|
I find that really interesting Zeroordie, now that our semester is over, we've had several lectures on festival submissions, and we're working through submitting stuff on without a box. It's good to hear stuff coming from someone who has some credibility and not just other filmmakers giving advice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 10:34
|
|
|
That was very informative, thanks a lot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 11:05
|
|
|
Andraste posted:I guess the fear is that if you're short turns out really good, and gets recognized at festivals and lets say someone wants to buy it or something, they will want to see ALL of the paperwork including the studio teacher paper trail, if they find out you broke state law, you could be in trouble. While it's important to get all your ducks in a row, that's the sort of thing a distributor will work out if they really want your film. A particularly shady distributor might just not mention it on the form when they fill out their E&O insurance, but it's no longer your problem at that point. To let something like that keep you from going to festival is ridiculous though. Even if you have insurance problems with distribution, the market for shorts is miniscule. Your chances of selling it are tiny, no matter how good it is. You don't need distribution to win awards, and I'm guessing you didn't make a short to cash in anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 20:37
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Your chances of selling it are tiny, no matter how good it is. You don't need distribution to win awards, and I'm guessing you didn't make a short to cash in anyway. This is precisely why we are submitting it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2009 21:57
|
|
|
Quick and dirty because I'm on vacation still and bored. Stupid, Stupid Photographers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2010 00:21
|
|
|
Speaking as a wedding photographer - the guy in that video is loving douche, was that all from the one wedding? That being said, I've had the same problem with videographers being pushy jumping into a shot 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 22:56
|
|
|
Yeah, that was one wedding. And honestly he was pretty nice, but just kept jumping in the way. That's only ten of about fifteen or sixteen crosses across two cameras during the day. And yes, wedding videographers are just as bad, probably a little worse because our cameras are usually more limited as far as what we're able to get.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2010 23:16
|
|
|
3 dudes trying to get pictures and video at a wedding seems like a lot of traffic to not make mistakes sometimes, but the dude should seriously have a little more situational awareness than that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2010 09:16
|
|
|
Sometimes I think stuff like that is just a photographer (and videographers do this too) get into that zone and shut themselves off to whatever else is going on. Wedding photogs do this a lot more than say, the sports photographers who are usually more than happy and able to keep out of the way. Probably because they know that high school football players just aim for the camera guys anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2010 14:33
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Worse things have happened on a film set Just ask Vic Morrow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2010 22:13
|
|
|
Tiresias posted:Just ask Vic Morrow. Nicely put.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2010 05:42
|
|
|
So any of yous guys ever do the 'produce a show for public access' thing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2010 04:29
|
|
|
The Affair posted:So any of yous guys ever do the 'produce a show for public access' thing? The most noticeable difference working on a public access crew versus a professional crew... Body odour. Lots and lots of body odour on a public access crew.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2010 07:40
|
|
|
That and most public access is godawful because the people using the equipment don't know a drat thing about what they're doing. If you can make a good show you'd be doing a service to the community. And it's a good way to get practice, so go for it!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2010 22:00
|
|
|
I cut my teeth doing broadcast directing for random public access shows. Great experience that is hard to get elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2010 23:04
|
|
|
Walnut Crunch posted:Lots and lots of body odour on a public access crew. Haha I got approached by a pal about doing the production leg work for running a feature/news package show about local happenings, but I dunno. All body odor issues aside it seems a lot of work for something that we wouldn't legally own, according to the station's rules.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2010 15:25
|
|
|
I think the whole public access has really changed what with the internet and lower cost cameras. It used to be the only way to get your hands on anything remotely professional was to work public access. The only way to distribute your video was public access. That's all changed now. I guess public access is still good if you want to get into a live truck, a control room, or on a studio or shoulder mount camera.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2010 05:37
|
|
|
Yeah, and I've really done all that stuff too, so it's not a padding out the resume thing (at least for me.) I think he wants the experience plus the "I run a TV show" bragging rights, but I dunno, sounds like a headache. I guess I should convince him that they do have this thing called the internet, now, and it'd probably be seen by a lot more people than Knoxville Community Television (home of the angry wrestling show) could ever deliver.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2010 15:15
|
|
|
Here's a neat little toy for all you control obsessed DPs or ACs. Remote iris using an iPhone app: http://www.plcelectronicsolutions.com/ I can see quite a few downsides (apparently iris only so no focus, iPhone battery life, etc.) but it's a pretty neat gimmick. The receiver might make it a worthwhile deal, it is pretty drat cheap, as long as there is an alternative way to control it. Somehow using my iPhone just doesn't seem very reliable to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2010 17:31
|
|
|
Steadiman posted:Somehow using my iPhone just doesn't seem very reliable to me. I sometimes have trouble setting the volume on my iPod correctly using the jog control, so I'm not sure about the reliability of that app in setting the iris. Of course, that's without ever trying it out. I'm always up to play with new toys, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2010 17:54
|
|
|
Tiresias posted:I sometimes have trouble setting the volume on my iPod correctly using the jog control, so I'm not sure about the reliability of that app in setting the iris. Of course, that's without ever trying it out. I'm always up to play with new toys, though. Then there is the fact that iris pulls are quite a lot rarer than focus pulls, I have no idea why they only focused(get it?  ) on iris. And the calibration of the lenses seems like it would be a painfully slow process for any decent sized shooting kit. Ofcourse you only have to do it once, but still. And imagine receiving a text message just as the big explosion is about to happen, and suddenly losing iris input because the text window demanded attention! Have fun explaining you need to go again because your girlfriend wanted you to know she was "hot n hrny 4 u bb!xxx". drat that would be awkward. I know, I know...your phone should be off or in airplane mode. But haven't we all forgotten that one time or another. In its defense, it is a really neat gimmick and a novel use for the iPhone. So 10 out of 10 for originality, -5 out of 10 for actual usefulness. Atleast they're proving that there really is an app for everything. EDIT: Also, I just realised it doesn't do any form of position memory or automation. Seems odd as it would be very easy to implement automation on this. Just create a simple system of start and end points, and a duration, and add a playback button. Seems like a very obvious thing, I wonder why they didn't include that. Steadiman fucked around with this message at 13:03 on Jan 29, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2010 12:48
|
|
|
Steadiman posted:EDIT: Also, I just realised it doesn't do any form of position memory or automation. Seems odd as it would be very easy to implement automation on this. Just create a simple system of start and end points, and a duration, and add a playback button. Seems like a very obvious thing, I wonder why they didn't include that. I'm sure they felt the pressure on to be the first to get an app that interacted with hardware in this fashion, so they wanted the same functionality as a Bartech Iris or Preston device. Once they bring it to market, they can add features like programmed iris sequences. Definitely a novel gimmick, and for the price of the receiver, makes for a possible solution for indie and low budgets. I think the biggest problem, like you said, is the PHONE part of the iPhone. Every day, make double sure your phone is in airplane mode, but also has the wifi activated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2010 08:53
|
|
|
Tiresias posted:I'm sure they felt the pressure on to be the first to get an app that interacted with hardware in this fashion, so they wanted the same functionality as a Bartech Iris or Preston device. Once they bring it to market, they can add features like programmed iris sequences. And I'm imagining using this and can see a lot of improvements that would make it kick all kinds of rear end. It would be great if they added, atleast, a second channel for focus, easy automation, camera run/stop, and maybe even ramping functions. The biggest advantage they have over hardware-only systems is the modularity of software, you can create a completely new system just with a software update! Also they need to make setting up the lenses easier, right now it looks tremendously convoluted for anything but a basic lens package. Imagine having to set this thing up for a three camera kit with 20+ lenses, you'll be there all day! Iris-only makes it pretty useless to anyone aside from giving the DP himself control over it, separate from the AC pulling focus. Though you could probably just hook up the motor to the focus ring and use it that way, they never really make it clear in that video if it's precise enough for this. The fact that they kind of gloss over this makes me think that it is not. One interesting thing they have, that I've never seen before, is the ability to control three cameras simultaneously. If they add focus, combined with the sweet price point (99 cent app and $1300 receiver still make it cheaper than anything, except maybe that crappy Hocus-Focus POS, even if you have to buy the iPhone/Touch first), it would be a very desirable backup unit because you can always have it with you and you're ready to whip it out at a moment's notice. Even the battery problem can be overcome by buying a load of those battery extenders. The only problems I can't see them overcome is the lack of tactile feedback and the small screen size. The screen size is particular might be a problem for the larger ACs out there if you add a second function in there. I'm also curious what kind of reception problems you can run into with this. I don't know, maybe something for the iPad? Though that might be too big and cumbersome to lug around on set all day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2010 12:09
|
|
|
Steadiman posted:I'm also curious what kind of reception problems you can run into with this. This would probably be a killer. The app seems to have onscreen confirmation that it's connected, but has no indication of latency. Since it runs over wifi, if you're shooting in an area with numerous wifi networks (let's say anywhere in NYC), you'll see latency take a hit because you're bound to be on the same channel(s) as the other networks. Ad-hoc network latency of <50ms is great, but what happens if your latency goes to 500ms? That's half a second delay, which feels like a lifetime if you know you're underexposed and waiting for the motor to correct. Lack of tactile feedback is a big doozy, in my opinion. When you crank the focus knob, or in this case push the iris guide, and nothing happens, you start troubleshooting. If you do the same on your iPhone app, you compound possible mechanical and radio problems with fuzzy software problems. I come from a computers background, and nothing makes you want to beat your head against a wall more than the ethereal nature of computers when troubleshooting. I think they're probably onto something. If they added additional channels for focus, that'd definitely offer a competitive advantage considering the price. Like you said, programming a lens database would directly compete with the Arri WCU and Preston wireless units (I guess it would compete with the Cam Tec too, but I wasn't too impressed with it). Something to play with, I'd love to see where they go with it. Maybe the iPad would be perfect for the focus and iris versions of the app? Huge screen, create a handgrip with battery pack to make it through the day. Flip over to pCam, or keep camera reports using another app. Doesn't appeal to me, but then again, that's probably why I stopped AC-ing. I like minimizing my frustrations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2010 19:05
|
|
|
Another thing to keep in mind with the iPhone is that some sound guys hate it - apparently it can interfere with their signal. Now i personally think thats just cause they have lovely gear, but you never know - I've talked to Union guys who confirmed that the iPhone can cause probs so i guess theres some validation to that claim. Now of course the super high end sound stuff shouldn't be so easy to mess with, but any production you're using this iPhone app on probably doesnt have a huge budget - I mean, if it did you wouldnt need the app. Interesting idea but, like so many other things, probably not all that practical
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2010 08:05
|
|
|
Any cell phone can cause interference on any audio recording hardware, and if it does, the sound guy should tell everyone to turn off their phones.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2010 08:36
|
|
|
Sound guys hate everything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2010 11:41
|
|
|
Just got my invite to the Panasonic Pavilion at the Olympics. Their head of tech is going to be showing off their 3d displays and their new 3d camera. Pretty cool. It does only record in AVCHD but at $20k it's a pretty intriguing option. The best part I heard is that a $400 plugin will let you edit 3d directly in final cut pro. Post has been the big question mark in making 3d stuff as you have to go back to the old days of the mega-suites with the mega-per-hour rates. The complete workflow with the camera seems pretty cool. With any luck our request for a demo unit will be approved. I'd love a week to play with the system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2010 16:38
|
|
|
Steadiman posted:Sound guys hate everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2010 06:59
|
|
|
SwedeRacer posted:Another thing to keep in mind with the iPhone is that some sound guys hate it - apparently it can interfere with their signal. Now i personally think thats just cause they have lovely gear, but you never know - I've talked to Union guys who confirmed that the iPhone can cause probs so i guess theres some validation to that claim. iPhones with the GSM radio on wreaks havoc on the sound department. However, since you'd want to isolate the iPhone from sudden text messages or phone calls during a shot, you'll probably go Airplane mode but leave wifi on. I don't think wifi signals cause the same problems that GSM phones do (hold that phone near a speaker... yea, that chirping).
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2010 07:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 20:05 |
|
|
I'm going to be shooting on an HV30 in a couple weeks and I was wondering if HD DV tapes were actually necessary for an HD camera? People have told me it is and some people have told me it isn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2010 09:09
|
|