|
1st AD posted:The BMCC is going to be a ton sharper than the 5D3 and can shoot raw. It's basically a 24p 2k RED - even if all the extra gear costs you an extra $3k, it's still a better deal than the RED unless you need higher resolution or high framerates (or a larger sensor/shallower DOF). If you don't think ~$6k for a functioning raw video system is amazing, then your loss I guess. Ah, thanks for the explanation. I understand thats all necessary but I guess tests like these bother me because its strict technical specs all on locations with natural light, it doesnt take into consideration the multitude of factors that come with shooting in certain situations. What kills the BMCC for me is the sensor. I know its workable to get the same framing for a shot but when in locations and sets that dont give you the ability to physically push the camera back to achieve a certain frame, thus effecting the ability to place lights in certain locations and what you can artistically express through ya know, "cinematography", it just negates every single technical benefit of high dynamic range and resolution for me. It ignores the psychology of a lens and compression. Having to decide to use a 10mm to achieve what I could with a 25mm is just baffling to me. I wanna see how that camera resides with a cinematographers ability to properly and effectively capture the vision of a scene. I just dont buy it as a "Cinema" camera. The price is great for a 2k RAW system, sure, but I guess Id rather spend ~$6k on a used FS100 with some nice glass. Know how to light your poo poo and 11-12 stop dynamic range is all you should need in post. That said, I have full confidence that the next few models of this camera, especially once they up the sensor size, will be absolutely awesome.
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 05:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:35 |
|
|
So Aaton, you know, the old camera company that, like Arri, has been making film cameras for decades? They announced a "Digi-mag" for their film cameras earlier this year but so far that's all they've done to transition to the digital age of cinema. Welp, they're making their first all-digital camera, and it's totally nuts. http://blog.abelcine.com/2012/09/27/aaton-unveils-the-delta-penelope-camera/ It's a high end cinema camera akin to the Alexa or F65, it looks the most like a film camera out of them all though. What separates it is several bizarre tricks up it's sleeve. Highlights: -It has a rotating shutter, exposing the sensor like a film camera does, or the F65 and Alexa studio. -Said shutter is mirrored, affording an optical viewfinder. -It also captures that reflected image for HD-SDI video output without impeding the optical viewfinder. -Ready for this? Yo dawg I herd you like shutters so we put shutters on your shutter so you can stop down while you stop down. instead of having internal ND's or just relying on a good old matte box with ND glass, it has about 20 Venetian blind-like shutters on the open side. While open, it fully exposes. When closed (nearly) all the way it merely provides about 20 slits to expose the sensor, effectively reducing the ISO from 800 to a 100 ISO equivalent without affecting the color like ND glass would, all while maintaining a 180 degree shutter angle. Got that? -the sensor is a CCD sensor, instead of the usual CMOS, so there is no debayering (I think, right?), and it captures globally, something that I feel is a bit of a moot point when a rotating shutter is involved. -peep dis, the sensor sits on a moving surface, moving randomly on a 2d plane at distances 1/2 a photosite wide per frame. Why? One: sensors have a pattered noise structure because the photosites never change. this way it emulates film emulsion, which is totally random. Two: since it moves at 1/2 a pixel per frame, what the frame contains is different each time, and when you play it back in motion, it gives the illusion of twice the resolution it's actually capturing, a phenomenon that film emulsion also shares. It makes the camera's native 3.5K resolution in to 7K "virtual resolution". A real thing or marketing buzz word? you tell me. It's coming out sometime over the next six months and there is no list price yet. Well?
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 07:00
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:
I think I am in love.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 07:09
|
|
|
Thanks, I'm married though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 07:10
|
|
|
It looks pretty amazing. I'm afraid 1-chip RAW systems will still need debayering (or some sort of demosaic process, depending on the sensor pattern) regardless of whether they're CMOS or CCD, though. Until Sigma decides to license out its Merrill sensor technology, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 07:21
|
|
|
Yeah wasn't sure about that but too lazy to look it up. That search bar is way up there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 07:43
|
|
|
Yeah I've seen that bar screencap before, that's some crazy DR that camera captures considering no lighting was brought into the scene. I bet it costs way more than an F65 though. Serious question - would it be possible to design a 3CCD S35 sensor system and have it work with, oh lets say medium format glass? Would that be enough to cover the imaging area? Or is the C100 design the way to go, design a sensor to capture 4x the target resolution in RBGG and then downsample? AccountSupervisor posted:What kills the BMCC for me is the sensor. I know its workable to get the same framing for a shot but when in locations and sets that dont give you the ability to physically push the camera back to achieve a certain frame, thus effecting the ability to place lights in certain locations and what you can artistically express through ya know, "cinematography", it just negates every single technical benefit of high dynamic range and resolution for me. It ignores the psychology of a lens and compression. Having to decide to use a 10mm to achieve what I could with a 25mm is just baffling to me. People got by with 16mm for decades and it's just a little less restrictive than the BMCC (on the account of there being more lens options for that format), I just don't see a lot of validity in this complaint. If you're used to shooting on a 5D then there will be disadvantages to shooting on a small sensor. I just don't think they really matter since there are more than enough lens options to compensate - 12mm f1.6, 7-14 f4 are wide enough for me. I suppose you can also get a 10-100 16mm workhorse zoom, but I think you would have to crop to 1080p to make that work. 1st AD fucked around with this message at 07:56 on Oct 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 07:53
|
|
|
1st AD posted:People got by with 16mm for decades and it's just a little less restrictive than the BMCC (on the account of there being more lens options for that format), I just don't see a lot of validity in this complaint. I do think they matter though. Its great you can get the same framing if you have the room and lens but lens compression and your ability to have as much flexibility in a tight scenario matter more to me than resolution and I feel like things like this are glossed over for the current resolution obsession. Having used a S35 camera and a 4/3 camera on the same set doing some tests, I found it really did effect the way we set everything up and what exactly we could do with the camera, especially during movement. The differences in a 20mm and a 35mm between the two sensor sizes was pretty frustrating in a lot of the shots, especially during medium close ups. It felt fairly restricting. It just feels like an incomplete camera, like the RED One was and personally Im just tired of this current trend of camera releasing. A lot of the importance in what a camera can provide as a tool is glossed over for high numbers and low pricing, especially at the prosumer level. This camera seems to epitomize that trend to me. Im not a fan of the 5D either, just fyi. I think both of the cameras are restricting in different but equally annoying ways. AccountSupervisor fucked around with this message at 09:27 on Oct 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 09:14
|
|
|
I saw the Delta at IBC a few weeks ago and was absolutely blown away by it. I admit I've always had a soft spot for Aaton ever since I first worked with the 35 and Xtr range (way back in the olden days, we used this thing called "film"), they just design such lovely cameras to work with. I missed working with Aaton. This will hopefully put them back in the spotlight a bit, though they always seem to play second fiddle to the might of Arri and seem to be permanently resigned to B-camera status :-(. But this camera might just come out of nowhere and make a big splash. It really is that good! As far as the Black Magic...well I think it's a neat camera in specs but, after having tried it for a bit, I am really disapointed in the form factor and usability. It is a lot bigger than I was expecting, but in all the wrong places. I.e. it is wide and tall but not long, like an oversized DSLR. This bothers me a lot, and always has with DSLRs too but here it is taken to another level. It is just not a good form factor for filming. Having a fixed monitor in the back is great for quickly checking stills but terrible for shooting moving pictures. It's also very much aimed at the post-process, fantastic logging features and great little touches to make an editor's life easier (obvious considering the company) but very little thought was given to actual on-set use because of that. Don't get me wrong, it definitely has a market in the owner/operator/low budget scene, but I strongly doubt it will be very competitive compared to what else is out there. There's other 2K RAW cameras coming out that seem much more usable. I am becoming a bit fed up with brochure-cameras (cameras that just have bullet points of awesome sounding features but are absolutely crap to use on set) In short...it's still a mess in digital world, and only getting messier with cameras like the A-Cam, the Canon 4K thing, that I forgot the name of, and the SinaCam coming out (I absolutely loved the SinaCam by the way!) But this is just, like, my opinion man...
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 11:17
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Serious question - would it be possible to design a 3CCD S35 sensor system and have it work with, oh lets say medium format glass? Would that be enough to cover the imaging area? Or is the C100 design the way to go, design a sensor to capture 4x the target resolution in RBGG and then downsample? I'd like to see this licensed out and used for a cinema camera: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor The design looks inherently less light-sensitive than bayer chips (and seems to perform that way in Sigma's cameras), but does give a full-raster readout in red, green and blue from a single chip.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2012 18:15
|
|
|
I decided to go with the BMCC for my own personal projects because it delivers what I want at the price point I need. AccountSupervisor, BM has stated that the sensor size was a budget and availability compromise. There wasn't an S35 sensor available with the specs they wanted to meet anything close to the pricing. They're not a sensor manufacturer and had to acquire an off the shelf solution. People can come up with with all sorts of dream specs on what they think BM should have included in their camera. But in the end putting this into execution would have resulted in far more development time, cost and complexity. Their goal wasn't to build an Alexa or Red competitor. It was to build a step up from DSLRs that supports post production work better. If you think an FS100 is better that's fine. I'm sure many will prefer the FS100 or C100. The BMCC is just one more choice among many for low budget guys like me. In my opinion, no one else is offering the flexibility of raw, resolution and dynamic range at that price. I not sure why you would be tired that camera companies are releasing more cameras. BM is doing something pretty different than the existing companies. Would you rather not have that choice? I don't think BM was building a camera to just be impressive specs on a sheet. They were building a camera to fit into a specific post production workflow. Steadiman, I'm curious as to which 2K raw cameras are realistically going to be available broadly soon. I'm not really aware of any. Ikonoskop has had little luck in selling the A-cam. The Digital Bolex project seems like its being managed by people with no experience and no idea of project management. I'm hopeful about some of the Chinese cameras like the Kineraw, which is just initially launching in China. But I don't see a broad movement into this space. Yuns fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Oct 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2012 05:18
|
|
|
I think some of you need a little perspective here - 10 years ago in the prosumer realm you pretty much only had a DVX100, VX2000, XL1, and a GL2. You will never get a really fully featured camera system at sub $10k, but at like $5k there are so many options that provide better IQ and functionality than what was available in the last decade. Now you can get large sensors, high framerates, small chips with superzooms, and even raw. There isn't a system that has all of these at that price, but things are better than what we had before. edit: apparently the FS700 is out and I got a chance to play with one at San Diego Fashion Week. It is a lot smaller than I expected it to be, and it still has that stupid top mounted LCD. But hey shooting runways at 240fps is pretty fun. For whatever reason I expected it to be a lot heavier, but it definitely feels cheap. I'm sure the body is a lot more rugged than it looks/feels though. 1st AD fucked around with this message at 07:21 on Oct 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2012 05:37
|
|
|
Yuns posted:... In other news, I DP-ed a 48 hour film contest last week. Was a blast to do, even though the film we made is pretty drat weird (I am not responsible for any part of the story) but I enjoyed trying to create a creepy look with extremely limited budget/time/means. The actual shoot was just under 12 hours with around 66 setups. We didn't win but I still think it turned out nice. Have a look and let me know what you think! It's basically about a director who gets sucked into his own hell after being an rear end in a top hat for his whole life. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqvMyEmFVhI
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2012 13:09
|
|
|
Steadiman posted:In other news, I DP-ed a 48 hour film contest last week. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2012 07:51
|
|
|
Sagacity posted:This was pretty drat cool! It's undeniably weird, but it does work pretty well, I must say. Love the backstage steadicam move in the opening. And it's fun to see Hugo Metsers again, he was in my first short
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2012 08:51
|
|
|
Hey everyone, if this is the wrong thread to put this in, let me know! Background: My company has hired a video production company to develop some training videos for us, and I'm the project manager. Overall, I'm happy with them, but as a person without a lot of filmmaking experience, there are some real gaps in my perception of what we need to do and what they say we need to do. Current Dilemma: At this point, we've finalized the scripts and spend an arduous week filming everything that we needed to get. Already, I can tell that the videos are going to look fantastic. My only dilemma is that we are clashing about recording the VO. It was suggested by one person on the crew that they could put together a rough cut or edit and have someone in the crew record the narrator portion so that we could get a sense of the feel and timing before booking the recording space for the real narrator. Well, after the shoot, the producer is pushing to record the VO first and then edit video along with the narration because he says it will save us time and money by reducing re-recording costs. I don't know enough to determine which way will be more effective in getting the VO recorded correctly the first time around. Goons, does it make sense to do the rough cut or record the VO first and hope that we don't have to re-record? In my mind, I'm in favor of the rough cut because the VO talent can prepare him/herself with the rhythm or cadence ahead of time AND we'll be able to visualize what the look and sound will eventually be like. Does this make sense? I'd like like to be as efficient as possible so that no one is wasting their time re-recording or re-editing video when the rework could have been prevented. Make it easy on the production company as well as ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 00:04
|
|
|
Every project is different, but in my experience, if the story and timing are set well enough that a narrator could understand them, then record VO first. If you think the narrator will need visual timing, then wait, but a rough VO may be a huge help for the editor. Pixar records rough VO tracks, edits with those and then re-records after they have a tighter edit, if that helps. At the same time, you can record a rough VO with very little time and expense, just use an iPhone or whatever to do the lines then do the fine recording later.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 05:46
|
|
|
Depending on the project and the connection between images and VO (e.g. does there have to be perfect timing between the two, or not) it might make sense and be cheaper to just record the final VO first and then just edit to that. You can still edit the VO a little afterwards to fine tune the picture edit. It's a chicken and egg problem though, that really depends on what exactly you're producing. In the end you (hopefully) hired professionals who can make the right call on that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 08:08
|
|
|
Your comments have been really helpful. We want things to be as perfect as possible because we hope that people take our training videos seriously rather than perceive it as cheesy in any respect... which is hard to accomplish. The production company still insists that we'll incur a greater cost with recording a rough VO, and your advice (both of you) supports it. I'd just hate to have to find out that they can't edit around the VO and we have to re-record anything. Our company doesn't like to go over budget in any instance. I'm sure we're the only ones... I think my boss still wants to do a rough VO, so I'll have my work cut out for me trying to convince her otherwise. Wish me luck! And I hope to be back here asking for advice. I have to admit that I had a blast managing our end of the production. Including haggling over specific words in the script.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2012 03:55
|
|
|
Regarding the BMCC, my main problem is that it just feels incomplete and it just seems like a really awkward camera despite its impressive dynamic range and resolution. I really dont know what else to say about it as its not even released yet but everything Ive seen leaves a lot of to be desired for me and a lot of cinematographers Ive talked to. As far as my comments on the current trend of camera releasing. Well, a least at my level(Im a student, but me and a lot of my colleagues actually work in the industry along side school) it seems to really foster a mind set of "technology > craft". Where big numbers and pixel count trump functionality and ability to capture the image you need to capture in service of the script. With every new camera that comes out you get Phillip Bloom and every talking head on the internet making a thousand different blog posts talking about numbers and making videos comparing every camera in every which way and it just seems to encourage a culture that really misses a lot of what is at the heart of cinematography. Its great that we have a lot of tools to choose from, but a lot of these tools bottleneck people into shooting a certain way and its kind of made for a lot of stuff that has no style besides what the camera provides. Just put on Vimeos couch mode and watch the boring unfold. One of the best pieces of advice I have ever gotten from an ASC cinematographer(who also just won the second ever education award from the ASC), was "Do not let a camera define your shooting style" and I feel that a lot of these cameras do that. In other news, Harris Savides died this week 
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2012 20:26
|
|
|
Here are a couple of 30 second ads I just finished for a on-line vintage clothing store. Let me know what you think. https://vimeo.com/50819024 https://vimeo.com/51269527 Background: My long-time friend runs this on-line store and does her own fashion photography. I go with her on the shoots sometimes (whenever my wife is the model) and the last time I brought my Canon T2i for the heck of it. I wound up shooting some video but without any sort of plan. Months later I put together these spots for her website and my reel. I'm happy with how they turned out, considering the slap-dash method in which they were made.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 08:28
|
|
|
Where is that forest? Those trees look amazing. https://vimeo.com/51188739 This one is a bit more perfunctory, my friend needed a video with a kind of direct address to the audience, so I slapped this together in one night. I would really like input into my lighting, set design, and grading since I like the look but I feel like I could've done more to fill the frame. Maybe throw some practicals into the frame? Also, I hate pocket dollys. I decided to go with one because my studio space is 3 stories up and I didn't want to lug tracks + a dolly up on a freebie shoot, but I kind of wish I took the extra time now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 08:52
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:Here are a couple of 30 second ads I just finished for a on-line vintage clothing store. Let me know what you think. Great magic hour lighting. Needs more Zooey Deschanel though. 1st AD posted:Where is that forest? Those trees look amazing. I'll jump on this bandwagon and post my latest piece - a promo vid for a pre-k program. $20,000 a year! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvB3zCMpEvA&hd=1 BeavisNuke fucked around with this message at 12:34 on Oct 16, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 12:31
|
|
|
.
exp0n fucked around with this message at 01:06 on Nov 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 23:12
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:Here are a couple of 30 second ads I just finished for a on-line vintage clothing store. Let me know what you think. Just from an audience standpoint and having not read the background description before watching the videos, I had no idea they were about photography. Wouldn't hurt to add the website URL either. Visually, I liked them. The shots had a consistent look and feel throughout. I personally don't care for light leaks, but others do so that's all up to you or your client.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 00:52
|
|
|
chimheil posted:Just from an audience standpoint and having not read the background description before watching the videos, I had no idea they were about photography. Wouldn't hurt to add the website URL either. Visually, I liked them. The shots had a consistent look and feel throughout. I personally don't care for light leaks, but others do so that's all up to you or your client. It's for fashion, clothing sales, so double fail on my part I suppose. Show your girlfriend and see if she gets it. exponentory posted:I think your t2i is leaking light, were you loading your SD cards in a changing tent and was the magazine card cover closed all the way? Live and learn!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 02:55
|
|
|
It's a drat good filmmaking book . I wouldn't be selling it if I didn't come across another copy. The Affair fucked around with this message at 03:18 on Oct 31, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 03:10
|
|
|
The Affair posted:I'm pretttty sure I've seen it recommended in here before, so if anyone's looking for a copy of Man With A Camera and don't want to pay the crazy $80+ dollar prices for a copy on Amazon, I'm selling a spare copy I have for $50 shipped to any of you goons. My copy is also listed right now on Amazon if you'd rather go through it that way, also. I'll take it!
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 03:12
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:I'll take it! Sold! You can paypal me at cikmatt AT yahoo Dot com. Please include your address and what not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 03:16
|
|
|
The Affair posted:Sold! You can paypal me at cikmatt AT yahoo Dot com. Please include your address and what not. Done and done. Thanks a lot!
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 03:23
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:Done and done. Thanks a lot! No problemo, it's on it's way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 15:30
|
|
|
Hey guys, just wanted to share a set of 3 commercials I did for the Sony Entertainment Network's VIP deal. They're on YouTube starring 3 "YouTube personalities". They were pretty fun to make, and all of the stars were actually very cool. Give them a look, let me know what you think? http://www.sonyentertainmentnetwork.com/VIP EDIT: I was the Steadicam operator, not the DP. Tiresias fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Oct 31, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 18:52
|
|
|
Tiresias posted:
The steadicam work looks super smooth great job. Was the first commercial shot in natural light? That looks a bit drab. I do like the girl in the french outfit though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 12:21
|
|
|
BeavisNuke posted:The steadicam work looks super smooth great job. Was the first commercial shot in natural light? That looks a bit drab. I do like the girl in the french outfit though. Not sure if that was the intention for the color mix, or a result of going to YouTube, but yea seems like the contrast was turned down. We lit it, but it came out kinda toned down. Thanks for the kind words!
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 22:08
|
|
|
Got to use the steadicam at work for the first time in anger (did a tour of our new library facilities). Did a 90 second shot (longer than I would have liked) and nailed it after an hour of planning and choreography. Got back to the office, looked at it. Some silly bitch made a face and laughed as we went past her table. I am loving PISSED. I think we'll keep it on because it's only a video for internal purposes. But grr.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 17:12
|
|
|
I need some help; complete amateur here when it comes to cameras... To cut a long story short-- my friends and I are going to film a sci fi web series I've written and the only obstacle we have is lack of filming equipment. Because we have no real clue on what type of camera we need, we have come up with a couple of shorts to film in order to get some practise and see what works and what doesn't. Yes, we should all go to film school but we are quick studies and are passionate about filming this, so we're gonna jump in the deep end and learn from our mistakes  I'm going to buy a camera this weekend and, while the Internet has been very useful in confusing the hell out of me, would like some advice on what would be best. I don't want to go and be given a sales pitch and get the wrong camera. (Note: we have sound equipment and some lights--friend owns a music studio-- so that's taken care of. And one of us has experience with after effects and editing so, again...) --the shorts are being filmed outside and are piss take horror ideas --the web series will have green screen, special effects, out door shooting and space ship 'model' filming. Here are the two cameras: http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/canon/eos-650d-digital-slr-camera-with-18-55mm-lens-86026/show.html http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/sony/nex-vg20-18-200mm-lens-83322/show.html Thanks for any advice and if you think any of the other cameras could be better, then please say so. Money is, however, an issue and these are the cheaper options for us all. Also any advice on any extra stuff we would need (lenses, etc) would be welcome. And if anyone can give advice on 'how' to film models (not catwalk ones....that's easy....I mean hand made models) that isn't complicated would, again, be welcomed with a tankard of mead and much respect. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 19:47
|
|
|
I'd stick with cameras that cost less than $1000. That Canon is fine for it's price. If you want to pay for something like that NEX VG20 (which would be easier to use than the Canon, but still be a camera that missing essential features) you should save for something better like a Sony NEX 700. But that's just me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 06:58
|
|
|
Dont buy a camera. Don't spend a poo poo ton of money on anything. Use your phones to make a rough draft. Cut it together, try new things. Figure out what works. Once you figure out how to get the story to work- then buy/rent the right tool to accomplish your goal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 07:05
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:I'd stick with cameras that cost less than $1000. That Canon is fine for it's price. If you want to pay for something like that NEX VG20 (which would be easier to use than the Canon, but still be a camera that missing essential features) you should save for something better like a Sony NEX 700. I'll be discussing what camera to buy this friday and will see if I can get some of the others in the group to put some money forward so we can see what other options we have. Could wait until after Christmas, I guess. But I want to get the ball rolling as soon as possible. I've waited long enough lol TheBigBad posted:Dont buy a camera. Don't spend a poo poo ton of money on anything. Use your phones to make a rough draft. Cut it together, try new things. Figure out what works. The idea about using the phones is beautiful! I've been doing a rough story board and could go and do as you suggested. It would make it easier and more cost effective. Mainly because directing this lot will be like herding drunken cats. As a side note, the city I live in is crap for renting out stuff. It was an option I looked into but with the infrequent times we'd be filming (what with everyone working during the week/ends) it would create some real headaches. But I love the camera phone idea. Another idea to bring up on friday. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 17:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:35 |
|
|
Ghost Leaf posted:As a side note, the city I live in is crap for renting out stuff. It was an option I looked into but with the infrequent times we'd be filming (what with everyone working during the week/ends) it would create some real headaches. These guys are really good, and affordable: http://www.lensrentals.com/
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 22:54
|
|