Cinematography thread: No film vs. video talk, dammit

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > Cinematography thread: No film vs. video talk, dammit

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

Have you tried opening the clip's properties and setting the "interpret footage" option correctly? It allows you to specify how deinterlacing should be done (not at all, lower field first, upper field first). If you don't apply any deinterlacing you will get those tears.

# ¿ Jul 6, 2009 16:01

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 5, 2024 16:30

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

This is a short I wrote, directed, composited and edited last year. It was set up on a saturday, shot on a sunday and I spent a few months in my spare time working on it. I'm aware the actress has a bit of an accent, but I don't mind it.

What kind of location do you think we shot this in?

# ¿ May 25, 2010 10:42

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

Thanks for your critique!

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

I like the concept, and it's well acted

That's good to hear. This short was designed to be as simple as possible production-wise, because I'm more interested in the writing and acting instead of the logistics of producing, and it is encouraging to hear that it is interesting to watch, even within those constraints.

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

1. The music.

I agree it's a bit overbearing. The turnaround time on the music was very short (deadlines, sigh) and I'm afraid I didn't communicate the intentions clearly enough. I think it would've worked better if there was...less, I guess.

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

2. You lost her eyes. ...snip... You also clearly needed fill on the closeup, but I can't tell if that was a style choice or a mistake.

It was a stylistic choice. It was shot green-screen in a very cramped space so the lighting got kind of flat. This was an attempt to make it look more interesting. I'm actually quite pleased with how the DOP made it look, especially under the circumstances, but the colour correction may have gone a bit overboard (uncalibrated monitors, sigh).

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

3. Was the fact that her lover is a woman supposed to be a shocking twist or something?

No, it was intended to be a minor reveal, but not in a Sixth Sense kind of way. The fact that she's a woman isn't the point of it all. However, I have to agree that presenting it like this does make it seem like it is, in fact, supposed to be some kind of major twist.

Sagacity fucked around with this message at 23:32 on May 25, 2010

# ¿ May 25, 2010 23:26

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

Steadiman posted:

Ha! I know your DP quite well and have worked with him before! Say hi from me

Okay, I will. Will using the name 'Steadiman' ring any bells, though?

# ¿ May 26, 2010 08:48

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

Walnut Crunch posted:

RED gets all the breaks from their fans.

I think it's because RED presents itself as a small boutique shop going against 'the big guys'. In a way it is, of course, but the fans seem to feel included in the whole development process. Clever marketing, that.

Also, typically, the fans are not the high-level DP's that will just instruct production to get the best camera package available and therefore don't particularly care about any of RED's troubles

Finally, RED is not helped by Foxconn allegedly laying off all of its 800,000 mainland employees, so I guess cutting them some slack in that area would be okay.

# ¿ Jun 14, 2010 22:23

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

But if they're spending all that effort on changing the entire look of your film just to accomodate the fact that they're using a cheap camera, doesn't that strike you as a bit weird?

# ¿ Jan 17, 2011 13:00

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

People at the production company I worked for some years ago would do exactly that. When something looked good, they demanded to know which camera was used. After they got their answer (typically far less high-tech than they expected) they usually went "oh but they probably shot uncompressed as well".

# ¿ Jan 18, 2011 09:21

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

You also may want to bring up the exposure on the first interviewee's face.

# ¿ Dec 19, 2011 13:50

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

Steadiman posted:

In other news, I DP-ed a 48 hour film contest last week.

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 07:51

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

chimheil posted:

I saw on Twitter Philip Bloom was posting about a thing called an OmniRig which is much like the Movi

I've talked a bit with the director of this sample short a few years ago. He has done a lot of this 'single shot cinema' stuff, mostly in his documentaries about Indonesia (this is the first one). It's pretty neat, but is much more 'show-offy' than you would want regular camerawork to be. And, yes, it's wobbly as hell.

# ¿ Apr 14, 2013 17:39

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

chimheil posted:

Or would it be better to just master at 720, downrez the 1080 stuff, and uprez the 480 stuff?

This. Magic Bullet can't generate detail from thin air so an upconvert -> downconvert step won't gain you anything.

Having said that, check if you can also do your master in 1080. Chances are the system you're using is capable of it and you get the best quality master you can get with the source material (unless you only have 3 seconds worth of 1080 source material, clearly).

# ¿ Jun 14, 2013 20:00

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

A smug sociopath posted:

I find the vimeo-shoot everything open wide handheld-style as gross as anyone

I'm counting the days until journalists just shoot everything themselves with a clip-on GoPro

Politicians will have to invent a way to look approachable and friendly when distorted by a fisheye.

# ¿ Mar 9, 2014 23:39

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 5, 2024 16:30

Sagacity: May 2, 2003; Hopefully my epitaph will be funnier than my custom title.

Blackmagic have also been notorious for having products that are pretty decent but just slightly too crap to use in an actual production environment (connectors attached directly to the main boards, fixed pattern noise issues on their current cameras) and I agree with Slim Killington that they will really have to address these issues at this price point.

However, the Ursa still isn't that great for actual production use from an ergonomic point of view, so I'm not sure how much of the industry will start using it, especially when there is so much competition that is actually tried and tested. A lower rental (or purchase) price is worth nothing when the images you record look like rear end or you can't properly operate it.

# ¿ Apr 9, 2014 10:21

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > Cinematography thread: No film vs. video talk, dammit