|
well to be honest if "hurry up and wait" drives you crazy, you're in the wrong business. at least some tiny part of why I made the leap to directing was so that I would actually be doing something the entire time I'm on set. of course I still do my own post which is why I'm browsing SA while my quad core melts itself rendering a project that's due to be shown in 2 hours.
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2010 22:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:11 |
|
|
Jalumibnkrayal posted:faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaart i'm becoming increasingly curious as to what exactly it is you do for a living
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 00:38
|
|
|
bassguitarhero posted:Does that affect the validity of his points? Some dude is interested in how to start pursuing cinematography and gets inflammatory posts about how you HAVE to be holding a light meter 24/7 and have an eye just like Kubrick or don't even bother. please point out where in the thread this was posted
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 01:56
|
|
|
no, I mean please point out the "inflammatory posts about how you HAVE to be holding a light meter 24/7 and have an eye just like Kubrick or don't even bother. " some guy posted about learning to shoot video and someone else said "you should get a still camera and learn about light and focal lengths and shutter speeds" that's great advice. if you think that stuff doesn't matter, your video is almost certainly horrible, and your opinion is wrong. if you know someone who calls themselves a DP who does not own a light meter, that person is an incompetent douchebag. yes, you can shoot your gramma and kitty cats with your handicam in full auto, but this is the loving cinematography thread and you should take that elsewhere. nobody ever said you have to be a master photographer to shoot video or film. that was an inane strawman invented by a bad poster. Dr. Fishopolis fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Dec 3, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 03:36
|
|
|
what the hell how is it even a controversial opinion to suggest that a professional DP should own and know how to use a light meter
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 03:44
|
|
|
I'm not calling you a douchebag. I have no idea why you're taking this personally. We're on the internet.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 03:55
|
|
|
how dare you make hyperbolic inflammatory generalizations on the internet. i have concluded you are a terrible person to deal with on set. i know this because of the way you post on a forum.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 05:49
|
|
|
Mozzie posted:HV20.com or whatever in here occasionally. don't invoke that name don't you dare
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 06:07
|
|
|
1st AD posted:I just picked up an HMC150, is there something similar to a Kata one man band but in a backpack form? I'd like to be able to store my camera, 13" MBP, batteries, filters, shotgun mic, and on camera light. I have a petrol pack similar to this one: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/340292-REG/Petrol_PCBP_1_PCBP_1_Papoose_Mini_DV.html It's much better than the $150 I paid for it. It fits my XH A1 with the EVF folded up, it should fit your HMC perfectly.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2010 22:23
|
|
|
How did... what did... oh god.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2010 06:13
|
|
|
Bojanglesworth posted:Looks really sick though! As in "I am going to be sick." Did you ask how the shoot went?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2010 06:32
|
|
|
Flutch posted:Made this for my final project in Advanced Media Arts, looking for any feedback at all if you've got seven minutes. meant absolutely nothing, clearly took next to no effort to put together, was painfully boring to watch. it might have even been interesting in an andy warhol's "haircut" kind of way if not for the pretentious soundtrack. you clearly don't give a poo poo about your audience or have any interest in making anything entertaining or thought provoking.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2011 06:08
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:NO don't do it! The AF-100 is garbage, total garbage, personal experience talking. Care to elaborate?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2011 17:35
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:the crop factor is atrocious, even worse than the 7D everything you said makes sense except for this you do understand that 135 roll film and 35mm cinema film are two totally different frame sizes right? the micro 4/3 sensor is almost exactly the same size as a panavison 35mm frame, a PL cine prime should actually perform much better on an AF100 than a 7D or 5D.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2011 06:04
|
|
|
I certainly wouldn't rent an AF100, considering the F3 package day rates aren't too much more. I would probably buy one to own though. The things I need to own a camera for (concerts, events, ENG, doc, low budget music video, location scouts), the AF100 does great. The F3 is lovely, but it's nearly 10 thousand dollars more expensive. For narrative and commercial, I'm either renting or hiring a DP with gear anyway. I can see why a rental house wouldn't want to keep a bunch of AF100s around, but that doesn't make them garbage. Not everyone is a rental house.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2011 15:35
|
|
|
Only one framerate, and it's interlaced. I don't get it at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2011 05:56
|
|
|
jimcunningham posted:Awesome. Thanks much. I think ive decide to go with T3i and 50mm and a 55-250mm lens. Should be around $800. Unless you only ever want to shoot portraits and birds, you need a wider lens. Go to http://www.keh.com and pick up a t3i or t4i body, an 18-55 kit zoom (any of them are fine, they're all under a hundred bucks) and a 50 f1.8. If you want to stretch your budget a little, the 35mm f2 is a better "normal" prime for your camera.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Basically I want to try and find a way to get a decent image that it's too hard to color correct while also not having to spend 95% of my budget on rental fees. Should I follow the gearheads advice and rent a really fancy professional camera, should I be a cheapskate and try and make it work with my own reliable but rather cheap camera or should I try to find a happy medium by renting a C100? Do neither and hire a DP who is passionate about your vision and willing to do an indie thing for cheap in return for the chance to step up his or her game. If you're anywhere near a major city there are a shitload of gaffers, 1st ACs, LTs and small time theater LDs who you should be networking with. Some of those people are talented beyond their station and looking for a chance to prove it. They also know a lot of people in the same boat looking for a break. If you treat these people well, if your creative mojo is any good and you DO NOT SKIMP ON CRAFT SERVICE, you can begin to assemble an amazing crew of plucky pro-ams like yourself. Whoever told you you need an Alexa for your micro-budget period short is a complete idiot, do not listen to that person. Find someone with a decent reel who either owns or has access to a camera package so you can focus on direction and art department. If you're near a university, this could be very easy depending on the time of year.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
I'm putting together a music video shoot involving a busby berkeley - eqsue synchronized swimming scene. The budget can only be portrayed by a picture. This is the picture.  I am currently reevaluating my life priorities.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
I'm actually excited about it. I'm attached to direct, there's a DP with an F5 package and a great choreographer, it's just gonna be one of those pizza shoots and there's no producer to speak of. I mostly just wanted to post that picture because holy poo poo that picture. new favorite website: http://shittyrigs.com
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
32MB OF ESRAM posted:If you can wait until July they just released a new camera for the same price with WAY more features and a better form factor than the Pocket Cam. That thing has to tank the sales of the pocketcam when it's released and I bet they cut the price again to get rid of them. I'm baffled that they're billing this as an action cam when a stabilized, ultrawide, lightweight micro 4/3 lens straight up does not exist. I imagine the "standard" lens they're imagining here is the panny 14mm pancake, but without a heavy speedbooster that's a 42mm equivalent. I guess you could get the 8mm fisheye but it adds 1/3 of a pound which is not going to make drone operators happy. Even then, that's what you would call a "medium shot" for a go pro. Also, again, no stabilization at all.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
32MB OF ESRAM posted:I am assuming a 3-axis gimbal connected with a vibration plate will take care of the need for lens stabilization, but you're still left with a narrow FOV. If you're sending it up 200+ft. that may not be as big an issue as it would be if you were shooting vehicle interiors. I've stayed away from m43, is the lens situation really that dire? I thought it was sort of the next big thing. There's plenty of great lenses for m4/3, but the BMPCC and this new thing are a super16 sized sensor which really screws things up. There's a speedbooster that mitigates that somewhat but it's heavy and you lose the lens electronics so it's really just for manual primes. Chitin posted:Also nobody's thought to put OIS in a 10mm lens in any system because what? I'm certainly not saying anyone should make that lens, but in-body IS has been a thing for like a decade now.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
1st AD posted:That camera and the footage from the Digital Bolex look like poo poo to me. I still refuse to believe that is a real product that someone is selling to the public.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
melon cat posted:Thanks for chiming in on this. I'll be using the video camera for making videos for local small business, shooting corporate interviews, weddings, and run-and-gun interviews at busy events. And I usually have one assistant (of varying skill level) helping with recording or audio, so I definitely want a camera that's easy to pick up and record with without having to fiddle with settings, audio connection, etc. Yeah, I have to agree with that video you linked. Don't use a DSLR for professional videography. Just do not. It's not worth the pain. Separate system audio sounds like no big deal, but for videography work it's a complete non-starter for more reasons than will fit in this post. Rigging a DSLR sounds like no big deal, until your talent shows up early and you're not done setting up and your follow focus gear is jammed and you have to rack a backwards-focusing old prime lens and you miss it and it looks like poo poo. For videography, everything you can possibly have built in, needs to be built in. You need built-in audio. You NEED built-in ND. You SUPER loving NEED built-in ND. Holy poo poo. anyway, if you're doing a narrative thing and you can budget time to build a rig just the way you need it for a shot, by all means get a DSLR. But for videography work, holy poo poo absolutely never do that.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
VoodooXT posted:Here's an article about using the a6300 with the Atomos Shogun. Don't know if it's a great counter to getting a C100, but depending on what you're planning on shooting and the budget you have for purchasing equipment, you might want to hold off on buying a C100. I think this guy is a loon. Okay, yes. If you put together an a6300 and a shogun, you have a basic camera that can shoot 4k digital video that just about any broadcaster would gladly take, in a package that costs around $2400. That's loving crazy and worth getting excited about. However, this guy is talking about basic videography work. Weddings. Corporate gigs. Web delivery. Okay, quick outdoor interview. Great, let's get set up, shall we? Got my camera, lens, atomos, mic and rig parts out of the bag. 30 minutes later, everything is rigged up and ready to go. Screwed everything together with israeli arms, a cage and a nice little rail system. Cables connected, LUT loaded, mic levels set. Two different batteries that last 90 minutes if you're lucky. Oh, and we gotta screw in a 1/2 ND as well. Wait, no, make that a full. There we go. Oh poo poo, this cable's loose, lucky I have a spare. Wait, let's move back a bit, this lens really shines at around 25 feet. Meanwhile, I pulled out my 6 year old AF100 and shot the loving interview. Okay, sure I'm delivering 1080p, low bitrate, borderline ungradable footage. But I can also hand off a card at the end of the day and know it needs very little else for delivery. I don't care about the rest, because I know what my client wants and I'm comfortable in the fact that I'm not Janusz loving Kaminski. I work much, much faster and more simply than the guy with the DSLR. Nobody is going to look at a 300x crop of my footage and fret about the banding in the bokeh regions. Would I shoot a music video or a broadcast commercial or a narrative short with an AF100? gently caress no. Those things have rental budgets. But for videography, I wouldn't be caught dead with a DSLR.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
You're right, there's no need for all that external poo poo, which is my point. For videography, 99.99% of what matters is showing up, getting the shot and not loving up. Every time you throw variables into the equation, you're increasing your chances of loving up. DSLR rigs are a whole mess of variables. Even without a rig, poking around menus to set iso, white balance and shutter speed is very bad. Pushing a button, flipping a switch and turning a dial is good.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
If you have any film industry where you are, go PA for indie films. Volunteer if you have to. The director's job on set is a management position, you need to know what people's jobs are to be able to keep them happy and doing what you need them to do. On micro / no budget sets, you can work your way up from there to 2nd 2nd AD to 2nd AD to 1st AD pretty quickly. It isn't strictly necessary to go that far, but you do need to understand set etiquette and terminology, how/when to stay out of people's way, how/when to help expedite something. There is nothing, absolutely nothing more frustrating for a crew than a director who has limited or no experience on set. It is the one thing that I've seen tank the morale of a shoot more effectively than lovely food. I don't agree that the director doesn't have a defined job. In fact, if it isn't clear what the director's job is, they're probably something going wrong. The director's responsibilities are: 1. Be the final say for every artistic decision on set. That means having the complete vision of the film planned out. The director needs to be able to "see" the movie at all times. 2. Work with each department to make sure they're accomplishing that vision. That means knowing how to communicate that vision in the language of film crew. Each department has a slightly different dialect. 3. Communicate with actors. This is really a combination of 1 and 2, but it's its own skillset so I'm making it a separate entry. On low budget sets, this will also mean having some acting coach tricks up your sleeve. Anyway, go show up on set. Learn how everything works, be a part of a movie. You might end up wanting to do some other job!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
tanglewood1420 posted:I would slightly disagree that working your way up the AD tree is helpful to directing. I mean i guess it wouldn't be unhelpful but really it's a totally different skillset. In my experience there is very little to no correlation between a director's history in non-directing crew positions and their skill and ability to direct and lead a crew. As an anecdotal example, one of my best and most enjoyable jobs was for a director who had literally never set foot on a working film set before day one of principal photography (they were a playwright making their first film) and they were really great right from the get go despite their technical ignorance and the film turned out very well (it didn't make much money, but hey what does these days?). I have also worked on one film where the director had a long career as a director of photography and it was their first directing role and it was a terrible experience. Directing is really unique in filmmaking and I think the only way to tell if a) you enjoy it and b) you are any good at it is to have a go. Yeah, I didn't mean to suggest that it's either necessary or relevant to go the AD path, my point being you should know what things are called and what the gently caress people are actually doing on set. Producer or electric or AC would be just as good, I only didn't suggest it because those jobs require skills the OP probably doesn't have. It's like working in a kitchen. Everything's on a short clock, there's a language to learn, tight job synergy and a non-obvious hierarchy that has to be navigated to avoid loving other people up. I just think you should probably try being a prep cook before jumping in as chef. That said, I've also had good experiences with first-time directors without a lot of experience, but those people universally had close friends that were producing, DPing or both and could fill in the gaps for them. Directors don't have to know poo poo about lenses or electric or set construction, but they should know in broad terms how they work and how to ask for what they need.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:11 |
|
|
In other news, I've been waffling about upgrading my ancient AF100 for web delivery stuff, so I got a Ninja Blade to see if I could get past some of the problems I have with the aging codec. Holy crap, I have no idea how I lived without it. The display is incredible, the focus peaking is incredible, the false color and histograms are incredible, the battery life and stability and shooting straight to Prores on a hard drive is incredible. It's incredible, I love it, amen. I tried the Blackmagic equivalent a while back and this just blows it out of the water. Cheaper than the GH4 body I was gonna get and now I have a better rig for what I'm doing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 01:48
|
|