Help!!!

[Terry Hsieh]

Hey all,

 

So, I've been making amateur films for some time now- I've made some pretty bad things and some not-as-bad-pretty-bad things but the bottom line is that I have NO clue about the movie process. I've kind of decided that I'm not going to flub around like an amateur anymore, however, and that I'd like to get into

the more serious side of film-making. However, I'm totally clueless- allow me to elaborate:

 

I wrote my own script but i'm not sure of formatting and everything.

 

I have no clue about lighting.

 

I have no clue about what kinds of cameras I should be looking for to use.

 

I have no clue about HOW to get things like make-up, etc.

 

I have no clue how to secure a filming location such as a city corner, maybe? Do I have to get permission to film there, etc?

 

and I have no clue about what else I have no clue about....

 

 

If anyone could elaborate on anything they'd think a first-time movie maker might need, please do so.

 

Hopeless,

Terry

[James Steven Beverly]

Hey all,

 

So, I've been making amateur films for some time now- I've made some pretty bad things and some not-as-bad-pretty-bad things but the bottom line is that I have NO clue about the movie process. I've kind of decided that I'm not going to flub around like an amateur anymore, however, and that I'd like to get into

the more serious side of film-making. However, I'm totally clueless- allow me to elaborate:

 

I wrote my own script but i'm not sure of formatting and everything.

 

I have no clue about lighting.

 

I have no clue about what kinds of cameras I should be looking for to use.

 

I have no clue about HOW to get things like make-up, etc.

 

I have no clue how to secure a filming location such as a city corner, maybe? Do I have to get permission to film there, etc?

 

and I have no clue about what else I have no clue about....

If anyone could elaborate on anything they'd think a first-time movie maker might need, please do so.

 

Hopeless,

Terry

 

1. Screenwriting.com & www.script-o-rama.com/oldindex.shtml

2. cinematography.com & www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/qtvr/cineUpdate.jhtml

3 which ever one can you afford

4 www.monstermakers.com & www.makeuptalk.com/forums/archive/f-91.html

5 as Peter Bogdonovich related what Rodger Corman told him "Don't ask permission, you'll never get permission just do it." or Try just asking.

6 TONS OF STUFF, start reading and googleing all these subjects, NO ONE is going to hand you the stuff you need to learn, YOU'VE got to go LOOK for it. And above all, KEEP SHOOTING, the MORE you shoot the better you'll get. B)

[David Mullen ASC]

Read every filmmaking book you can. In the meanwhile, shoot very small projects with whatever camera you can borrow, doesn't matter. Things become more clear the more you shoot. Same goes for lighting; you have to learn to exercise your visual imagination and taste and SEE the lighting opportunities around you. Try to design sequences around a natural or practical light source and then you'll eventually learn how to simulate other light sources through studying reality. But you first have to train your eyes to notice the light around you.

 

You may look over and like the way the window in daytime creates a sheen over the table and softly backlights the glass and plate in front of you. So first you respond to light and decide what you like and don't like, then you breakdown what you are seeing and how it is being created naturally, and then you figure out how you may recreate it elsewhere if necessary.

[Jonathan Bowerbank]

Look into your local community college's film program. Jumping in there and working with other filmmakers is key to learning how to work in a collaborative art like film.

 

And I second David's statement about all the great books that are out there. I think you could find some great thing in lighting book. There's the "Lighting" book by Iain Brown or the "Cinematography" one by Malkewicz which has some of the most basic teachings of lighting, lighting equipment and electrical. To dig into more of the aesthetics and common practices of lighting professionals "Reflections" by Bergery is a fantastic read with some excellent examples throughout.

 

Good luck in just starting out! I can tell you have the energy and aspiration, which is all you need to keep you going, at least.

[Terry Hsieh]

hey all,

 

Thanks for the very helpful tips and locations where i can download material. I'll be sure to post the results of my first real "project" up somewhere to let you all critique.

 

 

Also, what should i do about a crew? If i don't have a budget should i just run with friends or is this not recommended?

 

Terry

[Kevin Masuda]

hey all,

 

Thanks for the very helpful tips and locations where i can download material. I'll be sure to post the results of my first real "project" up somewhere to let you all critique.

Also, what should i do about a crew? If i don't have a budget should i just run with friends or is this not recommended?

 

Terry

 

 

Terry,

You're a student right? Where do you go to school? Depending on how big your school is you could probably put a crew call out around campus.

 

Kev

[Terry Hsieh]

Terry,

You're a student right? Where do you go to school? Depending on how big your school is you could probably put a crew call out around campus.

 

Kev

 

Not a huge campus. Like maybe 800+ people? Not that big

 

Terry

[Terry Hsieh]

I'm also still a little confused about script format? Someone told my to do 1 minute of screentime per page but for me, that's impossible because i'll never know how much in my head is a "minute"? What are the conventions for writing a script?

 

 

Terry

[Nick Mulder]

I'm also still a little confused about script format? Someone told my to do 1 minute of screentime per page but for me, that's impossible because i'll never know how much in my head is a "minute"? What are the conventions for writing a script?

Terry

 

Act out the scenes live in your bedroom or whatever and time them ... Or make a mock-up in a 3d program

[James Steven Beverly]

I'm also still a little confused about script format? Someone told my to do 1 minute of screentime per page but for me, that's impossible because i'll never know how much in my head is a "minute"? What are the conventions for writing a script?

Terry

 

One page of dialogue put into proper script form is equil to approximately one minute of screen time. It's unnessesary for you to be able to judge a minute in your head, that has nothing to do with aproximating a script's running time. Put your script into proper script form and you will have the approximate runnning time of your film. That's why many low budget submission scripts are trimmed down to around 90 pages. That's about an hour and a half running time for the finished film, That gives theater owners and investors a quick turnover of audiences so that they are making the maximum profit possible which increases the chances of having your script made into a film ESPECIALLY for an unknown writer with no track record. Any more and and there are less people seeing the film each day so that means less profit, any less and people feel created so less people show up at each showing so less profit. This isn't rocket science. If you had visited the sites I provided or Googled some of your own, you would know what proper script form is and this question would have been un-nessesary. As I said No one is going to do this for you, you have to do it for yourself. B)

[Hal Smith]

To learn script format, download the free demo copy of Final Draft from their website. It'll let you write ten pages of script. Final Draft is what many pros use and learning to use it was, for me, a great primer in properly formatted scripts. I liked it enough that I eventually bought it. There is an educational discount version available through CDWG, you should be able to get your school's bookstore order it for you. You can order it direct from CDWG if you establish an account with them.

 

https://www.finaldraft.com/products/final-d...wnload-demo.php

 

http://www.cdwg.com/shop/search/Results.as...mp;platform=all

 

Another script format primer is at:

 

http://www.oscars.org/nicholl/format.html

 

It's somewhat hilarious in that it uses a script written in proper format to teach script format. I love re-entrant jokes.

[Terry Hsieh]

thanks alot. Here's my next question- for sound-

 

I know on sets, there are multiple microphones- usually a boom mike, and individual mikes that would be hidden in an actors hair, etc. How does one go about patching these in? Does it all go to the camera through a patch system or would I record each channel individually on a computer and then put it all in when I do the editing?

 

Also, what's the difference of digitally editing HD and non-HD? Do i need specific programs to edit HD? What kinds of HD cameras would you recommend if I have a limited budget? Say....no more than $2300? (that's my own money)

 

Terry

[David Mullen ASC]

Most of the time, one semi-directional "shotgun" mic on a boom pole is used to cover the sound in a scene, swung around to whoever is talking. Occasionally, two mics on two booms, or one planted mic and one boom. Other times, a lavelier "lapel" mic, usually radio transmitted.

 

These all go to a small mixer board or portable mixer before being recorded to some format.

 

You may need to make things simpler than that for budget reasons though. You can run the mic directly into the camcorder and set the levels before the scene is shot, or use auto levels controls. A "prosumer" camcorder will have XLR mic inputs, a cheaper consumer camera would just have RCA inputs. Most pro mics would use XLR connectors.

[Terry Hsieh]

Thanks, Mr. Mullen.

 

What about cameras? I'm looking between the Sony HDR-FX7, Sony HDR-SR1, and the JVC GR-HD1, although the last one may be pushing it. Those are the upper bounds of my camera budget. If I had to pick any of those, what would you recommend, and if there are any that fit within the $2000 budget that I don't know of yet but might work better for my filming situation, please tell me.

 

 

Terry

[Matthew Buick]

Why not shoot film? You could shoot Super 8 happily for $2,000, so many film are shot digitally these days, it would really help your's stand out from teh crowd.

[David Mullen ASC]

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-...rder-Review.htm

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-...rder-Review.htm

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/jvc_g...rder_review.htm

 

See also:

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-...X7-Compared.htm

 

I can't really recommend a camcorder that doesn't do 24P or 25P progressive-scan for that "film-look", but you'd have to pay more to find an HDV camcorder with that feature. The JVC cameras offer 720P and this new Sony HVR-VR1 does 24P, but they are all above your price range.

[Terry Hsieh]

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-...rder-Review.htm

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-...rder-Review.htm

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/jvc_g...rder_review.htm

 

See also:

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-...X7-Compared.htm

 

I can't really recommend a camcorder that doesn't do 24P or 25P progressive-scan for that "film-look", but you'd have to pay more to find an HDV camcorder with that feature. The JVC cameras offer 720P and this new Sony HVR-VR1 does 24P, but they are all above your price range.

 

Ok thanks.

 

I'm gonna go for the cheapest one I can get so that I can spend the rest on the film itself- which is the HDR-SR1.

 

Many thanks and merry belated christmas!

Terry

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm gonna go for the cheapest one I can get so that I can spend the rest on the film itself- which is the HDR-SR1.

 

You may regret not getting a camera that does 24P/25P. 60i HDTV still looks like ordinary video, just sharper.

[Terry Hsieh]

You may regret not getting a camera that does 24P/25P. 60i HDTV still looks like ordinary video, just sharper.

 

Does this mean I'll have problems with green-screening? Not that I'm doing any, but if I WAS to do green screening, would that affect it? IS there are 24P/25P camcorder that is under $3000? Please tell me, because I'd DEFINITELY buy it. If I was to film, say a thirty minute movie- nothing fancy, like a melodrama, would a HDR-SR1 make it look terrible?

 

Thanks,

Terry

[David Mullen ASC]

You can do chromakeying with interlaced-scan material -- you see this everyday on the weather report on TV news afterall... it's more a question of color subsampling. The HDV/DV 4:1:1 codecs have limitations in color depth, but some people manage to pull keys off of the material. It's not as easy compared to a camera that has 4:2:2 or better yet, 4:4:4 color. But you aren't going to find a consumer camera that does 4:2:2 anyway; the Panasonic HVX200 can do it, but that's out of your price range once you factor in the P2 cards.

 

The whole 60i versus 24P thing is not an issue of "terrible" or "great", just a question of the look. 60i looks like classic video. It can be high-end, top of the line, classic video... or cheap, nasty consumer video, but it will always look like video because film can't create that look. Progressive-scan video has the potential to be "film-like" in terms of its motion reproduction.

 

This doesn't mean you can't create a pretty picture in 60i. Those expensive Japanese samurai soap operas you see on the international channels are quite well-done in classic interlaced-scan.

 

You're working at such a low price point for a camera that you can't have everything; you may find a used 24P DV camera like a DVX100B or get a 60i HDV camera, but I don't think you can find a 24P HDV camera at those prices. If you're going to ask me whether it is better to have the 24P look but in standard def versus shoot hi-def but get the interlaced-scan look, I can't answer that question.

[Terry Hsieh]

You can do chromakeying with interlaced-scan material -- you see this everyday on the weather report on TV news afterall... it's more a question of color subsampling. The HDV/DV 4:1:1 codecs have limitations in color depth, but some people manage to pull keys off of the material. It's not as easy compared to a camera that has 4:2:2 or better yet, 4:4:4 color. But you aren't going to find a consumer camera that does 4:2:2 anyway; the Panasonic HVX200 can do it, but that's out of your price range once you factor in the P2 cards.

 

The whole 60i versus 24P thing is not an issue of "terrible" or "great", just a question of the look. 60i looks like classic video. It can be high-end, top of the line, classic video... or cheap, nasty consumer video, but it will always look like video because film can't create that look. Progressive-scan video has the potential to be "film-like" in terms of its motion reproduction.

 

This doesn't mean you can't create a pretty picture in 60i. Those expensive Japanese samurai soap operas you see on the international channels are quite well-done in classic interlaced-scan.

 

You're working at such a low price point for a camera that you can't have everything; you may find a used 24P DV camera like a DVX100B or get a 60i HDV camera, but I don't think you can find a 24P HDV camera at those prices. If you're going to ask me whether it is better to have the 24P look but in standard def versus shoot hi-def but get the interlaced-scan look, I can't answer that question.

 

 

hmmmm....so am I screwed if i'm looking to do some more artsy shotwork?

 

Terry

[David Mullen ASC]

hmmmm....so am I screwed if i'm looking to do some more artsy shotwork?

 

If you're asking if there is a really cheap camera that does everything you'll ever want, the answer is no. It's all about deciding what compromises you can live with. You want hard answers when there are none, especially at the price range you are talking about.

 

Ideally, you'd be looking at a 24P HDV/DVCPROHD camera like the Panasonic HVX200, the Sony HVR-VR1, the JVC GY-HD100U, or the 24F HDV Canon's (XL H1, XH G1, or XH A1)

 

But since those are all out of your price range, you are basically forced to make a choice between a 24P standard-def camera or a low-end interlaced-scan HDV camera. So again, it comes down to: do you want the 24P film-look but in standard def resolution... or the extra resolution of HD but no 24P film look? Or do you want to save your money for a 24P HDV camera?

 

I guess another question is do you really need HD? Will you be editing in HD, showing it in HD, etc.? You may be better off sticking to a 24P Mini-DV camera and working in standard def in editing, putting it out on DVD, etc. On the other hand, maybe the 24P look doesn't really interest you. If you haven't noticed a difference between progressive-scan and interlaced-scan video so far, maybe it's not worth worrying about. Certainly you can shoot pretty pictures in 60i HDV. If you like the image, go for it.

 

I'd spend some time if I were you at forums like dvinfo.net and see what users of these cameras are talking about. It's hard for me to be any more clear as to what you should buy, since I don't own anything and believe in renting a camera for a specific job. But then, I'm a DP, not a director.

[Chris Durham]

I actually recommend the novice filmmaker not go to HD. Being a novice myself, I really wanted to; but then I had to start looking at things critically - after all a decent camera is an investment. So, unless you're really confident that the work you're doing right now is going to be shown on a BIG screen I don't think there's a lot of need for it. The main reason I would advise against it - particularly in the prosumer market - is that the technology is still maturing. When you can buy a good 1080P camera under $5,000 AND there is a critical mass of consumers with HDTVs - a significant portion being 1080P - then it's a mature technology. Until then, you're just begging for your new investment to go obsolete.

 

Instead, look for a good 24P SD cam that will suffice for what you're doing and what you're displaying on. If you're distributing by DVD, SD is fine. If you're distributing via the web, it's more than fine. If you're hitting film festivals that typically play on big (not BIG) screens, you'll be fine - unless you think what you're doing is going to end up a runaway hit. But you're a beginner like me, so if you're good - not saying I am cause this hasn't happened yet - you might end up getting some kudos at festivals which you can parley into a bigger flick where you have some money and no longer have to shoot SD. The thing about that is that it doesn't really matter what you're shooting on - you will get acclaim based on the way you tell a story and the way that you use the tools you have at your disposal to tell that story. If you're good enough to get that, then you can use your newfound clout to buy you some new tools.

 

Or at least that's my take on the way it should work. Worrying too much about the best camera at our stage of the game is kind of like Picasso not wanting to use real sable brushes and waiting till they invented synthetics. You know what I mean. If I can't make a decent flick on my XL2 then I wouldn't have been able to make one on an XLH1 or even an Arri.

 

On the other hand, if you've got some money behind you and you're going to make a visual spectacle, then go HD; but if you've got that kind of cash you don't want to go prosumer, you want to go pro - and at those prices you might as well go film because if you're making a BIG picture video's only cheaper till you get the thing in the can. By the time you put it on the BIG screen it costs just as much.

 

Go for an XL2 or a DVX100B. I got my XL2 for $3600 new. The DVX is even less I think; and if you're really looking forward to an HD future, there's a 3rd party hardware upgrade you can get for it to make it an HD cam (can't remember the name) for about $3000 when you're ready for it. I'm partial to interchangeable lenses and non-anamorphic widescreen so I favor the XL2 - I'm in love with the wide angle lens.

 

Anyway, that's my two cents. But I'm just a novice myself. The thing I will say that seems to make a lot of sense in the world of film is to take your chances creatively but be conservative fiscally.

[Hal Smith]

The thing about that is that it doesn't really matter what you're shooting on - you will get acclaim based on the way you tell a story and the way that you use the tools you have at your disposal to tell that story. If you're good enough to get that, then you can use your newfound clout to buy you some new tools.

It's instructive to remember that a Super-8 film shot on Kodachrome 40 was an official Short Film Palme D'Or competition selection at the 2005 Cannes Festival. "The Man Who Met Himself" didn't win - but it sure as heck got noticed. Ultimately a good story well produced is what counts, not how much money was spent on equipment.

[Terry Hsieh]

It's instructive to remember that a Super-8 film shot on Kodachrome 40 was an official Short Film Palme D'Or competition selection at the 2005 Cannes Festival. "The Man Who Met Himself" didn't win - but it sure as heck got noticed. Ultimately a good story well produced is what counts, not how much money was spent on equipment.

 

Hmmmm...that's a really good point. I guess that really makes a lot of sense. So, if i'm going to use standard DV or non-HD, are there any lower priced, cameras that are around? Maybe under $2000 that could possibly do the trick? I'm willing to sacrifice all the artificial things like nightshot and all that other jazz that I never really use anyways, and I don't think normal filmmakers use. Basically, a decent shot quality. Are there any around?

 

Terry