Free Subway tuna and a RED

[Vincent Sweeney]

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/6807847/

[Sean Lambrecht]

If you had a nickel for every time that conversation took place you'd be Jim Jannard...

[Marcus Joseph]

That was hilarious.

[Andy_Alderslade]

That was hilarious.

 

 

Ha ha ha, 20 cast members each taking 10% of the gross....

[Karel Bata]

A friend of mine is now a millionaire through doing just that... :lol: And he's not alone. He's just bought another house. :huh:

[Adrian Sierkowski]

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/6823505/

 

via facebook ;)

[Saul Rodgar]

So frigging awesome yet disgustingly real. :unsure:

[Saul Rodgar]

Race to the bottom. This is absolutely sickening. Let's all shoot on iPhones.

[Tim Carroll]

Those were both hilarious . . . and so painfully real.

 

Best,

-Tim

[Guest]

I rarely find these things funny, but that was hilarious!!

 

Yeah, yeah, Saul, spare me the "that's you with the glasses and mustache" line. I pay every one and shoot 35mm. <_<

 

R,

[Adrian Sierkowski]

the 7D is 35mm film, but it's 35mm Digital film which is better! ;)

[Saul Rodgar]

I rarely find these things funny, but that was hilarious!!

 

Yeah, yeah, Saul, spare me the "that's you with the glasses and mustache" line. I pay every one and shoot 35mm. <_<

 

R,

 

I did think about you when I saw it, but I did remember you are a big 35mm fan, so you are redeemed, sort of . . . :P

 

Just messing with ya.

[John Sprung]

Ha ha ha, 20 cast members each taking 10% of the gross....

 

Which works out just fine if the gross is zero.... Mel Brooks -- "The Producers" ;-)

 

 

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Guest Stephen Murphy]

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/6840173/

[Guest Stephen Murphy]

and my personal fav....

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Stephen, can I pay you to just keep me entertained with this?

Love #2!

[JD Hartman]

The dialog in, "Cinematographer vs. Producer" was just played out, in real time on the set of the last music video I worked on. The only difference was that it was Cinamatogher vs. Gaffer. The DP had already been brainwashed and gone over to the "Dark Side".

[Adrian Sierkowski]

I am very sad, often, that a lot of "DoPs" these days only know of digital :/

[Vincent Sweeney]

I am very sad, often, that a lot of "DoPs" these days only know of digital :/

 

Then they aren't "DoP's", they are yet another "Timmy" who's mom bought them a RED or 5D.

 

The video you posted was very close to a conversation I had on a certain SLR feature that I luckily got away from. I guess that need for rent money can blind you for a moment.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Sad to say, of course, sometimes the need for rent wins out.

I'm fine calling someone a DoP even if they shoot exclusively digitally, so long as they know wtf they are doing!

Hell, despite my own investments in 16 and 35 kit, i still wind up shooting the largest proportion of my projects on the XDCam.. and eventually when I do go DSLR, I'm sure it'll take over the vasy bulk of short narrative work. So goes life; a long string of disappointments.

[Marcus Joseph]

Then they aren't "DoP's", they are yet another "Timmy" who's mom bought them a RED or 5D.

 

The video you posted was very close to a conversation I had on a certain SLR feature that I luckily got away from. I guess that need for rent money can blind you for a moment.

Did it occur that maybe Timmy made his own way to buy a RED or 5D and can't afford a 35mm film system or the all lovingly praised Arri anything?

 

The video was hilarious, but these views on current lower end digital camera systems are narrow minded. Most people use them cause it's cheap, not because they have an array of options and for some inane reasoning they go for the lesser camera.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Marcus, I hope you realize Timmy isn't a real person ;)

 

In truth, though, there is nothing wrong with someone using a lower end, or buying a lower end kit, the issues always come up when people insist on attempting to use cameras which are "inappropriate," whatever that means, for the aesthetic at hand.. e,g, you don't shoot Laurence of Arabia on a camera phone and expect it to (or assert it will) look like Laurence of Arabia.Yet, sadly, the mindset of a lot of these "timmies," is that because camera X has feature Y it is the be all end all camera and can do anything that any other camera can do better than anything which exists. This is not only blatantly false, but also damages said camera system when it's results don't pass mustard. The example, in the 5d community, is that house was shot on it, yet house was shot on the cameras for the specific purpose that it could fit into areas other cameras cannot.. hence the right tool for the right job. -v- someone saying that because house was shot on it, it's the right camera for my shoot (without further clarifying, for example, because we'll also have small locations an need to, say, hide the camera in a glove box of a car, or on the floor looking up past the shifter for 2 shot while doing 90mph!)

[Marcus Joseph]

Marcus, I hope you realize Timmy isn't a real person ;)

 

In truth, though, there is nothing wrong with someone using a lower end, or buying a lower end kit, the issues always come up when people insist on attempting to use cameras which are "inappropriate," whatever that means, for the aesthetic at hand.. e,g, you don't shoot Laurence of Arabia on a camera phone and expect it to (or assert it will) look like Laurence of Arabia.Yet, sadly, the mindset of a lot of these "timmies," is that because camera X has feature Y it is the be all end all camera and can do anything that any other camera can do better than anything which exists. This is not only blatantly false, but also damages said camera system when it's results don't pass mustard. The example, in the 5d community, is that house was shot on it, yet house was shot on the cameras for the specific purpose that it could fit into areas other cameras cannot.. hence the right tool for the right job. -v- someone saying that because house was shot on it, it's the right camera for my shoot (without further clarifying, for example, because we'll also have small locations an need to, say, hide the camera in a glove box of a car, or on the floor looking up past the shifter for 2 shot while doing 90mph!)

I've seen many of these claims too, I mean the other day I was told a person's footage didn't need grading (which was reiterated in one of the previous videos). I personally think film is still the definitive format (I can't speak for other young aspiring filmmakers), even 16mm (in the right hands with the right lenses), but it comes with its pricing and complexity for amateur and indie filmmakers. For the price (specifically with the on going costs) and what these recent cameras can do... I must say they're copping a lot of slack, they all surely have their pros and cons. And just as I meant with 16mm, with the right hands and lenses, it too can look great.

 

In specifics I just did some research on the Alexa and it does look like an impressive camera, I'll hold off judgement to see how it holds up.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Marcus Joseph

[Phil Rhodes]

The sad thing about this is that the producer will make enormous amounts of money. This sort of massively arrogant exploitative chutzpah works.

 

P

[Guest]

these views on current lower end digital camera systems are narrow minded.

 

No they're not. :D

 

R,