Eric Papa Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Im looking for advice to shoot a feature about 8 months from now. It will we filmed in a winter enviroment. I was planning on shooting it with my DVXa, but have seen alot of recomendations to use the anamorphic lens etc. My DP owns a XL2, would it be a better choice to use that since it is already 16:9? Whichever is used, what accesories shall I need? A matte box? Filters? etc. I have purchased a dolly and jib, and am planning on renting lights. Anything else you guys can reccomend? Once the film is edited, how much does it generally cost to transfer to film etc. and where should I go with the film from there. Audio recommendations would also help me out. Thanks, Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member drew_town Posted April 4, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted April 4, 2005 Either camera would be nice, but I'd chose the Canon. If you're thinking about a film print, you would want to consider renting a HD or HDV camera for its higher resolution. Matte boxes and filters are expensive. They're great to have, but I'd rent them. If you're doing any handheld work you might consider a shoulder mount, a glidecam, or a steadicam depending on what your needs are. If it's going to be really cold, you might need a cover that keeps your camera warm. It does cost a significant amount of money to transfer your movie to film. Others here might be able to give you an estimate on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted April 4, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted April 4, 2005 If you know you are going for a film-out for theatrical release, Super-16 film can be very competitive for lower budget productions: http://www.kodak.com/go/16mm http://www.moviemaker.com/issues/46/film.html http://www.ifvchicago.com/process/fin_ultralow.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Papa Posted April 4, 2005 Author Share Posted April 4, 2005 What are the benefits of transfering to film? Is it neccassary to get exposure for your movie? If I dont transfer to film would the DVX or XL2 be sufficient? You recommend an HD or HDV for the film transfer, say I went that route, would it be logical to sell one of my DVX to purchase a FX1, (not the Z1 because Im not planning on shooting pal, and we could bypass the no-XLR by just recording audio on a seperate device and re-sync later, correct?) Im open for any suggestions and Im not stuck on doing anything 'the way i plan to'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted April 4, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted April 4, 2005 What are the benefits of transfering to film? Is it neccassary to get exposure for your movie? If I dont transfer to film would the DVX or XL2 be sufficient? You recommend an HD or HDV for the film transfer, say I went that route, would it be logical to sell one of my DVX to purchase a FX1, (not the Z1 because Im not planning on shooting pal, and we could bypass the no-XLR by just recording audio on a seperate device and re-sync later, correct?) Im open for any suggestions and Im not stuck on doing anything 'the way i plan to'. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You can use the IMDB to compare the "success rate" of getting on the big screen: http://www.imdb.com/SearchTechnical?PCS:Super%2016 http://www.imdb.com/SearchTechnical?PCS:DV You can also go SEE some of the productions, and compare the "look" achieved on the screen. Kodak has DVDs available, comparing film and video production from a filmmaker's perspective: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/16mm/exp...=0.1.4.13&lc=en http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/ne...ifference.jhtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulgencio Martinez Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Hi Eric, Don´t sell your dvx. It isn´t suficient for going to film, but HD isn´t suficient either.(not to metion hdv) As i think DVX has a very good looking result with nice lattitude for a dv camera. This is what counts to me. I feel hdv as some better resolution but some worst looking image. too much video feeling. Try to compare and decide by your eye. you should never have blind faith about technical brochures Anyway, if you can shoot S16 Do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rik Andino Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 What are the benefits of transfering to film? Is it neccassary to get exposure for your movie? If I dont transfer to film would the DVX or XL2 be sufficient? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well if you're shooting on DV because of the low cost I think you'll find the cost of transferring video to film to be a bit overwelming Think around ballpark figures of $30K - $50K on the lowend So you can clearly see why S16 might seem like a viable option If you're DEFINITELY needing to end your project on a film print It'll cost around the same, be less of a hassle, and look better than DV. Now if you don't need to end on film--DV can be useful And provide nice looking images for a DVD played on your TV. I recommend you use the XL2 because it's slightly better than the DVX100a Get some filters to play around with the images If you can afford it get a good lens (try the 16x manual lens for the XL1/2) I'd also get a good sound person to record good audio & Rent a nice light kit and do your best lighting each scene Beware You can make a really good movie and not have any exposure... What you should remember: exposure comes more from WHO you are Rather than from how the movies is projected---Film or DVD... If you know people than you can schmooze your way in The film idustry (much like other industries) relies more on who you know Than what you do or how good you can do it. The good thing is that if you have a very good project people will come to you Everyone wants to be associated with good projects--cause those are rare finds. Good Luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Papa Posted April 5, 2005 Author Share Posted April 5, 2005 Fulgencio: I couldn't Agree more with you regarding a better "look" with the DVX, than the prosumer HDV cams out on the market. Thanks for the advice. Rick Andino: I guess a transfer to film is definatley out of the question with 30-50k and upwards. I am constantly working to try and save money (above my bills) to make this movie a reality. I refuse to put it off any longer, and I would like to have 5-10k saved up to make something happen. Is there a way for me to recieve some funding? I like your point regarding exposure of the finished product. With that said, I dont feel as though it needs to be printed to film to be well recognized. So at this point I would say I would be filming with an XL2, rented matte box/filters, possibly a maunal lens, rented light kit, the indie dollie, camcrane, and glidecam 4000 pro. If anyone has more advice, please fill me in. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted April 5, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted April 5, 2005 Is there a way for me to recieve some funding? If anyone has more advice, please fill me in. Thank you. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Kodak offers product grants, educational allowances, and scholarship programs to students in recognized university filmmaking programs: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/students...d=0.1.4.3&lc=en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Papa Posted April 5, 2005 Author Share Posted April 5, 2005 John_P_Pytlak: I have been out of film school for about 16 months. Would that disqualify me from the kodak grants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted April 5, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted April 5, 2005 John_P_Pytlak: I have been out of film school for about 16 months. Would that disqualify me from the kodak grants? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You need to be currently enrolled. Sorry. But as an independent filmmaker, you really should talk to your local Kodak rep. They can often find ways to help good projects. Where are you located? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Papa Posted April 5, 2005 Author Share Posted April 5, 2005 Im in Cleveland, Ohio. I appreciate all of your help. -Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted April 5, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted April 5, 2005 Im in Cleveland, Ohio. I appreciate all of your help.-Eric <{POST_SNAPBACK}> In Ohio, your Kodak technical rep would be Ben Stone, who works out of Chicago. Telephone: 773-867-3511, e-mail: benjamin.stone@kodak.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted April 6, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted April 6, 2005 Hi, If it's possible to get your DV burned out to film for $50k, the cost of filming out your video is becoming comparable with transferring your film to video for edit! Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Papa Posted April 6, 2005 Author Share Posted April 6, 2005 Yeah I think the whole film thing is a little out of my price range. Right now its looking like XL2. My DP says thats sufficient because being on a filmstock isn't really neccesary anymore to enter into a festival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR Posted April 7, 2005 Share Posted April 7, 2005 I concur with some of the other poster's, the XL-2 is a bit of a better camera. I would get the 16x manual zoom and some type of rods with FF and the mattebox. Even better would be getting a B4 adapter and wide Digi-primes. You might look into the Mini-35 but that thing is often a hassle to work with. Definitely get yourself a full set of ND's and ND grads. This will allow you to control DOF much easier as well as any hot skies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Papa Posted April 7, 2005 Author Share Posted April 7, 2005 King: Thanks for the advice. I believe my DP has a set of 35mm prime lenses. He said we have to get the EF adapter and then we can use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Marks Posted April 7, 2005 Share Posted April 7, 2005 I don't think you want to be using 35mm still camera primes on a Mini-DV camera, as you'll get an extreme telephoto effect. A manual lens is your best bet, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Papa Posted April 7, 2005 Author Share Posted April 7, 2005 I dont think they are 35mm still camera lenses, they are the same lenses we used on the arri 35mm. By the way, UR-A-HO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alvin Pingol Posted April 8, 2005 Share Posted April 8, 2005 (edited) >>I dont think they are 35mm still camera lenses, they are the same lenses we >>used on the arri 35mm. Still, the lenses are designed for 35mm, where the negative is a lot larger than the XL2's CCDs. Without using the P+S Technik adapter, you will still gain a significant amount of telephoto. >>By the way, UR-A-HO? IMHO, or, In My Humble Opinion. Edited April 8, 2005 by Alvin Pingol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Papa Posted April 8, 2005 Author Share Posted April 8, 2005 So do you think it would just be better to get a manual lens then try to use the film lenses. Or if we could get the adapter would that be better than using the manual lens? -E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alvin Pingol Posted April 10, 2005 Share Posted April 10, 2005 Personally, I wouldn't use the cine lenses, as you'll become very limited in the wide angle range; a wide 35mm cine lens will still be telephoto with a 1/3" CCD, and I imagine it'd be a bit difficult to compose your shots. The manual lens is probably the best solution, as the P+S Technik Mini35 adds its own textured/diffused look that you may or may not like, and the Pro35 would, I believe, require some additional adapters (and a lot more money). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Colclough Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 I enjoyed reading this thread. There are so many things I don't understand, but that's okay. No questions :) I wonder how the project is going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Love Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 Yeah I think the whole film thing is a little out of my price range. Right now its looking like XL2. My DP says thats sufficient because being on a filmstock isn't really neccesary anymore to enter into a festival. Eric, what are requirements to enter into Film Festival? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Paul Bruening Posted November 6, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted November 6, 2006 Hey Eric, I've got an XL2. It rocks. But, with the XL2, you're worried about stuff you don't need to. The EF adapter is crap because of the difference between the image plane of 35mm and the 1/3"chips. The manual zoom is dynamite. The power zoom is okay but you can't pull focus worth a dang. You'd be surprised just how much that doesn't matter in the Canon's format. That cam is more than adequate to get you to the big screen. You see, it isn't the format... it's all the other stuff that makes or breaks you. Shoot with the Canon. Let its ease of operation make your job "do-able". You've got a thousand other things to worry about to make that project even worth showing at the crummiest film festivals. I'm not trying to load with foreboding. It's just that movie making is multi-faceted. That camera is only one facet. Best of luck, Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now