Jump to content

Phil Connolly

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Phil Connolly last won the day on April 5

Phil Connolly had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

37 Excellent

About Phil Connolly

Profile Information

  • Occupation
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

16095 profile views
  1. I am not arguing against film or that it's not worthwhile. Just that to shoot film cheaper then digital you tend to have to jump through some hoops. E.g short ends, very low shooting ratio, very expensive digital. I know of a filmmaker shooting films on tiny budgets with 16mm. But it's DIY processed 16mm on a 2:1 shooting ratio. It's possible to make a good film this way. But it's pretty non standard. So yes film can be done cheaper and maybe digital can be expensive too. What I am against are these blanket statements that go out on this forum of "film is cheaper" without qualifying them. Because 9 times out of 10 it's not
  2. Still its a bit of a straw man argument, film is cheaper because on expensive shows Panavision and Union DIT's over charge for digital gear. I guess its possible to argue that digital is more expensive on the grounds that big budget productions don't budget carefully ( and of course we know they don't). But on a modest production, with a good PM thats shopped around to source all the staff and equipment - as Tylers own figures show film costs more. If there was minimal price impact of shooting on film vs digital, we'd all be doing it a lot more
  3. I think thats just magical thinking - what deal are they getting with Kodak where 10,000ft of film costs less then a days hire of an Alexa and a stack of hard disks? The cost of 10,000 ft of 35mm stock is more then a weeks hire of high end digital camera and thats before you even process the footage. In the UK the book rate of 10,000 ft of Kodak 35mm is £3875. I can hire an Alexa Mini body for around £500 per day. A DIT maybe costs £350 per day, £500 would be more then enough for data storage for a single days Alexa rushes. So even if they got the 35mm kit for free, all the lab work and transfers for free(good luck getting that) - they would still need a greater then 50% discount on the Kodak stock just to break even with an Alexa shoot cost wise. Film lenses cost the same to hire as digital lenses do they not? All the other bits and bobs grip, matt boxes etc cost either the same or less on a digital shoot. The only really saving is perhaps a 35mm camera body can be hired for less then an Alexa body. But I don't see why you'd get extra discounts for lenses and support gear on a 35mm shoot, its mostly the same stuff I love film, but stories like this don't seem credible. I would find it hard to believe any feature budget would find digital costing $150k more then film, unless its comparing Alexa 65 vs Super 16 or some other very unique uneven situation. Or do US DIT's cost several thousand dollars a day to hire?
  4. It has not got image stabilisation. I did a project handheld using the Panasonic 14-140mm zoom that does have internal stabilisation, last week and it turned out ok. I'm more of a tripod person so it tends not to matter to me , but there are lenses that can help. At the price point I don't think you can expect more then the basics, sure ND, good ergonomics, better battery life and SDI would all be great to have. But they would push the price up. I have access to an FS7 but already the BM pocket is turning into my goto camera for certain projects, because I can just fit it and a couple of lenses in a small bag and travel light. I still do the odd central London job where public transport is needed to get to the location. The ability to fit everything into a bag that you can take on the tube, go through barriers - is huge. Combined with the great low light, meaning I can get away with just bringing a reflector or single small LED source for interviews. Its very practical for those jobs. And this is from someone who was very angry with black magic 1 month ago and considering cancelling my order. BM has won me round...
  5. I've already shot two projects. It completely saved my bacon in a dark location, requiring 5000 and 10,000 ISO to get enough exposure. The footage that came out was quite useable, grainy but in a nice way 10,000 iso looks a bit like 500 ISO 16mm The only issues I have is the ergonomics are not great, I'm going to have to get a rig. The internal battery life is also poor - between 30 and 50 mins each charge dependant on resolution, again going to have to source an alternate power source
  6. There are two entry level jobs in film production: "Runner/PA" and "Director" - thats a old joke but you get the point. You can try climbing the "ladder" it will help make you contacts and get know etc... but it won't actually prepare you for the creative task of directing. I would recommend you just start making stuff, maybe videos for friends bands on no budget. keep working gradually get better, build up from micro budget to whatever. Since kit is now easy to access - nothing to stop you makeing stuff and experimenting. Plenty of good music video directors: Dougal Wilson, Hammer and Tongs (sorry dated ref's but google) only ever worked as directors but built up from project to project. Working on other peoples sets will help but only gets you so far, you need to test your own ideas and creativity in practice
  7. I agree resolve is the best bang for (no) buck out there. I used to use Apple Color and it had a really nice work flow and was powerful. Shame they killed it off on the roll out of FCP X. I've had good experiences with Baselight - it works great and the runners bring you food and drinks. I have to get my own drinks when using Resolve at home.
  8. Had a play with it today. They are excellent, the screen is really sharp, they are easy to set up, images out the box look great, good latitude and low light is v impressive. Just pointing it at the office in random lighting looked great. This is going to be the goto budget camera, the ergonomics without flip screen are a bit fiddly but i guess manageable with a rig. Might have to order a few more - I think these are going to be the perfect replacement for our stock of canon DLSR's. Shame they don't do an EF mount since our lenses are mostly EF and the adaptor is an extra expense.
  9. The Film Truthers are the same as Flat Earthers, it doesn't matter you can prove digital is cheaper using numbers and facts. They will still present some theory about shooting ratios and short ends that proves digital costs more. Right gotta go measure the horizon
  10. and perhaps worth the wait. They are very impressive at the price point.
  11. Mine finally arrived last Friday. From being ordered in Sept - glad I held out. But 6 months late isn't great, you'd hope BM learn't their lesson from the delays on the production 4k a few years ago and not announce projects that aren't ready Still got 5 nice new cameras to play with
  12. Nice - looks great, the location was perfect and the edit was nicely paced. The twist landed at about the right time - I only guessed it about 30 secs before it was revealed.
  13. Thanks Bruce will investigate - I didn't know they did a recent 2/3 version I guess the S35mm Varicams don't do a live 2/3" crop for multicam. I know the Ursa Mini does - but its not amazing in 2K mode.
  14. If your doing pack shots - longer lenses work best. Something in the 85 to135mm range works for me. You might not need the follow focus - if your not pulling focus on shot Would probably need some softer lighting - either soft sources or lighting modifiers to make the Arri Frensels soft: e.g poly board or reflector, couple of flags, couple of C-Stands, maybe a dimmer...
  15. Hmm thanks for the comments - I was considering the S35 crop option. But wonder if 2K Beyer crop would look worse then a 3chip 1080p type camera. But good to here Robin had good results with the vari cam. I'm just curious to see if standard 2/3" cameras have improved from the 400ISO of ten years ago. I'm assuming most have moved over from CCD to CMOS - which is better at low light. But as Phil R said stats are harder to find and decode on broadcast kit. The camera position is going to locked off - basically its an event in a venue where the rear camera position is about 50metres from the stage. It can't be forward of that because it will block the audience. But ideally needs to be able to get a mid shot from 50 meters. So using an online calculator gave me 500mm for a 1.2m wide shot and 1000mm for 60cm width at 50m. Hence the canon looking like the goto lens. The venue is a Cathedral so columns prevent putting the camera closer at the side. Has to be square on at the back. I imagine operating will be tricky but its mostly static shots and I've have to spec a really solid head. The thing thats out my control is the lighting and these lenses are slow. Hence the worry about camera speed. I did think of going full broadcast box zoom - like the canon 72X Digisuper - which is a bit faster. But that starts to push the budget. Looking for a mid range option. If this looks like its going to happen - I'll def try and test the Varicam and see if it intercuts with the other cameras. I'll get some quotes on the Grass Valley as well but seems outside of OB companies fewer places carry them.
  • Create New...