Phil Connolly

20 minutes ago, Manu Delpech said:

Only the first two directed by Chazelle are shot on super 16, lol. 

Its very weird they didn't go for a consistent format, only 2 eps seems very much like a directors indulgence in that situation. Normally on a series you want it to feel consistent, so if the whole thing can't be shot on 16, it seems pointless shooting 2 eps in the format. 

But it will be interesting to see how close they are able to match the RED footage to the super 16 on other episodes.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo! Oh wait I don't have an FX9

As you were

28 minutes ago, Carl Nenzen Loven said:

I hear you...but moral isn't really the discussion right here, right now. And as I clearly stated at the top. I know there are other cameras out there that does 4k, and everything that I have mentioned here.

I was curious if there was actual was a way to do it in the pipeline. For example, if it does work I can use the same rig for a F35 as well if that becomes the next step.

I already have the recorder, storage, and a sweet deal for a F3. So for me the biggest investment and hurdle would be to power the converter from P-tap possibly.

C

Sure, but there is a moral dimension when your building a rig to fool clients into thinking they are getting 4K rather then just supplying 1080p. 

I get your not asking for input on the moral dimension, just the technical side. But the request has no technical justification, since real time up-converters are less good then doing it in post. So outside of a live video situation your request is strange, hence triggering the moral element. If I was your client and I found out you'd cheated me with fake 4K, that business relationship would be over. Its just not a workable approach to fake. What would you say when your pitch?

Q What camera do you have?

A F3

Q is it 4K?

A yes

Q: well google says it isn't...

<potential job lost>

How would you spin that? Pretend its an FS7

Q: Your FS7 looks a lot like an F3...

etc...

Its going to get messy quickly. 

Also, if you go the F35 route - I'm sure many clients would be happy with the 1080p as it is. That camera has its fans for its nicely oversampled CCD and global shutter - your likely to get many takers just by owning a f35 and the 4k is less of an issue. I shot my last short in 1080p on the Ikonoskop for similar reasons. 

At this point there is a reason why the F3's are very cheap. If you have a recorder - they are probably a very good purchase, for personal projects and clients that want 1080p...but I wouldn't try and pretend they are something its not

Just now, Carl Nenzen Loven said:

Right...but if F3 upscaled to 4k in 422 looks better than DSLR 4k in 8-bit...and the client is hiring has no knowledge about this, I wouldn't say it matters?

C

You'd still be lying, just because your clients clueless (many are) thats not really an excuse.  9 times out of 10 you'd possibly get away with it, but if you get found out if could blow up in your face. I've literally been in that situation passing off RED 3K footage as 4K, it was a DOP mistake, but I had to go eat humble pie when the client found out (they had paid extra for 4K). 

So yes you could get away with it. But it would be dishonest

Also your not saving yourself any money.

You'd need an F3 + 4K SDI up-converter + external recorder + extra storage + power etc...

That rig would cost more then a budget 4K all in one camera e.g Ursa Mini, SH1, BM Pocket 4K and result in less good images.  So for the same outlay you can have an actual 4k rig. The black magic pocket 4K shoots nicer images then the F3 and its $1300. 

5 minutes ago, Carl Nenzen Loven said:

Last I checked the ProRes from the F3 does not take up that much space, and if I am not the one doing the edit or anything in post and the client demands 4K, that's where I am thinking of.

I know 4k isn't always needed either.

C

Thats the point 1080p prores doesn't take much space. 4K prores does (4 times as much space). So a job that needs 10Tb of storage now needs 40Tb - thats money wasted 

Also if the client demands 4K you should give them 4K not uprezed 1080p. Sure you might get away with it, but its not very honest. If I as a client was expecting 4K and got uprezed 1080p I would be not happy (even if it looked fine) I'd feel ripped off 

31 minutes ago, Carl Nenzen Loven said:

True, but it would still mean I need to deliver a 1080p file to upres.

Also, when I tried using the topaz labs, but it didn't read my ProRes...and only did output compressed formats...

 

C

Isn't it more efficient to deliver a 1080p file from a storage perspective. A 4K file would need potentially 4X the disk space for minimal visual gain.

If I was editing I wouldn't be keen on do a 4k post workflow on upscaled 1080p rushes. It would take up more space, slow down my machine and renders for no reason. Personally as a client I wouldn't want upscaled 1080p rushes for that reason.  From a workflow perspective, its going to be much more efficient to have a 1080p  project with a 4K uprez at the end vs upressing the rushes.  On longer form projects where you may end up with 100's of hours of footage - you want to keep file-sizes manageable. A 4K post workflow is only really worthwhile if you actually getting better images... You could find the nice 4:4:4 1080p images of the F3 are good enough and just stick with that. 4K isn't always needed 

If 4K is really important for your clients - the Black Magic Pocket 4K is probably a better shout. Then you get internal 4K to a good codec for a similar price point. 

This would probably do the job:

https://cvp.com/product/blackmagic_bmd-convmsdimux4k

But outside of using it on live multi-cam shows that need a 4K signal what would be the point. Your just increasing the recorded file size significantly for no improvement in the image.

Upscaling, is best left to post production then you can use tools like: https://videoai.topazlabs.com/  to get vastly better results then what you'd get on a real time portable converter.  A 4:4:4 file from an F3 processed through Gigapixel would probably look very close to 4K origination. 

I really liked it, really lovely short. 

The photography worked really well, looked great but was unfussy and served the story.

54 minutes ago, Richard Boddington said:

Canada and Australia have special work permits for young people that last for a year, do a Google search.  As for the US, forget it, you'll never get permission to work there legally.  Especially with near 100% unemployment in the film industry right now!!

https://moving2canada.com/working-holiday-visa-in-canada/

R,

You can work in the US if you can get an O1 visa, but you have to be at the top of your profession - its a non starter for someone starting out.

To work legally in a more junior position in the US usually means you have to marry an American.  

There is nothing worse on a short film where you have a 10 min short and 5 mins of credits. Its even worse when people make DIY studio logos etc...  keep it sort and simple.

Make your IMDB credits work for you, basically your going to use them to try and get more work. So just give yourself the credits that will help that.

On the low budget for a short end the more I think about it, I wouldn't volunteer a budget publically on a site like IMDB. It could bite me in the ass later. For instance I could be applying for a producing job where I want to show that I can deal with larger budgets and inflate the budgets a bit in my application - or the opposite if I want to show my ability to work in a tiny budget. I don't want to be caught in the lie if someone googles me.

I have short I'm finishing at the moment - the budget will never be made "public". 

After a couple of years grinding it out in the corporate video mines, you really start to curse the beigeness. The default response is usually to make it as dark as possible and try to find a way to get some texture onto the white walls:

But with good location choice it can be a joy.  I once shot a few scenes for a feature in the Channel 4 Building in London. Which was a joy, it was pretty much pre-lit with interesting lighting and coloured walls.  I didn't have to work very hard to get decent shots, which is rare.  The only challenge was keeping the big "4" logos that were plastered around the building out of shot.

All future movies will be remotely shot using motion capture with Andy Serkis playing all the parts.

Thats until "Devs" complete the machine and we just watch virtual alternate universe simulations of films...easy peasy.

I guess the proof will be in the footage 

4K S35 RAW

Vs

4K downsampled from 6K FF with weaker codec.

Different strengths and weaknesses - so probably quite close but the FX9 has a head start.

But at this point I wonder if many people will be investing in a new camera this year.  I work at a Uni and we were looking at upgrading from our FS7's - a prospect that I think is no longer necessary for at least this year.  Both because we don't know when productions will start and also we are going to have to be much more mindful of expenditure. Lots of belt tightening going on, whos going to have the cash to spend on shiny cameras? At least in the medium term....

I think working on getting testing fast and cheap is at least as important as a vaccine.

If you could test the cast and crew - at least weakly, combined with extra sanitation procedures on set -  production should be possible. 

Sometimes on productions you feel cut off from normal life anyway, e.g drive to set and work long days, you don't encounter anyone thats not on the production. So if everyone is tested and you stay in your production "bubble" you going to be at least as safe and probably more safe than many other workers at the moment.  

We also don't know how effective a vaccine will be  - so some form of "new normal" will have to happen or things will collapse. It's probably going to need a combination of medication, better hospital resources, testing, cleaning and moderate care on distancing.

The issue is the risk is hard to guage and different for different people. For instance my wife is immunocompromised, so could get very ill if she got it. Last month I was doing sound on a feature and at the moment when I was sticking a mic on a coughing/sick actor (normal flu in the end) i felt like I was probably taking a bit too much of a risk.  Its the not knowing if your at risk or not and if your close to a person with the illness or not. Testing has to be sorted out. 

They are certainly useful and a bargain at free. The Sony E mount is flexible and can be adapted to fit many lenses.

The main issue is the codec at only 28Mbps (and I think its only 8 bit) is a little light - so it's not going to withstand much in the way of colour correction. Basically you need to nail the look in the camera. The dynamic range will also be less then modern cameras.

The point of these cameras is to be used on jobs that won't get much colour correction. You can usually get the look in camera. It should have both manual and auto white balance (yes you should use manual white balance).  If you get the white balance wrong at the time of shooting there won't be much latitude to fix it in post - compared to a modern RAW camera where the white balance can be left until post production if you want 

If you able to shoot under controlled lighting, e.g in a little multicam studio its going to be possible to get very decent results - for simple stuff. There shortcomings would be more visible on a location drama/doc shoot under variable lighting.

These cameras are basically budget industrial/corporate cameras - Its not designed for glossy film or promo work. But if you've got a conference to record, a CEO to interview or product demo to make - they are completely fine.  At this level the lack of 4K and higher bit rates aren't as much of an issue.

I've done plenty of conference/event type recordings on similar cameras. The sort of thing where you want internal audio, small files, small camera, Built in XLR audio, long battery life etc... On long conference shoots the 28Mbs codec becomes a good thing - since you maybe recording for many hours and working with a tight post budget. On those shoots better file formats are overkill and just slow down your edit.

But on jobs where you want to push for a more glossy look, at the budget end their are now some very good options like Black Magic Pocket 4K etc...  The smaller pocket cameras and mirrorless cameras will produce better images, but you have to rig them, record audio separately, add ND filters etc... and on jobs where the visual quality isn't the priority there is still a place for these "industrial" cameras.

Good find

The 970 was a great camera. I did a short on the PAL version in 25p and we screened at the BFI in London via a snell and willcox up-converter - it looked pretty close to HD.  Ergonomically great as well... But compared to the current generation of HD/4k cameras it struggles.

I do like the global shutter small sensor look as an alternative to the ubiquitous S35 CMOS look on everything.

I directed a short on the Ikonoskop digital 16mm camera. I wouldn't want to repeat the experience due to the cameras reliability and difficulty dealing with the uncompressed RAW. The images were great, had a real filmic 16mm vibe that looked stunning projected. 

The low prices of F23's and DigiZooms/Prime's at the moment is a little bit tempting - as a format that could offer a different look/feel to Alexa etc.. but still be technically "good" enough for modern tastes. 

This is all getting very lardee-dah!! Back in the day my budget alternative to radio mics was to use a portable mini-disc recorder with wired lapel mic, hidden on the actor. Mono mode got you 148 mins per disk, so you'd just leave it recording and hope you got something usable.  When combined with your single K6/ME66 plugged directly into your PD150 camera - audio was recorded...

and sometimes it sounded fine... and for everything else there's ADR. 

5 hours ago, David Peterson said:

A laptop should never be used as the recorder.

Apart from the times when it crashed and ran out of batteries it was totally fine. The wooden "boom pole" was a much bigger issue to deal with. 

What share of the credit did you agree when you hired the writer? Ideally it's always important to agree that sort of stuff in advance.

It's a tricky subject and on big movies the Writers Guild do a lot of credit arbitration to work out who gets the credit based on the amount they contributed to the script.

In your situation you could have a discussion with the other writer about what's fair.

If he just contributed a few bits you might credit as "additional material by"

If its very loose editorial script doctoring help you might credit: "Script edited by"

If he say wrote more then 25% of the text then thats a co-writer credit.

If you wrote the story, you could give yourself "story by" and share the writing credit.

But yes if he wrote a chunk of the script and you make it, you should offer to credit him fairly. Unless he signed something to wave his credit. He might not be that bothered about the credit, but it better to be cool, ask him and give fair credit where it is due.

Some writers for hire and script doctors are fine with getting no credit and they are usually paid very well. 

If you didn't pay this person very much (and fee's on upwork can be silly low at times) then I think crediting is more important. 

The Zoom stuff is great, but I like the simplicity of the MixPre's. They can't do as much, but they can do everything you need and it's all at your fingertips.  Also the knobs glow red when the limiters kick in 

I rarely do much sound recording beyond, self shooting audio on corporates, but I did a couple of days on a feature last month and was glad of a Sound Devices MixPre6. It was just super simple to operate,  it left me able to focus on battling with the radio mics. I had an option of a zoom - but the sound devices seemed simpler to get my head around when I needed to hit the ground running. The zoom is probably a better deal for an owner operator. But the MixPre's look like they have been idiot proofed to make them easy to jump on in a rental situation

The last time I was a films sound recordist I used a laptop, a Mk1 M-Box and Pro Tools as the recorder. Which was mega clunky, but we got good audio. 

Was going to shoot some B roll for my short, but the Lockdown has just made the process much more expensive:

Beachy Head is only 5 miles from my house, but I can't get into work to borrow a camera. So it's a bit annoying sourcing stock footage that I could easily self shoot. But I'd rather get the film done then wait for the restrictions to be lifted. 

I'm a big fan of the Sound Devices Mix Pre 6 - its affodible, sounds good and has great analogue limiters. The Mix Pre 3 is also great if budget is a bit tighter

The other nice thing about the modern Sound devices is the "Wing Man" app for Android and IOS. You can remotely control the recorder, monitor levels and label and annotate your recordings. It saves so much time labeling the tracks as you go. 

1 minute ago, Phil Rhodes said:

That's different from the sort of unprofessionalism I was thinking of. Creative block is one thing. Turning up at 0945 for an 0800 call is idiocy.

P

Do people do that intentionally? Most production crews/casts I've encountered are pretty good, espousing the mantra of if your "on time, your late".

I have only been embarrassingly late once on an important job and that was due to my car's alternator dying in the middle of nowhere. I was about 3 hours late for a client attended shoot, not good. Once it's happened once, you don't want to repeat it. In that case I very nearly lost the client. So I don't see how you could be generally unprofessional and stay in work.

Pretty much every "actor" I've encountered that rocks up late and takes the piss, usually less good at acting. Likewise - actors with a good work ethic, usually "act" better. The unprofessional but genius actors, I find are in the minority - basically I've only read about them in William Goldman books rather than encountered in general production. 

"flake" is the wrong word in the freelance business. I've had to drop out from helping on friends projects countless times due to paid gigs coming in. Sometimes you just have to prioritise the better paid work to survive.

Same with agreeing to do too much, you bid/pitch on way more jobs then you get - so to stay in work you have to say yes to a lot of stuff. At times your end up being in the fortunate/unfortunate position of having too many jobs on the table and you have to drop out. Thats not being flaky, just surviving. As long as your up front and honest, while giving enough time for them to find replacements - I think thats fine. Also productions and schedules slip, causing clashes that you didn't foresee or projects taking much much longer for all manner of reasons. 

As a freelancer "my word is my bond" is a luxury I can't afford 

I always go in with good intentions as well, but creative practice is creative practice and nothing is certain. I bid on a job because I think I can do it but sometimes it can just go wrong.

About 5 years ago I completely failed to deliver a script I was commissioned to write. I went in with good intentions and was really excited about getting the job. But I couldn't ever find any flow, once I blew a couple of deadlines I completely lost confidence in my ability to write.  I was a mess, still holding onto the hope that I could pull it back, telling the client I was making progress.

Spending days staring at a blank screen. Dark days, artistic practice is hard and when it goes wrong, the emotional fall out can be devastating. It took me 4 years to get the courage up to start writing again and i took on my first paid commission since last year. It was really daunting.

So when your hiring someone in an artistic capacity, it can all go wrong, due to the nature of being human.  Again I wasn't trying to be "flaky", thats the wrong word. I don't think its flaky to try and then fail. Often it goes wrong because your trying too hard and being too critical upon yourself

Artists and creatives are like anyone else, some have a good work ethic and some don't.

I would say in general most of the people I've encountered (at all levels) in the film/tv industry have good work ethics, but the nature of the work weed's out those that aren't up for it. In order to get to a certain level, you usually need a certain amount of commitment to the work.

I also teach film production and encounter students the like the idea of being creatives, artists, filmmakers but don't have the work ethic, they never even get started. You need a degree of persistence to just get your foot in the door. The less committed fall by the wayside way before that. I've encountered some flakey people on v low budget indie indie productions - but even then it's pretty rare.

I've only had an actor turn up late (due to unprofessionalism) once and the person cast was a model not an actor. Actors are usually good. Maybe I've been lucky, but my belief has always been that "good" actors in terms of performance are usually good professionals. So on my personal projects I've been able to weed out any difficult people during the casting process. I've not worked with many full on mega stars, so it may be different at the very high end. 

I used to be a technician at a drama school (East 15), the workload they give the students is crazy. By the time they graduate they are under no illusions about work ethic etc.. So if you cast trained actors or theatre actors your usually fine. I've only encountered prema donna type "difficult" actors in the am dram world.

Also on low budget work you have to understand people might need to drop out of your job to take a better paid opportunity as they have to live.  At the low budget end you have to be flexible if you want good talent and have a back up plan in place if someone becomes unavailable. For instance no sane actor is going to fully commit to your indie short and potentially lose a HBO series to do it.  I have managed to get very good people to work on my projects at a fraction of their normal fee, either because they liked the script, it offered an opportunity to do something different and it landed in a gap in their schedule. Luck is in involved.