Adrian Sierkowski

That's always the problem of web files. Try exporting them with H.264 compression, but then you'd have to have some web space to host them (check voeh.com, I'm not sure but I think they allow larger filesize uploads for streaming). By the bye, what did you shoot this on?

I personally don't see what the big deal is. Yes, it's an amazing new tool at an amazing new price-point. But the question always becomes what happens when you're given a great tool without the budget to really optimize it. I remember I began shooting an Indie Bollywood film here on the F900. I tried to talk them out of it, as they were going to blow their entire equipment budget for a 3 hour long piece, on one camera rental. It didn't work, and we moved forward; until they realized that they couldn't afford the fun new tools. Everything is on hold now because of it, and chances are it will be on hold indefinitely. I worry about a lot of people who will accept any system on blind faith, or lack of forethought. The hubris of inexperience is always a hard thing to get around. That being said, though; I do welcome the RED. I would love to get my hands on one for some shooting, just to try it out. But, as with anything else and as has been mentioned many times before RED will not up-heave the film industry. If anything, as DV and now the newer HDV and DVCPROHD cameras have in the past done; Red MAY further democratize film making. And in the end, Democracy is a good thing.

It's not just about how much the USB can handle; it's more so about what the tape medium can handle. I am not sure, but i think MiniDV is limits to 25mb/s. Also there is major compression which comes into pplay between the CCDs on the chip and the tape you record on. Also, keep in mind a normal 3 chip CCD camera, IIRC, only converts to a 1.3megapixel still camera. There are much higher quality video cameras out there, but they are substantially more than 2000 quid.

Did you white balance the camera to correct for daylight? it also looks as though your focus is off to my eye. further, you're shooting on an overcast day; so essentially there isn't going to be too much contrast in the frame to begin with. You're working in SD off of a mini DV camera which isn't exactly the highest quality format made. I havn't used the camera you're using that I can recall, but I know from the extensive mini DV that I've shot that it often is a bit sub-par. In Premier Pro try upping the contrast by about 20% or so, which will give the illusion of much greater depth and dimension to the image and a camera such as that will always work best when you have a nice bright day to begin with. Just keep on experimenting and getting to know your camera. Also a still camera will always look better as it has higher resolution and is only taking 1 photograph, as opposed to 60 photographs (assuming a 1 second shutter speed on the still camera). That's just what i see, though.

Very beautiful shooting. reminds me a bit of the opening of the Reggio film Koyaanisqatsi. I love the time laps.

I could certainly use one of those in my living room. A conversation piece, as functional as it is artistic.

When in doubt blame an intern.

Best of luck. I'd've loved to have come down, but I got to the post too late :(

There was a book I read awhile ago "Confessions of an English Opium Eater" by Thomas de Quincey that I think could be made interesting. Aside from that, I'd like to try to pull off an adaptation of some of the epic poem work of Milton or Dante; the Inferno, or perhaps Paradise Lost.

I'm sorry Jonathan, I didn't mean to insinuate you mean all of them. I was just sticking up for myself! A prime example of this phenomenon is my friend Phil, Ba in film and all, very proud of himself as an editor, yet has no idea about editing anything but MiniDV. I shot him a question about the P2 on the HVX and he gave me that same blank look.

As a film student I can say we're not all bad. I know the names of most of the more commonly used equipment. . .it help, though, that my dad was a "lighting director" as his business cards always said, for a good 30 yrs.

That opening shot really thrilled me as well!

In terms of the second one, at least, there has been talk that it has Iraq war-overtones. But then again, you can say that about most films made today as it happens to be in the front of a lot of people's minds. I agree the plot was weak, and I dislike gore overall. I thought it was well shot and I love the whole empty-city. The problem with an empty city and mindless "zombies" is that it happens not to be too scary. My favorite character was the sniper, but I can't even recall his name. Also, in terms of deeper messages, I found myself thinking alot of the HIV/AIDS virus, as it spreads the same way (minus the saliva i think?). But in the end I feel it was a well shot film, with a good look to it, but not really worth the price of my admission (which was also absurd)

Glad I could be of some help :D

Beautiful, thank all of you for your opinions and options. I'll be giving shooters a call come Monday.

Sadly I'm sitting on the other coast in Philadelphia. What about DRCPRO HD? Any good of a mid-ground between the higher end HDs and the DVCAM option?

I've shot all of these cameras except the XH, and I would say either the DVX or XL2 would be ideal choices. I'd lean more towards the XL2, personally for the aforementioned interchangeable lenses (which you can rent on a need basis). I disliked the HVX for a few reasons, but it's still a very robust camera as it's built off of the DVX. Both the HVX and DVX can be more "filmic" but you need to invest in a SLR mount for lens interchangeability, such as the Red Rock M2. Good SLR glass can get pricey too, as can the adapter and accessories. I have only recently begun using a Red Rock and while I enjoy the DoF control, I think that the loss of light is not a good trade-off. but I'm going off topic. If you want to get all of a mountain in a shot, you can always move further back, so don't worry too much so about how "wide" the lens is (also, the wider the angle of the lens the more lens distortion you'll get on vertical lines.) Don't forget to factor in all the other costs: editing system, good tripod, monitor (is preferable) cases, audio etc. But I think overall you'll be a-ok with any of those cameras. Stay away from the HD/V unless you need it. The DVX and XL2, for SD cameras can produce amazing images. my two cents.

Ok, so I have been looking around on the forums for a few days now, trying to figure out what's the best format to telecine-to to preserve high quality based on the decks we have around [it's a school project]. The original would be 7218 stock coming off my Arri SR2. We will be finishing, originally, to go to DVD, but the Director/producer wants an option for fests as well, so we'll need something or at least moderately acceptable quality for larger screens. In any case, cost is an issue so I just want options and opinions based upon the decks as I said and also if it's possible (and economical) to go directly to Hard Disc. I was thinking DVCPRO HD, but I'm not sure if this is possible if going directly to Hard Disc or not. So here go the decks Sony HVRM15U Sony HVRM10U Sony DSR11 Sony DSR20 Sony DSR25. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

It's about the same here in Philadelphia. And the other big thing is that seeing a film camera is so alien 'round here that everyone wants to help out somewhere. I have never been on a no-budget production out here in want for a location. We can even swing free food here and again. Viva cheesesteaks

Definitely wish you the best of luck on all this!

If you're up in Norway, I'd not buy from an American company, but look for a European alternative to BH. I know Arri (based in Germany) makes lights as either 120/240V including that head you're looking at, but I'm not sure whether BH carries it. Give them a call, or an e mail and specify you need a 230V model.

Learn to love Rammen. Live for the moment on the set and the smile you get seeing something you envisioned come to life. Don't worry about how much you'll make; so long as you can get by, somehow, what does it really matter?

I'd say if you're doing mostly video work then that's a good place to start. You can get a strong key out of those units and they can still run on household circuits. You might also want to look into getting a 2K eventually, the highest you can run off of 120V 20A household power, as well as few smaller heads, 650s, 300s and, hell, even a 150 just for when you're doing specials [like punching up a natural light in a room etc]. Also, head over to filmtools.com they have some good starter gel kits. I think they have a color correction, a diffusion, and a cosmetic kit all for 'round $50 each. Not a bad deal.

Dear John, I'm a new member, but I too have always taken joy in reading you answers to everyone's questions. Having just lost my father to liver cirrhosis, I know what it is like to be in and out of hospitals, and I know times can be bleak. But I also know that we have a will, and ability as well, to endure. There is nothing I can do, I know, but say Thank You for being here on this forum to help people such as myself, muddle through filmmaking, always learning and befuddled. I will keep you in my best thoughts and wishes, though I never had the privilege to know you well. Sincerely, ~Adrian Sierkowski

I couldn't possibly agree more. When it comes to filmmaking in general, there isn't, and as far as I can tell, never will be a "one size fits all" solution. While I'm not one to hop on the RED wagon yet, I can say that if the camera truely does deliver on it's promises it will act as another complementary tool within a set which includes SD, HD, and Film instruments. Each one of these tools has it's own drawbacks, limitations, and areas of greatness. In the end, a the choice of media should be aesthetic, overall (this isn't entierly the case), but even the aesthetic reasonings often are forced to the backseat by budgets.