Matthew W. Phillips

I really enjoyed Pirates 2...thought it was better than the first actually.

Can't you say Cinematographer?

Sir, it was a demo reel. Demo reels don't have plots. They are just a montage of the DP's work.

I totally applaude this statement. This point right here is why I personally believe digital will not overcome film as the professional medium no matter how technically superior digital is supposed to get. (I know this may get backlash.) People, by their very nature, cannot put as much effort into something that is unlimited as in something that is limited. If you are wearing a $9,000 suit, aren't you going to be more careful eating with it on than you would be wearing a $10 t-shirt? Same sentiment here, and I think everyone serious about honing their skills should learn film. But the point is moot because digital is cheap and most people like the cheapness. I think people like George Lucas actually set a bad example for filmmaker's because he shot over 200 hours of footage for Attack of the Clones on digital. There is no reason at all that anyone should shoot that much footage to get what they need. If you are careful, you shouldn't even need more than a 6:1 shooting ratio. But it was digital so Lucas went off.

Levon, from a technical aspect, I thought it looked really good for a digital shoot. You nailed exposure right on buddy. Props for that. I agree that the audio was way too low but if this is a rough cut, you can work that out. Your lighting was good IMO but it was very straightforward. Maybe that is what LondonFilmMan is referring to. As far as his comment about you not putting much into it, I think he is being unprofessional and caddy. A critique is something that is to include suggestions for improvement, advice, etc...not silly childish comments that cannot benefit anyone. Keep up the good work! P.S.- I would love to see what you could do with film if you worked on it.

I think that, if you wanted it to look like grindhouse, you should have shot it in Super8 format. No offense, but that didn't look like grindhouse at all.

That will do it.

Last I heard, it was $4.88, but yeah, I think they still do it.

No, actually a 50' spool is 3600 total frames so: 18 fps= 3 minutes 20 secs. 24 fps= 2 minutes 30 secs.

I'm not so sure I think age has anything to do with how well a person makes a film. I mean, if you are new to film at 80, are you going to be better than someone new to film at 14? I watched the film and I think it is on par with many other first films I have seen outside of the fact that the camera used was not as good as some people with bigger bucks but that isnt a technical flaw on your part. That is a monetary constraint. ThomS, I think you were honest from your perspective but I dont think you really give much room for encouragement. I highly doubt that your first film was all that great either but the process he went through making this film is much more of a teacher than all your storyboarding ideas, book reading, and criticisms combined. Filmmaking really is a hands on thing. As far as storyboarding goes, I know a lot of, IMO, great filmmakers who dont storyboard at all. Some people like to go with the flow and see what will work best at the time. All the planning in the world will not prepare you for what's going to happen on the set, especially if something unprecedented happens. For the one who made this film, you are not any worse of a beginning filmmaker than anyone else. Consider the points that everyone has made but ultimately learn by DOING. If everyone did what someone else told them, there would never be innovation.

The XL2 also has 2:3:3:2 pulldown for film out.

Actually, the XL2 is, for all important reasons, native 16:9 CCD. The total area is 4:3 but who cares when the 16:9 area is the effective pixel area. It is native in the sense that you dont have to squeeze or stretch it to achieve true 16:9. Camcorderinfo.com even mentions that Canon uses "oversized" 4:3 chips just for the purpose of cutting out a good 16:9 image. I personally do not see where the outcome would be any different than a 16:9 chip with the same effective pixel count as the XL2. I think sometimes people get so technical that they lose sight of what's important.

How much do you want for it? I'm currently the high bidder for one on eebay but I'll be outbd before it's over and I'd prefer not to wait for shipping from Sweden.

Yes, I was thinking about shooting some indoor footage with Pro8mm ASA 100 Tungsten Color Negative stock. I have an incandiscent kit so will I have to use a filter to white balance? Pardon the noob question but I'm switching over from digital where all I have to do is use a bounce card and press a button. My kit is a 3-light 1250W kit (2 500, 1 250). Also, with a 1250W kit, would that be enough light for ASA100 or should I go with ASA 500? Appreciate any reply.