Jump to content

Matt Sandstrom

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Matt Sandstrom

  1. like i said you don't generally buy derivative rights from the bureau, i only know of some big tv networks that do. the swedish state television for example have a license to use music as they see fit, they produce let's say 2 hours a day that contains music, and they pay a number of million dollars per year. considering that the going rate for tv right is several thousand dollars per track which is maybe only 3 minutes i'd say they pay much less that the independent producer. one cool side effect is that they can use music that's otherwise impossible to license, like beatles tracks, and they do. ;-) one thing to consider is that usually the producer will buy sync rights (that's the derivative part) for tv productions, while the exhibition rights are covered by the network's licensense, so you don't have to pay that for tv shows. very often i'm given music by artists for free since they know if i'm making something for tv they will get paid once it airs. if this is the same in most of the world i'm unsure of though, maybe it's just (northern) europe. it's not unlikely that some/many/most networks require all rights to be cleared before delivery. /matt
  2. "the" world. afaik there's only one. ;-) of course, it's the same everywhere obviously. just read my post again and you'll see that i'm not contradicting this. my point is that artists and publishers can't really control what happens to their work in every case since they've given away some of their rights to a copyright bureau. they can still negotiate their own deals with people, but if somebody buys a music license from the copyright bureau they can play any song they want and the artist can't do anything about it. if you don't like it, don't use the bureau, but at the same time you say good bye to a steady revenue stream. radio stations, clubs, restaurants, and so on use this licensing scheme since they play so much music it just wouldn't work to negotiate every single track for either party. i don't think a license to create derivative work really exists for independent producers, i know some tv networks have it but they're a special case and they pay millions, but even if there was it wouldn't make sense since the number of tracks they need a license for is normally not that high. did i make myself clear? /matt
  3. no, because they give up this right to a copyright bureau. anyone who pays a license fee to the bureau can use any music they want, that's the way the world works. the license fee for such a license that covers derivative work is enormous though, so basically only tv networks can afford it, but a basic performance/broadcast license is pretty cheap, which is how bars, radio stations, live venues and so on pay for music. you can purchase further rights directly from the artist/label, but they can never limit your rights to less than the license you've bought from the bureau grants you. /matt
  4. when it comes to derivative work it's not just protecting your copyright and/or making money, but also or even mainly the right to control what you're associated with. in this case i'm sure the association is fine with everyone, but this is a fact that people often forget. copying music and using it in your movie are two completely different things. /matt
  5. space light also come with black covers/skirts making them less lantern like and more like chimeras, that's how i've usually used them. and there's also a smaller one which fits easier in location ceilings, and it only has two 800w lights so power is not a problem. we used two of those on our music video for nom de guerre recently, see my homepage. i'm not sure whether a gymnasium is a studio or a location though. the ceiling is certainly high enough and there's plenty of gear up there to hang stuff from. ;-) /matt
  6. yes, it's always in that ballpark. one strategy is to decide which side to err on if unsure. it depends on the stock, the scene and the look you're after. with reversal it's usually better to underexpose slightly if in doubt, since it blows out so easily, so i usually open 1/3, which is easier to dial in on most light meters too. /matt
  7. won't work. you need the diffusion closer to the light, outside the window. otherwise the entire window essentially becomes your light source, which removes direction, fills shadows, and washes out the room, exactly what you don't want. /matt
  8. yes, there's money in festivals, but rarely worth the work since the chance of winning even if your film is fantastic is very very small. i've had work screened in dozens of festivals, and the exposure has been worth it for sure, but the price money i've been able to pick up along the way barely convers dvd's and postage, let alone travel. some grants and sponsor gifts have been worth a lot but since you need to make another film to get them they really only mean more costs. ;-) i've never made anything serious on super 8 that didn't make money though. the only short i did was picked up by national television and won a few awards, so that was a big financial success for its investors, i.e. me. the rest has been music videos, and while i never get rich doing them i usually get the common 10% of the budget, which usually means around $100-$200 for super 8 videos. not good for at least three days of work but it's money. :-) /matt
  9. thanks, yes uppsala bildteknik did the transfers. except sisten i är en skit which was done by kahl film. absolutely not recommended though. it took months (!) to get it done properly, he scratched my original badly, didn't offer any compensation for that, and then stopped answering my emails and calls when i complained. many people have had similar experiences with the guy, sorry, crook. ;-) stay far away. to avoid confusion, uppsala bildteknik are highly recommended. kahl film not. /matt
  10. light from the outside, through a frame of diffusion, and make sure the window frame, curtains, blinds, flowers and whatever cast some soft shadows on the bed and actor. you may have to move the light and diffusion further away to get that. if the walls are white you probably have to use negative fill camera left and flags to avoid washing out the scene. since it's a night with no sun to compete with you don't need a huge unit; a blonde will do fine. i like to treat moonlight as white if it's the only source, but if you have practicals in the scene it has to be bluer than them to look right. good luck, /matt
  11. last time i met alfredo online he sent me this. same thing in all my private bbs mailboxes, and in the comments on my youtube and myspace clips. funny guy. this is gonna get nasty soon so somebody please delete his account asap. david you're a moderator, right? /matt oh, i forgot the best part: :-) /matt
  12. there's also a soft fill light above the camera. you can see it in his eyes in the closeups. it's big and soft edged, probably something shot through diffusion, it's not the top light since that never reaches the eyes, but it's fairly high up too. it's common to round off the light and/or add fill on closeups. it doesn't look like it's there in the wide shots. /matt ps. you can actually see the double shadow under his eyebrows.
  13. this has sort of been addressed i guess, but decide whether it's mostly sunny or mostly cloudy, pick one, and wait every time before you roll. happens all the time, even on shoots where there's plenty of grip equipment available. /matt
  14. and somebody saying that they don't give a fu-ck stops them from doing that? and with all due respect (who am i kidding) i'm not sure i want people who's parents and grandparents think so to read anything i write anyway. /matt EDIT: i forgot i was on tv. dash added. mistake corrected. :-)
  15. silly questions perhaps but did you know how to operate the genny? on automatic they often won't strike a big hmi, while on max they will, and then there's choke and throttle, and sometimes you have to open the lid to the fuel tank to let the gasoline flow. and so on. it's not just amps but combustion and mechanics too. /matt
  16. if it works for him, fine, but isn't it just a question of how you've learned it and what you draw from experience? i know extremely well how a face looks on neg, reversal, video, hd whatever on this and that lighting setup with this ratio. do i know how a face will look if one side of the face spots two stops under the other, and how this will look in front of a green wall another stop further down? not really. i'm not lost of course but it doesn't come naturally. i'll still use my spot meter to check so that wall doesn't become too dark though. /matt
  17. yes. disclaimer though: i haven't used the ntsc fx1 but the pal one doesn't work in ntsc while the pal z1 does. i'm fairly sure it's the same the other way too. /matt
  18. it's hard to see from your post what level you're on, so forgive me if this is too basic. try using the incident meter to measure the strength of the light sources rather than as "an approximation of the human head". next to the subject, point it towards a light source, or all the light sources from that direction, shade it from the other ones, read, repeat. then it's just a matter of deciding which light source to expose for. as for getting different readings with the spot meter, that's only natural since different objects reflect different amounts. if skin is lit from an angle where it becomes specular it reflects much much more than medium grey, but usually around a stop less. i only use spot meters to double check problem areas or areas that i need to go black or blown out. i don't think many people use them to set their exposure. /matt
  19. B)--> QUOTE(Raz B @ Feb 27 2007, 10:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Can you tell more about the production? thanks, sure. i directed and did the concept and production design, dp was david grehn, makeup by jessica, don't remember her last name silly me, and that was the entire crew. we shot 11 rolls of 64t, 2 of the sister, 3 running and 6 syncing. the sister's room was built in our small studio space and lit with two bounced redheads and a halogen clamp light, in retrospect more was needed because it became too grainy even for my taste. it's better to light and push down in post when shooting reversal. or not light at all and let it go black. dark areas just look muddy. the running was shot from the back of a saab 9000, see if you can see the exhaust at one point, it's fairly obvious. no additional lighting which was a calculated "mistake". there's way too much contrast in any outdoor environment for 64t to handle. if you expose for the shadows the whole image flares and if you try to protect the highlights the shadows go completely black -- we got some of both. we were able to make it look good in telecine but at the expense of more grain. just a 575w hmi would have been nice. i've use them before on similar shoots and aimed right at the face it adds just the glow you need even in bright daylight. finally the gymnasium. we left the overhead fluorescents on near the walls to make them green and flickery, but lit the center with two 2x800 spacelights. backlight was a redhead with some kind of ocean colored theatrical gel, and a dimmed frosted redhead was mounted on the tripod for fill. the tripod was put on wheels so we could dolly whenever and wherever we wanted. i wanted everything to be constantly moving. my camera (canon 814e) runs at 24fps, steadily enough to hold sync for several second, but we telecined to 25fps pal so we played the music 4% slower on the set. it went very well and the slightly sped up look added to the feeling of the video i think. the rolls were processed by andec in berlin and telecine was an attended best light to minidv at uppsala bildteknik near stockholm. they use a flashscan. i edited the video on final cut pro then output to uncompressed and onlined in after effects. just some minor color corrections, grain reduction on the sister scenes, and some slight reframings. and then i uploaded it to my website. :-) total budget was around $1000. any questions? /matt
  20. it will be enough for closeups but if this is in broad daylight not for the entire band. i guess most people would suggest an 18k for such situations but i'd get a 4k. those still run off a small genny. since it's a music video it doesn't have to look right so you can even spot it, use very little diffusion and get some cool vignetting. i only shoot low budget music videos so i've no idea how to do it properly anyway. i leave that to a real dp when i direct fiction. ;-) /matt
  21. oh here too, that's why it's the title of the song. it's just that if you listen to the lyrics it's obvious that she's really his sister. "i have hated you since you were twelve ... you have hated me since i was born ... sibling rivalry" and so on. it doesn't matter though. one should be able to enjoy a pop song without listening to the lyrics, and the same goes for the video. he's running and she's angry, that all there is to it. :-) /matt
  22. sorry, it's the computer. javascript is broken. good think it's not mine... /matt
  23. either i'm stupid, my computer is, or the site is, because i don't see a film, just a bunch of comments. /matt
  24. that's the idea. not sure what you mean by if though. i did shoot that. ;-) i've told the band that if they let me do their next video we'll include a shot or two where you can see this chase continuing in the background. ah, "incest - fun for the whole family"? cool. yeah you're supposed to notice after a while. i thought people would sooner though, but it doesn't matter. maybe it's an internet thing as you say. thanks a lot for the feedback. /matt
  • Create New...