Jamie Lewis
-
Posts
174 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Jamie Lewis
-
-
This spot was directed by Dave Meyers who is repped by @Radical.Media.
Dave is best known for his award winning work directing music videos, but he emerging as a go to director in the world of spots. The DP is one of my favorites, Paul Cameron, A.S.C.
The spot was shot on film, using Panavised Arri 435 cameras. If you watch the spot as they approach the doors of the hangar, you'll notice the rows upon rows of kino flos placed in ceiling and the way they are placed on the cone shaped "scoreboard" type structure. Of course, many other units were more than likely used at floor level, in various ways as Cameron saw fit, but I don't have that information.
Excellent job of color grading by Colorist Tim Masick of Company 3. There was also 2D and 3D VFX by Method Studios on the spot, particularly the sky replacement and background elements on the exterior shots as the players approach the tarmac.
Meyers only had one day to film the spot with all the players and because he felt the players were way too valuable to be possibly risking an injury for a non close up shots he sometimes relied on doubles for the tight shots of hands and feet. I think he also have used doubles in some of the wider shots, which is why you'll see shots of players in silhouette.
Hope this helped.
That was VERY helpful. Thanks, Wendell.
-
Does anybody have any info on how this TV spot was shot? Such as if it was shot on a blue screen or on location? The lighting is pretty wicked (both inside and outside scenes). I'm guessing it was shot on film.
Here's a link to the TV spot. There are no stills. Just click on TV spot.
http://www.nike.com/nikebasketball/usa/?lo...ce,secondcoming
-
That's the wrong link, you have to go to the Products - Downloads section.
If the digital river shot is what they showed, no wonder why people didn't like it. The red is so incredibly off it's ridiculous.
-
Ok I found it. It's in ArriNews 04/2002.
They showed the Arri comparison test film 'Circle of Love' (which has the same scenes shot on 35mm and on the F900) to a test audience. About a third of the people were filmmakers, the other two-thirds not. They were asked to judge specific criteria and in 38 out of 55 instances people prefered film.
Anyone interested in reading the whole article can find it on the Arri website in the downloads section.
There is no listing for 04/2002 on Arri's website.
-
I seem to recall reading about such a survey. Maybe in an old edition of Arrinews. The result was that the majority of people preferred film images to digital ones.
I'm guessing that it was about off the shelf digital compared to film because I'll bet my entire life savings, and future earnings, that the "majority" cannot tell the difference between a film that was shot on film or one that was shot digitally (Miami Vice, Sin City, Once Upon a Time In Mexico, etc.)
-
And in one of the quickest double dips.....
http://www.movieweb.com/dvd/news/36/22836.php
We first reported here that there was going to be a Director's cut version of Zodiac coming to DVD, but now according to DVD Times this new, 2-disc version will be hitting stores January 8th from Paramount Home Entertainment.
This release will be a 2-disc set on DVD and it will also be available on HD-DVD.
-
Yes this is my Dilema because I'm in Pal world and can get a 25p camera and not have to worry about that, but I could really use the NTSC analog in, so I'm very torn about it all.
Forgot about that Analog in too!
On paper it's almost like my perfect camera, but I've yet to get to play with one in real life.
*fingers crossed*
Your video is looking nice BTW!
love
Freya
I think you would be perfectly happy with the camera. It exceeded my expectations a great deal. I was torn between this and a DVX but I chose the Canon since I wanted the HD res. I added an XLR & adapter and got a TON of filters off Ebay that work perfectly.
-
I guess you could ask for a proper manual exposure mode instead of having to pull tricks but given that the camera is so cheap and it is 1080p and it actually has a microphone socket, well you might be taken for being mean spirited and looking a gift horse in the mouth!
It certainly seems like a preety incredible little thing.
I'm very keen to play with one.
love
Freya
A little light pointed in the lens or spend $2000 more to do what this camera can do?
The only issue I have with it is the work around that has to be done to get 24p editable. That's the only drawback. Now that I've shot with it a few times, it's a real gem at $2500 let along $950.
-
Darrell. Your problem is that your camera being a low end consumer model, has kind of got everything set to auto. The other problem is that the HV20 doesn't actually have a manual exposure mode, so you basically have to trick the camera to get some control over it. Apparently the camera also is keen to turn up the gain automatically in an annoying way.
The only way round this is to lock the exposure and choose from a set of pre-set exposure options. You stil won't be able to control the exposure settings exactly but one of the presets is likely to be what you need. Obviously you want to find a setting with the electronic gain turned off and a relatively normal shutter speed.
love
Freya
I have complete control of the exposure when doing th light trick. I go from -11 to +9 at 48 and no gain. I don't know what more you could possibly ask for. I shot some pretty dark scenes and they came out with very little to no gain. I cant see any in any of the full res footage I've shot. The camera is a little peach and with some ingenuity it can be made to do things cameras that cost $2000+ more can.
-
Hilarious
He pwned me.
-
Mr. Lewis,
I'm not sure why you need to all caps me. When I said real world examples I mean a tutorial where someone goes through their camera settings and shows you why they set it for certain situations. Thanks for the exposure tip.
Don't hate on me just because I'm learning.
I'm not hating on you. You asked for real world examples which is what I provided you with. You don't get more real world than that.
You asked how to set the exposure. That should have been one of the very first things you looked for in the manual when you got the camera.
Here is a writeup on the exposure trick. That goes into more detail.
-
and to clarify I am not using "low light mode" just IAF, HDV Cine mode 24p.
You hit the joystick until it says exposure then you hold the light in front of the camera and hit the joystick up.
I don't understand why you're looking for "real world" experiences. I LINKED you to REAL WORLD shots done with the HV20 by ME. What else more could you possibly looking for? :unsure:
The exposure setting is basically the ND filter. When you engage manual exposure you're disabling the ND filter.
-
Here's a link to some low light stills from my HV20.
http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=25089
I didn't get any noise. There's a "hack" to turn gain off in Cinema mode. When you enable the exposure adjustment you have to have a bright light covering the entire lens. I do this by having an all white background on my cell, cover the lens with it and then I hit the exposure. I get a wide range of apertures locked at 48 shutter with no gain.
-
I'm a complete newb when it comes to lighting but I'll give it a shot. It will help me also because this is what I would do and if it's wrong the experienced people on here will tear it up and correct me. :lol:
The two night shots look very "sourcy," especially the first one. The second looks almost like it's light coming from a TV or a flashlight. Maybe defusing it would help?
I don't think there is much wrong with the 3rd one. I like it.
The 4th one definitely needs some separation from the background. The girls skin color is LITERALLY the same color as the wall. Maybe a splash of another color can help break that up, or something on the wall. I think that's why the shot looks "flat and unattractive."
-
Wow, thans a bunch everyone. This is why I love this site! ;)
I still have a number of questions:
@ Jamie Lewis: I took me a while to understand it, but now I get the overall concept.
Did you (or somebody else) test this one? So its possible to get a nice shot while ,say, walking up and down a stairs?
It's not meant for very uneven surfaces, stairs and such. If you added more weight to it it would definitely lessen the shakyness going up the stairs. I've built it and used it in walking shots and it produced nothing that was unacceptable by a long shot. The follows were centered and nice. I would be one of the first to notice too much shakyness.
-
Also you can build a boom for a mic for $20 or so. Buy one of those light bulb changer rods. Drill a hole at the end of one of the attachments. Insert the proper screw, secure with a nut and you have one of the longest booms going and it's $400 cheaper than anything that can stretch to that length.
This is the pole I bought.
-
Here's a Stradicam'esque piece. It's a take on the overpriced Figrig.
http://www.instructables.com/id/E8G7WIV29PET9K4XJ7/
I built one and it works great.
-
How about buying some Igloo coolers and storing them in those? They're moisture and leak free.
-
All your shots look nice. I think the "moon light" is way too blue. I feel as though moon light is a paler blue. The shots that you could use only practicals are great... just what you had to go through makes them great. Sometimes it's the journey and hindsight that makes things sweeter. Always remember - light is light. Whether it is the instruments in a new light kit or a $5 desk lamp - in essence they do the same thing. Don't get hung up on that it doesn't have Desisti stamped on the side just keep doing it with what is there in front of you.
Keep going!
z
Thanks, Zolomij. It's quite comical to see the sound guy holding the boom in one hand and then holding a desk lamp in the other while trying to keep absolutely steady.
It was all definitely worth it as this was really a learning experience. Having that little train wreck just added a nice chunk more to the whole learning process. Much more so had everything worked out perfectly!
-
Good work! There are better lights out there than Smith Victors, I look forward to seeing some of your stuff once you get your hands on some better tools :)
Jonathan, yeah I was going for a surreal look. It's a flashback scene. I tried to make it as blue as possible.
As for the Smith Victors, it's the only thing my "budget" I could afford at the time. I got both lights, hard case, stands and lamps for $250. I couldn't really find anything with that much light for that price. If you know of some others around that price, because I want to get a couple more lights soon, please feel free to recommend me some! Tuition, mortgage and pets don't allow for much leeway when it comes to a film budget.
-
Well I had my first shoot this weekend using a lighting kit. All I've ever done is use available light and didn't give it much thought. I did some practicing over the past few months with still life just to get a feel of how to actually paint a scene. I'm using a Canon HV20 to shoot and my lighting consists of 2 Smith Victor 600w and a Lowel Prolight 250w and of course a bunch of gels.
Here are some stills (from footage) of the shoot. Any and all critique and tips are welcome.
This was the first shot and the one I like the best. I got the exact look I was out to get.
On this one I completely forgot to put a bounce below them to get some light on them. :(
This was the 3rd choice of a location for this scene. The first location became unavailable because the person had to leave town and I didn't feel comfortable being there without her. The 2nd location became unavailable because the prior scene took longer than expected and the person went to bed! In this location we ran into a MAJOR snag, minimal power. Every outlet in the house was only 2 pronged and there was concern with the circuit breaker. The house has minimal power as more than one appliance trips the breaker. The breaker is located in another apartment and at 3am I don't think they would appreciate a knock on their door.
So the only thing we could do was use the lamps that were in the house. It was trying but fun at the same time trying to make it work.
The next two are of the same location. The first shot came out exactly how I wanted it but the 2nd one gave me some problems. I couldn't get the kitchen dark. The light was bouncing everywhere. So we decided to try and light everything!
And this last one was my first attempt at using a gobo(?) and going for a "moonlight shining through blinds look."
-
What are some tips on getting enough coverage. I shot a short film this past weekend and this morning I have thought of some areas where I feel I missed some coverage shots.
Any tips on how to minimize this? Is it just about gaining experience, heavily storyboarding it or something else?
:unsure:
-
Hey Guys sorry I can't imbed the movie here but check out a short a shot with a good director friend of mine. Its not a school project but we both go to Cal State Northridge Film school. I'll try to put up my very first film project - S16 for school asap. Love to get input and any advice. We shot on F-900 which was a lot of fun! S16 was on Panavision elaine. Enjoy
www.darkedgeentertainment.com
I liked it. Nicely shot "night." The story was well done for a short. I give it a thumbs up! :D
-
I posted this in the reel forum and remembered this is where I might have seen it.....
I saw a link to someones reel and/or website on here and they had a music video they did. The band was playing in the middle of the road. It looked like a deserted road. I remember the lead singer being extremely skinny and did this weird dance with his feet as he was singing. I guess the music would be classified as rock. Does anybody know what I'm talking about?
It was shot absolutely beautifully and I would like to see it again. It was a download I believe.
Nike Second Coming TV Spot
in Lighting for Film & Video
Posted
Good find!
Thanks!