Alberto Fernandez

I know this is old but... it seems to me the problem with recording or even converting to 24p with this camera comes from getting jumpy image because video is clear and film is not, this creating more visual jumpyness. Now, After effects has a motion blur option that attempts to 'fix' that problem... does anyone have experience using it? does this generally work? or will i get a jumpy blurry image? I have no camera or native footage to work with. THanks.

FLOURISH - I saw that movie a couple weeks ago, I really feel like asking people around here what went wrong with that movie. I mean what makes people get together with some budget (minor in this case) and just do so many mistakes. I saw the "making of" documentary just to see what kind of people did that. And well, the director is so NOT charismatic that I think its just some kind of joke, trying to make a legend by being the worst director with the most arrogant attitude, both of those attributes are so incompatible that its seems surreal. He spends his time telling the cinematographer "he is not doing a good job" while telling the doc camera he is not afraid to speak his mind. Well, the cinematography on this movie is top notch compared to whatever other factors created a movie that can induce anxiety, like the poor sound, the bad acting, the terrible sequencing, the lack of real mystery, and most importantly, the fact that by the end of the movie the plot is so randomly overcomplicated, and the elements to help people solve it are so deficient (starting by the sound) that you feel you just wasted 2 hours of your life, and you will never get them back. I never even cared to watch the ending or know what really happened, who killed who, why, or who was the real insane person, or what was real or what was not. It was like trying a cake made with onions and poop... how the hell did it get to my table?.. and why is the baker so proud of it? Someone out there is laughing real hard at this big joke PS... Pirate of The Caribbean is too long, it got so boring.. they went overboard trying to make a "Revenge of the Sith" or "Return of the King" kind of closure movie.

Ok, a year later and you got 1 person to see the movie.. yeah!! hah Seriously, I watched this on DVD a few months ago and it really got me interested in filmmaking. The best thing about it is the storytelling style, I thought it was an Almodovar film, then after the film I noticed he only produced it, but it seems pretty obvious to me he gave some pointers to the director, editor, actors.. it has his signature. This is a kind of movie for screenwriters and editors, its just so good from that angle, it shows only what you need to see, and leaves you guessing on the non critical elements, for example: spoiler next: after the main characters (polley and robbins) split their own ways due to the treatment ending polley tries to get on the ambulance but she is not allowed, robbins finds polley's bag on the ambulance that drove him home.. did she leave the bag on purpose so that robbins could find her? the director does not show the audience if it was an accident or not, it only shows when robbins finds it and decides to follow the lead. Well, its complicated to explain, but it makes it all so subtle I am pretty sure Almodovar had something to do with that. This movie is just a great thing to watch if you are tired of big studio movies, its just so different in pace, and nothing is violently shoved into your mind, it makes you feel smart because all those symbolisms actually make sense. Its like reading a good book, unlike weird movies with symbolisms you cant really decipher because they are simply mistakes the director allowed to be left in for random reasons, or just to make it NOT a regular film. Something similar happens in another really extremely good movie of Almodovar, "Volver", where he makes just unbelievably stuff, like SPOILER ALERT!!..... make you think someone is a ghost without using any kind of camera trick, special effect, moods, nothing, just good simple dialog and amazing actors. Think 6th sense.. but BETTER (altough not used as a climax). Its mind blowing when you realize she wasnt really a ghost, in this case this movie does not make you feel smart i guess.. hah.. quite the opposite in fact, but wow, its refreshing to know there are people being SO creative that they dont need special effects or tricks to make you 'buy' the story.

I am surprised to not see Susan Sarandon or Sean Penn by "Dead Man Walking" on any list (maybe i missed one). I think they were amazing. Morgan Freeman - Shawshank Redemption Susan Sarandon - Dead Man Walking Sean Penn - Dead Man Walking Robert Musgrave and Owen Wilson - Bottlerocket ... for this scene: .. except they cut it right at the best part. Nicholas Cage - Leaving las Vegas .. for falling down and pretend he was a poisonous plant. Al Pacino and (Sal) - Dogs Day Afternoon ... just to name a few.

Cant Buy Me Love - You gotta admit they did a great job at making some dirty town in New Mexico (supposedly) look like a very nice, cool, and interesting place to live, which it is, but at least Im not used to getting that from movies, desert scenarios are usually reserved for whacky, weird, surreal movies.. not romantic comedies. Credit goes to concentrating on shooting a story on a desert in the winter-fall-autumn, not the typical hot summer desert. Lost Boys - How good is a vampire movie atmosphere that goes from real to fantasy (the characters) without the audience noticing it or 'waking up' to the trick?. Same goes for a movie like E.T. for example, but I still think lost boys was an amazing experience. Breakfast Club - very cool.

I dont have any video skills, ok. heh. I've thought about the sound, its all considered in a separate budget, along with lights and the rest of the equipment, or I could rent all that. I know how to work with sound so that wont be a problem. I plan to start as camera man for someone else, if they let me (Someone suggested me this approach). Or doing free wedding concept videos, or just sell it to them if they like it after they watch it. Just because im a tech moron that doesnt mean im a moron in general. :P I wont know how far I am from actually pulling it off until i can be involved in a video production, i dont think ill be charging even symbolic amounts of money until 2008 IF i really push myself. If you want to laugh even more, just picture this, a noob like me trying to make a groom and bride's onw little version of an MTV The Hills episode, with similar music and format. The reason i choose that one is 1)the format is awesome.. and 2) the acting quality bar is not set very high.. heh. Well, thanks, Frank.

Yup, i probably got that from reading how the two different systems used to work some time ago, and is not valid anymore, Simon. Here is another thread that can help you understand the SD and HD differences, Cathy. SD or HD thread

Erm... i guess this could be moved to the First Time Filmmakers area.

I know nothing about it but I was wondering about that the other day, here is the easy source: Wiki source and the more complicated source: Dalsa source Allegedly, ccd had more quality at the expense of more power and size, and CMOS could have more functions in the chip with less power and size. But apparently thats not necessarily the case anymore. I think if you get a CCD camera you will get a more analog feel, and a more vivid and HD feel with a CMOS chip. Im sure someone will correct me if im misleading you... :D I know even less about HD and SD, but my guess is it depends on your target audience too. Both choices can be seen in a large 16:9 TV and few people would know the difference. There is a show on MTV called "the hills", its shot on SD and the whole production looks awesome in my opinion, i thought it was HD for sure, which got me thinking HD is not a requisite for awesomeness (well, a panasonic SDX900 helps, along with a top colorist with a gazillion dollar color software). On the other hand, if you have the proper tools to handle and produce HD without losing definition in the process then go for it, that means the camera that can fully capture it (that means 3 chips on the camera), the right format to transfer (check the native format of the camera), the editing software that can handle it (final cut, premiere pro or cs3, avid, vegas 7, etc), and produce it (blueray or HD DVD). Ive never touched a decent camera in my life, but hey, i guess im learing something here.. hah. Someone will correct my mistakes i assume. Good luck.

I want to invest as much as 5k in a camera and computer. I am going to try to do some weddings to regain some money but its not my ultimate goal, but bad lighting i guess is something to consider in the meantime. My goal is to have the best setting possible that gives me good quality, I guess thats defined by the budget, but I have a day job, so what I am really interested in is: losing the least amount of time on compression, decompression, transforming from one format into another, but at the same time I'm willing to spend more time if I can work with HD on this system (and if the budget allows it). I want to keep it very simple, just shoot, transfer into PC, edit (HD prefferably), and produce a DVD (blue ray or HD DVD if not impossible). Oh and i want the final product to be on 16:9. To recap: Camera with 16:9, 3ccd, good handling low light, under $3,500.00, records in a ready-to-use format for Adobe Premiere CS3 (or another suggested software with minimal loss of quality, or with mininal loss of time to transfer into another format if necessary). It its capable of producing an HD final product it would be a super plus. So, what would be the best camera? Sony HDR-FX7 http://www.amazon.com/Sony-HDR-FX7-High-De...0743&sr=1-1 Canon XH A1 http://www.amazon.com/Canon-XH-A1-High-Def...0836&sr=1-1 Canon XL2Canon XL2 Panasonic Pro AG-DVX100B Panasonic Pro AG 100b Which Computer? Gateway GT3076m $1,300 aprox Funciones: . Procesador Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E43001 . Windows Vista® Home Premium Original 2 . Monitor Gateway® LCD de 22" (widescreen HD) . Memoria DDR2 de 2GB de canal dual . Unidad de disco duro SATA II de 400GB a 7200rpm3 . Unidad de DVD±RW 16x multiformato de doble capa Will it work with an INTEL 950 video card (default) or am i gonna have to put a Video card in it? It has PCIx16 ready. or.. Dell Precision 390 (as is) $1,500 aprox Core 2 duo E4300 2GB ram Nvidia Quadro FX550 128mb 19" monitor 80gb disc Which editing software? Is Adobe Premiere CS3 the best option for mr? (consider las vegas, pinnacle, avid possibly). I know i am answering my own question here.. but help me out, all i can see is the specs and tech, i know there is more to it than what i can conclude by reading tech reports and prices. And what would be the average price to pay for a wedding 1h video with this equipment, with an average editor (i mean, what should i charge per wedding if i manage to work one.?.. hehe. Please post your recommended equip combo for my needs, thanks. Many Thanks.