Mike Donis

I have always found a way to use talc powder in a film somehow. So I second that idea! I do think you'll need to worry about compositing the reflection though. You can probably use your framing to minimise how much focus is put on the reflection to minimise anything less-than-perfect that may come from the more complicated effect though. Make sure someone bumps the car up and down to make it looks like it's actually moving. My 2 cents...! Cheers :) Mike

A lot of the fight scenes were shown in the frame letterboxed to scope, when the majority of the movie filled the 1.85 projection area. Some very cool, in-your-face direction. Fun cinema! ...and Toronto playing Toronto was a very nice change!

In this instance though, if instead I digitally converged the shots so that the foremost element was whatever is closest to the camera, do you think that would be worthwhile? Meaning it would produce the window effect, even with the hyper-stereoscopy. I'd imagine the converged section of the frame being not what the content of the scene asks you to focus on would also produce a lot of eye strain.... When shooting in stereo are we virtually forced to never include anything in the foreground that isn't contained perfectly within the frame, and is that just a nature of the beast? What are your thoughts?

Hi Russell, Thanks for your reply, indeed it is helpful. Yes, the side-by-side DVX test was something I did because I had access to two DVX100s for free. I definitely find the interocular far too great for this type of scene - it also made us need to blow up the image significantly to fix convergence issues which also lost a lot of image quality for our DVD version. You can't tell as much on Youtube with their tiny windows, but it's quite soft on a larger television. You mention wanting to avoid elements coming out of the screen - would it perhaps be less distracting, considering this scene is already shot, to digitally adjust the convergence to the foremost element, and let the viewer converge their own eyes to focus farther into the screen where the actors may be? I'd imagine that would be even more distracting (with this given footage) and the only solution is to keep that sort of thing out of the frame altogether henceforth, unless it's totally contained in the shot? I really appreciate your notes. Best, Mike

Hello all! Here's a test scene I shot with a home-built stereo rig and two DVX100s side-by-side. You'll need to go to my actual channel to be able to access the drop-down list to choose your ideal method of watching it in stereo - I think it defaults to cross-eyed, which is probably the best way if you can get your eyes to work like that. I'm hoping to shoot more 3D! I'd love to hear thoughts on what you feel works and what you feel doesn't visually in this piece. Best Mike

I'm likin' this dreamy imagery... very cool. I'm certainly interested to see the short when it's complete.

I like it - and I agree, it doesn't look "no" budget. Good work!

Very short and sweet, which is always good for demo reels. I like a lot of the imagery, but not knowing what else you've got, it's hard to say what else you should add :) I guess being more specific, shots I'm not as much a fan of: first shot of the reel at 0:11, tracking shot @ 0:19, CU @ 0:37, MS @ 0:57. Also, you title cards are off centre :P Shots I love: WS @ 0:16, XCU @ 0:29 My absolute favourite shot is the one with the hot wheels @ 0:35 - love it! Hope I've been of some help. Cheers, Mike

That sounds like it could be quite tricky to pull off - not to mention also perfectly tracking the background footage of whatever rushing road you're using. It's not possible to simply frame the actual points of contact the bike makes with the road out of the shot?

What is there looks good, and I don't mind the static iagery in and of itself at all. I do think that selecting some shots with more movement would make the reel feel less long, however. It seems like there isn't enough to see to be worth a whole two minutes. I'd personally shorten the amount of time spent on each shot or, like the others have mentioned, select shots to hold for this length that are more complex in movement. I think that would add more interest to the video and do it for me personally. Just my two cents worth.... Repeating, however, that what's there does look good. I just feel it should be better presented.

Wonderful imagery. Some of the longer-lensed shots seemed to struggle with focus a little bit, but it didn't stop the overall whole collection from looking fantastic in my opinion. The wider shots with deeper focus really pop out and it was a pleasure to watch :) What is the documentary about?

And here's a Vimeo link: http://www.vimeo.com/6616498 I'd love to hear some responses :) Best, Mike

Great work, especially considering your limitations. I prefer the 1.85 compositions to the 2.35 generally in this batch of stills, so it's nice to hear that's how you're finishing. Keep us updated :) Cheers, Mike

I've found that Adobe Premiere CS3 can encode beautiful quality Blu-Ray compiant H.264 files, and the bundled Encore CS3 can create basic, but very playable BD-R discs. I burned a Blu-Ray for a feature film's test screening, and it worked great - looking as good as you'd imagine on the big screen. Encore is quite an easy program to learn, especially if making a less complicated disc. Note that Encore's Blu-Ray authoring capabilities aren't as good as their DVD-authoring capabilities. People have had problems creating video menus and other fancier disc options, but a basic still menu with background music works gorgeously.

I gather your point, but to compare: eating filet mignon every night would make you tire of it. Sometimes mac and cheese hits the spot - and there ain't nothing wrong with that in my books.... An excellent quote though, Kevin - thinking about whether the world needs what you'll create. It's something everyone should think of when embarking on a big artistic project - I just feel that sometimes, the world does need mac and cheese :) In this video's instance, though - I took its comedy (with its unexpected ending) as a jab *at* the garbage that's out there.