Andy Joesoef

It's too long and repetitive. Cut it down to less than a minute and it will be interesting. That isn't sarcasm. I think it will be much improved by gutting it to its core.

thanks for your critique, could you tell me specifically the part that is repetitive. i tried to be more visual than anything because the story was not written at all. again, thanks!

Is it really that bad or you are all speechless. I really have no clue, but well this is my first short ever. I don't really care if its bad, I just really enjoyed the process :D

thx for posting this. i was quite captivated & enjoyed both the 'story' & the visuals - the poetry, if you will. i have more words (will come later)- but wanted to send you props for your hard work.

 

dh

wow, thanks!

http://vimeo.com/25990445

I appreciate it !!

And this:

 

That's one crazy flare fest.

I found another great source of info here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiAToA3qZcI

The canon one is a pretty decent lens for its price given its quality. I wouldn't go with the sigmas because... they're sigmas :unsure: at least IMO. There's also the Zeiss 28mm f/2.0 distagon ZE. But the price is almost 3x the canon. Unless I have a budget to burn like rocket fuel, I would go with the canon.

You should look into Punch Drunk Love. it also has some very nice flares.

 

 

Good movie too. I guess Star Trek was the first movie that got my attention to the flares. Most often I see this type of effect used in music videos, like this :

Do realize that they can become distracting to the audience if they are overused, unless for artistic purposes, and do not visualize a script better when they're in every single reflective surface of a shot. *cough-cough* Sorry for the lecture.

So far, Star Trek pulled it off without being too much. I have never seen any other movies with similar amount of flare used as much as Star Trek. And I can kind of understand it visually. It adds to the futuristic feel of being inside a spaceship, at least in my opinion, it should be flashy :P I think it worked wonderfully in the movie. But I totally agree, overusing this style can be fatal.

Has anyone seen the show about cars on BBC called Top Gear ? I see a lot of great shots in there.

Excuse my amateurish nature of this post, but I'm just really curious on how to get the flare effect on JJ Abrams recent feature Star Trek ? Is it done by facing some lightings directly to the camera ? Is it post work ? I mean, how do you control such thing and get the right amount of flare. It looks pretty eye candy and adds a cool dimension on the scene. Any ideas ?

Premiere CS5 only works on 64 bit OS which would affect your driver availability on your devices. Vegas is good on resource and really fast on both render and workflow. As far as color correction goes, feature wise they are quite similar. I assume you're a PC person. If you're a mac get Final Cut Pro. If you wanna go with industry standard get Avid Media Composer. If you want simple, fast, and easy then get Vegas.

What you'll generally want to have in a basic kit, in my opinion is as such:

 

ND set (.6, .9, 1.2) in both solid and grad (luminance control)

Pola filter (luma control as well as reflection control)

85 Filter (color balancing)

FLD and FLB filter (color correction for floros)

Optical Clear (lens protection, and/or used for smearing crap on to get special fxs, like Vaseline, or toothpaste)

 

I also like an 81EF filter sometimes, but not really necessary

 

 

Those will give you a good starting point. From there you'll eventually diversify into things like Diffusion filters (i love the classic softs and black pro mists) enhancement filters, low con and ultra con filters ect, but for buying they get expensive fast and honestly I don't use them as much as I do an ND grad, or a pola.

 

There is a book on filters which is very useful to read up on:

 

Image Control: Motion Picture and Video Camera Filters and Lab Techniques

by: Gerald Hirschfeld, ASC

 

http://www.ascmag.com/store/product.php?productid=250&cat=296&bestseller=Y

Wow you're a great help ! I'll use your info as a reference. Thanks a bunch

Dear cinematographers, I'm wondering what are some of the great cinema filters B) that would be your weapon of choice. I'm curious for what's good for indoor and outdoor. Any replies would be appreciated!

Budget?

I did forget to mention the budget my bad :P Basically not more than $1500 and if I can get 2 lens for about that price that would even be more awesome

Hi everyone

I have a Canon 550D DSLR and have been experimenting a lot with it shooting HD video. The lens that I start with is 18-55mm EF-S that comes with it which is not so great. I also have an old 50mm f/1.4 nikkor with adapter, tamron 11-18mm super wide aspherical, and 50mm f/1.8 nikkor. They are pretty decent lenses but I find 50mm too narrow for my taste/style So my next step is to get a nicer and better lens. I have been looking and my choices are the 28mm f/1.8, 17-55mm f/2.8, and 35mm f/2.0 all canon. I'm into wes anderson style flat wide angle shots and even with my 18-55 f/3.5 I rarely zoom in to bigger focal length because I can't get to f/3.5. I also heard that prime lenses are usually sharper and better due to the fewer elements. I want a faster, versatile, and sharp lens but I won't shell extra bucks to get zeiss until I get myself a 5D Mark II. What would you suggest ?

Thanks! ;)

Would filtering the light source with a diffuser work you think ? One time I had to use an umbrella to take out 2 stops on a lit window and it worked. I guess this is more of an exposure solution rather than to bring image detail.