Jump to content

joshua gallegos

Basic Member
  • Posts

    334
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by joshua gallegos

  1. After using this app more, I don't understand why someone would want to film on an iphone, it's incredibly unorthodox, as you have no control of f/stop and it's a pain trying to lock down the exposure, plus you have to white balance everything! I'll just stick with SLR, because there's more control. I saw Reed Morano's video for Magnetic Zeroes again, and it seems she ran into a lot focus issues. Sometimes the highlights blowout by accident? I can see how this app could help a documentarist or someone capturing live footage for news, etc. I think Reed used some kind of adapter to use a different lens, plus she's already a bona fide cinematographer, so I think it's even harder to use an iphone for someone like me, who has virtually no experience. It's an impressive video, though. Loved the homage to 7th Seal.

     

     

    I know it's a long road to improve, but I'm more than ready to walk it. To think I wasted a whole year not filming anything. :(

  2. I think I'll use it to make silent short films, since audio will be an issue. But I like what I saw, considering it's a cheap method of filming. Though I wish I had more control of focal length lens, and the fact that you can only rate the iphone at 450 ASA, won't be good for night shooting, considering the shutter speed has to be at 1/48. But it's better than nothing, I suppose.

     

    little test clip, didn't have much time today.

     

    https://vimeo.com/195656618

     

    I did notice the exposure changes, even though i had it locked down.

  3. It's been a very long time since I've made a short film, and I was looking into FilmicPro for iPhone, and the fact that Reed Morano shot a Magnetic Zeroes video with FilmicPro on the iPhone. The biggest challenge to making films are locations, I mean if you do it straight with paperwork, it's nearly impossible to achieve because you need filming insurance. So, I figure the best way is to shoot with an iphone, because it doesn't draw any attention. I want to really separate myself from narrative filmmaking and do more experimental work, I wanted to further explore David Lynch's structure from 'Inland Empire'.

     

    Has anyone used FilmicPro? I figure I will shoot 720p, since I don't like very high definition. I want to make at least 10 short films this upcoming year on the iphone and refine my craft. I think the past mistakes I made, was that I was critical in my thinking, whereas filmmaking is more about feeling the image, so I will change my approach completely.

     

    Here are my first two short films, which I shot with a dslr, they were great learning experiences. I think overall I only have about 28 hours of filming experience, butth is something I cannot let go!

     

    https://vimeo.com/jthomsg

     

    I'm pretty excited to get back it, I thought taking a long break would cure from this illness of cinema, but it just won't go away.

  4. I think the best thing any aspiring cinematographer can do is to remain humble, and to keep learning. What amazes me is how even a seasoned cinematographer like Roger Deakins, is still open to possibility, regardless of his lengthy and legendary career. He's always remained humble to the arts and sciences of the motion picture industry. It's like Andrei Tarkovsky once said, (to paraphrase), that filmmaking requires everything of you, the best films are the ones where you sacrifice a part of yourself for that fragment in which the entirety of the film is being made. It certainly isn't an easy art to peruse, but in the end it might prove to be a worthwhile endeavor, and perhaps life-fulfilling. Never stop learning and never stop asking the right questions.

    • Upvote 1
  5. I think everyone is too obsessed with technology, but I've always found Cinemark's digital projectors to be quite outstanding, especially when Turner Classic Movies is presenting beautiful, innovative work to the unknowing masses. I truly have no issues with digital presentation, because if it were to be presented on film, you would need a skilled projectionist to make the experience less bumpy. I remember reading a review on 'Inherent Vice', and how messy some of the screenings were due to inexperienced projectionists. And I also remember reading about Tarantino's disastrous Sundance screening of 'Reservoir Dogs, he had to take over the booth to project his own movie. I think everyone is nostalgic of dinosaur technology as David Lynch phrased it, we should just embrace change and be glad we're still able to see some great films in this day and age on a big ass movie screen.

     

    Next on the list, Stanley Kubrick's 'The Shining'.

     

    http://www.tcm.com/fathom/?ecid=subnavtcmfathom

  6. Did anyone watch the Dr. Strangelove special event by Turner Classic Movies? It was a nationwide release by Fathom Events. I saw the film tonight, and it's the first film I've seen in a theater since forever, and I quickly erupted in tears as the film opened, I don't even know why that happened, but maybe it's because I've been resentful of movies for the obvious reason that it was my dream to make them someday. It was sad that only four people showed up for the screening, considering the movie house had a capacity of 300 people, it just shows you that very few people treat cinema as an art or have any respect for the classics. Film lovers are something of a deep minority; when I saw the film again I just appreciated it even more, that first close-up of Sterling Hayden was breathtaking, I just needed such an experience in my life again.

  7. Come to think of it, life isn't the same when I'm not trying to make another little movie. I just can't get rid of that feeling deep inside that tells me make more and more.

     

     

    What I realized is that money is actually cinema's worst enemy, but at the same time you're able to open yourself creatively. The key is finding creative like-minded people who actually don't care about money! I think that's why it's important to go to film school and find like-minded people who want to make films.

  8. Hey there! I'm sorry if this is too many questions at once, but I figured it would be better to just lay my initial questions all out at once instead of peppering them throughout the thread over time.

     

    I graduated from college this May with an English degree and a minor in Communications, and I want to go to film school as a graduate student. In order to do this, I need a short film (I'd really like to go to USC). However, my university didn't/doesn't exactly have a cutting-edge film program, so I'm a little flustered.

     

    Here's a bit of background about my short film project. It concerns a young woman going to a bar in the early hours of her 21st birthday (it's like 12:08 AM) and ordering her first-ever drink. It's going to be shot without dialog--it will be all body language and sound effects, like a Pixar short, if that makes sense. I want the look of the film to be "objective" (I know that's not a real thing in film) except for a couple of wide-angle shots and a deep focus shot which pulls back over the bar to establish that she's in a bar (if there's a way to do this without deep focus, let me know). I'd also like to do something like this shot from The Music Man (https://youtu.be/CC33O52pGUg?t=2m43s). I don't know how they did it, but I suppose you can cheat it in post if you're a good/patient enough rotoscoper.

     

    Anyway, I was looking into what kind of camera I should use to film this project. I've saved up a bit of money and I want to get the best camera possible for the job without requiring me to learn a textbook-worth of information or have tons of hands-on time with the camera before I use it. Since I'll be filming in a real bar (sadly, I haven't saved up enough money to build one from scratch on a soundstage) at night, there will be low light and the possibility of competing color temperatures (since I can't exactly tear out any lights). I'd also prefer to go for as filmic a look as possible. I would shoot the project on film if I could, but I super-don't know enough about film to do that. For this reason, I was looking at either the RED camera or the ARRI Alexa XT. After reading about the RED, I came away with the impression that it was a very particular camera that had kind of a steep learning curve, and that the ARRI Alexa XT would be much easier to shoot with, although I don't know if it's easy enough. My experience has mainly been with that one miniDV Canon SD prosumer camera that everyone had. I also would like to shoot Open Gate ARRIRAW for the project to maximize the pixel count for upscaling to 4K.

     

    Since I live near Atlanta, I'm looking at renting from here: http://pce-atlanta.com/. Here is their list of cameras and lenses (PDF): http://www.pce-atlanta.com/pdf/Camera%20Catalog_4_8_2013.pdf. I'm going to be renting the camera and lenses for a weekend.

     

    So my first question is: how feasible is this? Especially as I've never used the Alexa before and I'm not an experienced color corrector. Can you just drop ARRIRAW footage into the free version of Da Vinci Resolve or Adobe SpeedGrade and get good results just by messing with a few presets, or is it going to be a month of tedious work? Because I don't have the time to devote every day to it, especially as I'll also be doing foley work.

     

    My second question is this: ARRIRAW is flat footage, correct? So how do you know how the colors are going to look when using the monitor?

     

    My third question is: how much is that Codex docking station that plugs into the USB 3.0 connection on a MacBook Pro? I've been unable to get a straight answer from their website. And do I need to buy a software license to transfer the ARRIRAW files to a hard drive using it?

     

    My fourth question is this: what kinds of lenses should I use? I was thinking of just getting a zoom lens, since that would be cheaper, but would I be able to pull off that deep-focus shot with it? And ARRI's website tells me that shooting in Open Gate ARRIRAW can be a problem because a lot of lenses don't fully cover the sensor area. Do any of the lenses on that list qualify? I'd rather not abandon the Open Gate part of my plan, but I'd sooner abandon it than abandon the Alexa XT (although if I weren't shooting in Open Gate ARRIRAW I guess I could switch to an Alexa with the XT module), so if I have to, I will.

     

    My fifth question is: do I need to get a new tripod? I mainly have the kind which you can use for still camera work or for that relatively light Canon prosumer camera I mentioned. Is the Alexa XT a heavy camera?

     

    My sixth question is: lighting. I don't understand it. I have a lot of questions about it. I'm considering just using the available light for this reason. For instance, I understand the three-point lighting method (or I think I do, anyway) and I understand how it's easy to do in close-up, but what happens when you cut to a long shot from a different angle, exposing where the lighting rigs would be?

     

    My seventh question is: how do I keep it from looking like TV? Let me elaborate on that. I initially thought that aspect ratio played a part in making TV look like TV, but Better Call Saul looks like a movie to me, and Witness for the Prosecution, mistakenly presented in 16:9, looked like a movie as well--not like TV. So my theory is that it has something to do with coverage and composition (and maybe editing and lighting, too). I want my short film to look like a film. What are some common pitfalls I should avoid if I don't want my film to be mundane?

     

    I think that's it for now. If you guys could do me a favor and keep checking this thread, I'm sure I'll have more questions. Thank you so much for your time. Also, please let me know if in the future I should make separate topics for questions with separate subject matter. I just didn't want to clutter up your forums.

    It sounds like a very expensive experiment, the hardest part about making films is coming up with resources and the proper crew that will make your vision the best it can be. Since you plan to do everything yourself, it's going to take you years before you become proficient in making movies. I became incredibly disillusioned with making short films, because I realized I can't do everything myself, and since I don't know any rich people to borrow money from, I can't get any projects off the ground without compromising my own money. Shooting with an Alexa XT makes very little sense since you're a novice planning to shoot the entire yourself. I'd reconsider, since Alexa files are too big to store on any hard drive, post-production costs will rack up.

     

    Consider a great filmmaker like David Lynch and what he managed to do with a Sony camcorder, it's really extraordinary.

     

     

    Experiment without spending too much money.

  9. Imagine if people had to pick their favourites for the first 9 mos of 2016. It's been a wasteland so far. How many sequels, prequels, and super hero movies has Hollywood cranked out in just the first 9 mos of the year?

     

    R,

    I haven't been to a movie theater for over a year, it's not an enjoyable experience anymore. Even most of these Sundance/Cannes movies are about homosexual romances, it's as if these directors think we want to see their autobiography. I am absolutely done with new films.

  10. It's been a long time since I've seen that one but I recall it being very lovely. Have you ever seen "Portrait of Jennie" (1948)? Lush b&w cinematography by Joseph August, ASC. The shoot exhausted him (being a Selznick production) and he died right after he finished it.

     

    I looked up the director, as I haven't seen the film and to my delight it was William Dieterle. I have seen a couple of his films: Devil & Daniel Webster, and The Hunchback of Notre Dame...

  11. If you like Charles Lang, ASC, Criterion is putting out a blu-ray of his VistaVision western, "One-Eyed Jacks", partly shot in Monterey, CA.

    I've never seen 'One-Eyed Jacks', but I particularly love The Ghost & Mrs Muir, added to the soundtrack by Bernard Herrmann, it's truly a great underrated film. I remember being completely enchanted by it, when I saw it on TCM some years ago.

     

  12. I really enjoyed the cinematography in 'Some Like It Hot' by Charles Lang, it was Billy Wilder who went against the idea of shooting the film as a comedy, because the opening had to be very gritty and real, so that the audience believed that the characters were really scared. If you really think about how absurd the plot is, you would never have imagined it would've worked so well, that's just the pure genius of Wilder. Also the work done by Robert Elswit on Punch-Drunk Love.

  13. That's great, I completely agree. But I just can't enjoy new films, I don't think they'll ever be as great as they used to be, it kind of seems like theatrical films are trying to find a way to become relevant again, but I could care less about them now. I mean I can't see a difference from a Coca-Cola commercial to the look of a theatrical film, there's just nothing special about movies anymore.

  14. I am not a DP by any means but do come from years of experience in the video game industry. The "immersion" of video games has nothing to do with the color temperature of the image. I recall meetings where the sole purpose was to discuss techniques for immersing players into the game. Not once did I hear anyone mention about color temperature. Gaming companies have even funded psychological studies to determine this phenomenon. The most basic implementation is, believe it or not, intuitive controls (making the player feel in control of his/her environment) and the sound (fx, music were appropriate.) Graphics, for all of their beauty and fun, do not significantly contribute to immersion in a vacuum. Only once you have the other two things down will everything else matter.

    I disagree, I don't know how long ago you worked in the gaming industry, but things have changed so fast, especially in role playing games such as Fallout 4. A new virtual reality technology is now available, and the future of the gaming industry will slowly creep into mainstream cinema. Younger audiences will no longer be interested in watching cinema in two dimensions once they get a taste of virtual reality technology. Just look at this small clip and look how the environment actually changes, the game has a built in clock, so there's actual day and night. With the addition of virtual reality, the lighting will become a crucial aspect of the immersion.

     

     

     

    This is going to change everything.

  15. Who decides what is 'appropriate' photography though? What if I want to risk trying something 'inappropriate'? Cinema won't advance or continue to engage new audiences without taking some risks.

    Because there is such a thing as proper technique, you can only browse through several decades of powerful filmmaking to know what works and what doesn't. There are just some things you can't change about moviemaking. Strangely, the biggest cinematographic breakthroughs are actually taking place in videogames, because they are made for the sole purpose of IMMERSING the gamer, to experience things as if you were experiencing them in real life. And what you see, you see how you would normally see it. There aren't any aberrations as in film, where the color temperature is not what your eyes would normally see.

  16. I don't mean to disrespect any cinematographers working in TV, a lot of them do amazing work in shows like Game of Thrones, or Reed Morano's work in Vinyl, and David's work as well. But I've browsed through enough network shows and seen plenty of trailers like Purge, to know that not every up and coming cinematographer has cared to look at past films. I don't understand why Mr. Robot feels the need to create such disjointed composition in every frame! The fact that it's a popular show, just comes to show you that very few people care about past films.

  17. There is plenty of playing with color temperature in "True Grit", warm scenes, cold scenes, etc.

    There is, but it's used appropriately and it doesn't look as messy as the scene from Mr. Robot that I posted. I think the basis of this entire discussion is differentiating the differences between film and digital, and my point is that there is no difference, it comes from the cinematographer's eye. For instance Roger's work in the digital and film format have no discrepancy, because he acquired such discipline from shooting film. Nowadays, the lower tier cinematographers/ students, do not have such a discipline and rely heavily on color correction as opposed to trusting or having that eye. I remember Roger posted a story where the monitor for Skyfall wasn't properly calibrated, and he was still able to tell it was off, even though they were telling him it wasn't off. I think every cinematographer should at the very least aspire to be as great as Roger Deakins, some will never reach that prowess, but they can surely try. It's just things I've noticed, how image making has in a way, overshadowed the film performances. A great example is Chivo's work in 'The Revenant' or any other film he's shot, it's all about "wow, look how pretty that looks", and it wasn't like that before, just like in Ford's 'The Searchers', the cinematography doesn't overpower the performances, it's there to help the story.

  18. Every Tv show appears as a masterpiece the first two to three seasons, there will come a time when it will become formulaic and completely redundant. Have you seen 'The Interrogation' by Francis Coppola? The way he achieves the character's alienation from reality doesn't have any gimmicks like most TV shows, it's masterfully crafted.

    Mean to say 'The Conversation'.

  19. But come on, if shooting in a different color temperature other than for a neutral balance is to be avoided, it doesn't leave a lot of creative tools at the cinematographer's disposal! We'd be back to the 1940's and 50's color movies where skin tones had to be neutral no matter if an actor was standing next to a fire or under the moon or watching the sun set.

     

    My point was that approach is often misused, especially in TV. One of the most perfect films ever shot in recent years is 'True Grit' by Roger Deakins, and that is because every image tells the story- the way it's composed and lighting, and even his perfect use of image color balancing! And you can see an enormous amount of discipline on Roger's part, something that is lacking in most films these days. Of course, this is just my personal opinion. Most commercial films I've noticed tend to look the same, they're hardly indistinguishable from one another, especially horror movies. And I didn't think East of Eden was all that bad, it was made in the 1950s, I think color balancing differently may look impressive at times, but it may detract from the story or give a scene a level of 'importance' that it didn't need. It just has to be used more sparingly as opposed to just be there for the sake of art.

  20. I couldn't disagree more. I think it's perfect. The show is about a guy who is so totally detached from reality and the people around him, that he's completely incapable of relating to the world in any conventional way.

     

    Personally I think the visual construction of the show absolutely nails the presentation of that. It puts you right there in this world you can't quite relate to, where everyone's looking out the short side of the frame, and seems a little off.

     

    I think the show's a masterpiece for that (in combination with the sublime writing and acting).

    Every Tv show appears as a masterpiece the first two to three seasons, there will come a time when it will become formulaic and completely redundant. Have you seen 'The Interrogation' by Francis Coppola? The way he achieves the character's alienation from reality doesn't have any gimmicks like most TV shows, it's masterfully crafted.

×
×
  • Create New...