Dan Hasson

If you are in London go straight to Arri Rental in Uxbridge. From their website:

Lots of answers to your question in this photography subreddit that you can read here.

5 hours ago, Uli Meyer said:

Thanks Dan, glad you liked it.

I am amazed that you can shoot a feature film for $7600 in 16 days. That's $475 per day for everything, actors, crew, locations?! I'm currently planning a 15 minute short film, can you please put me in touch with your producer? ?

We saved a lot of money shooting in Brighton compared to London that's for sure! Having the producer cook lunch every now and then also cuts costs down ?

The company I co-own produced the film, www.3132film.com / info@3132film.com

18 hours ago, Uli Meyer said:

Hey Dan, very interesting article, thank you for sharing your experiences. Can I ask what the entire budget of the film was? How many shooting days? Hats off for making your own feature films!

Hey Uli,

Thanks for the feedback!

The films budget was $7,600. This was achieved as our production company owned most of the camera / audio kit. So, the majority of the budget went on locations, cast and crew.

We originally scheduled 14 days but had to add on a two additional days later for a pickups / reshoot of a couple of scenes and some ADR. The reshoots were needed due to some audio problems as talked about in the article.

Just watched your films on your website. Absolutely loved The Discarded! One of the best shorts I've seen in a long time.

Thanks,
Dan

On 2/12/2024 at 3:44 PM, Uli Meyer said:

Oops, sorry, I didn't notice that you could click on it!

No worries. Hope you like the article Uli!

5 hours ago, Uli Meyer said:

Hey Dan, where is the article?

Hey Uli,

23 hours ago, Dan Hasson said:

You can read it here.

It's linked there or click the full URL below:

https://nofilmschool.com/thoughtless-in-remarks

Hey all,

Just wanted to share an article about the making of my upcoming second feature to see what you all think. You can read it here.

It's a little more production focused than cinematography but thought I wanted to put it here too.

You can watch the trailer here:

Thanks,

Dan

Great filmmaker!

As Sebastian mentioned Bait, I'd highly recommend that too.

In all honesty, I preferred Bait to Enys Men. I'm interested to see what Jenkin brings out as his next film.

14 hours ago, Jeff Bernstein said:

Scroobview : A beautifully edited trailer with acute appreciation of vector-agreement from shot to shot that maintains a controlled liveliness in variety. Example : shot (1) left to right; (2) right to left; (3) left to right—then right to left; (4) left to right; (5) intensified left to right; (6) right to left; (7) left to right; (8) rectilinear (peace, stability, love).

 

Theory : Shots 3 and 5 and 8 are perfectly placed in the perfectly edited continuum.

 

The editing draws the eye along expertly—the ongoing geometry is consummate—the shots flow into the gaze as effortlessly as sunlight.

 

Wonderfully accomplished work.

 

And a cute, highly relatable title.

 

Congratulations and good luck.

 

 

 

 

Hi @Jeff Bernstein,

Thank you for your feedback! This is very kind and really appreciated.

Best,

Dan

https://www.3132film.com/

Hey all,

Happy new year!

I am in post for a feature film. We are nearing the end of post and have just released the films trailer. It can be seen below.

I am super excited to share this and are looking forward to releasing it. My last feature film, When Are You Moving Out?, was released in the US and Canada under Gravitas Ventures. With Thoughtless in Remarks, I'm intending to go the festival route. Has anyone got any festivals they recommend taking their indie feature too? 

Any thoughts, questions or feedback on the trailer would be appreciated

Thanks,
Dan

Interesting tests. I'm both optimistic and pessimistic about the future with AI in filmmaking.

I don't believe that this will take away from people wanting to make a film in more or less the traditional way. Maybe AI will be incorporated in shoots but ultimately there will still be a camera and sound to capture actors performing.

My pessimistic side see's commercials heading the other way. My belief comes from working a lot with client and agencies who look to cut corners (not all but a lot). Perhaps if it's presented to them to make their 15 second TVC with AI (and AI being at a much more advanced state) for nothing compared to a one day shoot with 30 crew, a few actors etc, they might go with the former.

The majority of my income is from commercials so I hope I am wrong and maybe I'm wrong about my optimism. 

5 hours ago, Uli Meyer said:

Everyone is moaning about the price tag but I am sure that if the camera could be offered cheaper, it would be. Back in the Super 8 days, there were hundreds of thousands if not millions of potential buyers of cameras. That market doesn't exist anymore. It probably cost Kodak quite a bit to develop the camera. The target market appears to be professional cinematographers and prosumers and there aren't as many out there. And by the way, I remember looking at some of the top end Beaulieu cameras when I was a kid in the 70s and they cost a fortune too ?

You're right of course it would cost them a lot, I get that. I'm just saying if I had the money I would.

Absolutely love that they've put the time and effort to bring a new camera out!

4 hours ago, Stephen Perera said:

Thanks Dan! the price tag? prob want to try get the music video DPs who are all into film these days and good for them!

Yeah $5,495 is steep but that's just me on top of buying film, processing and scanning. I would rather just use my older Super8 camera. However, if I had the money I would probably buy one!

Ha yeah I can imagine it will be used on music videos for sure.

That's great news about the camera. I feel the price tag will put a lot of people off? 

2 hours ago, Stephen Perera said:

...so Kodak in their infinite wisdom decide to include film that my lab of choice will not touch.....

e.g. Cinelab London: We only process Kodak colour negative film. We do not process Tri-X Reversal, Kodachrome, Ektachrome, or B&W 8mm film. 

regardless of that it looks super cool as a product design....

There is a lab that I think has excellent results and they process / scan Tri-X Reversal: https://www.gaugefilm.co.uk/ They're based in the midlands (Wolverhampton).

I haven't shot Super8 in a while but I always used these guys for my colour neg process and scanning. They were really professional and helpful.

Thanks for sharing!

On 9/8/2023 at 9:39 PM, Joerg Polzfusz said:

Hi!

Did anyone played around with tools like this that use AI to remove background noise, echoes etc. from voice recordings?

https://podcast.adobe.com/enhance

 

I played around with Adobe Podcast on some various audio files.

• One was dialogue from a boom on a shoot. It sounded great anyway and we had a fantastic on set mixer. However, there was some natural city noise in the background. The AI did a great job of removing that noise but gave the vocal an odd hum.
• The second was on audio from an iPhone video clip I filmed just a friend, nothing professional for any film, from about 8 years ago. Again, the AI removed background noises but made the voice sound like they had a lisp.

So, my experience (although I don't really work in sound at all) was it always had a pay off eg can remove police sirens but gives the dialogue a humming sound.

I wonder if Adobe will release a more sophisticated version at some point with maybe more controls than there currently are. 

I guess for anything more professional like Peter Jackson and his team used on the Beatles doc and the new song won't be openly available for a while or will cost a lot? Maybe I'm wrong though.

On 10/19/2023 at 6:13 PM, Mark Dunn said:

I still say it may well be visually acceptable. Maybe you could ask a few non-experts what they think about the shot, without prompting. If they mention the reflections, then I'm wrong.

As to Photoshop, this is almost an animation job and not what it's intended for. As I said I know nothing of these things but I wonder if there is an effects plugin meant for a job like this. Does "power windows" mean anything to you? They're mentioned on the forum.

This? I could be completely wrong.

 

@Mark DunnI used this method and it worked great! Thank you.

It took some time because the head and eye movements were hard to track as it was a closeup on a 90mm wide open.

I would cut the shot up into moments where the actor was still enough for the tracking of the power windows to be consistent. This varied from 15 frames or 4 seconds or 7 seconds. Then I added some blur to the power windows. To blend the cut up film I would add a cross dissolve wherever I cut so each time the new power window appeared on a cut, it would blend. 

In the final grade we have pulled the shadows down and there was enough eye light to keep the actors eyes lit.

We showed to a couple of people without telling them and no one noticed when we asked after. One person who had seen the original clip watched the edited version and again did not notice.

Thanks for everyones help and hope what I wrote above can possibly help anyone at some point.

4 hours ago, charles pappas said:

If it were me, I wouldn't worry about the reflections much, but I'd put a good number of cutaways in there and fight to the death with the director over them.

That is, unless this scene stacks up favorably with Bibi Anderson's famous monologue in Persona.

I'll see what could work for some cutaways.

Thanks Charles!

9 minutes ago, Mark Dunn said:

I still say it may well be visually acceptable. Maybe you could ask a few non-experts what they think about the shot, without prompting. If they mention the reflections, then I'm wrong.

As to Photoshop, this is almost an animation job and not what it's intended for. As I said I know nothing of these things but I wonder if there is an effects plugin meant for a job like this. Does "power windows" mean anything to you? They're mentioned on the forum.

This? I could be completely wrong.

 

Hey,

Great idea! I'll show some friends and family and not prompt as you say.

Yeah I've tried power windows and adding some blue to reflections. Quite tough as it was shot on a tight lens (90mm) and whenever the actor moves, their movements are quite big making the tracking quite tough. 

Like I said I'll try your first suggestion and go from there. Thank you for your help Mark!

Best,
Dan

13 minutes ago, Mark Dunn said:

Glasses reflect- personally I would certainly accept it visually. It doesn't look too intrusive. Presumably this isn't going to be a continuous shot but will be a few seconds at a time which reduces the amount of attention it will get.

No idea how this would be dealt with as a VFX shot but it is a tremendous amount of work. Just make sure any extra work is charged for so they get the idea that you solve these problems beforehand.

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the response. Unfortunately this is a continuous shot... 

Like I mentioned there is one take that was the final where this was dealt with and not a problem. However, the actors performance was not as good... 

Yeah I'm not sure either. The only thing I can think of is making a tiff sequence and frame by frame painting it out in Photoshop. Of course the hours will massively clock up this way!

Thanks,
D 

Hello,

I am editing a project for a client. We have issues with reflections in the characters glasses of the tripod.

Super low budget job but they said they used a polar filter to sort and took other measures but unfortunately things didn't work out that way..... 

The images are from three points in the shot (which runs for 2mins and 7 seconds in total) which show the various points the reflection appears.

Click here for higher res versions of the images.

I'm a one person post team on this so will have to do it myself. Can anyone advise on painting out or other methods to sort out these reflections. In my mind it's something like using spot healing in Photoshop but of course this is 24 frames per second for just over two minutes, not one frame...

I am using DaVinci Resolve.

Thanks,
Dan

12 hours ago, Frank Wylie said:

The camera has detachable magazines.  Most common sizes are 400 and 1000 feet, with some specialty magazines of 100, 200 and 2,000 feet (rare).

The camera you posted has been modified with a Mitchell-type rack-over base.

Any competent camera repair person can work on these.  I owned 2 of these beasties at one time, but no longer have them.

The shuttle movement in this camera is perhaps the most steady registering movement ever designed.

Sven Nykvist shot background processing plates for Ingmar Burgman's "Fanny and Alexander" (1982) with a 2709 hand cranked camera.  They are superb cameras, but a bit awkward to operate if compared to "modern" cameras.

Hi Frank,

Thanks so much for all this information! 

Interesting about the Fanny and Alexander background plates too. Thanks so much!

D

19 minutes ago, Frank Wylie said:

Bell and Howell 2709.  This one is setup for hand cranking, but they were able to be fitted with an auxiliary motor.   This camera was produced from 1909 to the late 1970's.

Thanks Frank! Do you know how much feet of film it takes?

This one looks in good shape for such an old camera. I wonder who keeps them serviced?

Hi all,

I was watching this video about Scorsese's new film and a shot of him looking through the viewfinder of this camera came up. 

Does anyone know what camera it is? Is it hand cranked because of the handle sticking out?

Thanks!

Dan

Hey Tyler and Joerg,

We have played more with the DaVinci settings and have found a balance that works! 

Thank you for your help and your fast responses.

Many thanks,
Dan

On 9/9/2023 at 12:08 AM, Tyler Purcell said:

Resolve works great, you just have to try different versions of the stabilizer. Each one has it's own unique look/feel. I use the "translation" one the most. 

Hi Tyler,

I've played around with these but it usually results with some wobbly artefacts from the camera shake. It usually works fine for me but it must just be this particular shot.

Do you know if there is a difference what stabilise can do with the free and paid versions of Davinci?

Thanks!