Jump to content

Matt Pacini

Basic Member
  • Posts

    1,243
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Matt Pacini

  1. I realize this is a late post, but my two cents: 1. A $30 Radio Shack mixer is not a professional piece of gear. You aren't just getting 'effects' for the extra money, you're getting quality components that sound better and are more rugged. 2. I always record on separate tracks if at all possible. You have more control that way. Yes, it's almost certainly going to end up as mono after post, but that is no excuse to make that decision while recording, painting everyone else down the line into a corner. Matt Pacini
  2. Wow, does nobody actually come to this forum, or was this a bad question to ask?
  3. ... or girls :) What's an average, saying working in a major city like Los Angeles, for both union and non-union work? And what's the best way to get work, if you were starting out? MP
  4. I just can't afford multi-thousands of dollars for what I SHOULD be buying. I have a Zoom h4n, and I'm wondering... is there some way to get this to record SMPTE timecode? Perhaps an external SMPTE generator (if there is a battery powered version) that would record timecode on an extra track? Any suggestions? Otherwise, what is the lowest price typical unit someone would use that has timecode capability? MP
  5. I disagree completely. And I'm someone who has shot an entire feature on Super 8. If it's worth shooting, it's worth shooting on the best format possible. The limited places that telecine Super 8 means that there's less competition - so it's not cheaper than 16mm to transfer to video. That, and it's so much harder to get a decent image on S8, it takes more time, and/or you end up burning more stock getting it right. I wish I'd have shot my feature in 16, even though it would have cost more in film stock - it was a really expensive for the telecine, and a lot of the film is really not too great looking. Matt Pacini
  6. I don't think he was giving you general advice not to go to college. You absolutely should. The entertainment industry is one of the very, very rare professions where college doesn't matter that much, like 99.99999% of the 'real world jobs' out there. I would highly suggest sticking with the college plan, and I'm someone who did NOT get a degree, and I'm suffering for it now! Don't fall into the trap of 'just follow your dreams' and give up thinking about doing anything else for a living. (You only hear that from people who are the extremely small minority who 'got in'). It is HIGHLY unlikely that you will make a living in this business (I'm not). You don't have to ONLY know one skill to make it in the entertainment industry. There are many examples of people with other careers, even very difficult ones, who have also done very well in the industry, but the example I like to give is Michael Chrichton. He went to Harvard Medical School & was trained to be a doctor before getting into the entertainment industry. Check out his resume as writer/director/producer: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000341/
  7. Well, this issue has been highly distorted and skewed by political propaganda. Just a few facts to enlighten: Nobody is going without healthcare in America, unless they choose to. I'll explain: In America, there is a federal law, that no hospital emergency room can turn you away for failure of ability to pay. So if you have a true emergency, you get it taken care of, period. In addition to that, most (if not all) states have free health care. There is Medicaid, Medicare, MediCal - the federal and state welfare agencies pay for free healthcare - our poor in fact get free healthcare (and dental and vision, etc.), but since we don't pay for EVERYONE, and it's not called 'Universal Healthcare" there is this incorrect assumption that poor people in America have no healthcare, which is false. And all the lefties who want the government to do everything the private sector can do, ignore, distort, or outright lie about this, and it's so common, that most people believe the myth. Now, before everyone chimes in and declares me a liar, perhaps you should check it out yourself. Here's what we have in California, for instance: http://www.medi-cal.ca.gov/ So us not having "Universal Healthcare", but having a system where you share the cost with your employer (if you have one), or the government picking up the tab (if you don't), is more fair, because it's asking people who CAN afford it, to pay it. Like my Dad used to say: "There's no such thing as a free lunch." We're all paying for it eventually anyway. It's a matter of HOW, and WHEN. And it's much MORE expensive when you are ALSO paying for the added expense of a gigantic government bureaucracy to manage the whole thing.
  8. There are a lot of good points here, on both sides of the issue. But for us "old timers" here, a lot of this sounds old & stale (having heard of the imminent demise of film literally our entire lives), and yet film is still here. I heard all of this stuff when Blair Witch Project came out (it doesn't matter what you shoot on anymore, it's all about the story!!!), and that wasn't even digital - it was Hi8 analog tape! And yet here we are, a multitude of 'film-killing' formats later, with everything still NOT standing up to film in quality. There are pro's & cons to shooting any particular format, but EVERY electronic imaging format has major problems that film does not. And pretty much nobody 10 years ago thought film would still be going strong, yet it is. One thing I've noticed, is that every format that comes out seems to be considered 'dated' or 'no longer hot' in about 2-3 years time... except film. I think most of this is driven by the marketing cycles of the manufacturers, and not in any way based on what's best, etc. We're all responding to the same marketing propaganda that is used to get us to buy new cars every few years - the new ones are going to change our lives, then in a couple years, those same companies are telling us how stale and outdated the last product is, and we MUST buy the newer model to be cool. Matt Pacini
  9. Just did a low-budget shoot this weekend, recording sound for a friend who was directing. This is always a problem. I always make a big deal to all the extras that they need to be absolutely silent during takes, and fake talking, but not actually make any noise. Even though you actually want talking in the background, you don't want it to actually take place while the shot is happening. The problem is, you're cutting different shots together in editing, if you're hearing extras talk, you'll be chopping right in the middle of their dialog and you might hear it.
  10. A lot of this type of thing can be had at www.imdb.com Just search for any movie you're interested in, and look at "technical specs". Here's what imdb.com says about Carrie: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074285/technical Camera Panavision Split Diopter Lense Laboratory DeLuxe Film negative format (mm/video inches) 35 mm Cinematographic process Spherical Printed film format 35 mm Aspect ratio 1.85 : 1
  11. You are "saddened by the existence of B movies"? Well, I hate to say it, but yes, you do come off as being pretentious. But more than that, you illuminate (to this crowd, anyway) that you not only know little or nothing about making films, but that you are possibly destined to never make a film at all. We have all met countless film students who are committed to never making anything but masterpieces. You guys live inside the myth that you are special, and that the film industry are just waiting to hear your pitch or read your script, then they will no doubt hand you giant big bags full of cash to make your masterpiece. My advice? Make a film. ANY film. You will be humbled. As someone who has made a "B-film" myself, NOT intentionally, I can tell you that once you actually make a film, you will discover that feeling familiar to all of us on this board who have made actual films (not just discussed them in class with some instructor who probably hasn't made actual films either) that the entire universe is conspiring to keep you from getting your film made. The problem with movies, is that ANY ONE THING can turn your masterpiece into a B Movie. Bad acting, not enough money (to hire skilled people, build good sets & design, etc.), bad or even just a slightly problematic script, bad weather, lazy crew members... The list is endless, and these don't include the most obvious one - you will be a first time director, and it's almost inevitable that you will make crap your first time out. Literally every top director, writer, etc. has made what you consider to be crap. All you have now, is good intentions and a overabundance of false confidence. That's not a good combination. Matt Pacini
  12. I think for the most part, what you are describing were not necessarily intentional, but the results of lower budget films. Some of those you list were shot on 16mm, for instance, and therefore would have more grain. Lens flares are what you will get if you either aren't using a Mattebox and/or shade setup, or you are sloppy and forget not to shoot into the sun or lights. Same with large amounts of over or underexposure. Some were a touch of 'run & gun' situations, like Easy Rider for instance, because of low budget and a bit of 'get the shot while you can' situations. Some will argue these points with me, but I'd say that most intentional applications of these things, started out as accidents & someone liked the look, so they duplicated it for a certain aesthetic. Matt Pacini
  13. I have a LOT of Super 8 experience - I even shot a feature on that format! Over 350 rolls of experience. I would highly suggest NOT shooting on it for what you are doing. The reasons? 1. ALL Super 8 cameras with the exception of the Nizo 6080 are VERY noisy. I've shot with all the high-end S8 cameras, and I've tried everything to quiet them down, and nothing works! 2. There is no such thing as sound film anymore, so you will have to record sound separately. You can sync audio in your editing software, but DO NOT use an analog device to record audio. You will have problems. Also, the only non-modified S8 cameras with crystal sync are the high end Beaulieu's, (which I don't particularly like that much, but some do). 3. Only 2 makes of S8 cameras take lenses - all the others are built in (Some Beaulieu's, and I can't remember the other make - an obscure make, takes them. All the Canon's, Nikon's, Bauers, etc. have built-in lenses). I would shoot in 16mm if I were you, IF you really want the film look and have the budget. It's infinitely easier to get a quality image, they are generally quieter, it's easier (and usually cheaper) to get your film processed and transferred to video, etc. Matt Pacini
  14. You need to give a lot more information in your question: What's your budget? What format? (film, digital, aspect ratio, film stock you're using, or digital camera you're using).
  15. I'm going to assume you are in a small bathroom, and on a budget (both time and money). I'd either hang something directly overhead, and use bounce cards for fill where you need it, or I'd aim a PAR light at the ceiling from the floor (put a large chunk of foamcore on the ceiling to make sure it bounces white light). Either way, as stated above, use some black-foil to control spill. I'd keep some of your top-light off the walls with the black foil - you will probably get as much as you need coming off the bounce-fill. Matt Pacini
  16. You are going to have a lot going against you, if what's outside is important, and it sounds like it is. A couple things to look out for: 1. Reflections, obviously, as you've said. (Try not to be a 90 degree angles to the windows to keep yourself out of the reflection). 2. The difference in brightness between what's outside and what's inside is going to be a huge problem for you - daytime, outside is going to be too bright, and nighttime - it's going to be too dark. Either way, you're going to have problems if you're hoping to see your actors inside, AND the scene outside - daytime exteriors will be blown out, and nighttime exteriors will be super dark. You have to expose for what's most important, which is your actors, so unless you can put ND's (Neutral Density Filters) on all the windows for your daytime shooting, (and I'm guessing you can't) you won't be able to do much to control any of this. As always, try to get into the actual location and shoot tests. At least you will know what you will be up against and can plan accordingly. Matt Pacini
  17. Every film has budget restrictions, and every filmmaker wishes his/her film had no budget restrictions! The key when starting out, is to stick with character based stories, with limited budgets, limited locations, etc. It's just gotta be about story & characters, not cool visuals etc. Some genre's make this impossible (like super-hero stories!), so if you really want to make a film, and not just THIS film, you have to pick a genre that can exist within a small budget and try to write as interesting a story as possible with that limitation. This is why there are so many low-budget romantic comedies, for instance - no FX needed, no car chases, explosions, flying people, talking animals, etc. Matt Pacini
  18. I think you should first visualize the shot, then pick the lens. Of course, this is one of those "chicken/egg" things, because the more experience you have using different focal lengths, the more you will 'see' what that looks like in your head as you're visualizing your shots. Do a lot of testing to see what things look like not only at different focal lengths, but also test composition: A shot with a wide angle lens, of 3 people standing 15 feet away, is not going to look anything at all like a shot with that very same lens, from 3 feet away & at a different angle. There are even films shot on only one lens! (Bottle Rocket - 25mm). There is much more to composition than just what focal length you are choosing. Make the lens serve your idea, not the other way around. Matt Pacini
  19. I don't have any experience with the Flycam, but I have the Glidecam Smooth Shooter & 4000pro sled setup. It works great! Just the sled would probably be sufficient for the 7D. Get one, try it out, and if your arm is killing you, then get the rest of the rig. Matt Pacini
  20. I did this quite a bit on one project I did a few years ago. Here's my advice: Don't do this in a changing bag, I'd guess it's probably physically impossible. You want to set up your rewinds & all gear in a 100% dark room. Practice a 'dry run' in the dark. It's a lot more difficult than it sounds! I was able to get my bathroom dark at night, putting rolled up towels across the crack under the door, blanket off the window, etc. Remember, it's a two stage process: You are rolling from the 400's to the 100's, then BACK to 100's, so your emulsion will be facing the right direction. I made this mistake, shot some film, and broke out in a cold sweat and nearly fainted, when the lab called and said "Hey, your footage is blood red, upside down, and running backwards". That's one of those mistakes you don't make twice! Matt Pacini
  21. I was on a commercial shoot for a 30 second spot, shooting a basketball team - Lebron James & Mike Bibby (& doubles for most of their stuff). They had 5 cameras going on all shots, and they shot for 12 hours Saturday, and 13 hours Sunday... for a .30 second spot. Abso-freakin-lutely insane. It was the same 2 minutes or so of action, over, and over, and over, and over... It seemed like the director didn't know what he was doing, because he really wasn't asking for anything different at all in the takes. Just "Ok, let's do it again". Really insecure, if you ask me. Or a major Stanley Kubrick obsession. There were I think 3 setups a day., being covered by 5 cameras. I mean seriously, how much coverage do you really need for a 30 second spot? I can't even imagine how much film stock they burned through. Matt Pacini
  22. I hope it's just a rumor. Any stories like these, about film going away, even in small doses like this, saddens me greatly. Having said that though, I'm not that pessimistic - we've been hearing "film is dead" for what, 50+ years now? Matt Pacini
  23. I would take all price estimates/advice you get here with a giant grain of salt, unless the person states that they KNOW that's the rate in your area. As having lived in both Southern California, AND Northern California, I can tell you that the rates differ HUGELY, and that's even IF you can find what you need. There is not that much available in the N. half of the state, and a lot of companies know this, charge more, and are open fewer hours as well. Check this all out with actual companies before you start budgeting - don't just ask people on a website! Matt Pacini
  24. Maybe I'm missing something here. Shooting in 'real time' like this, - If the Cine camera is not somehow synced with the computer/display, isn't the finished footage going to be strobing like mad? Matt Pacini
  25. Hmmm... Maybe I'm missing something here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a 360 degree shutter, NO shutter at all? Either way, it sounds like an orgy of smearing going on to me! Matt Pacini
×
×
  • Create New...