Max Field

4 minutes ago, Phil Connolly said:

Buried (2010) is a good example of being visually inventive for such a tiny location

It was wild how they made one location last an entire feature. I wonder how that film would've done without A-list talent.

Source Filmmaker (aka SFM) is the big one that people are using on the indie scene. I've done a few shorts myself and compared them to stuff people from video game backgrounds were putting out and what I can definitely say is if you want your imagination to become completely free without physical or budgetary constraints, try making some SFM shorts.

People who come from video game backgrounds pay very little attention to lighting and still blocking and opt for moving handheld camera 24/7, which really loses its flare when they end up shooting the whole thing like that. Use programs like that to pretend you have $250k to shoot a short.

Just wondering if we could compile a list of suggested views that encapsulate great blocking and framing. Nothing on the scale of Metropolis with large elaborate sets, things that anyone is physically capable of in terms of budget, but need a trained mind to consistently do.

Thanks!

Do we know if TeleFilm actively reads this place?

7 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

As a freelancer, I can relate to that! I just always keep a dozen kettles on the stove in various states of boiling, just incase someone tries to screw me, at least I have a backup plan. You can avoid not getting paid by always taking some portion of your pay up front before the camera rolls or before you lay a finger on an editing program. I've been doing that for a few years and it's saved my ass many times, where clients have received an initial cut and then decided to cut you off. I once spent 3 months on a project that the director didn't like (not my fault, shitty producer) and they never paid me for the last month of work. They had however, given me a deposit and that saved my ass. 

I'll be real, if someone screws me over in business I become incredibly vengeful lol.

Just now, Justin Hayward said:

I know very little about this, but from what I understand, you can pay for Amazon Prime to host your movie if you want to.  I thought that's why so many movies that go totally unnoticed at festivals and by other distributors tend to wind up on Amazon Prime eventually.

I think you're right on that one. My statement on Netflix still stands.. which is treated like being in the movie theater nowadays by the average civilian.

29 minutes ago, Phil Rhodes said:

But most of it? Metal corrosion will get it before much else does.

Not sure if they're comparable, but I see tons of solid state consumer electronics from over 30 years ago still working like new with minimal maintenance. Digital cinema cameras are barely 20 years old, are we already seeing them dying due to "old age" as opposed to continued physical trauma?

1 hour ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said:

I would have thought that there is no time better to be in that biz. With all the media, series, Netflix, channels, films and all. What you say sounds very similar to still photography.

I'm not saying this to come off as brash towards you (just to contribute to discussion), but I am sick of people saying that Netflix and Amazon Prime are just handing out distribution deals left and right. It's still an extremely connection based industry, like it's always been.

If the floodgates were really that open I would've been producing my own show on Netflix years ago.

Maybe I don't shoot as much as everyone else, but every time I see $1000 off on a camera because it has 3,000 more hours than the others I immediately take it. Never had a problem as a result.
Do camera hours for solid state technology really mean anything for the first 20,000?

I hate when trying to buy an old camera and the guy is like "well this is low hours for a body this old so I can't lower price" and I'm just like "they're gonna stay low because no one's paying that much for it."

Some (most) owner/operators are idiots when it comes to sunk cost fallacy.

The actual biggest fear no one mentioned is for automation and phone filters to wipe out low-mid level cinematography as a whole.

Videography is already a practically dead business thanks to the iPhone and the cushion most of us have had is being in the business of making the videos look cinematic as opposed to just making videos. Much harder for computers to filtrate the general look DPs are going for... but they'll eventually find a way.

...Not getting paid.

This had a great feel and look as others have stated before.

Sorry to ask, but I'm extremely curious how such a small band was able to afford a music video shot on 35mm? Are they backed by some label throwing a ton of money at the situation?

I might've just gotten lucky, but I got my Alexa for way less than what I'm seeing a lot of the newer Sony cameras go for now.

Literally the only reason I like my Arri Alexa EV is for how the skin tones blow out so naturally and how the lips on faces are always this proper pink color. Are there less expensive camera options which surprisingly have the same effect? Please show minimally graded samples?

Thanks for any input!

Take note of the blue light bleeding in at the top right corner:

This was shot on an Arri Alexa EV with a 50mm Zeiss CP2. 2 Arri 650s about 7.5 feet high pointing down at a cross to backlight the talent.

The big question I have is on the science for intentionally creating more light bleeds like this, I'm in love with the look. I try to trigger it through just fiddling with angles but I have no real consistent way of knowing how to make it happen every time. Is it dependent on the lens? Does sensor size affect it? Intensity of the light?

Please, any knowledge you have on this will benefit me greatly. Thanks as always!

Just saw this on Christmas. Aperture felt wide open the entire time, was it one of the more difficult pictures to pull focus for? And did you go to the Checkers across the street from the Bronx stairs after wrapping? I visited the stairs and was way too happy to see a Checkers was right next to it.

Also wanted to comment on the scissor stabbing scene. It's very rare, if not the first time, you get to see that level of horror movie gore with a completely casual tone. Maybe the most memorable scene of the film.

Most visually impressive film I've seen this year... but my opinion doesn't mean much as I've only seen like 3 movies this year...

Let's watch RED Cameras plummet even further on the used market in 2020!

On 12/20/2019 at 4:36 PM, Stuart Brereton said:

Sorry Simon, but you've evidently never been an AC. Measuring with a tape is done because it gives you actual distances, rather than vague marks on a focus wheel. If you know your focus distances, then there is no need to recheck focus after lens changes. Using a tape measure means that the focus puller can do his or her job without looking through the camera, without distracting the camera operator. Focusing by eye requires a target to focus on, using a tape does not.

Which AC's job is it to calibrate the flange distance on each lens? I tried doing it on one of mine and could get it close but never exact. Or is that the job of the rental house when preparing a camera/lens package?

I'd love to go purely off of measurements because I'm sick of having to squint-eye the monitor all the time.

10 minutes ago, Phil Connolly said:

On the budget end, I've found Rode NT3's to sound very close to the Sennhiser 416 they are based on. Its difficult to tell the difference. But at the University I work at, they brought 10 NTG-3's and 4 x416's about 15 years ago. Since then about 4 of the NTG-3's have just died but all the 416's are still in service. We have been replacing the NTG-3 with the MKH 60's which sound noticeably better. They cost quite a bit more, but are hopefully a good investment and will last as long as our 416's which we still use. 

I've said this multiple places: Never found a Rode mic that beat every competitor at the same price point.

I would post the sound clips you had, great is a matter of opinion.

I'll be honest... barely any money in Youtube unless you're a huge channel. You could ask for 60% or 0% of all profits and you'd be left with a similar amount of money. Get as much flat rate as you can.

24 minutes ago, Mike Krumlauf said:

Its just a guy spinning a ENG camera with his hands. one point of contact is the handle, the other is the shoulder pad. Done the move myself many times.

Can you make a video demonstrating that? I can do that when it goes low down but I can't figure out the hand placement for it being above chest level.

I've used the Zoom H4N and H6. H6 has much better GUI and more ins and outs, so to me the better buy.

Whatever you do, do not use the built in microphones, they pick up vibrations and wind in the ugliest of ways. Also just don't really even sound that good. Always use an XLR mic into the input for the microphone aspect.

Man this Phil Rhodes guy's been everywhere lately!

Thanks for that end of it. What about when people say a camera would lose resolution in the red channel? Do different companies select the crushing of the chroma resolution through different methods?