Daniel D. Teoli Jr.

Some sound options for low budget filmmakers. https://learnaboutfilm.com/making-a-film/equipment-for-low-budget-filmmaking/sound-equipment-for-film/

When the sound man holds the boom pole do they use any supports if they can get by with holding boom chest level or is it usually overhead? If overhead the must get tired on long takes with arms overhead.

That is funny, I can't remember what film I had put up. I have a few Vimeo and YT accounts with lots of films online. Hard to keep them all straight. Vimeo must have removed the video. None of my stuff is EVER private, except a book preview I did about cutters. Some places treat photos of cutting like it is kiddy porn. I will have to remember to put the film name in when I post something online. The filthy censors take your stuff down as fast as you put it up. If I had the name I could have sent in a link for the Internet Archive. Tumblr removed all 48 of my websites last year. That was a huge loss. Took 4 years to make all the websites.

I have problems with sunlight in my grading and viewing room. I can't get my room dark enough and when the sun hits the window, even with blinds drawn, it puts a glare on the monitor screen. No matter where I move the monitor in the room it gets glare or my eyes get glare. And my preferred local for the screen gets the most glare. I need to get the room blacked out. When I viewed the grade at night it looked different from the daylight view with screen glare. I had to go back and redo it with a view camera dark cloth pulled over my head and the monitor.

This discusses shadows in post. If not up your alley, then may be of help to others. https://larryjordan.com/articles/create-a-cast-shadow-in-premiere-pro-cc Good luck!

Or will it ignite only from a flame?

https://larryjordan.com/articles/create-a-tilt-shift-blur-in-final-cut-pro-x/comment-page-1/#comment-775887 I thought it was always done with a TS lens. Looks like the TS effect in post does it better. I tried a 35mm Canon TS lens and disappointed with miniaturization effect with still photos.

I can't find the frame rate, but it was shooting in AVCHD and not in 4K. The 4K setting says XAVCS 4K and that is what I will use. If frame rate is 'Record Setting' then it was shooting at 30P 60M. If that is frame rate should I be using 24P 60M or 24P 100M for 4K?

OK, I found out how to shoot on manual video. I set the shutter speed to 1/40th. It looked like it had picked 1/60th the last time out and higher speeds before that. Still don't know what frame rate it is shooting at, will need further study. . But will give it a go on a slower shutter speed and see how it goes. I like the old style manual control cams with everything up front and easy access. I spent maybe 5 - 8 minutes trying to figure it out going through all the menus looking for how to change the shutter speed. With a shutter dial you click and are done in a second or less. I guess it could be worse. You have a touch screen and blow on it and your settings get screwed up.

Don't know frame rate. I figured it was fixed at standard video. I will have to check out the speeds, frame rates, etc. When I first started using the Sony it looked like the still photo shutter speeds didn't translate to the video. To me it looked like the camera picks the shutter speed. I never paid attention to it, but it possibly had picked 1/60th and 1/125th, but am not sure. I was just concerned with T stop. But I will have to study this all up. It doesn't seem to be point and shoot video, which is OK as long as you are schooled in how it works.

Dunno, I don't playback in cam very much because I don't have a little external monitor and can't see much on the Sony.

Nice work, but too flat for my taste. Will it change in final cut?

Playback is on TV via a raw footage DVD. I have been using whatever shutter speed the camera chooses. I will have to see how to change it. Thanks

I'm using a Sandisk Extreme Pro 64gB card that runs at 170 MB/s on the 4K Sony A7RII. If someone is standing 6 - 7 feet from the camera and they lift a magazine off a bed, the movement looks kinds jerky. They are not moving super fast, just normal speed movements. I was using a Rokinon 24mm lens and about 6 to 7 feet away, lit with available light and one small LED panel at 1600 ISO and T2.8. But don't know why any of that should matter. Other than that I use whatever the stock camera settings are for video. Periodically the Sony also puts a skinny line flash on the top of the screen for a millisecond or so. Maybe it does it every couple minutes. Any idea what the problem is? The IQ is beautiful, I am very happy with Sony other than these problems. Thanks

As Will said. The Wolverine is OK if you are showing on a phone...maybe. But for everything else it produces subpar content. I had 2 of them. Had issues with them both. First one broke after 20 sans and ate up film. It was an important beatnik 8mm stag film too. But I was just learning and didn't know proverbial squat about film scans. Second Wolverine had issues before 10 films. Sent both back to BH for refund. If Wolverine produced decent 2K scans then 20 - 30 scans and trash them would be OK for $300. But they don't. My full res test scan on YT and Vim: Both NSFW YouTube Vimeo Below is one of my first 8mm movies I made in 1975 at L.A.C.C. beginning film class. Very rare film about a carnival performer that reenacted a trick they would do in the carnival back in the 1940's - 50's. I had it scanned and he applied grain reduction software. Kinda plastic look, but still nicer than the rough original option with no grain reduction. I'd post before and after photos but my upload limit is very low and waste of time with postage stamp size photos. NSFW https://archive.org/details/GoneUpInSmoke Film was scanned frame by frame and I have the TIFF files...but he only sold me the TIFF files for post processed version. I don't have the raw scans. They would have been hundreds of $$ more. You pay for every GD thing with film scans. When I had it done, a few years ago, I didn't even know what a MP4 was. Don't know what scanner he used. It is all hush-hush with some of these operations...top secret!

You can only do so much with this scanner. But for the +/- $6,000 it can't be beat. I had problems with the LightPin gate with badly warped film. Luckily I have both the original gate and the LightPin gate, so can run both gates to see what works best. Clear edge films do not run well with the standard gate. It has a hard time reading clear film. The LightPin gate will read clear film as long as it is flat. Warped film won't work with the LightPin, at least I was not able to make it work and I tried numerous adjustments. If you are running auto exposure on the Retroscan it takes a few frames to get the exposure corrected and you will get 3 or 4 badly exposed frames when exposure changes or intertitles pop up. You can turn the auto exposure off to correct that, but you may have to scan the film a few times for exposure and combine in post. I will have to try the image stabilizer with overscan. Warp Stabilizer...sounds cool!

Yes, artists are good at having to juggle finances to get by. Plus the population has exploded, so lots more artists grabbing for the apple. Maybe that extends to filmmakers as well with the explosion of digital and YouTube...everyone is a filmmaker! In the old days filmmaking was more esoteric. But the need for filmmakers has also exploded with all the outlets we now have. Don't know about your local, but in the USA we have tons of art schools popping out a steady flow of artists as well. 2 creatives as a couple can be tough, unless at least one of them has a good foothold with producing a steady income. Same thing with musicians. I had heard a piece on public radio about symphony jobs. They said sometimes there may be a hundred applicants for one opening. Someone could be great, but if they make one mistake playing in the interview they are out of the consideration, as too many others applying for the same job won't make that mistake.

This dealer has a broad selection. And they may not sell for the listed price, as they haven't sold for the listed price as yet. But it gives you an idea of retail price. https://www.ebay.com/sch/katrinadoernerphotographs/m.html?item=324075957535&ul_noapp=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562 I haven't looked all the listings over, but this 23 print RISD portfolio seems like a decent deal. And is a good example of how a portfolio can be put together. https://www.ebay.com/itm/324075957535 They don't seem to have a brick and mortar location. Looks to be all mail order. That is getting more common with galleries as rent has skyrocketed as well as wages. Also less galleries going to expensive shows. (At least that is what I have read.)

As I mentioned before, you budget minded filmmakers can easily make a diffusion filter of varying degrees with a UV filter and some clear spray. The more coats of clear coat, the higher the diffusion. https://danieldteolijrarchivalcollection.wordpress.com/2019/12/30/creating-your-own-diffusion-filter/

Yes, this is nice, but nothing sharp in it. Or is it motion blur as well? I am looking for interesting bokeh along with at least some decent sharpness.

Oscar winner Bong Joon Ho reveals his must-see movies PSYCHO (dir. Alfred Hitchcock) THE HOUSEMAID (dir. Kim Ki-young) CURE (dir. Kiyoshi Kurosawa) RAGING BULL (dir. Martin Scorsese) TOUCH OF EVIL (dir. Orson Welles) Per:The Academy email

OP...can't you get the scan in singe image TIFFs and PP it yourself? With all these scans you are getting from different machines you have the material to do a nice scanner shootout.

Microsoft's Project Silica has designed a 75mm x 75mm x 2mm piece of quartz glass that can hold 75gb of data. https://petapixel.com/2020/02/12/your-photos-could-one-day-be-stored-for-10000-years-on-glass/ Petapixel banned me, so can't comment there. I have experienced some loss from bit rot, but not much. Although my digital archive only goes back to the late 80's. I am working on a 48 DVD archive right now transferring it to 'M' disk. The Memorex silver DVD's in the archive were burnt in 2002 or 2003. So far only 1 DVD was bad, but am only 40% done. The DVD's were basically unused, like new and in dark storage. The 1 bad DVD was able to be salvaged with a special software program, but roughly 5% - 7% of it was lost. A dupe copy of it exists on DVD at another location so will have to see if it is in better shape. The archive was duplicated on 2 types of media in case one media brand was not up to snuff. From my own testing, 'M' discs have proven to be very archival. Gold DVD's are only marginally better than silver DVD's and neither can remotely compare to the archival qualities of the 'M' disc. The verdict is still out on Blu-ray 'M' discs, but from limited testing complete so far, they are also much better than standard DVD media for archival work. I hope Microsoft's silica storage becomes mainstream someday. Looks like a excellent way to store data as long as it is affordable by the average person and you don't drop them.

OP. No don't have that problem. But I get distracted in other ways similar to what you mentioned. One film I watched about drugs in Mexico had lots of tilt / shift miniaturization effects going on. The first and second time was neat, but after a dozen or more times got distracting. Another film had constant camera shutter sound effects as a way to transition. I use that myself... 3 or 4 times OK, but not 50+ times. Records Collecting Dust II looked to me to be where the person wanted to try every and all special effects they could between each scene. It was unwatchable. I like art, but Records... was just interviews and the craziness messed up the interviews. Lots of films like that get me crazy. I don't like the superhuman unrealistic films that have gone mainstream over the last 15 years or so. I watched a nice silent film last night in 2 strip Technicolor called The Love Charm. Another nice silent film I was Upstream https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upstream_(film) The films don't have to be silent. I like films like High Noon, They Shoot Horses Don't They, La Strada, etc. In short I like the old classics. Modern? I liked The Shape of Water, Delicatessen and 1917 as examples. I don't mind CGI as long as it is realistic. Overcome overthinking OP? A good film draws you in and you are mesmerized in the moment. You can think later how great it was...for the rest of your life. That is the magic of film!

No, not litho. Just less gradations than standard digital. You study up your old BW film then compare to modern digital and you will see. The digital has a plastic look to it. ...of course this presupposes you want to emulate film. If you like the digital look then it would be a step backwards.