Giacomo Girolamo

As anyone else already said, please upload some pictures. Besides that, what camera do you have? 200 ISO is not a lot, but at the same time, every camera has some ISOs that works better than another. Please specify the model of the camera, what lens and what f/stop you are using. Bye!

Thank you all for your answers. What an incredible forum to learn and amazing community too! I'm really glad to be here :D

Sorry if I don't express myself in the right way. What I mean is that, in low light situation, if you don't need to have the background in focus, generally you don't get a lot (or don't get) blades on the bokeh, because the diaphragm is kinda way open. So the bokeh is pretty smooth. That's what I see in lots of historical movies or series, but in Rome, the bokeh shape has a lot of blade, and generally (but not always) lots of grain. So I ask to myself, why they don't open a little bit more the diaphragm, so they reduce the noise and get a nicer bokeh? That's my question. I thought that maybe has to be with the camera they use, or the lenses, but I don't really know. Thanks for the answers and for share your knowledge!

Hello everyone! Recently I started to re-watch Rome (2005) and I noticed (at least in the first season) that in almost all night scenes, when you see the bokeh effect of the background lights, you can noticed the blades from the diaphragm. I don't get why they do this (I was researching, and were different DP working with different directors so is kinda a esthetic choice). Is not because they want to preserve the background in the shot, because in most of them, the background is a plain wall with a candle or torch. So... I don't know why they choose that "looks". Is there any reason? Anyone have information about this? or maybe noticed when you saw the show? I don't know what camera they use, or the film stock, but I also noticed in some night scenes a significantly amount of grain/noise. I'll post a screen (sorry for the quality) of what I mean, but you can see it in almost every night. Thanks for the information!

The "cheesy" parts are the ones with the homeless, not so much when he plays with the girl, but when the parents came in, and the looks that the father share with the homeless. Some of that is the acting (nothing you can do about that now) but you can play with the edit, or the music. But man, thats a REALLY personal opinion, is not a mistake. Maybe you show the short to another people and they love and connect with that part. I personally not tend to like the cheesy moments in feel, so again, don't take for grant it what I say. You can take for grant it the audio part, haha (with the bottle and stuff). But that's easy to fix. Again, love your work Tiago. Hope to see more of your videos soon. Parabéns and bye!

You need a hard light from a small source and the talent been close to the walls, so the lighting edges looks sharp.

The same as another digital camara?

Hello Tiago, it was great watch all that beautiful footage. I believe that now the story is very much clear, but I also believe that you could (it's hard, I now) cut the short a little bit more, so the girl decide to hide in the street about the minute 5, instead 8. I also think that you can cut a little bit in the final part. We, as an audience, kinda share the thoughts of the parents, especially the dad, watching the toys and understand with him, what happened with the little girl. But we already now because we see the scene a minute in the past, so to me you could cut a lot of that moment. Maybe the moment, with the music and all, is kinda cheesy and I don't like that, haha, but I really believe that you can make the short even shorter. Oh, and please replace the samples (or change it with an EQ and less volume) of the man drinking with the bottle. All in that moment (when the little girl find him) is over the top in volume. Again, great work!

Sound great, especially because I don't remember the last one (of course the argument, and some shots in the beach, but I don't have it "fresh" which is great to do a new review). Today I don't have the time Tiago (maybe another ones can do a review first?), but tomorrow I'm going to watch it and I tell you my opinion. I'm sure it's gonna be great, even better if you cut some material, because you only cut the worst/boring part, But tomorrow I'll bring you my opinion. Keep the good work Tiago!

Stunning work, even more so when practically no budget. Congratulations! Can you talk us about the process? Do you have a crew? What was the approach to the production? It was some kind of scripted story, or just find locations an try to get footage to use later? Thanks for sharing, bye!

Love the footage. Maybe some shots looks kinda wash out, but I don't know if that lack of contrast is because vimeo compression, or the original footage. Nothing you can't enhance with a video program. Great shots!

What you can't get back is the "blur" of 24p.

I finded and watched a behind the scenes, and was a great learning experience; also an interview in nofilmschool. Again, thanks for sharing and congratulations to you and the rest of the crew!

Hello Aaron, really like the looks of the film. I can't tell if some of the grain was add in post, but I really like the looks you get, specially in the night scenes. The sound wasn't perfect but totally works, except for little moments. Great work, congrats to you and the rest of the crew!

It's simple. When you design an app for IOS, you know that the 90% of the people have the latest Iphone, so is like in the past, when video game designers work on SEGA or Nintendo. They work with the same hardware and the knew how the game is going to run. The problem to Android is not Androit itself, but there are 20 different versions in 60 different phones that run Android, so you have to design always to the oldest, cheap phones, because if you don't do it that way, only a small percent of the public can run your app properly.

It's a picture from Dario Argento's Opera? Because if I remember correctly, the movie has some shots similar to that one.

Haha, I do it in the same way, but is just an example of how mac, even when the look of the OS was as awful as windows, always has design in mind. I don't know your age, but my first computer was an XT, later a 386, and I see everything (the monitors have two colors, black and pink and later black and yellow). When I started I have to launch every program in DOS. Windows 95 was incredible but you can tell that was computer people making computers. With apple and lot of these little details, you can tell that they have designers thinking about the interface. You just have to been using windows (and before DOS) for years, and later use the in-search file system in finder or how you can install a new program just moving the app to the applications folders, to appreciate what a new paradigm was apple to the computers at that time. And again, if I wasn't a sound engineer, I probably never use a mac (not in that time so early, at least) because in every office or home you find a PC. But was the little things like that that let me realize that macs were something new. Later they go for the ipod and the rest is history. Nowadays windows is pretty intuitive too. And off course, the OS steal ideas all the time between them.

In audio, people use mac because you don't have a second take. If you are working with an artist or mixing an orchestra with lots and lots of files an plugs in, you need a SO stable. In that time (windows xp, and vista era, I believe) you can't find a PC in any of the mayor studios. Also, in that times, all the mayor plugs ins for audio, were built-in for mac, and windows was a less offer. In some home studios or low quality ones, you can find, maybe, a hackintosh (a pre build pc with mac software) but people mostly use macs. And let me be clear, windows was awful at that time, but tiger wasn't so pretty either. It was stable, and that is important, but tiger and panther and the previews one, were not so intuitive like an iphone nowadays. Ps. I fall in love with mac when I found out (in tiger I believe) that when you open the trash can, and press the delete buttom, the trash can windows close automatically, and I thought, "why in my PC I have to close this windows myself? When, ever, I want to erase my paper trash but I want to just look the empty window?" and then I understand that people in mac really think about the design, in a time that windows was pretty much DOS with some make up.

In my opinion, now macs are good, but they aren't so much different from a pc like in the old days. I work with mac only, but the reason is that when I started to work as sound engineer, the only type of computer you can find in a Studio was a mac. That's the first time I knew a mac (tiger then, a much unfriendly SO that the modern ones), and the reason why is because mac in that time was sooooooooo much stable than pc. I mean, in that time pc maybe freeze or has problems with .dll and librarys, and in mac the file management was great. Nowadays, is not like that at all. I mean, yes, I prefer windows to mac anytime but is a matter of what I used to, but nowadays pc are much stable than before, and the SO aren't so different either. Now I'm curious... in the world of cinema was like that? People only work with macs in the studios? I'm talking about 8, 10 years ago.

Hello Jason, welcome to the forum. First, and maybe sound weird in a cinematography forum, but great music in the videos. I believe that the music was just right with everyone, and in the slow motion ones, was mix perfect because was totally engaging. The first one, home, was beautiful, and love the composition too. What lens you used? because the footage was pretty smooth (in all the videos). The second one was my favorite, because was totally different and make me think about street photography (pau buscató for example, a barcelonean photographer). Some moments playing with shadows and lines were sublime. The third about the airport was good, great music. The forth one, the footage about the city was really good too and let me wanted to see more about the city. The last one was interesting, and like it, but maybe could be short, but I'm glad to knew about that river surfing (we don't have things like that in here). Well, really beautiful work and great choice about the music. I wonder if you try to add some foley to some footage, not only music. Maybe you can try who that works for you. Bye!

You can't take the sky from me

You have to light it right, too

Hi Tom, this site has a tons of scripts, lot unproduced, and each script has a forum page in which people discusses the themes and topics. http://www.simplyscripts.com You need to register to comment in the forum, but not to read the scripts. Bye!

You usually pay by hour in the studio, and usually the studio has a sound engineer that works in there. If is not a complicated thing, they can do it (and probably do it before). Not sure the price by the hour in your area, but just email or phone to some studios and figurate out.

You are the boss Landon, hope you can help Tiago and both of you can make Tiago's work even better.