N DeWood

I saw this listing for an Arri SR on ebay, and I thought it was just funny! Maybe you'll think the same. :D http://cgi.ebay.com/Arriflex-16sr-movie-ca...1QQcmdZViewItem Nick,

Actually, there is a real valuable lesson for you here! You've done an amazing job putting a production together, that shows true dedication, that will pay off in the future. BUT, you've made a huge mistake by not putting in writing what kind of an arrangement you all had together. In this business, NEVER work with anyone without putting in writing exactly what each one's expectation is. It is something you must do on each and every production, no matter the size. No exception. Since it looks like you've put everything together, you should've had him sign an agreement giving the rights to the script to you in exchange for deferred compensation and/or credit rights. Believe it or not, depending on what oral representations were made, and if you have any witnesses, you may have legal rights that you are not aware of. Remember, a partnership can arise from a simple oral agreement followed by conduct of the parties. So check into that if you feel your rights and hardwork were trampled on! Nick,

Hi Phil, I am not overlooking the costs of film, processing, telecine, etc. You're right if you compare the cost of video and film simply by price tag. I think everyone knows that.All you have to do is to buy film, and check with a local lab to find out the cost of processing. But I am not making a strictly financial comparison. When you look at the entire experience of using a film camera, whether's it's the ability to shoot incredibly beautiful images, the use of great lenses and zoom motors, various accessories, and the ability to control the depth of field, you'll see that the difference is negligeble. But the quality of film remains at most times superior. Therefore the proper question is: What will you pay for a video package that can obtain the same results from a 16mm film package? I wouldn't even begin to compare the cost of my XL2 to the Arri SR. There isn't even a comparison to be made, whether it's price, quality or anything else. From my painful experience, film has come out cheaper!! Why? In video, you'd have to rent an expensive HD Camera package, light up right to avoid the unbelievable sharpness of HD, deal with the limited latitude of the format, purchase all sort of decks to ingest the HD from the tapes, and on and on... And even then, video, as a whole, cannot at this stage match the mature world of film. So, you're right if you were to compare price tags of the stock and all the processing attending film, to the price of an XL2 but I insist there is a difference when it comes down to the value of the whole production. The XL2 simply doesn't cut it. Nick

Hello Jac, I would avoid any prosumer HDV cameras (1/3 inch ccd) for now. Wait until the formats settle in that market. If you must go HD (and absolutely don't or can't rent), make sure to invest in a real HD Camera and not HDV. Though that will break the bank. There are many reasons for this, and you may want to do your research about the differences between these two formats. I've heard all kind of complaints about HDV cameras, from the new Canon to the new Panasonic, yet very little gripes about the Varicams and CineAltas (of course those are very expensive). As for the XL2, I own one, and I am simply not impressed with its 24P capability, its lenses, and accessories. I now use it along side my Arri SR to record sound and for behind the scenes video coverage. At times, I use it because I just want video (like for interviews). It's not a bad camera if you desire to shoot regular video, but I simply don't believe in the miniDV world as capable "filmmaking" cameras, due to the lack of excellent lenses and accessories that are so necessary for shooting the images you want. I can't over emphasize the importance of the lens in any camera package. Of course, there will be many who will disagree, but that's just my opinion. Hope this helps. Nick, p.s. Never dismiss film as a format to start with (I've made a big mistake in wasted time and money going video first). There are many decent models that cost less than a canon XL2, and depending on where you live, you can just rent all types of amazing lenses and accessories to use with your film camera (for those special projects), where you will achieve results rivaling even the very expensive HD cameras.

Hello, It really depends on your production and your goals. If you are an independent seeking to create independent films or programmings in the hope of selling them to would be distributors, a single LLC will do fine for many reasons. Unlike a Corporation, with an LLC, you don't have to adhere to rigid corporate meetings, minutes, etc., that must be done with a corporation, and has to be maintained on a yearly basis. Of course each State's corporate laws differ, but they all have similar requirements for a corporation. An LLC is easier to setup, and you don't have to deal with declaring what type of shares you wish to issue: Par or Non Par. Some states may even require a certain amount of Capitalization before you can incorporate. OTOH, an LLC will allow you to easily setup a legal structure, without the hassle of corporate requirements. Don't setup an LLC for each production. You need to pay filing fees, yearly business fees, obtain different EIN numbers, and various insurance coverages, file quarterly IRS reports (even if you don't make any money), and the list goes on. One LLC can take care of most of your needs. However, if you will be getting into large projects with other producers or companies, then your own LLC and their LLCs or corporations could create a specific LLC jointly just for that purpose. This way, the production is jointly owned by your LLC and whatever structure they're conducting business through. Finally, remember the "S" in S Corps is an IRS election to prevent your company from being double taxed as a C Corp. It is not a different category of corporation. An S class corporation is OK if you intend to have up to 75 shareholders, and wisht to raise capital by issuing shares. However, that brings up another question: Are those investors there for just that one production, or are they long term investors who simply wish to own part of your S Class Corp? With an LLC you can raise capital, but you have to do all sort of things such as amend the by laws, and convey what is referred to as "member" interest. It's not the same as Corporations. There are many other things involved in choosing a legal entity. Also, there are tax considerations to consider which you must discuss with your CPA or attorney. Best of luck. Nick,

hello, Why did you take a reflected reading rather than an incident reading? Is that the only type of reading you took? Also, did you take a candle reading, and then reference ASC manual for proper exposure before shooting?

Thanks for the advice. I'll order the Minolta. Just out of curiosity, why is the one made by Sachtler cost so much more? Any features in the sachtler that's worth three times the price of the minolta meter?! :o Here's the Sachtler model: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...egoryNavigation Nick

Hello everyone, Any recommendation on a good color temperature meter. Budget is up to $1K? I need a meter that can give the color temperature and the corresponding corrective filter number. Thanx for any help. Nick

Assuming that you've obtained the releases in writing (and are on file), your rights are governed via the terms of the contracts you entered into with the previous owners. Unless the contracts state otherwise or have exceptions (which I doubt), your rights are secured. The fact that the feature was not released prior to the changing of title on both properties to new owners is irrelvant. Best of luck. Nick,

Hello Peter, Your are definitely on point. As far as I am concerned, we've become a country of war, troop loving, and flag waving idiots. Amazing how well hated we've become to so many countries. Let the others on this forum support their cocaine sniffing "misunderestimated" president who hates "fereigners," it really doesn't matter because history is always designed to repeat itself. If you show you care or have any decency they'll attack you as a libera. Thanks again for your insights. ;) Nick

Hey Brian, My point was not about making a living as a camera shooter. I was only talking about the larger goal of becoming a filmmaker. I've been down the video path for filmmaking after listening to all the crazy advice, and it's been a costly mistake for me personally. So my focus is the long run. You may shoot video to make a living, but keep your eyes set on film, until video one day matches it, complete with accessories and lenses. As far as I am concerned, I fund my projects and shoots from working in a different field, simply because shooting video will not cut it. I spend my time to make the resources available to learn film. My experience with the video world is that you will be competing with legions of people who claim they're videographers or indies, or god knows what, because they have a video camera! While in the short run, for purpose of making a living, you are right, in the long run it may be harmful. Time and time again, I've noticed from the DPs who work around my area, those with film experience or background (and I don't mean just shooting film) consistently get good jobs, whether it's a decent indie or a hollywood film being shot in the area. Also remember, film doesn't just entail shooting a camera. There are the operators, the assistants, the loaders, etc. So, if you are a beginner, learning how to load Aatons and Arricams may get you some decent work after all. Nick

It always amazes me how there is so much discussion every time a new video camera comes out. :blink: From the Gl2 to the XL2 to the Pansonics, everyone and his mother seem to have one, yet where are the films? Remember, there is a reason why people who make movies are called "filmmakers" and not videomakers. Once again, these companies hype their little products to the masses to make a quick profit. I say, for FILMMAKING, if you can't afford 35mm then shoot 16mm, and if you can't afford that shoot 8mm, until you can upgrade. I have owned an XL2, and have worked with a few HDV cameras (which are nothing more than super super video!), I find them only good for documentaries, video training, weddings, and sports coverage. Compared to video, learning film is nothing short of beautiful, though the learning curve can be steep, but it is well worth it. How can an entire HVX200 that costs nearly 6K compete with a cine zoom lense from Zeiss or Arri that can cost close to 20K, and that's just for S16mm. Think about it guys. Nick

It's alway amazing how video always looks like Video whether it's HD, HDV, or SD. Overall good Sharp pictures, and good depth of field execution. Best of luck on your future work. Nick

I see your point R., I was trying to make the point that at $1,500 a year, the rental insurance is usually included with all of the other insurance coverages that any DP or small production may need. My point was not that you did not understand the importance of insurance (so I hope I wasn't misrepresenting your statement), but simply that since rental insurance is included in one' overall insurance coverage, rental coverage would not be an issue to begin with. Nick

Hello Mitch, I agree with you from the financial point of view. However, I was wondering if owning the camera enabled you to gain experience much more rapidly than not owning one. For example, would owning a camera enable you to take short or smaller projects quicker and more efficiently, without having to wonder with the camera package is available at the local rental shop? And what about availability? What if you are called upon to do a job within a day or two, and the camera shop doesn't have the camera package because it's either in the shop or out? How do you handle those issues as a professional DP? Thanks. Nick