Chris Dingley1 Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Hey everyone, here are some stills from the first round of shoots of my new film "Faint by Numbers." Its s16mm shot on the SR2 With super speed lenses. the current images are from DVCAM tapes and we will be upgrading the tapes to most liely dvcpro50 for the offline then hd for the online(this should clean up some of the video noise caused by the DVCAM compression.) but for now let me know what you think. The bar shots and the last shot are 7219, the office is 7217. Feedback is always welcomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Very nice work. The first two are a little flat for me but the rest is nice. You have S16 looking like 35. Good job. Love the bottles. btw... if I may suggest, always transfer to HDCam first... then down convert from there to what you'll need. Then, Tape to Tape color correct another HDCam of your selects.. down convert them to what you'll need. Up converting from DVCam up... not so good. If not HDCam.. starting at DVCPro50 would be the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Dingley1 Posted February 27, 2009 Author Share Posted February 27, 2009 thanks for your comments, as for the transfer i would go from the negative to up convert not the tape., Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 ok.. so you are going to Re-Transfer selected takes from the Neg. That is the best way to go.... "upgrading the tapes to most likely dvcpro50 for the offline then hd for the online" sounded like you were literally upconverting from DVCam up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Dingley1 Posted March 1, 2009 Author Share Posted March 1, 2009 ok.. so you are going to Re-Transfer selected takes from the Neg. That is the best way to go.... "upgrading the tapes to most likely dvcpro50 for the offline then hd for the online" sounded like you were literally upconverting from DVCam up. HaHa no, sorry about the poor phrasing. The bottles were a gutted kino kit(gotta love them). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Gus Sacks Posted March 2, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted March 2, 2009 The first two are a little flat for me but the rest is nice. You have S16 looking like 35. Good job. I might want to disagree with you, David. Most of the shots, save the one with the close-up in the foreground and the woman in the background, look very flat to me, and most of the lighting feels unmotivated and just like fill light gone wild. I think it still looks like Super16. Chris, I'd pay attention to your levels, and see that your actors don't pop out of the background so much like that - especially in a bar situation. But, yes, the bottles are nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 Man, you're TOUGH! :huh: I agree... but give the guy a break... ...the bottles (do) look great, huh? :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Gus Sacks Posted March 2, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted March 2, 2009 Man, you're TOUGH! :huh: I agree... but give the guy a break... ...the bottles (do) look great, huh? :P Yeah... For some reason I've found I do dish it when it comes to reviewing work. But I would only hope for an expect the same with my own work. Haha, if you agree then you should give it to him straight! :rolleyes: Maybe he'll learn more. Yeah, they look pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 (edited) Yeah... For some reason I've found I do dish it when it comes to reviewing work. But I would only hope for an expect the same with my own work. Haha, if you agree then you should give it to him straight! :rolleyes: Maybe he'll learn more. Yeah, they look pretty good. Yes, the pictures are somewhat to pretty flatly lit, but I guess it depends what school of cinematography you adhere to and not so much what the cinematographer needs to learn. Anyone familiar with the work of Lance Acord would agree that he lights his movies in what I consider to be a very flat style. In the behind the scenes for Marie Antoinette, he acknowledges that flat lighting is his style, from which he departed for that period movie. I respect the man as a cinematographer, but that doesn't mean I light that way myself for most projects. His work on Buffalo 66 is outstanding in its even-lit cinematography. So it could just be a matter of intent _although some people just don't really know how to light either, and may use the "flatly-lit by intent" as a cop out. And I know one cinematographer _who has posted here briefly_ who considers the dramatic lighting style as "Hollywood cinematography group-think." ;) Edited March 2, 2009 by Saul Rodgar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DS Williams Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 The shots look fairly high key, meaning less contrast between key and fill, ect. The flat look may be intended. If so, the shots are nice. I particularly like the bottles! good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now