new v200t clip

Post by **the woy** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:24 pm

For anyone who's interested:
MPEG1 extract reel edit 8MB

It's a few loose and unedited shots from my upcoming short film, shot on v2 200t, nizo6080. The film will be matted for 16x9 aspect ratio. The reel is still 4x3 and contains only selective coverage from some scenes.

Enjoy. Nico

PS.: Heavy compression, contrastier than the original (MPEG encoders fault), no colour correction.

Post by **npcoombs** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:12 pm

In terms of the film: yes I like the look of the 200T.

In terms of the direction you need to include more wide angle shots outdoors, and possibly use a wide angle lens in the interior to transcend the tv drama/amateur video feel. There seems to be a lack of refinement in the composition.

Post by **freddiesykes** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 8:51 pm

That stock looks great and it is a compressed video that hasn't even been colour corrected, good God. Can anyone tell me how this stock looks in 16mm (or show footage or pics)?

Post by **Evan Kubota** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:13 pm

Fantastic - the image stability is quite good also. I liked the POV car footage.

Post by **the woy** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:29 pm

freddiesykes wrote:That stock looks great and it is a compressed video that hasn't even been colour corrected, good God. Can anyone tell me how this stock looks in 16mm (or show footage or pics)?

This ist V2 200t on Standard 16mm, a little underexposed (HD Telecine downconvert, DV Stream screencap). It is colour corrected and post contrast has been applied quite heavily. Raw stock is digging into the shadows as hell. It's from another short film I made.

Liked the V2 200t on S8, too. Filmed with the internal filter outside, always metered externally and overexposed 1 stop or more except for the interiors... they came out quite grainy.

Nic

Post by **Arislan** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:04 pm

How did you get Harry Dean Stanton to appear?

Post by **audadvnc** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:35 pm

16mm is so georgeous. I love the girl's red hair against her pale skin.

Post by **freddiesykes** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 1:38 am

Bob, have you had any experience with Delden Film Lab in Bloomington? I'm thinking I will be shooting some negative this summer. :o

Post by **audadvnc** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:24 am

Delden does good, reliable work. They're a little pricey, you can get negative done cheaper elsewhere, but if you're willing to drive out to Bloomington you won't have to pay postage. They run 16 and 35mm ECN every day of the week. They are only open after hours: 5PM to midnite, I believe. Call before you go to get their hours.

Post by **sarmoti** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:33 am

The Woy,

Just out of curiosity what camera/lens was that 16mm shot with? What was it telecined with?

Post by **mattias** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 3:20 am

npcoombs wrote:In terms of the direction

yeah, he really needs to frame his sync claps better. :-) how would you ever have a clue what's not included in this *raw assembly* anyway?

[quasi-film-intellectuals-bashing-mode off]
it looks pretty good, but it's always hard to judge when the technical quality is so low. any stock could look just like that, show in any camera.

/matt

Post by **the woy** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:36 am

sarmoti wrote:Just out of curiosity what camera/lens was that 16mm shot with? What was it telecined with?

It was shot on a ARRI 16SR2 with a 9,5 mm HighSpeed prime opened at 1,4-2. The stock was a 120m short end from a TV production, my generous clapper loader still had it in her fridge. The scanning was done on a Spirit DataCine with DaVinci 8:8:8 in 1920x1080px to TIFF still frames. Only 1440x1080px was used as the actual frame area because of the aspect ratio of the original neg.

Nic

Post by **npcoombs** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:38 am

mattias wrote:
npcoombs wrote:In terms of the direction
yeah, he really needs to frame his sync claps better. how would you ever have a clue what's not included in this *raw assembly* anyway?

Then you also agree that the footage here is not very well composed or framed. The 'good stuff' that has been left out would of course be an entirely different matter, if it really is that drastically different from the shots in this clip.

Post by **the woy** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 1:33 pm

npcoombs wrote:
mattias wrote:
npcoombs wrote:In terms of the direction
yeah, he really needs to frame his sync claps better. how would you ever have a clue what's not included in this *raw assembly* anyway?
Then you also agree that the footage here is not very well composed or framed. The 'good stuff' that has been left out would of course be an entirely different matter, if it really is that drastically different from the shots in this clip.

I have about 40min footage of the entire shot, but I wanted this raw reel not to show the look nor framing of the finished film, more a variety of how the v200 reacted in various settings (inside, tungsten, hmi light, skin tones etc), so I just sorted some shots out, it also contains several behind the scenes takes - which will never make it into the finished film. It's not framed to it's final aspect ratio either.

The circumstances of making the project were hard, extremely cold shooting days, 95% handheld camera operating, sick actors etc. Don't want to go into the details, but at certain days we had to cut down the blocking to 25% of the planned amount. On the filmmaking side I'm not satisfied either, but my aim was trying to tell the story in the simplest way possible, without necessarily provoking breathtaking coverage all the time.

Nico

Post by **mattias** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 4:38 pm

npcoombs wrote:Then you also agree that the footage here is not very well composed or framed.

how well do you regularly expect footage of an assistant clapping his hands for sound sync purposes to be composed? i've no idea what you're saying.

/matt