compare/contrast a short film & 2 edits

[sonnyboo]

I need some eyes to be critical and do a COMPARE/CONTRAST between two edit sof the same movie. Which is better?

This one was shot with two cameras (Canon Optura's) and the flashbacks were done in Super 8 film (Ektachrome 160)with a Nikon R10. Finding a use for SUPER 8 FILM is easy, and it adds another aesthetic choice to the movie.

I also did two variations of colour in the telecine of the Super 8 footage. Doug at FILM & VIDEO TRANSFERS (aka http://www.thetransferstation.com) was the colourist & he pulled a miracle out of some poorly kept Ektachrome 160 from 1991 developped & transferred in 2002.


CONCUPISCENCE, a short film {comedy}
ORIGINAL VERSION (10 minutes)
http://www.movieflix.com/movie_info.mfx?movie_id=2633
http://www.story.com/sonnyboo2.htm


NEW, EDITED VERSION (7 minutes)
real player http://sonnyboo.com/video/concup2.rm
Quicktime http://sonnyboo.com/video/concup2.mov
* the REAL PLAYER verison encoded far better than the quicktime file

Does the new version make sense? Is it a better movie than the original version/edit ? Help me determine the answer, please. I beg of you Indieclub! If the original is better, then I may only use this as an Internet promo piece.

This one is being considered for TV distribution, but I had to get rid of two major sequences, so I don't know if it makes sense now. I used a MAGIC 8 BALL for a site gag, and also had obtained (legally) the Internet rights to the theme from the LOVE BOAT.

Now that I may get it on TV, I enter a different arena for rights. Magic 8 Ball is OUT because it is TRADEMARKED and they want $$$ or approval which will take 6-10 months (according to their legal department), and the additional $$ for TV rights to Love Boat Theme is more than I would ever make back from this short in a million years.

As usual, all reviews, no matter how harsh, are welcome.

- Love always,
Peter John Ross
http://wWw.sOnNybOo.cOm

[jumar]

Couldn't watch the first edit, but the second one made sense to me. The only cut that seemed strange was when the boss wraps up the meeting... it seems like he's heard and is reacting to what the two guys have been saying, which I doubt was the intention.

[mattias]

* the REAL PLAYER verison encoded far better than the quicktime file

since you used the age old sorenson codec and 30% less bandwidth, why do you sound surprised? :-) sorenson 3 and a few more kbps will do the trick, i promise.

downloading now. feedback on its way.

/matt

[sonnyboo]

Well, I used Media Cleaner EZ to encode the Quicktime because the file sizes when I do the regular QUICKTIME are so huge, no one can host them.


Any tips on encoding using Sorenson or Quicktime Pro to encode for the web?


Also - thanks for the tip on the BOSS character. I hadn't noticed that, but I am soooo biased at this point, I need objective feedback.

- PJR

[mattias]

Any tips on encoding using Sorenson or Quicktime Pro to encode for the web?

but i just gave them!?!

/matt

[mattias]

ok, watched the second one now. the first one didn't work for me either, but depending on what you cut out my critique might still be useful:

it suffers from a rather severe structural problem. the beginning, from the credits up until the boss screaming on the phone, is way too long even though it successfully builds quite some tension. the volunteering scene that follows is brilliant but after this i felt nothing for anyone and i learned nothing about anyone, and the final plot twist felt forced and too sudden, far from releasing any of that tension you built up. i think if you work some more on it though you'll have a really good short.

good luck.

/matt

[sonnyboo]

[quote="mattias"][quote="sonnyboo"]Any tips on encoding using Sorenson or Quicktime Pro to encode for the web?[/quote]

but i just gave them!?!

/matt[/quote]


I said I was using MEDIA CLEANER EZ, and I get no say in the codec version, frame rate, or anything. I would have no clue how to use Quicktime Pro or any other encoding with Sorenson 3.

Should I use Quicktime Pro to encode or try to go off the timeline with specific settings?


Thank you for your notes. I hope you can see the longers version & see if it suffers from the same, because your review is my worst fears realized about cutting it down.

(it's free on MOVIEFLIX.COM, but you have to register for the free registration).

[mattias]

I said I was using MEDIA CLEANER EZ, and I get no say in the codec version, frame rate, or anything

really? you can't chose which codec to use? not the frame rate? not the quality/bandwidth? sounds like a truly shitty program and if so i can't help you.

/matt

[paul]

I said I was using MEDIA CLEANER EZ, and I get no say in the codec version,

It's true. I remember this program, it's like a camera with all automatic and no manual settings. Indeed, nobody can help you this way Sonnyboo. Try to download another program. Try Tmpgenc or download windows media encoder or do a search on a p2p for cleaner or Procoder. So far you haven't got the right software for quality encoding. Also, deinterlace your film for publishing on the internet.

Paul

[pheboglobi]

If you can afford it, Discreet's Cleaner (http://www.discreet.com/products/cleaner/) is a fabulous program that gives tons of options for encoding to the web as well as VCDs, DVDs, etc. Its MPEG2 encoding, by the way, is one of the best available for prosumer level programs. It also has wizards and templates to automate encoding if you don't want to get into the nitty gritty details.

--Garrett

[sonnyboo]

Media Cleaner EZ is the fuly automated version of that program.

[jean]

Here's my 0,02€

I've seen only the second version.

The introduction of the two guys is good, but to long. What they're up to is obvious after a few moments, and as the talking goes on, I learn nothing new. The girl ending the macho talk by simply walking over to the two guys is brilliant. My conclusion: two mouth-machos, talking like porn actors, but in real life the presence of a girl is enough to totally embarras them and shut them up.

The boss on the telephone does not add information; in the volunteer scene he says what happened. I liked the volunteer scene very much, entertaining and learn more about the macho-talk guys. One sticks to talking, and behaves like a total asshole. the other one however decides to go for it, and volunteers. He's the more sympathic one, less aggressive. Instead of going to hooters, he actually is doing something to approach the girl. Instead of only talking, he actually begins to do something.

I feel that this dampens the final conflict, the working scene again is very long, and almost no tension. From the "harmless" macho nothing really weird is expected. Indeed the "seduction" is a clueless guy trying to get close to the girl, I almost felt pity for him.

The girls reaction is way over the top, my sympathy was almost changing towards the guy The ending again takes the steam out of the conflict. According to the end, the girl rejects him because he's married? Not because he's a asshole and totally unattractive, and molesting her together with his senior macho guy?

Just my thoughts

[sonnyboo]

Okay, I've been truly isnpired by your QUICKTIME comments and doing dilligent work to see what I can do to improv the quality.

I have been using QUICKIMTE PRO to "Export" using varying settings and I am VERY happy with the results.

Thank you for helping me know what to look for. I will post a re-link witht he updated version in Quicktime.

- PJR