K40 Resolution vs. 50d -- Dreamers, Facts, Feature Potential

Forum covering all aspects of small gauge cinematography! This is the main discussion forum.

Moderator: Andreas Wideroe

Freya
Posts: 880
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 5:50 pm
Contact:

Post by Freya »

sunrise wrote:First of all the Dogma thing is still going. There are still being made films that are certified Dogma films.
There are certainly people still making dogma films but they stopped giving out certificates long ago, and theres hasn't been a certification process for a long time, which is a real shame as it would have been an opportunity for small filmakers to get publicity.

At least that's what it says on their website?
The dogma thing was NOT about mini-DV. Although it was a big part of it.

Some dogma films was shot on 35mm!
I didn't mean to suggest it was, certainly they originally envisioned shooting on 35mm for the first films and the rules even specify what format of 35mm to use.

I would love to hear of any 35mm dogme films! It's not easy to find out about such things! I've not heard of any of them. The dv based films get all the publicity I guess.
The dogma thing, and the miniDV thing was meant as a stunt to cut productions costs.
I think it was partly about the ease of use of the cameras in the situation too. For instance dogme films must have synchronous sound. It also fits what they were trying to achieve styleistically, They wanted to acheive a greater realism and video is very much associated with that.

In sweden most of the film industry seem to go over to HDTV, in Denmark we use DigiBeta and DVcam. HDTV is on it's way though.

All the films being made on the digital format has been mare expensive than it would have to shoot them on film. Because of the huge post production work.

I think you should look toward aesthetic reasons rather than finacial for choosing miniDV.
It depends on what it is and what you are doing. If you intend to finish on dvd then it's going to be a lot cheaper to shoot on dv and documentary in paticular are very suited to dv because of the high shooting ratios. It all depends on where you are standing doesn't it.

I expect you are thinking paticually about narrative based feature films which is kind of what this thread is all about, but sometimes dv can be cheaper, a lot cheaper than film. It depends where you are finishing up and a lot of other things.

Where I am the idea of shooting on 35mm is ridiculous in the extreme and film is often a luxury. For people who work in the industry on big projects for film and television, they may think differently.

love

Freya
User avatar
sunrise
Senior member
Posts: 1584
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 12:03 am
Location: denmark
Contact:

Post by sunrise »

Freya, I believe we were talking features in this thread.

Dogma #3: Mifune's last song was shot on 16mm an blown up to 35mm.

Last Dogma film finished that I know of was Dogma #30: Días de Boda, which was released last year.

sunrise
User avatar
MovieStuff
Posts: 6135
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:07 am
Real name: Roger Evans
Location: Kerrville, Texas
Contact:

Post by MovieStuff »

Alex wrote:Jittery carts can be found out before the cartridge is shot. Just see if the film pulls through easily from the top of the cartridge to the bottom.
That method is not reliable. We see all kinds of jittery film come through where people checked their carts using that very method. If it's worked for you, that's great. But it isn't reliable based on what we've seen.

Roger
shralp
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 7:38 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon
Contact:

Post by shralp »

Jeez, some serious amounts of posts to this thread since I walked out of the office only 3 hours ago....

Mattias, I guess what I was saying in my earlier post is this:

50ft. cart of Pro8 50D w/processing - $35.00
100ft. spool of same stock, (7245) in 16mm - $35.00 + $13 processing=$48

So basically, 2 carts of Super 8 50D, (100ft.) are going to run you $70 but the same quantity, that is, one 100' daylight spool of 7245, is going to run you $48. Regardless of how much you end up shooting, its gonna be cheaper to shoot it in 16mm compared to the same stock in Super 8. Plus, it's a clean, spanky 16mm image....
Freya
Posts: 880
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 5:50 pm
Contact:

Post by Freya »

sunrise wrote:
Freya, I believe we were talking features in this thread.
Yup! That's what I said! ;)
Dogma #3: Mifune's last song was shot on 16mm an blown up to 35mm.
Well they all have to be blown up to 35mm as part of the rules but I'd not heard of any that originated on 35mm. I like the idea tho! Most 35mm cameras are huge so it would be interesting how they would deal with that, although there are some exceptions like the eyemo.

I'd love to hear of any that were shot on 35mm. I think that would be really interesting!
Last Dogma film finished that I know of was Dogma #30: Días de Boda, which was released last year.
I wasn't suggesting that there were no new dogme films being made, just that they weren't certifying them anymore:

http://www.dogme95.dk/news/interview/pr ... elelse.htm

However, it seems that they are still listing new dogme films on the website (up to 35!), so it's not quite as bleak as I imagined. I thought that they were abandoning acknowledging new films. Being listed on the website does give them a bit of publicity, I'm not sure how they get listed tho!

Also, I was wrong that the sound had to be recorded in synch as the FAQ describes sound being synced in post!
It just has to be recorded at the same time as the film.

love

Freya
mg
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 6:14 am
Contact:

Post by mg »

Shralp wrote:
So basically, 2 carts of Super 8 50D, (100ft.) are going to run you $70 but the same quantity, that is, one 100' daylight spool of 7245, is going to run you $48.
I think your math is a little fuzzy here. With those 2 carts of S8 you end up with about 5 minutes of footage, whereas 100 ft of 16mm will only give you about 2.5 minutes of footage IIRC. So for 5 min of 16mm footage (using your numbers), you're out $96, not $48. Yes you have the same physical length of film, but the time length is different.

I agree, it's a nice 16mm image, but not at your price "savings."

mg
shralp
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 7:38 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon
Contact:

Post by shralp »

mg,
THAT IS A VERY, VERY GOOD POINT. ONE THAT SEEMS TO HAVE COMPLETELY ESCAPED ME...... NO WONDER I SCORED BETTER IN ENGLISH ON MY SAT's THAN I DID IN MATH. 8O
mattias
Posts: 8356
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 1:31 pm
Location: Gubbängen, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by mattias »

shralp wrote:the same quantity.
ok, i read your last post, but i have a piece of advice on hwo you can use english to improve your math. :-) if you call the fundamental quantities by their real names it's kind of hard to make mistakes like this. had you written "the same time" you would have immediately seen that the math was wrong, and had you written "the same length" you would have seen that you were using the wrong quantity. also the rest of us would have had an easier time trying to figure out what you meant.

you're welcome. :-)

/matt
mattias
Posts: 8356
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 1:31 pm
Location: Gubbängen, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by mattias »

sunrise wrote: In sweden most of the film industry seem to go over to HDTV, in Denmark we use DigiBeta and DVcam. HDTV is on it's way though.
actually imx is the most common format these days. it's basically a hd camera recording in sd resolution on normal digibeta tape. the benefits over digibeta (at least the eng type) and dvcam is the film like gamma response, wider exposure latitude, progressive scan and true 16:9. i've seen tests transferred to 35mm and it looks fantastic. about as sharp as 16mm but without the grain.

/matt
Freya
Posts: 880
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 5:50 pm
Contact:

Post by Freya »

mattias wrote:
shralp wrote:the same quantity.
ok, i read your last post, but i have a piece of advice on hwo you can use english to improve your math. :-) if you call the fundamental quantities by their real names it's kind of hard to make mistakes like this. had you written "the same time" you would have immediately seen that the math was wrong, and had you written "the same length" you would have seen that you were using the wrong quantity. also the rest of us would have had an easier time trying to figure out what you meant.

you're welcome. :-)

/matt
Meow! ;)

love

Freya
FilmsUP
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2003 4:59 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by FilmsUP »

I think the "28 Days." people had an agenda. Yes, they did a wonderful job with DV video. But the long shots did not cut it. Even if they wanted a DV film, those long shots of London could have been done on super 16 and looked so much better.
nonkjo
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 4:50 pm
Location: Corpus Christi, TX
Contact:

Post by nonkjo »

I think the "28 Days." people had an agenda.
I agree. "28 Days" was about making a feature on MiniDV...With 15 million set aside for budget and being adament about not shooting film, there are still a ton of cameras that would have been better suited to shoot this film...like JVC's Cineline cameras for example...

James Green
Alex

Post by Alex »

I agree that 28 days was about an agenda that probably involved promoting mini-dv.

A feature involving a Super-8 film could have an equal agenda for Kodak.

Get people thinking that mini-dv is more like Super-8 in quality rather than 16mm or 35mm.
marc
Senior member
Posts: 1931
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 12:01 am
Real name: Marc
Contact:

Post by marc »

I realize that this post has brought up several issues regarding the pros and cons of shooting a feature on Super 8 film. The issue that I would like to adress in my post here is the cost issue. As Freya pointed out in her previous post, the best way for a filmmaker to save money in shooting a Super 8 feature for blow up is to do a great job in production ( lighting, controlling contrast, etc. ) and then transfer to video and do an excellent job of finishing the film on video with great sound editing, etc. If a " Big Wig" likes what he sees then maybe the blow up can be funded by a "Deeper Pocket". In my opinion, super 8's best ally is video post production. Properly shot, Super 8 transfered to video looks great.
Alex

Post by Alex »

Good points Marc.

The other ingredient that is being somewhat overlooked is that Super-8 IS a performer's medium. You want to AVOID spending too much money on your background imagery because it won't help the overall Super-8 image as much as a nice close-up of your talented performers will.

In 16mm and 35mm you MUST complement the foreground characters with background set designs that enchance the overall look. Super-8 may be the up and coming performers best friend IF the quiet Nizo's are used and good location sound can be recorded and many of the shots feature the performer up close (waist up and closer).

As the background is minimized, the lighting requirements can be reduced as well.
Post Reply