Hey, no argument; that is the way I went, only using Hi-8 video because it was cheaper than the new digital 8. I busted my nuts getting a miniDV 3 CCD camera and I'm still paying for it.
The local "cine" club regularly makes all video productions which are scripted, costumed, lit, and professionally sound recorded with real live actors; but, they all shun film. They used to use it but now no one uses it. Yea, I've gone and done all that, been there.
Now I'm saying I rather had done it with 16mm film.
The movie making skills you are talking about can be developed with using film just like they can using video. I have a small book called, "SCENARIOS! SCENARIOS! SCENARIOS!" by Donald R. Horn, it has 78 Easy-to-Do Scripts to liven up your home movies, Complete with timing and camera instructions. All footage is for 8mm, for 16mm double the amount. That is what I would use today. The stories start at 12 feet of 16mm film. You do not need to shoot a lot of film to learn how to shoot a story.
One does need to shoot film in order to learn how to use the camera and film and lenses and filters and shipping and processing and loading and projecting and cleaning and splicing and so on and on.
After making a few of those silly movie stories one starts to think that way and is soon writing scripts just like the 3 chip Brit video guys.
Video productions will always look like video but film will look like film; video cannot be made to look like film so says the pros on cinematographydotcom. They say, if you want to show your productions in theaters, shoot film; if TV is all you want to show your productions on then stick with video.
Shooting on video first to learn how to make stories is a good idea, so is using smaller formats first and cameras that are made like 16mm cameras, I fell for it, bought them, all of them, used them, upgraded them, and now I feel that I wasted a lot of time monkeying around with stuff I don't need or want to use. I still don't have any 16mm film productions under my belt. If I had just shot 16 to start with, everything would be there ready to take to the next step in the releasing processes.
If you want to drive a motorcycle don't buy a car.
The above are just some thoughts that come to a guy who has done it and collected all sorts of equipment and used it. Now I see that it was mostly in vane. All I really want to do is use my 16mm camera, but, I can't find it in this pile of stuff!
Ready for Film Medium?
Moderator: Andreas Wideroe
-
studiocarter
- Senior member
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:13 pm
- Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
- Contact:
-
studiocarter
- Senior member
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:13 pm
- Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
- Contact:
bump.
These guys crack me up. They use 16mm Bolex. Having lots of fun, learning to shoot, they now are selling a 3xDVD set of antics. I gotta have it.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... eName=WDVW
the former link was sold and this now is the second posting of the same 16mm DVD set
These guys crack me up. They use 16mm Bolex. Having lots of fun, learning to shoot, they now are selling a 3xDVD set of antics. I gotta have it.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... eName=WDVW
the former link was sold and this now is the second posting of the same 16mm DVD set
Last edited by studiocarter on Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
ericMartinJarvies
- Senior member
- Posts: 1274
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 2:26 am
- Location: cabo san lucas, bcs, mexico
- Contact:
anyone can shoot video.
only dedicated, mindful people shoot motion picture film! it is an art, a craft, and something that takes time to learn and master. the exposure latitude and range of filmstocks makes for a long list of possiblities. the fact that you cannot see what you have just shot, makes you wait and think about what you shot, and when you receive the processed film back, you then are anxious and excited to compare what you think you shot with what actually exposed onto the emulsion. the differances between what you thought you shot and what you actually shot is the excitement and the motiviation to shot more film, to fix problems, improve quality, etc. etc.
i beleive anyone that wants to make movies should first shot on film until they have it mastered, and then allow themselves ot use video. because at that point, you truly understand the differances between the two, and what is possible. with video, it is very difficult to get the look and feel of film, even with the new emulators and film grain software applications. film provides a more timeless look and feel. it makes the viewer associate it with a motion picture movie, instead of a home video. perhaps this distinction alone is the greatest value film has ... we have all beed raised viewing movies at theatres that have been shot on film, and so in our minds that particular look and feel stimulates reaction from us that automatically associates the experience with something cinematic. and so the value of the production is increased by great measure becuase of this aspect alone. in my opinion.
the thing with film is it takes alot of time to master, to learn for that matter. and so, if you do not have time, film should not be used. it also costs alot of money ... so if you do not have money to spend on film, use video. but if you really like film, and feel compelled ot use it, and you take the plunge, you will knowwithin your first 1-3 exposures/processings if it is for you or not. many people give up on it, becuase they are dissapointed with their initial results, or their secondary results, and even 3 4 or 5 times into it they are still being dissapointed. but for those who truly get the bug, they must truly have the fix. and the fix is in receiving that processed film and seeing the percentage of usable film increasing, while the percentage of unusable film decreases.
the first rolls of film should be used to take registration and resolultion tests. this will allow you to determine what needs to be repaired, modified, adjusted, fine tuned on your camera and lens. if possible, also take lighting tests, emulsion and exposure tests, etc. the more you know about the charactoristis of your camera the better!! the more you know about the charactorisitics of film emulsions ... the better. the SOONER you know about both of these, the LESS it will cost you and the sooner you can get to making your film.
the LAST thing you want to do is setup production, wherien you have actors and sets/locations scheduled, and you start implimenting your script, and you have no clue how to use your camera correctly. if you are recording sound, then you need to apply the same dedication to that as well. and if you add more to the production value, like using a video tap, then you need monitors and recording decks, cables, power supplies, and on and on. if you have a number of lights, you need to deal with power suply and cables/extensions, etc. filters for the lens, filters for the lights. all of these can continue to be added to your productions, thus adding value. but all of them, like the camera and the film emulsions themselves, MUST be FIRST understood, and then practiced and eventually mastered, so that when you are actually shooting your film, you are dealing with actors and script issues, and NOT technical issues ... or rather, alll the technical issues are second nature to you, and you have them all applied to practical memory for instant recall.
i would suggest you purchase an inexpensive russion k3 16mm camera for under $200.00. this is a hand crank camera and is noisy and does not have great registration. however, it does not require power supply, and it has through the lens viewfinder, and it is dead simple to use. purchase some 100' rolls of film and shoot some footage, proces the film, and see how you did. if you find at that point you do not desire the use of film and all the work and dedication it requires of you, then sell the camera and call it a day. if you DO like the film process, then shoot some more rolls with that camera until such a point you have outgrown it, and know all the reasons why you need a better camera, and purchase that better camera with the knowledge and understanding of why you need a better camera, and not becuase of what this forum or popular concensus tells you.
you could also use a filmo 16mm camera, it does not have a through the lens viewfinder, so this will mean you will have to learn MORE about exposing film during your experiences with this type of camera, thus your knowledge base will be greatly improved over using a through the lens camera. if your smart and can handle the task, do it!
aside from registration and resolution tests you initially shot, try NOT to shot home movies of family and kids ... that will lead to lazyness. instead, take and write one scene, and make it so it is condusive with the look and feel of a poorly shot film. perhaps a flashback scene, or something representing memory, dark and twisted or foggy and hazy ... this way, if your initial film exposures suck, your film clip wont!! understand? do not try to film a scene that requires high quality res and reg, exlt color rendition and lighting composition, etc. shot a scene or sequence that is intented to look like crap ... this way your on screen elements fall into place with what will most likely happen with your first time film shooting, as badly or poorly as it may possibly be. if you film is exposed crappy, then your story will not suffer, you scene can be edited and you will still feel good about things, even though your film quality sucks ... the story or scene or sequence is fitting.
good luck,
eric
only dedicated, mindful people shoot motion picture film! it is an art, a craft, and something that takes time to learn and master. the exposure latitude and range of filmstocks makes for a long list of possiblities. the fact that you cannot see what you have just shot, makes you wait and think about what you shot, and when you receive the processed film back, you then are anxious and excited to compare what you think you shot with what actually exposed onto the emulsion. the differances between what you thought you shot and what you actually shot is the excitement and the motiviation to shot more film, to fix problems, improve quality, etc. etc.
i beleive anyone that wants to make movies should first shot on film until they have it mastered, and then allow themselves ot use video. because at that point, you truly understand the differances between the two, and what is possible. with video, it is very difficult to get the look and feel of film, even with the new emulators and film grain software applications. film provides a more timeless look and feel. it makes the viewer associate it with a motion picture movie, instead of a home video. perhaps this distinction alone is the greatest value film has ... we have all beed raised viewing movies at theatres that have been shot on film, and so in our minds that particular look and feel stimulates reaction from us that automatically associates the experience with something cinematic. and so the value of the production is increased by great measure becuase of this aspect alone. in my opinion.
the thing with film is it takes alot of time to master, to learn for that matter. and so, if you do not have time, film should not be used. it also costs alot of money ... so if you do not have money to spend on film, use video. but if you really like film, and feel compelled ot use it, and you take the plunge, you will knowwithin your first 1-3 exposures/processings if it is for you or not. many people give up on it, becuase they are dissapointed with their initial results, or their secondary results, and even 3 4 or 5 times into it they are still being dissapointed. but for those who truly get the bug, they must truly have the fix. and the fix is in receiving that processed film and seeing the percentage of usable film increasing, while the percentage of unusable film decreases.
the first rolls of film should be used to take registration and resolultion tests. this will allow you to determine what needs to be repaired, modified, adjusted, fine tuned on your camera and lens. if possible, also take lighting tests, emulsion and exposure tests, etc. the more you know about the charactoristis of your camera the better!! the more you know about the charactorisitics of film emulsions ... the better. the SOONER you know about both of these, the LESS it will cost you and the sooner you can get to making your film.
the LAST thing you want to do is setup production, wherien you have actors and sets/locations scheduled, and you start implimenting your script, and you have no clue how to use your camera correctly. if you are recording sound, then you need to apply the same dedication to that as well. and if you add more to the production value, like using a video tap, then you need monitors and recording decks, cables, power supplies, and on and on. if you have a number of lights, you need to deal with power suply and cables/extensions, etc. filters for the lens, filters for the lights. all of these can continue to be added to your productions, thus adding value. but all of them, like the camera and the film emulsions themselves, MUST be FIRST understood, and then practiced and eventually mastered, so that when you are actually shooting your film, you are dealing with actors and script issues, and NOT technical issues ... or rather, alll the technical issues are second nature to you, and you have them all applied to practical memory for instant recall.
i would suggest you purchase an inexpensive russion k3 16mm camera for under $200.00. this is a hand crank camera and is noisy and does not have great registration. however, it does not require power supply, and it has through the lens viewfinder, and it is dead simple to use. purchase some 100' rolls of film and shoot some footage, proces the film, and see how you did. if you find at that point you do not desire the use of film and all the work and dedication it requires of you, then sell the camera and call it a day. if you DO like the film process, then shoot some more rolls with that camera until such a point you have outgrown it, and know all the reasons why you need a better camera, and purchase that better camera with the knowledge and understanding of why you need a better camera, and not becuase of what this forum or popular concensus tells you.
you could also use a filmo 16mm camera, it does not have a through the lens viewfinder, so this will mean you will have to learn MORE about exposing film during your experiences with this type of camera, thus your knowledge base will be greatly improved over using a through the lens camera. if your smart and can handle the task, do it!
aside from registration and resolution tests you initially shot, try NOT to shot home movies of family and kids ... that will lead to lazyness. instead, take and write one scene, and make it so it is condusive with the look and feel of a poorly shot film. perhaps a flashback scene, or something representing memory, dark and twisted or foggy and hazy ... this way, if your initial film exposures suck, your film clip wont!! understand? do not try to film a scene that requires high quality res and reg, exlt color rendition and lighting composition, etc. shot a scene or sequence that is intented to look like crap ... this way your on screen elements fall into place with what will most likely happen with your first time film shooting, as badly or poorly as it may possibly be. if you film is exposed crappy, then your story will not suffer, you scene can be edited and you will still feel good about things, even though your film quality sucks ... the story or scene or sequence is fitting.
good luck,
eric
eric martin jarvies
#7 avenido jarvies
pueblo viejo
cabo san lucas, baja california sur. mexico
cp 23410
044 624 141 9661
#7 avenido jarvies
pueblo viejo
cabo san lucas, baja california sur. mexico
cp 23410
044 624 141 9661
-
studiocarter
- Senior member
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:13 pm
- Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
- Contact:
script
Scene 1
Person enters room and falls down dead drunk. Camera is askew, dutch angle, possibly out of focus, and over or under exposed, it is also hand held and shakey. Show bottle spilling booze out. CU of face and messed up hair. Fade to black by passing hand over lens.
Scene 2
Anything and everything else on the roll will now pass as a dream of the drunken person.
Scene 3
Fade up from black to the drunk getting up off the floor. The person checks out his 'stock' and staggers off to get more. End.
Person enters room and falls down dead drunk. Camera is askew, dutch angle, possibly out of focus, and over or under exposed, it is also hand held and shakey. Show bottle spilling booze out. CU of face and messed up hair. Fade to black by passing hand over lens.
Scene 2
Anything and everything else on the roll will now pass as a dream of the drunken person.
Scene 3
Fade up from black to the drunk getting up off the floor. The person checks out his 'stock' and staggers off to get more. End.
there's a lot to filmmaking than just great pictures...mattias wrote:well, this thread is not about directing but cinematography, and not about learning but creating. if you're a beginner and/or don't care that much about taking great pictures, by all means go ahead and shoot minidv.JoshuaRyan wrote:Or you could make a short movie every 3 days with mini-dv (or every day if you really wanted) and then once you get good with that, then progress to 16.
/matt
imo, if your goal is to become a cinematographer, that's fine, but to eventually create good films, you need to practice the act of putting together movies. this practice can work with any medium.
-
studiocarter
- Senior member
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:13 pm
- Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
- Contact:
storyboards
Yep, get a pencil and paper and make storyboards. Entire movies can be made inside your head. Hitchcock kept his in his head, Shymalan has storyboards on his DVDs that are very instructive, and Rodriguez was a comic book artist so draws his own storyboards; his El Mariachi/Desperado DVD has great storyboard extras in the bonus section.
Like they say, it's not the camera, but the mind behind the camera that makes the movies.
Like they say, it's not the camera, but the mind behind the camera that makes the movies.
Wow, that looks interesting... have you seen their stuff? Any good? Just the idea of 100 random silly shorts shot on actual film sounds enticing...regular8mm wrote:bump.
These guys crack me up. They use 16mm Bolex. Having lots of fun, learning to shoot, they now are selling a 3xDVD set of antics. I gotta have it.
Quite inspiring to see people selling their own films in a totally DIY manner... the wonders of DVD... here in the UK tho the BBFC make it hard to do that though,.... but that's another thread, possibly on another board.
Tim Drage
films - http:///www.spiteyourface.com
noise - http://www.cementimental.com
"It's cheaper to shoot someone with a gun than a film camera." - amishman35
films - http:///www.spiteyourface.com
noise - http://www.cementimental.com
"It's cheaper to shoot someone with a gun than a film camera." - amishman35
-
studiocarter
- Senior member
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:13 pm
- Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
- Contact:
But if you only make, say, one short movie a day, somebody else might make 3 a day and beat you in the race to make the most movies!!!.JoshuaRyan wrote:Or you could make a short movie every 3 days with mini-dv (or every day if you really wanted) and then once you get good with that, then progress to 16.
IMHO, you'll get more out of your efforts -- DV or film -- if you spend as much energy on the free parts of filmmaking as you do on the expensive/technical ones.
The craft of storytelling -- building character and story arc, writing honest dialogue, using imagery and symbolism, and on and on -- is much like the craft of filmshooting: it has its' technical aspects as well as its' subjective/creatiive ones. Even as we see the same technical filmshooting mistakes repeated ad nauseum, the technical aspects of storytelling are poorly represented in the works of most amateur filmmakers.
Nobody would recommend loading up the expensive 16mm negative stock in the Arri and start shooting film without understanding the first thing about light, exposure, distance, shutter speed... But people do it with regard to story all the time, and frequently pay filmshooters big $ to get the picture technicals spot on perfect. (Shoot any interesting narrative scripts lately, Nigel?)
What am I trying to say? Who knows. Mostly that it would improve your efforts to spend more time writing, contemplating, talking, collaborating, planning, scheduling, writing more... By shooting a miniDV movie every 3 days, you'll learn a ton about making 3 day miniDV movies.
By expending all that energy instead on the story you are trying to tell, revealing layers of texture and detail as you work and rework, the capture process will become a servant to the story rather than vice versa.
I coulda just said, "Make a movie every 3 months and write every day instead." Now if only I could follow my own advice... ;)
-
FILM-THURSO
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:57 am
- Contact:
If Sci-Fi is your thing then perhaps you've heard of the British TV classic- "DOCTOR WHO". Your friends, who are clearly out of touch with the professional film industry (and stuck up there own ##### quite possibly) would do well to look at this forum. But back to Doctor Who...
... Now I was just watching one of the documentaries on the "Doctor Who- Pyramids Of Mars" dvd. In it the producers got to taking about how some of the show was filmed and most was video taped. They pointed out one story (can't remember which but one of the Tom Baker years) where they had a jungle set at Ealing and this was shot on film to reduce the cost of production. Later they came back to shoot some extra scenes on the same set only they used video. The producers said they would have preferred to shoot Doctor Who on film as film gave a better look and the clash of image with film and video on the jungle scene demonstrated the difference.
Even with advances in modern video, the format still can't yield the degree of latitude to create the full dramatic emphasis that is required. The video jungle was to bright whilst the film jungle was dark, shadowy and scarey with rich color contrasts against the darkness as was intended.
Todays video tech still can't achieve the level of mood creation possible with film. Have a look at the original 1960s "Star Trek" followed by "Space 1999" from the 1970s and then Doctor Who from 1975 and 1990. The most effective realism in these was the filmed image.
CAMERA RECOMENDATIONS STOP! These other guys are throwing you in at the deep end. Even with your knowledge of video technology, starting with a Beaulieu 'anything' will leave you frustrated and possibly put you off all together. START BASIC- grand pianos and harps both have strings but they are worked in different ways.
The principles of film and video are much the same but film is new to you.
Try something like the COSINA (professional) Magic Sound XL 204 Macro. This camera offers a good 220 degree shutter for poorer light, auto or fully manual iris and sound recording volume,TTL viewfinder and light metering, 2 micro phone inputs, 18 or 24 frames per second filming, remote control run, sound monitor output, 9v dc power in, macro power or manual zoom and optional 200ft cartridge capacity. Sounds like a lot but you'l wonder where it all goes in when you see the beautifully simple camera design. You can add the Supermag 400 to this camera and sound film is available for the Supermag. These basic functions on a very easy to operate camera will give you a good range of flexability without ruining miles of film.
Manual iris, that's the key to creative cinematography. It gives you the ability to ignore the light meter and go on your Jedi instincts. Add to that a 2x anamorphic lens and your getting into big screen sci-fi.
If you want to move on from there your next camera should have a pulse sync for post sound recording and here you can record live sound with pulse (required for syncronising sound to film) onto a minidisc digital master. You can also use the moniter output on any camera to record a digital sound back-up copy at the same time as filming if you don't have pulse. But the best advice- start basic- regardless of what you already know!
... Now I was just watching one of the documentaries on the "Doctor Who- Pyramids Of Mars" dvd. In it the producers got to taking about how some of the show was filmed and most was video taped. They pointed out one story (can't remember which but one of the Tom Baker years) where they had a jungle set at Ealing and this was shot on film to reduce the cost of production. Later they came back to shoot some extra scenes on the same set only they used video. The producers said they would have preferred to shoot Doctor Who on film as film gave a better look and the clash of image with film and video on the jungle scene demonstrated the difference.
Even with advances in modern video, the format still can't yield the degree of latitude to create the full dramatic emphasis that is required. The video jungle was to bright whilst the film jungle was dark, shadowy and scarey with rich color contrasts against the darkness as was intended.
Todays video tech still can't achieve the level of mood creation possible with film. Have a look at the original 1960s "Star Trek" followed by "Space 1999" from the 1970s and then Doctor Who from 1975 and 1990. The most effective realism in these was the filmed image.
CAMERA RECOMENDATIONS STOP! These other guys are throwing you in at the deep end. Even with your knowledge of video technology, starting with a Beaulieu 'anything' will leave you frustrated and possibly put you off all together. START BASIC- grand pianos and harps both have strings but they are worked in different ways.
The principles of film and video are much the same but film is new to you.
Try something like the COSINA (professional) Magic Sound XL 204 Macro. This camera offers a good 220 degree shutter for poorer light, auto or fully manual iris and sound recording volume,TTL viewfinder and light metering, 2 micro phone inputs, 18 or 24 frames per second filming, remote control run, sound monitor output, 9v dc power in, macro power or manual zoom and optional 200ft cartridge capacity. Sounds like a lot but you'l wonder where it all goes in when you see the beautifully simple camera design. You can add the Supermag 400 to this camera and sound film is available for the Supermag. These basic functions on a very easy to operate camera will give you a good range of flexability without ruining miles of film.
Manual iris, that's the key to creative cinematography. It gives you the ability to ignore the light meter and go on your Jedi instincts. Add to that a 2x anamorphic lens and your getting into big screen sci-fi.
If you want to move on from there your next camera should have a pulse sync for post sound recording and here you can record live sound with pulse (required for syncronising sound to film) onto a minidisc digital master. You can also use the moniter output on any camera to record a digital sound back-up copy at the same time as filming if you don't have pulse. But the best advice- start basic- regardless of what you already know!