Dersert/Night/Interiors: HVX+m2 Screencaps

Go m2! Go blurry films! Who cares about seeing the actor's face. They are over paid anyway.
 
darwinandpaine said:
This is true. But I think this comment is extremely simplistic and naive. What if you're in close quarters, and want to be at 24mm on the lens and have shallow depth of field? You're screwed with the HVX lens.

You make it sound like there's no difference between a shot with a 100mm lens from 12 feet away and a 50mm lens from 6 feet away. Any photographer worth his salt will tell you that's just not the case.

The thing about the M2 is that it gives you so many options. With the M2, I can get really shallow depth of field with my 24mm lens! Does the M2 loose a little sharpness? Yes. But if sharpness is your only criteria for what is aesthetically pleasing, I think you're missing the boat.
Click to expand...
\

Exactly. Maybe on exteriors, but interiors? The adapter is very useful.

I guess it really is whatever floats your boat on this one.
 
darwinandpaine said:
This is true. But I think this comment is extremely simplistic and naive. What if you're in close quarters, and want to be at 24mm on the lens and have shallow depth of field? You're screwed with the HVX lens.

You make it sound like there's no difference between a shot with a 100mm lens from 12 feet away and a 50mm lens from 6 feet away. Any photographer worth his salt will tell you that's just not the case.

The thing about the M2 is that it gives you so many options. With the M2, I can get really shallow depth of field with my 24mm lens! Does the M2 loose a little sharpness? Yes. But if sharpness is your only criteria for what is aesthetically pleasing, I think you're missing the boat.
Click to expand...

I've you read my previous post them I assume you read my others and also read the roughly three or four times I've stated that I DON'T THINK RESLUTION IS EVERYTHING. I posted several times not only in this thread that things like color, gamma, and motion are all much more important to me (not to mention the most important thing of all: composition). As I already said, I think keeping a pretty deep focus gives one much more sophisticated composition options and thus the M2, with it's loss of resolution, isn't really worth it for me.

Now, I agree that for very close quarters my quick fix isn't ideal or even doible. For my purpose however it works fine, as I usually make sure I have a decent amount of space (once again for composition options) and thus the few instances when I'd like to use a shallow DoF, I'm OK.

I can understand the appeal of the M2, and for a SD project I could certainly understand it's appeal. However, and I'm saying this completely theoretically as I've not seen HVX200 footage projected very big (certainly not 35mm size), I'm guessing that the pretty striking softness I'm seeing here would be much more ponounced on a big screen and perhaps un acceptible.
 
The m2 was a rental item, and the blue room was shot on a pickup day when I was unable to rent additional equipment.
 
You mentioned you considered renting a mattebox and mist filter, I am looking at mist filters, is there an advantage over the mattebox/filter then the screw on filter?
 
hey david, good looking stuff. I was confused at first because I thought I was looking at the teaser for the film itself, and I had no idea what the hell was going on.

Anyway, hi from a fellow CTPR grad... keep up the good work!
 
The DOF looks great on my monitor but I am sure will look too soft on a big screen - so it really depends on the final medium - if you are planning a filmout or large projection you NEED to test beforehand and make sure you can create images that will look good in the final medium. If you dont test before then you are simply gambling.
 
Yes, technically and aesthetically speaking, that girl is HOT. I suggest you perform numerous DOF experiments with her, sans pants. Ummm, otherwise, great work on your short!!!

:)

--Justin.
 
She was a fantastic actress to boot. *hint: If you try a Google Image search for Kate Groombridge, you'll find some more photos. They may not show off her acting ability, but do manage to capture that 'something' that made the long shooting days worth while. ;)
 
Going back to your pickups, would you happen to know which promist filter you WOULD have used? I am looking to buy one but have no idea which "strength" to use. I was curious if you happened to know what ='s the M2 best.

Thanks, and once again, I love this clip. I have it in my 'Save' folder. :)
 
I'd prefer to rent a set to test them each out, but if I were to guess off the top of my head, I might try a Black ProMist 1/4 or 1/2. You might try visiting a local camera shop and do a quick test shoot, swapping out various filters from 1/8 to 1.
 
Hi.

Great clips and stills, there's some beautiful shots in amongst the teaser trailer.

As a side bar, for those that do love the use of very shallow depth of view, and in the case of this film even the central image drifts in and out, I highly recommend watching - millennium mambo (Qianxi Manbo) by Hou Hsiao Hsien. The DOP is Pin Bing Lee and he does an unbelievable job. Also, like your piece, the lead actress (Qi Shu) is mesmerizing. For anyone interested in filmmaking this a must see even if you hate the film.

Link to trailer...

http://www.ocean-films.com/millenniummambo/videos.htm

Thanks.
 
Neil Rowe said:
the problem that independents generally suffer from when working with 35mm DOF is making the DOF too shallow. too often i see shots where only the plane of the eyes of the character is in focus and the rest of them falls soft, which is distracting and makes the entire image appear soft. a look at any major film on a 35mm sized imager or equivelant shows that the object is not to make the plane of focus so short that the back of the charachters head falls out of focus. instead we see alot of short lesnes, and sharp outlines around the entire charachter. hair.. clothing.. all that jazz is nicely rendered with clarity and detail. and the background does not fall quite as soft, and is still for the most part easily recognizeable .
Click to expand...

it is a good point and a sort of issue i've been noticing looking at some of this m2 footage. the question is, what methods/techniques can be used to achieve those sharp outlines you speak of with the m2?

here's an off topic/dumb question but i was wondering so i thought i'd throw it in. with the hvx or any dv camera you can zoom in on the talent's face or whatever and get your focus, but with a still 35mm lens on the m2 what is the way to go? you going to need a tape measure or just a really good eye or what??
 
David,

Great work on this stuff! Could you share with us your lighting package. I'm in the process of putting together my lighting package for a shoot in August. VERY similar to yours in terms of locations. Desert, bedroom night int., etc. Loooking through the thread, I only saw a 1200 HMI as a light. What else did you kit consist of? For the Ext. days did you use reflectors, silks, etc. Did you find your kit was enough, too much, where you always wishing you had more?

Thanks a ton for helping us out!
Brian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top