Can The Hvx Capture An Actors Soul?

You should know better than to use regular firewire. You need one with an L-shaped connector to ensure that it doesn't snatch out during the transfer and fry your firewire port. Tsk.
 
John_Hudson said:
:happy:

Well now we're bordering on the film / video debate (Again)

I see your point. Film is film; film rules.

He's giving you crap about using the HVX over 16mm ? Was he going to pay for the developing and telecine ?

You have the right story and the right talent and that 'soul', that 'intangilbe' ingredient is going to come to the surface

Patricia Clarckson 'Pieces of April' (academy Award nominated performance)
Tom Cruise & Jamie Foxx 'Collateral'
Cilian Murphy '28 Days Later'
Brittany Murphy 'Sin City'
Rudy Youngblood 'Apacalypto'

Can you deny the performances in these films were any less there than if shot on film ?

Tell Robert to stick to acting.
Click to expand...

In all seriousness with this one: The actor that said such a thing probably won't go far. The performance, as Hudson stated, is the performance REGARDLESS. Every one of the movies John listed proves that it's got nothing to do with the medium, but the content itself.
 
Wow, this thread was amazing. I haven't laughed this much in a long while. lol You have to realize that the comment your actor made is simply ridiculous. Your actor should never make you feel bad over your choice of format. especially between 16mm and HD. It's just like what John Hudson said in regards to an actor's performance. The camera can only record what the actor gives, and the actor's he mentions can deliver. Don't feel bad with your choice in format. Just make sure your talent can deliver. And if your actor tells you that you didn't capture his soul, just tell him there was nothing there. Best of luck on your film.
__________________
Click to expand...

When this actor started all this soul gobbly gook, all I could do was think of how I was going straight home to post this as a thread on DVX user.

I new this would get things stirred up because of the ambiguity and outright outlandishness.

I don't post a lot of threads because most questions have already been answered.

This was a topic that has obviously never been touched and I knew it would attract some funny, colorful and even thought provoking responses.

And yes, it is in essence the film/video debate again.

Watching Clerks for the first time ever last night got me fired up.
Yes, the look of Clerks is definitely more filmic or movie-like than what I get from my HVX.
BUT it's also a lot grainier.

The HVX produces a cleaner, sharper image, but it doesn't have that EXACT movie feel. Personally, I like a clean image better, and think that the "movie feel" is just something we've been conditioned into thinking is better. All the grain film produces on the big screen looks terrible if you think about it.

I think if the HVX came out BEFORE 16mm, and the HVX look was conditioned into our consciousness, then that actor would be saying film can't capture the soul as well as the HVX.

I personally am a digital soldier and am proud to be on the front lines of the revolution.

Thank you all.
 
I agree that we have been conditioned to think that film is better. The other day I was
in Circuit City looking and lusting after the flat screens. One of them stood out from all the others- a Sony XBR 1080 46" I believe. About $3200. Instead of the typical movie, it had a scene obviously shot with HD video (rather than film) of a Carribean poolside scene. I stood there amazed - every inch was in perfect focus- it was simply like I was standing there looking out a window of a cabana at the scene. Like I was THERE. After seeing the realism and true to life image of that scene, I realized that after a few years of HD video at the theaters, the "film look" may be outdated and we will wonder why we ever wanted the grainy look.
 
I agree with mainstreetprod. Film is amazing, but you have so many folks who've grown up with CGI and Video Games that the idea of a strictly "film" look is fast becoming quaint. A clean image is always better. Just saw 'The Great Escape' on HDNET last month and it was wonderfully clear, bright and clean. Had never seen it look anywhere NEAR that good. I don't remember it looking like "film" I remember it looking clean, delivering the optical information clearly. As for the actor's remarks: It's one for the books. It's also a great lesson: people will reveal to you up front who they are. I'd take a less talented actor who's gonna give me everything he/she's got over someone who's got some crazy ass baggage and issue's with something technical that really shouldn't concern them. What else is he gonna have problems with? The lights? The sound? The catering? The Actor in question sounds like they would have been a nightmare. Dodged a bullet.
 
Kholi said:
In all seriousness with this one: The actor that said such a thing probably won't go far. The performance, as Hudson stated, is the performance REGARDLESS. Every one of the movies John listed proves that it's got nothing to do with the medium, but the content itself.
Click to expand...
****ing - A :thumbsup:
 
mainstreetprod said:
Since this thread has degenerated into a serious discussion, I have to contribute.
I once successfully captured an actors soul on the HVX. P2 capacity dropped immediately from 20 minutes to less than 3, forcing me to transfer via firewire. During the transfer, I noticed a large lump in the firewire cable, sort of like when a python swallows a rat. It slowly lumbered down the cable and disappeared into the Mac.
I opened up FCP and started to click on Import Panasonic P2, when I noticed a
new option right below - "Import Actor's Soul". Clicking on that option brought up a window I had never seen labeled, 'Window to the Soul".

So it appears not only can the HVX capture an actor's soul as well as 35mm, but
the process has been fully facilitated by the Final Cut engineers. I'm pretty sure Edius
Broadcast is not yet soul compliant.
Click to expand...
Y'all are some sick f@$#s!
 
USLatinContent said:
Dumb? This is a serious problem in Holywoodland! I beg to differ!

What I do is save myself the casting hassle and add it in post. There is some really good 3d soul CGI software out there for really cheap. I got Soul Splash 6.0, but expect to spend a good 8 to 12 hours for your average LA actor for a believable soul effect. Or you could do what many indies do, just shoot on a different state! You don't really have to go too far though, as long as you leave LA you are pretty much good to go.
Click to expand...

Dude, I'm telling you, serious, dude, just set the f@$#ing actor on fire!
 
BenB said:
Best film ever made!

Aside from Behind The Green Door.

Both of which used In-Soul-A-Vision...
Click to expand...
Damn, Ben, who let you out of the FCP forum...:grin: :grin: :grin:
 
Blaine said:
Damn, Ben, who let you out of the FCP forum...:grin: :grin: :grin:
Click to expand...

He came out swinging, at that. Like three posts in under a minute.

Where's my HVX at... BenB just has TOO much soul; must capture.
 
Phil Maker said:
The reason I started this thread was not to attract every comedian/DP in cyberspace. Although I do appreciate all the humor, which in itself does allude to an answer, the point still has gone unfortunately missed.

#1 This "actor" said 16mm is WAY better. He made me feel bad for going with the HVX over 16. I wanted to know peoples feelings on this matter and not one person addressed it.

#2 I thought it was interesting that here was someone pointing to an intangible as the cause for video not being as good as film. I've heard all the arguments based on concrete examples, but never one that was based on an abstract idea.

I think everyone took the idea of "soul" and ran with it. The thing that interested me was not about the soul so much as it was about the idea that film is able to record something intangible in a scene or performance that digital is not.
Click to expand...

No, I think YOU misunderstand yourself! You missed the whole point of the technicalities of capturing a soul! LOL!

But seriously, as far as I can be while laughing my butt off (imagine me, with no butt), what he said was a totally stupid statement. The medium you use has nothing to do with the message and emotion your "story telling" conveys. You can either work well with a specific medium, or you can't. Great works of art have been created on every medium to ever exist. Thus, it's not the medium one iota, but how you are able to wrok with it. If you can't convey your message with HD, try film. If film doens't work for you, try writting it as a novel, or a graphic novel, or a comic book, or claymation, or In-Soul-A-Vision (couldn't resist, hee, hee...). It's not the medium, it's your personal ability to relate to the medium.

That or you're just a freakin' stupid actor who can't get two cents for his stupid "soul"!

Ah-hahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!

It's been a long ass day shooting in the cold on the water, and I'm burnt, peace...
 
Last edited:
I'm shooting a short film right now, with the HVX. I believe your mistake was to show footage to the actor BEFORE POST. Add a magic bullet effect, or do a 3 way color correction, then show it to him. He'll say: The HVX really captures souls!

I did a trailer from the only scene I shot. Poorly lit disco scene shot with 6db gain. After post... Small trailer, good music- everyone is pumped up for the rest of the shooting! Actors included!

EDIT- And the HVX colorspace is well suited for soul capturing. Emily Watson's soul was awarded on a Mini-dv shot film by Lars Von Trier. I can't see how her soul couldn't be better captured by the HVX.
 
Last edited:
Justyn said:
indeed!
Click to expand...


I'm sorry but the anti actor turn of this thread is a bit laughable. A so called director who doesn't like actors is the equivalent of a painter repulsed by his brushes or water color. Can't work with actors = lousy director and if you don't respect them you can't work with them. This actor was certainly an ill informed idoit for saying what he did, and probably not an actor anyone here would want to work with.

But, most professional actors are great and they are willing to expose themselves emotionally in a way that most of us would not dare. Too embarrasing. Lets give the good folks who do this, in the indy world for no money, a break shall we?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top