DVX100A getting the total film look

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey look. I'm in no way making any comments about the DVX. I'm commented on its popular usage nowadays. The DVX would be my camera of choice if i decided to produce a motion picture. I just wouldn't go to drastic lengths to try to (poorly) immitate the look of film. There are just SO many factors that seperate film from video that it's really not worth it. I embrace video as it's own media.

Now about how El Mariachi is 15 years old and it wouldnt cost so little these days...
Inflation affects the price of everything, not just the cost of making a feature film.
 
There is only ONE way to get the real FILM look:
Either have rich parents that can support you in your PURCHASE of actual 35mm film OR have a rich uncle that can do the same... all the rest is consumer bull*hit. Digital technology was created for us poor people that "want to make movies" but simply can not afford to. ie: the consumer development of digital technology and the lure of the 24 digital frame machine that will give us poor people the glimmer and hope of making a real film, when in actuality we are not. Film is and always will be a RICH MAN'S ART. Don't forget it. Doesn't matter how dam talented you are, if you do not have the funds for film, you're out. Simple is that. The rest is good conversation and a lot of "what if's and could've been's."

Darryl Abbinante
www.MOGthemovie.com
 
not true. With the right idea and drive a project can be 100% funded by grants and investors. Digital is thoe format for people who kind of want to make films, film is the format for people who really REALLY WANT to make films. If you WANT to, you can make a FILM for nothing out of your pocket.
 
in addition to 24p advanced, a good Magic Bullet plugin can make things look amazingly filmy. There's tons of these to choose from. But expensive if your into buying things.
 
"amazingly filmy" to someone who probably has never shot or processed film and is viewing said footage on a television screen.
 
Nathan.Buxton, I don't understand why you need to be so condescending to someone who simply asks about a feature that Panasonic itself uses to sell this camera. Just because you understand that the prime mover of a film is the story doesn't mean someone trying to replicate a film look deserves any judgement, or that you are any smarter.

I learned on reversal. I've shot 16 color, b/w, I've pushed it, skip bleached it, blown it out, tweaked it in any way I could; I've shot super16, shot 35. I have the DVX100B and I too want to have at my fingertips, as well as many other tools, the ability to have a filmic look. Does this mean I don't understand how important a story is? Even though I write and have written and shot scripts? No.

Film is beautiful. It is textured and has artifacts that remind us of the unpredictable, human elements of our stories. The look of film is even tied in many hearts to reasons why we took up shooting in the first place, those stories that we saw so many years ago. There are many reasons to shoot video with a film look. Myriad reasons. have you ever shot Day for Night on film? Did you ever have to learn how to do it? Did you ask anyone or study under them? Did they tell you, with derision, to go shoot day, and not worry about making Night look like Day?

Lighten up. You want to impress people with your knowledge? Then show it, and help them do what they are trying to do. You never know. Kindness might come back for you one day. Or maybe scorn will.
 
I agree with you, i am being a dick. But i have no problem with trying to get a "film look" but the DVX will never give you that no matter how hard you try. It might have simillar depth of field and simillar colour properties, but it wil never ever look like film. All the screenshots i see of people's 35mm adapter footage looks good (some of it looks horrible, but thats probably due to improper setup).. it just doesnt look like film.

Basically, my only problem is with people saying "I WANT THE FILM LOOK TELL ME HOW TO GET IT"

When they don't even know WHAT the film look is! in ten years, everyone is going to look back at the SDCAM/35mm adapter days and laugh or blush, because it IS quite silly.

yes, im condescending.
 
Nathan.Buxton said:
When they don't even know WHAT the film look is! in ten years, everyone is going to look back at the SDCAM/35mm adapter days and laugh or blush, because it IS quite silly.
Click to expand...

I dont know why your putting words in my mouth... I want the dvx 3chip, 24pa, 35mm adapter look, so it doesnt look like ordinary dv. If someone else says it looks like film, well then, I've accomplished what I set out to do.
 
I don't know how you think i was referring to you in any way? Sure! If you want to shoot 24 fps thats a very legitimate need. I would shoot 24p aswell. Yes, the DVX has "3 chips" and is a very nice SD cam. And a 35mm adapter CAN enable you to capture a frame that is roughly 28mm wide (if you calibrate it correctly) and enable you to use optics that will closely resemble the DOF of a film camera. And if you intend on showing this footage on a TV screen or a computer screen on the internet thant PERFECT! it will look fantastic! just dont try and say it truly looks like film... it won't.
 
No matter what you shoot your movie on if the acting sucks, story whatever than who really cares. Do you think that when people watched Iraq in Fragments they siad, Oh I really wish they would have shot that on 35mm because the film look is just so much better.
Listen people if you want your movie to look like film, shoot on film. If you just want some scene file settings than use the search button, its really amazing. One of the major differences that some people often overlook is lattitude. No matter how well you know your scene file settings you cannot escape the low dynamic range of video (the dvx is decent compared sony,canon, Etc.), which is a dead giveaway. The reason people continue to fill up seats in a theatre is not because it was shot on film, but because of the director, actors, story. Maybe someday when everyone is making movies with the same tools they will discover that it wasn't the look, but lack of (you name it). Video is just to add perspective. Why do people read books
 
broskeeper said:
Mattie you got me totally right. I'm much much MUCH better at the story aspect. I'm really goot at pacing, character, plot and the creative side, but the knock on me has always been on the technical side of things. So I'm trying to find out how to get the best look. I'm shooting a feature this summer on a DVX, so that's why I asked.
Click to expand...


this is the poster who started this thread, and if you look closely he wants instruction on the camera, not the story. Maybe thats why we focused in on the camera and the so called film look?
 
I guess the main point i'm trying to say is: use the right tool for what needs to be done. If what needs to be done is film look on the cheap, what better way to do it than shoot the film yourself, process it yourself and cut it yourself? if you think it can;t be done than you only lack motivation.
 
The simple answer is to hire a cinematographer and sound guy. You can find film students willing to work for next to nothing, maybe less if your script is excellent. You will also need a bunch of lights, a good mic, and small crew to get an acceptable result. Renting is cheaper than buying, and some DPs have cameras and lights. Seriously, don't sweat the technical stuff unless you want to and think you will enjoy it, and are willing to seriously sacrifice image quality for a learning experience. I definitely do not recommend shooting your own first feature unless you are coming from a cinematography background or you're doing it just for fun.
 
Hey Nathan, are you trying to derail this thread or what? You've made your point about there being no point in trying to emulate film, but many of us are trying to do just that, so why be offensive about the results of this guys best efforts? It's a real thread killer. I actualy want to get back on topic. Sorry if I am taking your comment too seriously.

All the best
Lucas
 
The unfortunately thing is that cinematography is an ongoing effort for me and I'm really trying to learn it better. I posted something where I tried to get a more cinematic look, and one of the true professionals on the board, who probably could have offered me help, just tells me it looks "wrong."

Nathan, I realize that you're a pro who shoots 35mm and obviously has access to the best stuff; you've made this point before. I'm not, and I'm trying to get as close as I can. If you'd be willing to just offer me some help instead of dissing my efforts I'd appreciate it a lot.

Lucas, thanks for backing me up, btw; I do appreciate it. If you want to offer any critiques I'd appreciate it, too!
 
Ok sorry guys. I have been too hard on this. From now on i'll feel confident i may have made some kind of "point." i will never post anything like that again.

And for the record, amulet man's footage looks good! i like it! just doesnt resemble film- neither 16, nor 35mm.
 
I think he means the "35mm film" look, not the "old film" look. Instead of the digital look. I think that's what he mean...
 
Nathan, I see your point. To me its like going to Ikea to get furniture. Its particleboard covered with a thin sheet of paper to create a "wood look". The average person would glance at it, and say "thats a nice oak cabinet". But upon further inspection it is not, does not feel like or look like real wood. Someone who works with wood everyday like me would glance at it and say "thats some trashy lookin material there."

I enjoy my DVX and the more I fiddle with it the better I get the picture to look, but yes film is film and video is video no matter how you look at it.

However, there is nothing wrong with trying to improve on that particleboard to make it look more and more like real wood.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top