Jamie Jones - RISE - Music Video - HVX/M2 Nikon

Geoff_R

Geoff_R

Veteran
Haven't posted anything in a while...

This is a video I shot back in April/May which resulted in my moving to Los Angeles from Chicago. Ultra-low budget, shot over three days with HVX, M2 and nikon primes (24,35,50,135). This was my first time using the M2 so got a little happy with the DOF :)

The song is called 'Rise' by Jamie Jones featuring All-4-One. It's part of his new solo album which was very recently released. Not sure when the video is going to air at this time.

Any thoughts/comments would be greatly appreciated!

Link to video... (Quicktime7)
http://www.redguerillaproductions.com/media/musicvideos/rise_jamiejones.mov

Some stills....

rise_still01.jpg

rise_still03.jpg

rise_still04.jpg

rise_still05.jpg
 
Excellent piece. Very moving. I, too would love to hear more about your setup. Did you shoot 1080i or 720p? Looks great!

Todd
 
Thanks all for the feedback! Here's a little more detail on the production itself.

We shot 720p, default scene setting 6. With the M2, I had a 24mm, 35mm, and 135 all 2.8 lenses and then a 50mm 1.4. We ended up using the 50 the most for this shoot. (Also had a 70-300mm Quantaray zoom 4/5.6 which was used on a few extreme long shots.)

Disregarding the initial setup time to prep and ready the M2, I didn't notice a difference in speed or efficiency on set. Working with the M2 did not in any way slow down the production. Changing lenses was a snap as long as you light appropriately for the stop needed. I probably saved a little time because I was never using a follow focus and therefore never needed to adjust any gears, ect.

I am not fully sold on the M2. Sometimes I could notice the 'spinning of the disc' even at a 60 shutter. It would sometimes appear in the upper corners of the frame. It was too great of a stretch to try zooming in further... the image in full would then be sacrificed. The solution for me was to shoot 2:35 and take the bottom portion of the frame. This was fine for 'this' project as I wanted to shoot 2:35, but there have been other projects since then which were more suited to a 16:9 frame and I decided to pass on using the M2.

There is also a very slight wobble in the spinning ground glass which makes it difficult to shoot sunsets or directly into a light. I've seen how one can open the M2 and tweak and adjust but I'm not the most mechanically inclined person :) So I can't really do that. For these reasons, I may switch to a SGpro soon.

Our lighting package consisted of (2) 2k zip softlights, (3) 1K arri (1) 650 arri and (1)300 arri. We used the 2k softs for a lot of interiors. They are great for fill and setting an ambient light level. Then we'd use the 1ks for key lights. I really could have used some good 2k fresnel but the budget didn't allow for it this time around. On more recent shoots, I've been using 2k fresnels and they are a tremendous boost! You can get by with 1k's but you'll find it hard to light a semi-large interior at anything more than F2 which makes using a 2.8 lens quite difficult.
 
Really nice video, and thanks for the info on the lighting you used. I also wasn't a big fan of the m2 when I used it. I could never quite tweak it right. Anyways, strange question but what monitor mount are you using in the picturean ,d how does it hold up? I have my marshall mounted on this $20 piece of garbage that scares me to death. When I move the moniter often swings and sways

Thanks

Chris
 
Nobody356 said:
Really nice video, and thanks for the info on the lighting you used. I also wasn't a big fan of the m2 when I used it. I could never quite tweak it right. Anyways, strange question but what monitor mount are you using in the picturean ,d how does it hold up? I have my marshall mounted on this $20 piece of garbage that scares me to death. When I move the moniter often swings and sways

Thanks

Chris
Click to expand...

I'm using the ball mount that came with the Varizoom sold 720p SWIT monitor. It's got a clamp-like element which can be tightened on just about any arm as long as it's got hard edges (it slips on anything circular or too small for that matter) OR you can screw the ball mount directly into the thread on the top of the HVX; either way, the monitor mount is horrible...

I have the same problem. It often comes loose and the monitor slips. There is only one thread to tighten on the ball head and it just doesn't do the job. When you add a battery to the back of the monitor, it's almost too much weight for it to handle. I'm actually trying to find a way to have the battery on a DC plate or something and then run the small power cable up to the monitor. That'd probably make things easier. OR I'm looking at getting a more articulate arm mount, similar to the one I've seen being used with the RED and it's monitor.
 
great video, very well done. i usually can't sit through a whole music video but this kept my attention the whole time. my only questions are:
how did this video result in you moving to LA?
how'd you get wayne brady in the video?
can you share any budget info?

once again, great job man
 
chris f said:
great video, very well done. i usually can't sit through a whole music video but this kept my attention the whole time. my only questions are:
how did this video result in you moving to LA?
how'd you get wayne brady in the video?
can you share any budget info?

once again, great job man
Click to expand...

I got the call to shoot this video back in early April while living in Chicago. I flew out to LA on a one-way ticket because we weren't sure of the time-frame for wrapping up the edit. (I was both the DP and editor) We had three main shooting days and two small pickup days and about 2 or 3 weeks of post leading up to the digi-beta layoff. By the time we were done, there was another new project in the works and it's been pretty busy since then. So this gig ended up creating a series of opportunities that allowed me to stay in LA.

With the talent; Wayne and Jamie are good friends so like any good friend would... he helped out :)

Budget-wise... very very low. I can't be specific but we did a lot of guerilla style filmmaking, flying light with little or no crew in order to make this happen. We pulled a lot of strings and many people pitched in their time and effort for little or no pay.

Thanks for checking the video out, Chris.
 
aurantaurant said:
It would look even sicker if you crushed the blacks more. bump up the contrast.
Click to expand...

The master and DVD copies look a little different, more towards what you're describing. I feel like the H.264 encode adds a 1% brightness or gamma increase...

Thanks for checking the video out.

Geoff
 
Excellent job, Geoff!
Did you do the "technical part" all by yourself or did you have a small crew?
Also the actors were really good, every emotion was believable, not too much, not too less... If I could only believe in god now...
So you were aways around 2.8 with the Iris? Did you just focus with the SWIT?
Anyway, perfectly executed, I can see why you got so many follow ups!
 
3 questions:

1. How did you power all those lights, you just used different circuits? Or you had a generator if so which one?

2. You mentioned you had to light for the right fstop what do you mean?

3. What exactly do you mean the red rock's glass was spinning (trying to focus?)
I know it's a spinning ground glass device, but how did that affect your work?


Geoff_R said:
The master and DVD copies look a little different, more towards what you're describing. I feel like the H.264 encode adds a 1% brightness or gamma increase...

Thanks for checking the video out.

Geoff
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Geoff_R said:
The master and DVD copies look a little different, more towards what you're describing. I feel like the H.264 encode adds a 1% brightness or gamma increase...

Thanks for checking the video out.

Geoff
Click to expand...

h.264 has a huge gamma bug...it is much more than 1%.
btw: very nice video! :thumbup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top