Are you a filmmaker or "Videomaker"?

A piece of information I didn't include was that the guy giving me grief was a retired TV writer. In his 70's, very much old school, old Hollywood, etc. The shows he wrote for were all shot in 35.
 
brianluce said:
A piece of information I didn't include was that the guy giving me grief was a retired TV writer. In his 70's, very much old school, old Hollywood, etc. The shows he wrote for were all shot in 35.
Click to expand...


in that case you should have pretended that his eyesight was going and it wasn't a video camera at all. :thumbsup:
 
There's alway the generic terms:

Cinematographer ... of course, your material had better end up in a Cinema!
Or a DP ... though you aren't exactly taking photographs.
And "Movie Maker" is just a consumer editing program.


That's it, I'm officially calling my self an "Acquirer" from now on.


- Mikko ... doesn't shoot, tape, or film - he acquires.
 
Luis Caffesse said:
People still refer to 'albums' and 'records' . . .
Click to expand...


I actually have some real phonograph albums. Big pasteboard books with sleeves holding a half dozen or so 78 rpm disks.

"Album" just came to mean a collection. And a "record" is just a recording of some sort.

Wish I had a record player that could handle 78's. The Dinning Sisters have been silent for too long. :)
 
Oh yeah. I have some old Carter Family 78s around here somewhere. Ya think they make a turntable that can handle 78s with a USB jack?
 
"78 RPM records can be transferred by recording at 33.3 / 45 RPM and using software to restore to original speed."

Inteesting. Thanks Mikko.
 
I wonder what a 60 year old hard plastic...um...what are they made of, anyway? disk would do to a diamond or sapphire needle? They're really made to be played with steel needles. :)
 
They're made of Bakelite, mostly.

Get one of them laser-gizmo turntables, that read the grooves with a light-beam...
 
to me, people should only advertise making films if thats what they do. If one specializes in video, that should be what is advertised.
I sometimes have clients ask how much it is to film something and I don't hesitate to tell them. I then offer my camera and services for a fraction of that cost.
 
ah you are who you say you are!!!!!
p.c people are just to mean !!!! tell em you shoot for film using your digital camera
so you can one day premiere in film! one day?.... or just say what ever ..how many soundprogects get shot on film oh yeah its all ways digital/analog tape so
say blow me i shoot loads ...of movies on anything maybe a pxl 2000 remeber those!!!!????

just know films like episode 3 star wars are all video to film and many video products are on set for film
i think a seriose video techniction will eventualy develop a film for theaters
thats what id like to do like 28days later,was that a hoax the xl 1 was the main camera?
so dont let to many a-holes over correct you !!! maybe your an artist who films with a video camera!!!!!!?
what ever just shoot da a-hole!!!!!!!!!!with your video cam ......
mike d
no spell check was used in the making of this reply
 
Is Soderbergh no longer a filmmaker now that he has embraced RedOne?
No.

"This is the camera I've been waiting for my whole career: jaw-dropping imagery recorded onboard a camera light enough to hold with one hand. I don't know how Jim and the RED team did it--and they won't tell me--but I know this: RED is going to change everything." Steven Soderbergh
 
Billy Pilgrim said:
I know this guy who made two 16mm movies in college who, for some reason, thinks it's really important to distinct himself from me by calling me a "videomaker" or "video artist" when I call myself a filmmaker. And if I show any annoyance, he says "If you're so adamant about shooting digital, why do you call yourself a filmmaker, and call your videos 'films'? You're a videomaker." It's not the term that annoys me, it's the condescending attitude. I know quite a few asshats who think they're geniuses because they shoot on film, as opposed to video, which, according to them is "not serious". It really bugs me. I'm a filmmaker. I don't care if there's an emulsion, or a bunch of pixels, or a bird inside of a box, etching the images with it's beak.
Click to expand...

Well, if he refers to himself as a filmmaker, you can always tell him to put "amateur" in front of "filmmaker" if he's ONLY shooting on 16mm. :thumbsup:

Hey, the only REAL film makers are Kodak, Fuji, Ilford, etc. :laugh:

TECHNICALLY, here's what video is: "a form of electronic moving image technology that uses a 15 kHz horizontal scan rate and a 50 or 60 Hz interlaced refresh rate." (from a broadcasting website). - i.e. television!

Anyway, this is kind of a lame arguement now. Only people who need to feel self-important would put another artist down because they think the medium they work in is superior to the other's.

And I would say this: it is a LOT more technically challenging to make "video" look decent than current "infinite" lattitude motion picture film stocks. My opinion; I'm sure some will argue.
 
The only film I deal with is at the bottom of my shower. I make money creating content and moving people with motion pictures.
 
I don't call myself either. What I call myself varies upon the project. For instance.

If i'm recording an event then I will call myself a videographer.

If i'm on set regardless of if it's film or video I call myself a Director of Photography.

The reason I dont call myself a filmmaker is because to me it insinuates that you are the person that actually creates the entire movie. I always talk about my "crew" when discussing "filmmaking" because I have "film crews".

And no I won't call it video crew if i'm shooting on video that's just stupid. My grip isn't any less of a grip because it's on digital versus film. The same goes for everybody on the set.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top