Were these music videos shot on Panasonics?

A

andrew00

Well-known member
Hey,

So I've been looking at shooting some music videos with my cameras (dvx, ex1) and trying to work out what camera most top videos were shot with - I naturally assumed it was all high end broadcast cameras costing a grand a day to rent.

However, I was watching some videos by Ace Norton and it seems to me in one he used a DVX100 and in another an HVX. This seemed strange to me as I expected to see a massive broadcast one, as I said, because the bands are major label artists.

Can you please take a look at the vids and see what you think:

- Bloc Party - Flux

Vid - http://youtube.com/watch?v=AulHrdaBGEU&feature=rec-fresh
Pics of DVX - http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/acenorton/IMG_0044.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/acenorton/IMG_0212.jpg

- HVX?

http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/acenorton/?action=view&current=IMG_0710.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/acenorton/IMG_0203.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/acenorton/IMG_0043.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/acenorton/DSC_0094.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/acenorton/DSC_0097.jpg

The above feature videos from Simian Mobile Disco and Mountain Goats amongst others.
 
I'm not sure, but I got the impression a lot of his newer stuff was shot on the HVX. I had seen those photos before and was excited to see the HVX was being used on such cool projects.

My guess is that he might be shooting behind the scenes or shooting a second unit shot for the big destruction scene in the Flux video on the DVX, but that video definitely looks like the HVX. My impression is that he directs but doesn't usually operate on his videos, so that DVX might just be for some backup or something.

Granted that's mostly speculation, but the videos look like HVX and there are a lot of photos of someone else actually operating, so I'm just guesstimating...
 
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1JtmeXL8-iI

Aye, in the video above you can see some filming and unless my eyes deceive me that's an HVX.

Is it wrong that I'm surprised a well known director is using an HVX and not some big name camera?

I mean, the HVX is an awesome camera, and I also appreciate there's more to the videos than just the hunk of metal used to film it, but I would have expected a big involved shoot to use something of recognised broadcast quality, and my mind, perhaps wrongly, would not have thought the HVX would be of that quality.
 
I was pretty surprised too. I'm not sure the budgets on Ace's videos, but my guess is in the $15,000 range. They seem to be pretty much released on the web, so I guess the HVX is a good choice. Some of his older ones are on film, but nothing recent. I would have expected super 16 or an F-900 or something, but it's encouraging to see an HVX being used...
 
dont get hung up on what cameras are used for what. a good shooter can make a perfectly fine video on an old vhs (or even a fisher price kiddie camera) its just a matter of the right tool for the right job.
 
wgzn said:
dont get hung up on what cameras are used for what. a good shooter can make a perfectly fine video on an old vhs (or even a fisher price kiddie camera) its just a matter of the right tool for the right job.
Click to expand...

Remeber the PXL2000? If you can make anything look good on that. You are Kubrick.
 
Oh I agree, it's like when people talk about film look as if it's hitting a few knobs on final cut when in reality the best way to achieve such a thing is with good lighting and planning etc.

But what I meant was, in some of those shots there's expensive cranes, the Bloc Party set took two days to build etc so must have a fair number of people on it, and for all that money having been spent you'd expect to see a camera of similar expensive tastes.
 
Aye I appreciate the production value isn't influenced largely by the camera alone.

Actually that's another thing I'm curious about, ok for smaller budget music videos the director is often the guy doing everything, but on the large budget videos, how much involvement does the director have in post?

I.E. Is he there at the screen playing with the mac or is he.she just telling other specialists what to do?

In other words, would Ace himself be whacking out all the green screen stuff and the colour correction and all that stuff or is he more a superviser.
 
I think at the sort of medium level it really depends. The low budgets, directors often do it all, the mediums (like bigger indie-type bands that Ace directs) it depends, and the Dave Myers and Hype Williams-level directors mostly don't do their own post. Directors are usually involved in the post, but don't do the physical editing most of the time. Similarly the DP will have a say in the telecine or color correction work in post. It seems like now this sort of depends since even a really big director can post if they'd like, but typically they don't.
 
Ah so it's less that the directors do less as the budget goes up and more that the company producing gets bigger and so has specialist staff on board to do the grading, ae work etc, to a standard that is unrealistic for the director to be able to do.

That being said, if I were to try to build a skillset to place myself in that mid-budget Ace type level of director (naturally working my way there, but we're talking skillset wise here), what might I need to learn software wise?

I appreciate a lot of this is creativity and people skills and all that, but I'm talking specifically software.

I'm currently great with FCP and magic bullets, alright with motion and know a bit of colour. Also good with photoshop, though only really editing still images, not necessarily 3d or video/animation etc.

I don't know AE at all.

For example if I were to create videos like these:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bhPh6ou8Kbk
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Lq1KXTDamms&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=CgGItLYyBQ0

What would I use?

I know I could use FCP for the editing, but I guess since the videos get a bit complicated that won't do.

I'm thinking AE? I'm prepared to go on a big AE learning spree but don't want to go mental if it's not suitable.

I guess I don't know how to create the backgrounds they're using in these videos, so can AE do all of that? And then naturally there's the editing of everything once they've been created.
 
Check this article:

http://toolfarm.com/FOTC.html

Those guys do effects for Ace Norton and tons of other music videos and I'd bet AE is their workhorse.
If you're interested in effects, animated backgrounds, compositing, etc., it's a great thing to learn. It lets you do some really high-end stuff without paying an insane amount of money. Combining it with plugins and some other selected applications, it really can't be touched for 2D work. Where it has weaknesses (tracking, for example), there are programs to fill in the gaps. It also will help you learn all of the basic operations that you might need, like keying, roto, 2D (and 2.5D) compositing, etc. that is applicable in everything from Shake to Flame.


Check here:

http://www.graymachine.com/content/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection&id=4&Itemid=31

There's a free tutorial that will help you create some of those Ladyhawke-style graphics. A lot of the Teenagers video is stock footage (explosions etc.), but they've been keyed out and inserted over the backgrounds. Similarly, the Ladyhawke and Hadouken! videos are keyed footage inserted over backgrounds. AE will let you key and composite like this, and you can generate all of the blurs and lighting effects either within the program or with plugins. The backgrounds in some of these are pretty simple sometimes, they're just combined nicely and they use a lot of practical elements (rather than being generated entirely in post).
 
Thanks for the replies, I've been learning AE a little and reckon I'll pick up a training dvd, I see lynda and total training do them, which should help!

So, just so I see I'm getting it, really it's about two things 1) having the imagination and 2) knowing how to make that in reality.

So in the Teenagers video, if I'm getting it right - the human shots would've been green screen shot then keyed and feathered and resized to place where they do.

The backgrounds would've been a number of layers, e.g. some still images that were animated or 3d animations etc or stock footage that was brought in and animated in AE.

Then the bit at the end where all the heads are rotating can be done again in AE by taking one head, setting a rotation with its time and speed etc, then just copying that over and over, resizing and positioning these new layers so they're in line then setting their rotation/animation to be equal to the first layer - aka the parent - so they follow everything that it does - so when the person's head version 1 rotates, so do all over versions.

What about the sweet looking 80s graphics when it zooms into a mountain, could that be AE created too or would that be stock or something?

Cheers, this is super informative for a humble leaner like me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top