Should I rent Varicam or buy HPX500?

Iraq in Fragments was shot on Mini DV, and projected, looked amazing. Amazing enough to win an Oscar. I would say that it was definitely considered a "real" movie by audiences who saw it in theaters and by the Academy voters, wouldn't you? You are looking for a stock answer with a question that has too many variables to consider. I would say HPX500 footage is capable of looking great projected, if you are capable of making it look great. Lighting, lens quality, filtration, camera movement and composition, post workflow and film out, etc. all play a large part in the overall projected quality equation.

FWIW, I have seen DBeta filmouts that I shot looks amazing on a 30' screen. Seeing S16 look blurry means that somebody blew it along the way, not that S16 cannot look like a "real" movie when projected. Same with the HVX, I have seen plenty of crappy looking HVX footage, projected or not, that would have looked crappy no matter how it was displayed.

It sounds as if you are looking for someone to tell you that the HPX500 can look as good as 35mm film when projected. I would vote for no, unless the 35mm film was not well shot. But the HPX500 is totally capable of looking killer when projected, if you are up to the task. Way too many variables to give you a pat answer.

I am sure that other DVXers could chime in on HVX and S16 and for that matter HPX500 footage that they have seen projected that looked good.

Dan
 
Indyreel said:
Still, no one has directly answered the question. Will an HPX500 production look high enough quality on the big screen to be considered a "real" movie. I have seen super16 (looked blurry) and hvx (looked pale and dim) on the big screen and I want to know if the 500 will look better than that.
Click to expand...

Not sure what your defenition of a real movie is, everyones is different.

Yes, the hpx 500 will look better than an hvx on the big screen but it won't make your movie better.
 
The 16mm probably looked blurry because the focus was off. Same if a RED originated a soft focus film. Or if a Genesis was soft. Operator error.

Yes, an HPX500 will project well. The Varicam will have more dynamic range for you to play with though.
 
puredrifting said:
Iraq in Fragments was shot on Mini DV, and projected, looked amazing. Amazing enough to win an Oscar. I would say that it was definitely considered a "real" movie by audiences who saw it in theaters and by the Academy voters, wouldn't you? You are looking for a stock answer with a question that has too many variables to consider. I would say HPX500 footage is capable of looking great projected, if you are capable of making it look great. Lighting, lens quality, filtration, camera movement and composition, post workflow and film out, etc. all play a large part in the overall projected quality equation.

FWIW, I have seen DBeta filmouts that I shot looks amazing on a 30' screen. Seeing S16 look blurry means that somebody blew it along the way, not that S16 cannot look like a "real" movie when projected. Same with the HVX, I have seen plenty of crappy looking HVX footage, projected or not, that would have looked crappy no matter how it was displayed.

It sounds as if you are looking for someone to tell you that the HPX500 can look as good as 35mm film when projected. I would vote for no, unless the 35mm film was not well shot. But the HPX500 is totally capable of looking killer when projected, if you are up to the task. Way too many variables to give you a pat answer.

I am sure that other DVXers could chime in on HVX and S16 and for that matter HPX500 footage that they have seen projected that looked good.

Dan
Click to expand...

The oscar Iraq in fragments won was for cinematography, shows what someone who knows thier stuff can do with a $3k SD camera.
 
ChipG said:
The oscar Iraq in fragments won was for cinematography, shows what someone who knows thier stuff can do with a $3k SD camera.
Click to expand...

Iraq in Fragments was beautifully photographed (with a DVX100) but it did not win an Oscar for cinematography. It was nominated for Best Documentary. AlphaCine in Seattle handled the upres and output to film. Beautiful work by them, and James Longley of course.

I just got the HPX2700 today and have to say the images are stunning. I am upgrading from an HPX500 and to be honest my expectations were set somewhat low. After seeing just a few rough tests with the 2700, however, it is apparent the camera presents a huge jump in image quality. That being said, the HPX500 is an amazing value, especially with some really quality glass up front.

Peter
 
I'm sorry, a dvx100 won an oscar the year or two before for best cinematography. Got them mixed up.
 
Last edited:
Yes I can guarantee the hpx500 will give you that real movie feel if you put real movie money, preproduction, production, post production, marketing, distribution behind it. If you do all of those it will look like a real movie and be a real movie. The reason a lot of low budget stuff you see looks low budget is because they don't have 50k in the budget for a beauty pass on all actors close ups, days in a color correction facility with a seasoned professional. Most low budget put 90% of the budget up in front of the camera. I am not the biggest fan of hpx500 but I really feel as if iron man could have been shot on it minus the vfx scenes. It had a rough look. But Superman returns was the cleanest movie I have ever seen in my life and I don't think the hpx500 could have pulled that off. So buy a hpx and learn to use it so well you start to brag about it. Then shoot your movie with a huge budget and experienced professionals helping you and I guarantee it will look like a real movie. Hell it may even turn into a real movie. Peace
 
Yes, the HPX500 is entirely suited for large screen projection, even with the relatively affordable CAC lenses... Again, given that the subject matter fits the look the camera can deliver... It's way better than the best thing available outside of 35 only a few years ago. The 2700 is better, and it should be, it costs over 4 times as much.

There's another thing you should consider - Most of the bigger festivals offer the option to project in HDCAM, and some are beginning to offer Blu Ray as well.. Also, many of the multiplexes now have quality projectors for the material they run before the movie (not the local ads, the pieces that look like ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT)...

The smaller festivals are leaning toward DVD, some BetaSP and generally don't project 35 anyway.

So it is not necessary to fork over your own money for a 35 blowup for festivals... Get in a festival, project in HDCAM (minimal cost compared to a 35 print) and if you get a distributor interested, let them pay for the 35 blowup.

Also, many very good looking films have been shot in super16, including Altman's JIMMY DEAN, JIMMY DEAN. And many very bad looking films have been shot in 35.

As I said at the beginning of this thread, if the potential distributor is nit-picking the marginal resolution issues from the 500, you're in trouble going in. Believe me, they're more interested in story and quality of the talent on the screen.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top