"A Verse Before Dying" - AF-100 Western Short

Great job everyone!

Great job everyone!

I thought you all did a great job, and congrats on the wrap! You all seemed to handle it very professionally in everything, prep, setup, shooting and editing. A well oiled machine! The turn around was fast!

The camera seemed to do everything it needed to, in the right hands it really delivers!

The end product was very entertaining, I loved it! Thanks for putting it out here!

The only thing i didn't care for was the ending, in terms of story arch it was there, but the delivery fell flat for me. From the point of drawing the gun out of the bible to the gathering of the horse it just felt dull. Perhaps if it was overcranked with some dramatic sound of the final gun shot continuing to ring for a bit or something it might have capped of better for me. But hey I'm young and crave the drama....

Anyways kudos and congrats to you all and your crew!

And I really love all the behind the scenes stuff that's coming out! Very educational!
 
Last edited:
And that is exactly why the actor nails the character. He is a priest, apparently with a dark past or maybe not. According to the stranger he did him some evil and that's why he came for revenge. Should the priest be all happy and nappy and colorful and whatever. Certainly not. And having the gun hidden like that in the bible certainly shows the priest's state of mind. Without more background into the characters and their stories is difficult, almost impossible, to make conclusive assessments about them. They all did their part very well. Congrats again.

My quibble is the whole backstory being told by the text, and the dialogue, and not by drama. I'd like to see some scenes pointing to that "dark past". Maybe that would make the actor's acting more convincing, since we, as viewers, know WHAT is he acting about.

Who is the protagonist, the boy or the priest? The whole solution of the story happens a little too fast, and I'd like to see some clues of the priest coming up with the plan, and deciding to give in his life up for his crimes of the past. I think that would make the critiques about if he should be stone-faced or not go away. Giving us some more emotional data about his journey. More scenes with him and the boy, the moment he decides to die, etc.

And the bible, as a script device, should have a bigger part in the first act more than "he didn't always carry that book" (once again in the dialogue, even though elegantly) - in my opinion.

I'd love to see some more action in the blocking of the last scene, and have more suspense BEFORE we already can guess the gun is in the bible.

I have huge constrains about the look of the piece - production design, cinematography, make-up, wardrobe, etc. since, for me, westerns should be much more gritty, BUT I believe this is a personal opinion, and if that's the vision of the director, there is no right or wrong, so I'll abstain about getting in those details.

Anyway, that was a great job, and I believe the clean, romanticized look of the film, reflects, in some unconscious way, the level of enjoyment carried out during production. It even looks childish, sometimes, and I think it relates to the fact it's a bunch of grown-ups playing and enjoying doing what they love, like they were little kids. Hard not to respect that.
 
And good catch on the "smoke" in the gun-lowering shot. That is, I believe, a filter reflection, and while we had a "clean" take of that, I didn't like the performances as much as I did in the take we used.
SM

I saw that too....looked like smoke without a shot :-) once more the sound was really really good! :thumbsup:
 
I am saying nothing about the story, the acting or even about the blocking/framing or sound/music - simply because that's missing the point. The point is what you can get out of the camera image-wise, and how it is to shoot with it. Re: the latter, we must go by the reports, since you can't figure that out from the film - and by all accounts, the af100 is great to work with in the field. That leaves image quality - and really the highest compliment I can think of is that I now have ZERO hesitation in using the af100 for my upcoming feature. That's all I needed to know - and I thank all involved profusely, for making this film and especially for the wonderful and informative commentary and info regarding lenses and so forth. We all owe you a huge debt of gratitude. And, the old adage still holds: "work with the best" - as this film clearly shows. I can only dream to have this caliber of people involved in my production - maybe someday, when I have a proper budget :).
 
I am saying nothing about the story, the acting or even about the blocking/framing or sound/music - simply because that's missing the point. The point is what you can get out of the camera image-wise, and how it is to shoot with it. Re: the latter, we must go by the reports, since you can't figure that out from the film - and by all accounts, the af100 is great to work with in the field. That leaves image quality - and really the highest compliment I can think of is that I now have ZERO hesitation in using the af100 for my upcoming feature. That's all I needed to know - and I thank all involved profusely, for making this film and especially for the wonderful and informative commentary and info regarding lenses and so forth. We all owe you a huge debt of gratitude. And, the old adage still holds: "work with the best" - as this film clearly shows. I can only dream to have this caliber of people involved in my production - maybe someday, when I have a proper budget :).

I'd be happy to work on your crew, Corpse. :D
 
Phew! Just read through the entire thread. Feels like I went on an incredible journey with you all (I'm sure it was better in person).

Anyway, great great work with this! It's really awesome to see a project like this come together, especially from a great group of people like you folks. I know it takes a lot of effort and time to not only do the project, but to also provide us with such a detailed look into the production details.

I've learned a lot from just this thread alone, so thanks for the insight and for the experience!
 
Hey Stephen and Gang,
Great job on the short. I watched it yesterday and had a few questions (I'm gonig off memory at this point.) Was there some sort of strobing of the light on the beginning push in on the bad guy? Seemed like the light coming in from the window was pulsing or something? Other thing was when the boy was running it seems like he's in a blue-ish circle. Almost like a weird vignette. I noticed it again when you posted the grabs w/ the lens notes. Lastly, when the bad guy lowers the gun there seems to be a reflection that looks like smoke, is that from a filter or something? That's all I remember.

Thanks again for taking the time and introducing the cam to everyone in something other than a test. Very helpful. Also, Matt Gettemeier is a G!

T

wind was pushing the mirror board a little. The chrome gun was reflecting off the promist.
 
Thanks Matt. Again, great job with the sound. Just hearing you describe how you work I know how much easier it makes it on the edit when the sound is great.
 
Looks fantastic overall! Will need to watch a few more times. There were a few shots here and there that I wasn't crazy about, but that had to do with the lens selection and not the cinematography by any means. What lens what used on the opening shot of the bad guy from behind at the table? Something just looked really "off" about it to me. I think it was really only the saloon stuff that bothered me a little. That and the wide lens going over the well, I just can't dig the distortion personally.

Hate to sound like I'm bashing it, totally not, the work is fantastic! I applaud ever effort. I just want to understand the camera better. Would love a version with the lenses labeled. The dream stuff and all the outdoor stuff looks incredible.
 
Looks fantastic overall! Will need to watch a few more times. There were a few shots here and there that I wasn't crazy about, but that had to do with the lens selection and not the cinematography by any means. What lens what used on the opening shot of the bad guy from behind at the table? Something just looked really "off" about it to me. I think it was really only the saloon stuff that bothered me a little. That and the wide lens going over the well, I just can't dig the distortion personally.

Hate to sound like I'm bashing it, totally not, the work is fantastic! I applaud ever effort. I just want to understand the camera better. Would love a version with the lenses labeled. The dream stuff and all the outdoor stuff looks incredible.

Zeiss 18mm Compact Prime on that shot. As for the rest (or at least a bunch more of them)…
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-NOW-ONLINE!&p=2195538&viewfull=1#post2195538
…and…
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-NOW-ONLINE!&p=2195543&viewfull=1#post2195543
…and…
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-NOW-ONLINE!&p=2195547&viewfull=1#post2195547
 
jarek i think lens selection IS cinematography. or rather a part of it

I know...but you get what I mean. Should I have been more specific in saying "camera work" ? Anyway...the point of the film was to test the camera, with different types of lenses for one. If they were going for perfection they would have used Zeiss Ultra Primes or a set of Cookes or something. I expected some shots to look better than others. I just pointed out a shot that I particularly didn't like the "look" of and want to know why I didn't like it. Probably the only shot I wasn't sold on.
 
i feel you. i don't like that shot either. i think it's the framing though not the lens. (if you're talking about that establishing shot from behind the bad guy at the table).

i think PERHAPS the framing is awkward due to piece of that window in top frame with the light coming. perhaps a lower camera placement that shows the window more in frame, compositionally speaking. i think the camera height is what's bothering me. i don't like the camera up that high. i could be wrong. can't quite figure it out.
 

Sweet! I didn't see those.

Is it weird I prefer the look of the Zeiss ZFs over the Zeiss CPs? Or maybe I'm just telling myself that cause it's all I can afford right now? :D

The 50-300mm is killer by the way. How much does one of those run? Quick google search didn't help me.
 
Sweet! I didn't see those.

Is it weird I prefer the look of the Zeiss ZFs over the Zeiss CPs? Or maybe I'm just telling myself that cause it's all I can afford right now? :D

The 50-300mm is killer by the way. How much does one of those run? Quick google search didn't help me.

It's not weird at all. In fact, I prefer the Zeiss ZFs myself, but that might be because they're mine. :D

As for the Nikon 50-300mm, I think you can pick them up on eBay for around $500.
 
Funny,

That opening shot is literally my favorite shot in the movie. I find that one the most cinematic.

And about the promist, the promist only was used on interior shots of the bar.
 
Back
Top