Any camera is good enough - the feel good myth

[Guest]

Just because you can use any camera to make a good movie, doesn't mean any camera can shoot any style, and especially not every circumstance.


Two films which are somewhat similar, had dramatically different results. "Like Crazy"(LC) and "And While We Were Here" (AWWWH). Both films look decidedly dslr-ish, yet only LC works well.

The cinematogrpahy and compositions of AWWWH were stellar, but the camera just couldn't keep up with the demands of the style. Moire', rolling shutter, shadow noise, crappy highlights all stood out in a bad way.

In contrast, the raw cinema verite' style in LC wasn't adversly effected by the the 7d and cinestyle. Even with smashed highlights and ugly clipping, the life of the imagery wasn't hindered. It may have even been helped by the dslr, for the real-ness psychological factor.


I think projects like AWWWH and "Upsteam Color" would have benefitted from being shot on Alexa or film. I think long gone are the days were shooting something on dslr could make a movie go viral. But we are also close to the days were a dslr can shoot to nearly the level of alexa/epic.

Anyways, just foood for thought. A project's shooting style is going to be intertwined with the camera, and some DP's just can't work with certain cameras.

 

[Isaac_Brody]

A project's shooting style is going to be intertwined with the camera, and some DP's just can't work with certain cameras.

I would reframe this to say that a projects shooting style is going to be intertwined with its budget, and many DP's will work with the camera that the budget dictates. Budget determines most decisions for what you see on set, and DP's work within those constraints to tell the story within those limits.

some DP's just can't work with certain cameras.

It's nice to be Roger Deakins, but I would say many can't afford not to work with certain cameras.

 

[Gillvane]

Just because you can use any camera to make a good movie, doesn't mean any camera can shoot any style, and especially not every circumstance.


Two films which are somewhat similar, had dramatically different results. "Like Crazy"(LC) and "And While We Were Here" (AWWWH). Both films look decidedly dslr-ish, yet only LC works well.

The cinematogrpahy and compositions of AWWWH were stellar, but the camera just couldn't keep up with the demands of the style. Moire', rolling shutter, shadow noise, crappy highlights all stood out in a bad way.

In contrast, the raw cinema verite' style in LC wasn't adversly effected by the the 7d and cinestyle. Even with smashed highlights and ugly clipping, the life of the imagery wasn't hindered. It may have even been helped by the dslr, for the real-ness psychological factor.


I think projects like AWWWH and "Upsteam Color" would have benefitted from being shot on Alexa or film. I think long gone are the days were shooting something on dslr could make a movie go viral. But we are also close to the days were a dslr can shoot to nearly the level of alexa/epic.

Anyways, just foood for thought. A project's shooting style is going to be intertwined with the camera, and some DP's just can't work with certain cameras.

From the trailers I thought AWWWH looked slightly better because the skin tones were nicer. The exterior scenes in LC weren't bad, but the interiors were just orange. Not warm, but orange which I did not like.

But if you stole the eyes of God and used them as lenses in your camera I still would rather go to the dentist than sit through either one of these films.

 

[Guest]

From the trailers I thought AWWWH looked slightly better because the skin tones were nicer. The exterior scenes in LC weren't bad, but the interiors were just orange. Not warm, but orange which I did not like.

But if you stole the eyes of God and used them as lenses in your camera I still would rather go to the dentist than sit through either one of these films.

hence why they had no budget and were shot on dslr. haha.