are we all filmmakers now?

As for grannies, though childless, Kathryn Bigelow, at 58 could be a grandmother (and not due to a Bristol Palin type situation).
She could have had a kid at 29, who could have had a kid at 29... voila- Grannie Bigelow!

And no less a Lothario than JR Hudson wouldn't mind, ahh... interlacing with Bigelow. :happy:
 
Cranky said:
24p is still used largely because it can be converted rather easily into 50 and 60 fps. Aside of that, why on Planet Earth one would shoot a wildlife documentary in HD in stroby 24p? I bet James Cameron would never do that. Um, at least I hope so.
Click to expand...

You are looking at this issue strictly on a personal level. It's one thing to not like the "look" of 24p, its another thing entirely to want it abolished. Makes me think that you are purposely trying to ruffle feathers, no? :happy:

You may not like the aesthetic that 24p provides but even you cannot argue that it does in fact provide a certain aesthetic. Good or bad. So, by admitting that you do not like 24p, specifically in a Wildlife Documentary, you are conceding the fact that different frame rates for different shooting situations do matter. And in that regard you'd also have to concede that for a filmmaker, 24p is a valid choice to achieve a particular look for which he or she strives. Sure, you may personally not appreciate the look but you can't argue that for others the frame rate is as important a production design decision as is lighting, shot selection, color correction, exposure, or even film stock.
 
Rick Meyer said:
You are looking at this issue strictly on a personal level. It's one thing to not like the "look" of 24p, its another thing entirely to want it abolished. Makes me think that you are purposely trying to ruffle feathers, no? :happy:
Click to expand...
I do like the look of 24p. I don't know why Barry thinks that I am a 24p hater. I like its look for feature films. But when I watch a documentary shot with long DOF I want all the fluidity that I can have. Same with traditional TV shows like the proverbial travel shows, why they suddenly switch from reality look to movie look?

Rick Meyer said:
Sure, you may personally not appreciate the look but you can't argue that for others the frame rate is as important a production design decision as is lighting, shot selection, color correction, exposure, or even film stock.
Click to expand...
Sure it may be important for them, but I am a viewer of their final result. If they shoot ART for themselves then fine, let them use whatever you want. But if they shoot for the masses then have to consider what is best for the public, not for themselves.
 
Last edited:
Cranky said:
Sure it may be important for them, but I am a viewer of their final result. If they shoot ART for themselves then fine, let them use whatever you want. But if they shoot for the masses then have to consider what is best for the public, not for themselves.
Click to expand...

Did you really just call yourself the "masses?" Haha. Keep it up buddy. :evil:

Don't make a "mass" out of yourself. :D
 
Oh ****. Come on!

This is elitism pure and simple, and nothing else.

No, an editor is not someone who's worked for years and years. A filmmaker is not someone who's dedicated a lifetime to making motion pictures. A writer isn't a person who's published and reknowned, and an actor isn't a purebred third generation 'actohr'.
**** that. Seriously.

If you have a camera and you tell stories with that camera, no matter how sucky they are or how little experience you have - that makes you a filmmaker. Even if you just post them on YouTube.
You tell stories on paper? You're a writer. Even if no one will ever read them or like them.
You like putting home family movies together in iMovie? That makes you an editor.

I'm directing my first feature film now, and a few of the roles are played by friends of mine with little or no real ambition to make a career in movies. But on my set, these people are actors and they get the same amount of respect as the established ones do. In fact, it's a safe bet amateur actors work harder for less reward generally, and should actually recieve MORE respect for that.

Everything else is just a question of what level you're on, and what your ambition is.


Besides, how do you know Grandma wasn't shopping a camera for a birthday present?
 
JavaExMachina said:
Oh poo poo. Come on!

This is elitism pure and simple, and nothing else.

No, an editor is not someone who's worked for years and years. A filmmaker is not someone who's dedicated a lifetime to making motion pictures. A writer isn't a person who's published and reknowned, and an actor isn't a purebred third generation 'actohr'.
poo poo that. Seriously.

If you have a camera and you tell stories with that camera, no matter how sucky they are or how little experience you have - that makes you a filmmaker. Even if you just post them on YouTube.
You tell stories on paper? You're a writer. Even if no one will ever read them or like them.
You like putting home family movies together in iMovie? That makes you an editor.

I'm directing my first feature film now, and a few of the roles are played by friends of mine with little or no real ambition to make a career in movies. But on my set, these people are actors and they get the same amount of respect as the established ones do. In fact, it's a safe bet amateur actors work harder for less reward generally, and should actually recieve MORE respect for that.

Everything else is just a question of what level you're on, and what your ambition is.


Besides, how do you know Grandma wasn't shopping a camera for a birthday present?
Click to expand...

I agree with all of that. I think that giving ourselves "permission" to do something creative is often the biggest and most difficult step. We sometimes make the mistake that the way we want to see ourselves is something that someone else bestows on us.
 
Cranky, why don't you just vote in the most powerful way that a consumer - of media, or of any other product, at all - possibly can? Don't buy, subscribe to or in any way involve yourself, with it.

If some product was originated in a format that you don't care to watch - don't watch it.

The nice thing about this solution is that no one else has to hear about it...
 
I figured I'd provide a copy of the rules with a magnifying glass and some Carol Burnett references to appeal to them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top