Burt Reynolds Introduces the NEW Bandit Trans Am | FS700. A7s, 7Q+

A

ashclever

Well-known member
Hey Guys,

Fun project. About 65% FS700 and 35% on the A7s being used on a DJI Ronin-M. Both Cameras rigged with 7Q's filming in ProRes.

I only had 8 days to edit once I was done shooting so it could be premiered with Trans Am Worldwide's font door booth at the New York Auto Show that began yesterday.

Hope ya guys enjoy it. I am still loving the FS700. Happy to answer any questions.

 
Last edited:
FWIW, the car made Fox News (auto) off the NYC Show.

And I'll skip my celeb brush story with Burt Reynolds from 1993.
 
You had me at "Burt Reynolds Introduces..."

Scrape the smile off my face!
If I had stoopid money I WOULD buy one of these. I drive a Charger but I'd trade it in like a flash!

And you nailed this piece. Every shot was nice. Every shot stuck to the feel you created. As they say in basketball - "Nothin' but NET"!
 
Thanks a lot guys, really happy you enjoyed it!

Really didn't want to misrepresent Burt and the legacy he created with that car.
 
The video has been linked to on several major news sites like Esquire and Digital Trends.
 
Yeah it is pretty exciting! It has been an interesting experience though....lol. Maybe this will start an interesting discussion on piracy vs advertising boost.

While the Youtube Version has now broken a million plays in the 6 days of it's release we are very happy. But, I came across my video on Facebook's player uploaded by someone else! I know this happens but a first for me...that I know of.

So it was ripped off Youtube and reposted on their facebook page. At the time I found it on Sunday (3rd day of release) there were over 2.5 million plays on that version while we had just hit 250,000 on our Youtube. Now there is close to 9,000,000 plays on this facebook upload. It had so much momentum we did not want to make him to yank it. I mean, we are talking about 200,000 shares floating around with a running advertisment on everyone's pages.

I have been in communication with the Facebook uploader/poster who did this and an agreement has been reached for him to never repost anything of ours again but allow him to leave this upload. Over the weekend it was steady on the TRENDING NOW section of Facebook. This is a very mixed feeling decision....but ultimately the bottom line is that the advertisement is getting a ton of exposure and that is what both I and Trans Am Worldwide wanted to have happen. He did leave all title credits on the video, which if he had ripped off would have been the deal breaker.

Then I just saw FOX SPORTS grabbed my video and re-cut it to a minute and half with their own voiceover to throw it on their facebook....and no footage credit for myself or my production company RoughCUT Productions. Lots of mixed emotions with excitement and annoyances.

Facebook most definitely supports videos uploaded on it's player much much more than posted content to external links.....but where do these Facebook posts end up at the end of it all vs the much better archived Youtube option? In the attempt of trying to keep plays gathering in one location, via Youtube, we missed out on the personal upload experience of Facebook, lesson learned, have to do both, even if Facebooks player has worse quality and much worse archiving ability to show popularity. It hurts a bit.

What do you guys think regarding the pros and cons of this kind of piracy working out the way it did and/or Youtube vs Facebook on hosting videos? Wow, you actually read all the way to the end of this....someone must have pirated your video too! LOL
 
ashclever said:
... What do you guys think regarding the pros and cons of this kind of piracy working out the way it did and/or Youtube vs Facebook on hosting videos? Wow, you actually read all the way to the end of this....someone must have pirated your video too! LOL
Click to expand...
There are several issues here.

1) If the hosting channel has a revenue sharing deal with YouTube and FB just rips it, then it can be a significant revenue loss to the channel owner, making this an easy legal case for the copyright violation.

2) If the channel and the video belongs to the owner of the advertised product (i.e., the Trans Am license holders), then, for them this is a fantastic viral free-be. If, as an example, this was a movie ad and it received a multitude of plays off any hosting site, the movie producers would be ecstatic, as their goal is for their product to be seen by as many eyeballs as possible.

3) For a production company hired for the shoot, this is a tremendous advertisement. The only problem may arise - once again, referring to the first point - if there's a revenue sharing deal based on a number of hits/views. If the compensation was a flat rate, then the production company should be as ecstatic as the content owners. It's free promotion and the top line on anyone's resume.

PS. When I "hung out" with Burt, he was driving SL 500 convertible.
 
I thought you did a good job on the editing of the voice over. Kept a lot of mystery in the beginning and the subject nicely revealed itself. A lot to be proud of in this video.
I do feel that the image looks a little thin at times. Blacks don't look like they have been equalized across the whole piece. Some images also have a funky cross over in them with a lot of over saturation going on and yet are still lacking in the blacks. While this is probably intentional, it's a bit strange mixed in with more normal color and dynamic ranges.

Screen Shot 2016-03-31 at 7.48.20 AM.jpg
 
Last edited:
yoclay said:
I thought you did a good job on the editing of the voice over. Kept a lot of mystery in the beginning and the subject nicely revealed itself. A lot to be proud of in this video.
I do feel that the image looks a little thin at times. Blacks don't look like they have been equalized across the whole piece. Some images also have a funky cross over in them with a lot of over saturation going on and yet are still lacking in the blacks. While this is probably intentional, it's a bit strange mixed in with more normal color and dynamic ranges.


View attachment 112042
Click to expand...


I understand where you're coming from. There are a handful....or maybe even a few more than that, of shots I wish I had more time to make more adjustments to in the color grade. I was originally supposed to have 12 days to edit the whole video from when we shot it. On the 5th day I was told they needed it in 3 days! I was already working night and day on it before I found out that I just lost 4 days of planned editing time. Other than having an assistent for one day to synch clips and sound for 80% of the footage, I edited and color graded the piece in 8 days.

I also had no choice in timing when Mr. Reynolds would be available for the shoot, of which I only had him for 3 hours between lunch and other celebrity visits who stopped by to see him during the shoot. So this footage of the car was at the peak of the day for sunlight asking the most dynamic range possible and the 7Q/monitor even with sunhood is almost impossible to see in these conditions....hence, the raw footage of the drive shots where often pretty overexposed. It greatly affected the end grade I was able to pull off some of those areas....this shot in particular was really hot. I do wish I had brought down the saturation more here but the lifted blacks are intentional to show more of the cars lines which get totally lost in once I begin to crush blacks in such high dynamic range section that was shot improperly to begin with. This was the last part of the shoot, 10 minutes drive time and Mr. Reynolds left immediately after so I didn't even get a chance to review my monitor to see what we had gotten. Little bit of a bummer but hey, that's just the way it goes sometimes.





DLD said:
There are several issues here.

1) If the hosting channel has a revenue sharing deal with YouTube and FB just rips it, then it can be a significant revenue loss to the channel owner, making this an easy legal case for the copyright violation.

2) If the channel and the video belongs to the owner of the advertised product (i.e., the Trans Am license holders), then, for them this is a fantastic viral free-be. If, as an example, this was a movie ad and it received a multitude of plays off any hosting site, the movie producers would be ecstatic, as their goal is for their product to be seen by as many eyeballs as possible.

3) For a production company hired for the shoot, this is a tremendous advertisement. The only problem may arise - once again, referring to the first point - if there's a revenue sharing deal based on a number of hits/views. If the compensation was a flat rate, then the production company should be as ecstatic as the content owners. It's free promotion and the top line on anyone's resume.

PS. When I "hung out" with Burt, he was driving SL 500 convertible.
Click to expand...


Number 1 on this list is not our situation so it sounds like we in agreement that ultimately, by far the pros outweigh the cons.

So you used hang with the Bandit, NICE!
 
Last edited:
ash-

nice job on the piece.

and don't get me started on my burt reynolds production fandango story!

as for re-branding your content without permission or authorization,

i would think about a lawyer letter to fox sports noting ownership.

i'm just saying.

be well.

rob
smalltalk.productions
 
ashclever said:
... So you used hang with the Bandit, NICE!
Click to expand...
Hah! Not quite. This was during his "Hearts Afire" days. He used to frequent an electronics store where I was working. It wasn't far from the studios and we had quite a few celebs as regular customers. I met him a few times there, a little small talk, had to carry stuff out to his car. The passing pedestrians are whispering, "Is that Burt Reynolds?" Even in LA, people were smitten.

From the later accounts that made it out to the public at large, he was having a lot of personal problems then. I'll leave it at that.
 
Saw Smokey and The Bandit for the first time a few weeks ago. About as deep as a paper plate but it sure is a fun movie. Everyone looks like they had a blast making it. Definitely some kind of redneck masterpiece.
 
Batutta said:
Saw Smokey and The Bandit for the first time a few weeks ago...
Click to expand...
A few months ago, I was at a supermarket with a friend. As we were going through the checkout line, I noticed some tabloid rag with Robin Wright on the cover. I mentioned - one of those "retail in LA" stories - about meeting Robin once around the time she did "The Princess Bride". My friend, late 40's, looks at me in bewilderment, "I've never heard of the "Princess Bride". The checkout cashier and the bag girl laugh at us arguing. So, I ask them, "You surely heard of the "Princess Bride"?". - "Nope". Then snicker. "Is that an old movie?" - "1987" - "Hahahahahahaha. We've not seen anything made before the year two thousand". I turn back to my friend, "You've surely seenold movies like "Casablanca"? - "Nope" - "But it's a classic!" - "When was it made?" - "1942" - "In black and white?" - "Yes" - "Thanks but I am not interested".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top