BusGirl

Danilo Del Tufo

Danilo Del Tufo

Well-known member
I just found Busgirl link in quicktime player (advertising mode)! It's shot with Fx1 and Micro35:

http://72.41.206.35/Busgirl/Busgirl.html

Screen grab from Busgirl, I've made some cc to homage the director! I'm very happy for the release of his work, I've found various clips some months ago in Micro35 forum. Truely Indie Filmaker Power!

 
Last edited:
Neat, I remember seeing some footage awhile back of one of the scenes from that movie. Looks very filmic except for the lighting in some areas. Looks really good otherwise, though.
 
Truly professional. I wonder what it would have looked like without the CC.

The Micro35 costs about half the price of the camera itsself! This sucks big time...
 
Last edited:
It looks soft...
I'm not impressed with the micro35. It's either a crummy dop causing this or the adapter itself.

I wish somebody like Mcgregor could do some shooting with this thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Angrius said:
It looks soft...
I'm not impressed with the micro35. It's either a crummy dop causing this or the adapter itself.

I wish somebody like Mcgregor could do some shooting with this thing.
Click to expand...

Why does every see Mcgregor as an Fx1 God.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
First of all, I don't see anybody as a "God".
and the guy above me is correct. He's one of the only people that I know around here that can make this camera look good. I've seen some other great postings on dvinfo with some great footage.

Here's the problem. Most people on here can't light a scene. This is a perfect example of that.
Other than that, the 35mm adapter is garbage compared to the G35 or the shooter doesn't know what to do with the lens mounted on this thing and doesn't understand how to light.

This video is hardly amazing in my eyes. It looks like it could have been shot with a Canon Elura.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
THis is surprisingly sharp for a dof adapter... Is it soft? Maybe it's because I've been looking at SD footage from the DVX with DOF adapters. It still looks nice and crisp to me. Actually, some shots are pretty soft... This is nothing like an Elura -- although the motion looks a little videoish.
 
I've seen the trailer and it has a couple of very cinematic shots and some really videoish shots too. I didn't like most of the way it was lit though (just a matter of personal taste). The girls' acting didn't do much for me either. Never the less I'm curious to see it. Shooting a serious feature length is an achievement on it's own.
 
vincent_price said:
I've cc the grab... just 4 fun... :costumed-smiley-047 :costumed-smiley-047
Click to expand...

I like your green-red cc more for this grab, but of course it depends on the style of the film as a whole...
 
I can tell by the trailer this movie wont have a really interesting plot. And alot of it looked videoish. which also makes it look alot less professional, and also makes all the acting skills cheesy.
 
I think it's sad that people think that something shot on video or that looks videoish looks less professional. Before this new generation of cameras came out, when the XL1 and the pd150 ruled, so many cool and very stylistic feature films were made on video. Of course, almost a century of tv has got the viewers used to equating "film look" = professional, but I've seen some real stinkers made on film and some real amazing thing made on video. If "Clockwork Orange" had been shot on video would you say it is crap just because it looks videoish? If everybody was so close minded there would be no point doing what most of us are doing here at the forum...after almost all of us are shooting with video. With that logic the only way we would be able to make movies would be with a film camera...but I think I speak for millions of camcorder owners when I say this logic is not gonna fly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top