Cinema-quality movie shot entirely with iPhone

The big hurdle we all have is not lack of good low-cost cameras, it's money for location and lights and production design. So yeah, Iphone movie with evocative locations and lighting and sets and costumes, of course looks pretty good.

+1
 
Has anyone ever seen 720p projected in a theatre? Or how about an SD to film print? It's really not as bad as you think. 'Cinema Quality' has much more to do with a cinematic experience than just resolution. Things that encompass a cinematic experience include great cinematography, sound, acting, and editing, something that Park has apparently mastered. I'd love to see this film, and am tempted to fly to Seoul just to see it, if I had the time...

I would not be surprised if this short will be better than any other short by any other director, for the entire year. Parks movies are beyond good, they are some of the best ever made.

Word to what Kholi and Barry have been saying, always the voice of reason on these boards.

By the way, they shot the film with DoF adapters, much like how many of you still might. An average person can not tell the difference between 1080 and 720, with out A/B'ing many times. And also, most people cant tell the difference between 1080 and 2K, and so forth. This is a demonstration that its not the camera, but the filmmaker.

Hear, hear! To mirror a similar sentiment on a thread over at Reduser: If you gave an iPhone to Stanley Kubrick or Roger Deakins, they could wipe the floor with your average kid armed with two loaded Epics.

People who've invested heavily in gear abhor any shift towards technological equalization, even as slight as this. The film guys scoffed at the Red guys, the Red guys scoffed at the DSLR guys, and I wouldn't be surprised if the DSLR guys scoff at this. What's even more surprising is that anyone has time to get anything done through all their seething--not that any one here has body of work that Park has. There's a financial jealousy at work here causing wide-ranging ad hominem accusations of "scams" and "gimmicks", ultimately missing the real point of the artistic validity of the final product. It's immediately apparent when someone chooses to attack something without having the proper context in which to do so; a context gained by actually watching the film.
 
Last edited:
My Korean is pretty bad, but just a quick note on Korean names for those who are interested. Korean's written system is called Hangul, and the written system is broken into syllables. Most Koreans have a full name that consists of three syllables. The family name, or what we would call the 'last name', is always at the beginning of the spelling and consists of one syllable. While the 'given name', or what we would call the 'first name' consists of the last two syllables. So the director Park ChanWook's last name is Park, while his first name is ChanWook (or Chan-wook, or Chan Wook). And spelled like this in Hangul: 박찬욱. So 박 = Pak, and so on.
 
My Korean is pretty bad, but just a quick note on Korean names for those who are interested. Korean's written system is called Hangul, and the written system is broken into syllables. Most Koreans have a full name that consists of three syllables. The family name, or what we would call the 'last name', is always at the beginning of the spelling and consists of one syllable. While the 'given name', or what we would call the 'first name' consists of the last two syllables. So the director Park ChanWook's last name is Park, while his first name is ChanWook (or Chan-wook, or Chan Wook). And spelled like this in Hangul: 박찬욱. So 박 = Pak, and so on.

Yeah, I'm just confused on Korean honorifics. I think it's more respectful there to call someone by their last name.
 
What makes this whole thing even all the more amusing is that the main guy in the digital cinema technological know, Scott Billups, predicted in his book Digital Moviemaking 3.0 (2007) that due to Moore's Law filmmakers will be recording HD movies and editing them all on their iPhones. If any of you were in the music recording industry throughout the 90s, you know where this is headed. Cheaper computers and digital audio workstations decimated the thriving professional recording studio industry as bedroom studios quickly gained the same specs. It was unfathomable that digital recording technology would advance to the point that software could actually change the acoustics of the room you're recording in to sound exactly like anywhere else. What, you think that wont happen to lighting in 10 years time? If you think we're already through the 'paradigm shift', I LOL in your general direction. This film is just the tip of the iceberg that's going to ultimately seperate the artists from those strictly seeking a profit--because there simply wont be much of one to make.
 
My Korean is pretty bad, but just a quick note on Korean names for those who are interested. Korean's written system is called Hangul, and the written system is broken into syllables. Most Koreans have a full name that consists of three syllables. The family name, or what we would call the 'last name', is always at the beginning of the spelling and consists of one syllable. While the 'given name', or what we would call the 'first name' consists of the last two syllables. So the director Park ChanWook's last name is Park, while his first name is ChanWook (or Chan-wook, or Chan Wook). And spelled like this in Hangul: 박찬욱. So 박 = Pak, and so on.

Cool... I always call him Chan-wook Park because I find it weird to put the last name before, not really a costume around here.

And I'm on the lookout for a Korean teacher here in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, not easy to find at all. São Paulo would've been better.
 
Hear, hear! To mirror a similar sentiment on a thread over at Reduser: If you gave an iPhone to Stanley Kubrick or Roger Deakins, they could wipe the floor with your average kid armed with two loaded Epics.

People who've invested heavily in gear abhor any shift towards technological equalization, even as slight as this. The film guys scoffed at the Red guys, the Red guys scoffed at the DSLR guys, and I wouldn't be surprised if the DSLR guys scoff at this. What's even more surprising is that anyone has time to get anything done through all their seething--not that any one here has body of work that Park has. There's a financial jealousy at work here causing wide-ranging ad hominem accusations of "scams" and "gimmicks", ultimately missing the real point of the artistic validity of the final product. It's immediately apparent when someone chooses to attack something without having the proper context in which to do so; a context gained by actually watching the film.

I agree completely!

And yeah, I don't understand Korean honorifics well at all, most of it has to do with relative age and familiarity.

@Pietro Impagliazzo Nice. Looks like you already know multiple languages quite well.
 
Wow, so if you use a 35mm adapter on a HVX200, is that a scam as well? It's a 32 minute film that he hopes will help aspiring young filmmakers. I think that goes pretty far in saying "It's not the equipment that limits you in telling a story." He probably had a lot of fun doing it just for the feeling of seeing how it felt to shoot with such strange equipment.

I mean, have you shot video with an iPhone4? I have, and I helped someone who was doing a 10 minute short as they needed a second phone. I used the 'almostDSLR' app that REALLY helped get the most out of the iPhone. And we didn't use special lenses.

I don't care what ANYONE says, the iPhone4 has one of THE best phone cameras I have EVER seen. EVERY other phone I have tried out, and I have tried out many, don't even come close on video OR stills. Everyone who tells me how great their camera is, I say, let's shoot, head to head, you pick the subject, same time, and they never come close.

Would I want to shoot a film on the iPhone? HELL NO! :) Why do you think I have an AF100. That said, I too think it's great that he is showing people getting into cinematography that before they spend thousands of dollars on equipment, start small, with what you have, and see what you can do. Sure, I know the first comment about "but he's using other lenses and a phone mount to do this", so what? He said he was using 10 iPhones and only 2 main iPhones. He doesn't say if they all had lenses used. Given the sensor size, you can probably get some cheap lenses to put on the front of that thing.

I look forward to seeing the final result.
 
Back
Top