R
Romane19
Guest
Co-Sign. It's awesome.
"Corrado" - A production blog
- Thread starter taormina
- Start date
- Status
Co-Sign. It's awesome.
taormina
Hates to Rent
Covered a few pages back....
Not sure about the timelines of rental vs. purchase - maybe someone who's had a distributed DVD can chime in.
taormina
Hates to Rent
Hi Norm,
A poster is available on my site: www.taorminafilms.com
As for a trailer, we haven't cut one yet.
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
Very interesting blog.
For those interested, if i might add, a few points that you discovered as you started shooting (that i have personally learned by DP'ing over 60 productions including 6 feature-length film). With $300k you could easily go for a bigger camera. I just shot a 400k feature with 2 Panavision Genesis and was in 7th heaven -- not only the camera is rated at 500 (as opposed to 320 of HVX before the adapter) you don't need any silly adapters. And the image is super crisp with no compression and over all need way less light then your set-up.
I think your desire to own everything slightly kicked you in the ass ultimately. Although you are right that renting on a 4 week shoot is expensive you can afford though to rent bigger lights and with bigger lights come "bigger" look. On a recent feature whenever i could i was lighting with 4k HMIs coming in through the windows and each time the G&E powered up the lights without the light even pointing in a specific direction i already was getting "something cool." From the few stills of the film i saw it has a "nice" look of what we came to expect from well lit HVX with 35mm lenses but nothing beyond that -- no edge or look which in part is because you lacked some bigger lighting units to create the punch.
That said though huge congrats on finishing the shoot!
For those interested, if i might add, a few points that you discovered as you started shooting (that i have personally learned by DP'ing over 60 productions including 6 feature-length film). With $300k you could easily go for a bigger camera. I just shot a 400k feature with 2 Panavision Genesis and was in 7th heaven -- not only the camera is rated at 500 (as opposed to 320 of HVX before the adapter) you don't need any silly adapters. And the image is super crisp with no compression and over all need way less light then your set-up.
I think your desire to own everything slightly kicked you in the ass ultimately. Although you are right that renting on a 4 week shoot is expensive you can afford though to rent bigger lights and with bigger lights come "bigger" look. On a recent feature whenever i could i was lighting with 4k HMIs coming in through the windows and each time the G&E powered up the lights without the light even pointing in a specific direction i already was getting "something cool." From the few stills of the film i saw it has a "nice" look of what we came to expect from well lit HVX with 35mm lenses but nothing beyond that -- no edge or look which in part is because you lacked some bigger lighting units to create the punch.
That said though huge congrats on finishing the shoot!
Brandon Rice
Distributed Producer
The gaffer on our last shoot wouldn't necessarily agree with that statement... he was all about the subtle lighting, the small lights that give the image that extra pop... he made a joke that when a DP asks for the big 2k's... it's like destroying the image..
Thoughts?
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
In real life light isn't perfect, so the only way to simulate it on film is to light in an "imperfect" way -- lighting with big lights from far away and letting the lights just hit "random" things in the frame. That way you also free up actors by letting the actors do acting rather then worrying about them hitting the specific marks only because i want them in this small pool of light. And don't get me wrong on the very same film the next most used light (besides kinos) were 150ws...
What i notice from working on productions with smaller lights is that on the "small light productions" you light each camera set-up while on "big light productions"where all the big lights are set you only add a small light here and there depending on specific framing. In that sense lighting with big lights is... quicker. But also "easier" as you are reacting to what's already there rather then what it might look like.
It's this film:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1242544/
No access to the footage yet.
What i notice from working on productions with smaller lights is that on the "small light productions" you light each camera set-up while on "big light productions"where all the big lights are set you only add a small light here and there depending on specific framing. In that sense lighting with big lights is... quicker. But also "easier" as you are reacting to what's already there rather then what it might look like.
It's this film:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1242544/
No access to the footage yet.
Last edited:
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
i'm curious what you would think of my film. it was a "small to no light" production lit with the intent to free up the actors. in essence, I light the space, not the characters.
http://www.sabipictures.com/heartofnow/previews/preview-trailer/
http://www.sabipictures.com/heartofnow/previews/preview-trailer/
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
Zak, check your email.
10s
Veteran
The "bigger" look isn't due to just larger fixtures. Lighting is relative to set size and cinematic style. A small light or candle looks great given the scene/story, while huge banks of lights would be appropriate for a high key look. It just depends.
I think the "bigger" look is found in pre-production shot design, i.e., storyboarding. Designing shots in pre-pro is crucial for designing a fresh and exciting cinematic experience rather than simply winging it and hoping you're a natural. Winging it is a process of shooting and finding the shots and story later on during the edit. It works, but it's risky and can cost alot in money, time and emotions. The other process is to spend as much time as required and plan out the production before hand. Once you're on the set there's no time to figure things out... it's production time, not design time, so it makes sense to do the important film making work here. Designed shots include: lighting, coloring, framing, actor blocking, camera movement, pre-editing the shot to shot flow to make sure you have the best combination of shots for telling the scene and directing the audience attention toward key story points.
I think the "bigger" look is found in pre-production shot design, i.e., storyboarding. Designing shots in pre-pro is crucial for designing a fresh and exciting cinematic experience rather than simply winging it and hoping you're a natural. Winging it is a process of shooting and finding the shots and story later on during the edit. It works, but it's risky and can cost alot in money, time and emotions. The other process is to spend as much time as required and plan out the production before hand. Once you're on the set there's no time to figure things out... it's production time, not design time, so it makes sense to do the important film making work here. Designed shots include: lighting, coloring, framing, actor blocking, camera movement, pre-editing the shot to shot flow to make sure you have the best combination of shots for telling the scene and directing the audience attention toward key story points.
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
10s, welcome to the reality of life where the DP gets fired on the first day of the shoot and another DP (me) comes in to take over with no prep what so ever. The "no prep what so ever" happens way more often than one would think and cutting out the shots to make your day happens all the time. So although in theory i totally agree with your approach in reality it's just wishful thinking.
To put it in the context of "Corrado" i'm convinced that on many days he just got the basic coverage having to forget about some cool shots because of time constrain.
To put it in the context of "Corrado" i'm convinced that on many days he just got the basic coverage having to forget about some cool shots because of time constrain.
Last edited:
DavidG
Active member
Good stuff, site looks great. RVAD did a really good job. Its great how much of a pro vibe you get your movie just from the style of website. I am very much looking forward to seeing what the colourists and the sound guys have been up to. It must be a great feeling being so close to having your finished product.
David.
David.
filmman
Veteran
Corrado is a success because of Adam's production philosophy. Although discussions of lighting and better equipment are always very interesting, it's important to realize that maintaining control over all aspects of the production are more important than the details.
If Adam had spent more time on planning, Corrado wouldn't have been produced. Given the cast he ended up with and the distributor interest he started out with, he would've ended up keeping Corrado in development a few more months, maybe another year. The movie then would've been shot under a studio contract for around $30,000,000.
Adam started out with essentially no money; but he had money and the potential to raise more. Adam's genius was that he began with his own camera and his own money and made a professional movie that independent distributors would be interested in. He got the talent for the least amount of money because he was going to make the movie with them or without them. The only essential person in making Corrado was and is Adam.
Adam learned how to be a successful indie filmmaker. He doesn't even have to worry about what equipment he has to use next time. He's a viable producer now and will hire the best cast and crew for his productions.
And, yes, he might decide to hire a top notch DP with a lot of lighting experience and shoot with the latest digital cameras.
But, Adam might also decide to shoot 35mm film on his next project. What would prevent him from doing so? LOL
If Adam had spent more time on planning, Corrado wouldn't have been produced. Given the cast he ended up with and the distributor interest he started out with, he would've ended up keeping Corrado in development a few more months, maybe another year. The movie then would've been shot under a studio contract for around $30,000,000.
Adam started out with essentially no money; but he had money and the potential to raise more. Adam's genius was that he began with his own camera and his own money and made a professional movie that independent distributors would be interested in. He got the talent for the least amount of money because he was going to make the movie with them or without them. The only essential person in making Corrado was and is Adam.
Adam learned how to be a successful indie filmmaker. He doesn't even have to worry about what equipment he has to use next time. He's a viable producer now and will hire the best cast and crew for his productions.
And, yes, he might decide to hire a top notch DP with a lot of lighting experience and shoot with the latest digital cameras.
But, Adam might also decide to shoot 35mm film on his next project. What would prevent him from doing so? LOL
Adam seems like a pretty humble guy who is focused on the caliber of the work, but while we´re at it and so close to completion lets give this generous guy a round of applause, or better yet a standing ovation! ... For Really DOING IT and Really SHARING IT.
Genius = Creative Vision. Savvy. Balls of Steel.
Dogday.
Genius = Creative Vision. Savvy. Balls of Steel.
Dogday.
Last edited:
10s
Veteran
My comments about pre-pro planning is not a direct critique on Corrado but rather a general observation about the nature of getting the "bigger" look. The comment made by Patryk_Rebisz regearding using bigger lights, etc. helped bring this out of me.
Getting great cinematic shots takes real effort and the effort should happen in the planning stage not during production where the clock dictates behavior.
If DPs are fired/hired etc,.... that's really a pre-pro issue. You need to know your crew ahead of time and KNOW what they bring to the production. Finding out they don't cut it while shooting on the set in my book is just poor planning. That's a case of someone (the director & producer) being to busy to do their job properly or assuming they know what's going on without really knowing much. Experience has a way of teaching us lessons about being too busy or assuming things.
Cinematic dullness is a product of either bad taste or poor planning/rushed productions. Those wonderful breathtaking scenes that sweep you away are not off the cuff accidents, but rather focused efforts that respect the details of the nth degree.
I believe all of us want to see Corrado commercially succeed. So far it has been a success in terms of passion and drive. Like every product produced and actively being marketed, the customer/audience will decide the degree of its success.
Getting great cinematic shots takes real effort and the effort should happen in the planning stage not during production where the clock dictates behavior.
If DPs are fired/hired etc,.... that's really a pre-pro issue. You need to know your crew ahead of time and KNOW what they bring to the production. Finding out they don't cut it while shooting on the set in my book is just poor planning. That's a case of someone (the director & producer) being to busy to do their job properly or assuming they know what's going on without really knowing much. Experience has a way of teaching us lessons about being too busy or assuming things.
Cinematic dullness is a product of either bad taste or poor planning/rushed productions. Those wonderful breathtaking scenes that sweep you away are not off the cuff accidents, but rather focused efforts that respect the details of the nth degree.
I believe all of us want to see Corrado commercially succeed. So far it has been a success in terms of passion and drive. Like every product produced and actively being marketed, the customer/audience will decide the degree of its success.
taormina
Hates to Rent
taormina
Hates to Rent
Not really, I did have some time constraints and of course could have done more with more time, but I got more or less what I wanted.
As to the lighting, I selected a sourcy low key look for the whole thing ahead of time. It was intentionally done that way, and wouldn't have changed if I had bigger lights or not.
I thought it looked really good and the lighting worked really well, the actors moved into the light source.
From the trailer I had no idea what the film is about but it is a teaser trailer...
- Status