Azmyth
Veteran
that would be up for theatrical viewing?
say something on the lines of...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zciqppDGzGo
say something on the lines of...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zciqppDGzGo
GH1's capable of feature films yet?
- Thread starter Azmyth
- Start date
Hunter Hampton
Carbonite Member
I know ill get smacked for this, but its possibly more capable than the varicam used to shoot that film on.
PhilJackson
Active member
At this point in time, it's not the camera that's going to limit you, it's the rest of the production. Films have been made on much lower quality technology and have done well.
Azmyth
Veteran
More capable than the Varicam?
Explain!
I've been looking and so far I haven't seen anything yet done on the GH1 that looks as cinematic.
I didn't come here to die is cool, but it looks very stylized and still has that "video" look to me.
Azmyth
Veteran
XL1 i thought.
XL1.
We'll see what it's up for as soon as people start shooting features with it. I think it could very well be good enough for a feature. Just look at Crank 2 and their DV cams and what came of it.
I'm personally working with a group doing a 45 minute short for the festival circuit. We'll see what it looks like in the end.
That's because they weren't shot cinematic. There is a LOT of work behind the scenes that make things look like a movie. If you've ever been on set somewhere you'd know that things don't look natural at all on a set. They look natural when you watch the movie later but what you see is NOT what you get.
Remember, movies are make-believe.
I've seen the trailers for that GH1 feature and it does look video. That's just the way it was shot. I'm fairly certain you could make the GH1 look a lot better.
There have been some of the DVXfests that have used the GH1 in more studio-ish production and those look much more like real features.
Azmyth
Veteran
I guess, lets pretend we have professional lighting and crew.
thisisapocalypse
Well-known member
+1 That's what I'm doing
It's not "no-budget" but $10K is pretty close to no budget. If I shoot and light right, it looks very cinematic...when I screw up, it looks like "video." It's always me though, never the camera. Set design, lighting, wardrobe, shot design, etc., are all way more important to achieving the cinematic look than just the sensor in the camera and especially the codec. Oh yeah, sound? Let's not forget sound - even more important than the camera, arguably.Attachments
Last edited:
Azmyth
Veteran
+1 That's what I'm doing
I would agree that your stuff looks pretty cinematic. Probably the best I've seen (only my opinion) with what little I have seen of it. I'd like to see some more.
I'm weighing my options and the pros and cons of upgrading cameras for my next film.
I always want to raise the bar with each film.
For the first one we used 2 canon HV40's, I bought lots of lighting, an H4N and some nice mics and I'm happy with the results.
This time I want to hire a professional lighting technician, and I'm either going to rent or buy a new camera.
The options so far are..
Rent a RED ONE or find a DP who has one and hire him. (Same goes for any professional level camera.. EX3.. HPX2700... varicam.. etc.) But if I rent, it will be the RED ONE. This will utimately be the best looking image (as long as we light everyone well) but it will be expensive and there won't be much room for reshoots or last minute shoots. Everything will have to be extremely planned to the letter.
Buy a GH1, Canon 7D or 5D. This option is good because I already have sound gear that works well with it. Its smaller, and since I'm buying it.. we can shoot whatever, whenever and not have to worry about losing money on wasted time or people not showing up. Its a matter of convenience I guess.
Ultimately, I'd like to shoot on the RED ONE, but even though the picture is amazing.. it does have other limitations that don't have anything to do with how the footage would look. Size, cost, time.
I've seen all kinds of stuff online where the red looks just as bad as any amateur camcorder video. It's a quirky beast that is capable of greatness but also of really bad stuff too.
Part of the "video" look is where the whites blow out when folks don't light properly. The trick is to always use more light than you think is enough but evenly enough so that you don't blow out your whites while still making things look bright. Then bring everything down in post using curves.
Essentially you are limiting your latitude to make things fit together. It's done on film all the time. Just because film has more latitude, doesn't mean you should be relying on it.
Part of the "video" look is where the whites blow out when folks don't light properly. The trick is to always use more light than you think is enough but evenly enough so that you don't blow out your whites while still making things look bright. Then bring everything down in post using curves.
Essentially you are limiting your latitude to make things fit together. It's done on film all the time. Just because film has more latitude, doesn't mean you should be relying on it.
something funny that I just ran across that might help some. Why soap operas don't look like other productions:
http://blogs.static.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/58468.html
http://blogs.static.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/58468.html
thisisapocalypse
Well-known member
I love the GH1, but if renting a Red ONE is really an option given your budget, that's the route I would take, but usually 2-days worth of rental + lenses would buy you a GH1, and you're going to need to rent lots of lights too for that bad boy.
So yeah, if you can afford to shoot on the Red ONE or can find a DP who has one you can afford, definitely take that route. If you can't then I'd go with either a GH1 or 5D - 5D if you need really wide stuff or hyper shallow dof, GH1 - I like the image better overall but it's a tricky camera and you've got to spend some time with it before you get to shooting.
Luis_
Well-known member
In this trailer I see some of the rolling shutter effect which throws the cinematic feel right out the window for me.
But also I wasn't feeling the texture, color, or tone.
I have seen short films from the GH1 that I was very impressed with and looked amazing!
as a matter fact: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=188783
But also I wasn't feeling the texture, color, or tone.
I have seen short films from the GH1 that I was very impressed with and looked amazing!
as a matter fact: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=188783
matt s.
Veteran
I've shot 3 lo budget features. the first 2 were stock dvx100A and the third was stock HMC150. Not once has anyone asked (besides a few other filmmakers) what we shot the movies on. no one cared. they got into the stories and thats all that mattered to them. yes all three films were shown in multiple theaters and they all looked great projected wether it was from dvd or on the last one we projected h.264 from a mac pro and it blew people away. to me unless you have already secured distribution and you have a decent budget (150k+) and are definitely planning on a 35mm transfer then yes shoot on the RED. if this is only your second film than personally I see that as a waste oif whatever budget you have and you should put the money you want to spend on the RED into something more useful like hiring a light and sound guys. Those 2 things will greatly improve the image from any any camera IMO. The RED isnt gonna make your movie any better and ultimately could make it a lot worse if you have never shot with one before. I would love to be able to shoot on RED some day but at this point in time we feel its better to just keep making movies with what we have available to us all the time and what we already know how to use properly.
thisisapocalypse
Well-known member
Thanks by the way, I have to be careful about what/how much I put up as some fests are picky about that - but feel free to PM me and I'll be happy to share with you privately and answer your GH1 questions to the best of my ability.