How do I make my T2i look pro for cheap?
- Thread starter tackyattack
- Start date
Ren Tachino
Active member
I completely agree. I know that the person behind a camera is all that really matters. And yes, they will have seen a reel or previous work. But based on my experience with clients, I know appearance does matter to them as they don't always understand technology as well as we might. But this is just my opinion and open to debate, but hopefully on another thread so the OP can get answers without going off on a tangent.
Michael Carter
Veteran
Life4eva was actin' up and I missed it??? Dang, he's *****-slapped me around once or twice, and no mods showed up for the food fight!
Reading some of these posts - DIY rigs? I made one of those plumbing-pipe steadicams - but I did it with aluminum tube and a manfrotto QR adapter, looked pretty fab. But show up with spray-painted PVC and... I dunno.
I just think it's terribly misguided to spend money strictly to look pimped. I started shooting stills after years of retail & b2b art directing. I shot a portfolio in my garage with novatron strobes and a Nikon 8008. I came up with a complex (pre-digital cams & no photoshop) style that looked luscious & mysterious, and got a lot of attention from creative directors. I told 'em I did stuff my way, I'd spent years on sets and used what I liked gear-wise. I shot 35mm tungsten, stuffed the slides into an enlarger with a $5 flash head taped to it and duped onto 8x10 sheet film (which the lab said was impossible by the way).
90% of the gigs I got from that style were product on white seamless - that's how it works sometimes. Nobody said a thing about my (at-the-time) ghetto gear - all they could say was "how did you get those looks without photoshop?" and then assign me catalogue shots.
I did a (stills) fashion shoot with a buddy's krasnogorsk 16mm movie camera & reversal film once. Shot little bursts and snipped the frames I liked, had them scanned with the frame edges & sprocket holes. Cool as hell, but all I did was show a test to the client and say "this shoot is gonna be weird as far as gear goes".
Focus on the work, focus on finding something that's unique to you - there's the value. Nobody gives a flip what you shoot with if they expect to be wowed by it. Present yourself as an iconoclast until you can afford all the stuff you want, and "wow that's a tiny camera" becomes "wow, look what he does with a tiny camera". Yeah, if you're sixteen or something, they'll see through that, so show them good work and tell them you're looking for a break. Give great value to small clients with low budgets. Position yourself as a partner who will help them be more profitable - via video or photography - not a photographer.
For what it's worth: no-photoshop 35mm hand-duped to 4x5 or 8x10 Velvia on an 80's 8008 with a cheap-ass lens:
Reading some of these posts - DIY rigs? I made one of those plumbing-pipe steadicams - but I did it with aluminum tube and a manfrotto QR adapter, looked pretty fab. But show up with spray-painted PVC and... I dunno.
I just think it's terribly misguided to spend money strictly to look pimped. I started shooting stills after years of retail & b2b art directing. I shot a portfolio in my garage with novatron strobes and a Nikon 8008. I came up with a complex (pre-digital cams & no photoshop) style that looked luscious & mysterious, and got a lot of attention from creative directors. I told 'em I did stuff my way, I'd spent years on sets and used what I liked gear-wise. I shot 35mm tungsten, stuffed the slides into an enlarger with a $5 flash head taped to it and duped onto 8x10 sheet film (which the lab said was impossible by the way).
90% of the gigs I got from that style were product on white seamless - that's how it works sometimes. Nobody said a thing about my (at-the-time) ghetto gear - all they could say was "how did you get those looks without photoshop?" and then assign me catalogue shots.
I did a (stills) fashion shoot with a buddy's krasnogorsk 16mm movie camera & reversal film once. Shot little bursts and snipped the frames I liked, had them scanned with the frame edges & sprocket holes. Cool as hell, but all I did was show a test to the client and say "this shoot is gonna be weird as far as gear goes".
Focus on the work, focus on finding something that's unique to you - there's the value. Nobody gives a flip what you shoot with if they expect to be wowed by it. Present yourself as an iconoclast until you can afford all the stuff you want, and "wow that's a tiny camera" becomes "wow, look what he does with a tiny camera". Yeah, if you're sixteen or something, they'll see through that, so show them good work and tell them you're looking for a break. Give great value to small clients with low budgets. Position yourself as a partner who will help them be more profitable - via video or photography - not a photographer.
For what it's worth: no-photoshop 35mm hand-duped to 4x5 or 8x10 Velvia on an 80's 8008 with a cheap-ass lens:
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
Sadly, I wish all clients would look only at your reel only. The sad truth is that many clients, especially small budget (dare I also call them small minded) ones don't even know how to judge your demo reel. They might not even watch it.
They just want to feel like there is a professional production going on that will be worth their investment in you.
Before I used a DVX100, I started off with a little Sony 3 chip miniDV camera. I used to hate working with clients who didn't know anything about video because they tend to nitpick everything, looking for something to complain about or add their 2 cents to in order to feel like they are contributing to the project somehow. But once I upgraded to larger pro-looking equipment, I noticed that clients trusted me more and didn't argue with my "professional opinion" as much. There is something to be said for that.
I found myself shooting with a shotgun mic and headphones even if the footage was intended to be silent B-roll, just because beefing up the camera made the client happy. Its stupid, I'll be the first to admit, and as an artist I HATE it.
...But, as long as paying clients are the reason we can afford this stuff in the first place, sometimes we have to play along. Heck, I landed other jobs on location when people saw my gear. They'd approach me or my client and ask who's doing the video. I don't feel like that would happen as much with a less impressive looking camera.
Heck, I've had clients judge me negatively when they found out I personally prefer using PC to edit versus Mac ("But everyone knows you need a Mac to edit video! Your stuff must not be as good!"- I kid you not, I've actually gotten that from someone).
We live in a shallow world. Does that mean I'm not going to use my T2i to shoot the next project? Hardly. I love my Canon DSLR and I intend to use it as much as possible! Just like I'm still using mostly Windows-based editing workstations, despite what people think of it. Because all things being equal, I know what works well from my own personal experience, and intend to always deliver a quality product, whether the client appreciates it or not.
I have been joking about gutting out a DVX and putting the DSLR inside the body.
Just 2 weeks ago, I traveled to California to do a job I owed someone as a favor. Of course, I brought along my DSLR and not the DVX100. I explained the whole "DSLR revolution" in film making, and the guy thought it was interesting, but then followed with "but you're also bringing the big camera, right?". *sigh*
Sidenote: When joking about this with my B&H corporate rep, he told me he knows someone who actually brings his older DV cam along and mounts it on a tripod next to the DSLR. Absurd, but don't underestimate the importance of impressing a client during production! It can make it easier to impress them post production as well!
They just want to feel like there is a professional production going on that will be worth their investment in you.
Before I used a DVX100, I started off with a little Sony 3 chip miniDV camera. I used to hate working with clients who didn't know anything about video because they tend to nitpick everything, looking for something to complain about or add their 2 cents to in order to feel like they are contributing to the project somehow. But once I upgraded to larger pro-looking equipment, I noticed that clients trusted me more and didn't argue with my "professional opinion" as much. There is something to be said for that.
I found myself shooting with a shotgun mic and headphones even if the footage was intended to be silent B-roll, just because beefing up the camera made the client happy. Its stupid, I'll be the first to admit, and as an artist I HATE it.
...But, as long as paying clients are the reason we can afford this stuff in the first place, sometimes we have to play along. Heck, I landed other jobs on location when people saw my gear. They'd approach me or my client and ask who's doing the video. I don't feel like that would happen as much with a less impressive looking camera.
Heck, I've had clients judge me negatively when they found out I personally prefer using PC to edit versus Mac ("But everyone knows you need a Mac to edit video! Your stuff must not be as good!"- I kid you not, I've actually gotten that from someone).
We live in a shallow world. Does that mean I'm not going to use my T2i to shoot the next project? Hardly. I love my Canon DSLR and I intend to use it as much as possible! Just like I'm still using mostly Windows-based editing workstations, despite what people think of it. Because all things being equal, I know what works well from my own personal experience, and intend to always deliver a quality product, whether the client appreciates it or not.
I have been joking about gutting out a DVX and putting the DSLR inside the body.
Just 2 weeks ago, I traveled to California to do a job I owed someone as a favor. Of course, I brought along my DSLR and not the DVX100. I explained the whole "DSLR revolution" in film making, and the guy thought it was interesting, but then followed with "but you're also bringing the big camera, right?". *sigh*
Sidenote: When joking about this with my B&H corporate rep, he told me he knows someone who actually brings his older DV cam along and mounts it on a tripod next to the DSLR. Absurd, but don't underestimate the importance of impressing a client during production! It can make it easier to impress them post production as well!
ROCKMORE
Veteran
I strapped my 60D to a bridge railing to get some rush hour traffic shots with a cop 10 feet away watching me. If he new I was working on material for a documentary he would have asked me for a permit, but I think he thought I was a tourist so he just walked on. I had the unassuming 55-250 IS zoom in the camera. I bought it over the 70-200 L a few months ago because I need IS for a car mount, but now I think the stealth look will get me into less trouble on the streets than a white lens.
I shoot in places all the time where if it were a conventional video rig I would get bounced. Try shooting in the NYC subway without a permit from the mayors office. The cops can confiscate your gear if they want, but they won't even look at a DSLR.
Last edited:
Ren Tachino
Active member
Sadly, I wish all clients would look only at your reel only. The sad truth is that many clients, especially small budget (dare I also call them small minded) ones don't even know how to judge your demo reel. They might not even watch it.
They just want to feel like there is a professional production going on that will be worth their investment in you.
Before I used a DVX100, I started off with a little Sony 3 chip miniDV camera. I used to hate working with clients who didn't know anything about video because they tend to nitpick everything, looking for something to complain about or add their 2 cents to in order to feel like they are contributing to the project somehow. But once I upgraded to larger pro-looking equipment, I noticed that clients trusted me more and didn't argue with my "professional opinion" as much. There is something to be said for that.
I found myself shooting with a shotgun mic and headphones even if the footage was intended to be silent B-roll, just because beefing up the camera made the client happy. Its stupid, I'll be the first to admit, and as an artist I HATE it.
...But, as long as paying clients are the reason we can afford this stuff in the first place, sometimes we have to play along. Heck, I landed other jobs on location when people saw my gear. They'd approach me or my client and ask who's doing the video. I don't feel like that would happen as much with a less impressive looking camera.
Heck, I've had clients judge me negatively when they found out I personally prefer using PC to edit versus Mac ("But everyone knows you need a Mac to edit video! Your stuff must not be as good!"- I kid you not, I've actually gotten that from someone).
We live in a shallow world. Does that mean I'm not going to use my T2i to shoot the next project? Hardly. I love my Canon DSLR and I intend to use it as much as possible! Just like I'm still using mostly Windows-based editing workstations, despite what people think of it. Because all things being equal, I know what works well from my own personal experience, and intend to always deliver a quality product, whether the client appreciates it or not.
I have been joking about gutting out a DVX and putting the DSLR inside the body.
Just 2 weeks ago, I traveled to California to do a job I owed someone as a favor. Of course, I brought along my DSLR and not the DVX100. I explained the whole "DSLR revolution" in film making, and the guy thought it was interesting, but then followed with "but you're also bringing the big camera, right?". *sigh*
Sidenote: When joking about this with my B&H corporate rep, he told me he knows someone who actually brings his older DV cam along and mounts it on a tripod next to the DSLR. Absurd, but don't underestimate the importance of impressing a client during production! It can make it easier to impress them post production as well!
Exactly! I've had experiences similar to yours and I agree that it is a sad truth, but a truth nonetheless. Clients just don't think the same way we do.
Michael Carter
Veteran
Wow, I thought that was totally true!!!
Seriously, (and I'm a mac user) it seems like it's down to which OS experience you like best - all the major software (minus FCP) is supposedly the same on either platform - but when I tell my clients "I'm on a mac, but I can post PC files for approval" they generally are like "oooh, you're a real artist". Thing is, all of those guys with PCs at work have iPhones and their wives are using iMacs to manage their photos. That's all gonna change to something more reality-based.
My first T2i shoot, one of the models walked into the setup at a location house, saw the camera and said "Hey, the shoot I just came from used a still camera! What's going on with that?" (OK, it was on a crane and there were butterflies and a wall of c-stands, but still...)
Michael Carter
Veteran
Thanks - those really were the days - working with reversal film, no negs, what came back from the lab was what you got (and my 35mm polaroid back was $700 in early 90's money, plus I had to dedicate a Nikon body to it... funny, I still have that rig!)
I easily spent well over a grand developing that style (3 or 4 exposures per frame, rack focusing and switching lights for each shutter hit, products on layers of glass or telling models to "hold real still") but... that's a huge, huge thing to do - TEST. So many new users post basic questions here, when you can search, google, and then find how those answers work with your own personality.
The tools we have now are so amazing - seconds after you shoot you can have your footage in AE or Photoshop; but the organic stuff, where you have little control - that's where I found the coolest stuff. That shot of the mary kay cosmetics above - the silvery blurs in the BG - there was a c-stand leg showing that I planned to cover up; I ended up laying a bunch of grip arms along side it for more. The drop-shadowy stuff in all those shots was organic, produced by the lens and the lights, and you had to make the best of what the setup was giving you. - and really fight to change it. But once you stopped "fighting" and viewed it as "something is just being handed to me here" - that was cool. And yeah, that look for product stills? It took every light stand I had, and then some mic stands, and some duct tape, and tiny bits of roof flashing cut into reflectors - a bigger gear budget would have really helped.
But you can get amazing looks with very little. These days, when I need a lens flare, I take my most scratched up CD case and hold the cover in front of the my most jacked up lens and shoot my own plates vs. a plugin. Stuff like that? It's gold.
Thankfully, Va. isn't big on permits. I've never gotten one unless I have to stop traffic for a period of time.
Where I run into trouble is on property that's owned by a Foundation (Williamsburg especially) or leased from a governmental entity like the Richmond Convention center. The 7D is usually OK as long as I stay with smaller lenses....but every once in a while I get caught. Then I grab the GoPro or the Q3HD or as a last resort my video glasses.
Owning a news site is a plus. Va. allows press to get away with many things others can't. I can even cross police lines when I want.
Last edited:
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
Heh- don't want to take this any more off topic than it already is, but the whole Mac vs PC thing drives me crazy. I grew up using only macs (my dad was a software engineer for communication protocols, and we always had macs in the early 80's from his office) and loved them back in the day. Macs used to be technically superior, pushing the RISC-based chips which helped accelerate graphic-related routines, and even integrated sound- my black and white Mac classic from the 80's can read printed text. Meanwhile PCs of the era didn't have digital sound until Sound Blaster became a standard add on almost a decade later.
But that was then. These days, Mac and PC are based on EXACTLY the same hardware. The proof is that you can install Windows on a Mac (bootcamp) and Mac OS on a PC (hackintosh).
That means THERE IS ZERO BENEFIT FROM A TECHNICAL STANDPOINT to use one versus the other. They both can perform the same calculations at the same speed. Now, I'm not saying there isn't reason to buy a mac- people still prefer the smooth looking UI and Apple's legendary support, but if you're looking to get the most rendering power for your money, the sad reality is that you can buy a much more powerful PC for the same money.
That is ultimately why I stopped using macs- I need as much CPU power as I can get for my rendering, and I don't care which UI it comes with.
But... people outside our industry don't understand. They see Big camera = pro equipment. They see Mac = artist. Its sickening, but hey- that's people for ya.
Michael Carter
Veteran
Well, there's two levels of mac vs. PC - there's designers & editors, where lately it comes down to which OS you're second nature with. (The Mac cost is a myth though, when you consider resale - I got 5+ years from a used G5 and sold it for a $200 loss, 5 YEARS later... I made 90% of my income with that box). The other camp is the "i hate iphones, ipads" etc gang, who predict every new piece of consumer hardware will be a massive failure. After three products that changed or created entire industries (iPhone, iPod, iPad) you'd think they'd learn. And yep, every major tech corporation ends up shrieking at their R&D guys "Copy this yesterday!! Now!!!" and we see either crap (Zune??) or decent products (all the apple-OS knockoff phones). I only own Mac towers & laptops though. I'm too hard on my phones to buy a $300 phone, most weekends you'll find me under my car or in my crawl space... and I have teens so the phone is always with me. (Nothing like ripping 90 year old plumbing out in a muddy crawl space with your kids calling for money...)
I'm not sure the Mac cost issue is a myth...When I'm looking to buy a computer, I'm looking for the most performance for my money, not making a few hundred back in 5 years. I absolutely love the styling on the Macbooks, but it's just not worth an extra 500-800 dollars just to get similar performance. I bought a refurbished Dell Precision 15" for 1100 a year and a half ago that will give as good or better performance than the basic 1800 dollar mackbook pro 15", all with a much higher resolution screen. Plus I get on-site service for 3 years. I'm not saying it doesn't have its cons, but it really doesn't seem like the price thing is a myth.
Edit: For a more direct comparison (i.e. not refurbished and a 2+ year old model) A new dell precision m4500 with a quad core processor (core i7 740q) full HD (1900x1080) screen, 4gb of ram, high performance graphics card (fx 1800m) will run you $2000. I just couldn't justify paying the same price for something with much worse performance, especially if I'm doing things that require powerful CPU and GPU, i.e. video encoding, GPU accelerated rendering, and other film related stuff.
Edit: For a more direct comparison (i.e. not refurbished and a 2+ year old model) A new dell precision m4500 with a quad core processor (core i7 740q) full HD (1900x1080) screen, 4gb of ram, high performance graphics card (fx 1800m) will run you $2000. I just couldn't justify paying the same price for something with much worse performance, especially if I'm doing things that require powerful CPU and GPU, i.e. video encoding, GPU accelerated rendering, and other film related stuff.
Last edited:
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
No- there are intelligent, educated people, and then there are idiots. The world is full of the later, and this thread is testament to that.
Its not a myth. Everytime I consider a new box, someone inevitably says "oh, check out Mac again, the prices really are more competitive these days" and every single time I consider it... and every single time I am disappointed when I shop around.
Just last week, I decided I needed a faster portable rendering station, and started shopping for something with at least a core i5 460 chip to replace my core 2 duo setup.
After a talking with a corporate rep at the Dell Outlet, they quoted me a refurbished 15R Core i5 with 6GB of Ram, 640GB HD, HDMI out, etc... $429 with free shipping. I checked out refurbished Macs (just to be fair, since mine is coming from the Dell outlet), and the closest thing I could find was close to $2,000, and had less storage space! I sold my old laptop from 2 years ago for about $350 on ebay, making my entire "upgrade" about $80.
Just got my core i5, loaded up CS4 and Vegas pro on it, and couldn't be happier- all for less than a good SLR lens. I'm not knocking Apple, I still have a nostalgic love for them that dates back to when you got more for your money. But until they can compete with the price-for-performance ratio that PCs have, I won't go back to them.
Meanwhile, if I have $2k to spend on a laptop for portable rendering, I'm better off buying 4-5 of these i5's and setting up a render farm!
/rant.
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
@dishe, That's a great deal! Haha, man, now you're making me think about a portable render farm
I love the Dell outlet. Call them, the guys on the phone have access to inventory not available online.
Good stuff!!
To the OP- sorry to take your thread so terribly off topic!!