HV20 for theatrical distribution?

TheJetBlack

TheJetBlack

Active member
(Not really sure which category this falls under, so I posted here due to me asking a lot about hardwares. So if a mod sees this thread fitting somewhere else, please move t. Thanks. )

I've read on a different forum that cameras like HV20, 5D MkII, and so on are mainly suited for straight-to-DVD or TV release -- but when it comes to theatrical release, it's not realistic. One of the problems, according to what I've read, is when they blow it up 35mm -- the grains and such will be highly visible and ugly.

I keep thinking... what about films like Crank 2? It was released into theaters and it was shot on the Canon XH-A1 (and HV20 for random shots). I saw it and it looked like a real movie and it was a real movie.

Same goes for the Sony PMW-EX1. Looked great for District 9 and the amazing Public Enemies.

So this theory that consumer and prosumer cameras aren't fit for theatrical release, but the RED One and Sony F23 is perfectly fit seems odd to me. Don't get me wrong, RED and F23 are a dozen times more in price because they produce amazing and definitely superior images. However, EX1 and HV20... they come out with images that are seamless -- to me, anyway. I'm more about story than technical things, so if I have passable technicalities and a compelling story -- it's all good to me.

The theory that consumer/prosumer aren't good enough due to the "ugliness" when its blown up to 35mm, does that stem from it having to do with how we compress/export things in FCP or any of the other editing systems? Does it have to with better lighting for low-light environments? What is it exactly?

I also try to shoot in Cine Mode 24p and leave it at neutral to reduce the grains, and it seems to work. Is this the right route?

The main reason for asking is because I'm in the process of getting film grants for my next feature and I have tremendous faith in the script I've written. It's been through many revisions and I've gotten many feedbacks from various filmmakers... so I'm hopeful that when I shoot it and when it's done, it could have a chance to get picked up and released into real theaters after its festival runs (that's me being really hopeful. lol).

With the film grant, I was hoping to save most of it up for post-production (sound mix, additional ADR, music, sound effects/foley, etc). And use my HV20 and RODE VideoMic. Get a better XLR mic. A shoulder mount rig for hand held shooting. Props. Hire three good actors. And the dilemma is -- get another prosumer camera. My choices are:

1) Sony EX1
2) Canon t2i
3) Canon 5D
4) GH1 Hacked
5) Get another HV20.

Which one would be best for feature filming? If someone can give me pros and cons -- that'd be super.

Thanks reading this long-arse thread, but I wanna make sure I make informed decisions before I go and purchase things.

Peace. God bless. Happy filmmaking. :happy:
 
Don't buy a camera. Hire a DP who has his own camera and gear. He'll probably have all manner of extras -- dolly, crane, etc. -- that will add a lot of production value to your film.

Why do people always feel that they have to OWN gear??? Spend your money on hiring skilled people who already have all the gear and know how to use it. Your film will be much better for it.

Best of luck!
 
While I do agree that's the wisest choice, I own a dolly and I have access to a jib for crane shots. And honestly, I'm fascinated with the role as I not only enjoy directing but I enjoy shooting and lighting a scene as well. I wanna learn more about it and do it.

If had an immense amount of dough, I'd hire a real DoP. However, I do not.
 
TheJetBlack said:
While I do agree that's the wisest choice, I own a dolly and I have access to a jib for crane shots. And honestly, I'm fascinated with the role as I not only enjoy directing but I enjoy shooting and lighting a scene as well. I wanna learn more about it and do it.

If had an immense amount of dough, I'd hire a real DoP. However, I do not.
Click to expand...

Okay, you're trying to shoot a feature for theatrical release. That means a LOT of people are putting their time and talents on the line for this, most likely for deferred pay. Don't jeopardize their efforts by putting an amateur on the camera. The #1 rule of producing is "ALWAYS hire the best, most talented, most experienced person you can afford for every job." Even on a deferred-pay basis, you are probably not the best cinematographer you can get.

You want to learn? You'll learn faster and better at the elbow of an experienced shooter. If you prefer to 'learn by doing', then get a cam and shoot test footage, test scenes, even little short films. Don't waste the time of your entire cast and crew on a feature-length project just so you can learn -- and make mistakes.

You don't need "an immense amount of dough". You need a great script and a proven ability to produce and direct it into a great film. If you have that, you stand a good chance of getting a DP with something far better than an HV20 to shoot on -- and you can get him on a deferred-pay basis.
 
28 Days Later was shot on an XL1 and released theatrically.

I'm just saying.

Open Water was released theatrically and shot with a Sony DCR-VX2000
Sony DSR-PD150

Again, I;m just saying.
 
All shot for SPECIFIC reasons on those formats. And how many is that compared to the total number of films released theatrically? Less than 1% I'd wager.
 
"November" which starred Courteney Cox was shot on the DVX100a and released theatrically.

I forget what cam "My Date With Drew" was shot on, but it was a consumer-level cam bought from Circuit City. It got a limited theatrical release.

It can be done. No question. But if the OP wants to have ANY decent chance of getting a theatrical release for his movie, he needs a qualified person operating the camera. This is no time for on-the-job training.

EDIT: The cam used on "My Date With Drew" was the Panasonic PV-DV953. It's a 3CCD cam that, at that time, sold for about $1500. You can get them used on Amazon.com for less than $400 now.
 
Last edited:
Okay, you're trying to shoot a feature for theatrical release. That means a LOT of people are putting their time and talents on the line for this, most likely for deferred pay. Don't jeopardize their efforts by putting an amateur on the camera. The #1 rule of producing is "ALWAYS hire the best, most talented, most experienced person you can afford for every job." Even on a deferred-pay basis, you are probably not the best cinematographer you can get.

You want to learn? You'll learn faster and better at the elbow of an experienced shooter. If you prefer to 'learn by doing', then get a cam and shoot test footage, test scenes, even little short films. Don't waste the time of your entire cast and crew on a feature-length project just so you can learn -- and make mistakes.

You don't need "an immense amount of dough". You need a great script and a proven ability to produce and direct it into a great film. If you have that, you stand a good chance of getting a DP with something far better than an HV20 to shoot on -- and you can get him on a deferred-pay basis.
Click to expand...
I've shot features before and they were essentially my way of practicing ASAP rather than shooting pointless shorts. I've improved tremendously with each new feature. May not be on a grand scale. Didn't win festival awards, but I've learned more than I ever did making shorts. Never done test shoots. When I say I wanna learn, it's always the same thought process. I'm always gonna learn. That's what so great about it.

The features were definitely no-budget and this next project will be a micro-budget. So it shouldn't be too different in that process, other than choreographing the boxing scenes tediously. That I will get professional help on. I'm confident that I'm more than ready. I just gotta do it. It's really not that hard for me. It's just a matter of why I wanna do the story.

But if the OP wants to have ANY decent chance of getting a theatrical release for his movie, he needs a qualified person operating the camera. This is no time for on-the-job training.
Click to expand...
You don't know if I'm qualified or not. I went school and I got my degree. I know how to operate a camera and I've learned to be better. This thread was me asking for help in deciding on my next camera because I'm not sure if prosumers are suitable for theaters -- which I no longer question after doing more research.


J.R. Hudson

28 Days Later was shot on an XL1 and released theatrically.

I'm just saying.

Open Water was released theatrically and shot with a Sony DCR-VX2000
Sony DSR-PD150

Again, I;m just saying.
Click to expand...
That's cool. You know what, I'm making a decision. I'm getting an XHA1 and learn every aspect of that camera. If Crank 2 and The Signal looked pretty damn good using it and it got released into theatres, it has something more to do with lighting and camera techniques than the camera itself. Hell, I may even save up a little more for an EX1.

I shouldn't get caught up on the format. If my feature is good enough, I'm sure it'll entertain people at festivals. And if I'm lucky, a distributor will help me meet the standards for 35mm blow up. I shall focus on a making sure the story compelling instead. The script I've written will reach its full potential once I find the right actors and a competent crew.

Thanks for the replies, though. Helped me think things through.

Another question if it's all right -- shall I import my HV20 footage through HDMI rather than firewire and edit in full HD into FCP 7 (possibly on a 2TB Lacie External Hard drive)? Would the pulldown with Compressor still be possible...? I've never tried this.
 
TheJetBlack said:
I've shot features before and they were essentially my way of practicing ASAP rather than shooting pointless shorts. I've improved tremendously with each new feature. May not be on a grand scale. Didn't win festival awards, but I've learned more than I ever did making shorts. Never done test shoots. When I say I wanna learn, it's always the same thought process. I'm always gonna learn. That's what so great about it.
Click to expand...

As long as your cast and crew are okay with donating their time and talents to help you learn, that's cool.

You don't know if I'm qualified or not. I went school and I got my degree. I know how to operate a camera and I've learned to be better.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I never said you weren't qualified. I said you need a qualified person operating the camera. If you are the MOST qualified person you can get, that's good. But just knowing how to operate a camera doesn't in itself make you a good cinematographer. You said you wanted to learn, so I assume there are things you don't know yet. Like I said before, you can either learn on your own (at the expense of others), or you can learn from a skilled, experienced cinematographer. That's all I was saying.
 
TheJetBlack said:
Another question if it's all right -- shall I import my HV20 footage through HDMI rather than firewire and edit in full HD into FCP 7 (possibly on a 2TB Lacie External Hard drive)? Would the pulldown with Compressor still be possible...? I've never tried this.
Click to expand...

Okay, I don't know any way to say this without it sounding like I'm trying to be rude and insulting, which I swear I'm not. But if you have your degree and have experience running cameras, how can you not know the answer to this question??? Your footage is digital. Capture with firewire. Whether or not you edit in full HD depends on whether your Mac can handle the load. If it can, that's what you do. If not, you render proxy files for editing or render it to some intermediary format. Don't know the Compressor answer, but someone here will.

Best of luck!
 
Exporting recorded HVxx footage via Firewire or HDMI will give you the same video to work from. Neither will differ in quality.
 
^+1
"Again, for the gazillionth time: It's not about the tool, it's about how it is used. This applies to sex, filmmaking, sports and many other venues."
 
Sit down and figure out the best way to use your available resources.

Yes, it is possible to get a project shot on a relatively cheap camera to the big theatrical screen, but that's only going to happen if you're not only deft with the available equipment, but have the story content that ensures viewers (and distributors) see past your budgetary limitations.

If you are determined to light and shoot the project yourself, know whatever camera you choose to use inside and out prior to principal photography. On the job is not when you want to be learning how to use the camera, or how to leverage certain color profiles. For that matter, you don't want to realize afterward that the method you choose to shoot in camera doesn't suit what you want to achieve in post.


I owned an HV20 at one point, and it's capable of excellent images for it's pricepoint. But the lack of full and easily accessed manual controls makes it inefficient at times. Also, on the technical side, it's not possible to manually adjust gain, and you can only lock it by tricking the camera. Additionally, HDV - the recording format, is highly compressed.

The EX1 is a technically superior camera from start to finish, but it's easy to screw up if you haven't got the practice time in. The XH-A1 ranks between the HV20 and EX1. I know, as I've owned all three cameras at one point or another.

Ego aside, consider the suggestion to hire a DP. As a Producer and Director, you'll have plenty on your plate without micromanaging every aspect of the camera and lighting department. An offer of deferred pay, as well as an upfront stipend of what you would have put towards the camera is likely to gain you a wealth of knowledge, equipment, and an extra set of hands you wouldn't have on set otherwise.

I've served as a DP for three small feature projects as well as two shorts, and some music video projects. I do corporate and TV work to pay the bills most days, so I enjoy switching to narrative work, and tend to make my rates quite competitive for me, the camera, and my grip truck and other gear. Why? Because once I attach myself to a project I'd prefer to make it look as amazing as possible, and that means making all my toys available to myself. When I can't reach that deal, I end up frustrated that what I want on set is sitting in the garage.

Some of the Directors I've worked for had a keen eye for what they wanted with camera and lighting. For those directors I acted on an advisory basis - I provided what they asked for, but I would problem solve the technical details while they focused on actors or producing duties. And I would make small suggestions that complemented their way of thinking.

Bringing on a DP may make a better range of cameras available to you as well - starting in February I'll be offering the PMW-F3 to my clients. Perhaps for you the AF-100 is more in your price range - but in the hands of a skilled DP either will provide that shallow depth of field without the artifacts of the Canon 5DmkII.

Don't be scared to learn from someone with more experience. No matter how good you get, there's always something to learn.
 
Given the quality and prices of the newer mid range cams, I can't even imagine shooting with a HDV codec. In it's 15 minutes of fame, that series of Canon cams were a breakthrough, but it will be a limiting factor now. You are going to spend time and some money on a project, and would like to get a return out of it. Compared to the value of the effort, why would you use a $400 HDV cam?

Grant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top