Is it possible to make a GOOD FEATURE FILM, with the 7D?

1 in 10,000 are pretty good odds!!!

I'm sure people will try and make films with the 7D. Maybe it will work sometimes. But like Barry's says if you really had a good film to make would you do it with a DSLR? The money would be there for a better camera.

The 7Ds and DSLRs will be great for somethings. Like this EPK.

http://www.vimeo.com/9072811
 
J.R. Hudson said:
Open Water ?

There was not much for desire in their cinematography on that film, but I thought it entertaining.
Click to expand...
Really?

It hurt to watch it. I'm not talking about the look, I'm talking about the first half hour looked as amateur as the worst first-timer home camcorder mess anyone's ever seen.

Once they actually get to the point where they're floating lost on the surface of the water, a lot of that goes away, but watch it again and see if you think it qualifies as good.
 
Thanks guys, but...

Thanks guys, but...

I fully understand about needing a good script, story and budget, but what I really want to know is purely whether the 7D or 5D resolution would blow up nicely on a theater sized screen. And also Barry mentioned that using a still camera is convoluted and difficult in shooting a feature.

Can anyone who has used a 7D or 5D to shoot a feature or short film share on what the specific visual or mechanical challenges or pitfalls were that they experienced with this equipment? Also, has anyone tried using prime lenses to shoot projects and how has this turned out compared to still lenses? Thanks! MG
 
moviemaykr said:
Can anyone who has used a 7D or 5D to shoot a feature or short film share on what the specific visual or mechanical challenges or pitfalls were that they experienced with this equipment?
Click to expand...
Well I'm keeping a blog on www.canonfilmmakers.com about the technical stuff on my production.
I've only written one blog there yet, but I'm waiting on some new equipment and will post once I've got some more and better tests done.
Keep an eye out there and maybe you can avoid some of the mistakes I'm bound to make.
 
The first part was like video with my old RCA camcorder. But after they were floating around it was just the story that sucked you in. Plus what's her name had a nice body and they got ate by sharks. That is about all I remember.


Barry_Green said:
Really?

It hurt to watch it. I'm not talking about the look, I'm talking about the first half hour looked as amateur as the worst first-timer home camcorder mess anyone's ever seen.

Once they actually get to the point where they're floating lost on the surface of the water, a lot of that goes away, but watch it again and see if you think it qualifies as good.
Click to expand...
 
moviemaykr said:
what I really want to know is purely whether the 7D or 5D resolution would blow up nicely on a theater sized screen.
Click to expand...
That should be the least of your concerns. Again, "Open Water" and "Blair Witch" made it to the theaters, shot on standard-def interlaced cameras that didn't even offer 24p.

Standard-def DVX films have been in theaters repeatedly, including two Oscar-nominated documentaries, "Iraq In Fragments" and "Murderball."

The only time I've seen a film in the theater and seriously been bothered by the lack of resolution, was "28 Days Later", shot on a standard-def XL1 in "frame mode" and cropped to 16:9, which means it was pretty much about VHS resolution.

And also Barry mentioned that using a still camera is convoluted and difficult in shooting a feature.
Click to expand...
A feature, or anything else. The product isn't designed to shoot video.

It can be done, yes, but you'll spend money, time, and effort to overcome those limitations.

Also, has anyone tried using prime lenses to shoot projects and how has this turned out compared to still lenses? Thanks! MG
Click to expand...
Still lenses are prime lenses.
 
Ryan Paige said:
I feel like I would understand this discussion better if some basketball-related analogies were worked in somehow.
Click to expand...

Sweet Clyde, laugh derisively at him!

What I think can be taken away is, work against the odds. Be that 1 out of 10,000 that is quality enough to be shown to a grand audience. Have confidence in yourself. As wise as many of the people here and elsewhere are on film, don't ever let anyone tell you "no" and let that stop you from trying, because those film lottery winners? What if they took "no" as a definitive answer?
 
well no one is telling him no...actually many have told him its perfectly doable on lesser cameras.
there're just giving him reality.

At the end of the day...just make a film...have fun...and learn from it :)
 
Hi!

So far I have shot three feature length films
and a multitude of small commercials on dslr cameras.

The 7D is my favorite camera that costs less than $25,000 fully equipped.

Here is my blog about the experience, I also rant a lot:

7dcinema.blogspot.com

steps to making a good feature on the 7D (foregoing all script, budget and other woes)

1.know your camera inside and out. Turn off auto lighting optimizer. Turn metering timer to 30min. Experiment in depth with picture styles. Learn to read the histogram in video mode (still histo. Is totally different).

2. Know your exposure. Understand what looks best, what works, and what you can 'get away with' Marshall lcd70p LCD is THE BOMB for this because of false color.

3. Know your lenses. I personally think canon branded lenses are sort of a failure for movie mode. Try some vintage nikkor primes,
or contax zeiss. Or try canon. The main word is try. Test test test.

4. Know your camera support or how to operate. The size and weight of this camera offers new opportunities as well as new opportunities to fail. Be comfortable operating with it's form factor figure out what works to give you the look you need.

In conclusion my opinion is that these dslrs are micro cinema cameras.
They aren't video cameras at all, and for that I'm greatful. I despise
the video world, I love the cinema world. The dvx100 was awesome when it came out because it was the first prosumer cinema video hybrid. In many ways it was crippled or imperfect too (no focus marks that correspond to real world distances anyone?) but people still made good footage with it.

Best of luck on your film.
 
Re: Limitations

Re: Limitations

can anyone give me specific limitations they've run into with using a 7D or 5D type camera on a feature type project? I know I will learn them from experience, but it would be helpful for people who have already experienced the limitations to please warn me of what specific problems/limitations they have encountered, such as: lighting issues? issues shooting in low light? overheating? still photography prime lenses vs motion picture prime lenses? frame rates selections? post problems or anything else? etc...

I just shot a music video in 1080p 24fps and the footage looked great, but of course, that's not the same as a feature...
 
moviemaykr said:
can anyone give me specific limitations they've run into with using a 7D or 5D type camera on a feature type project? I know I will learn them from experience, but it would be helpful for people who have already experienced the limitations to please warn me of what specific problems/limitations they have encountered, such as: lighting issues? issues shooting in low light? overheating? still photography prime lenses vs motion picture prime lenses? frame rates selections? post problems or anything else? etc...

I just shot a music video in 1080p 24fps and the footage looked great, but of course, that's not the same as a feature...
Click to expand...

I think it's funny how people sometimes think a feature is some kind of holy Grail of shooting.

To use the basketball analogy, a good looking music video is like a flashy pick up game that lasts 15 minutes on a street court, and a feature is like playing a whole NBA season.

If you can get good images you can shoot good images.

Overheating: varies by camera body. Don't put a beachtek or battery grip under the camera and you'll be okay if your camera is not heat sensitive (some bodies are more than others apparently)

otherwise it's just fiddly because it's small.

Have plenty of batteries and 16gb cards and more than one charger.

Read my blog.
 
Has anyone asked: why are you shooting or trying to shoot with a dslr?

Edit: I see it was because of budget. Take this advice or leave it... It'S not gonna be that much cheaper to shoot with a dslr in a way that'll get you an amazing image versus renting a RED.
 
Last edited:
moviemaykr said:
can anyone give me specific limitations they've run into with using a 7D or 5D type camera on a feature type project? I know I will learn them from experience, but it would be helpful for people who have already experienced the limitations to please warn me of what specific problems/limitations they have encountered, such as: lighting issues? issues shooting in low light? overheating? still photography prime lenses vs motion picture prime lenses? frame rates selections? post problems or anything else? etc...

I just shot a music video in 1080p 24fps and the footage looked great, but of course, that's not the same as a feature...
Click to expand...

I think it's funny how people sometimes think a feature is some kind of holy Grail of shooting.

To use the basketball analogy, a good looking music video is like a flashy pick up game that lasts 15 minutes on a street court, and a feature is like playing a whole NBA season.

If you can get good images you can shoot good images.

Overheating: varies by camera body. Don't put a beachtek or battery grip under the camera and you'll be okay if your camera is not heat sensitive (some bodies are more than others apparently)

otherwise it's just fiddly because it's small.

Have plenty of batteries and 16gb cards and more than one charger.

Read my blog.
 
Kholi said:
Has anyone asked: why are you shooting or trying to shoot with a dslr?

Edit: I see it was because of budget. Take this advice or leave it... It'S not gonna be that much cheaper to shoot with a dslr in a way that'll get you an amazing image versus renting a RED.
Click to expand...

Because that's what the marketing hype tell us to do...!

Seriously, when you look at all the accessories that people add (notice I'm not saying "have to add") such as Zoom recorder, shoulder mounts, monitor. glass, FF, rails, mattebox etc, you are very quickly up to the price point of an EX-1 or HVX. So I have to agree with Kholi. In the long run, you may not be saving money.

It's not about the gear, really. Story is king. Go rent or buy "It Might Get Loud," a profile of 3 guitarists. 1 rolls with 1/2 million dollars worth of fx gear, another with a department store guitar. Both make incredible music because of talent and hard work. You can make a good film with a Flip camera if all the creative pieces are present.
 
Long story short: because everyone and their mother has a 7D the resale value is very poor. Selling the gear off you purchase for it after the shoot is going to be even harder to do without taking a serious hit. So say you skimp a little and only spend 4000 on a 7D shooting package. It may sell for 2000. You spent 2K to rent that package for the duration of your shoot.

I know very very bare bones RED kits (nikon lenses, monitor, sticks and recording media) that rent for 100 a day!!!!! And that's readily found here in LA. I'd you offer 1500 to these owners they'd flip.

With that bare bones red kit you'll kill a 7D image.

I think the op is asking: can you make a good looking movie with a few dslrs? Depends on what you call good looking.

I keep saying this but anyone who has failed to listen please get off of your computer and go find these two titles--

PRIMER --Sundance king, Shot on 16mm, very few retakes,by no name no experience filmmakers for 16,000! Shane Carruth was an engineer at the time and had this great idea for a very good psychological sci-fi feature. He picked up some books, wrote a script and learned his way into Sundance with am incredible watch. I've seen this feautre a good 20 times.

The Signal -- shot in Atlanta by xlcinema.com (I also think they were dvxusers) peers for 60k on an xl-h1 and mini35 combo and sold for 1.5 million to Magnolia pictures. If you don't know the combo, just imagine shooting at 100 iso at all times but the image noise is something like 640 iso. That's what it's like shooting with an XL-H1 and Mini35.

These are must sees as they're real and existing cases of success. And very rare at that.

Either of these could have been done with a 7D and they would still be as good.
 
Last edited:
Kholi said:
Long story short: because everyone and their mother has a 7D the resale value is very poor. Selling the gear off you purchase for it after the shoot is going to be even harder to do without taking a serious hit. So say you skimp a little and only spend 4000 on a 7D shooting package. It may sell for 2000. You spent 2K to rent that package for the duration of your shoot.

I know very very bare bones RED kits (nikon lenses, monitor, sticks and recording media) that rent for 100 a day!!!!! And that's readily found here in LA. I'd you offer 1500 to these owners they'd flip.

With that bare bones red kit you'll kill a 7D image.

I think the op is asking: can you make a good looking movie with a few dslrs? Depends on what you call good looking.

I keep saying this but anyone who has failed to listen please get off of your computer and go find these two titles--

PRIMER --Sundance king, Shot on 16mm, very few retakes,by no name no experience filmmakers for 16,000! Shane Carruth was an engineer at the time and had this great idea for a very good psychological sci-fi feature. He picked up some books, wrote a script and learned his way into Sundance with am incredible watch. I've seen this feautre a good 20 times.

The Signal -- shot in Atlanta by xlcinema.com (I also think they were dvxusers) peers for 60k on an xl-h1 and mini35 combo and sold for 1.5 million to Magnolia pictures. If you don't know the combo, just imagine shooting at 100 iso at all times but the image noise is something like 640 iso. That's what it's like shooting with an XL-H1 and Mini35.

These are must sees as they're real and existing cases of success. And very rare at that.

Either of these could have been done with a 7D and they would still be as good.
Click to expand...



Both great films, and yes, you're 100% correct. Especially here in LA, everybody and their mother can make a movie, but it's always the content what stands out. When Quentin Tarantino was asked for advice for independent filmmakers, his response was :

"Make Reservoir Dogs."

Meaning, make a movie that kicks ass, and nobody will care what you shot it on.
 
Last edited:
kholi..i think somewhere in there the Op also said something to the point of being able to pick up the 7d and shoot whenever he wanted and learning to use it very well, instead of renting a RED for a little time and being inexperienced with it....so i guess thats part of the deciding factor.

But if u got some budding DOP thats skilled on the RED but cheap cuz he's still as i said a budding DOP then i guess that'd work.

I'm gonna just break out into a little Jamaican here and say "yow boss...jus' go mek di dyam movie and dun" >> translation " yo my man...just make the darn film and be done with it"

shoot with what u got. Cheers :)
 
Barry was the film "The New Year Parade" done with DV100, a or b?

Barry_Green said:
Is it possible to make a "GOOD FEATURE FILM"? It's possible but it's extremely rare to do so. Very few people actually accomplish it. And the particular camera they use has little to nothing to do with it.

Look up the rack of awards that The New Year Parade has won -- that was shot on a standard-def DVX100.

Look at the Oscar nominations James Longley has gotten -- those were earned for films shot on a standard-def DVX100.

If you're capable of making a good feature film, then yes it'd be possible to do it on a 7D. It'll just be a lot more work than it would be on something that's made for the job.

If you knew, for a fact, that your film was going to be GOOD -- great script, great acting, great director -- then yeah, you'd be foolish to bet all that on the convoluted hassle of shooting it on a still camera. If your film package is good, it'll attract money, and you'd use that money to hire the right crew and the right equipment to do the job right.

And if your film package can't attract any money? Well, that's when you face the Simon Cowell moment, of recognizing that maybe it really isn't very good after all. So then you have a choice -- stop what you're doing and refine it until it is good enough to attract some money to "do it right", or -- just forge ahead with what you've got and try to "prove everyone wrong." Just be aware that that works for about 1 in 10,000.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top