Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

E

Ernest_Acosta

Well-known member
On Friday I checked out the movie Open Water.  I know the moviemaker used a DV camera and on some literature it said transfer was 24P to 35mm.  Assuming that the XL2 isn't released yet, would it be safe to say that it was the DVX100?  The images were very sharp in medium and close-up shots but as with all mini-dv, the wide shots were less than desirable?  Anyone care to comment?
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

it was for sure shot on a vx2000, and i believe a couple pd150s as well - it was not shot in 24p.. its some sort of mispront.. and the imagery smells bad.. the dvx looks way better on the big screen
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

IAL is absolutely correct. In fact, VARIETY first release the '24p' release and were wrong about it. The filmmaker has stated what IAL has said and added "They wish they had the DVX... but it was not available when they started shooting!"
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

Maybe they were referring to an uprezzing to 24P HD at some point along the way, and then transferring it to film...

From what I've seen it most definitely originated in 60i
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

..yeah whats horrible is that even in the previews on the big screen.. YOU CAN SEE INTERLACE ARTIFACTS!!

.. yes im serious, and no its not just in my head.. they are there. its like they they didnt bother to deinterlace it for progressive output instead just taking interlaced frames, and throwing them in a 24p timeline for a filmout or something.. but oh well.. its not my film.. be sure to check it out next time you see the preview, or the film. :)
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

[quote author=iamloser link=board=news;num=1092064353;start=0#6 date=08/09/04 at 12:54:24]..yeah whats horrible is that even in the previews on the big screen.. YOU CAN SEE INTERLACE ARTIFACTS!!

.. yes im serious, and no its not just in my head.. they are there. its like they they didnt bother to deinterlace it for progressive output instead just taking interlaced frames, and throwing them in a 24p timeline for a filmout or something.. but oh well.. its not my film.. be sure to check it out next time you see the preview, or the film. :)[/quote]

http://www.apple.com/trailers/lions_gate/open_water/open_large.html

tell me where please
like between which quotes I guess?
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

..if i recall correctly pretty much the whole trailer in the theater is riddled with the interlacing. its especially noticeable anytime there is fast movement.. like when the sharks thrash the water. I dont know that you would be able to see it in the web trailer.. which does not work for me.. it freezes. im sure if the movie was transferred like the trailer you wont have any trouble finding the interlacing on the big screen.
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

I agree with IAL on this...  A few weeks ago I saw the trailer in the movie theater, not knowing anything about the movie, and instantly I could see the "DV" in the footage; interlacing artifacts, jagged edges, and blown out highlights.  I'm sure the movie is great, but it certainly didn't fool me into thinking it was anything other than MiniDV.

EDIT: I should add that none of the people in the theater with me thought Open Water looked "different" than other movies.  They didn't think Collateral looked "like video" either.  Are we really that much more aware of the image quality of films than the average moviegoer?
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

The average movie-goer thinks "Oh, look! Tom Cruise!"

That said, just because they don't notice a difference conciously doesn't mean it doesn't affect them subconciously. A movie like Collateral used the video look to its advantage, whereas I highly doubt if they shot Lord of the Rings in 60i it'd have been as impressive. People wouldn't have neccesarily thought the scenery was as beautiful or something...
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

[quote author=Jaime Valles link=board=news;num=1092064353;start=0#9 date=08/11/04 at 13:36:53]Are we really that much more aware of the image quality of films than the average moviegoer?[/quote]

Yes we are; it's a curse similar to Lon Chaney's Wolfman. But different.
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

[quote author=Mike_Donis link=board=news;num=1092064353;start=0#10 date=08/11/04 at 13:56:36]That said, just because they don't notice a difference conciously doesn't mean it doesn't affect them subconciously.  A movie like Collateral used the video look to its advantage, whereas I highly doubt if they shot Lord of the Rings in 60i it'd have been as impressive.  People wouldn't have neccesarily thought the scenery was as beautiful or something...[/quote]

I agree... to a point.  While many here were discussing the merits of HD vs 35mm, Star Wars Episode II and Once Upon A Time In Mexico were both released, and the average movie-goer didn't even blink at the HD footage they were seeing.  They had no idea.  To them, it was just another movie.  And nobody complained that they didn't look good, except for us in these forums.

EDIT: Actually, I thought both those movies looked stunning; HD or not. So I wan't complaining either, and I KNEW!!!
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

Well, I was really just referring to 60i footage being transfered to 24P, not 24P native footage.

I think the Cine Alta camera captures beautful imagery in the right hands :)
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

collateral was shot on 3 differnt types of cameras.. most exteriors were shot with a modified vipercam(which is a very specialized and awsome high def camera). and a little was shot on the sony cine alta , and then a few interiors were shot on 35mm. then they blended it all together..  all of it looks like film, but the vipercam and cine alta were used for outdoors cause they could pick up more detail , and were more light sensitive at night without aot of lighting than most film would be capeable of.
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

[quote author=iamloser link=board=news;num=1092064353;start=15#15 date=08/13/04 at 05:38:32]...then they blended it all together..  all of it looks like film, but the vipercam and cine alta were used for outdoors cause they could pick up more detail... [/quote]

Well, it certainly looks good; but I remember when I saw the trailer in the theater for the first time, without knowing anything about the film, I told my wife "this is some form of video, not film". She looked at me and said "How on earth can you tell?" I understand that they were trying to get the "feel of night" and the HD allowed them to "see into the night", but it doesn't look like film, to me.

Back on subject, though, Open Water certainly looks like DV, but I guess only to us here. Most folks will see it the same way they saw 28 Days Later, Tadpole, and Bamboozled... all of which are MiniDV, but the masses didn't know. As long as the script, acting and directing is good, the medium is irrelevant; just a tool. You can paint a masterpiece with oil paints, or with much cheaper watercolors. They won't look the same, but who's to say which is better? And more importantly, who cares as long as it's good?
 
Re: Is "Open Water" shot w/DVX?

Most of collateral was shot on the 900s, and 2 of them. They used the Viper for a couple days but got fedup with the amount of equipment needed to shoot. I saw it with a big time DP that said he kept getting thrown out of the movie when it went from HD to 35mm, and to me, I couldnt tell the difference to be honest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top