GH3 Lack of gh3 film festival inclusion - theories? camera politics?

blake2404

blake2404

Well-known member
I am a gh3 owner and am thinking of using it to shoot a short film project this summer. Ideally i'll be entering it in festivals, but I have a hard time finding any reference to gh3 films in festivals anywhere, big or small. I am sure there a couple obscure examples........but could there be a stance against certain cameras? Or is it just a matter of no stand out work being created on the gh3 for festival submission.

There were quite a few gh2 films, but that was at a different time (pre-4k dslr)

Interested to hear your thoughts. I am quite willing to be proven wrong, I just find it peculiar to find iphone films, nikon dslr films and so on......but a lack of gh3 content.
 
Just go and shoot and and get it done right. If it's good and fits the festival theme. It will be selected. Most of them don't care what was shot on but more about the content.
 
Don't even list the camera that you used unless it is required. What's you finished output going to be (HD or 2k or 4k)?
 
Good advice from both. I understand and agree that camera limitations shouldn't a film from getting made. I am not concerned with the finished product, it's more just a weird anomaly for me that there is a lack of gh3 films in festivals and curious whether some more significant festivals discriminate a bit. As far as a finished output......that is something i'll have to consider. I think some festivals want a 2k master, but some are fine with 1080p.

I do think some submissions require camera info though, but yes in the case that they don't, it might be advantageous to omit that fact.
 
The other poster is right - content is king. Can you imagine a situation where a festival selection is taking place and they go "wow that's a fantastic film!" and someone notices, "but it was shot on a GH3!" at which point they go "oh well, in that case throw it in the trash"? Me neither. You may ask: but what if it's a marginal situation and one of the criteria is the camera? If your film is so undistinguished that the camera is the final nail in the coffin, then the problem was that your film was ready for the coffin in the first place - make a better film! Remember, last year a highly regarded film - "Tangerine" - was shot on an iPhone 5S; didn't prevent it from being a very critically acclaimed film, successful at festivals and an audience favorite (and the 5S footage looking darn good). All that said, I personally don't like the motion cadence I get from the GH3, so there's that - but someone else may be able to do stuff with the GH3 that I can't. If you can get the GH3 to work for you, don't wait - go shoot.
 
There are so many festivals out there im sure the gh3&4 have had a running in a lot of them. No reason to include what gear it was filmed with though. Content is all that should matter for indies
 
The Gh3 is a great camera. It was used on some nice projects, and several of my own short films. I think it was kind of this middle project between the Gh2 which was able to be hacked and improved dramatically and the Gh4 which was a huge leap in performance and usability. The Gh3 was never hacked, but it provided lots of good stuff. So shoot your film with it. It is more about lenses, lighting and audio today than the chips. Each camera has strengths and weaknesses. Know thyself and your camera and it will look great. Agree with all the above.
 
I would say it is not necessarily the festivals being snobbish or deliberately overlooking your GH3, but rather more likely just not a lot of filmmakers submitting projects shot on that camera. Make yours and and the submission number go up.
 
Many festivals do ask about the camera used but usually it's for internal uses. I am involved with 4 film festivals including the Cleveland 48hr and I have seen many gh3 and gh4 contents. But barely it is mentioned. I have seen really good stuff to really bad ones lol so yea. Make sure your content is good :)
 
I wanted to thank everyone for their input. In the end I have to concede that there probably is very little camera politics going on. I agree that content is the main factor, although strengths and limitations of camera/sensors will play a part.

I have decided to shoot with a c100/ninja combo. I just think the color and low noise is more attractive to me for what I am doing. I also agree with the user who stated the gh3 motion cadence is a lil peculiar.

Thanks again, as usual this forum ends up being immensely helpful.
 
I don't think there's any conspiracies at all.

The GH2 is famous for its image after the hack, and has very very little moire and antialiasing. I think it does a full sensor readout and bins down the image, as opposed to cropping and line skipping.

The Gh3 has supposedly a similar image, but suffers from moire and anti aliasing.

I think people go by reputation, and at the time, the Gh2 was the best camera at the price. In one blind test by the Zacuto people a lot of professionals (including Coppola!) chose the Gh2 over pro cameras like the Alexa.

http://www.eoshd.com/2012/07/zacuto...oppola-and-audience-majority-give-win-to-gh2/

I still use the Gh2.... fabulous workhorse.... as a backup and B camera to my hacked Samsung NX1 which shoots 4K.

If you can get a Gh2 at around $250 then I think it's a bargain.
 
I was soundie on a short film just finished recently which got shot with a GH3. Is still a great camera.

I wouldn't buy it today though.... I'd either spend less on a G6 instead, or get a G7.
 
My last film has screened at a dozen festivals and not once has anyone asked what camera I used. I'd suggest you just shoot on whatever camera you choose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top