More traffic at dvx100

dvx100 has a retro indie vibe. i plan on using it for the opening scenes of my movie.
 
Hipsters camera of choice? First they bring back Vinyl, then Polaroids, so is the DVX and MiniDV filmmaking next? Also, am I really that old?
 
I can't imagine the hipsters being excited about anything that has "digital" in the name. Long live Polaroid, super 8 and VHS!

As to age, man, I am really old. My first video experience was on 1/2" B&W EIAJ open reel equipment. Cameras actually had tubes in them back then, you know.

- Greg
 
Last edited:
16x9 was a hassle when having to mix with 4x3, and it was sort of nice when it was either SD video or film. Later on a $3500 DVX shot the same NTSC signal as a $100,000 video camera which was nice. But I don't really miss the analog tape days or even digital tape days.
Dealing with generation loss and all the other attributes of analog video are not exactly fond memories. But at the same time, it was a different world in a sense. Not "everyone" was doing it and while gear was really expensive, jobs often paid more too.

I wish i had all the tools I have now 20 years ago! Or even 10 years ago or even 6! :)
 
I'm once again dealing with 4:3 working on some demo reels. I really wish I had switched to 16x9 sooner. Several of my cameras could do it but I resisted for several reasons. It sure would make my job easier now up-ressing footage to mix in.
 
Loved my DVX100B it was a wonderful camera and after shooting with Betacams on my shoulder, it was a delight. The images often called "non broadcast" kicked the ass out of those shot by the nay sayers who could only resort to CBC or BBC standards to back them up. But I have to admit, hanging a home made lens adapter off the zoom lens with a vintage Nikkor 50mm lens with home made rods and matte box, a 7 inch auto dvd player for a monitor all balancing on a Home Depot bought aluminum slab attached to a manfrotto quick release.....well kinda sketchy.
But I was thrilled to have that shallow depth of field shot that was way better that setting the cam up at the other end of the building and zooming in gave me. Scared the sh1t out of many an interview subject and old school director.
I just tossed out a couple of boxes of tape a couple of months ago kept one and a small sony handycam just in case I ever need to log and transfer. It sits right beside the VHS player and DVD recorder, sort of an in house museum.
 
I honestly wouldn't mind if MiniDV made a bit of a comeback.. or CCD cameras for that matter, there is something beautiful about CCD chips.. CMOS, idk, I understand they're pros but everything looks too good now, it doesnt have a personality really anymore.
 
I wouldn't mind if mini dv made a comeback but I wouldn't go back. I never really liked it to begin with. I do however like CCDs and global shutters. I know what you mean about personality. Gosh things have changed over the 25 years I've been shooting
 
I'm planning to use my two DVX100a's to shoot a short Christmas film with my church youth group. If I ever get my web series off the ground, I'll probably use them for that too. The low-light quality of the DVX is hard to beat. And I just love the look and feel of the footage. I know I'll have to give it up someday, but not today.
 
I may be way wrong but it seems like a decade or so ago there was more creative stuff being shared when many of us were using DVX100s and XL2s. Not sure what changed.
 
Making films got cheaper and easier, so everybody and his brother dubbed himself a 'filmmaker' and flooded YouTube, Vimeo and everywhere else with garbage, making it hard to find the quality stuff.
 
firehawk said:
I may be way wrong but it seems like a decade or so ago there was more creative stuff being shared when many of us were using DVX100s and XL2s. Not sure what changed.
Click to expand...

Easy access to equipment has led to a flood of new folks who may have a few dollars but don't have the creative energy. Back in the old days, when even a DVX100 cost the inflation-adjusted equivalent of today's $6,000, you needed a lot more energy and drive and passion to even be able to get your hands on a camera. And then you had to put up with a Letus or Redrock 35mm adapter, and the attendant light losses, and all the lighting hassles that go with it. And we didn't have cheapo $29 LEDs to light with, you needed real lighting equipment which wasn't cheap. So if you wanted to make a film, it was much harder than it is today. Accordingly, you really, really needed to be dedicated to see the process through. Sure, a lot of crap was made, but some really interesting stuff was too. I think the extra dedication and effort needed meant that more crap got abandoned early on, and a higher percentage of good stuff got finished because the amount of work, dedication and passion required to finish something meant that the work that was created was something that was more important to those filmmakers. It meant something to them, it meant enough that they'd go through the sacrifices to get it made and finished.

Now, with easy access to cheap equipment everywhere, we're flooded with a whole boatload of poorly-thought-out, poorly-executed, soulless nonsense, a lot of which was seemingly made primarily so the creator could get some footage into After Effects so they could play around there and add grading and effects and whatnot. Right around the start of the DSLR Revolution, suddenly a travelogue became a "film"; people would shoot location shots and set a soundtrack under it and call it a "short film" instead of what it really was -- a series of test shots. 2008-2009-ish, it became more about "interesting shots" and we had an absolute dearth of "interesting characters" or "interesting stories". Why? Because it's a whole lot easier to go out and grab a few location shots and string 'em together and slap Magic Bullet Looks on 'em, than it is to come up with a compelling story, audition and cast compelling actors, and execute a brilliant directorial style, and then convince a good dozen people to work for free for a couple of weeks to bring your vision to life.

So we got flooded with a bunch of "location reels", and the "new breed of filmmaker" demanded recognition as a "filmmaker" for putting out this stuff, and we were overrun with pointless horsecrap, and the creative spirit seems to have died.

Is there interesting, creative stuff being made nowadays? I'm sure there is, but it's lost among a sea of horsecrap, and with the ratio of "brilliant" to "horsecrap" sinking so low, it's harder and harder to find the "brilliant", so people don't bother. Try to get comments on a User Film in the User Film section nowadays, it's tough, because people won't bother to watch. They've been burned too many times before.

Back in the old days, we'd get 90+ entries in a DVXFest, and sure, 80 of them would be awful, but 70 of those would still show a lot of work and those filmmakers would generally go on to improve in the next fest. And 5 to 10 of the entries would be really excellent. Today? We put out a DVXFest and get maybe one or two entries, total. People just don't bother anymore.

Would it be too harsh to say that the "democratization of film" killed off indie film? I don't know, but I think a case could be made for it. I think when things were harder, it really sorted the wheat from the chaff and the mixed metaphor continues in saying that the cream really did rise to the top back then. Now there's so much chaff it's harder to find the wheat.
 
Yes there is plenty of garbage out there and many people think that owning a DSLR, a photographer makes. That being said, affordable high quality gear has also opened doors to creatives and has really created content that has some out of the box thinking. I also think that, to a degree, there is a trickle up effect that is causing professionals to up their game in order to set themselves apart in a way other than the equipment they own.

- Proud XL2 Owner
 
Last edited:
Great replies, guys. Thank you. Yeah I agree amidst all the massive influx of "filmmakers" and all the negatives that has produced, we now also have the possible positive result that the pros can't slack off and have to have their stuff together because there are so many newcomers willing to do cheap work and have access to good tools. This change seems to have affected the corporate realm, weddings and entertainment.

I personally see both sides of that because those cheap kids with DSLR's are biting at my heels but at the same time gear has come down enough that I can compete with the top houses here which used to be so grossly arrogant they'd boast no one could touch them and charge whatever exhorbitant amount they wanted.

Like you said Barry, a 3 or 4 grand DVX100 was harder to purchase a decade ago and by the time you added mics, lights etc.. a person had to be relatively serious and committed to start a project. Today with hardly any money a person can make a lousy "film."
 
William said:
The venerable HMC150 is the best DVX100 Panasonic ever made. :happy:
Click to expand...
Haha. I owned a DVX100B and still have 3 HMC150s. Don't ban me from the site, but I never was crazy about the DVX. I am much more fond of the HMC. Part of it was that I never committed myself to learning as much about the camera as I have the HMC, though...and Barry's awesome book helped a lot!

I do remember seeing lots of neat projects back in the day people did and sometimes still do with the DVX. And sometimes I see some from the HMC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top