None of these cameras are for "Indie Filmmakers"

As the beloved and ever supporting wife of DOP16mm, and the writing force behind our team, I want to know that our projects will look their best. That said, with 2 kids, a morgage, two cars, an editing system that will make our projects look as polished and professional as they can be. I have to wonder what is this new fantom camera going to fit into our tight budget, and how much is the cost of the system upgrades going to take away from our children's collage funds. Even DOP16mm has a pin-up of the new camera by his desk, and not me.

For you younger guy's without all the trappings of marital bliss, go for it, shoot for the stars.
 
Isaac_Brody said:
Well the HVX also shoots SD 16x9 to minidv. So why not just get the HVX and use it like a DVX until you can afford to shoot HD?

If you have the money for a brand new DVX why not save a little extra and have a versatile SD/HD camera?
Click to expand...

This is a good point. I quit shooting my project because my filmout service advised me to shoot in 4:3, but to insure a good 16:9 transfer, told me to put my DVX in letterbox mode, then use the letterbox margins as a guide in terms of putting masking tape top and bottom margins on the LCD monitor so in my 4:3 shooting I'd be aware of where they would crop the image for 16:9. The only problem is, the film transfer guys were going to crop at slightly smaller margins than the DVX's letterbox mode (which served as my tape guide on the LCD viewfinder). With this project I needed precise margins. Plus, the LCD uses more battery juice, and I like using the regular EVF better.

The upshot is, I sold my DVX when I learned enough about the HVX. 16:9 in SD is reason enough for me to move up, even though the extra money will be a real pain. The HD will be icing on some cake way in the future.
 
dop16mm said:
That said, with 2 kids, a morgage, two cars, an editing system that will make our projects look as polished and professional as they can be. I have to wonder what is this new fantom camera going to fit into our tight budget, and how much is the cost of the system upgrades going to take away from our children's collage funds.
Click to expand...

Now that adds a lot more relevant info. that wasn't in the first post (that I saw). Super Size Me (from what I read--which could be wrong) was shot on a PD-150. The DVX is a way better camera. A DVX + decent sound and lighting + good ideas well executed is good enough given your other responsibilities. If it doesn't work out, son and daughter can still go to college!!:laugh:
 
dop16mm said:
As the beloved and ever supporting wife of DOP16mm, and the writing force behind our team, I want to know that our projects will look their best. That said, with 2 kids, a morgage, two cars, an editing system that will make our projects look as polished and professional as they can be. I have to wonder what is this new fantom camera going to fit into our tight budget, and how much is the cost of the system upgrades going to take away from our children's collage funds. Even DOP16mm has a pin-up of the new camera by his desk, and not me.

For you younger guy's without all the trappings of marital bliss, go for it, shoot for the stars.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you need to participate in this thread:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=34479

I can only say this in response to what you just wrote:

If it's out of your league then it's out of your league. And are you really equating the cost of the camera (workflow) and the limitatins of your budget with the effect it has on your kids college fund.

:lipsrseal
 
My main point is that if you already have a dvx why move up until you are getting paid for it. Also if you are just starting out with no gear you also need lights and mics and tripods etc. If you can't afford to go full boat HD, the price difference can go a long way towards filling out your kit. Most people in the general audience don't even know the difference between dv and film let alone sd vs. hd, but they do know good sound/ bad sound. A sennheiser 416 with zeppelin windscreen will do a lot more for your production values than HD, don't ignore the details. And of course the script is the most important detail. As independants, the only thing we can produce for nothing is the script, work it until it is right, no excuse for crap, you're not pandering to studio execs or star egos.
 
dop16mm said:
Most people in the general audience don't even know the difference between dv and film let alone sd vs. hd, but they do know good sound/ bad sound. A sennheiser 416 with zeppelin windscreen will do a lot more for your production values than HD, don't ignore the details. And of course the script is the most important detail.
Click to expand...

Here, Here :thumbsup:

Great original post and follow by the wife. That is a team I would love to work with.

As a small nit-picky point though. "Indie Filmmaker" involves a wide-range of budgets. I have worked on 35mm with budgets under $300,000. All of this was raised independently. They just took the time to raise the money to make the movie they wanted. At the same time I have worked on 16mm with sub $50,000 budgets or DV features with budgets of $25,000. Every independent producer has a different approach and budget on how to tell their particular story.

Point is that for a certain level of indie filmmaker the HVX is a great camera. Others willneed/want to tell their story with a Hi8 camera. The best advice would be to budget and plan this all ahead of time. The camera is just a very small percentage of a movie's total budget.

Best
 
I have to agree with the second point:

Things that will make your film shine has nothing to do with pixel counts.

1. Talent

The first and foremost crucial ingredient is talent by your actors. The second someone cannot obviously act, not only is it immedialtey noticable but seriously detracting from your world.

2. Sound

I love Sound. I love sound design, an fx and foley and scores and the audible sensation of BEING RIGHT THERE in the thick of it. Not enough emphasis is placed on Sound especially at this level.

3. Story

In the end it will come down the story. Those first two items hold your attention but it wont keep it. The story ultimately is king. We see this to be true each and every summer in Hollywood. They bring out the best actors, crews, budgets and in the end "If it aint got that story thing it aint got that bling....."

Notice how none of the above has anything to do with pixels and latitude and exposure and cameras and lighting? Because if you have the TOP 3 secured; you have a WINNER.

Favorite Examples?

Pieces of April

28 Days Later
 
John_Hudson said:
I love Sound. I love sound design, an fx and foley and scores and the audible sensation of BEING RIGHT THERE in the thick of it. Not enough emphasis is placed on Sound especially at this level.
Click to expand...


I couldn't agree more.
SOUND SOUND SOUND.

A friend of mine who is a sound designer has a saying he repeats over and over to all his "indie" clients in regards to what format they shoot on:

"The eyes adjust, the ears don't"

Perfect examples that you named John, in both those movies the visual image is pretty bad...granted it's good for DV, but pretty rough when compared to most movies. But, if the story is good, after the first 5 minutes you get used to the look and forget about it.

Now try doing that with the sound on a movie
People will be walking out of the theater during those first 5 minutes.
:)


Oh, and not to pull away from the 'story is king' thrust of your post (which I agree 100% with)... but I would add that LIGHTING is more important than the specs of the camera you shoot with. Someone on the CML list posted a great line a while back and I'll never forget it:

If you know how to light it doesn't matter what format you shoot on.
And if you don't know how to light it doesn't matter what format you shoot on.
 
John_Hudson said:
I have to agree with the second point:

Things that will make your film shine has nothing to do with pixel counts.

1. Talent

The first and foremost crucial ingredient is talent by your actors. The second someone cannot obviously act, not only is it immedialtey noticable but seriously detracting from your world.

2. Sound

I love Sound. I love sound design, an fx and foley and scores and the audible sensation of BEING RIGHT THERE in the thick of it. Not enough emphasis is placed on Sound especially at this level.

3. Story

In the end it will come down the story. Those first two items hold your attention but it wont keep it. The story ultimately is king. We see this to be true each and every summer in Hollywood. They bring out the best actors, crews, budgets and in the end "If it aint got that story thing it aint got that bling....."

Notice how none of the above has anything to do with pixels and latitude and exposure and cameras and lighting? Because if you have the TOP 3 secured; you have a WINNER.
Click to expand...

Amen to that! I would also add a fourth element to your list - experience. Technology keeps getting more affordable, but there is absolutely no shortcut to talent and experience. Talent is an inherent characteristic and we simply pay dues to get the experience. Someone who is experienced should know that good sound and dynamic story are absolutely critical to the end result. Buying a pen will not make magically transform you into Shakespeare, buying a paint brush will not automatically make you Renoir, and buying a new camera will not automatically make you Spielberg - you must have natural talent, spot-on sound, a great story, and solid experience if your production is to excel...

Gibby
www.cut4.tv
 
Of course talent and experience. My list is assuming we have a bit of that.

And lighting? I want nothing more than to learn the art and craft of lighting (at an Academy and ASC standards level no less) but I think the bare bones facts is that 'acceptable levels of exposure' are going to be enough for the audience assuming we have the top 3 nailed down.
 
John_Hudson said:
I think the bare bones facts is that 'acceptable levels of exposure' are going to be enough for the audience assuming we have the top 3 nailed down.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, I guess I didn't phrase it correctly...
My point was that instead of being hung up on camera specs, it's the craft of filmmaking that is much more important.

My point was only that I would be concerned with lighting before camera specs... because it will make a bigger difference in the end product (after story, talent, and sound..etc).
 
Yeah, I nearly put in a smart-aleck response that said "well put? Sounds like a bad english translation of a Japanese product manual..." :laugh: :grin: :evil: :thumbsup:
 
Luis Caffesse said:
Thanks John... next time you quote me though, feel free to take the liberty to fix my typos. It's been a long day.
Click to expand...

There ya go -- all fixed!
 
And damn it Luis, get a real Chewbacca Avatar!


chewbacca.jpg
 
John_Hudson said:
Favorite Examples?

Pieces of April

28 Days Later
Click to expand...

Which camera was used in the 28 Days Later? Just saw the movie and was wondering...thanks. :thumbup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top