Panasonic unveiled G1-HD...

Status
Not open for further replies.
The current consumer camcorders record to a bayer color array on a 3-4Mp sensor and record in 21-24Mb/s H.264 long GOP. Other than the weak glass, partially overcome with a 35mm adapter and good glass, these cameras have very good picture sharpness, more than enough for a movie.

The issue is: Is that enough? Can you get what YOU want out of it? Do you want texture detail or other aspects that the consumer camera can't provide? Rack focus is one example.
 
squig, I would say don't put your hard earned $25k on a D90 production. If you want to go DSLR there is nothing but the Mark 2. For an excellent traditional video camera, if you can get a hold of an HPX 500 you can't go wrong. There must be a few people were you are that should have one you can hook up to.
 
Prior to the DSLR's coming out I was going to shoot it on a HMC150 or Canon HF/HG series with an adapter. The trouble is it's a gritty urban drama with a lot of night outdoor scenes and nightclub scenes so I really need the low light ability of a DSLR and I can walk around stealing shots unnoticed. I'll be shooting in an environment that's out of control. I want the film to look lo-fi like a 70's 16mm film. It's about kids and drug abuse so I'm after a Christianne F/Needle Park look. The D90 is capable if I am.

If the Mark II did 24fps I'd get one. I probably won't finish the script, casting etc till July so maybe the D400 will be out by then. I'll be looking closely at the GH1 but that music video in it's 720p 15Mbps glory had the look I want so I might just get a second D90 to compensate for the overheating.

I'm paying nothing or very little for locations, using raw talent, and I'm the director/producer/dop/editor so 25k including 10% for overruns should be ok....then there's always the visa. I should be able to raise some extra funds.

I'm not really concerned about distribution until it's finished. There really isn't a lot of competition here to get good indie films screened and I think the script is compelling enough.
 
Last edited:
Squig, try to stray away from DVXuser until you finish your script. None of this camera stuff matters if you don't have at least a first full and finished draft of your feature.

And, honestly, by then something else WILL be out, and you'll be ahead of the game because you have a full length script AND 25K to shoot with.

It's hard to get away from this site, I'm a gear-head as well but I'm about to commence principal on a feature and trust me, the one thing that's more important than anything else is that script, man.

If you had to shoot on a GH-1 you would still be leagues ahead of most other productions. But you will never catch up if you don't get on that script.
 
yeah you're right....but unfortunately the creative process isn't something you can rush and I just haven't had the right mindset lately to get stuck into the heavy emotional part of the script. All the scenes are there but there is some important dialogue yet to be downloaded from my head.

I've been busy doing really exciting things like working out the production budget and organising equipment. I should have all that out of the way shortly so I can concentrate on the script. I might be doing things in a strange order but that's just how I usually do things. As the buck stops with me it will take however long it takes.

Before I saw the potential of the D90 I didn't even have a script....just an idea in my head. Maybe I should shoot with it, we've come this far together.

I just read the GH1 is going to be available in Japan on April 24 http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/03/h...ot_in_red_availabile_april_24_in_japan-2.html
 
If you only plan on showing the feature on Vimeo or YouTube, perhaps even SD DVD I can't see why the D90 wouldn't be enough. Otherwise, your foot = shot in.
 
I never joke

I know it's going to cost as much as the whole production......but here in the bush they haven't heard of digital projection. We only have about 200 screens in the whole country. And then there's festivals overseas to consider.
 
Ruzo said:
Squid,
As a simple movie fan, if your feature looked like this, I would most likely not be inclined to watch it. This is exactly the cold video look that is completely uninspiring for a movie.
Click to expand...

Was that a joke? But if it's not, explain. This is an interesting (honestly) thought/comment.
 
Squid,
As a simple movie fan, if your feature looked like this, I would most likely not be inclined to watch it. This is exactly the cold video look that is completely uninspiring.
Click to expand...

What the heck is "video look"? I have no idea where the people get the notion that film is not sharp? 16mm is sharp, 35mm sharper, 70 mm even more so and IMAX, well just look at it. You soften it with filters and whatnot or in post.
Next time you go to the movies and watch a high production movie take a closer look at its crispiness and sharpness. Shallow DOF maybe, but the focused areas sharp as nails. Look at TV series like CSI and the same. Crispy chickens.

It is better to start with a sharp footage and have options in post.
 
Ruzo said:
Squid,
As a simple movie fan, if your feature looked like this, I would most likely not be inclined to watch it. This is exactly the cold video look that is completely uninspiring for a movie.
Click to expand...
yep....but try telling john that. How am I supposed to convey urban decay with a toothpaste commercial look like that? Maybe if I get a 5D and bash it on the pavement enough times it might look ok
 
As a simple movie fan, if your feature looked like this, I would most likely not be inclined to watch it.
Click to expand...


If you are part of this forum and the industry you are not a simple movie fan. Then again if you are s simple movie fan you shouldn't be a part of this forum or this industry.


Maybe if I get a 5D and bash it on the pavement enough times it might look ok
Click to expand...


????
 
Kholi said:
Was that a joke? But if it's not, explain. This is an interesting (honestly) thought/comment.
Click to expand...

Not a joke at all. This is just clean video and there is nothing artistic about the look. It's kind of too plain...too real...too cold. Like digital sounding music. It does not pull me into its world. I never liked the video look and will never like it. I can't wait for the D90 look to be without artifacts.
 
Ruzo said:
Not a joke at all. This is just clean video and there is nothing artistic about the look. It's kind of too plain...too real...too cold. Like digital sounding music. It does not pull me into its world. I never liked the video look and will never like it. I can't wait for the D90 look to be without artifacts.
Click to expand...

I can respect that! I just wanted to know what you meant. No arguments from me, man.

Thanks for expounding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top