REJOUER - Film being made with GH1!

PappasArts

PappasArts

Veteran
Link to teaser trailer... This film was shot at 1080/24 with Dalsa Digital lenses: 19, 24, 35, 50, 85, 100, 180mm.

http://vimeo.com/5455889


Behind the scenes:

http://vimeo.com/5455889




Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84
Facebook & Myspace:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
 
Last edited:
That is absolutely fantastic. I said it from the beginning, that "mud" crap was totally uncalled for. I knew that in the hands of real pros this cam was gonna rock. Whoever doesn't see the potential of this little thing is blind. I was just wathcing the TV series the Philanthropist and Burn Notice and the image quality was the same as this trailer. And they are big budget series. The folks at Panasonic must have laughed real hard when they heard about people in here saying that they could not work with it because it was only 17 mbits and had an unnaceptable amout of "mud". Thanks God there are folks showing how it is really done. Thank Pappas for the links.

BTW: I guess thats the project Illya Friedman was working on.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the link Pappas. I start shooting a feature next week with two of these puppies. This kind of footage just reinforces that I made the right decision in picking the Gh1 as my cams. A few prime lenses and a little more practice with camera movement and I'll be singing. This camera has limitations but thanks to this forum I know what they are and am prepared for the workarounds. Thanks to all that contributed the positive as well as the negative aspects of the Gh1. It all helps.
 
Your welcome guys! It's great to see positive stuff like that. I just saw some recent 1080/24 that was very sharp indeed. The mud junk ( which is highly boring ) is so over blown!

I just can't wait for my camera I ordered last month to ship. The GH1 mysterious delivery delay, is like a very slow water boarding experience.....Grrrr torture!


.
 
I just don't get how that smooth quality was achieved with so much motion happening. My initial tests with 1080 and 720 (PAL) AVCHD, compared with Panasonic consumer camcorder lower bitrate AVCHD, were all judder and no fluid, and jumps at missing (?) frames - nothing like this trailer's smoothness. Tomorrow I'll work on settings, taking careful notes, till I crack it. It's clearly possible to get very good results - if one knows how.
 
Some Hollywood quality shots in there.

Was it shot in 720p or full HD 24p? Good low light shots as well... though a lot of that is down to an expensive lens, probably.

Yes I agree, shot properly and with a knowledge of what scenes cause mud, you can avoid it altogether.
 
Ozpeter said:
I just don't get how that smooth quality was achieved with so much motion happening. .
Click to expand...
As I was watching I was asking myself the very same question. The whole movement is so fluid. This is always what seperated me from Hollywood trailers vs Independent Low budget Trailers. The motion is most times different (in my eyes at least). Also, as you alluded to, no (or not much) mud.

I seen Illya Freidman in the outtakes...maybe he can answer this. Also, the final footage (both of them) were showning as 29,97 in Quicktime. I guess the question is...was thi shot in 24p or 60p and retimed to 29.97? In any case, as someone already mentioned, this looks like DVX footage (colors etc) but in a much higher definition. Good stuff.
 
In any case, as someone already mentioned, this looks like DVX footage (colors etc) but in a much higher definition.
Click to expand...

It was compared to footage from the HVX 200a. Thats a huge difference from DVX and a big achievement for a camera costing a lot less.
 
why is it that only a few shots looked like film but the rest either looks like ex1-ish video or this vague somewhere in between RED and EX1 and not quite filmic enough look....???

the most stand out filmic shots where at 00:30 - 00:34. then there is a half second shot that looks like video when she throws the lemon thing. and 00:35 - 00:40 looks good again.

there are some other filmic shots but most are that vague in between ex1 and red look.... and some just look like straight ex1.... is it lens choice/grading/camera settings/lighting or just random luck?

anyone else getting this feeling? i know it's subjective...

oh and the project looks damn good!! verry polished and professional!! which is why i'm a bit confused as to why all the shots don't have that filmic feel...


cheers
 
Patrick, plain and simple: Composition and lighting. Has nothing to do with the camera itself, in my opinion this film is poorly lit for the most part, at least as far as I can tell from the teaser.
 
Andrew Brinkhaus said:
Patrick, plain and simple: Composition and lighting. Has nothing to do with the camera itself, in my opinion this film is poorly lit for the most part, at least as far as I can tell from the teaser.
Click to expand...
Yes...there are many dark (what looks to be under-expoesed) shots. But overall I think this looks great. I think a lot of those shots can be pulled up in post however.
 
i'm a bit iffy on your composition and lighting theory...

i can consistently get great filmic imagery out of my dvx/sgpro combo. even with bad lighting and bad composition it looks like film 99% of the time. but this gh1 seems to only look like film 30% of the time.... it's not consistent....

if it isn’t settings or lens choice/aperture... then i'm starting to think that this camera just looks like a stock ex1 99% of the time, and it's a testament to their ability that they fooled me for 30%. seems more plausible.
 
John Caballero said:
It was compared to footage from the HVX 200a. Thats a huge difference from DVX and a big achievement for a camera costing a lot less.
Click to expand...


Don't forget in JDS's test; The GH1 core image was better than a HPX-170', so beating the HVX200 was a given after the newer bigger brother was conquered!
 
Umm....I've seen actual amateur 'FILM' (shot on 35mm) that looked like video. I'm talking stuff that did not give me that WOW factor that professionally shot movies do. I have to believe that HOW it's shot makes a heck of a difference.

Edit: I wish I could find it but the most recent exampe I seen was an actual pilot for a TV show. It did look good but a lot of folks thought it was a video camera with an a adapter. SOme of the scenes looked...videoish.
 
jenningsp said:
i'm a bit iffy on your composition and lighting theory...

i can consistently get great filmic imagery out of my dvx/sgpro combo. even with bad lighting and bad composition it looks like film 99% of the time. but this gh1 seems to only look like film 30% of the time.... it's not consistent....

if it isn’t settings or lens choice/aperture... then i'm starting to think that this camera just looks like a stock ex1 99% of the time, and it's a testament to their ability that they fooled me for 30%. seems more plausible.
Click to expand...
SDOF?
Those prison shots are infinite focus with flat light splashed everywhere.

These look pretty filmmic
http://www.vimeo.com/5391750
http://vimeo.com/4582107

And yeah - look at my frame rate tests where the GH1 is next to the 170. It kills it for filmmic lattitude.

You gain some latitude with your SGpro but still nowhere near GH1 lattitude.

FILMMLOOK:
Lattitude,
Framerate
Art Direction
Lighting
Composition
Post

4 out of 6 are sorely lacking in this GH1 footage
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top