sdx vs. dvx for feature film

C

c.g._eads

Veteran
I'm thinking about upgrading from a dvx to an sdx for my feature film (which I would like to look as close to film as possible).  I would like to get some opinions from people who have used both (I've never used the sdx).  

Some questions:

1) Is it worth it financially to upgrade?  Is the look that much better?
2) Can you change lenses?
3) Does it use mini-dv tapes?
4) Are Hi-def cameras available for a comparable price?  If so, should I go with them instead?

I'm basically trying to get the best film look possible for my budget and outside of the dvx, I know nothing about prosumer digital cameras.  If someone could throw a little knowledge my way about all the differences between these options I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks, c.g.
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

Do you have the budget is the question you might want to ask & even better, do you have a distribution deal?

If not the DVX will make excellent DVDs. DVD is where it's all at.

Most theatre releases play for how long? 4-6 weeks if they draw a crowd otherwise they're pulled. So really all films live in the public's mind through DVD. DVD is the target, while 35mm releases are now really just marketing for the DVD. All Hollywood knows DVDs are where the money is, ask Tom Hanks. I buy more DVDs now than I go to see movies in the theatre, so do most of you. The 60 inch LCD technology is changing our movie going ritual. Theatre won't die but it will be challenged.

Yes the SDX is much better in many ways than the DVX because it captures more information, 4:2:0-? sampling. Will it make a better DVD, maybe so, but many DVX users clearly demonstrate this little camera with a skilled film maker can make beautiful images/movies. The SDX is around $27,000 while the DVs is 3,500. You choose.

I'd put my money into getting help from script doctors, better actors, better sets,  a great musical score, ADR, foley, press kits, etc... and the all important publicist. Fans love stories of the hidden genius with crummy gear turning out heart felt stories that move the audience to tears & laughter. Your publicist will help shape this.

(A great story would be to tell everyone you made it on a beat up used VHS camcorder you found at Goodwill and a cup of coffee. remember Hollywood, i.e., movies are all illusion, & so are we! ....it's entertainment.. the truth is often really boring.)

As far as film out ( that means taking a video & turning it into 35mm prints for theatre projection ) most all well shot video ( including interlace :o) looks great if the transfer lab is diligent and you spend some $ on color Correction @ $650.00 per hour X 3+ days for a daVinci 2k w/ power windows.... Overall a print will cost from 22,000 to 45,000 and then you'll need copies etc.... add 50,000 more and then you'll need another couple hundred gs for promotional, ads, press, etc... your distibutor will know this stuff.

here's a link to answer some of your question.

http://www.cinematography.com/articles/sdx900.asp
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

10s,

Good thread, thanks for your input. I'm in a similar boat. I'm going to shoot a feature next year, the director wants to consider everything from film to the 100A. He is much more inclined towards the high end- film/HD. Given all considerations, I'm trying to encourage him to head towards the SDX or the 100A. I have a hard time going with something higher in the food chain, especially because this is his first film. It's a great script, good story but still it's his first film and %5 of films actually make it to the screen ? I have a hard time justifying the cost, and the distraction that those budget considerations will introduce to the creative process would be a bummer.

I have a 100A, and we'd rent the SDX if we went that route. THe 4:2:2 in the SDX would be nice, but especially the shallower depth of field, and lens options of the SDX.

I guess I'm just musing publicly, but if anyonehas any other thoughts to consider it would be great to hear from you.
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

I'd ask the question, "who's gonna do the post work on it", i.e., editing, SFX, CC, Audio, etc... because outside of your normal Macs & PCs the budget skyrockets quickly. Check out prices for HD & have your heart medication nearby.  ;)

Film making is like cooking: in development we detemine who's coming to dinner and what to eat, in Pre Production we plan out the logistics for gathering all the food, china, pots & pans, cooks, etc...in Production we acquire these items (go shopping) and gather the ingrediants and bring them to the kitchen, Post Production is where we finally bring the ingrediants together and cook them (i.e., editing, ADR, Foley, Score, Color Correction,etc.) and in Distributon we dish out the food on plates and eat it. The Priemere is simply a toast!

Here's to your project!

enjoy!
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

Ditto to everything 10s said.

Especially on a first feature. Maybe 0.00000005% of those will make it to the big screen. Maybe 0.000001% of them will get a commercial release on DVD. If you've got name actors and a screenplay that's won awards at contests and a distribution agreement in place, that's when you choose a better format to shoot on.

I think the way to say it is, a better film on a lesser format will almost invariably succeed more than a lesser film on a better format. (or at least it should).

(and... "name" actors aren't actors that have been in some small films or a TV series somewhere; "name" actors are when you say "I've got so-and-so in this film" and people recognize them just from the name, you don't have to explain who they are).
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

I agree with everything you guys are saying. However, there's nothing wrong with wanting the best possible image, within your budget range, for your film. That's my question. Is the the sdx's image quality, from a purely technical standpoint, (assuming you know how to tap it to its fullest) worth the extra money?

I will probably be outputting to DVD but it will play in festivals so at some point it may have to be blown up.

c.g.
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

That's a question no one but your team can answer. Because your question relates to the value of money and technical issues seem to follow the law of Diminishing Returns, like stereos ( it'll only cost you 5,000 more for a slighly better sound) you have to decide what is the proper course of action.

I see your located in California. Try this:

Find a film lab & a rental shop and take your team on a fact finding trip.

Be forewarned, they're in business, that means they believe their products will solve your problems no matter what! and it'll help their wallet out too.  :)

1. Film Lab: Arrange a demo of their video to film transfer in their dailies theatre. Ask that they demonstrate shots from all sorts of cameras, especially the cheapies. Ask what sort of doctoring went into the film product, meaning how much extra work did the put into this beside lazering it to 35.

2. Camera Rental Shop: Stop #2 of the day, visit a prearranged demo of the SDX at your local rental shop. See if they can demonstrate it's abilites. Inquire into insurance, costs, availabilty, etc...

3. Lunch: Talk it over with the team. Run a few scenarios.
        A. DVX: cost, quality, limitations, advantages, etc...
        B. SDX: cost, quality, limitations, advantages, etc...
Compare & contrast these and ask yourself hard questions.

4. Check into all the Festivals you want to enter and see what your up against. If everyone is shooting 35 then that's what you'll need.  

5. Distribution will recommend 35, at least HD. See what they say, maybe things are changing. Try Straight to video, see what they suggest.

6. Make a list of all the things you'll need beside the picture, cost it out, add it up and then talk again.

7. Get together and dream up of what you could spend it on if you decided to bag it all and just goof off ;)
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

The 900 is about as good as DV gets and blows the doors off the DVX. If it's quality you want go with the 900.
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

Save your money and attend NAB this year. Theres going to be HD 24p cameras for less than 20k and I'm not talking about the FX1. I don't know if the Drake camera will be featured there.
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

10s is giving you the way to go. There's nothing better than finding out for yourself by checking out the SDX900 at a rental shop and seeing what you think of it. Make sure to take a look at some raw captured footage. You'll be amazed at how good it looks. Clean, sharp picture and rich, vibrant color.

It uses DVCPRO50 tapes, which on average will cost you about twice as much as MiniDV tapes, and you have to rent a DVCPRO50 deck to capture.

If the SDX900 fits reasonably into your budget, then go for it. You'll be sure to get great looking pictures. If you're looking really tight financially, and you guys are trying to find a way to squeeze a little extra something to find the money to do it, don't bother, it's not worth it. The DVX100 is capable of great stuff in the right hands, and in the end, it's going to be content and a skilled crew that make it a good feature.

At any rate, good luck. And keep everyone posted as to how it turns out.
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

Reading through this thread, especially the prices for film outs, it got me wondering how much up-rezzes cost. Obviously, there aren't many digital projectors in theaters yet, but say someone got accepted to a film festival that exhibited digitally, but only from Beta or HD...approx. how much would it cost to uprez a 90 minute feature from miniDV to one of these formats? In general, what are some of the variables involved in this kind of transfer? I've tried looking for internet sites for places that do this kind of uprez, but I didn't really find anything, so I figured I'd ask here.

Just wondering.
Thanks
Nathan
 
Re: sdx vs. dvx for feature film

I know a place in Toronto (Precision Transfers) that does HD uprezzing. The price was aroud 800 dollars I believe, for a 2 hour feature. Don't quote me on that though :P

And for a BetaSP transfer - it's much cheaper. Because there isn't any uprezzing (it's all SD anyways) it's just the transfer, and tape stock costs. I think you'd be looking at closer to around 100 or so for BetsSP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top