SHOOTING A FEATURE with CANON 5D

vic777 said:
If your budget is 500K you shoot with RED, a no brainer. The 5D is for ZERO budget.
Click to expand...

Great advice if you want a great looking movie with 2 locations, no known actors and no money for marketing or distribution. Just to rent 1 RED for 1 month with all the necessities is $25k. For $25k you can own 3-4 DSLR rigs. Use multiple cameras for each take cutting down on the overall production budget.
 
Depends on where you are. A film I consulted on last month rented two Reds with all accessories, and a backup body for three weeks for a total of $10K. Also be aware that multicam shooting has its own look and why several of the sitcoms have done single camera. You can edit multicam to some extent to not look so much by avoiding the sync cuts and slipping cuts to not look so perfect, etc.

Michael
 
wilbah said:
What percentage of indie-features (out of the thousands that get made every year) see a theater, or even a legit finish on 35 for an end product? I'd bet my butt it ain't too many.
Click to expand...

For 2009 it was 405 films that were produced independent that went on to some form of a theatrical release. The majority of the releases were massively limited (1 or 2 screens, less than a week). 136 of those had one or more stars in them (someone who's been a lead in a film grossing $50M+)

The AVERAGE budget of those films for ones with stars was $9.9m and $4.7m for those with no names at all. Those numbers are skewed a bit high because of some expensive vanity projects in the mix.

Here's the important stat: Less than 11% of films released in 2009 represented 90% of the box office revenues for films released in 2009. So 11% of the movies made 90% of the revenue.

These numbers are from "The A.K.A. Report (2009, Q1-Q4).

I'm still researching this, but based on my analysis from dramatic domestic films In that report I think there was fewer than 5 films in 2009 that had microbudgets (under $1M) that had a theatrical release, and if I recall correctly ALL of them were through a service company.
 
Before you make this decision, go see Aronofsky's Black Swan. Shot mostly on S16mm film with some subway scenes shot on DSLR's. The DSLR scenes are noticeably soft compared to 16mm, much less 35mm film or a Red or Alexa. A good high end HD production camera would be a better choice. DSLR's work well for niche specialty shots in tight situations that play to their strengths, but why any filmmaker with a reasonable budget would opt for one as the prime A camera is beyond me. The video quality just isn't that good.
 
Last edited:
I'm a Red guy now - but - that being said - check out the GH2. Much more resolution than a 5D or 7D, all the benefits and drawbacks of a super small camera but with less aliasing and moire, and more detail.
 
I worked on Black swan so I know the particulars. They like the stealth of the camera. I especially like this quote from the variety review.

"Shot digitally by cinematographer Josep M. Civit on the Canon 5D Mark 2, using traditional still-photo lenses, the picture's imagery is rich, combining micro-sharp definition of people and objects with a cinematic, watercolor-like softness in the lighting."

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117943481/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top