Shooting For the Big Screen

O

olindacat

Well-known member
Recognizing the fact that the story, the talent, the costumes, lighting, the sets, the director, DP, grips, lights, and audio/crew all take precedence over a camera and lens set-up, let me start by asking what camera I should use to shoot for a big screen?


I know this is an insanely rude question, in most respects, as it has been asked a trillion times, but let me put this into context:


1. Cameras and lenses have come a long way. I will say that shooting RAW stills, versus jpegs for instance, using say a Nikon D800 versus a D2X versus an Olympus E-10, are light years apart in quality and in terms of the size I could enlarge an image. So, the 4K option seems like it might be that much better for a big screen, even if it is being downscaled or the projector only does UHD, etc. Is the 4K image size better for the big screen?


2. Is 1080P good enough?


3. I know there are a million flavors. Is acquisition in 4K down sampled to 4K the smart way to go?


4. If you are shooting a film for a festival, in my case the Maui Film Festival, are you shooting raw?


5. Would you change from say CC Premiere to Davinci 12 for color grading if you're trying to shoot for such a screen?


6. If you were, like many of us, on a tight budget would you put every cent you could into, say the newest Blackmagic cameras and a budget cine lens (zoom)? (Bear in mind I need to work with the camera daily, for maybe years, so renting is not an option.)


7. I have gotten some great stuff our of my D800E. But it was made for shooting stills not for making a movie. I am the type to shoot with a pinhole camera and Coke bottles too, but I also know that when I shot 8x10 chromes I blew away my Minolta SRT-201, as did my Nikon D2X, as did my D800E, etc. So, I am done with rigging up a DSLR to try to shoot a movie. I actually want to use my movie camera to shoot my raw stills, when I need them, but I don't want to buy into Red if I can help it.


8. I almost went for an AF100. I know it is prosumer but many better movie makers than I will ever be used it, the DVX100, and other Coke bottles and pinhole cameras to shoot their award-winning films. I admit I am a dreamer and that I do want to 'see' my vision though something that I can use faithfully for years to come, and I also read constantly how there is 'a camera for every job', and to 'get the right camera for the right job'. Well, I will be improvising. I see the F3s out there and wonder if that is a mistake. I see Cooke zooms and wonder if that is a mistake. I see the used URSA here in the for sale section and I wonder if it is a mistake.


9. No matter what camera I buy it will be a mistake. Odds are whatever I do with it will be horrid to watch. But I will still try. I will invest everything I can in not only the camera, but eh audio mixer/recorder and miss, the talent, the costumes, the lighting, the script, the entire crew. All of me.


10. So: would you buy new or would you buy used? I am not afraid to invest, but then I wonder how best to do it? When you're a OMB having multicam set-ups, assuming you can pull it off with the lighting set-ups, etc., is very helpful at times, although David Jones has written extensively about how it can backfire on you too, unless you think it out, like he does and I hope to. If you were in that place, would you get an URSA mini and two of their new little studio cams?


11. I just sold my Nikon D800E, 50 1.2, 14-24, and 70-200 VR1. Not because I necessarily give up on Nikon, but because those lenses are not necessarily the best options available from Nikon and I might be able to shoot, for example, by golf courses with a cine zoom. Thus, I have some camera/lens money and am seeking input on whether to buy old or new, and what old might be a good idea if my ultimate goal is to put whatever I shoot onto big screen, even if it is only my own screen in my own backyard with only my puppy, wife, and cat as an audience.


Many many thanks for reading and contributing. Yes, I have read all, not just one, but all of the stickies in this section of this site :-) (great stuff too!)
 
Last edited:
As far as multicam goes, even with crew I've found it to take at least as long as single cam to shoot and that it often doesn't cut together as well as you think. S0ometimes real doesn't look real and cheating a shot looks better in the edit. A lot of trial and error is involved especially with more than two people moving about on screen. And you have to run from camera to camera checking your blocking and can only watch one. Your assistants may fail to grasp what you are trying to do. And then the actors miss their marks on the real takes and you don't realise. Or you move a camera for artistic reasons after initial set up and under time pressure fail to notice another camera is now in shot. That's narrative though, sit down interviews or the like are relatively hassle free for multicam.

If you are looking for camera suggestions and don't want DSLRs my suggestion would be blackmagic. Maybe the BMCC 2.5K second hand and a pocket camera for the B cam. I find these two cut very well together without needing any colour correction to match the cameras (still need to grade the footage) whereas the 4K is noticeably less noisy when downsampled and the colours (which are subjectively nicer straight out of the camera) need some work to match the other two. That said others have reported different experiences so there might not be consistency across the model range. Also 4K means you will never have enough hard drives. Be aware that colour correction in resolve is required to get the best out of these cameras and if it isn't something you have experience with it is a steep learning curve.

If you aren't completely opposed to DSLRs, the Sony A7s is the camera people are losing their minds over. I've used it, I was blown away. But I haven't bought one. I like the blackmagic mojo, like I liked the panasonic mojo before that. I am opposed to DSLRs and unlike many hate the 5d look. But that doesn't mean you should reject DSLRs that potential clients will actually ask for by name. Some people will ask for a 5D because they like it, some because its the only camera they can actually name. It often won't be suited to the job but do you want to miss out because you can't find or use one? Find people who have the cameras you might need so you can rent them and buy one or two less expensive ones for yourself. And even consider buying one that your circle doesn't have and might need so you can rent or lend yours out for reciprocal favours. I only own one camera (well three but I rarely use the GH2 or HVX anymore), the pocket. And rent or borrow others as required.

Buy second hand if you can. Post NAB announcements there will be a lot of people selling 2.5K BMCC for the next thing but it's still a great camera. The new cameras are almost all filling niches in size and flexibility. If you don't need those particular design features you don't need to jump on them now. And there will probably be a massive pricedrop or sale coming up as blackmagic clear stock to make room for the demand on the new cameras. And it will likely take a year or two to tweak the firmware to get these new models to be the best cameras they can be if history is anything to go by.

If you are used to the lowlight performance of DSLRs you will want a speedbooster. As long as you're not shooting by candlelight this will make the performance acceptable. And give you the equivalent of a larger sensor. For example the pocket S16 sized sensor effectively behaves like an S35 sensor. Rokinon/Samyang cine primes are probably your best bang for buck if you want good glass. I've had perfectly good results with manual vintage Nikons and am over the moon with my new Veydras. If you want a zoom then the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 on a speedbooster is widely regarded as an excellent match with blackmagic cameras. With smaller sensor sizes you can also look to vintage lenses and buy lenses that used to cost more than a house. I have Angenieux and Lomo zooms that are very nice but won't cover larger sensors. Unless you are a vintage lens tragic I'd honestly stay away from c mount and stick with hassle free modern glass with modern mounts.

Final note: if you want to get your footage on the big screen - invest first and foremost in getting good sound. Sound is 70% of what you see and poor sound is the hallmark of the amateur. No one single thing can raise the bar quite so dramatically as good quality sound. If you have money, invest it here. And not on gear. Spend it on someone who knows what they are doing.
 
Thanks. At least I didn't write it for nothing then! Spend over half an hour trying to cut through to the matter of a dozen lengthy questions and hit 'post' to find the question did a runner! Not sure what there was to be embarrassed about in the questions asked but leaving them up to be answered might help the next guy. Or give someone else a chance to respond and tell me I'm an idiot and suggest a better/worse/different solution.
 
I like forums where you take responsibility for what you post and have respect for those who take the time to answer - I love edit buttons that time out after maybe 30 minutes, and have a policy of not removing them unless they are litigious, or unpleasant. Dumping the question when somebody took a fair while to answer is lowest common denominator stuff - even an edit that explained why it was done (like getting you in trouble with your boss/client) people understand.
 
Thanks guys but lets steer to the gentlemanly side of bashing on the OP. If you check the times he deleted his post before I finished my response. Nothing intentionally rude going on here.

This thread may well end up deleted but if not, for those reading the primary question was seeking advice about shooting with the intention of cinema release wondering whether 1080p is good enough or 4K is essential (which I neglected to answer I notice reading back...1080p is good enough, 4K can be better). Expanding on that further questions relating to purchasing strategies, non-DSLR camera and lens advice, and one man band multicam if I remember correctly. A couple of others I didn't directly address.
 
Actually, I thought I remove the post within about 10 minutes of throwing it up. It only showed one person having seen it and I did not want to endure the abuse of asking, what I thought was, another 'which camera should I buy' post. Then last night, when I was away from my desk, I saw this incredible reply by Egg Born Son and now, that I just woke up, the first thing I am doing (even before coffee), is to sit here and atone for my sins.

I'd have to say that Egg Born's reply was so along the lines of what I have been in deep deliberation about, written from such a place of experience, that I am just blow away at how helpful and generous the Egg Born Son was.

Now, I can't remember exactly every word I wrote, but it was specific to acquisition and in many ways a conundrum, of sorts, because it is diametrically opposed to what most 'experienced' film industry people would say is 'smart', 'necessary', and so forth. I figured I'd get a rash of chastising posts to follow, and did not want to brew any storms so tried to take it down. Now that the Egg man has gone to such great lengths to share is invaluable and (to me anyway) helpful knowledge I owe it to him (and anyone who could benefit) to best I can in terms of reconstructing the original post. I will do this in a few minutes, after I have had some coffee ;-)
 
paulears said:
I like forums where you take responsibility for what you post and have respect for those who take the time to answer - I love edit buttons that time out after maybe 30 minutes, and have a policy of not removing them unless they are litigious, or unpleasant. Dumping the question when somebody took a fair while to answer is lowest common denominator stuff - even an edit that explained why it was done (like getting you in trouble with your boss/client) people understand.
Click to expand...

I agree Paul. You are completely correct. Again, had I realized that the one person who saw my post would have even bothered to reply, I would have come back here and did what I am about to do. So lucky we are to have you ring in on this so strongly.
 
olindacat said:
Actually, I thought I remove the post within about 10 minutes of throwing it up. It only showed one person having seen it and I did not want to endure the abuse of asking, what I thought was, another 'which camera should I buy' post. Then last night, when I was away from my desk, I saw this incredible reply by Egg Born Son and now, that I just woke up, the first thing I am doing (even before coffee), is to sit here and atone for my sins.

I'd have to say that Egg Born's reply was so along the lines of what I have been in deep deliberation about, written from such a place of experience, that I am just blow away at how helpful and generous the Egg Born Son was.

Now, I can't remember exactly every word I wrote, but it was specific to acquisition and in many ways a conundrum, of sorts, because it is diametrically opposed to what most 'experienced' film industry people would say is 'smart', 'necessary', and so forth. I figured I'd get a rash of chastising posts to follow, and did not want to brew any storms so tried to take it down. Now that the Egg man has gone to such great lengths to share is invaluable and (to me anyway) helpful knowledge I owe it to him (and anyone who could benefit) to best I can in terms of reconstructing the original post. I will do this in a few minutes, after I have had some coffee ;-)
Click to expand...


Well then. All's well that ends well.
Coffee and donuts for everyone.
 
Egg Born Son said:
Thanks. At least I didn't write it for nothing then! Spend over half an hour trying to cut through to the matter of a dozen lengthy questions and hit 'post' to find the question did a runner! Not sure what there was to be embarrassed about in the questions asked but leaving them up to be answered might help the next guy. Or give someone else a chance to respond and tell me I'm an idiot and suggest a better/worse/different solution.
Click to expand...

I will do my damnedest to reconstruct the original post Egg Born Son. I appreciate your efforts, as do all of us, and certainly would never intentionally abuse anyone's time here. Please give me a chance to redeem myself ol mighty one....
 
I hereby pledge a Crispy Creme in Kahului for anyone coming to Maui! Especially Egg Born Son and Paul, and DP Stewart, and Spartacus.
 
Stephen Mick said:
I can restore the original post, I think. If that's what the OP would like.
Click to expand...

Sure Stephen. I feel bad for wasting anyone's time here and only tried to delete so I could put even more thought into the questions I posed. The primary purpose of the post was to sort out todays options, given the lower cost old gear and the lower cost new gear. It is like a convergence of sorts, where I really feel the Black Magic impact is quite amazing. I am slowly shutting down my print publication and want to spend greater amounts of time making the baby steps to an end goal of a silver screen, only it may not be an IMAX, but more likely a neighborhood backyard projector run by yours truly. It is a dream nonetheless. I will expand apres coffee.
 
invest in audio first. having great audio is much more important than what camera you use.

with that said, the camera i'm most interested in is the blackmagic ursa mini 4.6k.
 
Egg Born Son said:
As far as multicam goes, even with crew I've found it to take at least as long as single cam to shoot and that it often doesn't cut together as well as you think. S0ometimes real doesn't look real and cheating a shot looks better in the edit. A lot of trial and error is involved especially with more than two people moving about on screen. And you have to run from camera to camera checking your blocking and can only watch one. Your assistants may fail to grasp what you are trying to do. And then the actors miss their marks on the real takes and you don't realise. Or you move a camera for artistic reasons after initial set up and under time pressure fail to notice another camera is now in shot. That's narrative though, sit down interviews or the like are relatively hassle free for multicam.
Click to expand...

For now, it is my and my wife and our two animals and perhaps a friend now and then. If she is 'on screen' cameras are locked down for a scene, set-up for her to walk across room or bridge or whatever. I'd boom her if there was any dialogue. But, blocking wold be done by me for each scene, and if 1080p is good enough for the big screen then I'd have leeway with a 4k file to crop or move things around in post. That is why I worry that buying into an F3 or an FS100 or AF100 is going to make the job harder. I only think multicam because we might only be able to pull off one shot, maybe two a day, and with so little i the tank budget wise the $2-3K for extra B-roll bodies seems like a possibility. I am not shooting interviews or events or weddings or commercials. I want to make any kind of film I can. Put it up here and have my ears torn off and suffer the ridicule and shame and use that to make me stronger (I hope).


Egg Born Son said:
If you are looking for camera suggestions and don't want DSLRs my suggestion would be blackmagic. Maybe the BMCC 2.5K second hand and a pocket camera for the B cam. I find these two cut very well together without needing any colour correction to match the cameras (still need to grade the footage) whereas the 4K is noticeably less noisy when downsampled and the colours (which are subjectively nicer straight out of the camera) need some work to match the other two. That said others have reported different experiences so there might not be consistency across the model range. Also 4K means you will never have enough hard drives. Be aware that colour correction in resolve is required to get the best out of these cameras and if it isn't something you have experience with it is a steep learning curve.
Click to expand...

Because this is the cinema section, I was focusing on yes camera, but to be clear I think 'the indian', e.g., what (and how) I shoot, is more important than 'the arrow' or with what I shoot. Still, we are talking about the image appearing on a big screen, and the leeway I have had with raw and larger files, say for example in my D800E, meant that I had much more reach with a 24-70 2.8 as I could digitally 'zoom' and I could fill shadows in post with raw, etc. I was wondering (aloud) about cameras, used ones especially, as they are video/film-centric. But, when I think about most of my 'rigging' it always seems to involve the audio more than anything else. I bought a 744T, the best pics, the best of everything I could, and was so over my head I sold the thing and got a Beachtex, then a Riggy. I must confess I do not like recording to my camera and I do not like Plural eyes either, although it has been a couple of years since I used it. Obviously, a lot has been written about audio, which I agree is 70% of what we see http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?101753-A-compilation-of-lessons-from-the-field and I don't think I want to entrust the sound to even BM. I have not reached out to the audio section of this site in a while as it can get pretty upsetting with pros having one POV, indies having an other, OMBs another, and so on. While I think this is helpful, http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?51526-New-To-Audio-Read-This-First-Please, it doesn't tell me if I should get an external recorder, and is more focused on the mic, so I point this out not to cite audio per se, but to say this type of thread is still relevant as the new gear impacts things and what was fine in 2007 may not be so today. In terms of acquisition, shooting, trying to match I assume camera lines should be in concert, and so I wonder if three of the BM Micro CCs would suffice? (I would have to get a stills camera and lens set and skip the convergence idea.)

Egg Born Son said:
If you aren't completely opposed to DSLRs, the Sony A7s is the camera people are losing their minds over. I've used it, I was blown away. But I haven't bought one. I like the blackmagic mojo, like I liked the panasonic mojo before that. I am opposed to DSLRs and unlike many hate the 5d look. But that doesn't mean you should reject DSLRs that potential clients will actually ask for by name. Some people will ask for a 5D because they like it, some because its the only camera they can actually name. It often won't be suited to the job but do you want to miss out because you can't find or use one? Find people who have the cameras you might need so you can rent them and buy one or two less expensive ones for yourself. And even consider buying one that your circle doesn't have and might need so you can rent or lend yours out for reciprocal favours. I only own one camera (well three but I rarely use the GH2 or HVX anymore), the pocket. And rent or borrow others as required.
Click to expand...

I always felt the 5D/Canon color had a sort of cast to it I can't explain, but yellow. I am well-aware of the low-light wow factor of the Sony A7s and have read about it a lot, here and on ESHOD, DPReview.com, etc. I am resigned to the fact that I will not be using the imager for audio anyway, so just a ref mic will be used for syncing. But isn't an external recorder required for the A7s to get the 4k? Then there's the whole matching footage thing. Do I want to pay $3k a unit for $1K? 1K seems mo bettah.

Egg Born Son said:
Buy second hand if you can. Post NAB announcements there will be a lot of people selling 2.5K BMCC for the next thing but it's still a great camera. The new cameras are almost all filling niches in size and flexibility. If you don't need those particular design features you don't need to jump on them now. And there will probably be a massive pricedrop or sale coming up as blackmagic clear stock to make room for the demand on the new cameras. And it will likely take a year or two to tweak the firmware to get these new models to be the best cameras they can be if history is anything to go by.
Click to expand...

For imaging, audio, lighting, etc., I have bought second hand and new. Part of the reason for this post is pondering the question: is what is being put up on the screen today (I'm talking Sundance or Maui Film Festival -- these two are totally different I know) coming from the latest and greatest or is it still a mix? I have no problem using old gear, but I can say (as I did earlier) that the newer stuff is cheaper and better, and so penny wise pound foolish is what is nagging me. I need 2-3x units, in spite of the wisdom against multicam, and matching footage, lens investments, e.g., MFT for the Micro CC, or three AF100s, or FS100s, etc., is a consideration I am trying to weigh.

Egg Born Son said:
If you are used to the lowlight performance of DSLRs you will want a speedbooster. As long as you're not shooting by candlelight this will make the performance acceptable. And give you the equivalent of a larger sensor. For example the pocket S16 sized sensor effectively behaves like an S35 sensor. Rokinon/Samyang cine primes are probably your best bang for buck if you want good glass. I've had perfectly good results with manual vintage Nikons and am over the moon with my new Veydras. If you want a zoom then the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 on a speedbooster is widely regarded as an excellent match with blackmagic cameras. With smaller sensor sizes you can also look to vintage lenses and buy lenses that used to cost more than a house. I have Angenieux and Lomo zooms that are very nice but won't cover larger sensors. Unless you are a vintage lens tragic I'd honestly stay away from c mount and stick with hassle free modern glass with modern mounts.
Click to expand...

I saw that Veydra set from HK in the far sale section and was eyeing it. But I really wonder how much rack focusing I really need, and I certainly am not in a place where I am going to have an AC pulling, and so my follow-focus days may actually be coming to an end. I wonder how many movie goers can tell an 80K Leica vs a $35K Zeiss zoom, vs a $500 50 1.2 from Nikon? (Now I'm really in trouble!) I think the Sigma Art sense, is that what you are suggesting, is highly regarded. I have shot with large format Schneider and Zeiss and Nikon and Canon glass, and it is still the subject and the way things are shot that are numero uno. Still, I would say the money spent was worth it, and that is where I get really missed up.

Egg Born Son said:
Final note: if you want to get your footage on the big screen - invest first and foremost in getting good sound. Sound is 70% of what you see and poor sound is the hallmark of the amateur. No one single thing can raise the bar quite so dramatically as good quality sound. If you have money, invest it here. And not on gear. Spend it on someone who knows what they are doing.
Click to expand...

I used to pay pro photographers to shoot for my magazine (Maui Golf Review). I used to hire art directors to do my layouts. Pros for all jobs. Then budgets got cut, egos were huge, they were a nightmare to manage. I got so frustrated I lean bred Quark and hired designers to come in and set up page layouts I could adapt on my own. It cut costs and gave me independence from being controlled. Same with the image. I had photos who wold not even get out of bed unless I scouted the site first, before dawn, and told then the visibility. (I guess that's why they are pros, and I was the schmo ;-) It got old paying $1400 for a half day when it was cloudy and the guy gave me a CD with cloudy shots on it. Hey, I had to pay for his time!So, I invested in cameras, took courses, taught myself, joined forums and learned.

Well, because I need to shoot over months and years, and do not have money, the notion of hiring a pro is just a luxury I can't afford. I will go to school to learn audio if I need to. My ears are old and my rock and roll blasting of the past have made them cruder. A real audiophile would look at me in disgust. But, I can say that in five years my game has improved. It is probably now a 2 on a scale of one to 10, with 10 being best. I think audio definitely belongs right here in the cinematography section in that it needs to be incorporated into the 'scene' just as much as the image, but I still maintain that 'a picture is worth a 1000 words'.
 
ugafan said:
invest in audio first. having great audio is much more important than what camera you use.

with that said, the camera i'm most interested in is the blackmagic ursa mini 4.6k.
Click to expand...

When I first joined this forum, I spent a lot of time in the audio section trying to focus on that, as I know how to frame, focus, and expose. Let me just say I spent 3x more on my audio than I did my imaging gear, and the end-result was I was too new and ignorant to make good use of the gear I had, e.g., 744T, 302 mixer, the best nice I could find (used), boom poles, expensive cables, interfaces for the laptop, software I could not figure out, the list goes on. You know what? I need to learn it like I did imaging. I need to edify myself so I can use the gear. I'll be back at the audio forum asking where I can do this, and hope I won't get too many hisses.
 
Same goes for lighting, scripting, costumes, make-up, and post....

Only because I do a very nice 100-page print publication by myself, and am used to generating the content, used to creating a vision for each issue, used to taking the conglomeration of everything and outputting a finished product, and am 52 and still have a few good years left in me, I figure I will give motion a real go. I have no delusions that anyone will be inspired by what I do, however. Still, everything in life begins with a little sparkle in the eye ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top