Sick Ferrari Video I did

15 seconds establishing shot? Shakycam? Gaining interest for a used Ferrari?

I did not like the curb on the road, ruins the image for me. Either a curbed sidewalk and skyscrapers and buses and people, or a deserted country road, but this is just a personal thing.

You did not show once how the driver breaks and turns, but he shifted like twenty times. He should've gone supersonic till the end of the video.

But the worst thing is that this video tells nothing about the car. It is useless for those who knew about it, and it is useless for those who did not know about it. It is A CAR video. It can be replaced with one photo of the car, titled: "DNA Autoworks has the 360 Spider for sale".
 
You obviously know nothing about shooting cars and budget restrictions.

15 second establishment? Try 4
Shaky cam: Hell yes, works perfectly for the video
As for location: Do you have the money to rent a city to use? NO
And we are trying to show off that the car looks and feel like a Ferrari. But its not, it's a kit car.

So it's not "Hey DNA has a Ferrari 360 for sale" The video is designed to go on his home page.
 
In this case this is false advertising, because the car has Ferrari logos. You can say that this kit car just have Ferrari brakes, but AFAIK Ferrari does not make brakes, Brembo does.

I agree, as a "hey look, our kit car looks like a real Ferrari" video this would work. I still wonder how these DNA guys can get away with the labeling.

I wish the unfocused/focused shots were faster. Maybe I watched too much of Top Gear.

Still don't like shakycam. With all other fancy shots I bet you could afford a cheap dolly for that tracking shot.
 
I think it's too long, this kind of marketing really needs to be as succinct as possible to be effective. The shaky cam wasn't well done. It didn't look gritty, it looked like someone forgot the tripod. I had no problem with it otherwise, but apparently that's because I don't really care who makes what on a car or what someone tries to sell it as, as long as it runs. Different culture.
 
15 second establishment? Try 4
Click to expand...

4 second mark, wide - field
4 - 9 seconds, cattails - close
10 - 14 bird in air - wide

Just tossing those numbers out there.


I didn't like the look of the video. But let me say this: People like super cars because of their looks and their sound. It's sexy, it's powerful, it's elegant. That rev is what gets people going. It's why people install cold-air intakes on their cheap cars.

The sound in your video is over-modulated, it peaks, it distorts, there is a weird sound effect mix going on, and it's just bad. It might not be a supercar, but come on dude, you could have at least recorded the sound well enough so the car sounds decent and not bad.

I'm just saying. Visuals aren't all of it. Especially with cars, sure, you can show them looking good. But if they sound bad, you assume there is something funky going on in the engine, or that's it's a crap car. Not the image you want in a 84 second advert.
 
Last edited:
I watched it on my laptop with bad sound, but I'm pretty sure I agree on that point as well. It depends how much was technology.
 
Last edited:
i dont hate it as much as others here. i like SOME of the shakycam but its a bit TOO much in places and overall feels self-conscious. i think a lok of your detail shots were poorly composed and yeah, the sound is horrible. were you shooting for overmodulated or were you just not paying attention to levels?

i agree that one smooth jib/dolly shot might have justified the rest of the shakycam in the spirit of juxtaposition.

i do like your color treatment. you just need to work on a few things.
decent effort overall. especially if you are relatively young.

another point of advice. when you provide your own glowing review of your own work, it BETTER BE DAMNED NEAR PERFECT otherwise people are pretty apt to call you out on it - as seen in the above responses ; )
 
Something happened with the sound in the conversion to youtube. I really have no idea how because it hasn't happened for me on anything else. But on the actual copy that the client has its perfect.

And the establishments are necessary to set up the scene. I don't know why everyone has such a problem with this. It works, and works well. Don't any of you watch Top Gear? They do vids like this all the time (Although with a much higher budget) and no one complains.
 
Sound, sound, SOUND...It seems sound is always treated like visual's ugly, unwanted brother...always overlooked but come premiere day he'll climb a clock tower and shoot your visual down.
Establishing was kind of long...and there were hot spots all over the cats tails which were distracting. ND filters would have vastly helped...especially with the bird/sky shot (in my humble opinion)
Didn't mind the driving shots...always love when the wheels are spinning backwards
Ferrari will have a field day if that car is a non-Ferrari, kit car
Oh and SOUND

EDIT
" Something happened with the sound in the conversion to youtube. I really have no idea how because it hasn't happened for me on anything else. But on the actual copy that the client has its perfect."

Glad to hear
 
Last edited:
Jesus Christ. With all the junk I have to watch made with these sub-$6000 cameras this was at least very decent....I've kind of written about this already and pissed off all the teenage-boys-with-skateboards video makers who it turns out are extraordinarily sensitive...but...how many videos are posted made with these cameras which are painful to watch---and get spectacular feedback! Many, many! This one, I could have done with a couple close-ups of the driver but all in all totally cool video. (I could have done without the "sick" though....don't tell someone you're good, let them tell you)

Good job!
 
I guess I just got a little excited when I was typing the title lol. Although I do feel like the last two posts were much more contructive crticism, and not a bashing. I appreciate that guys, that's the only way to learn and get better.
 
davidpula said:
Jesus Christ. With all the junk I have to watch made with these sub-$6000 cameras this was at least very decent....I've kind of written about this already and pissed off all the teenage-boys-with-skateboards video makers who it turns out are extraordinarily sensitive...but...how many videos are posted made with these cameras which are painful to watch---and get spectacular feedback! Many, many! This one, I could have done with a couple close-ups of the driver but all in all totally cool video. (I could have done without the "sick" though....don't tell someone you're good, let them tell you)

Good job!
Click to expand...


second that. Everything can be improved, but i like it too and it's really not bad
how some of readers are trying to say. Furthermore, it's not a ferrari ad
with 2 000 000$ budget i suppose if posted on hvx/hpx forum!
 
Dubdriver17 said:
Don't any of you watch Top Gear? They do vids like this all the time (Although with a much higher budget) and no one complains.
Click to expand...
I watch Top Gear all the time. I have all 13 seasons of TG including North Pole Special in HD, I also have 12 and a half seasons of FG -- first three and a half seasons missing.

No, they don't do shakycam beauty shots, and their unfocus/focus/refocus shots are stable and fast. They also use grad filters to darken/colorize the sky, it is one of their trademarks.

This has been shot with the HV30, it is about the same duration as yours, but is much closer to TG style and, dare I say, more pleasant to watch: http://www.vimeo.com/3669349
 
Cranky said:
This has been shot with the HV30, it is about the same duration as yours, but is much closer to TG style and, dare I say, more pleasant to watch: http://www.vimeo.com/3669349
Click to expand...

Yikes...this is even worse. Looks like the car reaches a max speed of 35 mph! :) I like some of the beauty shots at the beginning but get in that car and OPEN IT UP!! It's a damn Porche!

I like the kit car Ferrari video better...minus the first 15 seconds...
 
So if I had cut out the 1st 15 seconds and gone right into crazy driving footage, you would like it? There's no establishment, there's no anticipation, it doesn't edit with the music. These are basic filmmaking principles here.
 
An overall note for everyone on this thread - Let's keep things constructive and civil.

Criticism is great - and that is how we all get better - but keep it constructive.
The line between constructive and offensive isn't really all that thin - and you should all know the difference.

Thanks.
 
Luis Caffesse said:
An overall note for everyone on this thread - Let's keep things constructive and civil.

Criticism is great - and that is how we all get better - but keep it constructive.
The line between constructive and offensive isn't really all that thin - and you should all know the difference.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Was that a Mini-RANT? :grin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top