Jump to content


Photo

All the invisible children - shooting gauge?


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Lav Bodnaruk

Lav Bodnaruk
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts
  • Director
  • Brisbane, Australia

Posted 15 November 2006 - 03:02 AM

Hey guys, just thought i throw this out there... since its been bugging me a bit. If you have seen this film "All the Invisible Children", then you know its 7 shorts by worlds great directors.... now, its obvious they'd be shot on 35mm but Blue Gypsy (3rd story) - directed by Emir Kusturica was different... anyone know what it was done on?

Cant find much on it, but here is an insert from that particular short on YouTube...

http://www.youtube.c...o...ted&search=
  • 0

#2 Roberto Hernandez

Roberto Hernandez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Student
  • Orlando, Florida

Posted 15 November 2006 - 03:48 AM

Hi Lav,

Looking at the link you suggested, which is very low quality, I would have to say it looks like 35mm. There are some interesting shots in the clip but the overall feel to me is 35mm.

  • 0

#3 Lav Bodnaruk

Lav Bodnaruk
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts
  • Director
  • Brisbane, Australia

Posted 15 November 2006 - 04:50 AM

Hey Roberto,

the file on YouTube is really low quality, you are right, but I am hinting towards 16mm or even 8mm. I watched it in a cinema, and it stood out like a sore thumb against other shorts that were obviously on 35mm... the grain was huge and at moments it appeared to look like video. I know its not though, since the 'feature' was produced by a company that I am sure would not allow it - I mean, mixing the gauges like that... but who knows?

Since I am a huge FAN of Kusturica and his work, I am very well aware of his recent obsession with super 8mm (he shot his last doco on it - his band on tour) so my thoughts went to that straight away... I somehow doubt he would be allowed to work with super 8mm and mix it with other 6 shorts on 35mm... maybe he shot 16mm? maybe he shot 35mm and 16mm, mixing? that last one sounds like the most feasable...
  • 0

#4 Jonathan Bowerbank

Jonathan Bowerbank
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2815 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 15 November 2006 - 01:16 PM

Yeah, extremely hard to tell with a YouTube clip.

But some of the shots near the beginning of the boy walking up to the car and such looked pretty close to HD to me. Also there's a POV shot from the boy's perspective just before he hops the wall that looked like HD as well.

Who knows?
  • 0

#5 Christophe Collette

Christophe Collette
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Montreal, Canada

Posted 15 November 2006 - 08:50 PM

Hi! This is a good short I had not seen! Althought the quality of the youtube file is really poor, I would highly doubt it is anything but 16mm or 35mm, it is obviously not Super 8mm, it would not make sense to crop super 8mm to 2:35 ratio. My guess is 35mm, a grainy stock, because it is unusual to crop 16mm to 2:35 ratio as well. But it could be 16mm since you are mentionning the incredibly grainy images. We'd have to see to know. And I am positive it was not shot on HD, Emir Kusturica is a film guy.

Christophe C
  • 0

#6 Lav Bodnaruk

Lav Bodnaruk
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts
  • Director
  • Brisbane, Australia

Posted 15 November 2006 - 09:13 PM

And I am positive it was not shot on HD, Emir Kusturica is a film guy.

Christophe C




found this link just now, the official web site:
http://www.alltheinv...e.com/index2.pl

Posted Image


maybe that still ought to put an end to this discussion.... dam;

For those who live in Brisbane Australia, the film is screening at teh Palace Centro Cinema on 18th of November, Saturday at 1:45PM....

I am not sure what is going on with the ration there... could it be that who ever uploaded the file did some cropping themselves?

thanks guys!

Edited by Lav Bodnaruk, 15 November 2006 - 09:15 PM.

  • 0

#7 Christophe Collette

Christophe Collette
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Montreal, Canada

Posted 15 November 2006 - 09:48 PM

Wow... So you think he shot this with that small cam, what is it anyway, looks like HVX200 or DVX100 but I know nothing about those cams... I am a film guy! .... I am astounded.... Well it was really hard to see from the youtube file...

Thanks for letting us know!
  • 0

#8 Christophe Collette

Christophe Collette
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 177 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Montreal, Canada

Posted 15 November 2006 - 09:59 PM

I thought a little more about it, that picture does not mean he actually shot the movie with this camera. Milorad Glusica was Dp on this. Maybe this was Kusturica's own camera... Not the production camera.... Well, again we'd have to see it to know really!
  • 0

#9 Lav Bodnaruk

Lav Bodnaruk
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 242 posts
  • Director
  • Brisbane, Australia

Posted 15 November 2006 - 10:29 PM

You are most right there...chances are he was using that as his own directors viewfinder... or similar?But then again, the film did stand out like a sore thumb when i saw it at the cinemas...

Still, video? I really doubt it...

I'd love for someone that has seen this film in the cinema to give their 2cents, since that YouTube is pathetic to be able to tell anything... and i think they mixed mediums in the film, so the clip in YouTube is only couple of minutes long - whilst the short is 20min...

Thanks Christophe!
  • 0

#10 Marcel Zyskind

Marcel Zyskind
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 135 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Cph

Posted 15 November 2006 - 11:55 PM

Still, video? I really doubt it...


Hi

Why would it be so unlikely to shoot a film on DV? A lot of directors shoot with the format.
The DVX100 is a great little camera.

All the best
Marcel
  • 0

#11 Luke Miller

Luke Miller

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 17 November 2006 - 08:58 PM

In regards to the photo. I didn't watch the whole short, but just in the first few shots I got the feeling it was a DVX or similar on a glide cam type stick from the movement of the frame.

Check out how when the camera moves it almost appears to be moving around the axis of, or directly behind, the lens. With most 35 cameras if your not steady cam it is going to be on your shoulder, which doesn't create quite the same movement, it would be more tripod like in its pans, and the movement didn't look very steady cammish to me.

The last short I shot on the DVX was entirely on a glide cam, and whenever I wasn't holding it steady (between takes) it looked alot like the movement in the first few shots of that youtube clip.

anyway my 2 cents.

... another thought, if it looked like he was mixing up formats throughout the piece, perhaps he was using the animorphic adapter during some of the shots. The way it softens the image, and allows you to use the whole ccd is enough to look like a slightly different format.


-luke
  • 0


Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Opal

Abel Cine

CineLab

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Opal

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

The Slider

CineTape

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies