Jump to content


Photo

my reel


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2660 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Los Angeles

Posted 12 November 2008 - 09:43 PM

I've finally stepped into the 20th century and started building a website. As of now all I have up is my reel, which I guess is the most important part anyway.
Have a look. There is a high res version and a lower res version. Thoughts and suggestions are welcome.
bradgrimmett.com
And please let me know if the download times are very long.
  • 0

#2 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 November 2008 - 11:35 PM

Lovely, download times are OK for the low res, didn't try the hi res.

Only thing I would fix is the shot of the guy in the hospital halfway through. It seems to be anamorphic but it is left un-stretched, so it looks distorted vertically. Minor thing, really . . .
  • 0

#3 Bruce Greene

Bruce Greene
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 489 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 November 2008 - 01:04 AM

I've finally stepped into the 20th century and started building a website. As of now all I have up is my reel, which I guess is the most important part anyway.
Have a look. There is a high res version and a lower res version. Thoughts and suggestions are welcome.
bradgrimmett.com
And please let me know if the download times are very long.


I tried the "hi-res" version and gave up without playing it on my pretty hi-speed DSL connection. The "low-res" plays just fine and the work looks good.
  • 0

#4 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2660 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 November 2008 - 01:09 AM

Only thing I would fix is the shot of the guy in the hospital halfway through. It seems to be anamorphic but it is left un-stretched, so it looks distorted vertically. Minor thing, really . . .

Hmm, that's strange. It looks fine when I play it. It was 1.85 and as far as I know is still in the correct aspect ratio. I guess it could be a bit off, but I don't think so. I'll check it out.
  • 0

#5 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7115 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 13 November 2008 - 01:12 AM

Brad, you might want to use flash for the low res version. I think it'll help the quality. If you'd like I can try to do a conversion to a .flv for you early next week. You'd need to find some coding though to get it properly embedded in the webpage. Aside from that looks ok in low-res, but i think you can get better. what compression are you using?
  • 0

#6 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2660 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 November 2008 - 01:14 AM

I tried the "hi-res" version and gave up without playing it on my pretty hi-speed DSL connection. The "low-res" plays just fine and the work looks good.

Thanks. Yeah, I figure I'll leave the high res up there for anyone who really wants a better look. I'll definitely keep the low res up though.
  • 0

#7 Matthew Buick

Matthew Buick
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2345 posts
  • Student
  • Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Posted 13 November 2008 - 09:06 AM

None of the web pages ran properly for me. The launch page didn't have it's photo, and neither reel page would display any video. Sorry.
  • 0

#8 Tom Hepburn

Tom Hepburn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago-land

Posted 13 November 2008 - 10:40 AM

Hi Brad,

The work itself looks awesome!
One this I would point out is there is a shift in the title position when you go to the default page and click High Rez version. A small thing, but easy fixable.
If Matthew can't see it, he may not have the quicktime plug in for his browser. Adrian suggested a flash file. Another advantage to that is that that format is a little more independent of the Windows vs. Mac conflicts and as long as someone is using a browser that less than 3 years old, it should have the plug in and play fine.

Tom
  • 0

#9 Serge Teulon

Serge Teulon
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London UK

Posted 13 November 2008 - 11:32 AM

Hey Brad,

Unfortunately my internet is quite slow so I didn't try and look at your high rez.
I do however think that your footage, which looks great, warrants a slight improvement in the quality of your low rez. Which codec did you use?
  • 0


Metropolis Post

CineTape

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

Abel Cine

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Glidecam

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Glidecam

Opal

The Slider

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

CineLab

CineTape

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera