Jump to content


Photo

doc camera?


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Chris Lange

Chris Lange
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Minneapolis, MN

Posted 02 December 2010 - 05:30 PM

Why do most discussions refer to this camera as a documentary camera as its main use?

Chris
  • 0

#2 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7117 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 02 December 2010 - 06:58 PM

I am assuming you mean the Iknoskop HD camera? Primarily because it's small and light-weight yet stills puts out a nice image. If memory serves, though, they just now started production of them, so I'm not sure how many people have used them yet. And there is nothing really precluding you from using it on other things aside from documentary etc.
  • 0

#3 Vincent Sweeney

Vincent Sweeney
  • Sustaining Members
  • 686 posts
  • Director
  • LA at the moment.

Posted 02 December 2010 - 07:34 PM

Partially because the marketing by companies (and surely their fans) like red, Canon, and now Sony and Panasonic, think that a camera with a 35mm sized sensor is a "cinema" camera and anything with a smaller one is for docs or "other" and this probably bleeds over.

In fact two of the most successful high-end independent directors, Danny Boyle and Aronofsky, prefer 2/3" chips (SI2k) or S16mm. Avatar and Miami Vice was also filmed with mostly 2/3" chips. 3D, in many ways, is better to shoot on with smaller sensors too and with its size, it seems that the Ikon would be ideal for it.

The Ikon, to me, is ideal for docs and features because of what you have to work with in post. It may not be the best set-up for Acam on a feature but should deliver some great stuff when put to work overall. I seems kind of like a modern equivalent to a S16mm bolex.
  • 0

#4 Saul Rodgar

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

Posted 03 December 2010 - 03:50 AM

Yeah, unfortunately the filmmaking group-think is bigger sensor / aperture is always better, when in reality few low budget / indie productions who dream about showing a print on 35mm on a 50 ft screen are prepared to deal with the focus pulling equipment and talent for acquisition on 35mm and larger film or video formats.

A talented cinematographer / director team can get great "shallow focus" images on 2/3" or 16mm cameras.
  • 0

#5 Chris Lange

Chris Lange
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Minneapolis, MN

Posted 05 December 2010 - 02:20 PM

Well, thanks for the insight. That helps. Good points regarding sensor size and marketing.

It seems that the cherished thing about new technology always references a limited DOF, when that's not always necessary to make an elegant or appropriate style. What happened to staging in depth, such as Renoir or Welles? The wide angle lens and some interesting blocking!

I know it depends on the story though. Just a blunt statement.

Chris
  • 0


Visual Products

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Willys Widgets

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Opal

The Slider

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

CineLab

Metropolis Post