Jump to content


Photo

Looking for format advice


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Jack Aversano

Jack Aversano

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Director

Posted 31 May 2012 - 04:15 PM

I am facing a 10 day shoot to finish off a feature. This will be our "A" cast and comprise 2/3s of the film. We are also angling for a theatrical release. We have shot 7d and will shoot with my 5d if all else fails. Having looked into the issue with 5d and dig I am looking hard at 16 or 35. So let us assume I can get a bit more $ to shoot film. I will use the 7d/5d footage as well for parts of the film that are to look like found footage/documentary so with those bits the quality is not of issue. I know there are a lot of opinions out there. Over all cost savings of film vs. the easy of digital (which at this point is 5d)? Have anyone faced this issue? Thanks....
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19765 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 31 May 2012 - 05:05 PM

Some will disagree with me here, but digital generally is cheaper to shoot than film due to the costs of stock, processing, and scanning -- all movies have to end up these days as a digital master for distribution; needing a film print is way down the line of priorities because no matter what, you are going to have to show people the movie in some digital form before and after you sell it to a distributor.

So if cost is your primary concern, I'd look into getting a deal on renting a better digital cinema camera (or borrow one). But that's ignoring whether S16 film would be better-suited artistically especially if you need it to stand apart from the 7D footage more obviously. If so, then you're going to have to fight for shooting on film and figure out a way to make it possible and affordable.
  • 0

#3 Jack Aversano

Jack Aversano

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Director

Posted 31 May 2012 - 06:46 PM

Yeah I think the work flow on digital is so turn key now that film is not worth the investment. I can go from the 5d work flow right to a digital cinema package for theaters. Deliverables it seems are not an issue given good cinematography. The choice seems then to couched in what is the best artistic choice and for what funds. I'd rater invest in better. production design.
  • 0

#4 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11943 posts
  • Other

Posted 31 May 2012 - 09:29 PM

I can go from the 5d work flow right to a digital cinema package for theaters.




You can, but there are significant technical shortcomings with most DSLRs that may make it difficult to get the material through a commercial quality control pass as is required by many distributors. This is principally an issue around moire and aliasing, but noise, compression artifacts, rolling shutter wobble and other things are also potential sources of trouble. Make sure you understand what this can mean before going ahead, as the fixes generally involve a lot of manual paint and creative work in software like After Effects, and will be expensive.
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19765 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 31 May 2012 - 11:16 PM

[/size][/color]


You can, but there are significant technical shortcomings with most DSLRs that may make it difficult to get the material through a commercial quality control pass as is required by many distributors. This is principally an issue around moire and aliasing, but noise, compression artifacts, rolling shutter wobble and other things are also potential sources of trouble. Make sure you understand what this can mean before going ahead, as the fixes generally involve a lot of manual paint and creative work in software like After Effects, and will be expensive.


Which is why I suggested finding a better digital camera, something like an MX Red One, for example, or a Sony F3 at least (though you'd have to go to an external recorder to get beyond the 8-bit 4:2:0 XDCAM 35 Mbps recording limitation that fall below the BBC requirement of 50 Mbps.) There is also the Canon C300, which does hit that 50 Mbps minimum.
  • 0

#6 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1414 posts
  • Other
  • Basel, Switzerland

Posted 01 June 2012 - 02:06 AM

In case you encounter a rough going shoot better chose film. A professional film movie camera never lets the film go, or in other words, the pellicle is at all times guided either by the transport claw(s) or the register pin(s). You can shake the mill while running, it won’t lose the process.

In the cold you’re at ease with a mechanical camera. No worries about electricity

Wanting something like a picture in theatres you’d pick a 65mm camera . . .

Single-frame work: film

Underwater: video

Edited by Simon Wyss, 01 June 2012 - 02:08 AM.

  • 0

#7 Jack Aversano

Jack Aversano

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Director

Posted 01 June 2012 - 01:36 PM

It's a small space and cramped. I like the 5d for it's size and low light. And yes it will get warm in there.
  • 0


Glidecam

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

The Slider

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Wooden Camera

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

CineTape

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Opal

Aerial Filmworks

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

The Slider

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport