Jump to content


"COWARD" online

35mm Anamorphic Fuji Panavision

  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 Stephen Murphy

Stephen Murphy
  • Guests

Posted 07 January 2013 - 04:33 AM

That 28 minute "short" film I shot almost a year ago this week has gone online in full. Fuji Eterna 500T pulled one stop with some Fuji Vivid 160T mixed in. Panavision HS and E series anamorphics. Lots of Mud.


Comments or criticisms welcome.
  • 0

#2 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 07 January 2013 - 06:04 AM

Gorgeous Stephen. Colors, shot composition, fluid movement. All stellar. Why cant all projects look this nice?
  • 0

#3 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11939 posts
  • Other

Posted 07 January 2013 - 08:59 AM

And how much water did you have to empty out of your boots?

I like the way the fires add a bit of colour contrast to the trench stuff. Bright orange on dull grey.

What did you use for the sunbeams in the officer's dugout and the prison cell? One of those huge Xenon things?
  • 0

#4 Stephen Murphy

Stephen Murphy
  • Guests

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:36 AM

Phil I gave up trying to get the water out of my boots on the first day. The boots subsequently fell apart, literally, on the 3rd day - and they were brand new boots.

In both those examples I used an 18k hmi and a 4k hmi molebeam. The molebeam gives the shaft of light, the 18k augments the beam and adds fill. In the officers dugout they were the only sources of light but in the prison cell I was bouncing 2 additional 575hmi cinepars to bring more light into the space, one rigged in the ceiling just above the window (out of frame obviously) and one on the floor for close ups. This got me up to a t4/5.6 split on 160asa stock with an 85filter.
  • 0

#5 John Allardice

John Allardice
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 68 posts
  • Director
  • Los Angeles

Posted 09 January 2013 - 04:33 AM

Some great classical anamorphic work there Stephen...couple of quick questions if you don't mind.
What was the schedule, overall & in the trench set?
Was the project heavily boarded or previs-ed beforehand, or dd you have a fair amount of input compositionally?..and as a supplement to that, I suppose, how much did you end up using of b-camera stuff, or was that mainly as coverage during heavy SFX shots?

Gorgeous stuff

John Allardice
  • 0

#6 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11939 posts
  • Other

Posted 09 January 2013 - 04:40 AM

And now a Vimeo staff pick.

There y'go!

Addendum: 22KW to light a conversation in a small dugout. Yikes.
  • 0

#7 Stephen Murphy

Stephen Murphy
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:29 AM

Hi John,
The shoot was 10 days total with an extra day for a few inserts. The trench exteriors were shot in 5 days, with the remaining scenes split over 5 days. I drew a few storyboards as a starting point for conversations about coverage but essentially most of the coverage and blocking was worked out on set and yes I was heavily involved in the compositions. I also operated a camera myself. B camera was used over two days with fellow cinematography.com member Ed Moore covering one of those days. The primary reason b camera was there was simply to maximise our coverage so that we wouldn't loose too much resetting pyro/fx (we had brutally short daylight hours)

Thanks Phil - you were expecting less then 22kw of light?:-)
  • 0

#8 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11939 posts
  • Other

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:59 AM

I suspect you could probably add up all the light I've ever used on every shoot I've ever done and not come to 22KW :)

(well, no, but, y'know)
  • 0

#9 Stephen Murphy

Stephen Murphy
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:02 PM

I suspect you'll get closer to 22kw then you think on your upcoming sci if epic!:-)
  • 0

#10 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11939 posts
  • Other

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:22 PM

I will if I can find somewhere that'll spot me enough gear for less than a kidney.
  • 0

#11 Kieran Scannell

Kieran Scannell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Netherlands/Ireland

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:54 PM

Stunning piece of work Stephen! And a great story, shame they couldn't strech it to feature length would certainly have Been worthy of it!
  • 0

#12 Richard Boddington

Richard Boddington
  • Sustaining Members
  • 5482 posts
  • Director

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:33 PM

Yeah ditto on the other comments great work. Another 50 mins and the producer would of had a feature film to SELL.

One thing though, I couldn't understand a word they were saying, what language was that? :D

R,
  • 0

#13 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:51 PM

Grr @ John. If not for John, this thread would be 100% Sustaining Members. :D
  • 0

#14 Jon Rosenbloom

Jon Rosenbloom
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 713 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 17 January 2013 - 03:14 PM

Beautiful, classic FILM photography. It's pretty amazing for a 10 day shoot. Couple questions: How did you get to vimeo from the DI? Also, what's the market for this kind of film? Going online takes you out of the premiere festival circuit, so what's the plan? Is it just the ultimate calling card?
  • 0

#15 Stephen Murphy

Stephen Murphy
  • Guests

Posted 17 January 2013 - 06:05 PM

Thanks Jon - from the DI Technicolor gave us a couple of different QuickTime masters and I used one of them, a prores master, to generate a file that would meet Vimeo's standards. The intent was always to screen it in theatres at some festivals and privately for other parties, which they've done, and then get it online and seen by as many as possible as soon as possible. As a 28 min film we all knew from the outset that it would have difficulty fitting into a lot of the festivals shorts programmes anyway so the decision was made to go online with it sooner rather then later. They still have their 2k DCP which they'll continue to screen at any of the festivals that have asked for it since its gone online. It does certainly seem to be working as a calling card at the moment thankfully.
  • 0

#16 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 18 January 2013 - 09:28 AM

Gorgeous Stephen. Colors, shot composition, fluid movement. All stellar. Why cant all projects look this nice?


I think partly because most projects don't have the budget to shoot 35mm Anamorphic but the big factor is that most projects don't have one of the best cinematographers in the country attached to them and to be honest, you can't expect them to, as there are more projects than the tiny amount of top cinematographers and also because people need to work on projects to gain experience before they are able to reach that higher level.

Anyway you need some worse things to make the other things look good, after-all that's why "god" invented video cameras. ;) (meow)

Actually the bigger question might be why the top end of UK productions have traditionally looked so bad when they actually have real budgets behind them, and while I have lots of answers to this question, this is probably not the best place for them here.

love

Freya
  • 0

#17 Francisco Martins

Francisco Martins
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 70 posts
  • Other

Posted 19 January 2013 - 04:05 PM

What was the budget for this???
  • 0

#18 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 19 January 2013 - 04:45 PM

What was the budget for this???


Who knows! It's a obviously a little low budget film, but one that can afford to shoot on film and nice lenses and rent a field and dig holes in it and proper lighting and nice costumes etc.

It's obviously not as much budget as a tiny BBC production, so the top end of a low budget short I guess.

Freya
  • 0

#19 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 19 January 2013 - 07:36 PM

According to IMDB, the budget was 250k. Isn't a low-budget short to me. However, it wasnt a normal short since it was 1/4 of a full movie. Producers could have made a full movie for that but it obviously wouldnt have been as grand.
  • 0

#20 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:06 AM

According to IMDB, the budget was 250k.


I'm guessing you mean U.S. dollars? Still seems unlikely but who knows!

Freya

Edited by Freya Black, 20 January 2013 - 06:07 AM.

  • 0



Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Abel Cine

CineTape

CineLab

Tai Audio

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider