Cinematography

Tell me more Ken. Just stating it's not against the article provided above is insufficient.

All phone cameras shoot in composite HD. They have no raw independent controls in post. The lens is ultra wide and the zoom (if there is one) is digital, not focal. Film is an industry. I’ve been doing this all my life. Shooting a professional film for release on a screen bigger than a 60” TV, needs the highest possible raw image and you need to use and Cine prime lenses to give it the look of a film. In all I recommend Red or Arri, (Because that’s what I use) but I hear that the new 5d Mark iv with 4K video raw is pretty good. I just want to make it clear to all indi-film makers, not you particularly — There ARE NO SHORTCUTS. Shooting a film on a phone is not an option! You have to use the technology of making films. This is taught in film school and is in itself a series of basics. You can’t miss these basics.

Understood and I appreciate the feedback. What's your take on DSLR's shooting "Raw"? ISO1080/ 60sp?

Most DSLRs are made to be a still camera. The most they can do for video is composite H264, 1080p resolution. The only DSLRs that can do raw video is the higher end Canon models. (I haven’t looked into DSLRs in over a year so that might not be true anymore) Also, remember to think in futures. If you do your homework, the footage you take today can be used again if shot properly and archived in high res. The main thing is that if you shoot a film in low res or low color depth and then want to project that film at a film festival. Say that festival is on a major theater screen in NY or LA? You WILL have a problem. My point is that if you understand color depth meters and dynamic range, the idea of using C4k or H264 is not an option. Not if you want to USE the footage. If it’s just a fun pic of the family? Fine. For a silly YouTube video? Fine. For pro use? No way. You can do it sure but it will take time and money to fix. The two things we don’t have. Lol!

Lol! Word.So what's your honest professional opinion of the film "Tangerine" and other films shot with 4K phone camera? If you haven't seen or read the reviews it's worth it for those among us on a budget. I am using a Canon ESO 80D with Ziess prime lens 1.2 60fps @ 1080ISO. Some filters like chocolate and teals or oranges for richer higher resolutions. I would love to get my hands on a RED or a SonyDF7 but that is too far out of reach.

Whatever you do, don't let the post team tell you which cameras to use. Their knowledge of acquisition is nil. They can advise you on the network's required framerate and codec, but that is about all. Whether your primary cameras are Sony, Panasonic, or JVC you will be mixing them with Go-Pros as every reality show does. Choose your main cameras for their handling characteristics that work in your show environment. For instance, you don't want to be caught doing lots of car work with a lens that doesn't focus closer than 4 ft.

It is not the camera it is the woman behind the camera.

Pup, care to explain?

I need a new camera too! Sometimes it easy to think they are all good enough for a project you are doing .... but thats not the case.

Arri Alexa, Red Scarlett, Red Raven or the Canon C700. For TV you need the top of the line raw image.

Hi Mark, I have shot a couple of short films on the Canon 5D mkii, Canon C300 and black magic. In my humble opinion these are all great cameras for shooting shorts or features on. Depending on your budget, you could pick up a second hand Canon 5D mkii for around $1000 (that's how much they tend to go for in Australia) or a 5D mkiii for around $2000. Here's a link to the short we shot on the Canon 5D mkii https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6Zsh2PGD4o

Adrian, thanks so much. I had looked at Sony but not Canon yet. Cheers

I second Adrian's comment. A used Canon 5Dmkii or 7D or Nikon D800 will produce great images when used properly. The only caveat is that you'll have to record sound separately with a Zoom or the like and re-sync in post (but don't let that stop you, it's a few extra steps that's all). I also recommend testing (or least get a hands on) with every camera you are considering. Look at the image quality, it's limitations vs it's advantages, even the ergonomics. (Can you use it out of the box or do you have to buy a bunch of accessories?) Unfortunately there is NO perfect camera, so it will boil down to your specific needs, budget, AND preferences. For example, I prefer dslr cameras for b-roll because I hate re-syncing audio in post, so I own a Sony Fs700. I like my camera and there are newer models being released almost every six months. For now, it's still good for what I need it to do. Shopping for a camera can be tedious but also exciting so have fun!

I love Sony!

It depends on how long the shots are. DSLRs shut down after around 16 min of continuous shooting. If you need it for longer shooting time. I recommend a camcorder or something like it. Panasonic makes good ones.

Do you mean a storyboard?
Most re-shoots come from story changes, recasting, technical errors or general lack of planning. But many very cohesive things are shot without even a storyboard, sometimes without a shot list- not that planning does not happen. Creative teams work different ways, but suffice it I have shot projects with detailed storyboards that were a mess, and others that were very well designed and executed because people were on the same page.
There are also look-books, video clip references, design renderings for wardrobe and sets, all of which should help departments plan their movie as a joint effort to one cohesive piece.
If you actually mean a literal comic book / graphic novel, this is a thing that many people have started to create as a companion piece or POC to a pending original web series/ film / whatever.
I just worked on one like that. The comic book was great. But very little coordination was realized in making the filmed trailer, and it mostly looks like it... despite very experienced pro team, went way over budget and the creator was quite unhappy.
Which sort of points to my belief that money or intentional process (or lack thereof) do not matter.
All that matters is good people are on the same journey together and making the same movie.. and that is actually extremely challenging for anything ambitious.

I meant an actual comic book.

The comic book idea makes sense to me you have the main idea of the story which saves time deciding what to write about. How do you make it evolve without being so halting and develop the plot without going out of bounds is what you have to work on.

It's an interesting theory, but I don’t think it’ll hold. I won’t go so far as to say it will never work, but so far I don’t think it has. Even the most loyal adaptations (Sin City, Scott Pilgrim, Logan, 300) will almost always use storyboard and concept artists to create production materials, same as any other film. I actually did concept art on Watchmen: Tales of the Black Freighter, and Robert Valley did the storyboards, and that was based on a comic jam packed with 9 panel grids over 12 full issues of source material.
The big problem with trying to use comics as storyboards and/or concept art its that it’s a different visual language that really doesn’t translate all that well to film. When filmmakers move into comics to try and sell film pitches (and there are plenty) they’re almost always garbage. They use a storyboard approach, and thus ignore everything that actually works in comics because they don’t understand comics. It just doesn’t works.
On occasion, you’ll see a comparison shot of a comic panel and the finished film that seems to match up exactly. However, those tend to be ‘key moments’ where the director wants to capture that certain look, or pay homage to the comic. If you reference the comic as the full film plays out, those match points are actually quite rare.
There are just too many differences in the mediums that complicate trying to use the comics as storyboards and/or concept art. Comics are isolated images, static information, iconography, keyframes, combined with text, sound effects, and balloons. When we move to the next frame, we create an entirely new image because our story flow is mostly about page design, or more specifically, how things move down the page to build our stories. Every single image is different, otherwise, it’s redundant. They’re all meant to create a series of snapshots that eventually tell a larger story. In comics, we can (and usually do) pick a new camera angle and design for every single panel drawn, because again, static images are what we're all about.
Trust me, the kind of jumping around we do in comics would drive a film audience absolutely insane because one is static chunks, and the other is continuous motion. I think everyone in the audience would get motion sickness if comics were ACTUALLY used as storyboards for films.
Although a ton of us in comics also draw storyboards for film and animation, storyboards are quite different. They’re designed to imply continuous movement and flow from one frame of film to the next because our job is to mimic camera placement and movement. We do our absolute best to create transitions and offer smooth break points for editing because it’s essential for great filmmaking. The cuts are better when they’re invisible. The ‘panel borders’ in film are deliberately hidden with editing and smooth transitions. But in comics, panel borders are our bread and butter, it’s where the story lives, and we fully embrace the jumps.
The pace is also ver different. Film is frames-per-second, and if you're the viewer you'd better keep up. With that, filmmakers present information in a way that everyone (or most people) can keep up. It’s essential, so the entire process is built around that premise. In comics, our readers can linger on a panel for as long as they'd like. They control the pace of the story.
Film is motion, Comics are static.
But again, if you can make it work, I say go for it.

No because you still need to do a screenplay, break it down into shots, assign those shots numbers, assign those numbers to shoot days. This is how it has worked for almost 100 years of film making. A comic book can be a good reference to design, story and overall art direction, but it’s not a broken down script.

Hi Jakub! I used the Bolex 16mm in college, and I do not remember the book we used. On Amazon.com and found the "Primer for Film Making: A Complete Guide to 16 Mm and 35 Mm Film Production" (1971). Feel free to reach out to me via the Stage 32 messenger/email, and I can address some of your specific questions. I see your in Slovakia. I worked on a movie years ago in Bratislava at Koliba Studios.

Hi Lindbergh, thank you for book advice, i'll try it. Hey, it's nice to know, that they are at Koliba collaborating international! What was that movie? Our cinematography is just growing up now. The change from communism to democracy was difficult for filmmaking here. But now it is on good way i think. ;)

"Behind Enemy Lines" (20th Century Fox). Really enjoyed visiting Bratislava. Most of the crew was picked from all over Europe.

Jakub, there are 2 general types of film, negative and reversal. Negative creates a negative image on the original film stock. Reversal creates a positive image on the original film, like slide film.
To see the images correctly a negative film has to be printed to a print film which shows the images with the colour and exposure as shot. When working with negative, a “work print” is first made. The “work print” is the actual film that is handled and cut in the editing process. Editing can be done on flatbed editor like those made by Steenbeck or Kem, the classic upright Moviola, a simple film viewer with rewinds to be able to move the film through the viewer, or every just holding the film up to light and cutting it if you are just cleaning up flash frames. Flash frames are those frames at the beginning of each take that are overexposed as the camera comes up to speed. The work print will be made with one light. One light means there are no changes to compensate for exposure or colour. One light is based upon the correct exposure for the print film stock used. If what you shot needs exposure or colour correction, that will be added later. Working with the work print will entail viewing the film, marking where the cuts are to happen, physically cutting and taping the pieces of film together in a tape splicer. Once you are happy with the edit, the negative is then cut conforming the negative to the print film using edge numbers on the film. Negative cutting uses a hot splicer and glue to bond the film bases of two different shots together. This means that one of the negative will have a portion of the image scraped off to have clean base to glue to. These hot splices would be visible. To hide the splices the shot used is spliced to a black film , called black leader, which is scraped to provide the bonding surface. The negative is bonded to black in A-B rolls so one shot on one rolls the next on the other roll. Back and forth between the A and B roll until the end of the edited picture. These A and B rolls can then be printed onto one roll of print stock. This would be the time when there would be light changes to correct the exposure and colour correction would be added as well. If a few prints are to be made, then an intermediary negative or internet is made to protect the original images in the A-B rolls.
If you shoot reversal, then you can in fact cut using a tape splicer and run it through a projector a few times as was done to News film for television. Better is to make a work print of the reversal film and edit that the same way as described for negative. The types of print stock used and the process for making multiple release prints are different but follow the same general idea that is used for negative.
Shooting negative and reversal is very different in many areas, latitude being the biggest difference for shooting. Of course you will need a light meter to set the exposure although you might be using one now when shooting. There is nothing scary, and the magic of looking through the viewfinder of a reflex camera when it starts to roll and the image starts to flicker is one of the biggest things I miss about the process of shooting film.
good luck

I did this back in film school. It’s an entire process bro. I don’t recommend it unless you 1) have a lot of money to waist & 2) a lot of time. One person cannot make a theatrical film alone in this way. The crew is 5 minimum. There are tons of books on this but no one does it anymore. Finding Mylar tape, acetate glue and a splicer might be difficult. Even the guys that shoot film in HWD telecine the reels and do the post in a computer. Don’t ruin yourself, keep it simple.

You might try some of the stock footage libraries.
This is an offer for 7 days of free downloads, including plates, from an ad in an American Cinematographer junk mail I received
https://www.videoblocks.com/join/offer?utm_v=2&utm_source=AmericanCinema...
good luck

Thx for this!

Thx, RB!

My pleasure, Robert! Glad you found the content useful!

Not only for me...but passing it along other places!

That's paying it forward. Always appreciated around these parts.

Thanks for acknowledging less can be more, when the "less" is still quite intentional.

Yep I saw that film. Pretty amazing. Which do you prefer- DSLR or phone?

Depends on what I'm doing and the complexity since I don't own any cameras.

So Lindbergh are you using any zoom lens on exterior scenes that may be far away?

It depends on what I'm doing, and that will determine what lenses the DP will use. Don't confuse a zoom in with a push in, and don't confuse a using a zoom lens for a close up v. doing a close up. Grab a DP and work together with s/he to get your desired results.

I was just reviewin the movie "Get Out" and to date it grossed over 235 million at the box office. It took Peale 5 years to pull it off. Not sure why it took so long as the cenimatography was rather simple in comparison to say "Moonlight" and other releases this year. I will be attending two Cannon Production workshops in Burbank this summer in the hopes of scoring on good skills in this arena.