how to exploit miniDV ARTISTICALLY on the big screen?
by Ed Brown
on
Nov 4, 2002 at 6:21:43 pm
I read your interesting RE: on Tapole revisited. Assuming you have great story, good tech shooting crew, DP, how can you ARTISTICALLY exploit 4:1:1 miniDV camera to transfer to big silver screen? Yes, avoid wide shots unless something in focus CU. But what can be artistic advantages of miniDV?
Or at worse, how avoid uglies?
Ed
Re: how to exploit miniDV ARTISTICALLY on the big screen? by John Sharaf on Nov 4, 2002 at 6:43:12 pm
Ed,
I think that aside from the economic reasons, many choose to use a mini DV camera for "stealth" purposes. I know we do this in the news genre when we can't get permission to shoot at a specific private location, or otherwise don't want to tip our hand, while other requirements of non-expectations of privacy prevail.
Nowadays it can be quite costly and labor intensive to properly get permission and/or permits to shoot on both public and private locations, with insurance requirements and public safety issues and the like. It is often difficult to convince those in authority that your project is "non-commercial" and they should waive otherwise restrictive location fees and requirements.
Most independent filmmakers who systematicly "steal" location shots have become adept at describing their projects as documentaries and thus hitch hiking on the presumed 1st amendment rights of the "press" that include unhindered access to public property.
Otherwise, as regards the technical stuff, it should be quite obvious that one should exercise the care and planing that goes into making any artistic film; previsualize the shot/scene, make sure all the participants know what to do, even rehearse if necessary. Choose the time of day and direction to shoot in consideration of the sun or other source of available light. Support the camera on a tripod or dolly or other mount that will allow the type of shot that we are used to seeing in a film exhibited where you hope to show it. If handheld, the skill of the operator must come into play, etc.
The beauty of your question regarding "artistic exploitation" is that it presumes that an artist in involved, has a vision and a plan and will presumeably execute and refine it until such time as he/she is satisfied! One of the possible results is art....another is garbage.
Re: how to exploit miniDV ARTISTICALLY on the big screen? by gcgipson on Nov 5, 2002 at 1:30:11 pm
I would think that, with DV, you have to pay VERY close attention to your camera work, blocking, and lighting, even more so then you do with film. When I say pay close attention, I am referring to avoiding DV’s weaknesses when blowing up to 35mm. Fine detail on wide panoramic shots, lighting “blowouts” when shooting bright contrasting visuals, and ghosting from fast camera movements seem to be DV to 35mm’s biggest pitfalls. If anyone would like to point out anything else, please let me know.
I'm fishing for tips to shoot feature, appreciate suggestions by Ed Brown on Nov 5, 2002 at 4:51:52 pm
Well I have an artistic vision in that I have a story, a script. Now I need to translate it. I suspect the more expensive 4:2:2 DV is much better on colors. I know Soderberg deliberately made his "Full Frontal" DV images "bad." I guess I need to make some sample shots with good lighting, low contracts, little detail and see what it blows up to with a transfe3r DV to 35 mil company.
Thanks
Ed
Re: I'm fishing for tips to shoot feature, appreciate suggestions by David Mullen on Nov 5, 2002 at 11:56:00 pm
Generally speaking, the more expensive video formats will give you better technical results for a transfer to 35mm for widescreen projection. True 16:9 CCD's are better than using 4:3 CCD's and cheating 16:9 in some way, better lenses help, better menu controls over the image help, less compression is better, more resolution doesn't hurt, etc.
Your budget will determine a lot of what equipment you can afford to work with.
Often the dividing line for the low-low budget filmmaker seems to be the "under $5000 DV" camcorders (often purchased) versus the low-end profeesional video camcorders (often rented). Often high-end Digital Betacam gear or even Hi-Def isn't much of an option -- although you never know what deals you can find so don't write them off completely.
I shot a three-week HD feature using a Sony HDCAM camera package (camera, lens, monitors, etc.) rented for $10,000 flat. Of course, there are other financial factors that come into play, like making downconversions to standard def video (DVCAM for that particular feature) for offline editing...
The Sony DSR-500WS has been a popular choice for many people who want to take the next step beyond the under-$5000 camcorder level. It's true 16:9, DVCAM, and is a basic professional Sony ENG betacam design with interchangeable lenses, etc. The PAL version was used for "Anniversary Party." It's more like a $17,000 camcorder w/ lens, so you'd probably be looking to rent, not buy.
As for the whole rent versus debate, sometimes I'm surprised by how so many indie filmmakers never even consider the option of renting. It all depends on the nature of the shoot -- is it short-term and contained, or long-term and open-ended -- and if you want a camera for multiple productions. And if you plan on shooting the project yourself and need to own a camera so you can spend time learning to use it. But having to own limits you to what level of equipment you can afford to buy, which is often less than what you can afford to rent.
Re: how to exploit miniDV ARTISTICALLY on the big screen? by David Mullen on Nov 6, 2002 at 3:42:29 am
Sometimes artifacts can be exploited. I saw "Crazy as Hell", shot in 24P HD framed for 2.35 and transferred to 35mm scope. Nicely shot, very rich lighting, art direction, etc. It takes place in a mental asylum. In one scene, a doctor runs into the room of a patient who is freaking out, attacking the orderlies, etc. The patient runs from one side of the room in normal light over to the other side, which has a window with sunlight coming through, but it is so clipped that not only is the window nearly invisible, but the entire wall is blinding white into which the patient almost disappears -- the doctor runs in and pulls the girl out of the blinding light and onto the floor (into normal exposure again). Now obviously the filmmakers could see how much the sunlight was burning out the frame, but they decided to use it to add to the nightmarish quality of the scene.
Re: how to exploit miniDV ARTISTICALLY on the big screen? by donatello on Nov 6, 2002 at 2:32:28 am
IMO these hand size mini DV camera's do NOT belong on the BIG SCREEN..... explore other options ... YES i know you are asking for suggestion tips to make it look good BUT i say only shoot with this type camera if you explored all other options !!!
as others below have suggested look into RENTING ... DP with own equipment use $$ you would have bought a camera to pay them... look into borrowing .. there are many ways to get BETTER camera for little $$.
for tips ask persons at
www.rocketchicken.com
they shot a feature "come together" on XL
DP Les Erskine ( the 6th day) shot it !
i saw it at the san jose film festival - digital projection
this is the ONLY dv movie that i've seen that i can say they lit it as if it was FILM
Re: how about considering DLP by Joseph Carney on Nov 8, 2002 at 7:33:22 pm
AT this moment as I type this, Jon Jost is touring the country showing his shot on DV features using a portable DLP projector. From what I hear it has built in line scaling among other features and is perfect for small venue projection. No need for film transfer at all.
If you convert your footage to mpeg2 you can used a small desktop, an ATI video card with DVI out (and included optimized DVD playback software), a DLP projector and achieve near HD resolution projecting against a nice screen. Throw in a low end surround audio system and there you go.
Something to think about for the future if you are commited to people seeing your feature.
