Luis,

I know my post was plenty sarcastic. And I don't mean any disrespect to Shannon. I'm trying to illustrate a point.

I too constantly fight to make people understand that cameras are tools. I guess I'm just not sure what "the point" of Shannon's post was.

>Client: "So can your camera do 24p?"
>Shannon: "It sure can!"

Really?! I've shot with this camera and know for a fact that the camera cannot shoot 24 Progressive frames per second.

>Shannon: Remember, it's how YOU direct as well.

What does the director's direction have to do with the ability of the camera?

>Shannon: Also the lighting. There's no camera in the world that you can just flip a switch and 'instant panavision' comes out of it."

That's what I thought until I read that the DP had nothing to do with acquiring quality footage.

>Client: "I heard it can't do 24p"
>Shannon: "From who?"
>Client: "Ummmmmmmmmmmmm, i don't remember, i read it on the internet."
>Shannon: "did you see it for yourself?"
>Client: "Uhhh, no."

Now that's a conversation I've had way to many times. I've been advising a colleague of mine who is in pre-production on an upcoming HD feature this summer regarding cameras and workflow. And I've spent more time correcting other peoples misinformation and rumor than anything else.

>Client: "Ok, im going to talk to my DP about this. See what he says.
>Shannon: "*sigh*"because you liked your buddies movie, and want to follow your DP's advice,

What's wrong with consulting with his DP, the guy who actually has to use the camera and is responsible for delivering the images that the director desires? He just made the point to believe what you know first hand and not what you've heard. Then he turns around and tells him to just trust him and ignore what he's seen with his own eyes and what his DP has worked with and knows to be capable of delivering what he wants.

I'm not discounting the capabilities of the FX1/Z1. But I think there is alot more misinformation and rumor being created by passionate internet posts and profit driven owner/operators than anything else. And Shannon's post seems to be the type of post that is adding to that list of misinformation and rumor. So what was point of the post? That the camera can do 24P? That the DP is unnescesary now that HDV is here? That clients should listen only to him? I'm confused.

Off topic:

I see you're in Austin, Luis. Have you had a chance to take in some films at SXSW? If you're interested and have the opportunity, check out the Feature Film, Four Eyed Monsters (www.foureyedmonsters.com) tomorrow. Four Eyed Monsters (www.imdb.com/title/tt0439182/combined) premiered in competition at the 2005 Slamdance Film Festival (http://slamdance.com/2005/festival/film_detail.asp?film_id=585), and made its regional premiere last week at the 2005 SXSW Film Festival (http://2005.sxsw.com/film/festival/screenings/film/1979.html).

The last screening at SXSW (http://2005.sxsw.com/film/festival/screenings/film/1979.html) will be this Friday, March 18th at 4:30 P.M. at the Alamo S. Lamar theater.

You can read the Film Threat Review here (www.filmthreat.com/Reviews.asp?Id=7127).

I'd love to hear feedback from anyone who gets a chance to see the film.

Jon,

I figured you were being tongue in cheek with your post as well, just wanted to make sure no one took me too seriously.

What I got from Shannon's post was that he felt people should test things out and see the results with their own eyes before making judgements on them.
He may have missed the mark on some of those points that you brought up, but overall that's what I took from it.

I'll step aside on this one now, seeing as Shannon should probably address this himself.


Yes, I have gotten the chance to see some of the SXSW films here, and I saw your post in the other forum about Four Eyed Monsters. I'm going to try to make it tomorrow, but I have a commercial shoot tomorrow starting at 10am, and I'm not sure how long it's going to run.

If I get out in time, I'll be there, and I'll be sure to let you know my 2 cents if I get a chance to see it.

*sigh*

For me to address Jon's total mutlilation of my post and misquaoting me and selectively copying/pasting what I said in this ficticious made-up-as-i-typed conversation to illustrate a point, would be to assume that Jon really didn't get my point.

But since i know damn well he did get my point and is just challenging his abilities to kick up some dust on the internet vs. my internet dust kicking skills......

AhhhhHHhhhhh, i won't address it. *smile*

Thanks Luis, you and everyone else AND JON got my point. *CHEESE* Stop picking on people Jon!

- ShannonRawls.com

Shannon,

I did not misquote you.

I was not aware that the conversation that was presented was fictious.

I am not, nor have I ever been interested in "kicking up dust".

I am not, nor have I ever "picked on people".

I apologize for having interupted the party with my interest in correct information.

OK guys, let's leave this one where she lays....aside from us getting off topic, the "can't read expressions in a forum" flu is close at hand...
Unless you know the person posting reasonably well, either John or Shannon's post could be taken in the incorrect context....let's move on.

Surprised I've not heard more comment on the cadence of the images...?

DSE, I'll reply in a new thread called "The reason CF24 is ugly....."

>>DSE, I'll reply in a new thread called "The reason CF24 is ugly....."<<
And Shannon, don't forget to quote Mr Benny and Rochester again, ok?