This community is amazing for the technical information.

I just wanted to start a thread, however, to speak to the rarely
discussed emotional component to working with this level of camera.

What do I mean?

I started with the video and filmmaking 18 years ago,
and from the very beginning,
I dreamt of a camera that would emulate the look of film
with the ease and cost of video...

As a child of the video revolution (I am 34 now)
I started with VHS, and make a high-grain film texture to it
by pushing the GAIN UP button, while working with
my fellow high school filmmaker, M. Night Shymalan.

Then, at NYU Film, I bought an Arriflex 35mm film camera,
but the obstacles to finishing a film with it (film and processing costs,
post costs) made completing a feature impossible.

Then came DV- a huge step, and one that allowed me and others to make
a feature film on DV video that is internationally distributed-
but a technology, in the end, not film-like enough.

So as HD came into focus, it seemed like the the realization of the dream-
and it is- HD is the dream of video that looks like film. The CineAlta arrives, and the VariCam... they, of course, look enough like film, but with one
problem- still expensive, at least for a filmmaker using the company name
of MicroCinema to describe a "small, inexpensive" and "chip-based" filmmaking.

So as I write this, finally...
a camcorder is finally being delivered to filmmakers and videomakers
all over America... one that allows for individuals and small crews
to make films and videos of the HIGHEST quality.

The levelling of the Hollywood playing field.

The democratization of digital technology.

Instead of movies, wedding and corporate videos, commercials
and TV shows being a reflection of talent and budget,
the HD100 symbolizes a paradigm shift
whereby the video or film you make is, more than ever,
a relfection of pure persistence and talent, with aesthetic visual beauty
no longer a commondity reserved for the wealthy.

Does this camera impact anyone else's career or artistic vision
in a manner as dramatic? How does the HD100 empower YOU?

T. Patrick Murray
MicroCinema
www.TheLastGame.com

Cudos. I wholeheartedly agree. This new generation of cameras is a dream come true for independent filmmakers.

I just turned 32. I made my first film, "Son of the Ninja," in grade 7 with a Hitachi VHS camera (the one with the VTR section hanging in a leather case near your waist.) It actually had 4-heads with "video insert" that wouldn't affect the soundtrack and "audio dub" for overdubbing music tracks later.

Everytime I watch one of M. Night's high school films on one of his DVDs, I'm reminded of how liberating it was to make films with video cameras when I was a kid, and edit them with two VCRs. I even convinced my parents to help me buy a "genlock" box for my Amiga that I would use to do key titles and little animations I made with DeluxePaint4. I never even imagined at the time that a computer would ever be capable of "digitizing" broadcast quality video.

Then of course I went to film school, started working in the industry, was introduced to Avid, and my attitude changed. Sad when I think about it.
I think that now with these internet DV filmmaking contests popping up, homemade 35mm lens adapters, and the advent of delivery codecs like H.264, more and more people will be inspired to just get out and make a film that actually looks like a film - not a home movie. No more excuses!
(except for inexperienced actors and bad lighting.) ;)

Tim

The camera really is amazing from the posted videos' I've been fortunate enough to work with. All camera competition aside, these new cameras this year are so much better than the last 5 years its astonishing.

Now an aspiring film maker can go to Best Buy, get an HC1 and Pinnacle Studio 10 package for Christmas for a mere $1800 and put together something that could be cast up on the big screen and retain the film makers intention. Amazing.

BTW. Is the web site microcinema.com your's? Steller site for years.

Oh my God?! I completely forgot about Delux Paint, It must have been THE BEST Paint package ever! *old memory's come flooding back* yea those where the good old days.

Then there was the Amiga 600, 1200, gosh..
I remember if you had 1 megabyte RAM you where *THE MAN*, yea I remember upgrading the Amiga 500 to 1MB ram for the first time and getting really excited when loading in a Game and it said "1 Megabyte RAM detected"

Anyway I'm not as old (sorry should say wise) as you guys, but even in my lifetime technology has changed quadratically.

I don't think videos going to be the same again.

I gotta say DV was a disapoinment for me personally (maybe I was expecting too much?)

But for me right NOW, a 35mm adaptor + any HDV cam (or HVX200) is more than enough.

These cameras do offer what i've wanted, images that are clean, sharp, and detailed, the Sony FX1 does that, the HD100 does just as good (maybe a little better), the XLH1 will probably do it better , and the HVX200 well huh who knows?

To be honest with you, I don't think this camera, or any other HDV camera, are going to make the slightest bit of difference as far as the "Levelling of the Hollywood playing field" goes. I think it's very easy to get caught up in thinking that a cheaper camera and newer technology is somehow going to allow you to make "that great film" you've always been thinking you'd make someday if you could afford it. The truth is, as Robert Rodriquez showed us 12 years ago, affordable avenues for making films have been with us for a long time, and we've not seen any huge influx of great quality low budget movies. The camera and film are just now a smaller part of the budget. You're still going to need to spend around $50k to make any kind of basic low budget feature film, (unless it's made in your living room with your Aunty as the main actor) of which you'd be beter off spending a little bit more and renting a Varicam or CineAlta if you want to get the best quality picture (if that's a priority for you), ...and that's just in case that almost unheard of miracle occurs and you actually DO make it into the cinemas with your film.
I think the very best thing any of us could do to to level the playing field is to get off the Internet and start writing, start actually making that film. Hey, but if somehow owning one of these cameras makes you feel it's going to be any easier, and makes you actually do it rather than talk about doing it, that's great, but honestly, ...inspiration is all you're really buying.

I think I'll take my own advice here..

All the best,

I agree with the last poster- this camera is JUST a tool...
it will not "make" a movie for anyone...

BUT

It symbolizes the removal of a huge barrier to entry into filmmaking-
and getting distribution, while a longshot, is not a miracle-
and will continue to be more practical as theatrical dies,
DVD and HD-DVD rises, and broadband becomes the new cable TV.

Case in point, my little movie made on DV in now in BlockBuster and
Amazon, and being remade in Hollywood by one of the top directors
in its' genre... never could have been shot, much less produced,
before DV... 16mm would have been prohibative.

You are right- it starts with the writing-
and because of this camera, I took my script,
found a little financing based on my DV film's success
and attracted Stephen Baldwin (alright, he's no Brad Pitt)
to Produce and act in it, all for well under a million bucks.

That scenario would be impossible with 35mm...

As for Rodriguez, one of my idols, EL MARIACHI succeeded,
but it looked only so-so visually... this camera, and the ones
that follow it, gives the Director a shot at aesthetic beauty...

It is a tool, just a tool... but the tool I have waited 18 years for.

Camera comes tomorrow... clock starts ticking... time to make an HD film!


T. Patrick Murray
MicroCinema (no, MicroCinema.com is not me, wish it were)
www.TheLastGame.com

Thats not entirely true, why assume that you have to use a camera be it film or video at all?

when "making a film" it could be all CGI, and that doesn't require anything but skill + software+ computer+(time to render)

I mean look at how many computer generated "films" have come out :

Toy Story
Toy Story 2
Shrek
Shrek2
Finding Nemo
Final Fantasty
Madagascar
Bugs Life
Sharks tale


and a whole load more, and with current home computers and softare we can do alot better than TRON :)


Any way I'm just kidding you are right the camera is a small part of the equation, but since we're in a forum that revoles around cameras its not a surprise that we would pay more attention on the cameras than anything else.

One thing for sure, cameras have changed alot, and they are gonna get better.


Anhar

Anhar is correct-
there is a parallel revolution occurring,
related but unrelated,
concerning computer technology...
the very thing that allows us to edit HD in our homes
instead of renting time with a 100k AVID like the old days...

The name of this game is empowerment-
if you are the next Brad Bird, you can make an animated film
with a Mac today, just like these cameras allow for a live action production
at mimimum cost...

Good point, Anhar.

If I could give awards for best thread of the day, this one would be the winner. Keep it up! I built this site in order to attract this exact type of conversation. Well done fellows,

Who's directing "The Last Game"? You didn't mention a name?

Also, good job on getting the doc out there - I'll try and rent it or maybe buy it!

Don't forget "A Corpse Bride" being shot as stop motion on a CANON digital SLR camera. I have been thinking about doing a stop motion movie like this for almost a year now. I'm glad to finally see somebody do it.

I am only 18, but when I think in the time when I was 9, already dreaming about having a camera to make a movie, there were only Hi8mm camcorders (at least, which I knew off) and that already seemed heaven. There even wasn't talking about 'filmmotion' and 24p and so on (I didn't knew the difference, and I think back in 1995 there were almost no cameras who could do such thing that was available for the prosumers, I think the XL1 started this with Frame Mode - correct me if I'm wrong)

And then, when I read this post, I think: damn, I should be lucky to live in this age. Sometimes I think - and I'm only talking about the material available, not about the skills of the operator - the stuff consumers now have available is better then the things of semi professionals 15 years ago. Maybe I'm even understating!
It's especcially great if you read a book about filmmaking, that was published in the 80's, where they say the best to make movies is 8mm or 16mm, nothing else then that. No non-lineair editing systems on computers for semi-pro's or amateurs then.
Now everybody can edit with their PC.

So, I know this maybe is going to sound 'soappy', or sentimental, but sometimes I feel bad for people who are 35 now, or some even 50 or older. Maybe they had/have the same dreams as I do, but I now have more chance to get a camera, make something, and just edit it at home, and send it to a festival or something.
Makes me feel very lucky, maybe even a little bit guilty, in a strange way.

Just wanted to post this sentiment for a moment...
Best regards,

Matthew:

That's a bittersweet sentiment to hear, because there is certainly truth in it. As an almost-40 year old who absolutely had dreams of filmmaking as you and others have describe starting in high school (and who also ran around with borrowed VHS 2-piece systems trying to make films, edited in camera), I do sometimes think about how great it would have been to have had access to the incredible riches available now for far less than the cost of a year of film school. But the "sweet" part of the bittersweet is that for those who are your age, it's all their for the taking and I'm happy for you that you get these opportunities. Still though, doesn't stop me from doing it too (if I can fit it in between working to pay the mortgage etc!).

Tim, I know exactly the feeling you are describing. I first had it when I took a training class in Final Cut Pro 1 and suddenly realized the capabilities I now had on my home computer, which was many times that of the edit suites I used to work on as a salaried employee. I felt it again when I teamed up with a theatre company to do a 48-hour film festival (while it was still a new idea!) and made a great little short in two days, then watched 6 other ones that same night (which led me to create Instant Films, my present company). It's a visceral feeling of pure excitement and empowerment.

But it's best to think of that technological bonus as being the gift horse that simply prevents one from having to raise that much more money to make a film--the rest of the process remains the same, and the temptation to just go out and shoot because it doesn't cost anything should probably be balanced with the understanding that there are no shortcuts to a great story, great performances or even great cinematography (it takes the same amount of skill to make beautiful looking video as it does film--in some ways, even more so).

Please, don't feel bad, it's our own fault. I'm nearly 50 and just finished making my first feature film. When I was 20 in London, my flat-mate had a really huge video camera connected to a really huge video recorder deck that you could just about hump around if you were in great shape, my other flat mate messed around with 8mm films and had a little 8mm editing station. But at the time I wasn't really interested. The quality did look really bad, but if I'd been really driven I COULD have made films using this, the technology was already there. The only thing that has changed is that now the picture quality is many time superior, so it's easier to make something out of the box that visually LOOKS like it could go straight to TV. This has absolutely nothing to do with whether what you produce is watchable by anyone except your cat.
There is a great analogy in the Music production world which has already gone down this pathway. Are we now seeing thousands of really talented people making the best music you've ever heard because you can make a really high quality album in your bedroom? (and have been able to for almost 20 years), I personally don't think so. Though I have to say that the ACCESS to all the atempts at it on the internet, (which we didn't have when record companies controlled everything you heard) is a truly revolutional thing. You can now get to hear a lot more variation in musical styles than when they controlled the musical outlets. I dearly hope the same thing will happen with film, at the same time hoping that people will still be able to make a living at it.

All the best,

I forgot to add: at Instant Films we get a lot of shorts sent to us by prospective directors; they are often beautifully packaged DVD's with slick menus etc. just like real films, but the majority of them get ejected after the first minute...

Geez, with one foot in the grave at age 56 I don't even make your list...

Seriously, don't feel sorry for me. Things change. And where is it carved in stone that shooting video - or film - is the be all and end all of existence? What about those poor, poor people who lived in the 1800's? They didn't even know what a movie was! Man, I *really* feel sorry for them. My daughter, who is 23 and an actress, and I often talk about differences in our childhoods. She finds it remarkable that my generation only had 3 or 4 black and white TV channels to watch and no VCR's or DVD's. Imagine that - how did we pass the time? Sometimes we actually had to just sit around and *think* about stuff instead of being assaulted by mass media everywhere ;-)

When I was 18 I was doing live theatre, for real audiences. Difficult as it might be to believe, people are actually still doing this today as well, and some of us manage to make a pretty good living at it :-)

All sarcasm aside, these are exciting times with lots of new products coming along to empower the "little guy." But the same could be said for the printing press, radio, automobile and many other things. And 30 years from now your kids will "feel sorry" for you since you didn't have holographic virtual reality teleportation when you were 18. So enjoy it while you can, and do the best job possible with the tools and media that are available. That's pretty much what every generation has done since man first started illustrating hunting stories on cave walls...

Yes, thanks for all the replies, I know it's not right to feel sorry, or to feel bad about it, and I realise it, but... well, just, let's say that I'm very lucky to have maybe more tools available, and I often think about it.
And I certainly know much crap is being made now, that's why a part of me still is happy that interlaced footage exists in consumer cams and that 16mm and 35mm is still expensive, so you already (often) need to have experience to work with film. Indeed, same example with music.

PS: Boyd, you talked about feeling about people in the 1800's who didn't know movies existed. I know you're completely right, and it will sound a little bit dumb, but when I was a little bit younger I indeed thought about this :-)
"Oh god, people in the 1800's never got to see ET!"
Héhé, and I know I'll miss much things in the future too, when I'm dead, but like you said: that doesn't worry me.
At least I know it's a little unjustified sentiment, but I still feel it, once in a while.
PPS: I know I'm a sentimental sucker from time to time :-D

I think there is a danger in the amount of well.. lets just call it garbage being produced will increase linearly as the technology also increases. As it gets easier for the avergae Joe to have access to higher and higher creating tools the more crap is going to be produced BUT at the same time the one redeming factor is that content is an individual component as it remains the same (i.e a bad story is still bad even if its shot on the best camera in the world).

I think we should be careful in who is driving who, as in "Is techonology driving people OR people driving technology?"

Becasue It will be a sad day when people make movies NOT becasue they want to but because they CAN!


Anhar

That day has long passed I think. But really, it's not all that different from the invention of the printing press is it? Suddenly anyone could be an author and their works could be widely distributed. The church and heads of state were not happy about this. And just look at the amount of trash that exists in printed form everywhere today. But nevertheless, there are still things worth reading.

When computer word processors first came out people were promising that we'd all be authors and newspaper publishers, same tune when the internet got going. What is happening is that only the medium has become cheaper and accessible. Talent and marketing for example have meanwhile become much more expensive and a new barrier to creating a product that will actually earn money.
A lot goes into a movie, and a camera and editing is just a small slice of it. You need uniquely talented writers, editors, camerapeople, marketers, managers etc etc to make the medium work for you. You need true vision and passion as well, its acutally a tough combination to find.

Having said this, were are in the middle of an explosion of recorded media due mostly to the rapid expansion of television on sattelite and so on. Television production companies are booming in many places, but you need to look at the content they are producing and get rid of traditional ideas of movie making. Its all about CONTENT and being open to new ideas and having the foresight to execute them.

The future is something only defined when you realise it has already happened. The revolution has been n progress for while now, but not everybody knows this, yet.

"Its all about CONTENT and being open to new ideas and having the foresight to execute them."

True. It's also important to keep an eye towards distribution methods. What still separates 99% of the music biz's technologically level playing field is corporate's hold on dist channels. Hdv-as-printing press will largely depend on large corp's lobbyists future success or failure to place barriers along the infotainment superhighway.

My fingers are crossed for the little (and talented) guys.

This all brings backs memories for me. When I was a Junior in High School in 1973, I got to make a very short video as part of an English Lit class of all places. It was a black and white unit with a huge deck and we thought it was awesome. I was also in drama class my senior year (knew Lesa Blount the actress who was a year behind me) and I dreamed of being able to make a movie, but reality and a baby and no great job prospects, and living in the then very conservative South (where movies were Satans work...) and joining the Army and life in general..., long time depression... delayed it for over 2 decades. So, nearing 50, I realize I have no exuse, I'm not to old, and after making my living writing software, no issues with technology.

And so far the best part is watching my son create a syndicated fishing show in his converted dining room using a couple of DVX100As, Vegas, and some pro equipment (vtr, monitor..). He has been my inspiration and motivaton to try and finally bring my dreams back alive. I made sure he didnt' take 'just' a job to make a living, ever since I saw him making perfect copies of comic strips freehand at the age of 5.

And this new JVC seems to be the ticket to help me get there. Finally. I know it's just a camera, but it's the camera I've been waiting for.
It's never to late and don't let youth oriented culture stop anyone. Buit most of all, I need to find a great script, or script writer to create one.

I read a quote from Tim Burton about Corpse Bride's stop-animation and how he hopes it will make a come back. But he also stresses how everyone thinks a CG-animated film will ALWAYS do better than traditional hand-drawn. He noted that it's the STORY, not the technology, that will always win out.

When I got into film as a 13 year old in 1989, I had Hi-8 and VHS only at my disposal. All edits were done as we shot, in the camera. By 1995, at film school, I was using hi-8, VHS, BetaSP and 16mm film. By 1999, I bought an XL-1 and started making indie movies on my own.

I got caught up in the technology aspect more times that I wish to admit, but at the end of the day, it was about the story. Sure, a movie shot on the FX1 will look better than VHS, but it still comes down to the story, the skills of the director, along with his cast and crew.

heath

Tim: for what it's worth, if there's a paradigm shift taking place today in terms of video recording technology, it's probably Sony and not JVC which will get much of the credit. True, JVC got the ball rolling for affordable HD videography with the HD1U and HD10U, but neither of those enjoyed even a fraction of the success of the Sony FX1 and Z1U. And now the HD100 is "late to the game" by comparison with a fairly high price tag and limited 720p recording format, which probably will not hold up over time compared to 1080i and 1080p. So yes, the HD100 is an interesting camera and will get its share of attention, but when the history books are written it will be the Sony cameras (and maybe the Panasonic HVX200) which will be listed as the ones which got everyone doing HD video work. JVC will be lucky to get any long-term credit for the coming HD revolution, because they aren't shipping cameras which "hit the mark" with a widespread audience.

Now this is what I have been talking about in almost all of my posts around these forums! As much as everyone hails this camera over that one, and if you onlu spend an extra "10-20k you could get this extra equipment and make this more like that"...Really what matters is having a well written story, and actors who can truly feel the characters they are playing, a great cast makes it feel more like a movie. A good location/set and well lit to give atmosphere...and your project can be something to be remembered.

I remember as a kid not even having the luxury of a camera, but using a simple tape recorder and acting out a total audio presentation. We laughed and had so much fun doing it, we stayed up all night making it "just right" and then playing it to family and friends. Moved on to helping my brother with his college films, and then getting my own vhs camera and having a blast creating things we wanted to see. Today we have such great ways to create amazing things. I am in fact glad to be 35 and not younger. Now I can take my experience and put it to greater things.

Anyhow, it's a pleasure to read some great posts about people remembering that it's "not all about the camera you use", but the whole package coming together. And your own personal experiences make it all the more a pleasurable read.

Sean

I don't think Timothy was suggesting the camera alone will do all the job for you... He was just showing his appreciation for the amazing evolution (revolution?) of the video cameras of today and their amazing potential.

It's easy to say the story, etc. is what counts, but if you go out there and get and old Hi8 video cam and try to shoot a movie on that... well, good luck, that's all I can say. Sure, Blair Witch worked, but it was a 'reality show' kind of film, not your traditional film. Don't think it would be fair to make it the rule, it's more of an exception.

DV has changed the way people see 'amateur' videography, and HD more so. HD is indeed a dream come true and the HD100 is the zenith of it all for the time being - 24p at under $6000, now that's something.

As what age is concerned... well, I personally think that us in early/mid 30s are probably in the best position to take advantage of this cameras, because not only we have the experience but also a different outlook in life.

I 100% agree that story, acting, lighting, etc make a good movie and not the camera. But at the same time I have to think to myself that if Star Wars Episode 3 was shot on DV that the fans would have hated it and those who still hated it would have hated it even more. I do not think it would have made nearly as much money as it did or stand out to as many as it did.

Movies are immortal and will live on forever for people to watch and enjoy. Way after the time when we are dead hopefully our movies will still be here for people to get something from. To me it is like the Roman collisium. No matter what material they used the design would have still been great. How how long will it have lasted in the eyes of the viewer. If the Collisium was built out of wood we even have it to look at today? It part of it was still there how many of us would look at it the same as we do now?

If the quality wasn't also an important (not as important but still an important piece of the puzzle) part to the story telling then maybe Hollywood should just start making all of their movies on DV cameras to cut costs so they can make profits again. Part of me thinks movies just wouldn't have the same impact as they do now.

I think DV finally got us to the point where we can shoot video that could actually hold up for many many years. It may be small compared to the size of video in the future but it will still look clean and clear. HDV brings us that small one final step closer to making our movies last forever.

Some great stories and insights...

This camera may not be remembered by name-
it is but one of a series, a single part of an arcing evolution
that will never stop its' progress...

but the films made by this camera will be remembered-
the best of them- films that would not be realized and of
sufficiently professional in quality (technical and artistic)
to be widely distributed if not for HD technology.

I predict someone from this board makes a great movie
with this very camera (and others will make great movies
with other HD cameras) and that is what I am talking about-
the empowerment of the individual gained by this psrticular
threshold of technical quality.

And while I look at envy at the youth of today (like Mathieu)
because of the extra time they have, I agree with the post
that believes the 30ish and above people will take best advantage
of this technology- for they understand best what this remarkable
technology allows them to do at new efficiencies... youth will
always be brash and brilliant, but I see the painterly hand of
those in their 30s 40s and 50s to capture a profound and powerful
story of this medium... for art is the antithesis of athletics: on old
bones rests the wisdom of experience and the miracle of empirical knowledge... the all-stars of literature and cinema are ever-advanced
in age, with no decline in creative energy and executive ability.

(P.S. Answer: Ron Shelton is attached to direct THE LAST GAME remake...
we will see if it gets green light...)

Yup all of you are right, and I agree. My post was meant that this camera(why my post is on here) and other cameras we now have access to, can give our productions a more accepted result.

I, and most people I know don't have the budget & won't be shooting a Star Wars ep.3 anyhow. So really, that's not an issue. But I agree that it wouldn't be anywhere near what that movie is if shot on dv. And I know I can't afford that, but a good story & acting, lights, etc. go a long way for telling a story. Something we all agree on.

Enjoy filming with what you have and make the most of it. Most of all have fun with it and learn. Being 35, with all these new goodies abound, kinda feel like a kid anyhow! Time to go play with my new toys!