Any help would be greatly appreciated....

[Andrew Peterson Padilla]

Man, that was informative.

Let me start out my reply with a response/question about something Jeff said...

What are the benefits of shooting the desired look in-camera as opposed to tweaking in post?

I would think that - in metaphorical terms - creating the desired look primarily in post with Magic Bullet or After Effects, etc would be like making up an ugly girl to look prettier, whereas achieving the majority of your desired look in-camera and simply PERFECTING it in post would be like putting makeup on Angelina Jolie.

My question pertaining to that is this: what can be done while shooting, and what should be left for post? That's one vague question for you.

On a similar subject, a more specific question... B&W... One of the two main characters in my film is a pickpocket and I'm going to be shooting a Fellini-esque sequence of the character ripping people off on the street, which I've been toying with the idea of having in B&W. I've read opposing points of view, some saying that if you want an authentic/old-fashioned B&W, shoot in-camera, while others say to keep your options open and shoot in color and change it in post. I suppose it's a judgement call, then? Any thoughts?

Now, on to Mike... First, you're the man. I learned more in that reply than I thought I'd learn this whole thread. That was so specific, you may have just made my film. As Ali G would say, Respek.

Now, you mentioned the 3x wide angle lens. That's something I figured I'd end up with, because my mentality as a director is very much Scorsese/Fellini/early Spielberg when it comes to shooting technique (in that zooming, for me, is pointless. Everything is the wide shot. When I AM coming in slow on someone, the camera will be easing forward.)

But that said, it's also the only lens I really know anything about. I've been told that it's what my style would benefit from, but at the same time, I know nothing about the other lenses. And you all have explained the general intricacies of the lenses very wellm but I don't know about the even MORE general generalities of the lenses in question. So here I go, ready to prove myself as the true "know-nothing" of DV filmmaking...

What's the difference between the 3x, the 20x, the 16x, 14x, etc...? I know they all differ in magnification, but what purpose does each individually serve?

Based on what you said though, Mike, I'll probably stick with the 20x and the 3x. And we move on...

Moniters and remotes. What exactly are the benefits of the two, and how much do they generally run, respectfully priced?

Adaptors. Will I need any for the two lenses in question?

What's rack focus?

Manual focus for me, as well, is a must. I have scenes where the foreground is focused on, while important things are blurred in the background for suspense purposes, as well as other scenes that play on the same technique, in different context. So is manual focus a pain? Is it something that takes years of practice and intense instruction by monks to learn? Or will a quick learner like myself be okay?

Anyway, count on me being on this forum alot more as filming approaches and more than likely even more as filming commences. I'll probably have more questions to ask rather soon, as I start buying the equipment.

Mike, Jeff, Matthew... Thanks alot. Extremely, extremely helpful. Sorry about the shameless barrage of questions.

[Andrew Peterson Padilla]

Oh, and by the by, Mike... The computer I have right now can't handle that video for some reason. It just freezes. I'm sure if I could download it to my computer, it would work better in standalone.

(I'm getting a new Mac for the project, so don't worry about the computer issue.)

[Mike Teutsch]

Andrew,

Ok, lets see where to begin?!

If the video that you mentioned in your last post, that freezes up, is the DVCreators XL2 tour Video, first try just waiting a long time. It is very long, about a half an hour and takes a long time to download. Hit it and walk away for an hour!!!!!!!!!! If that doesn't work, let us know.

As for the other questions, I will do the best I can. I assumed you knew more about cameras and lens than you do.

The focal length of the standard 20x lens is the 35mm equivelent of 42.3mm to 846mm, minimum to maximum zoom. The 3x is 26.6mm to 79.8mm. The 20x is difficult to use indoors, as you are too confined by the available space, and this is where the 3x comes into play. I will say that if you did not understand this before, definetly stay away from the manual lenses. And, these two lenses are both made for the Canon Xl series cameras and need no adapter. The 20x, in fact, is the one that comes with the camera.

As far as whether to shoot the movie look in camera, it is a decision that many have to make. On one hand you can do most tweaking in post, but everything you do in post degrades the image to a small degree. The closer you get to your desired look in the camera, the less you have to do in post and the less degredation you will have. It depends on the software you have and your skill at using it, you have to make the decision. The basis factor in this is that you can change color, contrast, etc. in post, but you can't restore detail that was never recorded. Ie, if you blow out whites or have no detail in the dark areas, you will not be able to restore them in post, if you want them.

As far as shooting in B&W, most I have heard say to shoot in color, then change it in post if that is what you want. This is always possible, but if you shoot in B&W, you can't put it back to color! Manipulating it to look old, etc. is a matter of what effects you apply in post.

As far as remotes, they are used to start and stop recording, zoom, focus, etc.. Companies like Varizoom and others make LANC controllers that connect to the cameras. Maybe the biggest advantage is that you do not have to touch the controls on the camera, and risk moving it during the shot. The XL2 inself comes with a romote that does many things, like start, stop, zoom, etc., study it.

A monitor, if it is a good one and set up properly, will allow you to see what is actually being recorded to tape, as opposed to what the less accurate viewfinder is showing you. They help you set the color and such. At your level, I'm not sure I would worry about it at this time. Besides, a good one is very expensive!

Do a search here and elsewhere on rack focus, but basically it is rapid change in focus from one subject to another, causing one to become clear and the other to blur out. Study it, but I would not worry about it for you first time.

In your paragraph on manual focus, you are basically talking about DOF, or Depth Of Field, not focus. DOF determines what is in focus and how much is not in focus. The less DOF, the less is in focus, which is what you want. Play with your camera and the 20x lens, but generally open the lens up as much a possible, (lowest iris number, like 1.6) zoom all the way in, (as close-up as you can get), and this will give you the "Least Depth of Field." You need to play with it to learn.

I wish you the best, but you need to really keep reading all of the posts on this forum, especially using the search feature and keys words.

Helping you helps me so I'm happy to do it.

Mike

[Andrew Peterson Padilla]

As for the video, that's what I did. I may not know much about XL2s, but computers are my thang.

I've owned a few DV cameras, but really just used what I had and didn't really ask too many questions. I admittedly don't know much about lenses, other than how they work. From not having each at my expense, I don't know what individual purpose each serves, but I'm starting to get it. I'd buy them all and find out, but my budget doesn't allow that. Possibly by shoot date, but not right now.

Yeah, that's what most have said. And as I haven't liked alot of the images shot clean and messed with in post, that's what I had my sights set on. I know Papert and Danny Boyle have both said that they do as much as possible before post, and they got amazing results, so it doesn't leave too much question.

I believe I will be buying both a remote and a monitor, as those two materials sound very much like something I'll find much use in for my type of shooting.

My answers are very much completely answered for what it is I'll be buying camera-wise.

Now let me ask you one more question on a very related subject... I want to make sure the lighting I'm intending on is the correct one. For my darker tone, I've settled on a 2K or 4K soft light, depending on the budget I have come film shoot in August. But since I have a darker tone AND a much lighter more realistic tone, I was curious as to what would be more beneficial.

On one hand, the darker tone's half of the film follows a thief just released from prison, going back into a life he's not proud of. The shot process is very slow, almost foreboding... It would benefit unquestionably by careful, meticulous (soft) lighting. On the other hand, the feel of the more realistic side of the film follows a character whose life is predictable and whose marriage is hollow. The shot process on this half is alot of tracking shots, and a sense of urgency. The look is intended to be very-hyper real. I'm wondering if for that if I should use the same soft light, a stronger one or no artificial light not available on location. I really would like to go with no light, because how often in real life does an artificial light follow you around all day? That said, I'm not sure what affect that will have on the end product.

Any suggestions?

[Richard Alvarez]

4k is a LOT of light for an interior DV shoot. It would be extremely hot from a single source, even blowing through a soft box. That's just a god-awful ammount if what you are looking for is a 'low key' "Noirish" sort of look. 2k is pretty hot too.

Sounds to me what you are looking for is a good set of Fresnels for the noir sequences. Something you can model the light with as oposed to an open faced, broader light. With a good set of fresnels, you can set some hot spots, highlights, and create 'pools' on the set that the characters move in and out of. Much more texture. (And yes, you can throw a softbox on them too.)

A couple of 1k softboxes will give you a broader light for your 'high key' sequences. If you have your 2k or 4k boxes, then that's where they will come in.

That's how I would approach it. Your mileage may very. (You can rent a good set of fresnels.)

The long tracking sequences for your real life section, will reguire either lighting a 'path' that the track moves through, mounting a light on the dolly , or a boom pole-china ball style,(in movies, artificial light DOES follow you around all day). Of course, using natural light and suplementing it is also acceptable. But if you are shooting outside, suplimenting it will mean HMI's, or Dichroic filters/gels on your tungstens, or at the very least, travelling bounce cards.

[Andrew Peterson Padilla]

Word Richard.

I will definitely reconsider the 2k-4k. I had no idea they were so strong. If I did get a 2k (which I probably won't), isn't it possible to mute the brightness with anything? Anything to create shade?

I see where you're coming from on the pools of light aspect, but that idea is a little too vintage for this film. Dark, grainy and smoky is this guy's life. It's neo-noir because of the character's profession, but not because of how he feels about his profession... making the look so defined and classic like that would make it a little too glamorous, you know?

And about the china ball lighting, that was something I was definitely thinking about.

I'll comment more thoroughly when I get back from work. Thanks.

[Andrew Todd]

andrew.. seriously look into getting a 35mm adapter.. ive got one (letus35) for my xl1s. i am a huge cheerleader for these and conistently recommend these to anyone and everyone looking to get a great "look" out of their minidv cam. With some cheap fd still lenses you can give your cam setup alot more flexbility for an extremely low price. check out the Alt imaging forum.. good luck with your shoot

[Richard Alvarez]

Depending on the type of light you get, yeah, there are ways to 'dim' it. One way being to actually use an electrical dimmer to turn down the voltage. Make sure you have one rated for the light, and understand that color temps change once you start to lower the light beyond a certain point.

You can also dim the light 'mechanically' by using scrims. Again, depending on the brand and style of light, you can slip a scrim in the holder and cut down the light by a stop or two. Ditto with ND gels.

Graduated scrims also exist. These are especially usefull when your subject is moving away from or towards light sources. Because as they move towards the light, the intensity will increase exponentially. (Light falls off at the inverse square of the distance). If you simply ride the iris, the exposure to the background will change in the shot. With a graduated scrim, you can 'shade' the light from the forground to the background. Scrims come in full, half, and graduated versions. (They look like pieces of screen stretced across a frame.)

Andrew, most of these questions can be answered by reading a couple of really good books on basic cinematography and filmmaking. Check out the forum for recommended books.

[Mike Teutsch]

Originally Posted by Andrew Todd

andrew.. seriously look into getting a 35mm adapter.. ive got one (letus35) for my xl1s. i am a huge cheerleader for these and conistently recommend these to anyone and everyone looking to get a great "look" out of their minidv cam. With some cheap fd still lenses you can give your cam setup alot more flexbility for an extremely low price. check out the Alt imaging forum.. good luck with your shoot

Andrew & Andrew,

With all due respect to both of you let me say something, and ask a few questions!

Mr. Todd, please carefully reread Mr. Padilla's posts then, ask yourself this question: Does it sound like Mr. Padilla is ready to jump into this, or any new camera, and a 35mm adapter? This will be his first attempt to shoot anything and his skills run toward writing and directing, as stated by him himself.

I applaud Mr. Padilla's desire and willingness to tackle his first real movie, and know he is going to enjoy the process. But, his skill in actually shooting a film is very limited. He doesn't understand the cameras, lighting, lenses, and I bet the sound part of it! This is not a put-down of him, it is just reality! Mr. Padilla is a very enthusiastic 20 year old. (I wish I were!)

So let’s try to be totally realistic in our advice and assistance. I am waiting for someone to jump in here and tell him that he needs a new HD camera, and he surely does not!

Mr. Padilla, you said you have the sound part covered, but it sounded like you were talking about in post, with maybe someone assisting you. Do you have good sound equipment to film with? In post you can add music and Foley etc., but you will not be able to correct bad captured audio from the shooting. It must be captured well in the shoot, and that means that the stock on-camera mic will not suffice for about 90% of the shoot. You will need booms and shotgun mics, wireless outfits and much more. If you don’t have these items, you will need to acquire them somehow, buy-borrow-rent! I just wanted to make sure you understand this.

So far, Mr. Padilla, you have listened to the advice that has been offered to you and I really applaud that! Sometimes it is very difficult for people to do. I hope that what I have said is good advice, and that if it is not, I hope that someone will jump in and correct me. It won’t hurt my feelings a bit, I am just trying to help you. I was very glad to see Mr. Alvarez jump in, as he is much more knowledgeable than I. And, I hope others add to this post also.

Let’s try to remember one thing though! Let’s concentrate on answering specific questions from Mr. Padilla, and I’m sure he will come up with many as this continues.

Mr. Padilla, please read as much as you can in the appropriate forum sections, and this will give you a lot of information and lead to more specifically directed questions.

The Audio section is, “Now Hear This,” and has a lot of great info. The cliché is, “Audio production -- it's 70% of everything you see,” and it is definitely true! I was at a film school a couple of weeks ago, and one the instructors, whose main skill is Audio production, made a statement that was very telling. He said that people will sit and watch a movie that is good, even if it is slightly out of focus, or the picture is not just right. But, if the sound is bad it has been shown that most people will leave within ten minutes!

The lighting section is Photon Management, and there is a wealth of information there also.

Spend every spare minute of your time reading all that you can, and when you have specific questions or do not understand something, then ask. We are all happy to help, and that is what makes this Forum so great!

I’m ready for the next question anytime. I will be away the 1st thru the 9th though, but many others will help you. Just remember to be very specific with your questions, and not ask something like which is better, that just doesn’t work well at all.

Good luck guys,

Mike

[Andrew Todd]

lol.. sorry mike.. hes looking at spending a good deal of cash.. id like to see him get his $$ worth.. but yeah...

[Matthew Nayman]

Hey mike, you beat me to it@!

Andrew, have you considered hiring a cinematographer and technical crew as opposed to spending so much on equipment? I am fesitval director, and bought my own stuff, but only because I really really know how to use and get the best. I am not suggesting that only experience techies get equipment, but I didn't start out on an XL2. I worked my way up.

You can't pick up a guitar and expect play like Eric Claton. I am very supportive of you making films and getting the right tools, but I strongly urge you to read EVERYTHING you can about film making. The Filmmakers Hand Book is a must. it covers everything you could ever want to know about aperatures, lighting, colour correction... all the nitty gritty.

If you feel your strengths are directing and story, focus on that and hire an experienced camera guy with his own stuff. It won't make a huge dent in your pocket book (if you get the right guy) and I promise you your film will be better...

Good luck. Just trying to help you out...

[Andrew Todd]

if this is your first go at it all maybe look into renting a cam or buying a cheaper one and try your hand at making a few shorts first... a feature is a big step.. better to learn from your own mistakes than to make them on something big.

[Richard Alvarez]

Gentlemen,

See my first post in this thead, where I suggested he lease and hire, and Andrew's response to those suggestions.

(It's good practice to read an ENTIRE thread before posting, so old info and suggestions aren't regenerated)

I think Andrew is planning on commiting his resouces in both time and money to acquiring production assets. I applaud him for doing reasearch ahead of time.

Just as PRE PRODUCTION is where you save money in actual production costs, pre purchase research is where you will save money in acquisition costs.

Read all the books and manuals you can get hold of. Post questions here, (AFTER you do a search for the topic). Before dropping a bundle on a high ticket item, consider a little expenditure in rental time to give it a test ride. (Assuming you can't just borrow it from a friend).

[Jeff McElroy]

The reason I like shooting ‘In Camera’ is because it forces me to have a concrete vision of my end product, from which to work around. I have the attitude that if my approach to DV is as filmic as possible, then my results will look much better. This sense of finality compels me to plan more efficiently… which may sound stupid, and is just a matter of personal ethics. So, take my advice in this regard with a grain of salt, as it is definitely neither the safest nor smartest way to work. As in all things, the best course of action would be to find an effective middle ground; one where you will provide yourself with a safe degree of versatility in post, and yet maintain enough of a sense of direction so as not to get lost in a sea of visual potential.

I recently did a noir-ish narrative film just for fun, which I shot using a B&W custom preset, from which I tweaked further in post. Perhaps you would like to see it? (Not sure how I would get it to you… perhaps email?)

Manual focus for me, as well, is a must. I have scenes where the foreground is focused on, while important things are blurred in the background for suspense purposes, as well as other scenes that play on the same technique, in different context. So is manual focus a pain? Is it something that takes years of practice and intense instruction by monks to learn? Or will a quick learner like myself be okay?

As Mike said, you are talking about achieving shallow depth of field.
You are never going to get the excellent dof control out of your camera that is afforded to 35mm motion pictures, but, for your purposes, you should be able to do yourself well if you are smart about it.

Yesterday, I went to my local park and shot about two dozen gulls all lined up along the seawall in perfect file (excellent for some interesting focusing varity). I was full telephoto (20x) with my iris as open as possible, applying both ND filters as to not over-expose the image. If I remember, I will post some screens after I capture the tape, as it covers the whole spectrum of potential in this regard.

Now, you mentioned the 3x wide angle lens. That's something I figured I'd end up with, because my mentality as a director is very much Scorsese/Fellini/early Spielberg when it comes to shooting technique (in that zooming, for me, is pointless. Everything is the wide shot. When I AM coming in slow on someone, the camera will be easing forward.)

As for me, I absolutely love long lenses, such as used in Red Beard, where like every shot is super telephoto. I am also obsessed with extreme wide angle close-ups… especially when shown in contrast with the aforementioned telephoto shots. I guess I just like extremes.

Now, technically, the 20x lens does not offer true manual focus. Instead, it is electronic, with a free spinning focus ring that mimics a ‘manual feel’. However, this is only referring to the technical means by which your lens functions. For your purposes, yes, you will be able to “manually” move a focus ring to achieve or change your desired point of focus with the 20x or 3x. If you want a true manual lens, which accomplishes changes in focus, focal length, and even aperture by mechanical means, the 16x manual will allot you just that (and is advertised as such). From the sounds of things though, I don’t think you really care by what means or exact precision, so long as you are able to focus for narrative effect.

To be honest, the 20x is a great piece of glass, and, for your stylistic purposes, the 3x looks to be a good accompanying investment. At your budget and experience, I wouldn’t go more technical than that (ie, the 16x manual), as this is a whole lot of stuff to ingest.

[Andrew Peterson Padilla]

Okay.. Wow.

This is my mission for this film... I want to make this film for under $15,000, not because that's all I have, because I have more... I would like to make a movie on a very low budget look as good as possible, so I can sell the movie on it. My writing and visual creativity is my strong-suit, so that will be top-notch... The idea is to take this movie on the road and all, but eventually sell my talents on it. Paraphrased goal outcome as follows:
"I made this film for $15,000"
"Wow, you made this for $15,000?"
"Imagine what I could do with just $1 million"

So obviously, I don't expect film quality or even amazing DV quality, just quality that doesn't distract from the film.

Also, the reason I want to make the movie now is because I can strike while I'm still young. Scorsese made Who's That Knocking... at 25, and was considered a prodigy, not because of the look of his film, but because of the maturity and vision of his film. I'm not saying I expect to be Scorsese, but simply that, the younger, the better.

Essentially, my approach to the visuals of this film is this... I've been building up my directorial "style" in my head for 8 years, and it's so specific at this point that I want the visuals of this film to just basically resemble what I see in my head. This film, in my head and in the screenplay, has been custom-fit for DV, as to not get too far ahead of myself.

-----------------------------------------------

Now...

Umm, let me respond to most of these by saying that yeah... I'm pretty much technically knowledge-less at this point, but I'm not shooting my actual film until five months after I get the basic equipment. In the meantime, I will be shooting short films non-stop, when I'm not working on for-hire videos.

I have ABSOLUTELY no intention of making my film without being fully learned with my camera and my equipment. This project/screenplay is way too important to me. My vision for this film is way too defined and specific for me to let myself ruin it.

I come to this forum almost everyday. I read a good deal of it, but I wanted to start this thread for specific recommendations for my film. There are a few basic things I still don't completely understand that I don't think are possible to understand until I have the camera in my hands.

I really wish I could afford/coax a cinematographer, but it's just not in the cards.

Another thing is that what I'm buying now isn't necessarily what I'm going to be settling with for my film shoot. I'll be spending another $5,000 or so come August when I'm more knowledgable about my camera and what I'll need, so I will probably be buying some more equipment.

The 3x and 20x lenses are the ones I'm sticking with for now.

Now, Mike... I appreciate your compliments and no offense was taken, as I admit my great inexperience. Sound-wise, I have a Sennheiser boom that fits me pretty well. If it doesn't fit the film, I'll change... I'll be getting some nice wireless mics, as well. Also, my best friend and roommate has an extremely nice recording studio, as that's his profession. I'm a musician and have recorded two albums and countless other my projects as producer, so sound is my strong-suit. I won't settle for crap in this category, because I know plenty about it. I know music and film are two different beasts, but i understand the physics of sound and the quality of sound recording very well.

To answer my fellow Andrew... On the case of a 35 mm adapter/lens... It seems to be a bit steep for this project monetarily. I don't really want to rent anything, because even doing that is too expensive, and I don't want to risk inflating my budget if I go a little over schedule. If there are any fitting the budget as stated above, I'll definitely strongly consider it before shooting the film, based on your recommendations.

Which brings me to another point. My cast/crew are all friends, being that almost all of my friends are professionals in creative fields. Professional actors, recording engineers, electric engineers, musicians, the works... Payment will only come for them if the film makes money. I won't be taking any profit/reimbursement, my cast and crew will.

So shooting will not be on a schedule, it will be very much piece by piece. The only time it will be on a strict schedule is when I'm shooting in a location, like a bar/office building. So renting is a bad idea, as is hiring a professional. It would be a pain for me to spend that kind of dough and it would be a nuisance for a professional to work with no defined shooting schedule.

That might all sound really bizarre to some of you, but it will absolutely produce the best film possible. This freedom will allow us many perks, namely having the freedom to shoot in as many locations as possible in a day and completel comfort with cast and crew.

Matthew, I really do see where you're coming from and I hope this post has helped you better understand my choices. Like I said, I wish I could hire a cinematographer and shoot this film on 35mm... This film would kick SERIOUSLY major ass if that were the case. (Right now I'll settle for the major ass that it's going to kick, as is)

Jeff, I would be extremely interested in seeing that video. My email is andrewpadillafilms@yahoo.com. Your post helped me better understand lenses in-context. I do have more to learn about DOF.

Thanks alot for understanding my POV, Richard... And I agree with you, I do still have alot to learn from other sources and will undoubtedly have more questions to ask afterwards. Thanks for the lighting enlightening.

I hope I haven't upped the retard level of this forum too much... The fact that you guys didn't just simply PM eachother laughing at how stupid I am is admirable on it's own.

A few of you are definitely getting thanks in my credits. You all have been fantastic. You have no idea how comforting it is to know I have somewhere to turn for educated opinions and answers, because I won't lie... This is scary.

Thanks.