Another XL1-S "28 Days Later" article, in American Cinematographer!!! at DVinfo.net

Luke Toyer · July 11th, 2003, 02:23 AM

Here:

http://www.theasc.com/magazine/index...ndex.html~main

Interesting to hear a full account of a Cinematographer using the XL1S on a film project and talking through the whole process (even to blowing it up to 35mm) in detail.

Enjoy.

Scott Brickert · July 16th, 2003, 11:11 PM

I was surprised and encouraged that they used the native 16:9 'format' as opposed to an anamorphic lense. Maybe I don't have to go buy a manual lense and anamorphic adapter after all... :)

Imran Zaidi · July 16th, 2003, 11:27 PM

So from what I gather, they shot it in standard 4x3 format, and then matted it in post?

Luke Toyer · July 17th, 2003, 02:24 AM

I agree with imran, I think it was matted in post.

As far as I'm aware, there is no difference in resolution using either method, however at least with using 4:3 and matting you are able to maintain an undistorted view of what you are filming, and you have some additional freedom when you come to crop the images later (and those 16:9 guidelines relly help too!!)

John Locke · July 17th, 2003, 03:19 AM

Is this out on DVD yet? I'll definitely be ordering this since films can take forever getting over here.

Luke Toyer · July 17th, 2003, 03:55 AM

It's been released over here in the UK already!

Maybe you guys will get it soon (or you can always import a copy from the UK)

Rob Lohman · July 17th, 2003, 06:00 AM

The 28 days later DVD will be released in the US within a couple
of months. www.thedigitalbits.com has the exact date
somewhere in their posts

Charles King · July 17th, 2003, 07:22 AM

And gues what...they used frame mode as well.

Luke Toyer · July 17th, 2003, 07:52 AM

This pleased me no end!!! I've been a bit gutted since the Panasonic DVX100 came out after I bought my XL1S, but now I feel a little more secure in using the "Frame Mode", despite all the grief about loss of resolution, etc.

I think the article demonstrates that the XL1S can quite plausibly be used for a 'Straight, non-documentary style' mainstream movie (even though the cinematography isn't the primary selling point of this particular movie).

Imran Zaidi · July 17th, 2003, 09:45 AM

Lets not forget the primary reasons for using DV for making this kind of movie. Gives a raw feel, allowing you to do things and have a look that you otherwise couldn't achieve with 35mm without a LOT of post work to dirty it down.

I doubt it benefits anyone to really try to compete with film for cinematography. Or rather, try to compete with the type of cinematography that goes along with film cameras. With DV you blaze your own trail and create your own look. That's what the DV revolution is all about.

After all, you could have a wonderful 24p cam, great lighting, and mirror large budget filming techniques, but in the end you'll have... a nice looking DV film that still looks like DV.

DV filmmakers have an edge - you can get that cam into places you can't get a film cam. You can go true guerrilla style. You can shove it into corners to get angles you otherwise couldn't. And because you're not intoxicating your audience with effects or puppetry, you have to rely on great stories to captivate your audience. What a novel concept!

Katherine Sullivan · July 21st, 2003, 05:42 PM

I may be an idiot...but what is an HMI...he refers to it in page 2 of the article...

"I had to hit the actors with big HMIs shooting through 4-by-4 and 6-by-6 silks to lift up the contrast and to illuminate the actors' faces so you would sense that there was some moonlight. "

David L. Fisher · July 21st, 2003, 09:22 PM

It's a light used for lighting outdoor scenes at night. I didn't know myself until I had been on a set and watched them in action, so ask away all day.

Luke Toyer · July 22nd, 2003, 04:44 AM

(Disclaimer: I may not be totally on the ball with all this, please correct any errors)

HMI's are kind of an alternative to Tungsten Lighting. They are like fluorescents, similar to daylight colour temperature.

They are also supposed to be more efficient in their use of electricity. Though they are also more expensive than Tungsten!!!

Hope this helps!!

Katherine Sullivan · July 22nd, 2003, 10:30 AM

Hey thanks yall.
You helped a lot. I think I might be able to learn a lot from this DV community.
Oh and I went to offthewallstudios.com and it was pretty cool. keep at it!

Jason Heck · July 23rd, 2003, 09:13 AM

Yep, they got it. HMI is a daylight balanced light, and they are very expensive compared to tungsten lights.
HMI's have a much higher light output for there given wattage. A 250 watt HMI is comparable to a 1K tungsten set to CTB.

Jason

July 11th, 2003, 02:23 AM	#1
Luke Toyer Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Croydon, SE ENGLAND Posts: 30	Another XL1-S "28 Days Later" article, in American Cinematographer!!! Here: http://www.theasc.com/magazine/index...ndex.html~main Interesting to hear a full account of a Cinematographer using the XL1S on a film project and talking through the whole process (even to blowing it up to 35mm) in detail. Enjoy. __________________ Luke Toyer Off The Wall Studios http://www.offthewallstudios.co.uk E-mail: luke@offthewallstudios.co.uk

July 17th, 2003, 02:24 AM	#4
Luke Toyer Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Croydon, SE ENGLAND Posts: 30	I agree with imran, I think it was matted in post. As far as I'm aware, there is no difference in resolution using either method, however at least with using 4:3 and matting you are able to maintain an undistorted view of what you are filming, and you have some additional freedom when you come to crop the images later (and those 16:9 guidelines relly help too!!) __________________ Luke Toyer Off The Wall Studios http://www.offthewallstudios.co.uk E-mail: luke@offthewallstudios.co.uk

July 17th, 2003, 03:19 AM	#5
John Locke Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Austin, TX USA Posts: 2,882	Is this out on DVD yet? I'll definitely be ordering this since films can take forever getting over here. __________________ John Locke SursumFilms.com

July 17th, 2003, 03:55 AM	#6
Luke Toyer Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Croydon, SE ENGLAND Posts: 30	It's been released over here in the UK already! Maybe you guys will get it soon (or you can always import a copy from the UK) __________________ Luke Toyer Off The Wall Studios http://www.offthewallstudios.co.uk E-mail: luke@offthewallstudios.co.uk

July 17th, 2003, 06:00 AM	#7
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	The 28 days later DVD will be released in the US within a couple of months. www.thedigitalbits.com has the exact date somewhere in their posts __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

July 16th, 2003, 11:11 PM	#2
Scott Brickert Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Crested Butte, CO Posts: 576	I was surprised and encouraged that they used the native 16:9 'format' as opposed to an anamorphic lense. Maybe I don't have to go buy a manual lense and anamorphic adapter after all... :)

July 16th, 2003, 11:27 PM	#3
Imran Zaidi Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,315	So from what I gather, they shot it in standard 4x3 format, and then matted it in post?

July 17th, 2003, 07:22 AM	#8
Charles King Major Player Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: sweden Posts: 795	And gues what...they used frame mode as well. __________________ Charles 'What we perceive to be may not be what we believe to be.'

July 17th, 2003, 07:52 AM	#9
Luke Toyer Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Croydon, SE ENGLAND Posts: 30	This pleased me no end!!! I've been a bit gutted since the Panasonic DVX100 came out after I bought my XL1S, but now I feel a little more secure in using the "Frame Mode", despite all the grief about loss of resolution, etc. I think the article demonstrates that the XL1S can quite plausibly be used for a 'Straight, non-documentary style' mainstream movie (even though the cinematography isn't the primary selling point of this particular movie). __________________ Luke Toyer Off The Wall Studios http://www.offthewallstudios.co.uk E-mail: luke@offthewallstudios.co.uk

July 17th, 2003, 09:45 AM	#10
Imran Zaidi Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,315	Lets not forget the primary reasons for using DV for making this kind of movie. Gives a raw feel, allowing you to do things and have a look that you otherwise couldn't achieve with 35mm without a LOT of post work to dirty it down. I doubt it benefits anyone to really try to compete with film for cinematography. Or rather, try to compete with the type of cinematography that goes along with film cameras. With DV you blaze your own trail and create your own look. That's what the DV revolution is all about. After all, you could have a wonderful 24p cam, great lighting, and mirror large budget filming techniques, but in the end you'll have... a nice looking DV film that still looks like DV. DV filmmakers have an edge - you can get that cam into places you can't get a film cam. You can go true guerrilla style. You can shove it into corners to get angles you otherwise couldn't. And because you're not intoxicating your audience with effects or puppetry, you have to rely on great stories to captivate your audience. What a novel concept!

July 21st, 2003, 05:42 PM	#11
Katherine Sullivan New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bend, OR Posts: 7	what is HMI? I may be an idiot...but what is an HMI...he refers to it in page 2 of the article... "I had to hit the actors with big HMIs shooting through 4-by-4 and 6-by-6 silks to lift up the contrast and to illuminate the actors' faces so you would sense that there was some moonlight. " __________________ Kat www.verityfilms.com

July 21st, 2003, 09:22 PM	#12
David L. Fisher New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bangkok, Thailand Posts: 23	HMI It's a light used for lighting outdoor scenes at night. I didn't know myself until I had been on a set and watched them in action, so ask away all day.

July 22nd, 2003, 04:44 AM	#13
Luke Toyer Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Croydon, SE ENGLAND Posts: 30	(Disclaimer: I may not be totally on the ball with all this, please correct any errors) HMI's are kind of an alternative to Tungsten Lighting. They are like fluorescents, similar to daylight colour temperature. They are also supposed to be more efficient in their use of electricity. Though they are also more expensive than Tungsten!!! Hope this helps!! __________________ Luke Toyer Off The Wall Studios http://www.offthewallstudios.co.uk E-mail: luke@offthewallstudios.co.uk

July 22nd, 2003, 10:30 AM	#14
Katherine Sullivan New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bend, OR Posts: 7	HMI Hey thanks yall. You helped a lot. I think I might be able to learn a lot from this DV community. Oh and I went to offthewallstudios.com and it was pretty cool. keep at it! __________________ Kat www.verityfilms.com

July 23rd, 2003, 09:13 AM	#15
Jason Heck New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Lexington, KY Posts: 14	Yep, they got it. HMI is a daylight balanced light, and they are very expensive compared to tungsten lights. HMI's have a much higher light output for there given wattage. A 250 watt HMI is comparable to a 1K tungsten set to CTB. Jason