First question here about a rock concert movie at DVinfo.net

Arvid Unsgaard · September 13th, 2007, 11:32 AM

Hi everyone on this forum. Im new here.

Im a screenwriter and editor. But now I got a work to do a concert movie for a swedish band.

So I have some questions for this.

My influence for this is the U2 - Rattle and hum, and also some Anton Corbijn work.

I was thinking to work with five cameras, with mini35 and HD-100. Here I wonder if I should use DV or HDV?

What I want is the depth of field, just like they have in the concerts I mentioned above.

So my first thread is if anyone have any advice about this.

What do you think.

Is it overkill to use mini35 for a concert movie?

I also want to say that - i will not be one of the photographer - im just want to know more as adirector.

Paul Jefferies · September 13th, 2007, 01:56 PM

Bear in mind the fact that the HD100 is not great at low light levels, and the Mini 35 will reduce that even more (and rock concert lighting is not always ideal for video). The setup would be quite bulky so you would probably be restricted to static tripod shots rather than roving cameras, and you may have to have two man crews on each camera (one operator, one focus puller, with maybe a seperate HD monitor). Also, if you're not too close to the stage you will need long lenses, which will cut down on the light even more. HD100's can't be genlocked together so you might want to consider HD250's instead

Arvid Unsgaard · September 13th, 2007, 11:58 PM

Thanks for your answer.

The concert place is rather small so I think we can have the cameras near the stage.

If we only have static tripod shots, do you think we should even then must have two men on every camera?

How many steps do the mini 35 takes? I heard two steps - is that right?

So if you should do a concert movie - what should you have for equipment if you want a more "film look" a more Anton Corbijn style?

Bill Davis · September 14th, 2007, 01:22 AM

Arvid,

Shallow depth of field is primarily a function of aperature size. The larger the aperature, all other things being equal, the shallower your depth of field will be.

Stage lighting tends to be very BRIGHT, particularly spotlights and performer key lights. So to get a proper exposure, your camera will want to shut DOWN the aperature, and you'll get a much broader depth of field

Things that can help:

Controlling the stage lighting so it's bright enough but not TOO bright.

Using cameras with good lenses and larger primary sensors (more pro then consumer) which gather light more efficiently so you can increase your shutter speed or kick in a ND filter, lowering the amount of light gathering and allowing you to open your aperature further.

Using external neutral density filters on the camera - again allowing the aperature to open up.

Shooting from farther away, and at longer zoom settings - again, diminishing the light hitting the sensor and, again, allowing a wider aperature to get a proper exposure.

But be careful with all of these. At some point, if you don't have enough light hitting the sensor for a proper exposure, you'll be fighting sensor noise.

Just a few ideas. Good luck.

Arvid Unsgaard · September 14th, 2007, 02:45 AM

Hi And thanks for your comments.

Do you have any suggestions about which camera i should choice.

One person recommended AG-DVX100 progressive

One other HD-100

And a third AG-HVX200

The last one I´m little afraid of because of the P2 cards, and we will shot the concerts two nights with five cameras so it will be plenty administration for the photographers.

If I have a bigger budget I maybe should choice a IMX camera and Pro35 but i dont think I got that money fr this production.

Do anyone know U2´s Rattle and hum DVD - I want something like that. Or Anton Corbijn´s Depeche Mode DVD - Devotion.

Is it totally wrong or even stupid to even think about to use mini 35?

Lori Starfelt · September 14th, 2007, 09:31 AM

I could be wrong but I think that's considered the cream of the crop in concert films. It's directed by Scorsese and has people like Lazlo Kovacs as cameraman. In fact, all of the camera operators were superb DPs in their own right. It was shot on 35mm. The Muddy Waters performance is fantastic but Scorsese thought that he wasn't performing so all of the camera operators were changing film in their camera except for Kovacs - Kovacs shoots the whole thing with one camera and keeps it interesting. It's a good lesson in what to do in an emergency.

Have fun. I love shooting live performances. You never know quite what you'll be confronted with.

Bert Smyth · September 14th, 2007, 09:41 AM

Rattle & Hum was shot on 16mm. You could always shot some Super 8mm footage, that would look cool. Good advice by Bill about the lighting. Contrast can also be an issue. I shot a concert performance where the contrast range between the lead singer and the bass player was too much. I chose to keep the lead singer looking normally exposed, which put the bass player in a well of darkness. I'd recommend telling band members if they are not standing in on a part of the stage that is lit, they probably will be too dark.

Arvid Unsgaard · September 14th, 2007, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lori Starfelt

I could be wrong but I think that's considered the cream of the crop in concert films. It's directed by Scorsese and has people like Lazlo Kovacs as cameraman. In fact, all of the camera operators were superb DPs in their own right. It was shot on 35mm. The Muddy Waters performance is fantastic but Scorsese thought that he wasn't performing so all of the camera operators were changing film in their camera except for Kovacs - Kovacs shoots the whole thing with one camera and keeps it interesting. It's a good lesson in what to do in an emergency.

Have fun. I love shooting live performances. You never know quite what you'll be confronted with.

Yes I have seen that - and this is also one of my absolut fav. of all concert movies.

Arvid Unsgaard · September 14th, 2007, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bert Smyth

Rattle & Hum was shot on 16mm. You could always shot some Super 8mm footage, that would look cool. Good advice by Bill about the lighting. Contrast can also be an issue. I shot a concert performance where the contrast range between the lead singer and the bass player was too much. I chose to keep the lead singer looking normally exposed, which put the bass player in a well of darkness. I'd recommend telling band members if they are not standing in on a part of the stage that is lit, they probably will be too dark.

Ok it was shot on 16mm. Yes super 8mm would be nice but I think the budget for me is a issue so thats why I want to try use mini 35 on a ordinary cheaper dv or hdv camera.

For me its ok if some part of the picture is black. But of course not always.

Chris Hurd · September 14th, 2007, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lori Starfelt

I think that's considered the cream of the crop in concert films.

The Last Waltz is, in my humble opinion, the Best. Concert film. Ever. As many times as I've seen it, I never get tired of watching it. Somehow seems like there's something new every time. Lazlo, R.I.P.

Arvid Unsgaard · September 15th, 2007, 12:17 AM

But have anyone some more comments about my choice or thinking to use a mini 35 for the concert.

Is that a bad choice - should I rethink.

What do you say.

Nate Weaver · September 15th, 2007, 09:04 PM

bert,

As a director/dp of a fair amount of concert video, and former hd100 owner with mini35 experience, I can tell you you're not going to have enough light for this. The hd100 mini combo is about 150 ASA. Youll be amost 2 stops under.

Btw, the concert stuff in R&H was 35 and the doc stuff was 16. You can see the 35Bls clearly in multiple places

Arvid Unsgaard · September 16th, 2007, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nate Weaver

bert,

As a director/dp of a fair amount of concert video, and former hd100 owner with mini35 experience, I can tell you you're not going to have enough light for this. The hd100 mini combo is about 150 ASA. Youll be amost 2 stops under.

Btw, the concert stuff in R&H was 35 and the doc stuff was 16. You can see the 35Bls clearly in multiple places

What I understand from you is that I should not use mini35.

Arvid Unsgaard · September 16th, 2007, 11:49 AM

So do I understand all of you so should I rethink my idea to use mini 35.

Please give me a helping hand on this.

About the light, i will have a person on that so he can give the stage more light if I need to.

Nate Weaver · September 16th, 2007, 01:32 PM

You would need a number of lights so large it would be impractical, most likely. Just adding a few par64s is not going to fix it.

September 13th, 2007, 11:32 AM	#1
Arvid Unsgaard Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: sweden Posts: 38	First question here about a rock concert movie Hi everyone on this forum. Im new here. Im a screenwriter and editor. But now I got a work to do a concert movie for a swedish band. So I have some questions for this. My influence for this is the U2 - Rattle and hum, and also some Anton Corbijn work. I was thinking to work with five cameras, with mini35 and HD-100. Here I wonder if I should use DV or HDV? What I want is the depth of field, just like they have in the concerts I mentioned above. So my first thread is if anyone have any advice about this. What do you think. Is it overkill to use mini35 for a concert movie? I also want to say that - i will not be one of the photographer - im just want to know more as adirector.

September 14th, 2007, 09:31 AM	#6
Lori Starfelt Major Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Los Angeles, california Posts: 228	BTW, have you watched The Last Waltz? I could be wrong but I think that's considered the cream of the crop in concert films. It's directed by Scorsese and has people like Lazlo Kovacs as cameraman. In fact, all of the camera operators were superb DPs in their own right. It was shot on 35mm. The Muddy Waters performance is fantastic but Scorsese thought that he wasn't performing so all of the camera operators were changing film in their camera except for Kovacs - Kovacs shoots the whole thing with one camera and keeps it interesting. It's a good lesson in what to do in an emergency. Have fun. I love shooting live performances. You never know quite what you'll be confronted with.

September 15th, 2007, 09:04 PM	#12
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	bert, As a director/dp of a fair amount of concert video, and former hd100 owner with mini35 experience, I can tell you you're not going to have enough light for this. The hd100 mini combo is about 150 ASA. Youll be amost 2 stops under. Btw, the concert stuff in R&H was 35 and the doc stuff was 16. You can see the 35Bls clearly in multiple places __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

September 16th, 2007, 01:32 PM	#15
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	You would need a number of lights so large it would be impractical, most likely. Just adding a few par64s is not going to fix it. __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

September 13th, 2007, 01:56 PM	#2
Paul Jefferies Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Croydon, England Posts: 277	Bear in mind the fact that the HD100 is not great at low light levels, and the Mini 35 will reduce that even more (and rock concert lighting is not always ideal for video). The setup would be quite bulky so you would probably be restricted to static tripod shots rather than roving cameras, and you may have to have two man crews on each camera (one operator, one focus puller, with maybe a seperate HD monitor). Also, if you're not too close to the stage you will need long lenses, which will cut down on the light even more. HD100's can't be genlocked together so you might want to consider HD250's instead

September 13th, 2007, 11:58 PM	#3
Arvid Unsgaard Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: sweden Posts: 38	Thanks for your answer. The concert place is rather small so I think we can have the cameras near the stage. If we only have static tripod shots, do you think we should even then must have two men on every camera? How many steps do the mini 35 takes? I heard two steps - is that right? So if you should do a concert movie - what should you have for equipment if you want a more "film look" a more Anton Corbijn style?

September 14th, 2007, 01:22 AM	#4
Bill Davis Trustee Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ 85260 Posts: 1,538	Arvid, Shallow depth of field is primarily a function of aperature size. The larger the aperature, all other things being equal, the shallower your depth of field will be. Stage lighting tends to be very BRIGHT, particularly spotlights and performer key lights. So to get a proper exposure, your camera will want to shut DOWN the aperature, and you'll get a much broader depth of field Things that can help: Controlling the stage lighting so it's bright enough but not TOO bright. Using cameras with good lenses and larger primary sensors (more pro then consumer) which gather light more efficiently so you can increase your shutter speed or kick in a ND filter, lowering the amount of light gathering and allowing you to open your aperature further. Using external neutral density filters on the camera - again allowing the aperature to open up. Shooting from farther away, and at longer zoom settings - again, diminishing the light hitting the sensor and, again, allowing a wider aperature to get a proper exposure. But be careful with all of these. At some point, if you don't have enough light hitting the sensor for a proper exposure, you'll be fighting sensor noise. Just a few ideas. Good luck.

September 14th, 2007, 02:45 AM	#5
Arvid Unsgaard Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: sweden Posts: 38	Hi And thanks for your comments. Do you have any suggestions about which camera i should choice. One person recommended AG-DVX100 progressive One other HD-100 And a third AG-HVX200 The last one I´m little afraid of because of the P2 cards, and we will shot the concerts two nights with five cameras so it will be plenty administration for the photographers. If I have a bigger budget I maybe should choice a IMX camera and Pro35 but i dont think I got that money fr this production. Do anyone know U2´s Rattle and hum DVD - I want something like that. Or Anton Corbijn´s Depeche Mode DVD - Devotion. Is it totally wrong or even stupid to even think about to use mini 35?

September 14th, 2007, 09:41 AM	#7
Bert Smyth Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 178	Rattle & Hum was shot on 16mm. You could always shot some Super 8mm footage, that would look cool. Good advice by Bill about the lighting. Contrast can also be an issue. I shot a concert performance where the contrast range between the lead singer and the bass player was too much. I chose to keep the lead singer looking normally exposed, which put the bass player in a well of darkness. I'd recommend telling band members if they are not standing in on a part of the stage that is lit, they probably will be too dark.

September 15th, 2007, 12:17 AM	#11
Arvid Unsgaard Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: sweden Posts: 38	But have anyone some more comments about my choice or thinking to use a mini 35 for the concert. Is that a bad choice - should I rethink. What do you say.

September 16th, 2007, 11:49 AM	#14
Arvid Unsgaard Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: sweden Posts: 38	So do I understand all of you so should I rethink my idea to use mini 35. Please give me a helping hand on this. About the light, i will have a person on that so he can give the stage more light if I need to.