Cheapest miniDV Film-Like Setup...

[Dejon Hamann]

I know alot of people have discussed the "best" film-like setups (xl2s, DVX100s, mini35s, etc.), but I think it would be interesting to see the cheapest and easiest setup. The focus being an entry level setup for beginners to get in and practice the craft. Something cheap enough yet with enough quality to get all those finicky first time shoppers off the bench and into the game!

Essential elements might include, but are not limited to:
- miniDV for ease of editing/pc transfer/cost
- some kind of 35mm adapter/contraption
- widescreen mode
- hopefully an external mic in
- quality zoom speeds

The goal here would be to put forth a total cost with an itemized list including camera, 35mm kit/components, etc. etc. The competition centered around providing the best overall quality at the absolute lowest price! Camera/components should be readily available, preferably used, or new if cheap.

Thankx to everyone for the wealth of info I've obtained allready on the subject - looking forward to some great suggestions!

[Rob Lohman]

Welcome aboard DVInfo.net Dejon!

In my very humble opinion a beginner really should not have
such things on his or her mind until later in the game. There is
very much to learn, and as with any craft it takes time to learn
it well! Experience and a good eye only come over time, even if
you have a good enough feel for it.

I think nothing holds more true then to just pick up a camera
and do it. Make some movies (short ones!). Then you will know
what you need to improve. In my opinion the following is far
more important than the cheapest miniDV film-like setup:

- a good story
- good actors (no, not your friends)
- composition / lighting
- audio
- editing

Ofcourse some equipment comes in to play in that list (like a
computer, editing software, audio recording equipment, support
like a tripod etc.).

It's a nice idea you want to start a list (since I just did as well),
but I'm not sure of your overal thought behind it (ie, the oh so
often talked about "film look").

You say: " best overall quality at the absolute lowest price! Camera/components should be readily available "

As you know best quality and lowest price do not go well together.
But I assume you mean good quality and low prices in respect
to the quality (so it may not be cheap, but cheapest in that
quality range).

When you say components should be readily available (and given
the cheap statement above) I don't think any 35mm adapter or
contraption is going to happen. Buying them commercially is very
expensive and the only other option is making one yourself (which
requires technical knowledge, time, money and isn't readily
available). Personally I think beginners should not even think
about 35mm adapters and film looks, especially the former.

Just try to explain to them what shallow depth-of-field REALLY
means in terms of your production. A beginner probably doesn't
even know what an iris or shutter does, let alone things like
depth-of-field.

I think the idea is very interesting (to compile a list of items to
get someone started with a good enough quality at a low price),
but is too grand for the beginner.

[Dejon Hamann]

I hear what you're saying about the many facets that go into a successful piece, but that wasn't the direction of THIS thread.

This is merely a thread to compile example cost effective kits that would produce a film-like result.

Maybe we should replace the word "beginner" with another?

You see, I consider myself a beginner though. I've probably only held a video-camera 12 times in my life, but I've been a close study of film for my 31 years. I could probably build a 35mm adapter with the right direction. I'm familiar with most of the miniDV equipment on the market. I've been an aspiring musician for over a decade recording my own albums from home studios. I understand what DOP is and why it's important and thus the creation of this thread.

I appreciate your input Rob and I think some of the language set aside you know what I'm getting at:) Maybe you could put forth the first rig? Just take a stab at it!

By the way, this beginner was just about to sink $1300 plus into a PV-GS400 w/ accessories. I've seen a few static 35mm adapters that produced good results for way under $200 - add the appropriate dvcam, etc. and you've got a "cheap" setup to produce film-like results. The thing is the list of components, cameras used, an directions to assemble are somewhat scattered and confusing. I was hoping to collect examples here in easy to read "kits."

[Kurth Bousman]

$100 and any video camera with true 16:9

[Rob Lohman]

Seeing the lack of responses it looks like most don't see this
happening Dejon, sorry.

What I was getting at is that there is no real (camera) package
(in my opinion) that gives you a film look unless you have money
to burn. The one that people seem to agree comes the closest
is the Panasonic DVX100A. Personally I can't live with the noise
of that camera though, but that's very personal indeed.

In the end the best way to put together a (camera) package (or
any for that matter) is to:

- write down what you need to have on the camera
- write down what would be nice to have
- write down what you don't care about

These lists should contain your budget as well. Then you should
be able to make a good list of camera's that fit your lists. Then it
is a matter of trying them out to see what you like.

It seems your budget is pretty low (the DVX is around $3500 or
something), not sure what would produce a "film look" for you in
that price range.

How many movies have you seen with those homebuilt 35mm
adapters? How many of those looked really good? Can you build
such a thing for under $200?

Keep in mind you will want a progressive scanning (or a Canon
frame model like the GL1/GL2 = around $2500) camera in any
case (at least that would be my pick if this "Film Look" is so
important to you).

[Aaron Shaw]

Can you build
such a thing for under $200?

Yes. The question is, how good will it be?

[Rob Lohman]

That was exactly my point Aaron! (I know you can, the question
is can someone else and what will the quality be...)

[Matt Champagne]

I'll take a stab at the original idea of this thread...though my opinion is entirely from research not actual experience.

I'll take the cheap end approach...I think that an absolute beginner with a low budget should start off with something like an optura series canon...as low as the 30 since they all have the same ccd from the 30 up...but really its not a huge price leap to the xi. Use that with a laptop in photo mode and direct to disk...and from what I've read you can get progessive footage at a higher than normal resolution ...or use the shutter spead low and you can get psuedo progressive footage...as well as it having native widescreen (though I've been told its not true 16:9 by a friend...not sure if he's right). That covers all your camera needs minus the zoom speed thing....and I say if your doing film...just don't zoom.


For audio grab something like this:

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/srs7/g=rec/search/detail/base_pid/270603/

$60 and it has a 1/8" connector so it works better with consumer cams and you won't need an adaptor. I'm sure its not the best mic in the world..but it will beat the pants off of your camera mic.

Then maybe some home depot work lights, and a few basic lighting accessories: a reflective car sunblocker thingie (whatever they are called) to bounce light off of....a large foam core thingie...maybe a large posterboard with some gold leafing glued to it. Ok yeah...I'm sure that proves I'm definatly not an expert, but hopefully I've said something helpful.

Personally, I would build an adaptor...to me it is just too good to pass up, but I am an engineering student and have been building rediculously thrown together stuff for years. But then the costs really start to rack up when you start having to buy lenses.

Then other than that...you just need a computer and editing software...I'd assume someone reading this has the first. I'm pretty sure there is some halfway decent open source stuff if your computer didn't come with any.

All in all...I'd say without the adaptor...you could keep a rig like that under $1000.

[Rob Lohman]

The optura series indeed is NOT native 16:9.

[Aaron Shaw]

Sorry, Rob. Wasn't questioning you there! Just agreeing with you!

[Dave Eanton]

I think that one of the ways to achieve a film look is to make sure that your audio is solid. I think that good audio helps "convince" the eyes that the footage is filmic. Seeing that you are already recording in a studio, you should have no problems with that.

As for home made adapters - I've seen a few, and I've built one myself. After working with the homemade stuff, you quickly want to go out and purchase the real deal - it's like in music - you eventually give in and purchase the LA-2A or that 1176. I think that for experimentation, it is simple to take test shots with a homemade adapter, and you might be able to pull off a short, but the problem is that - if you try to make an extended film with it, you will get problems with focus, registration, dust and stability of the adapter. This causes quite a bit of heart-ache during the post production when you realize the camera shifted, or that there's dust sitting in a crucial part of an action scene. In the end, you spend WAY more time in the post than is necessary...

[Rob Lohman]

No worries Aaron, just wanted to make sure everyone understood
what I meant by that line. We are indeed agreeing! <g>

[Steve Puttock]

I have been following this thread but do not understand what an adaptor is.
I presume its a fitting for the lens ?
It seems to be important ......

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

I've been looking at these things a bit, and it seems to me the best combination of film look features on a budget would be to use a nv-gs400e (pal) camera to get 25p (street price as low as $1050, the better option, 24p costs 2-3 times as much) to get native 16:9 and frame mode and nearly filmic frame rate. then throw on a 35mm adapter for DOF.

I almost went this route, but since i already have GL-2s and xl-1s available to me I couldnt justify the $1000+ for a gs400e. I did go ahead and build a 35mm lens adapter which seems to work pretty well and cost about $100 altogether.

$10 for pvc pipe parts for housing (from homedepot)
$20 for condenser lens (about $12+5sh)
$30 for ground glass (20+10sh from optosigma)
$8 for UV filter (used to mount adapter to minidv cam)
$4 for rear lens cap (used to mount lens to adapter)
$25 for used 50/1.4 canon fd lens

I got all of the parts on ebay except for the pvc, and I already had pvc primer/cement, clamp, saw, and sandpaper that i used to put the housing together.

I had to buy some macro filters for the minidv camera, to get it to do macro while zoomed slightly out of its range so it could focus and zoom on the groundglass. This depends on what your minidv camera can do.

Only issue with this adapter is the image comes in rotated 180degrees so you need to use a video monitor that you can flip over if you want to have an easier time composing shots. But you'll probably want a bigger, higher res screen than the lcd on the camera anyway since you have to be more precies about focusing with that shallow DOF.

Im fairly new to some of this stuff but i did it all based on info i got from the forum on alternative imaging methods.

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

oh yeah, steve, to answer you:

first off if you arent familiar with Depth of field check out:
http://www.mediachance.com/dvdlab/dof/index.htm

the pros shoot movies on 35mm film, so emulating the depth of field capabilities of that format is important in a setup trying to create images that look film-like.

the 35mm adapter people are talking about is a device that screws on the front of a standard consumer minidv camera and lets you put a 35mm slr lens on the other end. The 35mm lens projects an image onto a ground glass, and the minidv camera sees that image and records what is basically just a flat picture on a piece of ground glass. That image, however is the same one that would appear on 35mm film using that 35mm lens.