How to Maximize Distribution Options

Glenn Chan · April 26th, 2005, 07:50 PM

Maybe you don't need high resolution at all?*

Story-wise, it may be better if your film has a gritty look to it rather than looking like Hollywood. Following this logic, it might be better to shoot on 8mm/16mm than to have it look like Hollywood.

You could also think about your shooting style... if you want to do steadicam work, then consider how the camera system lends to manual focus, weight, and depth of field (extremely deep or extremely shallow depth of field may be desireable).

*There are other major differences between 35mm and video. I don't want to mislead anyone into thinking 35mm is better solely/mainly because of higher resolution. There are other factors like exposure latitude, experience (many talented DPs know how to shoot 35mm), money (35mm shoots usually have more), color correction/grading (often done for 35mm; rarely done for video), how film handles highlights, lack of video-specific artifacts, grain, etc.

2- Color grading can also help improve the look of your footage immensely. Check out BBC/Top Gear (do a search in the film look forum).

Heath McKnight · April 26th, 2005, 10:19 PM

Good to hear, Pete. Best of luck to ya!

heath

Joshua Starnes · April 27th, 2005, 10:41 AM

I wouldn't suggest 8mm - you will have a very hard time selling beyond DVD.

From what my contacts tell me, most distributors (particularly foreign distributors) are still looking for film projects, but will consider HD, especially if the material is good. You have a low budget (and it sounds like you're aiming high for how much you have to spend) but your ROI would likely be much better if you shot on S16 rather than HD.

However, if prosumer HD is what you can afford and not much more, and you're willing to wait until the HVX comes out at the end of the year, it's probably your best bet at the moment. It will lower your chances of theatrical distribution, but it won't wipe them out completely. I think you will need some sort of mini35 device. DOF does help in conveying the idea of the film look - even though you might loose a stop or two, I think 1/3" camera will definitely need it.

I'm here in Houston too. If you need any help when it comes time to shoot, let me know.

Pete Wilie · April 27th, 2005, 10:52 AM

Quote:

DOF does help in conveying the idea of the film look - even though you might loose a stop or two, I think 1/3" camera will definitely need it.

I've had no problems achieveing shallow DOF on video even with smaller CCDs like the GL2. It's not as easy as with film cameras, but it can be done without any special adapters.

Heath McKnight · April 27th, 2005, 10:55 AM

I get shallow DOF by zooming in on my subject from around 5 - 10 feet away. Looks good! This includes the DVX100A and the FX1.

heath

Joshua Starnes · April 28th, 2005, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Wilie

I've had no problems achieveing shallow DOF on video even with smaller CCDs like the GL2. It's not as easy as with film cameras, but it can be done without any special adapters.

Yeah, I've done it with a TRV-900, but it's cumbersome and not as good and limiting in camera movement. Focusing in close on something (like say an item on a table) with a shallow DOF on a table, then craning back real fast while changing focus to keep the new angle in focus? Forget about it. It's doable, but for slightly more money, it can look better and be easier to work with.

It's just my opinion, but it seems to my eye to present a better image (insofar as what standard film images look like) and easier work flow for dyanmic camera movement without having to deal with changing the focal length of your lens in the middle of the shot or problems in cramped interiors or any of that. But you would know your needs better than I would.

April 26th, 2005, 10:19 PM	#17
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Good to hear, Pete. Best of luck to ya! heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

April 27th, 2005, 10:55 AM	#20
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I get shallow DOF by zooming in on my subject from around 5 - 10 feet away. Looks good! This includes the DVX100A and the FX1. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

April 26th, 2005, 07:50 PM	#16
Glenn Chan Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 4,750	Maybe you don't need high resolution at all?* Story-wise, it may be better if your film has a gritty look to it rather than looking like Hollywood. Following this logic, it might be better to shoot on 8mm/16mm than to have it look like Hollywood. You could also think about your shooting style... if you want to do steadicam work, then consider how the camera system lends to manual focus, weight, and depth of field (extremely deep or extremely shallow depth of field may be desireable). *There are other major differences between 35mm and video. I don't want to mislead anyone into thinking 35mm is better solely/mainly because of higher resolution. There are other factors like exposure latitude, experience (many talented DPs know how to shoot 35mm), money (35mm shoots usually have more), color correction/grading (often done for 35mm; rarely done for video), how film handles highlights, lack of video-specific artifacts, grain, etc. 2- Color grading can also help improve the look of your footage immensely. Check out BBC/Top Gear (do a search in the film look forum).

April 27th, 2005, 10:41 AM	#18
Joshua Starnes Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 356	I wouldn't suggest 8mm - you will have a very hard time selling beyond DVD. From what my contacts tell me, most distributors (particularly foreign distributors) are still looking for film projects, but will consider HD, especially if the material is good. You have a low budget (and it sounds like you're aiming high for how much you have to spend) but your ROI would likely be much better if you shot on S16 rather than HD. However, if prosumer HD is what you can afford and not much more, and you're willing to wait until the HVX comes out at the end of the year, it's probably your best bet at the moment. It will lower your chances of theatrical distribution, but it won't wipe them out completely. I think you will need some sort of mini35 device. DOF does help in conveying the idea of the film look - even though you might loose a stop or two, I think 1/3" camera will definitely need it. I'm here in Houston too. If you need any help when it comes time to shoot, let me know.