Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

Making Movies


sparhawk

Recommended Posts

I think it's true that with all else being equal, a film camera is always going to produce better results than the currently-available home video cameras. That said, the varying skill of the photographer is going to be far more significant than the camera used -- a professional cinematographer using a home video camera will produce much better footage than an amateur using a movie camera.

 

Well said!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's where you are wrong because it is not true.

I know what you're saying, but there is no escaping the fact that a consumer video camera used for home movies has a distinct quality about it that makes it look like a home movie. When you pan the camera, I see distinct home movie qualities about it. The way it adjusts to lighting in the environment cries out "home movie". Etc. No matter how carefully you plan everything, as soon as you shoot the video, it will look like a home movie. Look at any one of those "funniest home movie" video shows on TV and they all look like video cameras filmed them. Look at college student projects on public access TV; they use a Sony camera for $800 and you can totally tell. I feel it's a direct by-product of it being a cheap camera made for consumers. The Blender comparison isn't really valid since both programs can create high quality renderings to help make them look indistinguishable. The nature of a consumer-level video camera, though, is that the sum of its parts makes it impossible to produce the quality of the more high-end cameras. IMO. If Steven Spielberg all the sudden uses a Sony Handycam as his filming means and it looks indistinguishable from one of his normal films, then I'll believe you. If drewb50 used a $650 Sony Handycam for his project, then it will help me believe also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Spielberg used a Sony Handycam it obviously would not look indistinguishable from his latest modern films, an no one ever said it would, that was never the point.

 

The point is that he could use it to make a film that is like a quality 60's (or so) movie. And that would be MILES above crappy "funniest home movie" shots which are all obviously not even attempts at being good quality movies, but are just mom or grampa shooting the kids. That would illustrate that MOST of the difference is skill, lighting, etc, and that only part of it is the camera.

shadowdark50.gif keep50.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know what you're saying, but there is no escaping the fact that a consumer video camera used for home movies has a distinct quality about it that makes it look like a home movie. When you pan the camera, I see distinct home movie qualities about it. The way it adjusts to lighting in the environment cries out "home movie". Etc. No matter how carefully you plan everything, as soon as you shoot the video, it will look like a home movie.

 

I know what you mean. Of course there are certain characterstics. I would feel pretty dumb if I bought a camera for 4000 Euro and it delivers exactly the same quality and features that one for 100 Euro does.

 

Look at any one of those "funniest home movie" video shows on TV and they all look like video cameras filmed them.

 

Actually this is a pretty bad example. First of all, these shots are usually taken either spontanous because something funny happens, or from people who happen to have a camera with them for some event (birthday party, swimming, etc.) where it was never intended to make it public. Just to keep a memory, like a photo.

 

Look at college student projects on public access TV; they use a Sony camera for $800 and you can totally tell.

 

Of course. These PROJECTS are planned ahead, and if they look exactly the same as some spontanous shooting then they would deserve a bad rating. :)

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's also the video equivalent to audio mastering where they post process the footage. In the original LOTR making of clips they used what's called "digital scoring" where they take the raw footage & they run it through a computer controlled machine to put additional filters on the film. Another example is Unbreakable where the bad guys have a blue "cold" tint & the scenes with good guy has a reddish "warm" tint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but you can do that in any decent video editing software, it doesn't take a gee-whiz-bang super computer to do that. With a good knowledge of After Effects and Premiere you can do the same things that have been done in hollywood (not saying that a dv cam will look the same as film or high end video altered in post, but the tools are available to the average consumer who'se willing to learn)

http://www.thirdfilms. com

A Thief's Path trailer is now on Youtube!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know what you're saying, but there is no escaping the fact that a consumer video camera used for home movies has a distinct quality about it that makes it look like a home movie. When you pan the camera, I see distinct home movie qualities about it. The way it adjusts to lighting in the environment cries out "home movie". Etc. No matter how carefully you plan everything, as soon as you shoot the video, it will look like a home movie. Look at any one of those "funniest home movie" video shows on TV and they all look like video cameras filmed them. Look at college student projects on public access TV; they use a Sony camera for $800 and you can totally tell. I feel it's a direct by-product of it being a cheap camera made for consumers. The Blender comparison isn't really valid since both programs can create high quality renderings to help make them look indistinguishable. The nature of a consumer-level video camera, though, is that the sum of its parts makes it impossible to produce the quality of the more high-end cameras. IMO. If Steven Spielberg all the sudden uses a Sony Handycam as his filming means and it looks indistinguishable from one of his normal films, then I'll believe you. If drewb50 used a $650 Sony Handycam for his project, then it will help me believe also.

 

Most of these reasons you point out here are due to ametuer operation.

 

sparhawk,

 

If you want to make video from a camcorder look more like film, you could:

 

-Don't pan. Mount the camera on a wagon or some type of dolly for movement.

 

-Don't zoom (unless you want the documentary hand held look). Mount the camera on a wagon or some type of dolly for movement.

 

-Frame your shots, mount the camera

 

-Don't mix lights. If you have daylight in the shot, supliment the light with tungsten with a blue filter. (look up color temperature + film lighting

 

-set the white balance (see camcorder manual)

 

-Turn off your camera's EVIL auto gain. This usually blows out the image and makes it grainy.

 

-Decrease your depth of field as much as possible (the area of the frame that is in focus).

1. Zoom in your lens (not while you're shooting)(disable digital zoom)

2. Open the camcorders iris/aperature, then decrease the exposure until the shot looks well balanced. (disable auto exposure)

 

-Use a video-film filter in post, such as the Premiere plug-in Magic Bullet. This will convert the footage to 24fps, increase the contrast ratio, and difuse the image.

 

 

Before I got the DVX100, I experimented with all of these things with my cheap JVC dv cam and had some great results.

 

Do the Google search "making video look like film"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think disallowing zoom and autoexposure are the two most important things on that list. Nothing screams "home movie" more than having the scene suddenly change brightness because you accidentally allowed a bright window to enter the edge of the shot.

 

Composing the scene properly is also important. I hate watching documentaries when the camera is zoomed into the interviewee's face so much that you can see the saliva glistening on their front teeth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the tips. Sounds really usefull. A few of them I already knew (like the not paning objective). What do you mean by "Frame your shots"?

Do you have any links on colour temperature?

 

I just tryied the gool searching. At first I came up with only crap links until I realized that I typed "videl"instead of "video". Great tip! Now I came up with a lot of interesting links. :) This is actually the first time, since I'm using the internet, that I bookmarked a searchphrase on a search engine. :)

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean by "Frame your shots"?

Do you have any links on colour temperature?

 

I mean:

-storyboard it -- get a rough idea for composition

-set up lights, actors, props, etc.

-put your camera on the tripod and adjust the position/height/angle until you like what you see

-then say, "action!"

 

Here are a couple links about color temp:

http://www.videomaker.com/article/12609

http://www.dv.com/columns/columns_item.jht...cleId=175801670

 

The second link takes you to DV.com -- a great source for DV info.

 

Also, try "indy film making" as a Google search. You'll pull up alot of info on how to make much of the equipment for little or no money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks! That looks like really usefull info. :) I once did a "short animation" movie. It was not much really, just a couple of seconds. I just took some toys from my kids, and then created a series of stills with my digital camera. It looked great though (to us at least). :) When flipping through the stills it almost feels like a movie. I could have edited it with some program, but I left it that as it was just a test.

Actually I was surprised how well it worked, considering that I did this just in 20 minutes without any prepration. Only thing I precalculated was the number of shots I must take to see how fast I should move the figures.

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recent Status Updates

    • nbohr1more

      TDM 15th Anniversary Contest is now active! Please declare your participation: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22413-the-dark-mod-15th-anniversary-contest-entry-thread/
       
      · 0 replies
    • JackFarmer

      @TheUnbeholden
      You cannot receive PMs. Could you please be so kind and check your mailbox if it is full (or maybe you switched off the function)?
      · 1 reply
    • OrbWeaver

      I like the new frob highlight but it would nice if it was less "flickery" while moving over objects (especially barred metal doors).
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      Please vote in the 15th Anniversary Contest Theme Poll
       
      · 0 replies
    • Ansome

      Well then, it's been about a week since I released my first FM and I must say that I was very pleasantly surprised by its reception. I had expected half as much interest in my short little FM as I received and even less when it came to positive feedback, but I am glad that the aspects of my mission that I put the most heart into were often the most appreciated. It was also delightful to read plenty of honest criticism and helpful feedback, as I've already been given plenty of useful pointers on improving my brushwork, level design, and gameplay difficulty.
      I've gotten back into the groove of chipping away at my reading and game list, as well as the endless FM catalogue here, but I may very well try my hand at the 15th anniversary contest should it materialize. That is assuming my eyes are ready for a few more months of Dark Radiant's bright interface while burning the midnight oil, of course!
      · 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...