Search results

Doesn't interest me, but there may be places where it works.

I'll go see it over the holidays in 2D 24 fps, no interest in 3d or 48 fps.

Yeah, the one time I needed better than Blu Ray exhibition copy we made an HDcam. We edit the H264 .mov files straight from the camera natively, we don't transcode.

The profiles don't have any effect on the RAW image, only the Jpeg. The RAW image is what it ts, straight off the sensor.

Admittedly we are Luddites... Probably 80% (or more) of our footage doesn't ever get synced at all. I know I want shot X to be next. The script notes say take 4 is the best take of shot X, view shot X Take 4 outside the editor with camera audio to confirm it is a good take, drop shot X take 4...

Ridiculously influential (and this "important") movie. Although almost totally for the script which borders on brilliance. The direction, cinematography, etc... they're OK, nothing to write home about.

I mean hell it's only worked for what the 80 years we've had the "talkies". Again, if you have 900 hours of un-slated doc footage, OK, I see that. For a narrative film where you are dealing with limited takes of a given shot, only one of which is gonna wind up on the timeline.... seems like...

I know a lot of people use it, but my team just doesn't see the point. We still sync every take manually from the slate. A ton of run and gun stuff with no slate (if that's what you do) I guess I see the utility, but for narrative it just makes no sense to me.

I find that with time (a year or so) you can go back and actually see the good. Right after it's finished I only see the bad.

The issue is the quality of the samples. If you think there isn't a MAJOR difference between orchestral sounds you get for free/cheap and the stuff people pay thousands for you are very wrong.

I think it was Scarlett Johansson I heard telling that story.

Kind of a tangent, but on the director style/patience thing. I heard a story that, I believe it was Woody Allen, will sometimes write a scene in the script he has no intention of using. It will be scheduled as the first scene of the shoot. They will get all set up for the master and after Take...

Yep. A couple generations from now, especially with an S35 sensor, better workflow, removable battery, etc... (at probably more like 4K or 5K) it would be more appealing.

Whoa.... seriously... If that's true why has ANYBODY bought one. Just saw there is an Add On solution. That's fine, but that means the $2000 price is bogus. The body only price is $2000 PLUS whatever the battery solution costs.

^^ This Though again not everyone has to work that way, but it's what I prefer. Once we're on set if the line isn't delivered with every syllable as written then the talent has "blown" the line as we shoot another take.

It has some good qualities, but not going to sell my 5D and run out to buy one. Maybe 2 or 3 generations down the road. The workflow seems like a complete PIA. Also not crazy about the S16 sized sensor. I'm not big on "owning" cameras anyway. If I'm shooting a feature I'm likely to rent the camera.

"Badly done" 35mm film, Badly done Alexa, and badly done F65 will look cheap as well. It's 15% the tool and 85% the person wielding it.

The main reason.... Bad scripts. The second reason... not having an experienced dedicated professional in virtually every role on set. A film with a "real" budget has a person whose only job is dressing the sets. They may have 10, 15, 20 years experience in dressing sets. There has been...

What you're looking for, without compromising any of your criteria, is more than $300/Day much less $300/Wk. For $300/Wk you can't even rent a DSLR and the lenses you'd need.

No right or wrong really. Great stuff (especially comedy) can result from turning the performers loose and letting them improv. For me, they get a chance to give me input on their character, including dialogue in pre-production. Once we're on set, unless they totally blow my mind with something...