Did you ever notice...

[Brooksy]

Ever notice that when people post their short film and talk about the equipment they used to make it, they always mention the camera they used and whether they used 35mm lenses or not. Not that I am complaining I was just wondering why? What makes the camera so special? Why not give your lighting some credit? Or Audio? Or make-up, costumes,etc.? I'm I suppose to be impressed with your camera and set-up?

I think I would be more impressed if you shot with 2 Juniors and a 20k Silver Bullet. Maybe it is just me, but can anyone fill me in on why people do this?

 

[indietalk]

Techies are into their gear. Either that, or they think their film looks like 35mm film, and they want someone to say it.

 

[ussinners]

I think it's because the first thing a viewer will ask is "What did you use?" That's a common question for any type of visual medium. As long as the sound doesn't suck, people don't care about the mic. If the scene is lit properly no one notices lighting. Since most lo-no budget shorts have modern clothing there is no costumer. I listed the camera I used during the credits, I was proud of what we did with it. I also included edited on Final Cut Pro. Yet I did not list Rode 2 mic.

 

[CDCosta]

I gotta admit, I would be more impressed if someone said they used a 20k SB in their short.

I'm assuming because it's one of the most common things asked. I know I ask it a lot, mostly because there's usually a limited range of cameras used at most of these indie filmmakers levels, and it's interesting to see how they used it.

Camera on a very indie level is mostly the cause of quality because lighting/sound/art/ect is usually undermined.

 

[countevil]

Maybe because a lot of people are working on very low budgets and have limmited resources. the camera is the bare minimum that you need. A lot of people probably don't use different lenses, if they've got a basic camera then they probably can't use different lenses.

 

[Zensteve]

whether they used 35mm lenses or not. (snip) I'm I suppose to be impressed with your camera and set-up?

Yup, you sure are.

It wasn't until very recently that the average joe could their mitts on Letus or Redrock gear.

Waaaaay back in the ol' days (maybe 3 years ago?) you had to canabalise a 35mm SLR still camera and shoot down the open top through a cardboard tube to get significant DOF on most cheap cameras, in the never-ending quixotic quest to achieve so-called "film look".

Now you just slap on a few easy-to-rent adapters, shoot in 24p, run footage through Magic Bullet a few times to dirty it up and voila... it looks like film!

Spoiler

(it still doesn't look like film)

But yeah, everyone like to talk about the extraordinary lengths they go to to achieve their amazing image, and that usually includes a list of everything camera-related. It sure would be nice to hear about all the other aspects that go into making the film. Almost everyone neglects the actors; they're even more important than your camera setup!

For an example of "it doesn't matter what kind of fancy hi-tech camera you have, unless you have the basics (including a good story) it will suck", go watch Phantom Menace.

I have no idea what my point is.