How do you value full-on DSLR feature films?

[Kholi]

Open discussion. At what value do you, as an individual, do you place on a full-on DSLR feature film?

As a filmmaker, does it intrigue you when you hear about someone going out to helm a feature on a DSLR? Or do you not care? Would it affect your decision on how much you paid attention to the progress of a developing feature film property? If it were coming to a theater near you would you shell out ten to fifteen dollars to go and see it regardless of if it were your kind of film, didn't have stars, etc?

Honest answers. And, yes, I think we all understand that sound is important and so is story. S'not what I'm asking here.

 

[brianluce]

I don't want to know what a movie is shot with until I've seen it, even then I'm only mildly interested. With such high prices, I don't want to do anything but get immersed in the movie.

It's essentially DVD bonus material.

 

[Ernest Worthing]

DSLR's are just a way for film makers on a budget, like myself, to have their dream realized. And if someone can pull off a successful feature with one, i would pay attention only in terms of the little guy making it big.

But generally, i pay no attention to the equipment used as long as im interested in the film and like it after having watched it. It doesn't matter to me whether it was filmed using an 8mm or an ARRI or an Epic or a t2i or whatever.

Honest

 

[directorik]

As a filmmaker, does it intrigue you when you hear about someone going out to helm a feature on a DSLR? Or do you not care?

Sure, it intrigues me. But I don't much care.

Would it affect your decision on how much you paid attention to the progress of a developing feature film property?

No. I rarely follow the progress of any feature film. The exception being a
movie made by friends or someone I know through a messageboard.

If it were coming to a theater near you would you shell out ten to fifteen dollars to go and see it regardless of if it were your kind of film, didn't have stars, etc?

No. I will often pay to see an independently produced feature in the theaters
simply to support independent filmmaking, but what camera was used has only
one time been even part of the reason. That was the guy who made a feature
on a Flip that was released in theaters.

But no, "shot on DSLR" does not enter into my decision at all.

 

[Psychosis Media]

Take cloverfeild for an example....i did not see the movie and i still havent seen it...it looks like it was shot on a dslr or similar type of medium and it looked cheap, i had no reason to go pay $15 to see something like that. I dont mind such movies that are direct to dvd that have that look, they are independents. I know its a double standard and i accept that. But not in the theaters if it is big budget. This is why ive had problems wasting my money watching pirates of the caribbean and trash like avatar. I dont know, i just think when film is used it looks better on the big screen. Only 1 film had done this right and that was blair witch project. Any big budget movies that comes out in the theaters looking like it was shot on a dslr i dont even bother. And i always compare that to BWP; im not an uber fan of the movie but it did creep me out in some parts. It was an example how that movie did change how films were made in some aspect.

 

[cameronchapman]

Personally, I don't care. As long as the movie looks good, it doesn't matter what it was shot on. And of course, "good" is relative. If it's a film that's supposed to look like it was shot on a camcorder, then it should look like it was shot on a camcorder (like Cloverfield or Paranormal Activity). If the camera type is irrelevant to the story (as it is with most movies), then I shouldn't notice the type of camera being used. If I do, then it's a failure either on the part of the choice of camera or the DP for not utilizing it properly.

And I'm not a film purist. Personally, I think film looks like crap a lot of the time, when compared to high-end digital footage. Sometimes the aesthetic of film adds to the story, and sometimes it detracts. Futuristic sci-fi is a great example of where a film look isn't necessarily desirable. Do we really think that they'll still be using film (or any similar medium) to record things in 300 years? No, they'll have moved on to something that gives a better image and doesn't require as much effort (as is already happening). So in that kind of situation, with that kind of setting, if something looks like film, it's taking away from the story.

I'm now prepared to be completely flamed for speaking out against film.

 

[Cracker Funk]

I shell out 10 bucks at my local theater, on the regular, but only when I have an indication that the movie I'm paying for might entertain me. That's all I want -- to be entertained. And that could mean anything from a giant tentpole blockbuster to a tiny DIY DSLR feature. But the only way I'm watching that DSLR feature is if I've heard good things about it -- buzz from festivals, positive reviews, etc.

Does news of a DSLR feature intrigue me? Definitely. Because I want to see what other people in my shoes are doing.

Can't wait to see yours, by the way.

 

[Kholi]

I shell out 10 bucks at my local theater, on the regular, but only when I have an indication that the movie I'm paying for might entertain me. That's all I want -- to be entertained. And that could mean anything from a giant tentpole blockbuster to a tiny DIY DSLR feature. But the only way I'm watching that DSLR feature is if I've heard good things about it -- buzz from festivals, positive reviews, etc.

This is what I imagine the majority would think, unless--like Directorik points out, you know the person or have some sort of contact with them.
[/quote]

Does news of a DSLR feature intrigue me? Definitely. Because I want to see what other people in my shoes are doing.

Same here. Especially one that's going to theaters. And, in conjunction with your first sentence about being entertained, I probably wouldn't pay to see it if it were not my kind of movie.

This is exactly why I haven't paid to watch TINY FURNITURE (7D, SXSW 2010 Winner, Theatrical Release, no names) in theaters or on iTunes.

Can't wait to see yours, by the way.

We shot RED MX, there's maybe six minutes total or so of GH-2 + PL Mount footage in it.

I'm curious for another reason, though.

 

[Cracker Funk]

We shot RED MX, there's maybe six minutes total or so of GH-2 + PL Mount footage in it.

Cool, even better. I want to see it cuz it looks fun, didn't care about the camera. Though, in the same respect as my earlier comment, when I said that I'm intrigued by a DSLR feature, I'm also intrigued by yours because you got it done on such a limited budget.

"Tiny Furniture" looks like one I might enjoy. I'll definitely catch it if it's on Netflix.

 

[dlevanchuk]

Don't care about camera.
I only watch movies for their story. If I really enjoyed the movie then I try to find out more info about it.

 

[PaulGriffith]

I'll only watch a movie if it's shot on IMAX.

 

[drc]

These replies have made an interesting read.

I start on my second short this Friday and we're using a 5D Mark 2.

 

[GuerrillaAngel]

Don't care. In fact, if one hypes their film with their expensive format choice, I'm less likely to watch it.

Tell me its shot on 8mm and you've my immediate attention!

 

[Cracker Funk]

Don't care. In fact, if one hypes their film with their expensive format choice, I'm less likely to watch it.

Tell me its shot on 8mm and you've my immediate attention!

Wait...but...umm....

DSLR is WAY less expensive than 8mm.

I think I hear ya, though -- 8mm gets your attention because it's actually film, and we know how different the entire process is, because of that.

Just thought I should clarify that your comment about expensive formats doesn't really apply to DSLR.

 

[GuerrillaAngel]

Wait...but...umm....

DSLR is WAY less expensive than 8mm.

I think I hear ya, though -- 8mm gets your attention because it's actually film, and we know how different the entire process is, because of that.

Just thought I should clarify that your comment about expensive formats doesn't really apply to DSLR.

That is true, however, 8mm can be edited with a lo-fi SD Final Cut Express on a 10-year-old iMac. DSLRs will require something a wee bit more expensive.

 

[Kholi]

Don't care. In fact, if one hypes their film with their expensive format choice, I'm less likely to watch it.

Tell me its shot on 8mm and you've my immediate attention!

CF = right
And, I'm confused... You don't care, but you care if it's shot on 8mm??

No comprende...

That is true, however, 8mm can be edited with a lo-fi SD Final Cut Express on a 10-year-old iMac. DSLRs will require something a wee bit more expensive.

No they won't... and the transfer from 8mm to something digital is a headache no matter which way you do it.

 

[GuerrillaAngel]

No they won't... and the transfer from 8mm to something digital is a headache no matter which way you do it.

Send your exposed 8mm film in to get it "developed" and you'll get a SD miniDV back. Firewire into your old iMac, no headaches. If its a short film with well rehearsed performances, the cost can be very low.

 

[Kholi]

Hardly anybody will give you a 8mm print anymore. Send your exposed 8mm film in and you'll get a SD miniDV back.

Cool, and now I have to go and capture that SD miniDV 1:1 style with a miniDV deck that I probably don't own, since it's 2011.

xD Just kidding, but for serious...

Anyway, gone off topic.

Keep the responses coming, because I'm interested in the "aspiring" filmmaker's perspective.

 

[Cracker Funk]

That is true, however, 8mm can be edited with a lo-fi SD Final Cut Express on a 10-year-old iMac. DSLRs will require something a wee bit more expensive.

"Wee bit", quite literally. I edited a DSLR feature on an $800 PC.

Are we having an less-expensive-off?

 

[brianluce]

Okay Kholi, we've shared, now you come clean sir. What's behind this? You're thinking of ditching your RED, aren't you.

I know I speak for all of us here, and we'll all help you get through this should you decide to go DSLR. We're here for you man. Okay? Never doubt that.

ps, Vitaliy's 44mb GH2 hack rawks!