cinematography Screenshot Image Resource

rayw · Jun 11, 2012

Many of the IT member submitted shorts & music videos are shot with dedicated camcorders and DSLR cameras being used as video cameras.
Most of those products have "that video camera" look to them - which I don't really care for. Sorry.

ITREF

Shooting in 1080 24fps only goes so far.
Chip size has some genuine math issues associated with it.
Lens' surely have a great effect.

But often the issues captured have to do with simple ( :lol:

) framing and lighting, so I'm often on a visual quest as to how to make my images from my poopy-cam look... less poopy.

The images captured and diplayed at the following link often require no special effects raz-ma-taz to "make" these nice or good or memorable shots.
http://www.cinemasquid.com/blu-ray/movies/screenshots

Obviously I would hope to emulate some of the processes used by genuine cinematographers.
Incidentally, I would hope to write/direct/produce a story that has two or three dozen MEMORABLE scenes worth teasing an audience with to actually watch the full film. D'ja think?! :idea:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1612774/technical
Budget: $500,000

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1470827/technical
Budget: $800,000

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1542344/technical
Budget: $18,000,000

Morris · Jun 11, 2012

Here's a tutorial you might find interesting http://www.videomaker.com/video/wat...=video2a_2012_fri_06_08a&utm_campaign=traffic

knightly · Jun 11, 2012

Do you have specific questions about the 3 shots shown?

rayw · Jun 11, 2012

Morris -
Thank you!
Good stuff: http://www.videomaker.com/learn/

Knightly -
No, sir.
I just thought they were decent representations among hundreds available of what a level, non-blown out highlights, non-crushed blacks, non-herky jerky cam shots.
And they were made using equipment within reach (if not already in the hands of) many of us.

Last night I watched the first five minutes of Troma's POT ZOMBIES on Comcast "On Demand".
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0466392/

$1,000 budget for a 54min "feature"
If anyone insists, they can watch it here, free, fortunately (or not) http://www.hulu.com/watch/145117

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7OrmZqIO1M

Stills: http://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?t=11967

I'd love to say these look much worse than what we usually see aired here - but I can't.
Why?
Why does much of what we see here look like sh!t?
How can a therapeutic dose of givadamn and an infusion of "Ah ha!" make it better?

I'm all for reverse engineering what someone else is doing.
It breaks my heart seeing all the right elements being used at 50 - 80% capacity to render "cinema enema".

For the love of all things film-ish, surely I could spend $1k better than that - AND - have Comcast pick it up somehow.

bird · Jun 11, 2012

rayw said:
$1,000 budget for a 54min "feature"
If anyone insists, they can watch it here, free, fortunately (or not) http://www.hulu.com/watch/145117

lolol, In light of Pot Zombie's premise, I love Hulu's 'You might also like...' recommendation of 'Inside Golf Magazine' .

Come to think of it, The Asylum probably has a Golf and Zombies pic in the works.

wheatgrinder · Jun 11, 2012

In short I believe quality is achieved by controlling the variables, the more control you exert the more impact you have on the image quality. Note I said IMPACT not IMPROVEMENT.

Seeking this control is what led my camera buying decisions. My first cam, a Sond HandyCam was a gift, I bought ND filters for it. My first PURCHASED camera was a cannon viax hfs100, more control, but needed DOF control, so I bough a 35mm adapter. Next camera was a DSLR.. My bank account wishes I had made my first camera purchase a DSLR, however, I KNOW now why I want to control exposure, shutter speed, and DOF..

DSLR's give us plenty of control over some key variables, learning how these impact quality is the fun part.

Framing, lighting, and production design are the the final arbiters of cinematic quality, at least to this noob.

rayw · Jun 11, 2012

bird said:
lolol, In light of Pot Zombie's premise, I love Hulu's 'You might also like...' recommendation of 'Inside Golf Magazine' .

Come to think of it, The Asylum probably has a Golf and Zombies pic in the works.

That IS odd.

I haven't watched any Troma flicks since... The Toxic Avenger in the late eighties.
Lloyd Kaufman's quite a character.
Interesting guy.
I know one of the IT regulars has a inspirational relationship with him. I think it's Nathan/Gonzo_Entertainment.
Yep - http://www.gonzofilmentertainment.com/About.html

I have mixed feelings about the kind of product that goes into something like POT ZOMBIE.
On the more important hand - Kaufman has a business to run and far be it from me to dare tell anyone how to keep their show running, (unless they're paying me to.) And if POT ZOMBIES makes the biz a buck then good for Troma Entertainment. More power to 'em.

And on the less important hand - Sh!t. Can you not at least TRY to make the camera collect a nice image?
If I can make a single nice image I should be able to make two.
And if I can make two decent images I should be able to edit together an over the shoulder conversation.
And if I can record a two minute conversation I should be able to make ten minutes, then twenty, then an hour's worth.

What set me off is I'm watching the cinematography in LET THE RIGHT ONE IN.
Story, acting, blah, blah, blah. I don't care. Different subject.
But the shots of these two little kids having a verbal/non-verbal conversation are beautiful.

Yeah, I know they're using a rather nice COLLECTION of equipment that fits in the back of a truck to make these images, but surely whatever P.O.S. the director of POT ZOMBIES, Justin Powers http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1110570/, had access too could have made better images than what he captured for that project.
I've got a cr@ppy little quarter-inch chip camera and I can do better than that.
I just want to be better.
Much better.

wheatgrinder said:
In short I believe quality is achieved by controlling the variables, the more control you exert the more impact you have on the image quality. Note I said IMPACT not IMPROVEMENT.

My bank account wishes I had made my first camera purchase a DSLR, however, I KNOW now why I want to control exposure, shutter speed, and DOF.

Amen.
Can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but I should be able to make a nice doggie chew good for something. :yes:

Yeah, I'm thinking my next camera purchase is going to skip a few tiers and just go for a Canon 5D mk II.
I'm seeing a lot of nice product being made with that.

knightly · Jun 12, 2012

Lighting does a bunch for the image... I would also recommend (don't laugh), Stephanie Meyer's Twilight Director's Diary. It has some cool pieces of information in it and shows some really good set design, including a side by side picture in particular demonstrating how important set design and art direction really are... a cover set shot during a rainy day was done, then redone because the image looked flat.

Right side of the image:

(image used without permission from: http://www.etsy.com/listing/22461601/twilight-book-pages-directors-notebook)

Same camera, same flimstock, same DP, same actors... just different set design, costume, and hairstyle.

rayw · Jun 12, 2012

knightly said:
Lighting does a bunch for the image... I would also recommend (don't laugh), Stephanie Meyer's Twilight Director's Diary... Same camera, same flimstock, same DP, same actors... just different set design, costume, and hairstyle.

Indeed.
Nice. Thank you! (Not laughing :grumpy:

)

Very interesting. This is exactly what I'm getting at. Budget-wise, all the needed assets are often in place, only they are only being partially (if not just poorly) utilized.

I might get p!ss poor acting out of my actors butchering my perfectly good screenplay I charge them with givingadamn about, but by golly I want to record some pretty images of them butchering it.

I want them to look at the dailies and think "Good God, I look terrible!" instead of thinking "Good God, the director/DP can't shoot fer sh!t!"