Cracker, we all know the T2i is awesome. So this would be a boring thread if we all just agreed!
If anything your post shows that a great camera does not a GREAT shot make. You have no illusion that your takes are great shots, what I hear you saying is "that with the limitations I have, these shots are good enough."
I'll concede on your first point.
On your second point, sort of, not really. Yes, it's true that a great camera a great shot will not make. My main point was that IF you're working with no, or little, lighting, you simply HAVE to go DSLR. Yeah, everybody knows that. I was only posting examples of such. Because with the lighting I'm using, an HDV would look considerably worse. That was the only reason I started this thread, but it's gone to other meaningful places, so that's cool.
Sorry to jump in semi-off topic, but I’m trying to get my head around the best way to edit from t2i (on pc) with CS3. Should/Can the files be converted to something more non-super computer manageable or CS3 friendly? If so, to what and with what?
-Thanks-
I'm not sure what super-computer is. Though, considering that I bought mine for $800, I don't think mine qualifies. I've got dual-core, can't remember exactly how fast the processor, but fairly fast Athlon, 1 Terabyte RAM, decent but not fancy video card. I'm editing on Edius, in native format. No problem (though, I'm yet to edit anything of significant length, so we'll see about that). Most PC software will not edit without converting. Somebody mentioned cineform. I've heard that does the trick, though it also takes up about 50% more hard-drive, so make sure you've got space.
We shoot our features (weekends only) in around 4 months. Usually we finish and premiere a feature a year, and have already begun shooting the next feature while in post on the previous one. I'm not saying we are better than you...I'm saying that with solid scheduling, preproduction, creativity, skill, and dedication, it can be done.
I can't help but wonder who "we" are. I've seen your work (and I like it - the nun song is funny). I suspect that your "we" is a whole lot bigger than my "we". I can't just put a team together of your size. For a lot of people, the resources aren't there, and it just ain't in the cards.
If you want to ignore the filmmaking basics and shoot at your own pace and style...you go to town. Yes there have been well-produced examples of this...but that's typically not the norm. And you first have to fully understand the rules before you can break them.
I think your use of the words "the filmmaking basics" might be a tad strong. "Filmmaking basics", yes. "THE" filmmaking basics, as if that's it, that's your only option, there's no other way to make films, no. I would edit your phrase to say, "
some of the filmmaking basics".
Plus, you guys might wanna consider the context of this thread -- I haven't shown you any shots that are typical of my shoot, at all. I've shown you shots that are a good example of really poor lighting, in which the results are far better (less worse) than had I been using HDV.
What you don't know about that first scene I posted is that there's another angle (well, actually, there's about 12 other angles). Anyway, in two of the angles, we have a wide shot, with a much larger room in the background, with a bunch of extras cavorting (this scene takes place at a party). I have enough lights to light the smaller room that the two main characters are having this conversation in. I don't have the lights to light the bigger room. So, had I lit them in the foreground, the background would've been too dim, and it would've looked unnatural. I do understand the basics. I'm choosing to break them for logistical reasons.
And that's another thing. You guys talk about how you're able to set up these brilliant shots in 20 minutes. Okay, what about when the camera is moving to eight different locations around a table, getting somewhere around twelve different angles? Are we going to use the same light setup for every new location? Uh, no. Because we're getting, in the end, a 360-degree view of the room, and those lights are now in my shot. How many times am I going to have to set them up again? How long are my unpaid extras going to hang out before they riot, while they wait for us to set up lights AGAIN and AGAIN, every time we move the camera? It's difficult enough to get unpaid extras to show up. I'm not going to keep them there for more than an hour. Again, I understand the basics. I'm not sure that you guys understand the logistics of my shoot, because I suspect we're in very different shoes.
And then, the outside night scene? There's no way I can light that, without it looking fake and artificial. Absolutely not.
Another example -- today, I shot a scene at a movie theater. You wanna talk about poor lighting? Great googly-moogly (maybe I'll post that later, as another example of DSLR under poor-lighting). The house lights were very dark. Not even my camera was picking up enough light. Obviously, I don't have the resources to properly light an entire-F-ing theater. And of course, I didn't want my subjects completely lit, cuz then it won't look like they're in a dark theater, even with color correction (cuz I'd have too many hard shadows). So, my solution was to bounce two 500W lights off of the screen. It doesn't look very good. I'm crossing my fingers that I can work something in post. Okay, I just convinced myself, I'll post one of these shots later, so you guys can analyze it, maybe say what you might've done differently (for other people to reference on their future projects), and maybe someone will have advice on what I can do in post, with what I've already shot (and will not be re-shooting).
Anyway, point-being -- most of my movie doesn't look like that, at all. Some scenes I've chosen to light with my cheap Lowell light kit (these would be the scenes in which I'm only getting a few angles, and thus would not have to set up the lights more than once). One scene I chose to not use any light at all, just the sunlight coming in through the windows. Many of my scenes are being lit by God (outside). Many of my scenes are being lit by one single 500W bulb, in the center of the room, hanging from the ceiling. I gave you two examples of poor lighting to highlight a strength of this camera.
And no, wheatgrinder, not everybody knows how awesome the T2i is. It seems like every single day we get someone on here asking which camera to buy. Well, for the people out there who are in my same shoes, here's my recommendation.
And
NOW we're back on thread.
And, thanks for the kind thoughts, I know all of your advice is coming from a helpful, positive place.
