Trying to set a goal.

H

harmonica44

It was only this year I decided I wanted to be a movie maker. I am 27 years old so I'm starting out kind of late on learning everything since I just started a few months ago. But I don't want to be one of those late starters, who doesn't get around to making anything serious until they are 40 and older. Nothing wrong with that, but I feel like I want to get a career path going at a younger age, instead of working the odd seven eleven type jobs, most of my life, until I finally try to break in, with something real.

I would like to make my first feature in the next few years, cause I would like to attempt a career in film by the time I'm 30. I feel that is a fair age without aiming too fast, since most other people have already started out in what profession they want to be in by the time they are 30, and most even before that.

So I've decided to keep on learning and practicing now, and aim to make my first feature in 2014 at the latest. That way it won't be too late, and I don't have to wait till I'm near middle age before I do it. Is this too soon of a goal to set for myself cause I feel it's a fair amount of ample time, especially since time goes by so fast, in the film learning world, and you gotta work fast to get it done, if you become a filmmaker while still young. I don't want to wait till I'm like 35 or 40 before I make a film, while my future wife, has already had maybe 10 years working in her career, by that time for example. The people I met so far in the business are my age and have already had more filmmaking jobs already, and have built more of a career, so I feel aiming for 2014 is not asking too much.

What do you think, fair goal?
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
Well my computer did not come with video editing anything, but I am currently looking for an older free trial of a program that my computer can handle. I will also post part of that scene on youtube or somewhere and link it here.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
K thanks. I couldn't find a free trial for Final Cut Pro or Premier Pro 4 or older versions, but I'm still looking. All they seem to have is Premiere Pro CS5 and Final Cut Pro X for free trials. Not sure if X will work on my computer but I can try. I don't necessarily need one of those for a free trial of course, those were just the first two I started looking for so far. Will Windows Live work on a mac for a free trial?

Here's a shot of some of that scene I shot. I will edit it with the rest once I get the free trial, then I'll add a clean and much better soundtrack to it, then the sound with the camera. So what about the shot could I improve on? Thanks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cx5x-SqNvA4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFmdzt-zHbc
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
harmonica44 said:
Here's a shot of some of that scene I shot. I will edit it with the rest once I get the free trial, then I'll add a clean and much better soundtrack to it, then the sound with the camera. So what about the shot could I improve on?
Click to expand...

Lighting on subject is flat and boring. Surrounding area is boring. There's a random phone cord hanging and a light switch. There should be interesting things there, not blank walls and ugly cords. The statue, the one thing that might look interesting, is mostly hidden behind the actor. I'd probably compose the shot different; everything about the shot is bland. Everything screams amateur no budget youtube video. The only thing you got right was having the camera on a tripod.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SinEater said:
Lighting on subject is flat and boring. Surrounding area is boring. There's a random phone cord hanging and a light switch. There should be interesting things there, not blank walls and ugly cords. The statue, the one thing that might look interesting, is mostly hidden behind the actor. I'd probably compose the shot different; everything about the shot is bland. Everything screams amateur no budget youtube video. The only thing you got right was having the camera on a tripod.
Click to expand...

I'm too weak to take this kind of punishment.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm feeling generous tonight, so I'm going to try to give you a lesson. Here's a frame grab from my team's 48 Hour Film this year. I was the co-producer/co-writer/DP for the project. I'm not saying it's a perfect shot, it's not even close. In fact I actually took the frame grab to point out some flaws that we made.
x28byb.png


It is, however, a hell of a lot more interesting to look at than this frame grab from the clip you posted.

fz87m8.png


First off, there's depth to my image. In the foreground, you can see drink glasses and a bottle of ketchup. Then you have the two actors, the subjects of the shot. Behind, you have a table, the rest of the bar, a hallway, interesting ceiling beams, lights. All simple things on their own, but this all helps create a sense of depth and makes the frame interesting.

Now lets compare to your shot. You have a guy crammed in a corner with a phone cord. I realize you're shooting in a house, but that means you have to work harder as a set designer. Move him away from the wall a bit, and have him on the right side of the frame. To his immediate left have that statue, that adds something interesting to the shot. He's talking to someone, so maybe have this shot be over the shoulder, with the second actor's shoulder showing on the left side of the frame. On the wall behind him add a poster, a photo, a shelf, anything. Just make it interesting. You have something on the wall in the upper left corner, but it's only barely in the shot so I have no idea what it is.

Now onto the lighting. See John's face? It looks interesting. I'm not talking about the expression, I'm talking about the lighting. There's shadows, which always make a face more interesting. I'm not saying the dark side of his face isn't lit, it is. Even shadows need to be lit to get exposure. The shadows are just lit a few stops lower than the highlights. It's not perfectly lit, in a perfect world the highlights on his face would have been a bit darker. We were on an extremely tight schedule and didn't have time to tweak. I think the editor is actually fixing it in post for the non 48 hour cut of the film, but I'm not positive. I also would have liked to have a better hair light on the talent, but we couldn't pull it off on this shot.

Let's look at your lighting. Your subject is completely flat and evenly lit. The only shadow is under his chin. This looks extremely boring, and should be avoided at all costs. In the background I'm seeing double shadows everywhere. This can usually be avoided by using better placement of lights. As I haven't seen the whole scene I don't know what the motivation for your light is, but I'm assuming you don't have one. When doing interiors it's nice to have a lamp or other practical light in the scene so the viewer knows where the light is coming from. You then base your lighting around that, and that can subconsciously explain the reasons for your lighting to the viewer.

Please understand I'm not saying all this to criticize your shot, I'm just trying to help you understand why it's so boring and bland. Even my shot, which looks a lot better than yours in my opinion, isn't really all that great. After some color correction and post fixes it will be better, but it's still just passable. It's also got two glaring mistakes that make me cringe, but most people don't even see them. Anyone figure out what those are?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
excellent break down of the shots, to see what works and what doesnt! we should have a specific topic on it, where we could post screen grabs from our shorts, and see how we can improve it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SinEater said:
I'm feeling generous tonight, so I'm going to try to give you a lesson. Here's a frame grab from my team's 48 Hour Film this year. I was the co-producer/co-writer/DP for the project. I'm not saying it's a perfect shot, it's not even close. In fact I actually took the frame grab to point out some flaws that we made.
x28byb.png


It is, however, a hell of a lot more interesting to look at than this frame grab from the clip you posted.

fz87m8.png


First off, there's depth to my image. In the foreground, you can see drink glasses and a bottle of ketchup. Then you have the two actors, the subjects of the shot. Behind, you have a table, the rest of the bar, a hallway, interesting ceiling beams, lights. All simple things on their own, but this all helps create a sense of depth and makes the frame interesting.

Now lets compare to your shot. You have a guy crammed in a corner with a phone cord. I realize you're shooting in a house, but that means you have to work harder as a set designer. Move him away from the wall a bit, and have him on the right side of the frame. To his immediate left have that statue, that adds something interesting to the shot. He's talking to someone, so maybe have this shot be over the shoulder, with the second actor's shoulder showing on the left side of the frame. On the wall behind him add a poster, a photo, a shelf, anything. Just make it interesting. You have something on the wall in the upper left corner, but it's only barely in the shot so I have no idea what it is.

Now onto the lighting. See John's face? It looks interesting. I'm not talking about the expression, I'm talking about the lighting. There's shadows, which always make a face more interesting. I'm not saying the dark side of his face isn't lit, it is. Even shadows need to be lit to get exposure. The shadows are just lit a few stops lower than the highlights. It's not perfectly lit, in a perfect world the highlights on his face would have been a bit darker. We were on an extremely tight schedule and didn't have time to tweak. I think the editor is actually fixing it in post for the non 48 hour cut of the film, but I'm not positive. I also would have liked to have a better hair light on the talent, but we couldn't pull it off on this shot.

Let's look at your lighting. Your subject is completely flat and evenly lit. The only shadow is under his chin. This looks extremely boring, and should be avoided at all costs. In the background I'm seeing double shadows everywhere. This can usually be avoided by using better placement of lights. As I haven't seen the whole scene I don't know what the motivation for your light is, but I'm assuming you don't have one. When doing interiors it's nice to have a lamp or other practical light in the scene so the viewer knows where the light is coming from. You then base your lighting around that, and that can subconsciously explain the reasons for your lighting to the viewer.

Please understand I'm not saying all this to criticize your shot, I'm just trying to help you understand why it's so boring and bland. Even my shot, which looks a lot better than yours in my opinion, isn't really all that great. After some color correction and post fixes it will be better, but it's still just passable. It's also got two glaring mistakes that make me cringe, but most people don't even see them. Anyone figure out what those are?
Click to expand...

Okay thanks. A lot of movies have fake shadow though. I lit the scene with a could of lamps and I was going to a go a bit brighter but felt there was a little too much shadow. Why is it that fake shadow in movies is good, as oppose to more realistic shadow? Not that I'm objecting, I'm just asking cause I'm trying to get the appeal. I watched a movie a while and payed attention to the lighting, and thought wow, they really go extreme dark, in the shadows, and extreme light where there aren't shadows. Not very realistic looking. Since I wrote a low budget script, and was going to shoot a scene from it, I thought it would be best to shoot it from very realistic plain looking setting, with realistic lighting, but still lit with lamps, to make it better, than complete natural lighting.

I guess not many audiences go for the bland home video look in a film, but I always thought it created a sense of realism for microbudget. But if that won't sell on that level, then I won't do it. But the scene you compared it to was shot in a much darker night club looking place, so isn't it hard to compare a dark night club, to a house lighting?

So when you say it the other scene creates a sense of depth of are you talking depth of field or just depth in the story?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
harmonica44 said:
Okay thanks. A lot of movies have fake shadow though. I lit the scene with a could of lamps and I was going to a go a bit brighter but felt there was a little too much shadow. Why is it that fake shadow in movies is good, as oppose to more realistic shadow? Not that I'm objecting, I'm just asking cause I'm trying to get the appeal. I watched a movie a while and payed attention to the lighting, and thought wow, they really go extreme dark, in the shadows, and extreme light where there aren't shadows. Not very realistic looking.
Click to expand...

Real life is boring. Everything about film is about making things better than real life, and this includes lighting and shadows. If you don't want your film to look like a home movie you need to master the use of light. Beginners often end up over-lighting everything, giving a bland flat look.

Plus the scene you compared it to was shot in a much darker night club looking place, so isn't it hard to compare a dark night club, to a house lighting?
Click to expand...

I used this shot because it was the only screen grab I had with me on my laptop. The basic principles still apply, though. Just because your shot is in a house doesn't mean it has to be boring flat lighting. Throw a practical lamp on the right side of the actor. Use this to motivate stronger light coming from the lamp, and then the other side of his face can be darker. Just anything so it isn't flat boring light.

So when you say it the other scene creates a sense of depth of are you talking depth of field or just depth in the story?
Click to expand...

Neither. I'm talking about it giving depth as in the third dimension. Even though film is a 2D medium, you can use lighting and set design to show visual depth. Shadow is particularly helpful with this, which is why flat lighting looks so boring.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
harmonica44 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cx5x-SqNvA4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFmdzt-zHbc
Click to expand...

Congrats! You have now officially posted more video to this site than I have. :) Now, read Sin's notes carefully. Watch some of your favorite things again and pay attention only to the objects in frame. Not the action, not the lighting, just watch the rooms, the furniture, what is on them, where they are placed, what colors they are. All of those things were consciously chosen and placed. Cinematography is at least 90% production design, and no amount of amazing lighting is going to make a bare white wall look like anything other than a bare white wall. Not that there is anything wrong with intentionally using a bare white wall, but then you have to nail some interesting composition and usually place a shot like that someplace where its narrative impact would make sense.

Keep cutting together what you have already shot, btw. You will learn more finishing something and starting the next project (building on the experience gained) than you would trying to do something over until perfected at this point.

Compositionally speaking, stuffing someone into a corner (usually) makes a subjective statement about their placement in the story/world/story-world. In a general interview setting it just looks awkward and unsettling (usually).

TheNoob said:
I'm too weak to take this kind of punishment.
Click to expand...

We all are, in a way. And by extension, no you are not, nor are the rest of us. ;)

SinEater said:
Thanks! I did just that.

How to Create Interesting Shots: A Learning Thread
Click to expand...

I like that thread, I'll be in there later with a few frames with things that make me hate them too. :D
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay. But in a lot of movies the houses are lit too dark though. Should I really not have the ceiling light on, even though a person normally would in a house at night. I guess I could not, but my first instinct is that it will come off as fake looking. Not that won't do it. I appreciate the advice. I just got to get the hang of imagining a realistic scene, with no lights on the ceiling. Right now I only have lamps but will see what I can get.

Another thing I like in movies is the film noir look some movies have where people are in shadow, and the sun is shining through the drapes, putting them in shadow. I think this would be a cool noir-ish look for that short I wanna do, but will that scream amatuer for a first timer, compared to a more accomplished director who can stylistically get away with it?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top