Another 7D Video: Beijing

Shot with available light and three lenses. From DslrNewsshooter Dan Chung by way of PrepShootPost's Eric Escobar:



I want a pulp feature shot with this camera...But I want an action sequence done with it first - a chase, a fight, a shootout.

Available light.

Edit to rant: You guys who are always saying you need more money with which to make your TV shows? You don't. You guys who say you can't make webisodes with TV quality? You can. You want to make a show that changes things? That makes an impact? That redefines things?

Don't think big. Think small.

INDIE FILM TOOLS: 7D, MAGIC BULLET MOJO

Eric Escobar over at Prep Shoot Post has a great post up about two indie film tools you can use to make really cool looking movies:

The Canon 7D -- $1700 for the basic camera

Magic Bullet Mojo -- $99 bucks

And here are the results when you mix the two:

Perya Colored from PrepShootPost on Vimeo.

The ability to shoot and color correct a film for less than $2500?

That's the win.

Or as Eric put it:

Does this mean we're going to see a whole slew of films at festivals and on-line shot with Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 lenses with perfect skintones and greenish shadows?

Absolutley!

Is that a bad thing?

Who cares?

I, for one, love shallow depth-of-field lensing with poppy color contrast processing that separates people from backgrounds.

The look I went for on the "Perya" footage was a 35mm slide film cross-processed type image. Punchy, vibrant colors with an emphasis on gorgeous skintones.

It's a great time to making images that move.

I, for one think that this is what's been needed in indie film for a long time - someone to put some color into it. Nothing sickens me more than when I see these grey blobs of meat puppetry moving across screen. I want some sharpness, some color, some sense of lighting design and sense of production value.

And at these prices there's no excuse not to color correct and enhance the storytelling capabilities of the images you are capturing in your camera. I talk to so many filmmakers every day who tell me they want their film to look indie , grainy and so forth.

They think it's edgy, experimental (emphasis on those last 2 syllables) or counterculture.

Do you know what are they really telling the buyers overseas who purchase these movies?

That their movie is cheap.

Indie Film - It All Growed Up

Drew Bellware sent me this via Google Reader about the pitfalls and triumphs of an indie film called FULL GROWN MEN. The post is from one of the producers, David Munro who is guest blogging on Prep Shoot Post and it is a perfect case study for today's indie film producer.

Read it now.

Of special interest is this:

Days turned into weeks, that turned into months. More top-tier festival play, more great reviews (and yes, some not-so-good ones – personal visions are always an acquired taste), more ‘We love it, buts” from acquisitions people. What was going on? Why hadn’t Harvey and Bob backed up the Brinks truck yet?

In crystal-clear hindsight, two reasons: first, we had not made a 100% audience-friendly film. And second, films that were not 100% audience-friendly were no longer selling. The irony, of course, is that indies were never meant to be mainstream. But the runaway success of Indiewood, and the resulting co-optation of indie distributors by studio specialty arms, had created unrealistic hopes, and imposed blockbuster logic on films that were never intended, or capable, of performing like “Pirates Of The Caribbean 3.”

The whole blog post is filled with good, solid in-your-face advice that only comes from someone who's lived this experience. I think Mr. Munro has experienced something similar to what I did several years ago... growing pains.

The Mad Pulp Bastard Rants Again! Pt. 2,345

Edit to add: You can watch streaming video from Natpe here. And there's that little chat function too, which makes the web way cooler than broadcast. Back to me ranting (it will make sense, trust your bastard) :


Okay, guys - repeat after me:

The Internet is NOT JUST VIDEO.

I'm not a wealthy guy. I'm not an exceptionally smart guy. I am however a guy who can take what's there and apply it to what I'm doing in new ways. It's the producer in me - we solve problems:

We don't have a crane for the camera? No problem - we have a ladder. We don't have stage blood for that zombie? No problem, we'll add this Karo syrup to cherry soda and you can dribble it out of your gaping wound. Don't have an image to use to create this key art? Fine give me that little digital camera there on your desk and I'll shoot it. Be right back.

And so on...and so on...

So it really upsets me when people look at the way things exist, smart people mind you, and can only focus on the problems and not the "workaround." If we are to move the internet forward in any meaningful way we have to focus on how we can get the job done, and not how impossible it is to do. Quit focusing on what it isn't and focus on what it is...

Enter Mark Cuban, and his "The Great Internet Video Lie."

Mr. Cuban - I'm sorry but your premise is inherently flawed. The internet doesn't really care if it can't support 500K viewers at once through a single source. Maybe for news programming - I'll give you that. The point of the internet is that its an archive that keeps finding new viewers all the time. Every day I stumble across something, or someone new sees this blog and gets hooked.

The internet is not a broadcasting model per se, it's an open air market that takes place 24/7 throughout the world.

Let's use your idea of a great concert. Okay then - 500K people watch it as it happens. But then, they tell someone and that someone goes to the web and watches the concert too, or downloads it and watches it later on their way home on the train, or after the kids have been put to bed. Then those people tell more folks about this great concert... and so on... and so on...

Then - people who really liked that concert decide to buy the DVD, that has extras. Really cool behind-the-scenes stuff. Oh, and wait - there's a book you can buy too! And a t-shirt!

Because really - how many people saw Woodstock live? (I didn't because no, I'm not that old. Nurse!) How many people bought the soundtrack? Did they see the movie - maybe, maybe not.

The internet is different. It's not broadcast. It's not theatrical. It's not books. It's not radio.

It's all those things and more.

And just because it doesn't do exactly what you want right this very second, doesn't mean it's a lie. It simply means it's growing, maturing. So what if it doesn't give you simultaneous broadcast capability through one source? Just use multiple sources (CDN's) !!!!

Is that soooo hard to work out?

Besides. Internet video is going to change again.

Because it needs to change...to evolve.

Clean Out The Garage! I'm Going to Make a TV Series!

While not quite there, it's close if this post by PREPSHOOTPOST is to be believed in regard as to how stupid cheap and "easy" this is....

And it gets these results.

I am especially emboldened by this statement:

"After spending four weeks shooting actors, props and some motion tracking shots, I could see how a small, dedicated group of artists could take any cheap, roll-up door industrial space in any edge city in America and churn out the next "300"."

and this:

"The production cost could actually be pretty low since the technology is stupid-cheap at this point. The trick is having that talented group of artists also include some talented writers and actors."

No location fees, permits, "officials" (cops directing traffic) or interruptions. An enclosed, safe environment that if managed properly and safely can yield fantastic results for pennies on the dollar. Of course, you would need insurance and some of those "officials" on days you were doing a stunt that involved firearms, flame or chemicals -- but you would need that anyway if you were simply storing those sorts of items there.

And let's freaking take this idea further: A series of episodes produced exclusively for the PSP.

Bar raised.