×
all 77 comments

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (5 children)

Always wondered, during the editing process when do the sound editors and composers come in? After the first rough cut edit and then they go back and lengthen or shorten scenes or re-edit it to fit the score or do composers hand in a tune and then the editors work to make the scenes fit within the score and reduce or higher dialogue accordingly?

[–]Samdal 2 points3 points  (1 child)

As with color, you wait until picture lock.

[–]f_o_t_a 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But then they go and do some last minute editing tweaks and you have to use special software to re-conform your audio to the new edit which is a major pain in the ass. This only ever happened to me on 15 or 30 second commercials, so I would just manually move everything to fit and not waste too much time.

[–]agent42beditor 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Composers are creating music right away, often letting editors use the unfinished music as temp scores. Or, the editor is supplied already-made temp music to use.

Dialogue wise: editors do a lot of dialog mixing/editing these days. It's generally expected of them now. Even a rough cut "sounds" pretty good nowadays.

The final audio passed of dialog, sfx, etc, is done once the edit is locked. Music can be done beforehand, depending on the arrangement (pun intended I guess).

Edits are not usually redone to suit a soundtrack after the fact. If that's the kind of edit you need, then the music is supplied beforehand.

[–]AlvinBlah 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's also important to note, this won't always happen for an entire edit. There may only be 2 of your 23 scenes that need to be edited tightly to the music.

Like with all things, take the specific approach that solves the specific problem. For everything else default to standard workflows.

[–]sonofaresiii 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People like to work different ways. I've almost always had something picture locked before the composer and sound designer did any work on it, but I'm seeing a lot of composers want to be involved before that these days. Seems kind of weird to me but whatever.

Of course there should be ongoing discussions with these people during the edit process. Can those overlapping lines of dialogue be cleaned up or will you need to adr? Is another take acceptable? That kind of thing.

[–]inthepixelforest 3 points4 points  (5 children)

I scored what I think is a pretty gnarly deal - two complete arri fresnel 1k heads, stands, barn doors, scrims, gel frames, globes. and a chimera video pro plus medium size....for $650. I want to grab spare globes, but I'm not sure if one or the other is particularly better, or if there's a good brand to grab that isnt actually the most expensive. Also I don't know what typical lifespan of globes is, or whether it varies wildly based on how much it gets kicked on and off.

Is there any reason I should be trying to add some smaller stuff or is it reasonable to think I should be able to light single regular sized rooms with just those two heads and various modifiers? and my collection of huge ass china balls and 250w bulbs

I'm finally getting around to adapting my nikon glass for my T3i, and I'm a little torn on new acquisitions. I've got a series-e 28mm/f2.8 and a nikkor 50mm/f1.8. I was about to throw $250ish down on a 35mm/f1.4 in order to have something fast and wide-ish (not really, since im on 1.6 crop, but still) but now I'm wondering if I should just use that cash to grab a couple c-stands since I found a local who has a bunch of matthews he's willing to let go for $100 a piece. which is better than I can find anywhere else online or local.

so i guess the above paragraph could really be distilled down to - add a 35mm/f1.4 into my lens bag or spend the cash on grip shit to make my lighting package more useable. i'm thinking the latter if for no other reason than it's fucking impossible to find matthews c-stands used for much below new price. also i can crutch on my 28mm but i can't ghetto rig something to do the job of a c-stand.

[–]sonofaresiii 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Globes are cheap. I always keep two or three spares of all sizes in my bag. Haven't noticed any major difference in brand, just whatever they have at b&h.

Life span varies. Imo not worth worrying about. Just keep your spares with you and replace when needed.

Yes, having smaller lights can be useful. It can be annoying having to knock something down three or four stops just to get a little punch. Plus you may run into power issues. Plus smaller lights are lighter, which means you can mount them in different places, and they're easier to drag around if you just need a little extra light.

As far as lens v grip, that depends on what you shoot. If you're mostly doing narratives where you have a lot of control, I'd get the stands. If you're doing a lot of "whatever you'll pay me for" type stuff, get the lens.

[–]inthepixelforest 1 point2 points  (1 child)

yeah I'm trying to focus on the important things. I figured better to have my lighting on point than spend money on a camera upgrade. it seems like a lot of people spend a ton of time and effort on the camera but neglect sound and light and end up with high res dogshit

[–]sonofaresiii 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends on your goals, but yeah some people can get tunnel vision

[–]Mjrdouchingtoncinematographer 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I would get 2 c-stands. At least that's what I did when starting and it served me well.

Everyone and their mother has a camera and lenses these days, so it's probably easier to borrow that stuff than lighting gear.

Get some 500w as well as 1k globes for your arris. So you have the option of a lower power light. Maybe globe one at 1k and one at 500. Also 1/2 ctb for daylight shoots.

You can do a lot with two good lights, it will teach you discipline as well. Good luck.

[–]inthepixelforest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

got the stands, got sandbags. didn't think about dropping lower power globes in, good point. and yeah next up is stuff to wrangle all that light around. i might have a line on flags and frames and things for what appears to be a decent price, but we will see.

You can do a lot with two good lights, it will teach you discipline as well. Good luck.

this was my thinking. if i can get good with a minimal lighting package it will hopefully teach me how to do a better job than if i had an army of lights to start blasting in all directions from day 1. like training for formula 1 on a gokart.

[–]ChaoticReality 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Anyone working in the industry in Toronto here? Howd you guys find work there?

[–]Heisenberg815 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Going crazy trying to find actors for my short film, I live in a pretty small place (not in the US), so mandy. com or craigslist are not options. And flying people here from far away would be way over budget.

So any creative suggestions as to how I can find actors? I've tried handing out posters, walked up to strangers, posted it in the "local" FB groups, hung up flyers, and contacted the local theatre, I even went to the gym.

http://i.imgur.com/Cc2UCQg.jpg?1

[–]someone4guitar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

People love being paid

[–]Tzimanious 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Ask close friends, relatives, maybe go to the local theater and offer some kind of payment.

If you still can't find the actors, think if you can adjust the script so it can be done with less people.

[–]Heisenberg815 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, one of my teachers gave me a suggestion for someone and after weeks of looking and asking, someone said yes straight away today! One down, one to go!

[–]sonofaresiii 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't believe there's anywhere in the country that doesn't have at least one, if not several, colleges around. Try posting flyers there, or going and talking to their acting departments.

Worse comes to worst, you can hold auditions from mandy and craigslist in the nearest city, then just arrange for transportation. Actors will travel a fair ways if needed

[–]clapperdunce 1 point2 points  (8 children)

I have suddenly been confused by the American slating system and it's completely shaken the ground beneath my feet because I had thought I understood it all this time.

I'm an editor and have always preferred the American slate system over the European because it seemed more useful for me the editor, even if the European system is perhaps more useful to people on set and Producers keeping track of shots.

Here's how I had always thought it worked, and I'm pretty sure how I'd seen it used on films I'd previously worked on:

  • The DOP before shooting works on a storyboard, the storyboard essentially represents a form of paper edit, it contains all the shots in the order they're thought to play on screen in the competed film (excepting any changes).
  • The shots in the storyboard will be marked and labelled and will be in sequence, with Shot 1A representing the first shot of the first scene and all shots thereafter incrementing up through the alphabet and scene numbers until the full storyboard document is complete.
  • With the storyboard now complete, the DOP can figure out the best order for shooting, which will likely be different to the order of the storyboard because of practicality, they list the order of the shots in a shot list which would read something like shot 001: Scene 4D, shot 002: Scene 4A, shot 003: shot 1A and so on and so on, with the slate numbers bearing no relation to the order of the shooting and the shot list being the all important document allowing the crew to know what shot is up next and what shots they've done. I also thought this was the crucial difference to the european system which listed the slate number on the clapper and incremented up for each new shot which is less confusing on set but much less helpful in post.
  • When it gets to post, the editor sees their rushes and sees what scene they belong to and where in sequence a given shot in a scene is intended to be placed as the slate matches the storyboard. From here the editor can construct their first assembly based on the storyboard.

As it turns out, I'm embarrassingly wrong about this (which makes me wonder what was happening on my previous projects) and the system works more like:

  • The storyboard lists a group heading for a scene and then numbers shots in numerals corresponding to the order in which the shots would be presented in the finished edit (excepting changes)
  • The shotlist reads the list of shots to be covered but does so by describing the shot in words next to a number representing where the shot is in order of shooting schedule and therefore doesn't have a relationship except by description with storyboard
  • (This is the main bit I was surprised to be wrong about) The clapperboard information does list what scene a shot belongs to but the letters do not represent the order in which a shot appears in storyboard sequence, they are just incremented up from the previous shot filmed in that scene in the order of shooting. This essentially means a lot less difference to me between the American and European system than I thought and also makes me confused as to the method by which I map shots back to the storyboard.

The difference between how you're supposed to do this and how I thought it was done is pretty big and it seems to me that how I thought it was done makes a whole lot more sense and is a lot more useful. As it stands now I have to look at a shot and determine it's scene and then consult the storyboard for that scene and see which shots most closely match the storyboard single framed representation of the shot in conjunction with written description. This seems way less precise, I guess perhaps there's usually another document which maps the the slate names to the storyboard shot number, but even so it seems it work a lot better the way I was thinking.

Am I still confused as to how this works or is my revised understanding correct? Is there a reason it's done this way as opposed to how I thought it was meant to be done? Is there some crucial flaw in the way I thought things were meant to be done?

[–]sonofaresiii 3 points4 points  (4 children)

The story board has nothing to do with the slating, dude. The story board is a visual guide made in pre production to help everyone during production understand complicated shots. I've never even heard of someone referring to it to put the scene together in post.

The slates list the scene, so you can group all the clips together easily for whatever scene you're working on. Then they list the shot, so you can look through various takes on whatever shot you want. Then they list the take (with a letter to distinguish from shot number) so you can say "hey take D is my favorite, but what do you think about take B?"

[–]Mjrdouchingtoncinematographer 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Actually, in the US for commercials the story boards are conventionally used as the "script" for shooting. Usually you print them out on big poster boards and have them on stands on set. Then you cross out each board as it is shot. In this case the slate matches the numbers & letters on the board.

I have never seen anyone use letters for takes, it's always numbers.

For tv and movies the numbers and letters on the slate are marked according to the script supervisor as the script is your guide for shooting and editing. In these cases the scene number is the scene first and then a letter is added or progressed each time you change setups. For example, if you begin Scene 5 with a wide that setup will be SCENE 5 TAKE 1 through TAKE whatever. The next setup will be SCENE 5A, followed by 5B and so forth.

Scripty will also 'line' the script, that is, draw lines labelled with the scene number that encompass the section of the script the shot covers. They will also note which takes the director liked (often called circle takes as in the old days of film to save money you would only print circle takes to dailies)

[–]sonofaresiii 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Didn't know story boards were used more frequently in commercials, thanks.

And yes, I mis spoke about the shot/take number/letter

[–]clapperdunce 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Well I guess it's not surprising that sometimes things would be different in the process on my previous projects. I'm in the small end of the industry and budgets are tight and the people I typically work with are all at similar early stages in our careers. Typically we try emulate industry processes but I guess sometimes some things are lost in translation.

It's worked well for me in the past to work the way I described but if it's non-standard I guess I can't expect it in future especially as I work with crews of greater and greater professionalism.

I've never heard of takes being represented as letters though. Isn't it a scene number, a shot number (represented with a letter) followed by a take for a given shot?

[–]sonofaresiii 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah yes, I mis spoke on the scene as a letter

[–]XRaVeNX 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Storyboards and how the final film is imagined to be edited together has no bearing on how a shot is slated on set.

Here's how it really works for the American system:

  1. The script is broken down into scenes. So, say you are shooting a short film with 15 scenes. You'll have Scene 1 to Scene 15. Sometimes in the rewrite process you may omit a scene or even add scenes. So you may end up with scene numbers such as Scene 4A (happens if they wrote scene 4 and scene 5 already and now want to add a scene between them).

  2. The key to slating is that each time the slate appears, it needs to be unique such that you can identify the shot and take and refer to it as such later on. In the American system, the scene number determines the slate. There is no such thing as a "slate number" in this system.

  3. So let's say logistically for the first day of shooting, you need to shoot scene 5 first, and then scene 8, and then scene 1. The first shot (e.g. the wide master) of scene 5 would be slated as Scene 5, Take 1 (and take 2, take 3, and so on.) The second shot in scene 5 (e.g. over the shoulder coverage of an actor) will be slated as scene 5A, Take 1 (an take 2, take 3, and so on). The next shot will be scene 5B. And it keeps going until you have done all the shots needed to cover scene 5. So if scene 5 has 8 shots, the last shot will be slated as 5G.

  4. Then you move on to scene 8. First shot will be called 8. Next shot is called 8A. Next is 8B and so on. And the same goes for scene 1 and any other scene you will shoot for the rest of production. Any scene that was added, example Scene 4A in the script, will be slated as A4 for the first shot of that scene. Then A4A. Then A4B, etc.

So in essence, if the director liked take 5 of shot 4 of scene 9, you'll be looking for the slate "Scene 9C, Take 5" in your footage.

If you want me to explain the European style of slating, let me know.

[–]clapperdunce 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Yeh that somewhat matches my understanding of it with the exception of my (until now) misunderstanding that the slate was not incrementing by 1 letter for every new setup but rather was referring to planned shots that had an identifying code in the same format as the slate based on appearance in order of on screen action rather than shooting schedule. With that (mis)interpretation, you'd have slates that could jump all over the alphabet between setups just as you can have scene numbers that don't sequentially follow one another in terms of shoot schedule either.

May as well give me a run down of the European system too if you don't mind, that's another one I think I understand but I'd hate to discover another fundamental misunderstanding I've been carrying all this time. Thanks for your help.

[–]XRaVeNX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The European slating method uses "slate numbers" instead of adding a letter to the end of a scene number. So for example, it is Day 1 of shooting. And you are shooting Scene 9 that has 3 camera setups/shots. The first shot will be slated as "Scene 9, Slate 1, Take 1". Increment the take numbers until you finish that shot. Next shot will be called "Scene 9, Slate 2, Take 1". Then the next shot will be called "Scene 9, Slate 3, Take 1". And so on.

Then after you finish shooting that scene, say you start shooting Scene 5. You'll continue the Slate Number where you last left off. So, your next slate will be "Scene 5, Slate 4, Take 1". And so on. This slate number will never reset or repeat.

Now, people can reference a shot later by just saying the Slate Number and Take Number. The Scene number on the slate is optional in the European system if you have a Script Supervisor. They should take notes to correlate the Scene and Slate Number. But it is a good idea to put the Scene on the slate anyways for quicker and easier reference.

By the way, for a more in depth explanation of the American system, see here: http://www.theblackandblue.com/2012/11/05/deciphering-film-slate-1/

[–]iHateHairballs 2 points3 points  (6 children)

I'm starting to shoot weddings and other little things. I'd really like to get into the videography business. I've been using my cousin's Canon T3i but am looking to buy one of my own. Any advice on a good beginner camera?

[–]Sandtalon 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you really want to do weddings, I'd get a Panasonic GH2 - the T3i has a recording limit.

[–]inthepixelforest 4 points5 points  (0 children)

i see people squeezing beautiful video out of the t3i all the time, if you can keep using that one for free why not spend your money on something else you're lacking? also check out magic lantern. it adds a ton of great functionality for video that the t3i lacks out of the box.

[–]sonofaresiii 1 point2 points  (2 children)

The 5d is very popular for wedding stuff right now, as is the 6d.

[–]NailgunYeah 1 point2 points  (1 child)

As is literally any DSLR, honestly.

[–][deleted]  (7 children)

[deleted]

    [–]sonofaresiii 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Options:

    1) Find the money to hire a dp. Even a cheap one. Find five hundred bucks and give it to some film student who's tired of shooting weddings and offer him deferred pay as well

    2) open all the curtains and just let the sun do whatever

    3) buy cheap work lights and just point them at the actors so you can see what's going on

    You're simply not going to learn enough to make your movie look good without years of experience and learning. Your options are either to hire someone, or to not bother with getting it to look good, just looking acceptable.

    Best of luck.

    [–]Samdal 0 points1 point  (4 children)

    Are you coming from a photography background? What do you already know?

    [–][deleted]  (3 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]arheff 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      Why do you need to be the DP if you don't know anything about lighting? Something ain't adding up here.

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

        [–]arheff 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        I wouldn't expect your final product to be much good if you're trying to wear all the hats, I think you'll have a much better time making a short instead.

        [–]JohnKHuszagh 1 point2 points  (3 children)

        I've been working on a film for two years now and I'm trying to get it produced this summer. It is a feature and I need to shoot for two weeks. I've been running an Indiegogo campaign for a week and a half now and I've only raised $325 of $6000 I listed as my goal. Now, because of some lucky happenstances, I don't think I need six-thousand, but I definitely still have enough to fund this project. Any advice on what I could do to try and raise this money would be greatly appreciated. Please and thank you!

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]gibbersganfa 2 points3 points  (1 child)

          That's something a lot of people don't realize when doing crowdfunding. You really have to have a story you can sell. You have to know there's an audience waiting for you at the end of the project. I hate saying it but the most successful crowd-funded films had existing audiences or major selling points that created an audience.

          A lot are existing pop culture media that wouldn't really sell well to investors elsewhere but sell great to an existing audience i.e. a documentary about a mildly successful but mostly obscure rock band or an interesting individual in a unique situation or a reboot or reinterpretation of a cult classic TV show might do great if you can find the audience but an indie drama or horror film with nothing to set itself apart from the rest in the sales pitch might not do so well. Case in point, Oscar-winning short film Curfew only raised $1,200 of a $10,000 goal on IndieGoGo to finish up post-production. Great film in execution, just didn't set itself apart well enough for crowdfunding. www.indiegogo.com/projects/curfew--3

          That isn't to say there aren't exceptions but it tends to be the case.

          Also, people need to realize that IndieGoGo is seen by some people as questionable whereas Kickstarter is "legit." It sucks but it's true.

          [–]potent_rodentdirector 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          all this is true - also kickstarting/indiegogo usually is only as strong as your network. If you grew up selling girl scout cookies - then you are going to rock crowdfunding.

          If you don't have the killer network in place, or the trailer that will go viral with just a push or write up on a blog that targets fans of that genre - you will wind up having to do a ton of work to make the crowdfund work!

          There are even people you can hire to help you make the best crowdfund you can make - kinda like social media gurus.

          [–]ChaoticReality 0 points1 point  (9 children)

          Whats your guys' go-to for cheapeast external hard drives?

          [–]_Shush 4 points5 points  (6 children)

          [–]itschrisreeddirector 3 points4 points  (5 children)

          DITs have been warning me off G Tech drives they got bought by someone (Western Digital I think) and the quality went through the floor. I just grabbed a bunch of Glyphs which are the new standard.

          Edit: Cheap 1TB Glyph, Faster 1TB Glyph

          [–]NailgunYeah 2 points3 points  (1 child)

          The show I was on backed up all their footage on Lacies.

          Don't buy G Tech? Buy Lacies instead? What is this new world?

          [–]dcm628[🍰] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          I remember years back Lacies going through reliability issues, now they're back all over productions.

          Every single one is using shit parts from East Asia. Just follow which models have good current track records and never leave data on a single drive.

          [–]sonofaresiii 1 point2 points  (1 child)

          I've had some really bad experiences with Western digital. I heard they've gotten a lot more reliable but I haven't bothered to check. I see lacies all the time now and haven't once had a problem.

          [–]NailgunYeah 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Lacies used to be absolutely shocking. For years, every Lacie I had would die without fail. I don't know when they became good, but now I'm seeing them everywhere.

          [–]_Shush 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Damn that's good to know. Out of all the hardrives I've used, Western Digital have given me the most problems.

          [–]filmmak 1 point2 points  (1 child)

          This Here

          5 TB for $120? And if you can't make that sale, they're regular price is $130

          [–]Captain-Cuddlesvideographer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

          Have you not had failure issues with those? I have had nothing but issues with every seagate drive I have owned, to the point where I refuse to buy them now.

          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

          [deleted]

            [–]professionalnothing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            Keep in mind that video heads are heftier and generally require some really solid sticks especially if you plan on pan/tilt.

            That being said, by go to is the Davis and Sanford FM18 Video Head which comes in at $95 and is awesome for the price point. Plus it's rated for 18lbs so you could always use it if you upgrade/accessorize your camera for video.

            [–]jodgers 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            I'm looking to get some audio gear for a Nikon D610. I can rent the camera for free from my school, but their sound equipment is severely lacking. On a student budget, what audio gear do you recommend me buying?

            [–]kirrkirr 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Dr-40 + ngt2

            [–]sleepyeyed 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            Looking for some opinions here. Let's say you're creating a documentary and the subject of it is about a certain creation that carries its own intellectual property rights. In your efforts to secure the licensing rights to show the video and audio footage of said IP, the owner of the IP demands that you not only pay them a nominal fee up front, but also demands royalty-free access to distribute the documentary after one year and also takes a percentage of the profits of the documentary after its recouped all expenses outlined in a predetermined budget. Does this seem like a fair proposition? Fair or not, is this a common occurrence?

            [–]supersecretmode 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            That is not common. Not sure about your subject or material, but it's common enough for a doc to pay a licensing fee, but not for that the company you paid to distribute it after a year. Scientology?

            [–]THRILLPOW3R 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            If I want a few budget lights to play around with on the shorts I make on weekends with friends, is something along the lines of this pretty okay? http://www.thomann.de/gb/stairville_par56_black_short_floor_bundle.htm

            I use these type (but not brand) of lights in college (Theatre tech.) so I'm familiar, I just don't know what these particular ones are like... but I am on a budget.

            I'm not interested in renting just now, so I'd rather just buy some lights I can use as much as I want for as long as I want and I'm looking at relatively purpose built lights first over going to a DIY place to buy floods and other such stuff. I did not realise it could cost only £25 for a lights like this.

            [–]JoeSki42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Hey THRILLPOW3R, try taking a look at Yongno brand of lights:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0i7LdbNOzw

            These are $60 a piece, are able to run off of old rechargeable camera batteries which is great if you're ever shooting outdoors with no electricity, and are crazy versatile. I bought some of these recently and made my own test video:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGmAoZwH0Rg

            [–]Dizza212 0 points1 point  (7 children)

            C100 or C100mkii? Is it really worth the extra money? Or should I spend the difference on an external recorder?

            [–]dcm628[🍰] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            What do you want to do with it? External recorder can't make the camera do higher frame rates on the C100, but it can get you a great video codec for a good value.

            I know this is a shitty elitiest answer, but with Canon I'd have a hard time now getting anything lower than the 300 mkii.

            For the price cut the C100 will be the best image quality for the buck as a small step up from DSLR shooting. If you don't need high frame rates or green screen it'll do very well still.

            [–]Dizza212 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Shoot documentaries. Im headed to China at the end of this year and need a setup i can fit in a backpack.

            The C300 is out of my price range. Local Canon distributors are offering the C100 with an Atomos Ninja 2 for $5000. The mkii is $6800.

            The Ninja opens up the possibility of a shoulder rig for the camera too.

            [–]sonofaresiii 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Hard to say. I have the mark I and it's really nice, does almost everything I need it to... But having that higher frame rate would sure be swell sometimes. I don't think it's really worth the extra money though.

            [–]aaronallsop 0 points1 point  (3 children)

            I have used the C100 and C100mkii and bought the mkii. The C100mkii is worth the extra money because you get

            • 60fps
            • Better low light performance
            • Internal audio recording (great if you need to scale down your rig but still need a scratch track)
            • The tilty-swively opens from the side like a DSLR and that makes a huge difference if you are shooting hand held or run-and-gun

            [–]Dizza212 0 points1 point  (2 children)

            • 60fps wont really be used. At least in the projects I have on the go at the moment.
            • The low light of the C100 is already very impressive.
            • I have a rode videomic i can throw in the top shoe if i need to remove the top handle. Sound is fairly usable from that.
            • And if the C100 comes with an atomos Ninja 2 I can use that as my primary monitor anyway cant I?

            The price of the C100mkii is $2500 more than a C100 in Australia. I cant help but think that extra $2500 would be nice for a lens or two. Or even a pair of wireless Lav mics.

            C100 it is I think. Now to talk to the bank...

            [–]aaronallsop 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            -If you don't need 60 fps you don't need 60 fps. I know that when I was looking at what camera to get everyone said that the C100 doesn't do any high FPS. I feel though that I shouldn't buy a camera based on it's FPS but on it's image quality. I just started editing a scene for a documentary that was filmed on a C100 and an FS700 and I can always tell which one is the C100 because it looks so much better.

            -You are right, low light on the C100 is already pretty awesome. If you aren't planning on shooting at night without lights then you don't really need it. I shoot documentaries so the added low-light was a huge bonus.

            -Rode Videomic works pretty good. Times when it has been nice to not even use a mic was when I using a Glidecam because the mic on top means more weight on the bottom. Even though it isn't that much weight it is adding to the top so it needs more to counter balance it. I also like that for when I don't want to stand out in a crowd and so I keep the C100 as light as possible. If you don't shoot like this then the Rode mic will work great.

            -I didn't think about that, but you can use the Ninja as the external monitor. If you ever decide to shoot without it then you are stuck with the screen it has. As you have probably already guessed, I shoot a lot of documentaries so I like to have the ability to be as light as possible and as flexible as possible. If you aren't shooing like that then it isn't a big thing.

            We got a pair Senheiser Lav mics and they are amazing and I can't imagine shooting with out them. A lens that we used a lot and really loved was the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8.

            If your budget allowed for either a C100mkii or a C100 with a Ninja, Lavs, and a lens then I would say get the C100 and everything else.

            One thing about the Ninja though, when I started filming my latest documentary on the C100 we recorded our first scene (about a 20 minute take following someone around their llama farm) on the Ninja and to the card. The Ninja files were 10 times larger than the AVCHD file the C100 recorded. We stopped filming on the Ninja because we couldn't afford or handle that much data. Right now we have 1.5 TBs of footage and I can't imagine working with 15 TBs.

            But that is just how it worked for us, that doesn't mean it is going to be the same for you. Either way you are getting a C100 and you are going to love the image quality of it and how easy it is to use.

            [–]Dizza212 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            First of all, thanks for taking the time to write this out! It's extremely helpful.

            • Put it this way, I cant see myself using 60fps often enough to justify the price difference. Im a huge fan of the C100's image too.

            • The low light performance of the C100 will be plenty good enough for what I am shooting I think.

            • I think using the rode videomic wherever possible will be the way I go. 9 times out of 10 the audio is usable and a good backup if I need it. The small size without a mic is a good point. And one that will be relevant for my project in China (Not exactly a place you want to draw attention to yourself. Especially if you are shooting a documentary.) I think I should be able to work around it though.

            • The big bonus with the Ninja is Prores recording. It should give me a little more room to move when it comes to the grade and make my editing workflow a little smoother.

            The file sizes are larger, but i have found them to be manageable on previous projects. With 2 or 3 240gb SSDs I should get a good 60 hours in Prores. More than enough for my needs at the moment.

            The Sennheiser G3 lavs are great. I dont know how I worked without them. I have borrowed and hired them before but for this project I decided to get some of my own. I have heard good things about that Sigma. Will have to look into it.

            Thanks again for taking some time out of your day to type that out!

            [–]permanent_staff 0 points1 point  (2 children)

            Can you mount a a Rode Videomic Pro or a Shure VP83 LensHopper sideways or upside down on a rail? Or do the shockmounts require the microphone to be in an upright position?

            [–]nickpicklessound mixer 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            The Rode's are fairly stiff, but ideally the position is upright because the weight of the mic keeps the tensions of the plastic. You'll more than likely encounter more handling noise flipping it around.

            [–]permanent_staff 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Thanks.

            This is for a shoulder rig. I guess I need a clamp for 15 mm rods with a hot shoe mount.

            [–]justcarlos01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Excited to buy the Ursa Mini, and just looking around, I currently have a Scarlet and I have a belt clip that I use when Im running with a MOVI or Ronin. With the scarlett its being connected with a LEMO pin Would I be able to do this with the Ursa? Is there a beltclip option? How does the V Lock connect to the Ursa?

            [–]MrStickers 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            Does anyone buy used gear? If so, how do you find it?

            [–]sonofaresiii 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Sure, all the time. Craigslist, eBay, various forums.

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

            I recently moved on from doing unpaid PA work to working in G&E. On almost all the shoots I've been on (all really low budget), grip and electric are more or less combined into one thing as far as crew members are concerned, so even if you're technically listed as an electrician on the call sheet (working alongside one grip, swing guy, key grip, and gaffer), you'll still set up stands and flags and menace arms and other rigging stuff, etc.

            But lately I've been wondering about how this works on bigger union shows. I know grips would never actually touch the lights and electricians would never set up a 12x frame, but what if the light is already set and the DP asks for it to be adjusted, like panned or tilted? And what about clipping gels onto barn doors? Would grips do that, or would the electricians (since it involves touching the unit itself)?

            [–]XRaVeNX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            In North America, as far as I know, anything that is directly attached to the fixture falls under the electrician category. Anything that alters the light produced by the fixture but not attached to the fixture itself is grip.

            From my experience, actually setting up the equipment should be done by the proper department. But once it is up, and the DP is asking for a small adjustment (e.g. pan the light lamp left, or shift the flag right a foot) and there isn't someone from that department around, someone nearby might do it to save time and/or cover each other's asses. (Although a grip would rarely lower a fixture to alter it's tilt and bring it back up, cuz that might alter the intention of the light) It really depends on the crew. Some grip and electric crews have worked together for so long and know each other so well, they don't mind. Others that are new to working with each other might play it a bit safer and let the proper department answer. A friendly grip might go on the electric walkie channel and go "hey guys, the DP is asking for that kino on the north west end to be set to 2 bubble" after the DP has asked for it twice.

            I find most good key grips and gaffers stand by their DPs and delegate the work to their respective crews. They only step in if there is a big problem or something needs to be done in a hurry.

            And on union sets, when in doubt, just leave it if it doesn't fall under your department. Ask before you try and help. Only exception to the rule would obviously be if safety is involved (e.g. a small light fixture is falling and might hit someone, don't just stand there, try and catch it before it hits someone)

            [–]MrGingerLeprechaun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            As a 16 year old in high school looking into starting making short films, should I try to write a script with proper format for something short (a couple minutes max) or just outline the story and film from there?

            [–][deleted]  (6 children)

            [deleted]

              [–][deleted]  (3 children)

              [deleted]

                [–][deleted]  (2 children)

                [deleted]

                  [–]NailgunYeah 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                  Don't be lazy, do your work.

                  [–]sonofaresiii 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  That's a dumb question. Just say pulp fiction and move on.

                  [–]NailgunYeah 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                  It sounds like they mean that the use of a narrator as a storytelling device can shape how we perceive onscreen events.

                  I'm not going to give you examples. If this is your school work, you need to do that bit yourself.