Film vs Dv

Started by Witkacy, October 01, 2003, 03:54:50 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2
User actions

Witkacy

October 01, 2003, 03:54:50 PM
Being new to this scene (an online forum)... I've heard much about DV and very little about film.  I've always shot in 16mm or Super-8.  I'm shooting in DV for the next project but is this the norm... is 16mm out because I've been looking to shoot in DV and make something that looks decent... very hard. I always shot with an Eclair Acl and a Nagra.  Very basic.... it seems with DV we spent time shooting for shooting's sake.  In 16mm I'll do 2 or 3 takes not much more, in DV people shoot like a Wiseman film.  Where's the restraint or sense of film.  I'd have never done what i've done without huge grants from the NFB but that doesn't negate people's sense of... OH I HAVE A PROJECT I HAVE A DV SO I CAN DO A FILM.  I like the accesibility to all but not the inate  access because some have a family DV and many do not.  As much as old school filmmaking privilieged many because of education... new school DV making privileges those with a family cameras.  
Cheers

SoNowThen

#1
October 01, 2003, 03:59:02 PM
I don't understand how you can go out and get all this grant money so easily. That's why I can't shoot film, 'cause I got no money. DV is cheap, and I like 5+ takes of everything, so it's out of necessity.

Can you tell me how to tap into all this NFB money?
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Witkacy

#2
October 01, 2003, 04:13:11 PM
Yes... you're from Canada... I always did my stuff on a PAFS grant (funding to the private sector).  I'm not sure if they shut down recently but I always got non-shooting grants i.e. processing, opticals, sound mix, neg cut, answer print, through them.  All in total for a 15 min film about 20k.  Much worth it.  But for myself... spending another 15k for 16mm short.... it is very hard. So I'm turning to DV mainly to get council grants or use my film contacts to get a script through. We all do what we can.

SoNowThen

#3
October 01, 2003, 04:15:50 PM
Indeed.

Good luck, anyhow. But you're right, it is very hard to make something truly look decent on dv. My short films haven't come close, but I gotta keep filming anyways.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Witkacy

#4
October 01, 2003, 04:25:03 PM
I've always done shorts and always tried to make something that people will enjoy or at least appreciate.  DV seems like another medium... do i do this so I can make something in film or is this what i want to always make.  A question to ask.  Right now I'm changing mediums because the cost is too great with film... but am I making these films/videos only to get something else or am i making them because people will watch them in DV.  Not sure?  Ultimately... I had what I think is a good film... my only choice(financially) shoot on DV.  That's it.

aclockworkjj

#5
October 01, 2003, 04:51:38 PM
This might help you Wit... http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=1467&start=0

I hear ya...I was recently looking at some listings for films looking for crew, or just to hang out and see if I can learn anything.  Most listed were of the student film type...but almost every single one was being shot on some form of DV...

...sadly, if you don't have a big budget, and very limited on time/turnaround...DV just makes more sense to most.

Witkacy

#6
October 01, 2003, 04:59:03 PM
Seriously... I always shot in 16mm or Super 8.  It is always a much more organized and intense shoot.  You waste 100ft of 16mm it cost you a handful unless you're rich.  Personally, I'm having an adjustment problem to shooting in DV.... quality-wise and just shooting with an eye and not unlimited minutes. I thought it would be liberating having hours of non-cost shooting... but I'll see as the shoot goes on.

aclockworkjj

#7
October 01, 2003, 05:27:51 PM
Quote from: WitkacyYou waste 100ft of 16mm it cost you a handful unless you're rich.  
costed me around $30 (US) at at the time (not including processing)...and $30 is a lot to a broke college kid for a few minutes of actual screen time.

Witkacy

#8
October 01, 2003, 06:00:02 PM
$30 is cheap.. add in  test print... processing... neg cut... any opticals... answer print... all for a minute of footage of which you cut out 45 seconds.  It's a whole different project compared to DV.  Then try your sound mix... long and laborious... but nothing is as satisfying and fun as working on a Steenbeck editor.  Much more fun than any computer.

aclockworkjj

#9
October 01, 2003, 06:46:15 PM
Quote from: Witkacy$30 is cheap..
realize thou, I was shooting only reversal at the time.

SHAFTR

#10
October 01, 2003, 07:04:18 PM
I'm paying $25 for 100ft of film reversal 16mm that is the price of film and processing.
"Talking shit about a pretty sunset
Blanketing opinions that i'll probably regret soon"

Witkacy

#11
October 01, 2003, 08:00:35 PM
Reversal is fine for certain applications.  It may cheaper in the first stages but ultimately its inherent limitations don't bode well for finished films.  If you're shooting small no-budget films that you don't see being screened beyond the classroom it's a good choice.  Then again... I'm looking at it from a purely material point of view... I guess you take your reversal and transfer directly to digital and edit there.  This wasn't my case a few years ago when reversal was seen primarily as a test role option.  So you might as well disregard what I'm saying.  I just always loved editing actual 16 footage and having a neg that only some white gloved tech touched. Apologies for the pre-digital tangent.

SHAFTR

#12
October 01, 2003, 08:19:48 PM
Right now I'm learning how to edit 16 mm Reversal footage (pre-digital).  I have a feeling I'll be spending a lot of time in the editing room.
"Talking shit about a pretty sunset
Blanketing opinions that i'll probably regret soon"

aclockworkjj

#13
October 01, 2003, 09:39:26 PM
haha,....I wish I had it transfered to DV!!

cut and splice here too.  It sucks, but really makes you feel proud of your finished product.  

Shafter expect to spend many late nights in there.  Maybe you are different, but I would bust my ass for like and hour, view it, bust my ass for another hour, take a 10 minute ciggie break, and repeat the process.  It worked well to not drive me nuts and start choppin' off fingers with a guillotine splicer.

Witkacy

#14
October 02, 2003, 12:26:39 PM
But you can't deny it is much more physical and enjoyable when you're handling the actual film stock... counting out frames... taping up 2 or 3 frames cause you never know when you might want to use them.  There's something too sterile about DV on a certain level.  Plus, endless shooting on DV doesn't help your eye or your relationship to the image.
Print
Go Up Pages1 2
User actions