The oldest question in the book

[KingBlackDeath]

I'm on the brink of "film"making and need advice or viewpoints.
Please divert from Overly Technical talk, for I am dumb.
I have a few friends that are "computer-savvy" but are not very creative people and wouldn't know what to tell me as far as equipment is concerned besides helping me find computer hardware.

I want to spend $600 or less on a DV camera, that definitely has a 16:9 mode and hopefully a Frame (30fps or less) mode. To save money, I'm only going to upload digital footage and not video. I'm buying a consumer model camera, so are there things I can get for $200 or less, or things I can do with my limited knowledge to make it look as much like film as possible (filters, compression, lenses, whatever)?

If so, what do said devices DO EXACTLY?

The "look" I'm seeking is kind of a PDL meets Being John Malkovich meets Eraserhead. But I'm going to fuck with the visuals alot more with color correction and putting things in front of and around the lens and overlapping selfmade paintings (Brakhage style) overtop of regular footage. It's not a very good description, I know, also, I'll be shooting alot of the things outside during sunny days in fields and small towns.
I like how PDL had very colorful images while somehow remaining bleak.


What formats do most festivals accept as sent to them? I'm not going to convert it to film obviously, so what will they accept? Is this a stupid question?

I will greatly appreciate any input and will repay you all with a Pizza Party when I am happy with the things that I have and the capabilities I possess.
Sorry for the length of this post.

[Rudie Obias]

I want to spend $600 or less on a DV camera, that definitely has a 16:9 mode and hopefully a Frame (30fps or less) mode. To save money, I'm only going to upload digital footage and not video. I'm buying a consumer model camera,

my advice it to buy  camera for at least $1000 and up.  these are the mini DV cameras while are a lot better and smaller than the digital 8 cameras.  this is the camera i use.  http://www.bestbuy.com/detail.asp?e=11165493&m=82&cat=93&scat=96

so are there things I can get for $200 or less, or things I can do with my limited knowledge to make it look as much like film as possible (filters, compression, lenses, whatever)?

If so, what do said devices DO EXACTLY?

check out http://scs.student.virginia.edu/~fms-uva/professional/

What formats do most festivals accept as sent to them? I'm not going to convert it to film obviously, so what will they accept?

ntsc/vhs format.  most film festivals preview films on a regular vcr.

I will greatly appreciate any input and will repay you all with a Pizza Party when I am happy with the things that I have and the capabilities I possess.

i live in cleveland so i may take you up on that offer.  i love free pizza!

[Ghostboy]

I love your avatar, bbd...

I agree that you should spend closer to a grand on a camera. Make sure it has 3 chips; that's going to make much more of a difference than 16:9 or Movie Mode or slow shutter speed effects. In fact, I reccomend not using a camera's in-camer 16:9 effect or Movie Mode, simply because it cuts down on resolution...which makes it look more like video.

There's no real way to make video look like film, at least on the prosumer level, but you can get close (see related thread). The lighting is where it's at (whether that's natural light or simulated light is up to you...you just have to know how to use it).

That's a great page that rudieob linked to up there, be sure to check it out. I also have a few tips on filmmaking on my own site, although I need to update/add to them...www.road-dog-productions.com

[aclockworkjj]

overlapping selfmade paintings (Brakhage style) overtop of regular footage.

I find the Stan Brakhage reference outstanding!  haha,...lemme guess, in or just completed Film School?...reguardless, still a good shit!  Best of luck to ya!

[TripMcKneely]

MY best advice would be to simply stop trying to make video look like film, its just not gonna happen.  Lucas spends a shitload of money to make his movies look like films and he has yet to be successful.  So i think that trying to keep it under 600 dollars is basically out of the quesiton.  My advice would be to try and use the video-look to your advantage, like with the dogma95 films.   And you dont need to spend a shitload on a camera, if the story and the lighting is good, your golden.  Anyone here agree?

[KingBlackDeath]

thanks everyone, keep it coming.
actually, I haven't gone to any school yet. I'm afraid of the commitment and the only reason I would be going to school would be to meet people.
If nothing happens in the next year or two I might go to film school, but I'm a musician as well, so I'm torn.

one problem I have is that the film I'm almost done writing and that I'm dying to make, takes place in the late spring/early summer. So I'm trying rush around and save money but I dont think I could make it in time for  1000. I just may take your advice though and work my ass off for a few months to get a 3 chip. What's the cheapest 3 chip out there? I have horrible luck and once I made a big purchase I know my car would break down or something.

I'm not really trying to make it LOOK like film, just as close as one can get using a fairly cheap camera. I more or less meant are there any tricks or particular program or camera settings that ya'll use to improve the image quality. or if there were websites with things like lighting tips and etc.. Also, what should for 16:9 without buying something expensive?

I sort of agree with going the Dogme route, but I want to make slowly paced films mostly, and hand held dogme craziness isn't really good for that, but I love that stuff.
sorry again for the long post

[KingBlackDeath]

also, where, if at all, does it say on the description of your camera or any camera does it say if it has three chips?

I've noticed this while searching for cameras that they are vague about a few things in their descriptions.

[KingBlackDeath]

one more thing....

TRIP....Trip McKneely......You are a sexual icon!

[Ghostboy]

I'd imagine it would say on the box...I don't know, it's been so long since I bought my camera. It'll probably say 3 CCDs, though, not 3 chips. I THINK you can get a few of the smaller 3 chip cameras for under a thousand dollars now, or at least right around there.

To make your movie look more cinematic, shoot in widescreen (although as I mentioned I'd reccomend faking it in post to using the camera's 16:9). And of course pay attention to the lighting...I'm sure there are some good websites, but two really fantastic books that give you a run down of hte basics are Kris Malkiewicz's (sp?) 'Film Lighting' and 'Cinematography.' The best way to learn, of course, is to just get out there and do it.

[TripMcKneely]

........Trip Mckeely..........Trip McKneely..........

hahaha

if a camera is 3 chip, it will scream it loud and proud, there will be no ambiguity.

[aclockworkjj]

To make your movie look more cinematic, shoot in widescreen (although as I mentioned I'd reccomend faking it in post to using the camera's 16:9).

I don't know if I understand what you are saying here?  Cause what I got out of it, you are still gonna be using a 4:3 aspect ratio.  Thus, faking it (assuming you are talking about black baring it), would only shrink and compress the frame vertically.  If widescreen is what you are looking for, I would recommend shooting it in 16:9 and importing into Premiere as a 4:3 project.  Once there, take the 16:9 footage and size it down (I believe to 75% ) over a black video track.  Boom!  Black barred without losing any of the original aspect ratio.

Like, I said, sorry if I misunderstood.....

[Ghostboy]

I'm sorry, I should have said compose your shots for widescreen (if you're shooting 4:3, just use a monitor and mask off the top and bottom of the screen with tape).

To wit: I would reccomend making movies in widescreen, however you go about achieving it. I, however, support shooting in 4:3 and masking in post.