I have a script! ...now what?

[Terry Lee]

Originally Posted by Steve House

The biggest problem with any writing, scripts included, is not adding things to the piece but figuring out what to take away. Polishing is a process of removing the superfluous in order to strengthen the essential.

Yes sir, well noted. I have in mind a few writers who will help me thin out the script if need be as well as sharpen.

[Terry Lee]

Originally Posted by Andy Graham

I wasn't actually in it myself, i was the dop, i filmed it and edited it.

I think what your reffering to is the day for night filter i used, well its meant to be more like late evening. Its been re edited since then (minor changes).

I always shoot safe which means i get a good quality un filtered image and do all my correction in post so its non destructive.

I shot it on the jvc hd100 in HDV25p mode.

thanks for watching it.

Andy.

Yea, I think that is what it is...were you going for more of a "film" look? I enjoyed the shots in the woods with the ferns, those were awesome but the movement of everything seamed a little faster than I anticipated for a 25p frame rate.. Do you think that has to do with the shutter speed you had it set to? Or is that as close as we can get with digital cameras before we must actually use film? (Assuming you were going for the film look..)

Over all it was awesome! I honestly want to see the finished product! The sequence of shots is what set it off. The tracking shot in the beginning through the forest where it stopped with one character hiding behind a tree was good as well as the shot at the end of the civilian’s eyes when being questioned. That shot emphasized instilled fear which was a good touch.

[Sean Evans]

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

OK for a quick play around, but if you want to have short that's does anywhere you need a really sharp script. You can get other people to DP and record sound.

If the goal is to maintain creative control, you have to produce it yourself. I can't imagine you could recruit anyone worth their salt to work on a project, or raise cash to pay them, if you don't have at least a modicum of experience in all aspects of the process.

It's only a "play around" if you approach it as one. The goal should be quick hard lessons on how to actually get something completed. If you spend weeks and weeks writing and rewriting half a dozen pages, aren't we just stuck right where the original poster is now? Another stack of paper waiting for someone else to recognize the brilliance? It's much easier to buckle down and shoot something you're not terribly invested in for a first go. Otherwise, you're back to being afraid of "wasting" the writing with a poor production.

[Andy Graham]

Thanks for the comments Terry im glad you liked it.

I think with the way cameras are progressing the gap between film and digital is gonna shrink dramatically. The RED camera is an amazing piece of technology and i couldn't tell the diffirence when i watched "jumper"

In my opinion the "film look" is simply progressive scan, and i think the hd100 in hdv25p mode is one of the nicest looking progressive cameras.....although i hate hdv as a formatte because its murder to work with.

BTW im glad you picked out the shot of the civilians eyes cause for me that was the pivital part of the whole thing, i was so worried that we got an actor that couldn't deliver the goods but Peter was great http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1280176/

Andy.

[Terry Lee]

Originally Posted by Andy Graham

In my opinion the "film look" is simply progressive scan, and i think the hd100 in hdv25p mode is one of the nicest looking progressive cameras.....although i hate hdv as a formatte because its murder to work with.

Oh its hard to work with hdv? Do you mind me asking what about it is difficult? I plan on buying the HD200u...

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Sean Evans

If the goal is to maintain creative control, you have to produce it yourself. I can't imagine you could recruit anyone worth their salt to work on a project, or raise cash to pay them, if you don't have at least a modicum of experience in all aspects of the process.

It's only a "play around" if you approach it as one. The goal should be quick hard lessons on how to actually get something completed. If you spend weeks and weeks writing and rewriting half a dozen pages, aren't we just stuck right where the original poster is now? Another stack of paper waiting for someone else to recognize the brilliance? It's much easier to buckle down and shoot something you're not terribly invested in for a first go. Otherwise, you're back to being afraid of "wasting" the writing with a poor production.

No, assuming you've got a good story and a good script, quite a few people will want to work on it. However, you do have to learn the skills of a producer, or team up with someone who wishes to go down that path and sees what's in the story.

There are crew people starting out in the industry who wish to practise their skills and shorts are a good place to do it. Many of them are happy to take a smart, talented writer who wishes to direct, who is willing to learn and has done their homework (i.e. been reading various books on filmmaking/production, so they know the questions to ask) in under their wing and give guidance. These are usually freebies. Filmmaking is a collaborative process and this isn't that unusual.

You can do technical exercises, which are fine, but writing and directing a good short is a difficult business and requires creative application. All the successful, award winning shorts that I know of have had weeks of work in their scripts.

People can go out shooting material to learn the mechanical processes, but they'll have to apply the scripting process in order to really progress. In some ways, as a director, you're better knowing the editing than the camera end.

[Andy Graham]

There is a whole load of science behind HDV, if you google it or search this forum youl'll find it.

What all this means is that when using final cut pro you get problems during the capture process, if final cut encounters a timecode break or drop out it creates a new clip. It takes the computer around 1-4 seconds to re aquire the image which means your loosing 1-4 seconds of your footage and thats a real pain if it does it in the middle of an actors dialogue or your dolly shot.

Although iv not been keeping up to date in the pro hd room i think it still hasn't been fixed by apple. And iv not updated my software in a long time.

I don't want to put you off the camera cause the image is superb. To minimise this problem you can use proper HDV tapes and remember to roll the camera for 10 sec before and after "action" is called.

go and rent this film http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0857376/ cause it was shot entirely on the HD100, thats another bit of advice.......watch movies, as many as you can cram into your personal time. you need t know whats out there and to watch others. Iv seen so many films i wouldn't know where to start if someone asked me to list them.......the french are twisted by the way! watch some of their stuff.

Andy.

[Terry Lee]

Originally Posted by Andy Graham

go and rent this film http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0857376/ cause it was shot entirely on the HD100, thats another bit of advice.......watch movies, as many as you can cram into your personal time. you need t know whats out there and to watch others. Iv seen so many films i wouldn't know where to start if someone asked me to list them.......the french are twisted by the way! watch some of their stuff.

Andy.

That was shot on the HD100? Wow, the camera is capable of doing more than I thought. I honestly cannot tell it from film. I looked it up on youtube btw.. but I will still go rent it.

About French films...I saw one a year ago about like some underground sex cult...it was insane. Some guy's face gets smashed with a fire extinguisher and they show the entire thing.

Give me a list of films and I'll go rent em!

[Andy Graham]

Originally Posted by Terry Lee

About French films...I saw one a year ago about like some underground sex cult...it was insane. Some guy's face gets smashed with a fire extinguisher and they show the entire thing.

Man i'm impressed, the film was called "irreversible" by Gaspar Noe and its one of the films i had in mind.

lot of the films i watch are so obscure i wouldn't even know where to direct you to get them. They come through other filmmaker friends.

Off the top of my head i would recommend

"feast" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0426459/ an american film that i don't think was ever released over here . Ithought this film was hillarious.

As mentioned before "five across the eyes" shot for absolutely buttons (£2000) starts bad but bare with it cause by the end you'll be shouting at the screen about what they should do......at least i was. its not a good film but by the end it developes character.

"Pans Labyrinth" a bit more mainstream but one of my favourate films

"itchi the killer" insane film http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0296042/

"shutter" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0440803/ the origional one not the re make.

"the exorcism of emily rose" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0404032/ a film that i love......... and then rent "Requiem" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0454931/ which is a German film about the same story. Its a good exorcise to see the different ways other filmmakers and countries deal with the same story.

Some of the more obscure ones i can't remember the names of so ill post back when i talk to my Director friend who i'm picking up today to work on our script.

Andy.

[Terry Lee]

alright awesome, thanks! I'll go see if I can find them.

My favorite movies are generally historically bassed movies like Breaveheart, 300, Troy..etc. I have just as big of a history channel, National Geographic collection as I do anything else.

For practice, I printed off the script for Robin Hood - The prince of Thives. I find that they cut out alot of the movie to make it fit within a reasonable time frame.

Hey BTW, since you work with the HD100, what would you suggest for a good matte box for my HD200, Chrosziel? what specs if so..

[Andy Graham]

Originally Posted by Terry Lee

Hey BTW, since you work with the HD100, what would you suggest for a good matte box for my HD200, Chrosziel? what specs if so..

I just bought a great little matte box recently. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/UNIVERSAL-BAR-...742.m153.l1262

superb bit of kit for not much money considering the chrosziel is about a grand. it fits like a glove and is just the right size (i.e its not bigger than the camera like some others iv seen)

Andy.

[Terry Lee]

awesome..now that looks like a good matte box for the price range i'm looking for.

any suggestions for a follow focus? well let me ask you this. The only reason I think I need a damn follow focus is because HD is of such a high resolution everyone will notice when my shot is out of focus. So my reasoning behind it is if I want crisp in focus shots, I will need a follow focus. But is that even a good reason to spend almost a grand on one?

[Andy Graham]

The follow focus won't get your shots any more in focus than if you just turned the focus ring with your hand as normal. The reason to use a follow focus is (at least in the digital realm) for focus pulls, thats when you have an actor in the foreground and an actor in the background and you switch focus from one to the other. In this case you focus on one actor and mark the ring on the follow focus and then focus on the other actor and do the same, then a focus puller can move btween each mark and you know it will be in focus.

If i were you id find one at a similar price to the mattebox, there are many of them around, the same company on ebay that does the mattebox also does a follow focus. Be carefull though, look at the pictures to se what side the gear is on, i had trouble fitting mine and i ended up doing a bit of diy modification to the base on the rail system.

i wouldn't spend a grand on it. use the money to buy other things like a good mic, the sennheisser ME66 is a half decent boom mic.

Andy.

[Terry Lee]

Originally Posted by Andy Graham

The follow focus won't get your shots any more in focus than if you just turned the focus ring with your hand as normal. The reason to use a follow focus is (at least in the digital realm) for focus pulls, thats when you have an actor in the foreground and an actor in the background and you switch focus from one to the other. In this case you focus on one actor and mark the ring on the follow focus and then focus on the other actor and do the same, then a focus puller can move btween each mark and you know it will be in focus.

Ohhh alright, so the knob is turned toward the camera man so that he has easier access to the focus ring...Well thats odd, I thought that is what the letus35 was built to do. From my understanding, the zoom lenses on the cameras had such a wide appeture (I think...) that you couldn't really get good control of the DOF. So you'd need something like the letus35 or mini35 for digital film. But i'm probably absolutely wrong on that haha.

i wouldn't spend a grand on it. use the money to buy other things like a good mic, the sennheisser ME66 is a half decent boom mic.

Yea, I plan on getting a DAT recorder with a boom mic...that will be thrown in with everything as well. I am sort of taking it step by step still. Making sure I know EVERYTHING about each little aspect of the equipment. I remember back when I first started posting in this forum you were one of the first to help me with this stuff. Btw, how did the reconstructions in caithness turn out?

[Andy Graham]

Hey id forgotten all about that, that job never went ahead.....not sure what happened with it. Good memory though

The follow focus is just an add on to the lens so that the focus puller can easily control the focus ring. With film it has a very shallow depth of field which means not much room for the actor to move before he is out of focus and so they have a professional focus puller that controls the focus leaving the camera operator to do his job.

The mini35 and letus35 are designed to put the exact same field of view as a 35mm film camera on to the CCD chips, this coupled with film lenses gives you the same depth of field as a film camera, which also brings the problems of a film camera i.e shallow depth of field and not much room to move.

I'v never used a lens adapter before so im limited in what i can tell you about them, i just know id be very reluctant to use one unless i had a lot of time with one to test it out. They used the stock lens when they shot "Gabriel"

Normally i keep it safe with the stock lens and if i want shallow depth of field i use the telly photo end of the lens and get as far back from the actor as i can (like the focus pull in my promo)

Andy.

BTW if your ever stuck during production drop me an email through my public profile and i'll do my best to help you out.