Full Frontal reviews

[Rik Sanchez]

Maybe we should put some quotations marks and a smiley face emicon :-) on our posts so people will know when we are poking fun of things. Of course we can't make Soadburger give his Xl-1s back, I'm not that extreme.

Like Ken said, he has made it harder for people to accept DV on a professional level, most people who don't know about DV will see it as proof that quality work can't be made on DV. What could have been a great boost for DV now became a huge step backwards. Just like gossip, people love talking about what's bad/wrong with something.

I once lost a video job because the guy in charge didn't like the fact that I shot on DV, he instead got a betacam crew to shoot a dance performance and the final output was to VHS so DV would have been more than okay but there was no way to get through to him. Now guys like this will see this movie as proof for their beliefs. Luckily there are not that many people like him nowadays but to those of us trying to make a living, especially those who just starting out, that one job loss can be painfull. Although we can't blame Sodaburger for all of this, he certainly is not helping matters now.

The only good that can come out of all of this is at least now DV will be a hot topic and will be discussed more, so we can all have our say to the naysayers when the time comes.

still haven't seen Bamboozled, got to check it out when I find a copy.

[Aaron Koolen]

Watched the NET trailer of bamboozled and it looked pretty good (As good as streaming media can). Can't wait to check it out myself. I need to try and get hold of some DV movies, as I haven't seen a single one.

[Doug Thompson]

Before we accept the notion that "Full Frontal" will discredit DV as an acceptable film medium, let's not forget other DV features like "Tadpole." True, it wasn't shot with an XL1S but it was shot on DV and looks pretty good on a full-sized theater screen.

Soderbergh likes to play with image and color manipulation (just look at what he did with "Traffic"). I watched "Full Frontal" more from a technical point of view and ignored the story. It was a more interesting film that way.

[Ken Tanaka]

<<<-- Originally posted by Josh Bass : Someone should explain to those critics that the footage was processed in post to make it look more assy. -->>>

Good idea. You do that.

[Josh Bass]

No thanks. They're all asses. They have no idea what they're talking about, especially the Houston' Chronicle's.

To Chorizosmells: I've heard BetaSP gets 700 lines of vertical resolution, but what does it matter unless you're displaying on an HDTV or something? Why don't people accept digital?

[Rik Sanchez]

Josh,
A lot of people here (producers) here have this betacam fixation, they think that's the only way to get good results. The won't even consider dv crews, especially independents like me, they would rather go out and get a full crew with betacams and spend twice as much money than go with a DV crew. I don't even waste my time trying to convince them. Some japanese companies seem to think super expensive video prices and betacam is the way to go.

Went to a lowrider car show this past sunday and went in to talk to the guy in charge if they had a video crew making a video for them, I saw no one shooting video at the show. The guy's expression when I asked him if he needed a video made was like how dare you even ask and I had my XL-1 with me also. He quickly told me had hired a video production company to make the video for him. I gave him my card and said thanks anyway and left. Even the photographers he had working with him all stared at me and gave me the evil eye. They seemed like they had never seen an XL-1 and I was crazy for trying to make a professional video. Anyway, at least I went in and asked, I'm sure they talked about that crazy foreigner with the weird looking camera as soon as I left.

[Joe Redifer]

Scratch off the MiniDV logo on the camera and put a BetacamSP logo on it. Prominently display that to potential clients. They will be so uninformed about video in general that they won't know the difference anyway. When they see the end results they will love it.

Did you remember to bow when before you began to ask the guy about making that video? The Japanese are real sticklers about manners and tradition. They won't like it if you come in and burp while scratching your ass before you ask to make their video. :)

[Rik Sanchez]

yeah, there's a fine line as to what's acceptable and what's not. If I had met the guy outside somewhere, it would have been totally cool if I excused myself and then quickly took a piss on a tree or on the side of a building, then came back to talk to him, of course, by then he probably would have joined me and took a piss also.

now that I think of if, that would make a funny video, I've stopped counting how many times I'm taking a walk and there is some guy pissing out in the open, day or night. 9 times out of 10 it will be a taxi driver.

But those guys are not fun to work with, they end up demanding more work that what they pay for. For now I'll by pass the DV ignorants and just stick to the enlightened ones.

[Jeff Donald]

Betacam has a resolution of 320 lines for the UVW series, 360 lines for the PVW series and about 380 for broadcast BVW series. It's simple math once you know the formula, 80 lines of resolution for every 1 MHz of bandwidth. The PVW series has 4.5 MKz of luma bandwidth. Why does Betcam SP look better than S-VHS? Two reason, much higher signal to noise ratio and betacam records the chroma (Cr and Cb) to 2 seperate tacks. S-VHS uses color under modulation.

The world is full of equipment snobs in every field. It's almost always a losing battle trying to convince them of DV's worthiness. A closed mind is a very difficult thing to change.

Jeff

[Ken Tanaka]

The trick is to sell the ENDS, not the MEANS.

[Jeff Donald]

While I've never meet you, Ken, I think you and I probably have a distinct advantage (age) that a lot of the people here don't have. I can walk into a potential client and say I've got 20 years experience and this is how we do this. The client figures I must know what I'm doing. Even if I didn't have the experience, it's assumed because of the age. It an air of confidence and authority. I show my reel and the work stands on its own. I've had a few clients and art directors question by choice of equipment over the years. I point out that betacam sp is an option but your budget will increase 20% or maybe a little more. This is based on the much costlier tape stock and increased rate for beta acquisition and digitizing an ANALOG source. I stress how old beta is and that modern digital offers many advantages. This works about 80% of the time. There are always those who resist change (fear?) or are just more comfortable with what they know and understand.

Jeff

[Ken Tanaka]

Yes, Jeff, we're probably similar in age and we may both have enough salt over the ears (or exposed skin on the roof) to lend an initial impression of authority. <g>

Although I've never worked in the film, video or broadcast industries 25 yrs in the visciously competitive institutional investment industry taught me one early lesson which I believe applies universally; you are what you seem to be, at least until your actions indicate otherwise. Young people I've interviewed and met over the years generally "seem" to be either over-confident or insecure and fearful.

As your remarks reflect, if you act like a victim you'll be treated like a victim. To get the job, whatever it may be, you must exude confidence in your capabilities without being an insufferable, arrogant ass. One of the best ways to do that is to keep your mouth shut and your eyes and ears wide open as much as possible. Hide your fears and insecurities by concentrating instead on listening to what the client is telling you verbally and non-verbally. Sit on his side of the figurative table during that initial meeting. Convey to him "Yes, I understand your needs and can help you achieve them" not "I've got cool stuff that you should pay me to use for you." Being a good listener and using your mouth mainly to ask good questions initially are keys to avoiding an immediate "No". In the case of videography, prematurely exposing your DV "means" merely gives someone an excuse to reject you. But chances are high that your gear was often not really the issue for rejection.

People, young or old, who cannot sublimate insecurities will project "victim" in any field. Certainly in the end you have to produce the goods. But you often have to trust that you'll find a way to accomplish the unfamiliar. The ultimate tyranny of the required can be the most powerful creative force to propel you to new levels of achievement, resourcefulness and creativity.

Just my thoughts for whatever they may be worth.

[Ken Tanaka]

<<<-- Originally posted by Ken Tanaka : I understand your point, Daniel. Soderbergh's use of the camera, and Canon's publicity surrounding it, has used his notoriety to shine a light onto the use possible use of prosumer-class equipment such as the XL1s. But when you actually see how grainy and poorly-lit the DV footage was you realize that the notoriety will likely be of a strongly negative nature. Indeed, several of the critics have already flatly criticized the use of DV for the film, subtley indicting the technology rather that Soderbergh for some of the film's poor quality.

So, should we -really- praise Soderbergh for using the XL1s on this film when, in fact, it has made an already steep hill of professional acceptance for DV gear even steeper? -->>>
--------------------------
Here's a classic example of my point. A quote from CNN's review of Full Frontal:

"Soderbergh shot most of "Full Frontal" on a cheap digital-video camera...."

So how much benefit did Soderbergh really deliver to aspiring filmmakers who use XL1s', PD150's or any other such camera?

------------
The full review is at:
http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/Movies/08/05/ca.s02.full.frontal.ap/index.html

[Josh Bass]

The Houston Press mentioned that he used specifically the XL1s, although I believe they actually called it the XL1 in the article.

[Rik Sanchez]

Go Ken, GO!!! I'm behind you, with some one like sodaburger who has a lot of exposure/influence in the media, he has brought on some bad press on DV.

His quote at the end, "If it ends up being a film that's more influential than successful, that's fine with me, too." was the kicker, the influence is turning outto be the kind he was not looking to give.

Another thing, if it cost less than 2 million to make and he shot it mostly on video, where did all the money go? Is there a breakdown on the costs of the film that anyone knows about?