|
New Music Video Shot With An Xl1
Hi all,
I just got done with the second video of the music videos Trilogy that i have been working on. Hoping this video will start playing on MTV, VH1, and BET soon. The video is for a Soul Artist (Tye Brown - Soul Street Records), the song is very powerful and has an amazing tone. I shot the entire video in 11 hours. Took me about 14 hours to edit, add effects, and render out everything. Basically a one man band thing. ??I hope you like and enjoy it. Any feedback is welcomed, actually please give me feedback on what you think of the video and of how its all put together. http://wafilms.com/music%20videos/tybrown.html <-- Music Video http://wafilms.com/ <-- My webpage please check it out after you are done and let me know what you think of my work. Sincerely Waheed AlQawasmi Film Director WAFILMS.COM |
Hi Waheed, you should ask one of the moderators to move your post to our DV for the Masses Board, that's where people usually present their work.
My comments on the clip: the music was nice, not my thing, but it has something relaxing, but I understand you don't want to know what I thought about the music ;-) About the clip: very nice cinematography, nice color correction, and shows that an XL1, although several years old, can still make very nice footage. Editing is very professional and good to. Camera movement, everything, nice and professional. Especially when you all did this on your own (nice to see on the set pictures too, I always love those). My only complaint would be that the substance of the clip is not that original, it's in that aspect a very 'usual' music clip, but one that's very professionally shot or at least makes a very pro impression. But I like it when clips have something surprising, something original, and I think your clip really doesn't have that. Having said that, I think 99% of the clips don't have that, so I think it's very hard too, to make an original video clip, because in essence, your just there in service of the music group. But, sincerely, very nice shot and very well edited. Congratulations! |
Thank you so much for the complement on the video. Back to the originality of the video, I agree with you. But with this video, I wanted it to look like all the stuff you see on MTV and VH1, because we are using this video to actually get a bigger investor intrested in the project. Please look at my other film work not music videos and let me know what you think. here is my webpage
WAFILMS.COM also how do you get them to move you to the DV users section??? thanx waheed |
I don't have time now to look to your webpage, at this moment I'm writing something for school, but I'll look into it later.
I think you can't move it, unless you double post it, but they don't like that here because it would get confusing. you could just email one of the moderators to move it, they will do it quickly without a problem. |
Waheed,
I really really liked the video and the artist. The film look you applied to the footage really matched the urban look I that I took from it. Great camera moves, just like the videos on BET, VH1 and some of the MTV stuff. I also checked out "B Ok". The best part of that video was the women. Peace, Jerome www.ejtmediaproductions.com |
impressed
sorry, this got posted post- haste.
|
I agree. This thread is headed into the 'DV for the Masses' section. Good to see someone still cranking out that XL-1 quality stuff.
-gb- |
impressed
heres the deal from my pov. full agreement with the opinion that this shows that even a 5+ year old video camera like the xl1 (i have one and just got an xl2) is capable of producing phenomenal results..IN THE RIGHT HANDS.
i replied just the other day to someone who was fretting/stressing over nuances btwn several of the latest/greatest cameras. my comments to him were to get any one of these remarkable tools, then GO OUT AND CAPTURE AMAZING IMAGES WITH IT. i agree that this particualr video is a box stock formula, but that was your want- so you are sucessful in your goal. if you had chose to go full on creative you would have the same, in my opinion,stunning quality imagery- as well as a fresh approach. this reinforces my belief that the best equipment in the world in the hands of the unable/uninspired is meaningless next to a basic high quality setup in the hands of those who have vision and ability. trust me, after spending the last 12+ years in medicine, i would rather be operated on by a top gun with a dull scalpel than a newly certified techie surgeon with all the latest toys. unfortunately there seems to be a lot of that going on. many peoples time would be better spent working on the concept above instead of ruminating on some individual feature of the newest technological flavor of the week. remember, these manufacturers main goal is to sell product. to do that if you already have competent equip. is to make you feel yours is somehow obsolete. sorry about the rant, but i think this is one of the most important points to keep in mind these days. the xl1 started a revolution and is still an amazing piece of equipment in 2006. |
I think the camera is even already about 8 years old, it was released in 1998 I think.
It doesn't matter, just to extra prove your point, Gregory. |
Hey all,
thanx for the complements and your feed back. You guys are all right, You have to have the following to make a great director or shooter or anything 1)you have got to have a vision and the creativity of coming up with a good product. 2)how you handel your self on a shoot and knowing how to use any kind of equipment 3)having equipment that you are comfortable with. This was my first shoot with an XL1, i shoot with more expensive cameras like a DVCPRO 700. It does not matter if you have new equipment to shoot with or not, if you dont know how to shoot your not gonna produce anything good even if you have the latest camera. Although it would have been nice for me to shoot this with like Sony HDW-F900, but its all good. The XL1 worked great. KEEP THE FEEDBACKS COMING, I WANNA HEAR WHAT YOU ALL HAVE TO SAY WAHEED ALQAWASMI WAFILMS.COM |
Nice video
I think you did a great job. Even the lip sync is pretty good!! He's a great artist and I like his sound.
But, on to you, I like what you did. Yes, it looks like other videos on TV and I think that is your point. It's very straight forward - not overly creative, but maybe this is the message you want to show. It's a very relaxing song, so you edited it in a way that reflected that....slow cuts....I like the overlapping dissolves - the panning past the photos and the artist walking the alley in opposite directions was the most dynamic effect of the shoot...well done. What post production editor and capture device are you using?? I would like to find out this because I'm in the market for one. P.S. What presets did you use to get the film look?? It looks a bit overly sharp (I would of personally knocked it down a few notches) but the tonal quality matches film pretty well. Did you have particular preset? I would like to know what they are. I'm still wondering where to put my setup levels at for the shadow detail at.....some people are telling me to -3 notches to darker, but I'm finding that the shadows are too inky...I think +1 notch from centered toward lighter shadows would look more like film. anysuggestions would be helpful. |
Dean,
Thanx for the complement. This video was ment for me to get more money into my company. Its three guys here in memphis, my self and two others that own a film company and a record company combined. So me doing this video is going to bring money into my film company eventually. We made this video like most of the stuff you see on BET, and MTV because that is what we want the video to be played on. As for the color correction and effects, I used After Effects 7.0. I do not use any preset film looks from after effects. I have my own little tricks and tweaks that i do, to give it that film look. If you notice i like the soft blown out look, you can see it on most of my work. And I cut the video on after effects. To tell you the truth, not much Post work was done to get that film look, its all in camera effects, my original footage looked pretty darn close. Regards, Waheed AlQawasmi http://wafilms.com/ |
I liked it a lot. He does indeed have a nice clean sound.
I am worried that the images (stills) you used may be proprietary and that may keep you from getting it on the air. Unless you have permission from the photographers I am wondering if this can be used anywhere? I think there is some leeway if they are reprints from Newspapers and other public medium but even then, unless you took the photos, someone is going to be holding copyright to them. I hope that doesn't kill it for you. Let us know how that part works out. I'll be following the thread. Overall, not totally original. But I understand the point you made about that and it makes some sense. I just got a bit tired of references to doors and then you see the person walking through a door, etc. I like to make subtler reference these days, or perhaps a metaphorical door of some type. if you literally translate the music into imnages, you leave the audience nothing to digest I suppose. Just a thought. You can safely make a split between what you show and what you are hearing. Just don't be distracting about it. Overall, again, mighty nice. And it is the guy behind the camera, not the camera. Thanks for sharing, Sean McHenry |
We do have premission to use the photos, and i dont think we will have problems with them. If we do i will let you guys know how it goes and how we solve it. Thanx for the feedback.
And indeed its not the camera. |
Waheed:
Very professional--amazing quality from the XL1 with the stock lens none the less. A valuable lesson for everyone here is that the equipment is not what makes a good video, it is the skill and knowledge of the cinematographer. Keep up the good work. JStan |
Jonthan,
Sorry for the delay getting back to you. I have been busy with my next music video and my next feature film. Thank you for the complement, your right its not the camera its the person behind it, its not the budget but the director behind the project. But having the good camera and the money also helps out alot. |
Hi Waheed –
Great work! Can you go into any more detail as to what you did in After Effects and ‘in camera’? Curious to know what frame rate you shot at -- and did you convert/render to progressive frames in After Effects? Basically love the film look you achieved and wondering what you did to achieve it! Thanks -- |
I'm still shooting with 2000 model XL-1 systems and getting great results too. I think you did a great job in shooting and editing but I have to be honest with you. We all know that DV is used to shoot network shows all the time but that is mostly for reality programming and I've been fortunate enough to do quite a bit of that using several different DV cameras. I really don't think this is what any of those networks are looking for though. I know that BET does air alot of videos shot with DV on Uncut but your content is certainly superior to that crap. Although my cameras have actually shot a network show and I have some content that looks really good too, I know that it's not network level. I hope that someone hasn't told you these things trying to sell you on something that may not happen. You are definitely on the right path so keep up the good work! I think the expansion of cable networks and internet broadcasting is going to make plenty of room for independent producers like us.
Network Show - XL-1 www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=42385 |
Quote:
Again, the work is great -- it would still be great even if it were shot on VHS...! |
Quote:
|
OK here are my answers: ahahha
James Binder: shot the thing on normal frame rate 29.97. The original footage did not look much far off from the final product. Everything was done in camera, except the WALL WALK where he was walking throught the pictures. Also I did my color correction through AE. My film look was not through a plugin or anything like that from AE, i have my own little tricks to make stuff look more filmmatic, but video is still video. If you need more info let me know. CHEERS!!! Ok the other JAMES: I appreciate your concern about what the channels play and dont play, but to tell you the truth the channels like the programers for MTV, and BET dont have control on what to play on the channel, the people that kinda make the money have deals lets say like with RCA, MOTOWN, and ETC, they bring in the artist and the artist manager who hires out the PR agency to do the videos and stuff go shoot what ever they want then take it to MTV. And as long as it does not break any FCC rules they really dont give a crap of what the stuff looks like. By the way 80% of the shows on BET is shot DV. This video i made for this artist actually helped that record label that has him signed to get the entire project sold to a big distributor, not sure which distribution company bought it. But the project is sold so its up to the record label to play the video, plus i am contracted to do the next 5 music videos for that artist, and I also own a part of that record lable so to tell you the truth I am not concerned about it being played on MTV or any where at all. I am making my money through the artist. Also its not like I care about having more air time, I have like 11 Emmy awards for my work in TV. hahahha so let me know if you have any more questions as well CHEERS TO YOU ALL!!!!!! |
Emmys or not, you don't even have to work in this industry to know that what you said about networks not having control of content is incorrect. Can you please provide a few examples of what your Emmys are for? Emmys have a wide range of coverage. I did say that I was aware of primetime reality shows being shot on DV for these networks because I have shot a few of them myself. Could you also list a few music videos aired in primetime that are shot entirely on DV on any of these networks? Neither you nor Mr. Binder have provided examples to back up your claims. I don't know who you have been talking to but yes, the networks DO care very much what the content looks like and yes, they, not record companies, ultimately decide what does and does not air on their network. Why do you think that Uncut is only shown at 2 a.m.? Because it's absolutely filthy and it's amateur hour, that's why. Record companies only control what their artists produce and if MTV, VH1 or BET, etc. say they are not interested for whatever reason, then...... it doesn't air! It also doesn't matter if a video has a million dollar budget and is shot on 35mm. If the artist isn't a top seller or isn't approved by the network for whatever reason, it's not going to air on that network.
If you are making money through that artist, you should care a whole lot about whether the videos air and where they air for maximum exposure and more record sales so you can get paid to make all of those videos you spoke of. Judging by the statements you have made, you sound as though that you may just be starting out in this area and are a bit naive and/or overzealous about the process. Just because they say 5 more videos will be made doesn't mean that they will and if they are it doesn't mean that you will be paid for them. There are plenty of labels and artists with far more resources and money than you that fail because of content that is just not selling and/or bad management. I hope that you and this artist are successful and I will keep a lookout for him and your videos airing on these networks. Please let us know what the airtimes and dates will be and on what networks for each of the 5 new videos and no matter what, please post each new video in this thread. Like I said, your work looks really good but I would still like for you to post some examples of your Emmy winnings and some mainstream artists whose videos are shot entirely on DV and air in primetime on these major networks and not on local affilliates or cable. Thanks. |
James: Did you even read what i said, I did not say that the network has no control. I said that the programers have no control, the guys high up in the NETWORK make the decision, and they are more concerned about how to make money out of the videos ok.
ALSO I DID SAY AND I QUOTE: And as long as it does not break any FCC rules they really dont give a crap of what the stuff looks like. SO THAT ANSWERS YOUR RANT ABOUT THE UNCUT STUFF. OK AND MY VIDEO HAS NOTHING OF THAT CONTENT IN IT. I DONT EVEN KNOW WHY YOU BROUGHT THAT UP. ok as for my EMMY awards go to my webpage and check out the ABOUT section and you can read them. I dont have time to write them up here. go to WAFILMS.COM and the reason i am not concierned if this perticular version of the video airs or not is because i know that i secured a Record deal in the music side of it and we are gonna have money to do whatever we want with the video, we are extremly happy with it but if it does not make the cut we will go back and reshoot it who cares dude, take it easy. CHEERS!!!!!!! PS: I KNOW THAT I AM 19YRS OLD BUT MY WORK STARTED PLAYING ON LOCAL TV STARTING FROM AGE 15, I DIRECTED NUMEROUS TV SHOWS THAT MADE ITS WAY ON LOCAL TV. AND MANY REPORTS THAT MADE ITS WAY TO FOX AND NBC. AND I DO MAKE A VERY COMFORTABLE LIVING WORKING IN TV AND FILM. |
I am going to proceed with caution here because I do not want to seem like I am intentionally trying to run you down. I think it's clear that I'm not because I already said that your video was very well done, not that you need my approval.
Now what do you think programmers do? They decide what airs and doesn't air. They do ultimately answer to the executives for a final word if that's the needed but I would think that they are programmers are decision makers and that's why they are called programmers. The FCC allows all kinds of crap on the air but that is all a matter of opinion. And yes, the networks do care very much what goes over the air as far as content and what it is shot on, that's why they have broadcast engineers to monitor all of the signals and levels. I mentioned BET and Uncut because that's the only video network and show that I know of that allows videos to air that have been shot entirely on DV. Your work is far superior to that crap for sure. Your Emmy awards are definitely worthy achievements but they are just as I suspected, from local markets only and not for huge mainstream projects. They certainly won't hurt your advancement but are not necessarily going to get you top paying jobs where you don't have the proven experience, Emmys or not. As far as your secured record deal, only you know the details of that and it remains to be seen if that will materialize and I hope it does. But, don't be surprised if it doesn't, especially with 5 videos to follow. I would have a check in my hand with half down on each project and wouldn't shoot one frame until each check cleared. I started at a very young age myself and produced, directed, shot and edited my first reality show for cable when I was 22 and have since moved on to network level shows. As far as you making a comfortable living doing what you do, that is open to interpretation. In other words, your idea of comfortable may be very different from mine or others. Your young age explains why you are a bit naive with how this industry works and I was no exception when I first started. I went through it and so will countless others. You have alot to learn about how it all works and you will because you are far ahead. I'm still learning new things about this insane industry we work in. I think if you keep up the good work you will definitely go somewhere. Good luck. I think that when you make claims you need to be able to back them up, that's all. P.S. You still haven't mentioned ANY major artist and/or video that airs on MTV, VH1 or BET in primetime, much less at all. P.S. #2 Please post ALL subsequent videos that you produce for this artist. |
I have to chime in...
I have to be honest... the video is just okay. It reminds me of the music videos that our local public access channels are jam-packed with late at night. I watched this video twice and it just has an amateur feel to it. The concept and picture quality are fine... I'm talking about the technical execution and editing (including color correction). It just has a homemade feel.
The picture from the camera is great - I agree with that. The concept is fine, too, considering this guy probably has no budget. Please don't get me wrong - it's not at all bad - I just wouldn't confuse this with a professional video. I just don't think it's "pro". It's probably wrong of me to compare this to a pro video, but other people were. |
Well, it's been a week and neither James Binder nor Waheed have yet listed any mainstream artists or videos that are shot entirely on DV and air in primetime on ANY of the music channels to back up their claims.
|
in general - i liked the music video ..
i looked at your site ... i usually look at about 50-60 reels a month. now i got to say that if the demo reel that you have posted on your site came across my desk ! it would be in the NO pile. i find the reel very uneven. i usually figure that the worst scene- section of a sample reel is the BEST that i will get for my $$$ ... IMO redo your sample reel ... there are sections that are very good and other sections that are so-so .. SO-So doesn't make it ... from viewing your site you have the material for a much better reel. |
I liked it. It was well done and brought me into the song. Yes it had that MTV feel but is that a bad thing??? Check you bank account against thiers'. I would trade that in a heart beat. Good work man keep it up.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Corporate feel? I still don't get it. How is this video compared to a corporate video?
Quote:
Quote:
|
OK you don't get it. "J taking the bait." It has nothing to do with corporate video. I felt it has that MTV (CORPORATE FEEL) it was a well done piece. (just my opinion) As far as trade bank accounts with a MTV corporate executive???? I would trade mine for most of theirs. (I would guess that most of them have more money than me) You either get this, are baiting me, or really are daft.
Quote:
|
Okay, I'm going to take the word corporate out because it is totally irrelevant and now I totally get it! You were just not speaking clearly, spelling, punctuating (not making executive's possessive) or using correct articles (using a instead of an executive's) correctly. Those small things change the way it reads. The word for in for an executive's is what threw me. You meant as compared to an executive's account. We all said he did a good job, just not network level or quality. Now I meant what you know.
|
I now one video shot on DV and on air @ MTV: Fatboy Slim; Praise you, directed by Spike Jonze.. ;-) There certainly are more, but it slipped my mind.
|
Finally! Somebody made some effort. Was that on MTV in America?
|
yes it was
|
Praise you was on MTV just about every hour in 1999/2000. BTW Waheed, good stuff on your site, but i agree with Don, your reel should reflect more of the newer (better produced?) projects on your site. Maybe even shorten it down a bit.
|
Quote:
Gregg Therieau GTV Productions www.gtvproductions.com |
WoW, what an extensive conversation going on here. I have been gone for the past couple of weeks working on my next music video and my next movie script, sorry I was just really busy.
I have done some research JAMES, and the video stated in the reply before, Fatboy Slim; Praise you, directed by Spike Jonze was shot. I will come back with some more for you once I have more time, but the thing is that it is hard to believe that MTV would not play it because it was shot on DV, if it looks good then they play it. Not just talking about my video just any video, also this technology has been out for a while and I think in that period of time they have had to play some music video that was shot on DV. ALSO Quote:
As I said I will try to get back soon and give you more examples, but I am extremly busy and don't have much time to waste. |
It looks great. The videos do look like video and not film. Perhaps it looks better uncompressed.
You've definately accomplished what you set out to do. As for me, being the MTV generation, I could see the clips on Mtv. The music wasn't bad, and it is playable. However, I don't think it will play often. MTV and other networks play videos that are hits and no matter how well a singer does or how well a video is produced, they will not constantly air something no one will care for. Your video will be a hit if it can bring interest into the singer or group or if the group has grown in popularity. You've got the group a foot into the industry if it's played, it's up to the singers to make the rest happen. Road shows. Just look at Piddy (my own name for him), other wise known as P Daddy, P Diddy, etc...He had the show on MTV to create the next hot rap group. It didn't happen. They were a commercial failure, even with all that free advertising. You're doing great, keep it up, its more than I could ever hope to accomplish. P.S. HDV music videos by Nicholas Bartleet, a member here on DVinfo, you might want to take a look at. These music videos look great and shot with a FX-1 camcorder not the Z1U. Also, take a look at the short movie clip "The Riddle" which was shot with a Cannon XL camera. This looks really nice. P.P.S. If the Presidents of The United States Of America can release a music video, all shot on camera phones, there is room for professionaly shot music videos on DV. P.U.S.A, great performers, got to see them for their last show in Seattle. Of course, there back again? Musicians never retire, they just take a long sabbatical till they need money. :) |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:20 PM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network