Category: Skid Row

09Jul

Competition is good: Life after Red

Posted in 4k, arri, Cameras, DSLR gear, epic, Gear, HDSLR, michael sutton, Mike Sutton, mns1974, red, resolution, S35, Skid Row, sony, video dslr, wide open camera, woc | Leave a comment

Moore’s law is the observation that over the history of computing hardware, the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles approximately every two years.  I think this law has changed for our market.  At least when it comes to camera technology.  Back in 2007 the Red One camera was released.  For most of us (who did not finance or were not personal friends of Jim Jannard) didn’t actually get the camera into our hands till 2008.  At that time many were still transitioning into HD via Panasonic P2 and Sony SxS based camcorders.  4K was a novelty.  Something only filmmakers would consider using. However most of the film makers I knew in 2008 (including myself) were shooting on S16 and 35mm film.  A lot of the appeal of the Red One was that it had a S35 size sensor. Until that point on the Panavision Genesis, Sony F35, Dalsa Origin and Arri D20 had sensors that size. All were expensive to rent and ownership was out of the question for almost all but rental houses. Around the same time frame the Canon 5D Mark II was released and affordable HD video with a large sensor was all the rage.  Not many people were interested in a $16,000 plus 4K camera when they could shoot 1080p with a Full frame DSLR for under four thousand dollars.  The Canon 5D Mark II was pretty much responsible for killing off the depth of field adapter market as well.  You could get that shallow look and the camera for the price of some of the adapter kits on the market. To be honest at that time so many people were vested in P2, SxS and HDV that it was not practical to invest in a camera that required a completely new way of working.  The costs associated with workflows were too high even for many film producers.  You needed a lot more video storage, there was audio issues with the camera, you needed a very fast workstation, there wasn’t many editing solutions that were affordable, etc, etc, etc.  Everyone I knew that owned a Red One or had used it, including myself, ended up dumping down to a 1080p deliverable  in the end.

Jump to 2010.  The Sony F3 Super 35 Digital Cinema camera comes to market.  The camera is 1080p but does S-Log and has 4:4:4 output for under $16,000.  The camera is a huge success and thousands are sold.  This is also true with every other S35 Digital Cinema camera that comes to market.  The FS100, the C300, and FS700 etc are all selling very well.  It is interesting since the Red Scarlet was released around the same time as the C300.  Interesting in that the Scarlet shoots 4K and the C300 and F3 do not. Yet the two sell in numbers that the Scarlet cannot even compete with.  If 4K is better then why buy a 1080p output camera?  Workflow, highlight handling, ISO, hardware requirements and deliverable. These are all deficiency’s I see in Red and are the most commented to me on shoots, and in consult sessions. In the end its about what its viewed on.  You can shoot 4K for a web video if you want to but 1080p does a fine job. The main benefit of Red of course is recording in Raw. Mind you Arri will have a 4K RAW camera and the C500 will output 4K RAW as well.   If you have the storage, a Red Rocket card (if your a Epic / Scarlet user) and time, you can yield beautiful results which is great for VFX work, feature work, etc.  These require a lot of resources but if you have them at your disposal it is worth it.

What Red needs to do now is focus on their weaknesses rather than continuing to out res everyone.  Resolution only goes so far and like Moore’s law there is an apex eventually (human cognitive resolution on average is limited to around 330ppi) .  Also when you use a Bayer pattern and you de-bayer in the end up loosing a portion of the true resolution you started with.  Maybe its Red’s goal to double up to 8K so in the end you have a true 6K output to work with?   The only problem with that is  that if you increase resolution you also potentially increase moire opportunity depending on the methods used.  Most all high res cameras have a OPL filter (optical low pass filter) on the sensor that basically softens the image.  Graeme at Red claims this is not the issue with Red and they do not need to add a stronger OLP filter as the pixel size remains the same.  Fair enough, but not all companies follow the same practices and I will have to take his word for it.  Regardless of this, resolution does have a cap with the human eye and the brains ability to process that image.  So while the argument for resolution not adding moire may be true, it still doesn’t change the fact of cognitive resolution by humans which means no benefit to the user in the end.   Its best to just avoid Bayer all together or find better ways to arrange patterns to incorporate more green which I think is what most companies are focusing on.  Canon C500, Sony F65 both do not use a standard Bayer pattern and therefore can retain more of their native resolution (not all of it as they are still Bayer pattern but have more green values) .  The Arri Alexa starts with a sensor which is much larger than 1920×1080 knowing that the De-Bayer will yield a nice 2K/1080P output. Ideally in the future 4K versions of cameras coming out should have a goal of Bayer free 4K output with a 1080p output option.

So the rush is on to come out with 4K cameras that will output a nice usable true 1080p/2K deliverable for 90% of the market we are in and a nice 4K output for the feature film market.  Canon, Sony, Arri and others are going full steam ahead with plans to accomplish this without requiring proprietary software and massive amounts of storage.

Red owned the 4K market.  Some would arguably say they created it.  Those of us who have had the opportunity to have used the Dalsa Origin (now defunct and sold to Teledyne), know this isn’t the case.  Red did not create 4K but it absolutely started the ball rolling getting 4K marketed properly.  Dalsa couldn’t have done what Red did.  Sony, Canon and Arri probably still consider 1080p as a standard for highend delivery. Red has had a lock on the market for a while in ultra high resolution Digital Cinema.  That of course is changing.  Its changing fast.  Moore’s Law is in full effect.  Three big company’s are hard at work getting their 4K cameras ready for NAB 2013 announcements.  All three have something Red currently does not deliver on.  There is also a growing amount of contempt in the Red community with business practices, policies, attitudes, etc. I won’t talk about specifics here for fear that Jared Abrams will ban me from the forum (joke).

The Scarlet was a good start but its marketing was dishonest.  This was a camera that was to be originally 3K for $3K, then it was to be 4K at  $10,000.  When all was said in done I think every Scarlet owner I know (and there is a lot, due to ideological pie in the sky ideas of renting it out etc) has spent at least $20k to properly outfit their camera.  Many of them are in the process of selling or have sold their camera to trade up / saving up for an Epic, Alexa, C500 or EOS-1D C.  Others are keeping their Scarlet and using it to shoot video with 1080p deliverables. Mind you you have to outfit any camera you get. The difference is some are more practical than others and hidden costs like needing a Red Rocket card (to be effective with delivery time frames, etc), proprietary SSDs, modules, docking stations, a computer with enough horsepower and a good GPU, all cost money.  Lots of it.  I also know a lot of C300 and F3 owners.  Most of these guys and girls are constantly working.  Almost all of them like the fact that the codecs in the camera are reasonable in regards to storage and that the cards are inexpensive.  Another point of interest and something I noticed is that many of them did not buy a whole new workstation to post with there new cameras.  They used what they had.  Archiving R3D files take up a lot of space.  Mind you it will depend on what Sony, Arri and Canon end up using for a codec but I am sure it will be well thought out and fairly space conservative.

The best part of Arri, Sony, Canon and others bringing real 4K competitive cameras to market is that it will make Red make changes.  Just as Red forced change in the industry by setting the bar higher, these other companies are going to force change on Red to improve its products and the way its deals with its customers.  I will not get into the details of why many Red users are unhappy as I think we have all heard the stories or know people personally who have been affected.  Sony will never deny you support or ban you if you criticize them.  Canon would never go on a tirade slamming everyone else in the business.  Arri will not preach 4K if there camera really only outputs 2K.  There is a lot of change that needs to happen.  Jim Jannard asked for competition and now he will have it.  Hopefully not to the detriment of the company.  I personally like using the Epic (as long as I have enough lights).  I hope this competition makes everyone better industry players.  I hope it opens up more products and makes them available to more levels of the market.

Sony, Canon, Panasonic, Arri and others need 4K and Red needs an attitude adjustment.  The ride is over. The puck has been dropped.  Game on. Ready for fanboy attack mode as always.

Mike Sutton

Follow me on Twitter: MNS1974

p.s. Note of disclosure.  I use and like: Arri, Vision Research, Fastec, Photron, Red, Silicon Imaging, Aaton, Weiscam, P+S Technik, Sony and Canon

p.s.s there is a very defensive group on www.reduser.net discussing this post.  Most clearly have not read the core context and do not seem to get that we all want a better camera and a better camera company.  Competition helps this on all fronts.  That is the point.

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMichael Sutton

04Jul

Tools to help your project be successful.

Posted in DSLR gear, Gear, HDSLR, michael sutton, Mike Sutton, mns1974, Skid Row, video dslr, wide open camera | Leave a comment

What to write about.  Its the day before Independence day.  Everyone has left work early, is “out sick”, or are on vacation.  I could have bailed on this but why?  There is plenty of things going on.  So I decided I would talk a bit about opportunity.  Specifically Kickstarter and IndeGoGo.  These are great tools for an artist, designer, etc to raise money to fund their project.  Usually in the past we needed to find a rich dentist who wanted his actress daughter to be in a film and in exchange he would give you $10,000 and get a useless points on the back end.  Points that legally you could not promise or deliver on if you were lucky enough to sell your film.  You would go do the friends and family route and try to raise as much money as you could to make your “masterpiece” get made.  This process often involved asking for free film stock, getting processing deals via a lesser grade lab, etc.

For designers of camera accessories, etc you used to have to either come up with the scratch yourself, partner with a machine shop or get an angel investor to pony up the bills. Enter kickstarter and indie go-go, two perfect tools to get your project off the ground.  Times have definitely changed and in this case for the better.

I have funded a few projects on both of these fundraising sites.  I think the biggest campaign I have put money into so far has been Carson Garner’s ( @F9photo ) Snow + Guardians .  Not only did the film look great, but the campaign was executed nicely.  The prizes were a big part of the finance push and the value to investors was clear and concise.  The prizes I won were a custom @kesslercrane Stealth slider mini with custom engraving and a nice mug.  The prize was worth more than I paid for it but to be honest I already had two of them and it was really about helping get this film funded.  I also funded @goforjared The Board of Education and @robimbs Game Changers.  All great looking projects who leveraged social media and had heart and genuine interest behind their films.

Now I have not personally used kickstarter for any projects of my own but am considering it for a idea I have for a new camera support accessory.   I have already made the product and put it in the hands of industry pro’s so I know that it works and fills a void which it was intended to do.  So although this post is a bit self serving I plan to launch a kickstarter campaign in a week or so, so that I can offer a product a limited amount of people have been able to utilize.  I think its probably the best way to get an idea out there be it a product, a project, etc.

Wish me luck and stay tuned to Wide Open Camera for news and updates.

Mike Sutton

Follow me on Twitter: MNS1974

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMichael Sutton

25Jun

Gear is not a bad four letter word: The story vs gear argument

Posted in DSLR gear, Gear, HDSLR, michael sutton, Mike Sutton, mns1974, Skid Row, video dslr, wide open camera, woc | Leave a comment

Story vs Gear

I like to talk tech.  Its something I have always done.  I used to take cameras apart and put them back together without leftover screws.  I learned every camera manual that was available on S16 and 35mm while others were reading On Golden Pond, The Outsiders, etc.  So tech is ingrained in my brain.  I have always been a mechanically inclined person.  Engineering has a place in my heart and head.  Jump to now where things have changed and there is more gear than every before in our industry.  More offerings of camera support, cameras, lenses, accessories etc.  We used to have two follow focus options in the 90′s.  Arri or Chrosziel were your choices.  We how have many like the ones mentioned plus Red Rock Micro, Zacuto, Movcam, D-Focus, Ikan, O’Connor, CaVision, Letus, etc.  You get my point.  There is approximately twenty companies for every one that there was.  This means lots of choice and lots to talk about.

Now I think we are all wise enough in this business to know that story is paramount in any traditional narrative film.  That doesn’t really need to be debated because of the vary definition of the word Narrative which describes a sequence of fictional or non-fictional events.  The word is also a synonym for story.  However we are a little more cleaver and creative that surface words and ideologies that define what a narrative should entail. Also, not all films have to have a story.  This upsets people sometimes and usually its from an audience that is accustomed to how Hollywood films and the studio system does business. An experimental film does not require a sequence of events that come to a fruitful conclusion or standard arc structures.  Doesn’t mean its going to be any good or that it will leave an audience satisfied but that’s not the creators problem.  They are just making something visual.  A good example of this is Tom Lowe’s TimeScapes.  This is a 4K film that consists of a fair amount of time-lapse and highspeed shooting and presents itself as a work of art which relies on the viewer to make their own assessments and evaluations on what the message is or if there even is one.  Its a great film, and I happen to have enjoyed it so I purchased it.  I have heard comments from others that they didn’t get the story or that the film was just a pile of imagery and aural stimulation.  Its whatever you want it to be and if you go into it with a preconceived notion of a traditional movie, it may not be your cup of tea.  True the film isn’t for everyone, but what it is without question, a beautifully shot work of art.

So story is paramount if that is your goal and expectation.  Shooting something without a clear and cut plot line does not lower its cache or value because someone else doesn’t get it or it breaks conventions.  It doesn’t make the film a camera test or other comments I have heard.  A painting doesn’t need a backstory.  A song doesn’t have to rhyme.  Your film doesn’t need to appease all or anyone but yourself.  Yes you will limit your audience.  Yes you will get flack from those who can only think in method.  So what!  Make what you want.

The gear argument always seems to come up when something new comes out. Its almost always tied to resolution, dynamic range, output capability, etc.  This will never go away. People in the DP end of this business (especially myself) love gear. We can talk about it all day. Pros and cons, feature sets, whats better about camera X vs camera Y, etc.   Every-time this happens however someone drops the “its about story not gear” comment.  We have all heard it and witnessed it.  Its like a bomb dropping that is supposed to make you feel dumb for talking tech.  Most of the time we are not however talking about story.  You will never see some writers on twitter getting a “its about the gear comment”.  We all know why that is the case but its interesting.  Sure its about the story if we are talking about making a narrative traditional film.  To be honest, there have been many films that had a great story that were shot horribly bad or had crappy production value.  The really good ones are often remade into something more sale-able.  Your movie that has this fantastic story but shot on Hi-8 might be a crowd favorite, but when you sit down at the bargaining table with a distributor he is going to offer you a lot less than if you shot it on film or HD/4K/etc  that is just a fact.  Back in the 90′s indie filmmakers used to always say at the American Film Market that their film looked like 35.  They said that with the hopes that a distributor would not hold it against them if they shot on 16mm for example.  Resolution and format was a bargaining chip.  Color vs Black and white was a bargaining chip.  Bad sound vs good sound could shave fifty thousand dollars off your potential deal.

The gear is important.  If quality was not an issue we would all be shooting mini dv and 16mm still.  Anyone who denies the fact that image and audio quality, production value, etc are not important is delusional.  I suppose if your intention is to never sell your work or if its an aesthetic choice then sure the gear doesn’t matter.  Its a handhold vs Steadicam type argument.  Sure you can get away with handheld but a well done Steadicam shot does increase production value and the sale price of your work.  Quality picture, sound, post, etc appeases the audience.  If story and structure is important then how it is presented is just as important.

If the gear we use really doesn’t matter, save your trip to NAB, Cinegear, IBC, etc.  Everyone I know who has made the gear doesn’t matter argument owns a Red, C300 or an F3 already.  If gear doesn’t matter just become an author and write a book instead.  I’m sure even writers like a good ergonomic keyboard, a nice printer and a fast computer to type on.  Maybe specialty screenwriting software vs plain old word?

Its okay to talk gear on twitter, facebook, forums, labs, meetups, etc.   Not all of us are writers.  Some of us shoot crappy stories that look great.  I have.

These are the tools of our trade. Feel free to talk about them.  They make our work look, sound, move and edit better. Its not a pen / keystoke vs camera argument.

Mike Sutton

Follow me on Twitter: MNS1974

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMichael Sutton

18Jun

Is 2/3? also dying? Fast track to S35 Digital Cinema.

Posted in 35mm, arri, S35, Skid Row | Leave a comment

In my first Wide Open Camera post I talked about changes in the business and where I see things going.  A few weeks ago I posted that RIP 16mm/35mm Film .  A major event happened last week that further solidified my thoughts on both.  Otto Nemenz a legend in the rental house game had an auction.  They sold off a fair amount of film and video gear.  The big surprises where several Sony F35 camera packages with SRW-1 recorders and processors that went for between 7-9k per package.  These cameras were considered top of the line even just a few years ago and were the flagship cameras before the F65 came out.  So how does a flagship camera that cost over $200K (still a current product on Sony’s broadcast site) sell for under $10,000??? No just one as a fluke, but nine.  The processor cost $13k on its own.   Mind you this is a Super 35mm Digital Cinema camera, but why so cheap?  Some might say “well its only 1080p”.  Well so is the Alexa, the C300 and the F3 all of which are more than $10k.  The F35 also does S-Log so that isn’t the reason. Is it because its heavy?  Alexa weighs about the same.  Is it because of the workflow?  Maybe.  It does take up more storage than all these others.  I think its just a sign that we all have too many expectations and things like dynamic range, 4K, compact size, etc are leading us on a fast track to major changes.

Otto also dumped most of their Super 16 and 35mm film cameras.  Camera that sold for over $250K sold for between $3.5k-6k.  Forty four 35mm cameras were sold, most of which were Moviecam Compacts, SLs, Arri 535, 435s, etc.  20 something Arri SR2′s and SR3′s sold for next to nothing.  I even picked up a Super 16 Arri SR3 Advanced Camera with 3 x mags for less than $650. This was a $75,000 camera less than a decade ago.  Television shows, commercials and low budget movies where shot with this this camera not even three years ago. When you see camera like this sell for these low prices at a fairly well advertized auction, it makes it pretty clear that film is dead.  Rental houses are not keeping these cameras because not many people want to rent them.  They take up space and have a lot of mechanical components that are not made anymore.

So what does it all mean?  What is happening to this business?  Change.  Change at an exponential rate.  Film-stock for the most part hit its technology ceiling quite a white ago. There isn’t much they can improve on.  Silver which is a main component in film stock isn’t getting any cheaper.  Its a problem using celluloid, silver and chemicals to make physical media.  Not only are issues of taking from the earth, but also reclamation, pollution, etc.  Also the fact that usual film is transferred to tape and tape is dead.  Tape ingest doesn’t allow for the instant gratification that a file based import offers.

A frame of Super 16 is roughly the size of a 2/3″ camera block.  The difference is one is defined in limitations of film and how many grains of silver you can add, chemistry, etc versus (digital) how much you tune or improve via pixel count, pixel size, processing, DSPs, AtoD’s, software, etc.  Also the fact that 2/3″ seems to be dying off in favor of S35 size sensors limits the acceptability of a S16 image to a user base that demands more.  It seems strange because people still buy 1/3″, 1/2″ cameras all the time.  Some people spend almost ten thousand dollars on these cameras.  They could have bought an F35.

Are people who rent cameras going to make money with rentals?  If you rent gear and advertise it yes.  Not everyone wants to own a camera. Especially these days when the market is rapidly changing.  That actually give rental houses an opportunity to capitalize. Is a camera really an investment anymore?  Film cameras used to be an amazing investment if you rented them as film had been around for over 100 years and not much changed.   Knowing the format was consistent, you knew you could spread the ROI over a longer period of time.  Not the case with digital cameras where formats change, demands are higher, life-cycle is short, and there is constant innovations in CMOS, etc technology.

So why did I buy an Arri SR3 Advanced for under $650 if film is dead?  To a degree it was for the nostalgia, but the reality is there is still a small market for film.  A Super 16 camera might seem like a bad buy but if I put this out with a few friends who shoot S16 or on a long term rental it will have more than paid for itself.  Arri SR3′s traditional rent for $375/day and because many are getting out of film rentals its safe to bump that rate down as its not cannibalizing the market (since that market is almost completely dead).  There are places in the world that still do shoot film, and therefore it makes for a good opportunity to sell the camera in Europe for example where SR3′s still fetch between 4.5-10k. I will most likely quadruple my money either route I take but to be honest it would look just great sitting on my bookshelf as a piece of history or art.

Mike Sutton

Follow me on Twitter: MNS1974

 

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMichael Sutton

11Jun

Promoting your film and yourself.

Posted in michael sutton, Mike Sutton, mns1974, Skid Row, video dslr, woc | Leave a comment

 

This community we call film is small. Smaller than most know.  One of the most important things I have found that you can do is to share your knowledge and also pay attention to what others are doing.  I joined Twitter a while ago but didn’t really start doing much with it till around this time last year. I think I had a few hundred followers at best and they were not targeting the audience I wanted to focus on for information and to share what I knew.  Its only been the past eight months that I have really decided to share what I knew, pictures, etc with others and started a follow back push to gain an audience.  Was I being arrogant and thinking I had some special insight to share?  No I wanted to see what others where doing with social media and had been offered a fair amount of jobs via Twitter.  I was used to getting a fair amount of emails and questions on the phone on how to break into the business, how to maintain business and who to move forward.  I am at a modest 6080 something followers now and think that Twitter has allowed me to stay in touch with fresh up and comers and new filmmakers etc.  A lot has changed in the  business and there has been a large group of DSLR filmmakers (hate to brand it that way) that have moved on and have become the go to guys for workshops, low budget commercials etc.  These are guys I follow.  There is also a new generation of filmmakers who drive hard and bust their balls pitching projects and ideas well beyond the conventions or box mentality we saw just ten years ago.  I follow those guys too.

Social media is probably the best friend a filmmaker these days could ever have.  Referrals a plenty, offers to help or assist on other projects, notifications of project funding, etc are all easy to hear about and take action on.  When I came up on this business there were a few forums on the internet but mostly I had to rely on things like www.newenglandfilm.com in order to spread word of casting calls, screenings, crew hires, etc.  There simply wasn’t the community there is today. ‘

The other thing I have found is that this expanding community we have on twitter, facebook, etc is amazingly giving and compassionate about what we all do.  Outreach coupled with in-expensive high quality HD cameras and post production leave us all with the ability to not only make something great but also promote it in ways we could never have dreamed of before.  Promoting a film used to involve hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to pull off.  These days with the right amount of friends and internet campaigning you can achieve goals studios could only dare to dream of in the the past.

As always take advantage of the tools at your disposal.  You have a free advertising ticket o promote not only your film but yourself, your business, your ideals, etc.  You can find like minded individuals who share a love for film as much as you.  Follow as many filmmakers, musicians, artists, etc as you can and learn from them.  They will eventually follow back.

Mike Sutton

Follow me on Twitter: MNS1974

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMichael Sutton

30May

Resolution Isn’t Everything: S16/35MM R.I.P. 1891 – 2012

Posted in Cameras, michael sutton, Mike Sutton, mns1974, Photography, Skid Row, wide open camera, woc | Leave a comment

Arri 416 Super 16 Camera

 

I think its interesting and funny at the same time that companies are now jumping on the 4K bandwagon in regards to cameras, editing and monitoring.  We had 4K and 2K for a long time with 16mm and 35mm film.  For over 100 years in fact.  Its not new, and we have for the most part always been able to screen in 4K via a 35mm film projector.  This is how we used to watch movies.  So what changed?  Why did standard definition and high definition become acceptable?  What essentially killed film?  I have several theories.  The main theory is not cost related, but cost is defiantly a factor for many. Resolution isn’t everything, convenience is.  To me it was the VHS tape and DVD that started the death spiral of film.  Then home theater, which over the past few decades has become so cheap that almost everyone I know who owns a TV has.  Home theater systems used to be uncommon in the mid to late 90′s.  You had to spend thousands of dollars just to get a decent sound system with Pro Logic 5.1.  Televisions moving from 4:3 to 16×9 aspect ratios to match the movie screen where also unheard of.  This wasn’t common place till the past four years.  Televisions going high-def, delivering a better picture where huge boosts to the death of film.  Another factor is laziness.  Not wanting to go out to the theater when you could just sit on your couch with the creature comforts of home.  The theater experience had also changed. The quality of watching a movie in the theater had always been for the most part a mind blowing experience (with the right movie).  Theaters got sloppy and expensive (due to cutting costs, hiring younger staffs, getting in as much screenings as possible a day, etc).  Distribution companies charged more, making concession prices rise beyond what most people cared to pay.  That two dollar popcorn became six just so the smaller theaters could pay to rent the film. Concessions became the only way a movie theater could make money.  Watching movies at home outside of the occasional movie on TV was rare.  Television manufacturers, the movie studios, camera manufactures, etc all changed this.

A huge factor in the death of film was caused buy the studios, distributors and cable companies. Movies go to DVD, Blu-Ray, streaming services, on demand, etc now faster than ever in history.  The other day I saw on-Demand had seven movies that were actually in the theater available for rent.  For less that the price of a theater ticket.  That is just insane.  Now its good for the film maker but totally devalues why we used to go to the movies.  The movies now come to us.  Why would you spend $20 to go to a movie if you know its going to be on your TV at home in four weeks?  If its a good movie I will always go see it, but I am not everyone.  Many will not.  They say, ill see it when its on-demand.  Services like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu have gotten better and better to the point where it almost doesn’t make sense to use physical media anymore. This is another reason why a film print has no more place in the market. It is the reason why DVD’s will be dead in four years or less.  Blu-Ray movies cost $30 when they first came out a few years ago.  Now they are $9.99 or less.  The same happened with DVDs except you can buy those for as low as two dollars in some stores.  Movies are not even recorded to VHS tape anymore, and haven’t been since 2009.

The streaming quality threshold is beyond the DVDs of half a decade ago.  The selections are beyond what any local Blockbuster (if you can find one) or Redbox can offer.  The business has changed.  We need it right now and we want it to look good.  Instant gratification.  You can’t do that with film right?  People are not going to put a 35mm projector in their house even though the quality is better. We have all made some sacrifices in order to get it quick and for it to look better than what we grew up with.  So why did film die?  We all know it was higher quality, with better resolution and color characteristics.  We all know its latitude was much better than 80% of the cameras on the market.  We know we can buy a film camera for one tenth of its value.  We know we can project that film at 4K + resolution and it will look amazing (if shot right of course).  So why did we give up?  Is it because film costs too much?  I don’t think so.  People are willing to spend 50K on a new digital 4K or HD camera knowing very well it will be outdated in less than four years.  People are willing to buy edit suites, monitoring, storage, etc for a lot of money to make it happen.  So its clear we are willing to spend a bunch of money to acquire in the highest resolution or quality we can.  But why are we not spending that type of money to view it?  Who of the thousands of Red owners actually owns a 4K monitor or projector?  Not many.  What is that?  Well most of us that have shot 4K know that the main deliverable is 1080p and not 4K.  4K monitors are expensive.  Just like flat screens were expensive when they first came out. Once the price levels the masses adopt. This is what happened with dvd, Blu-Ray, 42″ + size TVs, etc.  So 4K viewing at home is coming.  Not this year, probably not next, but its in the pipeline for most of us.  I think its interesting because as I mentioned at the beginning of my post, we already had 4K for a hundred years, and its taking a little longer than that to have it in our homes.  This will of course probably be the death for the remaining smaller theaters in the country.  Why do I say that?  Well, if you bring 4K TV’s into the home, you are also opening up the market to larger sizes.  TV’s are getting bigger everyday while the prices are getting smaller.  32″, 37″ and 42″ Televisions used to be the norm from 2005-2009. These were considered big and dropped jaws when someone came into your home to see you had a flat screen mounted above your mantel.  Since 2009-current the average television size seems to be between 42-65″ which is significant.  These size increases seem to coincide with the popularity of Blu-Ray, HD channels on cable and HD steaming.  You want to watch the higher quality image on a larger screen.  A theater in your home. Larger than life.  When 4K becomes available by companies like Best Buy, etc and are in homes (probably in late 2014) you will see a shift to fill entire walls or portions with screen size.  4K projection if made quiet, efficient, and bright will dominate the home theater market.  I think that if film wasn’t so bad for the environment, was easier to handle (acquisition, transfer, post and viewing)  it would have lasted longer.

So its really not about the cost. Its about convenience and being lazy.  Making a film on film is a much more rewarding process.  It is undoubtedly better in quality and makes you choose your shots wisely.  You do not take 100 takes to get it right (minus Kubrick).  You get excited to see your dailies when they come back from the lab.  You get to see them in ultra high resolution projected on a screen.  It just seems this has all changed.  The love doesn’t seem to be the same when shooting and screening dallies on digital.  I think film makers have to put their passion on the screen and make some art rather than make someone just because you can or its easy to do (because of the conveniences of HD/2K/4K video)

Kodak filed for bankruptcy and Fuji Film has cut back production and choices of stock.  The studios used to claim that movies be shot on film because film was viewed as an archive-able format.  The idea was that video formats would change over the years, but if you acquired on film and vaulted negatives, ideally you would be able to make deliverable’s from said negative even 50 years down the line.  For the most part that is true.  The exception is if there isn’t any way to scan that film negative down the line.  Companies are not making new film equipment, they are focusing on digital.  Hopefully the studios have all vaulted a ArriScan or Spirit Data Cine to fulfill future needs. Otherwise it would be like hanging onto home movies on VHS and expecting to find a way to view them without a player (how many of us have a VHS player anymore?)  Very few.  Camera manufactures have ceased production on all motion picture cameras.  Panavision, Arri and Aaton are all working and focusing on Digital Cinema Cameras.  Eclair’s, Aaton’s, Arri’s, CP’s, Moviecam, etc can be found on Ebay for next to nothing.  A tenth of their original value (if that).

I think while we still can, we should all rent or borrow a S16 or 35mm camera one day and shoot something from the heart on film.  I think you will find it will be your most rewarding art to date.  I will miss you 5219/7219 & 7213.  Not because of your resolution but because you were beautiful.

Mike Sutton

Follow me on Twitter: @MNS1974

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMichael Sutton

22May

The Extra Mile. DSLR Video.

Posted in film, HDSLR, michael sutton, mns1974, Skid Row, slider, timelapse, video dslr, wide open camera, woc | Leave a comment

 

50lbs of gear at 3,100+ feet

I can’t help but feel the the DSLR revolution has not only advanced what we can do with a camera (portability, serendipity, camera movement, etc) but has also created a lazy trend as well.  Something so light with a mindset of little thought needed can change that spontaneity into a rushed project.  The tripod seems to be an afterthought.  A shoulder mount rig or handheld becomes the norm.  It used be be hard to get your film made.  You had to raise money.  You had to get permits and plan months in advance. You looked at how you could add production value to convince that family friend or business owner to “invest” $5-$20,000 in your movie.  Cameras cost money to rent, film stock, processing and video transfers were expensive.  Films were not put together in a week or even a few days like they are now.  Camera tests were almost unheard of because nobody wanted to spend there money on them and the audience was not there as it is today (you tube, vimeo, blogs, etc)  Films took real effort to pull off.  Many got 50-75% of their shoot done only to run out of money.  An independent film around the time I made my first in 1996 cost approximately $40,000 (with favors) – $500,000 to make on film.  Video really wasn’t an option then because of the quality.  These days you can make a movie for $1,500 with amazing picture quality.  The problem is the effort behind it seems different now.  Guys sitting around on a couch talking, bad handheld, overly experimental “old school” lenses, etc.  Almost no production value or effort.  Now I am generalizing as there is a lot of good work out there.   In fact there is some amazing work out there.  That work stands out usually because it is well planned.  The camera movement is fluid and supported.  The production design is preplanned, locations were scouted. These projects stand out as the elite.

Now before I get slammed I want to be clear that I do not consider myself a film maker.  Yes I had made and sold a film before, but to be honest it was made specifically for the purpose of selling it.  It wasn’t very good and chocked full of exploitation. It’s so bad that if you can manage to actually find a copy of it you will notice the distribution company actually cut in scenes from two other movies for more T&A.  Just what B movie buyers wanted at the time.  Plenty of T&A, blood and guts, action, guns, etc.  That was a long time ago but even then I used Steadicam, a real dolly with track, 50k of light, negative fill, great locations, real actors, etc.  You had to put the money on the screen.

Jump forward to today and you could say the projects I do (outside of commercials) are hastily put together without a real amount of effort and I do a fair amount of camera tests / samples.  Makes me sound like a hypocrite doesn’t it?  to a degree you would be correct.  The difference is where you put your heart however.  The heart is an exception I call “Operation Origami” A film I have put 6 months so far into shooting.  Shot in multiple locations in the US (NH, NYC, RI, MA, Vegas, Los Angeles, etc) all with a lot of pre-production and preparation.  The average shoot day involves a day or two of gear preparation, packing, testing, etc.  Usually we carry about 45-70lbs of gear to each location.  Most of this is in one backpack with a secondary holding a backup camera and misc support. The difference between this project and any other is that I have a personal invested interest in it.  Its important to me and I genuinely am making it for myself.  Originally I was making this film as a test for a large commercial opportunity I have.  The second reason is I wanted to make a project with my girlfriend who is very creative.  I have since found myself wanting to make this for myself.  I don’t care about what others think about it. I have no intention of putting it in any film festivals, etc.  Its just a very personal project and therefore putting in a real effort makes sense, builds worth and personal value.

A great example of this is last weekend we packed two backpacks (mine 50lbs, hers 25lbs) and drive an hour to climb a mountain to shoot at the summit.  Once we got there it was 80+ degrees and we had no bug spray (black flies were everywhere and biting).  The climb was a 27-60 degree grade and took approx 2 hours to climb.  About 2.2 miles up, then back down. Neither of us had climbed in the past few years (me 5, her 13) so it was pretty rough with all the gear we had.  The path to the top was all rock and offered plenty of opportunities to twist ankles, etc.  Regardless, we made it all the way up 3,100+ feet.  The view was spectacular.  Just as we had envisioned.  I spent a fair amount of time setting up my gear to get the perfect shot.  The flies were everywhere and they were hungry.  We did three setups for a total of 10 seconds of our film.  Yes 10 seconds of footage.  Now we had another 2 hours down the mountain as the sun was going down.  Once down we still had an hour drive home, then it was time to offload the footage.  The drive to, climb up, shoot, climb down, drive back was a good seven hours of our day.  The prep and post prep was a good two-three hours as well.  Nine hours of our weekend (we both work full time jobs) gone for 10 seconds of our film.  Hopefully the final product once complete will be as well received as we envisioned it.  It was worth it.

Shuttle Pod Mini behind the scenes.

Mike Sutton @MNS1974

Follow @MNS1974

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMichael Sutton

15May

High-Speed & Time-Lapse.

Posted in high speed cameras, high speed photography, kessler crane, kessler slider, michael sutton, mns1974, motion high speed capture, philip bloom, Skid Row, time lapse, timelapse, ts3cine, wide open camera, woc | Leave a comment

 

High-speed and time-lapse are sort of the opposite but make a great pair to write about.  One is hundreds of stills recorded per second and the other is generally one frame per second or longer.  I chose to write about both as both are of great interest to me.

I have had a lot of opportunity to shoot with high-speed cameras for well over a decade now with my first experience being on a Photo-Sonics ActionMaster 16mm which shot film at 500fps using 400′ mags.  It only gave you about 30 seconds per mag but at the time there wasn’t any other way to shoot high-speed outside of film.  Since that time I have been blessed to use other high-speed cameras from companies like RedLake, Teledyne, Vision Research, Fastec Imaging, etc.  I have also had the opportunity to train people on the Phantom Flex and Fastec TS3Cine which has been a great experience to show everyone just how easy it is to use.

Basically the way true high-speed cameras work is they use a buffer system that is RAM based that you trigger to record an event.  This event is temporary and then needs to be told where its permanent home is.  Usually the camera will have a built in or removable storage system that you then dump that event to.  You also have the option of sending that event out of the cameras video output (HD-SDI or HDMI) to go to an external recorder.  Ideally you want to take the event that is recorded (an image stack) and go to the built in or removable storage on the camera in a RAW format or the highest quality setting you can.  If you keep the group of stills (image stack) intact as stills you have greater flexibility in post production to then change the video frame-rate, adjust color temp, etc.  So for example if you are shooting with a Phantom Flex for a commercial or feature, you would want to take the .cine files and use Glue Tools software to convert the files, etc.  If you shoot with the TS3Cine ideally you would dump from the buffer in the camera to the built in SSD as Cinema DNG RAW files (DNG image stack).  You would then take those files into After Effects, Resolve, etc to leverage your image as best possible.  The Sony NEX-FS700U handles high-speed in a different way.  Instead of giving you an image stack or RAW .Cine, etc files you get an AVCHD file that is whatever frame rate you set the camera to (example 23.98, 29.97, etc) Once the frame rate is selected you cannot change it later in post and the video is baked if you will, meaning it is what it is.  AVCHD does not correct in post as well as a RAW file, but the FS700 is a great option for lower budgets that do not require a specialized camera.  I was able to use and shoot with the FS700 last week and played with the 240, 480 and 960fps frame rates.  240fps looked very good and was 1080p but 480 and 960 use line skipping and doubling from much lower resolutions to achieve these speeds.  This works much like the Casio cameras but at a better quality level.  Weiscam HS2, Phantom Flex (Miro, Gold, 65, etc), and Fastec cameras all use their native resolutions throughout their frame rates and do not use line skipping and doubling to achieve their frame rates.  This means there is no interpolation or artifact and they maintain the details in the image. One thing that the FS700 does have over them is that it is a day to day use camera which these are not.  All these cameras have their pros and cons and I am glad that there is high-speed for every budget.  I will not get into if high-speed is overused or will become “tired” etc as the audience will judge what is done with these cameras.  I suspect there will be hundreds of face slapping videos coming out when the F700 is released to the public but have a feeling that will go away quickly and cool content will follow.

Time-lapse.  I got into time-lapse at the begging of this year, when everyone said it was done to death.  I had all the gear, the motion control, etc to make a great time-lapse but was stuck in 24fps and high-speed doing commercial work, marketing videos, etc.  I missed out on what some say was a trend and overdone, etc.  Me not caring decided I would learn time-lapse while others focused on high-speed.  In my early 20′s I had done a few stop-go claymations shot on a Bolex and with super 8 cameras like the Canon 814, Braun Nizo’s, etc.  I had always loved animation and the idea of capturing a subject at 1 or 2fps instead of 24 or 30 had always been appealing.  You can make the most ordinary subject come to life when shot at one frame at a time over an expanded period.  I have always loved photography so time-lapse and stop motion always felt natural.  Having had a 5DMKII since it was available I am amazed I had not tried it before. Its a lot of work but well worth the reward in the end.  I think because it is tedious that many avoid it or dislike it.  Spending 15 minutes to a full day to capture a 30 second event requires major dedication and most of all patience.

Mid last year I had seen a few videos from experts like Tom Lowe of www.Timescapes.org , Shawn Reeder, Preston Kanak, Eric Hines, Steve Bumgardner and Tyler Ginter to name a few so I decided to use the equipment I already owned and finally just do it. I did a simple test but decided if I was going to shoot time-lapse I might as well go big or go home so I hatched a plan to shoot a project that would require several months and seasons to complete. This is how the idea for Operation Origami (Link) was born. I have been working on this project with my girlfriend Heather @miss_h_bomb for the past five months using motion control by Kessler Crane (Stealth, Philip Bloom Pocket Dolly, the Shuttle Pod).  For cameras we have decided to go a little traditional and non-traditional using most of what is currently in the market today. Outside of the obvious Canon 5DMKII and MKIII we have used the C300, F3, FS100, Go Pro Hero 2, Arri Alexa, XF105, AF100, Epic X, etc.  For locations we have shot in NYC, Vegas, Boston, NH and are shooting a scene in LA.  From city streets to mountain tops and ocean sides, its been a project of the heart which is why I do not care if time-lapse is considered passe, etc.  I have learned a lot about lenses, camera motion from a frame at a time point of view, and more importantly about being prepared and the art of patience.  What these guys (time-lapse shooters) do is amazing and keeps me in a state of wonderment.

High-speed and time-lapse are both great additives to standard cinematography.  They also stand on their own and with the right artist behind the story, directing, cinematography, editing and color they can make for some fascinating works of art.  I will continue to use both regardless of what others say. Be true and focus on what you want to do and show.  Personally I can’t get enough of either.

Mike Sutton @MNS1974

Follow @MNS1974

p.s. Full disclosure, I work for a company that sells both the TS3Cine, Sony FS700U, and Canon line.  We also rent the Phantom Flex and Alexa Plus with 120fps option so I am biased.

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMNS1974

15May

High-Speed & Time-Lapse.

Posted in high speed cameras, high speed photography, kessler crane, kessler slider, michael sutton, mns1974, motion high speed capture, philip bloom, Skid Row, time lapse, timelapse, ts3cine, wide open camera, woc | Leave a comment

 

Philip Bloom checking out the Kessler Crane Shuttle Pod Mini in NYC

High-speed and time-lapse are sort of the opposite but make a great pair to write about.  One is hundreds of stills recorded per second and the other is generally one frame per second or longer.  I chose to write about both as both are of great interest to me.

I have had a lot of opportunity to shoot with high-speed cameras for well over a decade now with my first experience being on a Photo-Sonics ActionMaster 16mm which shot film at 500fps using 400′ mags.  It only gave you about 30 seconds per mag but at the time there wasn’t any other way to shoot high-speed outside of film.  Since that time I have been blessed to use other high-speed cameras from companies like RedLake, Teledyne, Vision Research, Fastec Imaging, etc.  I have also had the opportunity to train people on the Phantom Flex and Fastec TS3Cine which has been a great experience to show everyone just how easy it is to use.

Basically the way true high-speed cameras work is they use a buffer system that is RAM based that you trigger to record an event.  This event is temporary and then needs to be told where its permanent home is.  Usually the camera will have a built in or removable storage system that you then dump that event to.  You also have the option of sending that event out of the cameras video output (HD-SDI or HDMI) to go to an external recorder.  Ideally you want to take the event that is recorded (an image stack) and go to the built in or removable storage on the camera in a RAW format or the highest quality setting you can.  If you keep the group of stills (image stack) intact as stills you have greater flexibility in post production to then change the video frame-rate, adjust color temp, etc.  So for example if you are shooting with a Phantom Flex for a commercial or feature, you would want to take the .cine files and use Glue Tools software to convert the files, etc.  If you shoot with the TS3Cine ideally you would dump from the buffer in the camera to the built in SSD as Cinema DNG RAW files (DNG image stack).  You would then take those files into After Effects, Resolve, etc to leverage your image as best possible.  The Sony NEX-FS700U handles high-speed in a different way.  Instead of giving you an image stack or RAW .Cine, etc files you get an AVCHD file that is whatever frame rate you set the camera to (example 23.98, 29.97, etc) Once the frame rate is selected you cannot change it later in post and the video is baked if you will, meaning it is what it is.  AVCHD does not correct in post as well as a RAW file, but the FS700 is a great option for lower budgets that do not require a specialized camera.  I was able to use and shoot with the FS700 last week and played with the 240, 480 and 960fps frame rates.  240fps looked very good and was 1080p but 480 and 960 use line skipping and doubling from much lower resolutions to achieve these speeds.  This works much like the Casio cameras but at a better quality level.  Weiscam HS2, Phantom Flex (Miro, Gold, 65, etc), and Fastec cameras all use their native resolutions throughout their frame rates and do not use line skipping and doubling to achieve their frame rates.  This means there is no interpolation or artifact and they maintain the details in the image. One thing that the FS700 does have over them is that it is a day to day use camera which these are not.  All these cameras have their pros and cons and I am glad that there is high-speed for every budget.  I will not get into if high-speed is overused or will become “tired” etc as the audience will judge what is done with these cameras.  I suspect there will be hundreds of face slapping videos coming out when the F700 is released to the public but have a feeling that will go away quickly and cool content will follow.

Time-lapse.  I got into time-lapse at the beginning of this year, when everyone said it was done to death.  I had all the gear, the motion control, etc to make a great time-lapse but was stuck in 24fps and high-speed doing commercial work, marketing videos, etc.  I missed out on what some say was a trend and overdone, etc.  Me not caring decided I would learn time-lapse while others focused on high-speed.  In my early 20′s I had done a few stop-go claymations shot on a Bolex and with super 8 cameras like the Canon 814, Braun Nizo’s, etc.  I had always loved animation and the idea of capturing a subject at 1 or 2fps instead of 24 or 30 had always been appealing.  You can make the most ordinary subject come to life when shot at one frame at a time over an expanded period.  I have always loved photography so time-lapse and stop motion always felt natural.  Having had a 5DMKII since it was available I am amazed I had not tried it before. Its a lot of work but well worth the reward in the end.  I think because it is tedious that many avoid it or dislike it.  Spending 15 minutes to a full day to capture a 30 second event requires major dedication and most of all patience.

Mid last year I had seen a few videos from experts like Tom Lowe of www.Timescapes.org , Shawn Reeder, Preston Kanak, Philip Bloom, Eric Hines, Steve Bumgardner and Tyler Ginter to name a few so I decided to use the equipment I already owned and finally just do it. I did a simple test but decided if I was going to shoot time-lapse I might as well go big or go home so I hatched a plan to shoot a project that would require several months and seasons to complete. This is how the idea for Operation Origami was born. I have been working on this project with my girlfriend Heather @miss_h_bomb for the past five months using motion control by Kessler Crane (Stealth, Philip Bloom Pocket Dolly, the Shuttle Pod).  For cameras we have decided to go a little traditional and non-traditional using most of what is currently in the market today. Outside of the obvious Canon 5DMKII and MKIII we have used the C300, F3, FS100, Go Pro Hero 2, Arri Alexa, XF105, AF100, Epic X, etc.  For locations we have shot in NYC, Vegas, Boston, NH and are shooting a scene in LA.  From city streets to mountain tops and ocean sides, its been a project of the heart which is why I do not care if time-lapse is considered passe, etc.  I have learned a lot about lenses, camera motion from a frame at a time point of view, and more importantly about being prepared and the art of patience.  What these guys (time-lapse shooters) do is amazing and keeps me in a state of wonderment.

High-speed and time-lapse are both great additives to standard cinematography.  They also stand on their own and with the right artist behind the story, directing, cinematography, editing and color they can make for some fascinating works of art.  I will continue to use both regardless of what others say. Be true and focus on what you want to do and show.  Personally I can’t get enough of either.

Mike Sutton @MNS1974

Follow @MNS1974

p.s. Full disclosure, I work for a company that sells both the TS3Cine, Sony FS700U, and Canon line.  We also rent the Phantom Flex and Alexa Plus with 120fps option so I am biased.

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMichael Sutton

11May

Camera Movement Then And Now.

Posted in Camera Movement, Cameras, dolly camera, HDSLR, michael sutton, Mike Sutton, mns1974, Skid Row, slider camera, video camera, video dslr, wide open camera, woc | Leave a comment

Camera movement is something we all take for granted this past half decade.  We used to have bigger cameras, heavy dollies, camera cranes etc that required a large crew to man and rig. Cameras now of course are much smaller, lighter and allow us to get shots we couldn’t with say a MovieCam Compact or a Arri 4BLs.  Because cameras have changed so much we have access to tools to help move the camera in ways we never could before.  New filmmakers who haven’t been in the business past this last decade have an almost unlimited amount of options to get the camera from point A to point B. There were a handful of should mount rigs, reason being that most cameras already had that form factor built in.

Dollies (forward/backward, side-to-side) :

Back in the day, dollies where the only way to do a tracking shot unless you had a lot of money or knew a Steadicam Operator.  Setting up dolly track was a long and tedious process.  Laying down heavy steel track, unloading the Fisher dolly off the truck, etc required more than two people and required a lot of space. Renting a dolly was expensive.  Dollies featured hydraulic booming, crabbing wheels, etc.  Even a doorway dolly took up at least 3 feet of space and could barely move through a doorway.  Setting up a tracking shot in an small apartment for example wasn’t doable unless you built a pipe dolly or your own contraption to make it happen. Now we have great options from companies like Kessler Crane, Camblock, Ditto Gear, etc.  Shots I used to use a Mathews doorway dolly for in the past, I now do with a Kessler Crane Shuttle Pod System or K-Pod Dolly with flexi track.  Set up takes less than 10 minutes and transport is simple and easy.  I no longer use a truck to transport my camera support instead I load up my car and still have ample room.

Steadicam (any direction including slight booming shots):

Not many people had access to a Steadicam.  Fifteen years ago there were really only two Steadicam options.  Steadicam brand and George Paddock Industries GPI.  For the most part you couldn’t rent a Steadicam rig as no one dire hired and the rigs were significantly bigger and heavier (since pro cameras were 15-65lbs).  The other major reason was that Steadicam operating is a high end skill that requires extensive training and practice.  So the option was to hire a Steadicam Operator with a rig and their assistant.  This was expensive. I know as I am a Steadicam Operator for over 15 years.  After the Steadicam patent ran out it opened the doors to other companies to make rigs.  Glidecam, XCS, MK-V, GPI, Movcam, etc started making rigs and opened up the offerings.  At the same time cameras started to become more compact, the quality improved and they became lighter.  This allowed Steadicam and other stabilizer rigs to become lighter, easier to use and much more affordable to the masses.  A Steadicam rig back in 1997 was $60,000 +.  A Steadicam now a days is as little as $599.  It was only the past four years that cameras like the 5D MKII allowed for very light weight rigs like the Glidecam 1000-4000HD series to become viable options for smooth run and gun shooting.

Shoulder Mount Rigs (for mobile semi-stabilization):

Cameras film and video had a much different form factor of the cameras of today.  Cameras like the Aaton XTR Prod, Arri SR2, and others had magazines that extended that balanced out the weight of a lens and matte box on the front of the camera.  Due to that fact a shoulder mount rig really wasn’t needed.  Cameras also had Arri Rosettes so you could attach handles to the camera body.  Cameras these days lack these features and tend to be front heavy and lack ergonomics for shoulder mounting.  Now a days there are over 20 shoulder mount systems and more being manufactured everyday to make up for the lack of rig-ability, form factor and balance.  Zacuto, Red Rock Mico, Shape and Letus being the major stand outs in this group.  Almost every shooting including myself use a combination of a few different companies to make the best solution for their style of shooting and accessory rigging needs.

Cranes and Jibs (booming up/down, side-to-side:

Cranes and jibs were beasts till about 15 years ago.  Camera cranes were clunky, huge, heavy and required a crane operator in most cases.  They were meant to hold much heavier cameras and in many cases a camera operator w/AC or robotic head.  Crane shots were almost unheard of in independent films unless you built one yourself or knew someone.  Jibs were also fairly heavy duty and were far and few between.  There were only a few companies that made them and there were expensive.  Now we have Kessler Crane, Glidecam, Libec, Matthews, etc making affordable solutions for today’s cameras.  Jibs and cranes also are now made with space and storage confinements as considerations in mind.  They fold up, pack tight and can fit in most passenger cars.

Robotic Heads (pan/tilt and sometimes roll):

Robotic heads were rare on low budget commercials and features. There were only a few options and they had to be rented out of LA, NYC, Miami or Chicago.  No one I knew owned a Power pod or Libra head or anything close.  Usually these were two axis heads and you could add a third axis for a large price jump.  These heads were over $60,000 and required a skilled operator to use them.  With improvements in technology and lighter cameras the doors have been opened up.  You can now buy a robotic head with a controller for under $2,000 which is amazing when you think about it.  You can repeat shots and do basic motion control for 1/30th of the cost.  Now everyone can set up decent composite shots that were unattainable even ten years ago outside of having a Hollywood budget.

With all the tools we have now have available and at prices that most can afford there is no reason why we can’t have fluid and dynamic shots on projects of every budget.  Take advantage of these tools and use them wisely.  Most of us would have had to put aside a decent portion of the budget to get the perfect crane, steadicam or dolly shot.  We can do this for next to nothing now that rental companies and friends all own this once unattainable gear.

Mike Sutton @MNS1974

Follow @MNS1974

Twitt

All credit is given to author Wide Open CameraMichael Sutton