Liam

https://***URL not allowed***/apertus-axiom-beta-your-open-source-camera-an-update-and-recent-footage/

Footage is looking better than last time

Sorry if this is only news to me

If going the festival route, should I pretend I made them a year apart? That would be kind of relieving, like I'm already accomplished into the future a little. But it kinda killed me waiting for a year last time, especially since I mostly got rejections, and this is obviously.. twice that.

Is it weird or ill advised to go around with two films at the same time?

I like the Vimeo only route more than I expected, but I still have a feeling maybe really good luck at a festival - networking etc - is better than really good luck online.

Just kind of a weird problem, wanted some opinions.

I hear a lot that you should focus on one job, especially in filmmaking, because it's a "collaborative process". But my spirit guide lately has been Jim Lujan (writer/character designer/animator/voice actor/composer/editor). Today I was looking a lot at where to start learning to compose music for films.. which is a job made up entirely of skills I don't have (but with time, anyone can do basically anything of course). Then I started thinking I was being dumb.. I still want to believe at least learning some of everything is going to be helpful, even if you never end up doing it, just for ease of communication with your team maybe (actually I'm keen to do it all as well) - but I know I'm closed minded at times and possibly in the minority, so I'd like to hear some opinions.

I know Tarantino was very relieved to get the advice from Terry Gilliam "As a director, you don't have to do that. Your job is to hire talented people who can do that -- Your job is explaining your vision. Your job is articulating to them what you want on the screen."

Is the biggest risk that I do it all and just don't realize that I suck at half of it?

Heard decent things about the TAKSTAR SGC-598, for micro micro budget. Probably safer to get a rode (or yeah, a lav)

1 hour ago, Jonesy Jones said:

Liam, she has an advantage and is using it. Any good business plan or venture is going to recognize any advantages they may have over another and capitalize upon them. Everyone, including you and I, have an advantage. When we are clever enough to recognize them and utilize them we suddenly have a different frame of mind.

Additionally, it would be frustrating to me if I worked very very very hard to build an audience/platform as well as other personnel and connected resources, only to have people poo poo on me when I go to use them. Thoughts? 

thought 1: those people just don't understand budgetting at all. it was minimal enough of a setup, that when factoring in the volunteers, they could have made a feature film on half of that. this part isn't evil probably, just weirdly ignorant

thought 2: it must not actually have been a passion project. which it seems like you agree with? again, not evil, other than it being a lie. "I even chipped in a couple thousand dollars of my own money," was not spoken.

their careers can survive my poo poo

but yeah, let's all use our resources. 

Sorry, I really didn't mean to say she couldn't do it because she's an actor (or a woman for that matter ). She's just certainly being handed a lot.

9 minutes ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Not her debut...she's directed episodes of House of Cards too...and with Fincher as an executive producer she definately gets good advice...the reality though is, she has a lot of time on set...and that experience goes way beyond filmschool...it's easy enough to dismiss them as rich, but at this level you need talent...Netflix doesnt just "give" you an episode or two to direct...having said that, the last season bored me, but no mistake, this woman is talented.

Fincher doesn't come to set anymore. From what I heard, literally Spacey didn't want to direct, and she said "hey, I'll do it" *cough, two paychecks*. They said sure, because there are so many people it can't really go wrong.

32 minutes ago, fuzzynormal said:

 

BTW, Angelina Jolie is a director too.

Haha, I learned that the hard way

28 minutes ago, HockeyFan12 said:

There's capital and then there's cultural capital. People will leverage their names to get cheap labor. It might not be right, but it's their right to do so. I also strongly doubt everyone worked free. No one is being forced to donate or forced to work. It's all voluntary, even if it's frustrating. 

I hear you, though. I have worked on high profile festival projects for cheap mostly because I wanted the credit. It definitely really sucks but I only have myself to blame.

If anything, it should inspire you. If you can get better results for free than the House of Cards crew can get with $50k and tons of favors, you'll be doing so well soon enough that you needn't be jealous of them. Let it inspire you! Whenever you see something made by high end pros and think "I can do better," the only injustice is that you're not giving yourself the chance to prove you can. It's not like anyone involved in this had upsetting you in mind, they don't know who any of us are and don't care. So maybe it's not that their work is sub-par for the money, maybe it's that your work is better than you realize and you already have the skill to be in that upper echelon.

If you do, then you owe it to yourself to prove it. Or admit to yourself it's not your priority. If you have the talent and want to do something with it but don't, that's the only injustice, you being unfair to you.

(The Cannes shorts program isn't very competitive, either, but yes, nepotism plays a major major factor in the festival scene. Think of it like a social club trying to maintain an image and a guest list, with the films as the entertainment for the club. The social and branding components are more important than the quality of the content. But it makes sense, each festival represents a brand.)

Yeah, definitely implied the crew worked for free, but maybe she exaggerated

(Near the end of the clip)

Working like crazy on my own stuff right now! Definitely wouldn't want this to make someone give up. I'm just having a moment 

Some House of Cards crew, and star Robin Wright, made a six minute short film, set in one location, shot in two days. I guess the crew volunteered their time and resources. And they still ended up crowdfunding $50,000 to make it happen. So just a bunch of millionaires not willing to put a cent of their own into a film they call a "passion project". From the stills I've seen, I have no idea where $50,000 would have gone. And it sounded like they got accepted to CANNES before they were even finished. For Wright's directorial debut. Just because it looked pretty and had a big name. (My source was an interview on Colbert, if you want to look it up, sorry for not posting it here)

How is that okay? And how far back in time to you have to go to see Sundance and Cannes as the home of brilliant films that don't fit Hollywood's bill? (Sundance appeared to be a mess this year too. Apparently Nick Offerman and Kristen Stewart are the great talents of our generation)

Let me know if I'm just being a dick, but wow

Alex Buono is a guy to search for if you're curious about some of this.

They've used arri and RED and canon 7d's. Sometimes a cast member shoots something with a friend on a dvx100 and Lorne lets it in. Since they've been going for a hundred years, and don't care if the official crew is leading the way (and even they experiment), they've used everything.

5 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Presentation is important online by the way... and Liam you could start with putting some effort into your profile picture

I knowww, sorry.. I had to bump up the iso way too high

I love the imperfections of certain telephoto and wide angle adapters. I posted about mine with some photos here: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/20981-shitty-lenses/

Nice bokeh, edge softness, and distortion, imo. But they're maybe a little precarious and cheap

For the small time filmmakers, sometimes I feel like popularity is the only thing that matters. literally posting a lot about filming, and becoming a personality, is said by many to be very important, even just for submitting to a festival.. like it's not just about the quality of your film.

I feel really weird about advertising myself, especially to friends and family, and pretending I'm interesting

I'd rather slowly build up a following on vimeo by making films I'm proud of maybe.. which is obviously possible, but yeah.. do any of you do this? Thoughts?

This isn't a topic for the "shooting" section

I'm planning a film where someone plays two parts. I probably won't get too fancy with it at all. But just in case, I was wondering if anyone had advice for a novice to get into some masking and tracking (feels like that would be all I need..)

Plus then you could just keep stacking speedboosters and use the same lens for any situation (as shown)

F900 is a cinema camera with a teeny sensor, f3 is a cinema camera without raw. I feel a little weird calling a c100 a cinema camera, even though it's like part of the name. Yeah, it doesn't matter if it's your own film. A studio might stop you from shooting on a kinemax, because of brand, not specs. These days if a new camera comes out saying it's a cinema camera, it probably just means raw.

Dave Dugdale seemed to have transitioned his site's name pretty easily. And you can redirect when someone goes to the old site at least for a while, since that's the habit. But I definitely have no problem with eoshd. 

3 hours ago, benymypony said:

There are a lot of free songs on FreeMusicArchive, all genres: http://freemusicarchive.org/

+1

2 hours ago, kaylee said:

every filmmaker should read this book

Btw, I found a copy of this already, and after one page, I'm hooked

2 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Just to piss you off I Won't read it. Over and Out.

With less due respect, open your mind like a lot, Web.

13 minutes ago, noone said:

What strikes me as weird is he chose to use his name there.

Makes me think he did it for the attention he is going to get or it could be someone else having a lend.

Ooo, interesting. It's definitely not as long as.. any other post he's ever made. Maybe his son is pretending to be him, carrying on the family.. you know.. shame

3 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

I'm tempted to register there just to reply to him that the only way we'll definitively know if Canon are ripping us off is if we have to pay by Western Union and Canon tell us their mother is posting the 5DMKIVs back.

I thought that too, but then I'd be on DPReview.. not worth it

The nerve of Canon. Telling a lie, and ripping people off. The later is the worse of those to things.

Ebrahim is such a slut.