Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ben Prater

More great BMPCC footage...

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

 

Though I honestly doubt anyone in this thread has ever shot footage in their entire lives that is as good as Reverie.

 

 

That's funny, because I think the "footage" looks terrible. And the shot selection is nauseating (cheesy doesn't even begin to describe it). Speaking of PB, I know he's not Kubrick, but he makes VL look like an amateur. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's funny, because I think the "footage" looks terrible. And the shot selection is nauseating (cheesy doesn't even begin to describe it). Speaking of PB, I know he's not Kubrick, but he makes VL look like an amateur. 

I have to agree. It did show off the tech well, but that's it. Especially the helicopter-bit (around 1:25) was cringe-worthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's funny, because I think the "footage" looks terrible. And the shot selection is nauseating (cheesy doesn't even begin to describe it). Speaking of PB, I know he's not Kubrick, but he makes VL look like an amateur. 

 

 

I have to agree. It did show off the tech well, but that's it. Especially the helicopter-bit (around 1:25) was cringe-worthy.

 

The medium film (tv, video, cinema) helps to govern our population in a way like magic helped the chiefs of the primitives or the church in the Middle Ages to control their people. Without 'film', modern man wouldn't know what to feel, what to think, what to do.

 

The almost absolute power of the media makes it easy for comparatively silly clips to attract some attention. No doubt there are differences. Say, a music video by Chris Cunningham may show more technical creativity, good craftmanship and artistic taste than 99% of the rest of music videos. But in the end, this doesn't count. Film is a language, and as long as there are still things that need to be said - and THERE ARE! -, it is utterly cynic to compare all this longer than three seconds.

 

Reverie is nonsense, kitschy and brown-nosing the audience, us. Why should we be impressed? I know, this is probably the wrong place for this objection, but - carefully put - many of us try to impress, are desperate to lead their fellows up the garden path. Mirror, mirror on the wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vincent Laforet is about 1000 times as good a filmmaker as Philip Bloom. I can't even imagine the comparison is being made. That's a Pulitzer prize-winning NY Times photographer vs. an ordinary broadcast news cameraman.

 

I challenge you to find something shot on DSLR that makes better use of color than Reverie, for instance. Sure the aliasing is simply dreadful, and one must remember the 5D2 didn't even have 24p at that point. But it was justifiably famous (find me a PB frame as iconic as the cobblestone shot) and it's a predictable shame that most indie DSLR guys emulated Bloom and his boring moving slideshows than Laforet and his exciting narrative structure.

 

People would apologize by noting they can't afford a helicopter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vincent Laforet is about 1000 times as good a filmmaker as Philip Bloom. I can't even imagine the comparison is being made. That's a Pulitzer prize-winning NY Times photographer vs. an ordinary broadcast news cameraman.

 

Key word: Photographer. I rest my case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Axel is my type of guy.  Well put my man.

Yesterday I watched:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_(film)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Is_Colder_Than_Death_(film)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Collectionneuse

 

People who make advertising or corporate propaganda (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cW_rIdd69W8

as i call it are a complete joke.  They deserve no respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it was justifiably famous (find me a PB frame as iconic as the cobblestone shot) and it's a predictable shame that most indie DSLR guys emulated Bloom and his boring moving slideshows than Laforet and his exciting narrative structure.

 

Iconic imagery can be original, intelligent, making a stronger statement than a thousand words and still be mysterious and beautiful. The artist Paul McCarthy, for instance, invented an installation for the documenta (art show in Kassel, Germany), called 'shit plugs'. He designed containers of very thin glas, shaped like sex toys. In these he filled what his audience, his critics and his admirers, had contributed by using the chemical toilets McCarthy had invited them to on earlier exhibitions. The objects were semi-transparent, in colors of yellow and floating earth-colored streaks, like extraterrestrial lava lamps. You cannot in earnest compare some professional face-exhibitor on a nightly cobblestone with such an achievement. The Laforet image may be called iconic, because many (DSLR-videots!) will remember it instantly, but what does it stand for? Is it more than just a modular component of several chic commercials, promoting cars, perfume, cosmetics or, er, helicopters ;-) ? Linked to the promise that this highly polished visual emptiness suddenly was available to the amateurs?

 

And to assemble some of these nicely photograped, completely exchangeable images to a vague idea of something romantic, maybe a reunion of lovers (can someone tell me what I should think about the plot?), you call 'exiting narrative structure'. I guess by this standard we have quite a few geniuses amongst us, just think about all us wedding filmers!  

 

Bloom and Reid film things they find beautiful, and they edit them in a poetic way. The mood these clips evoke more often than not is triggered by the 'accompaning' music piece. Romantic illustrations. May not sound revolutionary, but is at least honest and a pleasant experience. 

 

Was it just coincidence that almost everybody picked the same frame of the three Brawley clips to show his grading version? Our minds look out for iconic images spontaneously.

 

@cls105: Thanks for the youtube-link!

 

SP_1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Key word: Photographer. I rest my case.

 

What the f? Photographers (especially professional ones) tend to make WAY more beautiful pictures than regular "cameradudes". I noticed a huge boom here in Finland with photographers grabbing a 5dmkII and making way more beautiful musicvideos/short films than working professional DP's when the DSLR craze started. But people here are bashing photographers? I've seen a bunch of "professional" DP's make horrible images that all copy one another. Just look at regular network tv. Basic stuff.

 

A professional photographer - like Vincent happens to be - will make beautiful images. Axel's ludicrous "I love shit inside arthouse exhibitions"- is bullshit at the highest order. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the f? Photographers (especially professional ones) tend to make WAY more beautiful pictures than regular "cameradudes". I noticed a huge boom here in Finland with photographers grabbing a 5dmkII and making way more beautiful musicvideos/short films than working professional DP's when the DSLR craze started. But people here are bashing photographers? I've seen a bunch of "professional" DP's make horrible images that all copy one another. Just look at regular network tv. Basic stuff.

 

A professional photographer - like Vincent happens to be - will make beautiful images. Axel's ludicrous "I love shit inside arthouse exhibitions"- is bullshit at the highest order. 

 

Um, i came from photography too. That's one of the reasons i was screaming for raw years ago. My point was that telling a story with a still image, is very different than tell a narrative with a motion picture.  Just looking at Reverie, you wouldn't say any of the frames are necessarily cheesy, but when you put them together the effect is nauseating.

 

Working with actors, getting emotion from a scene, these things matter. I'm not sure VL got a lot of experience with that shooting from his helicopter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the f? Photographers (especially professional ones) tend to make WAY more beautiful pictures than regular "cameradudes".

(...)

Just look at regular network tv. Basic stuff.

 

A professional photographer - like Vincent happens to be - will make beautiful images. Axel's ludicrous "I love shit inside arthouse exhibitions"- is bullshit at the highest order. 

 

You may not like modern art, or perhaps only if it's complaisantly decorative, which stopped to be considered art of the highest order after Hitler was defeated, who (as a painter of idylls) famously named modern art 'degenerated'. McCarthy actually sells, since decades, he is a  Pro.

 

But it is admittedly off-topic within the off-topic 'Reverie'. However, what happens here is judgment over a famous videoclip. By what standards do we judge? If the work is well photographed? Edited by the book? Good craftwork? 

 

All that may be. If you like, give it ten of ten. I protest though against the 'narrative montage'. If there was a narration, give me a clue, or I'd rather consume a trailer for Hangover IV.

 

Nobody asks if the thing makes any sense. Because it doesn't. It is even too professionally cheesy to deserve to be called poetic. It's real bullshit.

 

It's a demo video of the video capabilities of a new, 'gamechangig' type of camera, featuring a male model, who seems to have almost overslept a date with a female model, wears sunglasses at night and, after an unconvincing kiss, flies off with a helicopter. 

 

On photographers vs. filmmakers:

Photography is one of the key arts of cinema. Another is writing/inventing. Another is directing. Another is editing. Sounds like teamwork. If some narcisstic photographer considers himself fit for the lower tasks named above, that's what you get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't care about what Vincent Laforet is doing or has done. Nor do I find an issue with the absolutely rubbish footage released for the Pocket Camera.

I only care about what I CAN do with a camera. Seeing what these cameras can achieve is cool, but its much cooler having the thing in our hands and looking at ways to be creative with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd never actually watched Reverie & having just done so, it looks like a slick 80s cosmetic product ad - nothing wrong with that & kinda makes sense when you consider LF is a photographer. And after all its all about personal taste, which is different for each of us.

The whole PB vs LF debate is just funny cause i'd never heard of them before researching DSLRs & quite frankly i'm still not impressed. The dark horse that no one mentions is the one person i had heard of, Shane Hurlbut, & it was his info, posts & advice that showed me the way (still the most interesting/informative blog out there, by a proper jobbing DP).

So, what really convinced me to get a DSLR was this little offering & it really shows off what you can really do with this type of camera when you take a little time, effort & know how:

http://vimeo.com/10570139

 

 

Also, anyone considering a BM product should take a look at this article, as it really does represent what these cameras are all about & how to test them/think about them with just a little bit of objectivity:

 

http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2013/08/blackmagic-cinema-camera-tests/

 

 

Personally, i'm getting a pocket & think it will be a great little cheap camera & way better than any DSLR in its price range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol what's with the heated VL V PB argument?

 

Both make decent stuff.. Reverie isn't fantastic but you have to remember it was VL's first short film he has advanced a lot since then, not only that "Genesis" the GH3 film by PB AND Bruce Logan was pretty sh*thouse too let's be honest and that wasn't exactly their first venture into filmmaking.

 

Both do good stuff though too, I did like Mobius by VL and a a few short things by PB like the portrait of a boxer etc they've both done a lot.

 

The only real difference is PB is a giant advertising brand whore and VL is much more subtle.. PB has posted some great stuff on his site it's just hard to find it between all the adverts for terribly overpriced and overrated Zacuto sh*t or PB branded Kessler gear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...