http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ Videomaker Community Forums » Tag: filming - Recent Posts en Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:13:23 +0000 http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74634 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:24:19 +0000 Steve 74634@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Good question Robert! I just started a new thread based on your question: what will be the next one in the sequence film---digital---???, which compliements the final part of the Quantel article on Digital in Cinema.</p> <p>I hope everyone continues to discuss their thoughts and memories of Kodak. I find that the <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/13/opinion/greene-google-kodak/index.html?eref=rss_tech">CNN article</a> that foreshadowed the events unfolding sums it up best:</p> <p>"You press the button, we do the rest.</p> <p>The Kodak button was on portable cameras; Google's is the "Enter"<br /> button on hundreds of millions of computers that it does not<br /> manufacture, but that are the key to its success."</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74627 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 01:22:56 +0000 Robert Lonn 74627@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Interesting thread! I think we have seen this in many other Industries. Vinyls, Tapes and then CDs in music industry for example. An early example is the machanical calculators verses electronic ones. The Swedish company called Facit had 14000 employees in 140 countries in 1970. They were killed off by 1972-73 by cheaper, better Japaneese calculators. These jumps in technology will always happen. I think it is great.... otherwise there would be harder feeling nostalgic about "the good old days" I wonder what will be the next one in the sequence film---digital---??? </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74602 Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:27:48 +0000 MediaFish 74602@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I found this today - interesting followup on Kodak:</p> <p><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/story/2012-02-09/kodak-digital-camera-cuts/53024238/1?loc=interstitialskip" rel="nofollow">http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/story/2012-02-09/kodak-digital-camera-cuts/53024238/1?loc=interstitialskip</a> </p> <p> </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74569 Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:53:07 +0000 birdcat 74569@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Film is dead - OK, I said it - Doesn't mean I have to like it.</p> <p>But having said it, I am both sad and happy about it.</p> <p>I won't miss the days of shooting a dozen rolls of 35mm slides in an afternoon and waiting for that film to come back from the lab (and paying all that money) to see how my shots came out.</p> <p>I will miss teaching the skills required to shoot film and what it did for me however.  Much translates to the digital world but dodging and burning in, while easier in Photoshop, were invented in the darkroom, where I learned them.</p> <p>And learning the nuances of different films (like the difference between Ektachrome and Kodachrome, or why you certain needed filters with Ektachrome Infrared or 6 ASA Micrography) is now lost forever.</p> <p>Also, I scanned some of my old 35mm slides and at 3600 DPI they came out as 5584x3360 - a bit better than 18 MPx - But I could print those slides as an 11X14 print and examine it with a magnifying glass and see nothing but continuous tone - no pixels!  How many megapixels would be required to do the same in the digital world?  And what happens when technology demands a gigapixel image and all I have are some 640 X 480's left from my first digital camera that I'd like to print?</p> <p>Digital provides some nice advantages to be sure - I just wish it didn't exact such a sacrifice that was film.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74558 Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:45:03 +0000 Robin 74558@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Digital killed film off because Celluloid was a 'too many steps' process. The whole reason Lucas and then Cameron went all digital is because (in both cases) it was the only way to go with CG driven products. </p> <p>But even for the small no-budget productions (which I was on just four days ago), you can't beat digital with editing, color correcting, etc. What was posted in one week for this short, would have taken up to a month with each step. No comparison with either price or production.</p> <p>As to Kodak... Yes, it was (yet) another example of the "too big to fail" behemoth death march; companies whose corporate ego do not allow for change until it becomes painfully obvious. Like IBM before it ('who's going to want to own a desktop computer?'), those companies that are blind to technological trends will die from that blindness stepping into the dinosaur swamp of 'We don't need to innovate, we're _______' (fill in the blank).</p> <p>The only thing that saved Microsoft in my mind was that Gates foresaw the 'if you give it away for free, you have them hooked' model of business. Not a good model in my opinion either, but that's how behemoths can stomp the landscape with eyes open.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74500 Tue, 07 Feb 2012 06:36:05 +0000 Weddingmaster 74500@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> When I shot wedding Photography in the 90's I equated each shot as $1.00 for processing, Add that up to about 150-200 shots per wedding before any sales take place. Today photographers shoot upwards of 2000 pics..disposable media is what put kodak out of business. </p> <p>at the risk of political correctness...Why was Kodak not bailed out like GM? Sachs? Wall Street, were they not too big to fail also? or were they just not in the political game?</p> <p>Harry</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74487 Mon, 06 Feb 2012 09:39:14 +0000 Don 74487@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>the irony here is that online piracy means digital distribution to multiple users and sites means a film distributed online will last forever and be updated as new systems are developed meaning there is longevity in digital... the question remains on how to make it profitable and legal.... Personally I think online librarys of movies and tv shows is where the studios need to go in the future for the sake of archiving older films and keeping them preserved and in a place where people can find them...</p> <p>would have been better in the studios had bought into  netfilx and others and profited off ads as opposed to trying to sue the hell out of everybody to preserve an archaic monopoly on thier products.</p> <p>I agree film is dead...in the mainstream industry... hope the big studios follow suit and filmmaking becomes democratic and open to all the little guys with big dreams...</p> <p> </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74481 Mon, 06 Feb 2012 08:38:24 +0000 composite1 74481@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Much as I'm sorry to see so historically significant a company like Kodak fall by the wayside, I'm not sorry to see film go. I've shot and processed film from 35mm to massive 9"x9" for photography, motion picture, color, b&amp;w, negative, reversal, slide and contact to roll paper for archive. If I never have to breathe or get splashed by the toxic mix of chemicals it took to do all that or strip down and rebuild another film processor again it would still be too soon!</p> <p>I'm also not sorry to see all the film purists who poo-pooed and naysaid from around '96 until the late 2000's that 'digital will never surpass film'. In 2007, I saw a demo at NAB for a 6k projection on a massive screen and knew it had already happened. Yes, there are nuances film still captures better than digital, but even those are having gains rapidly made upon them. Just seeing how the new cameras can capture light in near darkness with a very good to great image is impressive alone. Let's face it, no silver halide based product can compete with 12,000 - 120,000 ISO!</p> <p>Digital also makes the task of timelapse and stopmotion photography a joy to perform. With a few quick and simple tests on-site, you can get consistent results with only the time needed to setup, breakdown and the actual shoot to get the job done. No sweating whether you got the right exposure and no sweating how it's going to turn out after being processed. Not to mention, the massive rolls of film and the cost of accessories to secure your undeveloped film are now gone.</p> <p>Now it's not all rosy because with anything, there are drawbacks. up front as you guys mentioned storage is a serious issue. CD's, DVD's, and Blu-Ray Discs are too finite for storage of massive uncompressed libraries for ever larger digital formats. Traditional harddrives are ideal in the short term, but are problematic in that they have mechanical parts which will eventually fail. Solid-state drives are also an ideal option but are much more expensive and apparently are more volatile than traditional harddrives in the long run.</p> <p>Modern Filmstocks however, if kept cool and dry will last for hundreds of years. The major problem with film and digital is the tech itself. It's great manufacturers are improving the tech by leaps and bounds. But, they are not only building in 'obsolescence' they are making it ever more difficult to archive what is created with their products. Hollywood and major news entities have massive servers archiving their stuff as they've been transitioning from tape and film libraries. But they have the same issue we have when archiving our footage, when the power goes off then what?</p> <p>So now the best course of action after you digitize from tape or download from flash media is to offload onto a backup/archival drive and put that sucker in a file cabinet or safe until needed again. Hopefully, it will occur to someone that a permanent method of digital storage that can transcend the constant fluctuations of manufacturers is needed and such a device will be created.</p> <p>In the meantime, film will still be around as an artist's medium just as charcoal, paint and sculpture are still with us after thousands of years.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74440 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 11:37:03 +0000 doublehamm 74440@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>5k 24fps footage from the Red Epic runs over 10GB/Minute of video.  Now imagine the 300fps it can shoot at 5k.  Even if it is a bit more compressed, and used for special occasions, that is still a lot of storage space needed!</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74438 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 10:25:12 +0000 robGRAUERT 74438@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I actually don't like the faster frame rates. I only use them for slo-mo. If you quickly wave your hand in front of your face, you'll see motion blur. There is much less motion blur with 60p, making it looks unrealistic, in my opinion. </p> <p>Plus, there is a technical trade off. The faster the frame rate, the more bandwidth is needed. Now, if your media is highly compressed, that might not matter. But not everyone works with highly compressed media.</p> <p>To each his own, though.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74437 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 10:15:37 +0000 Don 74437@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>what is film?</p> <p>personally I'm glad to see heavy weights like cameron pushing for faster frame rates with digital!</p> <p>To be honest 24 frames per second was the slowest frame rate possible to save money on film!</p> <p>action movies will never be the same now that film is gone, and directors that see digitals true potential are moving forward.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74433 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:07:19 +0000 Steve 74433@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Hi Rob, I guess that without Avatar, the digital shift would still have been inevitable, but the Box Office pull of James Cameron certainly did boost the confidence of cinemas to adopt 3D and thus digital screens at a faster rate than initially.</p> <p>There are certainly pros and cons to digital filming. It would be great if you could comment on the Quantel blog (which we researched) and provide balance from the perspective of a film maker!</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74432 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 06:47:12 +0000 MediaFish 74432@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>The answer to the Kodak question becomes clearer if you read the book Good to Great by Jim Collins.  Kodak failed to capitalize on several business fronts, failed to realize change was needed and that change was coming whether Kodak liked it or not.  When they did finally realize change was needed they moved entirely to slow.  They had the wrong business brain trusts on the bus - those that believed Kodak was too big and powerful but failed to embrace the new and up and coming technologies.  The story of Kodak will be studied in the business realms for years to come.  The story is not yet finished on Kodak - it will depend on what they do now that will spell the complete end of Kodak or a new beginning.  In business you produce the best product you can in order to be a good company.  In order to be a great company you build your product better than anyone else can.  Over the years Kodak had numerous occasions to embrace new technology and use it to do things better than anyone else.  However, it seems they made a business decision to be just like everyone else instead of better than everyone else which was the first step towards the end for Kodak.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74431 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 06:09:38 +0000 robGRAUERT 74431@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I disagree. I don't think Avatar is the reason why everything is shifting to digital. If Avatar was never released, it would not have changed the fact that shooting digital is cheaper than film and digital images have reached the quality of film.</p> <p>Kodak going out of business is unfortunate, but they should have seen this coming. They should have put forth an effort to create high quality compression schemes for acquisition. Doing so would all them to license the compression schemes to camera manufactures and NLE software for seamless workflows. Apple beat them too it and now cameras like the Alexa record ProRes files, which play nice with a lot of NLEs.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/why-digital-is-killing-film#post-74429 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 03:49:49 +0000 Steve 74429@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Check out this article to see the real reason why digital has seen off film for good in the movie business:</p> <p><a href="http://blog.quantel.eu/2012/02/the-rise-of-digital-in-motion-pictures-beyond-the-tipping-point-for-film-part-1-of-2/">The rise of digital in motion pictures Beyond the tipping point for film (part 1 of 2)</a></p> <p>It explains why the likes of Kodak, the iconic photography firm, went bankrupt and the one game-changing event in 2009 that changed everything!</p> <p>Do you agree?</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/tips-for-shooting-animals#post-71262 Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:28:51 +0000 Jennifer O'Rourke 71262@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Thanks, Stacy, we're glad you found the story informative. I think Stacy's reply is in reference to our latest feature:"<em>How to Direct Animals and Stay Sane</em>". <a href="http://www.videomaker.com/article/15084/" rel="nofollow">http://www.videomaker.com/article/15084/</a></p> <p>You can also find some animal videography tips in these two "shooting in the Wild" features. "<em>Wild Things: Tips for Shooting in the Wild</em>" - <a href="http://www.videomaker.com/article/13763/" rel="nofollow">http://www.videomaker.com/article/13763/</a></p> <p>and"Grizzlies in Yellowstone" <a href="http://www.videomaker.com/article/10192/" rel="nofollow">http://www.videomaker.com/article/10192/</a></p> <p> </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/tips-for-shooting-animals#post-71259 Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:08:22 +0000 grinner 71259@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> Your relationship with animals is key, just like your people skills when directing people. Talk to them. Literally explain what you are doing and why and let them feel your intentions. They'll do what they can after you connect.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/tips-for-shooting-animals#post-71242 Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:35:48 +0000 SargeHero 71242@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>From experience, shooting animals comes down to one peculiar thing, lots of patience. By the way, what information are you talking about?</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/tips-for-shooting-animals#post-71225 Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:30:35 +0000 Stacy 71225@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> This is great information. About to shoot a lot of therapy dogs for a local hospital, so this comes at a really great time.  And now I know to shoot wide shots first...and switch up angles for editing. Plus, I now know to let the animals do their thing and change my "initial" scripting as necessary.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/i-make-wildlife-yotube-videos#post-62406 Fri, 01 Oct 2010 18:09:01 +0000 wtzup 62406@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Nice stuff but intro lasts too long. about 16 seconds till any info about what you are showing. For a demo video on Nature the demo one you gave did not show nature. Remember in Video and all productions you have a few seconds to keep someone's attention. Quality looks good. Just work on the speed of telling the story. Will really increase the viewers.</p> <p> </p> <p>GL</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/i-make-wildlife-yotube-videos#post-62108 Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:57:33 +0000 Omar Ghanem 62108@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I'd like to introduce myself, my name is Omar Ghanem,iam an Egyptian and the creator of Natural Geo-Team.</p> <p>if you are wondering what is Natural Geo-Team?</p> <p> </p> <p> <br /> Natural Geo-team© is a group known for making short Wildlife Documentaries and Vlogs on Youtube. <br />We film anything concerning Nature and we have some webs series's that we are working on:<br />-Herping with Omar.<br />-Travel and Adventure.<br />-Graden Lovers.<br />-Sea madness.<br />-Nature Short Clips.<br />-Ant's empire.&lt;/span&gt;</p> <p> </p> <p>We started the real work on youtube on june 2009 and we made a group of loyal audience till now.</p> <p>i want you guys to check my videos out, i will be very thankful.</p> <p>this is my <a href="http://www.naturalgeo-team.jimdo.com">websiteÃ? </a></p> <p>and this is my <a href="http://www.youtube.com/natgeoteam">Youtube pageÃ?  </a></p> <p>Thank you,</p> <p>Omar Ghanem</p> <p> </p> <p>btw this is one of our videos</p> <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUZRmPv9Fdw">Owls stuck in a Tunnel!!!(A wildlife YT video)</a></p> <p> </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/starting-a-filming-business-dont-know-where-to-start#post-56659 Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:28:18 +0000 EarlC 56659@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Lotta responses right here at this VM link - <a href="http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/outdoor-video-question#post-56209">http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/outdoor-video-question#post-56209</a> check it out.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/starting-a-filming-business-dont-know-where-to-start#post-56654 Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:08:48 +0000 grinner 56654@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> I see no need to roll film for outdoors shows. IN all my days of making outdoor content, never have I rolled a frame of film. It's all been video, even back in the Bill Dance days.</p> <p>Set up an LLC with your atty, ensure the name you chose is available and protect it. I think you'd do much better financially in creating and pitching outdoor shows you caould get sponsored, rather than just making a home movie for a hunter. It's a saturated market but because it costs so little to produce these shows, there really is no gamble. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/starting-a-filming-business-dont-know-where-to-start#post-56652 Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:07:18 +0000 rakklub 56652@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Hi!  I need to start a filming business.  I have a name for the business, but not sure what to do.  How do I make a filming business for real.  Now my job or jobs that I have done, I film a hunt then make it into a video.  The hunter then pays for my services and in the end he/she will get a video of their experience.  So I am kind of a free lancer, I guess.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/outdoor-public-filming#post-56348 Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:36:18 +0000 composite1 56348@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Water,</p> <p>Really you should check in with your local film commission and see what their guidelines are concerning permits and so on. Particularly since you're showcasing these videos in a public bar. As your events get bigger, sooner rather than later issues about permission and a host of other concerns are going to pop up. All it takes is for one underage female to end up on camera the wrong way and someone who knows her to take offense and you'll have some real trouble. Not to mention, since you are going through the trouble of making these things, you should get something for it. Just remember, the minute you publicly display or distribute your films, the rules change and not necessarily in your favor.</p> <p>There are a lot of good back articles here on VM in addition to forum posts dealing with this very subject. But definitely check with your local and state film commissions. They are a valuable resource for info and all things production in your state.</p> <p>Good luck!</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/outdoor-public-filming#post-56339 Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:49:10 +0000 watertime 56339@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I attend a few outdoor public events that run thru out the summer out on the water. They tend to get a little wild (in a good way) and I always have the video cameras and other still cameras rolling when the beads start flying later in the afternoon(actually it is pretty easy to get volunteers for the film crew at these events).</p> <p>Up until now I cut the footage together with some party music and we usually get together in around this time of year for the "movie premiere" aka excuse to drink beer look at bikinis and dream about the warm weather.</p> <p>This year we took over a local bar and had 60 - 70 people there. </p> <p>Before this gets any bigger, what are the "rules" about filming public events and what can and can not be used. Up till now I have not sold any of the DVD's but as this event gets bigger it is starting to get expensive and would like to recoup some of the costs </p> <p>Any thoughts?</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/filming-full-speed-racing-atv-racing#post-42809 Sun, 04 Jan 2009 18:06:19 +0000 RockstarRider 42809@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>yeah  the GL2 is going to do great recording quad racing...have heard a lot of good stuff about it..</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/filming-full-speed-racing-atv-racing#post-42783 Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:13:40 +0000 EarlC 42783@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>GL2 is a GREAT standard definition camera, decent sound from in-cam mic, but I do often use a shotgun mic, and it is capable of producing 16x9 widescreen and GREAT glass (lens), plus the noted Canon image stabilization.</p> <p>I seriously doubt, used or otherwise, you'll find one in decent shape and with accessories for $1K - these puppies are still selling for high dollar most places and only someone looking to offload a overworked one, or in desperate need of money is going to let his/hers go for less than $1.5K. The resale value of these cameras remains high.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/filming-full-speed-racing-atv-racing#post-42764 Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:29:43 +0000 jjkrol0601 42764@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> I agree with with rob for that pricerange a canon gl2 is probably your best bet i have researched them and they have good quality although not hd. the stock mic on it has pretty good crisp audio.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/filming-full-speed-racing-atv-racing#post-42763 Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:08:08 +0000 robGRAUERT 42763@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> When I first got into video, I got a Canon GL2. Shoots a great image outdoors. You should be able to find a used one with accessories for $1000 or less. </p> <p> If you buy a used one, always buy it in person to make sure the equipment is working properly.  </p>