I need advice from some Pro's (Thanks)

dholt wrote on 2/24/2004, 8:48 AM
I'm getting ready to do 3 music video projects. I will be shooting them with Sony VX2000 and TRV950 DV Cameras. I use Vegas 4.0 along with Boris FX7, Commotion Pro 4.1 and Particle Illusion 3 for effects work.

Here is my situation. I'm dealing with a small independant recording company that might want me to do some work for them but they want film and the film look. They want 16MM or Super 16MM. I met somone else that wants everything in a Beta SP format. I want to shoot and edit with DV. Question?
What about DV to Film transfer?
Are there really plug ins that give a film look or is this just wishful thinking?
How would you address these companies that insist everything needs to be on film or it won't have the look and feel they are looking for? Their actual response is below: Thanks

All in all, my research has led me to the same conclusion, that in order
to get a rich look, that's seen in virtually all TV commercials, TV dramas,
and music videos, we would need to shoot on 16mm or Super 16mm. In our small
company, quality is very important to us because we have no money to
waist. Let me know if your company can provide a DP with camera that can shoot it
in 16. I believe that as producers it would be important for you to be
working in this medium as well. I have a close friend who produces TV
commercials for one of the biggest ad agencies in the world. He says they
never shoot on video, and they can afford any format or camera they
choose.


Comments

TVCmike wrote on 2/24/2004, 9:15 AM
I'm not sure I'm entirely in agreement with the 16mm argument. Sure, there's a stylistic difference, but in my experience there are other factors that are more important. I mean, there are commercial DVDs created with cinetele conversions out there, so it can't be purely the digital format.

I think there are probably a few factors to making something look "like film". The first is 23.976/24fps frame rate. It doesn't look as real as, say, 30fps, but that's the pont of film - to immerse you in another world. That leads to the second biggie, which is depth of field. Most films have a shallow depth of field, where only the subjects are in focus and the background remains out of focus. It's trickier to do with digital cameras because of the deep depth of field, but it can be done, and playing with the sharpness of the various elements of the picture can help you in that regard. Audio is another biggie, and the proper use of external microphones of various types will help. Proper lighting and contrast also plays a big factor, as does using a 3CCD camera for accurate color reproduction (which you have). Native 24p and 16:9 support in a camera is a plus if you can get it.

Jetdv has a great plug-in for making film look like a certain type of celluloid. But I think you could try accounting for some of those things above. Ironically, people enjoy certain defects that "add" to their particular experience. By no means is any of this my own information. They're just tips that I've picked up along the way. IMO you could use most of them today and demonstrate to your client how DV could fulfill their needs. You need to give them a good end result, and some clients are very insistent and will take their business elsewhere if you push back too much. Still, it can't hurt to try before renting a bunch of equipment. All IMHO, of course. :)
jetdv wrote on 2/24/2004, 9:22 AM
Bad link. The plugin is now here.
TVCmike wrote on 2/24/2004, 9:26 AM
My bad. Sorry...

Edit: and thank you for your hard work on the plug-in!
JackW wrote on 2/24/2004, 10:28 AM
So if they want film, or Beta SP, become a producer and sub out the jobs. Hire a 16mm or Beta shooter and let them do the shooting under your supervision. The editing too, if that's called for. Mark up the cost so you cover your expenses and a profit and everyone's happy.

Trying to make video look like film is like trying to make oils look like water color. What's the point, and what have you got once you've done it? They are two different media, two tools that have unique characteristics. While it's an interesting technical problem to attempt to achieve the "film look" in video, I'd much rather see the energy going into exploiting the strengths and uniqueness of the video medium.

The technique de jour situates video as the hand-maiden of film -- the digital intermediate processing of film, film-to-digital-to film. At the same time, though, an increasing number of motion picture houses are acquiring high end digital projection equipment. I've recently seen two feature-length films that were shot in HD and released for projection on a DVD.
More are sure to follow. Neither made an attempt to make the HD look like film. The result: outstanding image quality, brilliantly saturated colors and low production costs. The down side: some loss of definition in shadows and, according to one of the DP's some difficulty with back lit scenes.

My conclusion: let the film makers shoot film, videographers shoot video. Don't have a 16mm camera? Hire someone who does. The client whose letter you quote isn't ever going to be happy with anything that isn't 16mm, no matter how much "film look" gets applied to a video. His judgement isn't in his eye, it's in his prejudice.

scotty_dvc80 wrote on 2/24/2004, 10:59 AM
Well said Jack W. In his prejudiced..
I'm a salesman. So i would maybe try an aproach although softly.. provide Jack W. solution with a price with 16mm and a price with Digital DVX100 .. 24p
Sell him on the cost efficiency and the quality is similiar to 16mm so they say.. If need be get some footage of both and have him tell you which one is which.. lol
Sell him on the fact that many TV shows and the like are shot on Digital DV these days and sell him again on the cost efficiency .. If he doesnt buy it sell him the 16mm package ... When they see the bottom line of cost for their project and you muddy the waters by providing more info.. They may see the light. And go for the Digital DV..
Hes already bought into you. Obviously he trusts your word.. build more trust by giving him what you know while not offending him or his friend who told him to shoot it on 16mm. By giving him the two options with bottom line price for option 1 or option 2 your building trust and confidence in your knowledge. As well as providing yourself moreso likelyhood of closing the deal.
filmy wrote on 2/24/2004, 11:14 AM
I think you need to step back and take a look at the bigger picture. You are working for the client, not yourself. *if* they are providing the budget to shoot on film that there is no need to argue unless you can not provide the services they are sking for.

In this case it seems as though your are trying to provide a full service - from shooting it to posting it. If this is the case you need to come up with a list of what *you* can provide a client and present it to them. Shooting film may not be an option that you want to provide - you may not have the equipment to shoot on film or you may not want to deal with all that shooting on film brings with it. That is your choice. Once you put yourself out there it does not do you any good to tell clients what they want is not as good as what you want...that is a big no-no.

A very good friend of mine owns a commerical production company and he is a DP on top of that. If he is shooting he will shoot whatever format the client wants, be it 16mm or be it 35mm or be it HD or be it Digi Beta. Yes he will give his insight but at the shooting level he is a hired hand and it is not a quesiton of "What format do you use?" it is a quesiton of "Will you/can you shoot this format?" On the directorial/production end he will get together with his partner and come up with a treatment and a budget based on what the clent came to them with. They may say "We have $250,000 to shoot this spot" or they may say "Come up with a treatment and a bid". Either way the company is trying to service the client, not the other way around.

Havng said all of that - film look is best achieved by shooting film. Period. Are there ways to "fake it" with video? Yes and they get better each day. One of the Orphange's big claim to fame was they film looked the Cher music video with their "Magic Bullet" software. I believe they also did work on some scenes in 'Liquid Sky' (was that it? The Tom Cruise remake). For me I think it is really a choice - you mention you will be shooting the music videos so you have to ask your self - "How good of a DP am I?" You have to sit down and figure out if you can, first and formost, shoot video that has the depth of film using whatever video gear the budget allows. Come up with a comparison budget for shooting film. Now put your expericence as a DP into the mix.

If any of that wasn't specific to your questions let me be direct -

>>>I want to shoot and edit with DV.<<<

Than that should be reflected in your rate cards and discussions. If you shoot it must be DV. If you edit the source material must be presented to you on DV tapes and that your final output will only be on DV tapes. (And if you are using Vegas you will not be able to supply any EDL for any future online sessions)

>>>What about DV to Film transfer?<<<

If the client wants a film print of the final work it can be done, but that alone does not mean it will look like it was shot on film. One of the things I always go back to is seeing the Frank Zappa film "2,000 Motels" in a theater. It blew me away because it was shot on video but the film transfer was amazing - it looked like video being projected on this huge screen. Film that looked like video because it *was* video.

>>>Are there really plug ins that give a film look or is this just wishful thinking?<<<

There are many plug-ins around for vairous software that will help in taking the video edge off of film by adding 'looks'. Magic Bullet (After Effects), BigFX Film FX (After Effects, Premiere , Discreet, Speed Razor, FCP [I think]) Cinelook (After Effects), Zenote (Vegas - Based on the BigFX FilmFX plug-ins) and my current fave Digital Film Tools "55mm" and "Digital Film Lab" (After Effects, FCP, Most Avid stuff, Digital Fusion, Photoshop) to name a few.

There is also software and plug-ins that allow for converting interlaced footage to progressive and vice versa. Vegas does this, After Effects does this. Plug-ins like Re: Vision Effects' 'Twixter' and 'FieldsKit' do it very well and 'Magic Bullet' has it as part if it's package. There is also the stand alone "DVFilm Maker'.

If you use Vegas you can do a lot with nothing but Vegas. As mentioned JetDV created a script based on the steps in Spot's film look tutorial. I created some basic 'looks' that are also loaded when you install the script.

As for how much like film any of this looks is always debated, time and time again.

And probably the most important question you asked:
>>>How would you address these companies that insist everything needs to be on film or it won't have the look and feel they are looking for?<<<

Your job shouldn't be to correct your clients. Your job is to give them what they are asking for. If your method is different than what they are asking you to provide you can either poliety bow out telling them that you can not provde the services they are asking for or you can use examples of your past DV work, hopefully showing them the 'look' they want. Everyone wants a different 'look' and most of the time it is based on something else. I get crap for saying things like this next comment but - why do you thinkg Avid got such a name in the industry? There were other NLE's out there that were as good or better but because of word of mouth and being an extremely high end system with lots of bells and whistles (*and* offering so many flavors and upgrade options) the Avid name has become, more or less, associated with "professional" projects. If you are working in DV only, such as you say you want to do, you really don't need an Avid. But that won't stop a client yo umight have from asking if you use an Avid to do your work with. If a client wants to shoot on film however, you do need to shoot on film...no matter what you do you can not 100% fake it by shooting on DV. You can try to ask them specifily what it is they are 'looking' for. ..maybe it is just a color ttiming issue, maybe it is a special effect as simple as slow motion, maybe it is 'grain"...the thing is it is your job to give the client what they are asking for and if all you are getting from them is "16mm" than you aren't going to give them the 'look' they want even if you shoot on film.

A few things you might like to read:
http://www.lafcpug.org/review_film_plugins.html

http://www.dvfilm.com/faq.htm
http://www.theorphanage.com/webcontent/press06/
http://www.sundancemediagroup.com/tutorials/filmlook.htm