Chapter 12: After the Subway

As seen this morning on my NAB panel. My contribution to the emerging Subway Short genre of camera tests, with a twist—what happens after all the furtive subway hopping and phone dialing?

To see it in HD, you’ll have to go to YouTube (and please do). Why no HD on Vimeo? Vimeo only serves HD at 24p, and as lovely as that sounds, this short was shot on the Canon 5D Mark II, and therefore is at 30fps. Vimeo does a sloppy convesion to 24p, which is not cool.

Update on Tuesday, April 21, 2009 at 12:18AM by Stu

Thanks for all the comments below guys! Here’s a bit more about the short.

First of all, I knew going into this that the look would be that heartbreaking amalgamation of cinematic depth of field and video-like motion. But I didn’t want to send this camera back to Vincent without shooting something. I still consider this a “camera test” more than anything—but really, the best thing to come of the shoot was meeting The Stunt People, who are both the stars and co-creators of this peice. I can’t wait to work with Eric and the guys again.

I won’t shoot anything else at 30p, ever, unless I plan on slowing it down to 24 for a slight overcrank effect. I’ve seen entire TV commercials shot 30 for 24 though, so it could happen. I harassed the Canon reps at NAB today about 24p and manual control until they were afraid of me.

As devastating as the frame rate is, the lack of shutter control is worse. Most of the nasty video-like look is due to the camera’s frequent use of a shutter speed slower than 1/60. There’s plenty of 1/30 in there, which is the equivalent of a 360 degree shutter on a film camera—an impossibility, and a dead giveaway of video origination (even at 24p).

There are people out there enjoying some luck converting 5D Mark II footage to 24p using tools such as Twixtor and the built-in retiming in After Effects, but that only works on relatively sedate subjects (of which this short has very few), and even then, there are often nasty artifacts to contend with. Didn’t we choose this camera for image quality?

I had two big dropouts, which I fixed using that After Effects retiming feature. I immediately bought some Extreme IV CF cards to avoid that problem in the future.

I shot with only one lens, the slow-but-lovely 24–105mm f/4 L lens that comes with the camera. We were mostly at f/4.0, although I can’t be sure we always were. I stopped doing the half-twist trick after I realized how much I and the camera would be moving around. So as shallow as the DOF is, it’s nothing compared to what we could have had if I’d used primes. That’s a big leg up the 5D could have over the Panasonic GH1—even with slow glass, the Canon can make DOF that can be used as a storytelling aide, such as the moment where our guy sees the two adversaries in the distance. They appear as blurry blobs, just the way I like ‘em.

I had access to the full Redrock Micro DSLR bundle, but wound up stripping it way, way down to something I could be agile with and still pull focus as a solo operator. This stripped-down rig became the inspiration for the rig I blogged about recently.

I used my HV20 for one shot. Can you guess which one?

Editor Gregory Nussbaum (The Spirit) cut with Final Cut Pro, using half-res proxies that I rendered out of After Effects. When we locked the cut, I exported XML from Final Cut and imported that into Premiere Pro CS4. I then loaded that Premiere project into After Effects. From there, I could create precomps for each clip and swap in the full-res originals.

I color corrected entirely using Magic Bullet Colorista, sometimes several layers per shot. Many Power Masks to sculpt lighting and lift faces, as well as to unite the various colors of light present in the location. I used no lighting or bounce of any kind during the shoot.

I used the DV Rebel Tools to add new color correction layers and to preview my work using a configurable thumbnail view. The result is a deep, but very organized After Effects timeline.

And I will post more about most of these things!

Me @ NAB

Here’s where I’ll be in Vegas, baby:

On Monday, 4/20, I’ll be speaking at the Independent Filmmaking—A Million Dollar Look on a Thousand Dollar Budget: 2009 Edition panel. 11:30am–12:30pm in Room S222/S223.

That afternoon I will be signing copies of The DV Rebel’s Guide at the NAB Bookstore in the Central Lobby. 3–3:30pm. Copies will be on sale at the store at 15% off retail.

That night I will be at the fxphd party, so if you are enrolled, look for me there.

Tuesday (4/21) afternoon I’ll be signing and even giving away a few copies of The Guide at the Red Giant Software booth. 1:00 pm, booth SL2529.

That’s it for scheduled appearances. The rest of the time I’ll be watching Twitter for recommendations for cool gear to check out.

One spot you’re sure to see me is at the Redrock Micro booth. I’ve been playing with a new DSLR rig from them that combines light weight with single-operator follow-focus capability. Here’s a sneak peek:

It’s hard to see in this shot, but my left hand is wrapped around a horizontal grip that matches the vertical one on the right. I can cradle the grip and operate focus at the same time. Schweet!

If this rig looks weird to you, blame me, not Redrock. Look for more information on that in an announcement from them soon! Redrock is at booth C9544.

Update on Friday, June 12, 2009 at 3:35PM by Stu

That rig, called the “Captain Stu-bling,” is not available directly from Redrock. It may look weird, but it’s a joy to use, and quite affordable as this stuff goes.

Film at Half the Price

Public domain image by Max SmithI write a lot about accesible, i.e. "cheap" filmmaking. But as I explicitly mention in The Guide, filmmaking does cost money, and often the camera and what's in it comprise the least expensive aspect of a shoot.

And while we all know (and I don't say it enough) that color negative film is still the gold standard for motion picture image quality, we also know that it's expensive. Usually, if I eschew film for digital aquisition, it's for workflow reasons—but sometimes it's purely due to cost.

But what if film stock and processing was half price?

Panavision sent me this press release today:

PANAVISION PROPOSES TWO-PERF FILM SYSTEM FOR INDIE FILMMAKING IN TROUBLED ECONOMIC TIMES

Venerable Film System Provides High-quality Images Coupled with Significant Cost Savings

April 7, 2009—Woodland Hills, Calif. — While there is no easy antidote for the effect of the recession on independent filmmakers, Panavision suggests that the venerable two-perf film system may prove to be both an artistic and economic godsend in these troubled times.

Three recent productions – “Curve of Earth,” “Shoot First and Pray You Live” and “Gallow Walker” – are examples of films shot in 35mm two-perf that delivered the artistic vision of the production team, and saved roughly 50 percent on film negative and processing costs over standard four-perf, full-frame production.

Panavision now offers modified 35mm Panaflex cameras with two-perf movements available for rental. All handle Panavision’s range of legendary spherical film lenses from super speeds to Primos.

(For those unfamiliar with two-perf, the term refers to a modified film camera’s ability to record two images within the space usually inhabited by a single four-perf frame. “Perfs,” short for perforations, are the holes on either side of a piece of film that a camera sprocket engages to advance the film past the camera’s shutter.)

According to Andy Romanoff, Panavision Executive Vice President, Technical Marketing and Strategy, two-perf provides filmmakers with the ability to shoot 2.35 wide-screen images, usually attributed to higher-end systems, at reduced costs. It delivers a widescreen viewer experience but slices film stock and negative processing costs by 33 to 50 percent.

“In today’s difficult times,” said Romanoff, “filmmakers want the unique qualities of film, but find themselves daunted by cost. Using digital technology is a viable alternative, certainly, if you are using a sophisticated digital cinema system such as the Panavision Genesis. Using a less robust digital system will produce less robust images, and can compromise an artistic vision.

“With two-perf, no compromise is necessary. The two-perf system delivers true film images, allows creatives to lay down the images they imagined, and still create their film affordably.”

For more information, contact your local Panavision representative.

There's nothing new about 2-perf 35mm—George Lucas used it on THX 1138, back when it was calld Techniscope. No mention of whether the modern incarnation might use the full width of the 35mm frame (Super Techniscope?). The OG Techniscope used Academy width, which, when split horizontally created a perfect 2.35:1 aspect ratio.

This kind of smart use of film is very digital-friendly. Formats like Techniscope and 3-perf never really caught on before the advent of the DI, because they required an optical process to convert to projectable film. But now that every film image is likely to be digitally processed in post, such duplication is unnecessary.

What I like about 2-perf over 3-perf is that it brings some of the cajones back to 'scope filmmaking. There's no post-reframing or full-screen unmatted video versions of a Techniscope film. What you shot is what you got, much like anamorphic 'scope.

Attention Canon, Nikon: Video DSLRs Are Not For Who You Think

There’s a lot of talk about how the video features popping up in our DLSRs mean that photographers all need to become videographers. Alex Lindsay went on about it in TWiP #72, “The Death of Still Photography,” stating that photographers need to learn to shoot video, because their cameras now have that feature.

Bullshit.

Saying that photographers need to learn video because their cameras now feature video is like saying that you need to start a rock band because you bought an iMac that ships with Garage Band.

It is entirely possible that you are a still photographer who has no interest in video. That is OK. You know what’s pretty cool? Photography.

The only reason for a photographer to start doing video is an interest in shooting video.

And that has nothing to do with the convenience of a crippled video mode on the camera you were already going to buy.

Look at the photo below. On the left is a Canon video camera. Here are some of its features: 1920x1080 video at 60i, 30p and 24p, image stabilization, a crazy-long zoom range, mic input, lightning-fast autofocus. On the right is a lens that many Canon shooters are likely to have in their bag: the 85mm f/1.2L.

The lens is bigger, weighs more, and costs three times as much as the video camera, which is two years old.

Why do we expect stills shooters to suddenly take up video, when—if they had the slightest interest—they could have been carting around an HD camera for two years without taking up any more room in their bag than a prime lens?

Especially when you look at the specs of Canon DSLR video: Non-standard frame rates that don’t work for many countries and distribution methods, poor audio sync, overly compressed video that’s impossible to edit, zero manual control. Except focus, which is 100% manual with few tools to help you.

I said above that photographers should not feel any pressure to learn video if they don’t feel like it, but there is one class of shooter who might feel a legitimate pressure to add video to their toolkit: those photojournalists who are journalists first and photographers second. If you see your job not as bringing back photos but as bringing back a story, then by all means, you should probably be embracing video.

But not the crippled, crap video that your SLR just happens to have.

Get a video camera!

You’re a journalist. Capturing the event is all that matters. You don’t want to be fussing with manual focus and fiddly menus. You don’t want that mirror slamming down on you right in the middle of a once-in-a-lifetime-shot. You want perfect autofocus, fingertip manual control, instant-on video and a killer zoom range, in a form factor designed for what you’re doing. You’re also about to learn the hard way that whenever video is important, audio is twice as important, if not more.

You want a video camera. You could start with the one above that costs less than your cheapest lens and fits in the mesh bag you use for a water bottle. After that, if you like it, you might find out a secret: there are some really great professional video cameras out there that do even more.

The video mode on these DSLRs is exactly wrong for photojournalists.

But it’s exactly right for filmmakers.

Filmmakers have time to set up a shot. They control their environments. They can try a few different primes before settling on one. They expect to use manual focus. They plan on dual-system sound recording that involves a whole extra person who thinks only about sound. And they are gaga for shallow depth-of-field.

Filmmakers, at all levels from pros to wannabes, are thrilled about video DSLRs. They get it, they want it, and they know how to work around the limitations—if they even think of them as limitations.

Everyone else is scratching their heads wondering if they suddenly need to learn to pull focus, and if photography is dead. They’re so busy hating on the crippled video in the new 500D that they’ve overlooked that it’s a great stills rig at a great price.

Photographers: Don’t let gear define what you are. Do what you love. Cameras are cheap.

Filmmakers: Your camera will come, someday.

SLR manufacturers: You are making these things for filmmakers whether you think you are or not. Start listening to us. We want so badly to give you our money.

Update on Saturday, May 3, 2014 at 10:56PM by Stu

Thanks John.