Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Short Film shot on Scarlet-X

Sergio Perez said:
Well, A Dogma Film won the Grand Jury award at Cannes (Breaking The Waves). They sure are a bunch of naive idiots there...
Click to expand...

It was in 1996, one of the first "experimental" dogma 95 movies. It won because it was a NEW style. It's not new anymore, it was over-copied to a nausea point today.
 
Man, did you really quote that piece of shit, Armond White? He's kind of a moron.
 
Benoît-Joan Clariana-Roig said:
Are you serious ? Is it a troll, isn't it ?

2 people are talking and there's no shot/reverse shot cut, no exposition shot, no large shot, no framing at all, and you get random cuts with a lot of silence. Looks like more an vacation video shot handheld with a 20 000 $ cam. The only positive thing here is that the Scarlet performs very nicely.

Dogma style is not art, it's just plain laziness/unprofessional. It's a caricature here of that style that almost killed the european cinema (fortunately not in France).
Click to expand...


Show us your great work Benoît-Joan Clariana-Roig... Come on... show us all... Maybe you will be given a reality check by someone on this forum.

Note: Handheld or Dogma as you put it, is not a form of unprofessional director laziness, its a style... the same as placing a tripod on the ground... which must also be lazy to you.

I'm not impressed with your comments to people that are obviously trying to hone there skills and sharing there work. I say congratulations to them for learning and extending them selves.

Try saying nothing or be politely constructive at least...
 
Wow... Let us not forget how lazy and unprofessional Godard must have been with his hand-held work in A Bout de Soufle. And that lazy unprofessional jump-cut approach he used to edit to shorten the movie. He didn't even have a script when shooting! Digracefuly lazy.
 
I would call this peace more or less as an étude or at first learning courve in using Scarlet-X as a handheld, focus pulling without EVF,

and also in general as an étude about a filmmaking, film scripting, film casting, location hunting, executive short film production, etc,...
 
Mark Toia said:
Show us your great work Benoît-Joan Clariana-Roig... Come on... show us all... Maybe you will be given a reality check by someone on this forum.

Note: Handheld or Dogma as you put it, is not a form of unprofessional director laziness, its a style... the same as placing a tripod on the ground... which must also be lazy to you.

I'm not impressed with your comments to people that are obviously trying to hone there skills and sharing there work. I say congratulations to them for learning and extending them selves.

Try saying nothing or be politely constructive at least...
Click to expand...
Well said, Mark.
 
I love everything in this short - very inspiring. Thanks for sharing, Sebastian.

1. Where those professional actors ? Yes.

2. How did you synchronize the sound from the Zoom H4N and the image ? With a slate.

Thanks !

EDIT : Sebastian answered on his Vimeo page.
 
it's a great piece, and it looks even better knowing that it wasn't originaly started as a short, but it also reminds me if you have good actors and you know what you doing , i mean as soon as conversation started I stopped counting pixels :)
scarlet looks real cinema tool;
thank you for sharing.
 
Daniel Stilling said:
Moral of the story:
Dont tell somebody you are cheating on them unless you are close to home, or have 2 cars!
Click to expand...

haha you had me going there for a sec.

Great piece super Euro and i love it. For 3hrs production time it's pretty amazing although there were some moments that needed a reaction shot.

Bravo

4K is one of the coolest things around
 
Paramon Ivanovich said:
it's a great piece, and it looks even better knowing that it wasn't originaly started as a short, but it also reminds me if you have good actors and you know what you doing , i mean as soon as conversation started I stopped counting pixels :)
scarlet looks real cinema tool;
thank you for sharing.
Click to expand...

This.
 
Benoît-Joan Clariana-Roig said:
2 people are talking and there's no shot/reverse shot cut, no exposition shot, no large shot, no framing at all, and you get random cuts with a lot of silence. Looks like more an vacation video shot handheld with a 20 000 $ cam. The only positive thing here is that the Scarlet performs very nicely.

Dogma style is not art, it's just plain laziness/unprofessional. It's a caricature here of that style that almost killed the european cinema (fortunately not in France).
Click to expand...

I think the point you're missing is this was an impromptu camera test and all you can talk about is the style (or, lack thereof in your view) and execution of the piece....which means the camera passed.

That's why the test was performed in the first place. We end up looking past what camera was used, even though it's the reason we all watched, to focus on the story and how it's told, good or bad.

That's what we should all be taking away from this.
 
Brian Boyer said:
I think the point you're missing is this was an impromptu camera test and all you can talk about is the style (or, lack thereof in your view) and execution of the piece....which means the camera passed.

That's why the test was performed in the first place. We end up looking past what camera was used, even though it's the reason we all watched, to focus on the story and how it's told, good or bad.

That's what we should all be taking away from this.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I just hope that we won't see tons of finished projects like that "test". :skep:
 
Yes, and to that end, I need to bring up a concern. And this has little to do with the way this piece was shot, I think. When I initially downloaded the 1920x1080 .mov of this file, I encoded it in Sorenson Squeeze for full res playback through my PS3 (PS3's have just about the best HD decoding you can buy, btw) as an mp4. The resulting image, when I actually saw it on my Panny 50" studio monitor, was hyper, hyper sharp, very videoish in nature, more so than what I get with my AF100/Nanoflash/Voigtlander 25/.95. So I thought, ok, too much detail there. Something about the way the image was handled when it was Raw, and scaled down to 1080, resulted in this nasty hyper sharp edge enhanced look. There was considerable moire going on in both the character's scarves. So I took the source file (which was a pretty decently low compression 1920x1080) into AE and did a very low fast blur, which made the image on my monitor much more filim-like when I saw it still. But when rendered out and played back on my Panny, it still had the unmistakable look of video, thought the moire had been tamed and detail was not so brutal. No way around it though. Is this shooter's Canon lens simply way too sharp, or rather, coated in such a way that results in this? (that's the opinion of one person I asked) My older metal body Nikon glass has a very filmic look on my old Letus adapter, and again on the AF100. Good glass and not harsh. Poor man's Cooke. Perhaps it has to do with grading, and a very light-weight camera being hand or shoulder held? The moire concerns me. What has to happen when the image is RAW to avoid that when scaling down? I know Fincher shot GWDT with wide open anamorphic lenses, and I'm sure that helped tame hyper sharpness into something more filmic. I know the Alexa is a different beast, but I have a film shot with it for direct comparison, seeing this example leaves me wanting for the knowledge of how to tame the image from the Scarlet into something filmic, smoother. Please don't refer to how it looks on a laptop monitor. Put it on a good plasma.
 
Benoît-Joan Clariana-Roig said:
Are you serious ? Is it a troll, isn't it ?

2 people are talking and there's no shot/reverse shot cut, no exposition shot, no large shot, no framing at all, and you get random cuts with a lot of silence. Looks like more an vacation video shot handheld with a 20 000 $ cam. The only positive thing here is that the Scarlet performs very nicely.

Dogma style is not art, it's just plain laziness/unprofessional. It's a caricature here of that style that almost killed the european cinema (fortunately not in France).
Click to expand...


? The fundamentalist approach does not beckon creativity
 
Brant Hadfield said:
Yes, and to that end, I need to bring up a concern. And this has little to do with the way this piece was shot, I think. When I initially downloaded the 1920x1080 .mov of this file, I encoded it in Sorenson Squeeze for full res playback through my PS3 (PS3's have just about the best HD decoding you can buy, btw) as an mp4. The resulting image, when I actually saw it on my Panny 50" studio monitor, was hyper, hyper sharp, very videoish in nature, more so than what I get with my AF100/Nanoflash/Voigtlander 25/.95. So I thought, ok, too much detail there. Something about the way the image was handled when it was Raw, and scaled down to 1080, resulted in this nasty hyper sharp edge enhanced look. There was considerable moire going on in both the character's scarves. So I took the source file (which was a pretty decently low compression 1920x1080) into AE and did a very low fast blur, which made the image on my monitor much more filim-like when I saw it still. But when rendered out and played back on my Panny, it still had the unmistakable look of video, thought the moire had been tamed and detail was not so brutal. No way around it though. Is this shooter's Canon lens simply way too sharp, or rather, coated in such a way that results in this? (that's the opinion of one person I asked) My older metal body Nikon glass has a very filmic look on my old Letus adapter, and again on the AF100. Good glass and not harsh. Poor man's Cooke. Perhaps it has to do with grading, and a very light-weight camera being hand or shoulder held? The moire concerns me. What has to happen when the image is RAW to avoid that when scaling down? I know Fincher shot GWDT with wide open anamorphic lenses, and I'm sure that helped tame hyper sharpness into something more filmic. I know the Alexa is a different beast, but I have a film shot with it for direct comparison, seeing this example leaves me wanting for the knowledge of how to tame the image from the Scarlet into something filmic, smoother. Please don't refer to how it looks on a laptop monitor. Put it on a good plasma.
Click to expand...



Very genuine concern that also leaves me wondering. Is this the case of having older glass in front of newer technology making a better picture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top