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 :)

Indie filmmaking strategies?

Not that this applies to low-budget productions, but if you look at the production dairies for King Kong, they have some of the worst fix-it-in-post type shots around. For example:
- Painting out the reflection of the camera crew on a sheet of glass
- Rotoscoping moving branches and hair

I believe it works out that (for LOTR) each shoot day is so ridiculously expensive that it's cheaper to fix things in post than to shoot it right.
 
I'm one that tends to get taken out of a story when the production values are bad. I think practical lighting is fine, as long as the camera is seeing the shot properly. For example, you are using a single table lamp in a scene, and you love how it's casting a subtle light on someone's face, it is really working for you as you look it over with your own eyes. But then the camera is unable to reproduce that for you, perhaps due to its technical limitations and it no longer feels right, then the practical is not working. You have to augment.

Lighting and choice of lens are keys to how filmmakers tell stories. They are equal partners with script, sound, directing, etc. Good films can be made lacking in some of those areas, but great, memorable films often have that perfect balance.

I'd love to see Red be capable of a nice dynamic range that will allow all kinds of styles to work.
 
Stu Maschwitz

http://prolost.blogspot.com/

"The foundation of the DV Rebel approach is that you can make your film look great with the right off-the-shelf tools. But remember, you are starting from a huge deficit. Your camera, your wardrobe, your locations, your actors all cost a tiny fraction of those in the movies you want yours to look like. The one leg up you have is that you can match or beat the big boys in post. Don't compromise your one advantage—treat onlining as the part of the process where you can craft your Rebel production into something beautiful and expensive looking, and avail yourself to the best (but cheapest!) tool for the job."
 
@ GlennChan
The reason why for LotR or King Kong fixing it in the post is cheaper is simply because it is cheaper to pay for some guys working internship, than the whole crew on set and the rent for the equipment.

@ stevesherrick
One should not think that the Red cam can replace the need for some adequate lighting. At least you need to model the light and showdows interestingly to give the post something to work with.
 
That's exactly my point. Light, lens, etc are all crucial to telling the story. Red isn't going to change that. What it might do is allow you to see more information with less light than some people are used to with say, a middle of the road DV camera. But lighting is always going to be important, whether it's natural light or lighting that you carefully add to or subtract from a scene.

I have yet to see footage from Red projected on a big screen, but I'm looking forward to it at NAB. Should be very enlightening.
 
Hopefully you'll have a script, unlike "Days of Heaven"...

A nice camera like Red will allow you some leeway and allow you to get some shots on the run like inserts without lighting, but you'll still have to hire a grip and his truck. Even a bounce card needs someone to hold the card...
 
Has anyone thought about what the minimum number of crew you can get away with to shoot this hypothetical rebel film? I'm talking about the minimum number of people to still get great lighting with enough equipment. The reason I am asking is that this is very much on my mind as I intend to take the production into a far away land and each aditional person represents a greatdly added expense.

I am thinking the following (in no particular order):

1. Red One Camera Operator
2. HD Footage wrangler
3. 1st AC
4. Grip Man
5. Gaffer
6. Grip / Gaffer Assistant / Best Boy
7. Sound Mixer
8. Boom Operator
9. AD
10. Wardrobe / Art person
11. Continuity Supervisor (Can't the Director do this on his / Her own?)
12. PM
13. PA

...and that's it... oh, yeah, and the director and DP of course... but then again that could be the same person as the Red One camera operator ;-)
 
Continuity should be assigned to someone who is very skilled at that position. Director should be focused on story, actors, working with DP, etc. To me, a good continuity/script supervisor is worth a pot of gold. They save your arse in post. If you've seen a good one work, they are truly amazing. What they are able to keep track of and the notes they take will make an editor all warm and fuzzy.
 
TheThe, take a look at the following article. Dale explains how many people he used for his $100k film, and his philosophy behind it.
http://www.dalelauner.com/press/digitalcinema.html

If I read correctly, his crew would be:
1- Director
2- DP / camera operator
3- His/her intern
4- Costumer
5- His/her intern.
6- Production designer
7- His/her intern.
8- Sound
9- His/her intern (boom op)
10- Line producer, AD, UPM
11- Craft service / catering
12?- Grip? (or is this counted already in 3?)
- If he had to do it again, he might throw in a few more interns.

Now his goal wasn't to have great lighting, but rather to shoot fast/cheap. You can take a look at stills of his movie and the trailer on his website.
 
I try to let the script dictate the lighting... if it's all night exteriors, even 800 ASA will be tough - at some point you'll need big lights unless you want a movie of only closeups. On controlled sets, I've found that less is more - unless your director wants a glam-Hollywood style; then it's backlight and eyelight for every mark... time consuming and expensive....

Regarding RED, we can't know til we get our hands on one, but I suspect the 3-ton grip package and 3-ton lighting package I get on low-budget F900/950 features will serve me just fine for whatever movie I shoot... and don't think for a minute the crew will get any smaller... unless it's dictated by the script.
 
at some point you HAVE to make decisions ..and those decisions MUST fit in the budget .. if you decide your script is ready and you are going to GO for it ... then you do the BEST you can with what you have available...

these days i either get a 10 ton or nothing .. paying jobs ( commercials) might be a couple 10 tons but on projects i shoot for friends since 2000 have been no trucks ... we find locations that have good natural light ( daylight or practicals) .. we keep night street shooting to a min and tend to shoot the wide shots around magic hours( keep sky out of shot)...

if the choice comes down to either shooting using available light or not shooting the project = shoot ...

once i test red 103 to see it's limits - i'll then be using it to to the max and beyond..
 
TheThe said:
1. Red One Camera Operator
2. HD Footage wrangler
3. 1st AC
4. Grip Man
5. Gaffer
6. Grip / Gaffer Assistant / Best Boy
7. Sound Mixer
8. Boom Operator
9. AD
10. Wardrobe / Art person
11. Continuity Supervisor (Can't the Director do this on his / Her own?)
12. PM
13. PA
Click to expand...

My current thinking, for my feature, hopefully at a 200k budget shooting with two REDs, is this:

1. Director
2. DP/#1 camera op
3. 1st AC
4. #2 camera op/steadicam op
5. 2nd AC (pulling focus on camera #2)
6. Producer/UPM
7. Producer/Problem solver/Dolly grip (my brother) :biggrin:
6. AD
7. Second AD
9. Sound Mixer
10. Makeup/Wardrobe girl
11. Scripty
12. KeyGrip
13. Grip/Intern/Boom Op (he's boomed before)
14. Grip/Intern
15. HD Tech/Intern

I originally wanted to keep the crew at 10, but that notion went out the window when I added a second camera. I think I can get away with my grip/intern boom opping because my picture has very little on-location dialogue. And my DP basically acts as the gaffer. My crew-to-actor ratio is going to be extremely lopsided, because I only have three actors in this movie 90% of the time, with a few side characters coming and going. Better than my last shoot, which had like 25 actors and 8 crew. :(
 
"my DP basically acts as the gaffer"

so when does your DP get a break ?

DP has to be there for blocking actors/2cameras, then light it , then rehearse it a few times with actors , then shoot the scene,( maybe check the shot to make sure it's good or playback for director?) - then DP is on to the next shot ?

most of the other crew get to take a few minutes break during shooting the scene or while shot is set up....
 
Examples . . .

rodeo-b-01.jpg

UNCORRECTED SONY DSR450 FRAME.

r6.jpg

UNCORRECTED SONY DSR450 FRAME.
 
GlennChan said:
TheThe, take a look at the following article. Dale explains how many people he used for his $100k film, and his philosophy behind it.
http://www.dalelauner.com/press/digitalcinema.html
Click to expand...

Glenn, thanks for the link. I really looooved the article because that is exactly what I am planning on doing (like maybe half the other people on this site).

My situation is that I already have most of the (basic) equipment. All locations are basically free and great (it will be in Mexico). As for SAG talent, I am planning on invoking the foreign country rule... which is that if the SAG actor signs his or her contract in a foreign country, SAG rules don't apply. As far as my real expenses go, as I figured it, I plan on spending on getting there, crew, catering, some art / wardrope, and tons of post.

By the way, the reason I am somewhat confident of not needing that many people for crew is that I already shot a feature film, where I was the producer, financier, steadicam operator and the DP (how crazy is that). Here are some of the shots we got (all with minimal or no lights) (we just had an Arri softbank kit and that's it).

(Pic Withdrawn)

(Pic Withdrawn)

(Pic Withdrawn)
 
Here's a simpler lighting setup that achieves a mood very effectively. This one's a little more achievable than my last post.

The fluorescents are shop type work lights on speedrail wall-spreaders. There's one 4 bank 4' Kino visible. The light through the windows is coming from a few 1K tungsten PARs through a sodium vapor gel pack. The desk is lit with a practical and a Source 4 hidden by the ceiling.

So scratching the Kino, we're talking about a very simple and cheap lighting setup that could run on house power combined with very very effective production design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top