Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • 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 :)

looking for an excellent condition Bolex super 16mm camera package....

Even Florian Stadler who critized my conversions is shooting on video now. He is not a real DP . 95% of DP's are shooting on film.

To use a film camera, you need to learn how to use it,the film and the light!

I converted 2 cameras for Sonny Miller who is a real Pro.He is one of the cameramen who shot the James Bond movie 'Die another day'

He told me that he was my biggest fan about my work. This is a very serious reference. I converted hundred of uper 16 with any problem. Because I give 6 months waranty. Who will give you 6 months on his work? Why all the Pros are chosing Cameraspro? There is a reason. I am also a film director and DP and I know what a cameraman needs by experience. The other people who convert your camera never shot ONE FOOT of film in their entire life. How can you compare? The crew who built the Concorde are not the people who pilot it ! I build and I shoot! It's a big difference!
Guy Bodart
Cameraspro.com

.....makes sense now! Applause, thank you very much for your insight on reduser. Now back to video........just us point and shoot drones. lighting doesn't matter anyway!
 
John

Yes, sold your video camera. I know I am right. A simple example. How do you know Charlie Chaplin , old documentaries on the first War? It's because it was shot on film. If they were shot on video, you would never know Charlie Chaplin and all those great artist.

I can assure you that you will never sell any feature on Video in Cannes film festival.

You can sell short or documentaries. But video is not film and cameras are not reliable. It's a fact!

Guy
 
John

I tried video and I can tel you that it doesn't work for a feature. Too much contrast, fake colors, needs a lot of corrections. Cameras not reliable by hot,humid or cold temperature. low life batteries etc...

Guy
 
John

Yes, sold your video camera. I know I am right. A simple example. How do you know Charlie Chaplin , old documentaries on the first War? It's because it was shot on film. If they were shot on video, you would never know Charlie Chaplin and all those great artist.

I can assure you that you will never sell any feature on Video in Cannes film festival.

You can sell short or documentaries. But video is not film and cameras are not reliable. It's a fact!

Guy

yes, but i will never be able to aquire the knowledge i forgot in film school since film is slowly drying up in most major markets that actually hire dp's. Filmmaking is not film or video. I'm sure i could site you many examples, but you already know. YOu are in an industry that supports only film, so you are offended and trying to hold onto what you know. Nothing wrong with that. but you might also consider film or video is not an either or....but what's best for the job at hand. i'm sure some wise folks might tell you the same.
 
John

You know that I am right! I understand your opinion and respect it. But take a look around you and all good production (I am talking about features) are shot on fil...Because it's better. Video ,sometimes, can give you a good picture, but the result is always cold, without life....It's a fact! Only a few features were shot on video. Even Georges Lucas was critisized for the result of 3 last Stars War! Flat pictures!

Steven Spielberg said : 'The day when we will not get film in the camera, I will no shoot anymore'

And what is your answer about old movie conservasion against Video? As I said, we would never knew who was Charlie Chaplin....

Guy
 
Yes, I support shooting on film to have a good master and use a serious equipment. I support digital transfert , EFX etc....100%

I am just again shooting video to looks like film. He will never look like film.

Guy
 
Benjamin Button, Slumdog Millionaire, Miami Vice, Collateral, Knowing, Superman Returns, There will be blood, Starwars episodes 2 & 3, The Game, The book of Eli, Pirates of the Caribbean: on stranger tides, The lovely bones, Superbad......

Oh...and Avatar

.....sorry if i missed hundreds more, but aren't these films shot on video or a significant portion shot on video? Guess video is not really dead now.
 
Done....i think you have no point here. Most will agree that film and video are up for the job at hand. To point blank shoot down video when your profession depends on film is rather obvious on this forum. If you've paid much attention in the past three years then you will have seen a quite revolution in video/film production. But some dogs just cant learn a new trick either...so be it. Respect your view, but i'm open to film and/or video having shot both. Sure makes sense for me as an independent to shoot what i can actually afford and work with.
 
Some of those film were shot in part with video. The '300' were shot on film, Gladiator too and I am pretty sure than Pirates of Caribeans were shot on film.

There is room for video effects...Of course video is not dead. But the film still better!

But what is the interest to shoot on video? Once upn a time in Mexico was shot on video...It's yellow...Where are the colors?

Guy
 
I understand you very well! I saw so many guys comming back to film too

If your job is to shoot commercials etc...Video is great!

If my job is to shoot features, film is better. Bu as you must know, you need a very good DP to shoot on film. I saw so many gainy video and films too....

There is room for the two formats, but for different works

Guy
 
By the way, the super production AVATAR lost the Oscar against a Super 16 film Hurt Locker. I have it on blu ray and it's very good...

Take care
Guy
 
By the way, 'Pirates of the Caribbean" was shot on film. Some shots whith Panavision and other shots with Arriflex cameras. Please check!

Try to have good information!

Guy Bodart
Cameraspro
 
Hey Guy, that dude says that "There Will be Blood" was shot on video when in fact it was photographed in anamorphic 35mm all the way, baby! ppssst. You ought to call him on it before somebody else does!
 
Hello Joe

Yes, of course, you are right! Those pictures are too good to be on video. And I saw them shooting the 'Pirate' with 3 Panavisio/Camaflex Platinum and other models too.

I know that 'Chaos 1' was shot on HD and Chaos 2" with a red camera. It's kind of sharp, but doesn't look great. I like hose movies, but ...Why video to get a flat picture. I really do not understand. Troy, Alexander, 300 and other great productions don not play with video. Video and film are very different and video can be very useful for some effects etc...But for a very good look, no one very good video camera cannot be compared to even an old Mitchell 35mm. Film still the best. But people do not get it. It's sad!

Guy
 
John

Do not worry, everybody can make mistake. We were only talking about film and video ...between friends!

Guy
 
Guy just in case you hadn't heard we don't shoot video around here its called Digital Cinema. There is a difference! But I really hope you are not saying the people on these forums are not real DP's because they shoot RED, because that would be arrogant and ignorant. The only people I have ever met that rally against digital are the people who define their income by film. Most other people like the characteristics or don't. Both are still available, both do a great job.

As I'm sure you are aware the film stocks are getting finer and the characteristics are getting closer to digital. They still have a very discernible look, however the line is almost too fine to judge on many occasions between film and digital.

To state that someone won't look at a film because it is shot digitally was maybe true two or three years ago...the world is changing.
 
Tim

Come back on track . VIdeo, digital is the same crap. The red camera or other digital stuff dop not have the HD and latitude of film. They do not look like film.Too much contrast, fake colors etc...Real directors and DP shoot on film. Low budget movies are shot in digital...Except Avatar ,that I do not like at all and the last 3 Stars war from George that not a lot of people did not like either.

Digital is not an evolution itself and never replace film even if film will be replace by digital or other crapy cameras.

If you have money you shoot on film. If you want to play with little cameras without any money ,you will shoot on digital.

Any good productions are shot on film. Low budget or some directors shoot on digital because they think it's cheaper or easier. They are wrong!!

Watch 'Once upon a time in Mexico' from Robert and you will see a yellow saturated movie. Why? to correct the crapy digital result, they have to work a lotin post production to try to make it look like film and it doesn't look like film.

Check digital movies and you will see faces burned by the light, grainy spots when the DP is trying to shoot in the dark. We do not have that kind of thing on film.

Also, the motion picture equipment is much more reliable than any HD or Red cameras.

I lear my job in 67 with Tonino Delli Colli on the set of 'Once upon a time in the west' a Sergio Leone novie .Shot in Spain and in Cinecitta. Tonino was a great DP. He won an Oscar for 'The life is beautiful a few years ago.

I work several years for Cinecitta, I made features and sonme documentaries (For my own pleasure) and won several Awards in Europe for my work. So, please do not try to tell me what is the best in motion picture!!! I tried everything. Panavision, Arriflex, Mitchell, Cameflex with Claude Lelouch (One man and a woman), Pathe Webo, Bolex R16 and of course Super 16, Arri SR I,II,III S16 ,Eclair NPR S16, Aaton Super 16mm , I shot on 2 perf cameras Techniscope 2.39, Scope 2.35, reduced scope 2.0 etc....

What is your experience on film and video?

Thanks
Guy
 
Back
Top