Which camera do you usually use or recommend using? I use a Panasonic PV-GS150 Camcorder. I bought it because I wanted to test the 3CCD technology difference. The picture is much more clear and crisp, but it still looks like it's a home video rather than a film-like picture. I guess what I'm asking is what camera would you suggest if you are making a film. I heard alot of people like the Canon X1's or whatever they are, but they are so expensive. I'm looking for a good camera for a reasonable price. What do you suggest?

if you want it to look like film...you have to shoot on film, 3CCD's will get you clearer quality, but you need to shoot at 24fps, to get close to film... 2 things i suggest: 1. if you want it to look like film, shoot on film; 2. remember a large part is taking the time to light each scene carefully, lighting makes a world of difference.

Canon X1's are great but will put a hole in your savings account. There is nothing wrong with using Camcorders. I have seen some amazing stuff come from a Camcorder. You have a GS150 which is a descant camera and I personally I wouldn’t buy another camera until you have done a fair few films. As mentioned pay special attention to lighting but Also your shots have to look professional as well. That means Tri-pods, dollies, steady cams etc. If you put some thought into: Lighting, Sound and your shots you can see what a great Job Camcorders can do and I promise you wont feel the need to buy a new camera.

I think a great example of what you can do with a crappy camera is Perry Kroll's (titaniumdoughnut, a moderator on this site) film "Fletcher the Alien Catcher." The colors, lighting, framing, all make it look spectacular, and I think he uses a ZR50 or some crappy Canon camera like that. Go to www.perrykroll.com and watch it.

"I'm looking for a good camera for a reasonable price. What do you suggest?"

A non-reflex Bolex or Filmo... under $100 and gives great images with the right lenses. Of course, you'll shoot on film, not video, but think how much the XL1 would have cost and consider how much footage you can shoot with the difference.

If you're perceptive enough that you recognize the video-look that video always has, I'm not sure if you'll be satisfied with a more expensive camera which will never totally get rid of that look. You could go to super 8 also.

Thanks so much guys, I'm gonna stay with my Camcorder like you said and focus on the lighting and movement. Thanks for all the help. Appreciate it.

Wow!! I can't believe he actually made shots like that with a ZR50!!! That looks so professional.

I have a PV-GS120 and it served me very well for almost 2 years. I recently upgraded to a DVX100b but only after making a few movies and feeling the need for better image quality and the multitude of settings this camera offers. Lighting and audio are main components in making a good movie. The image quality is secondary in my opinion. Besides as far as I know the GS150 is just a newer model of my 120. They produce very nice footage, just make sure to de-interlace in post (common error I've seen).

-Kegan

Ok I have to ask you then, how did you set the manual settings? I have mine on MWB, 1/60, open, and 15DB. This gives the clearest shot. But what would I need to set it to, to get that film-like shot or something closest to it? Lighting helps, but it doesn't change the overall image to a softer tone. What do you suggest since you know this camera?

Don't use gain, especially -15 dB...

Your right I forgot about that. Thanks. What's the whole perpose of lighting if I do that right.

Well, a lot of people forget that it's about the movement of the camera too. It's not just what you can do in post, or the shutter speed you record in. They do have a lot to do with it, but so does the movement of the camera. Move SLOW and keep your shots tight on subjects. Use software like Magic Bullet to help with a film like look as well.

As said though, if you want the film like look shoot on film (I know you don't want to hear that. 24p is close and produces nice footage that is very different from the normal video look, but it's all about how the scene is shot and prepared.

-Kegan

quote:

Originally posted by funkbomb:
I think a great example of what you can do with a crappy camera is Perry Kroll's (titaniumdoughnut, a moderator on this site) film "Fletcher the Alien Catcher." The colors, lighting, framing, all make it look spectacular, and I think he uses a ZR50 or some crappy Canon camera like that. Go to www.perrykroll.com and watch it.

I could be wrong but I think he got those spectacular colors by messing with the white balance (i.e. setting it to incadescent light when shooting outdoors to get those blues) so you might want to give that a thought when shooting too. Framing and lighting contribute majorly also.

Very wise words in this thread. Excellent advise from everyone. Video can never look like film, but it can look damn good... EVEN from a crappy camera. I did shoot Fletcher on a ZR40, after three years spent playing with it and learning to squeeze every last little bit of style out of its stubborn little sensor.

I did shoot with an artificially offset white balance (achieved by white balancing to something that is not white). Technically, you can color it in post, but when you're dealing with the crappy resolution and quality of mini-DV, especially on a low end camera, it's just better to avoid as much post processing as you can. It brings out the grain and other artifacts when you play with it too much in editing. I gave everything a nice greenish tint with white balance, and then exaggerated it in post.

Other tricks involve, as everyone has mentioned, framing and lighting well, and zooming in from far away to get a soft background. Lighting doesn't mean you need to use lights, it just means you need to pay attention to how the light looks. I used almost entirely natural light, but I didn't shoot when the light wasn't going to work. I always had enough, and made sure it looked good. The basement was an exception, and I had to turn the gain way up, which shows, but it was a decision I made while shooting, and I complemented it by filming that scene in a raw fast-paced style that would work well with the grainy look.

Thank you so much for helping guys. The film "Fletcher the Alien Catcher" has inspired me beyond belief. The zooming in from far away to achieve a soft backround technique, I have actually done that and I noticed that effect in your film. I like how you said "Lighting doesn't mean you need to use lights, it just means you need to pay attention to how the light looks. I used almost entirely natural light, but I didn't shoot when the light wasn't going to work. I always had enough, and made sure it looked good."

I also liked the white balance technique. Filmming takes a good combination of all these techniques and aspects to make a quality finished project. The only question I have left is how did you setup and achieve your sound? Not the score , but how did you setup your dialogue capture and sound effects? I'm sure you didn't use the regular microphone built-in to the camera. What kind of mic did you attach to the camera, or was most of this done with ADR in post?

Almost all the dialog was ADR. The Mrs. Happlebee scene was recorded with a crappy radioshack mic that I don't recommend using. It had to be about 12 inches away, and was visible in most of the shots. I matted it out later. The footsteps and other ambient sound were actually from the on-camera mic, which worked out OK somehow.

I have a quistion too,

I have the Sony TRV70 camcorder. Its a expensive 1 chip camcorder and the image looks good. But i have read that the Canon ZR40 has a lot of manual controles. My camcorder does have a manual focus ring and i can set exposure. But thats about it. I dont have manual shutterspeed (i dont think this matters, dont feel the need to change the shutterspeed) but i have 1 thing that is most important, and that is that i have NO MANUAL WHITE BALANCE!
I can set it on: indoor, outdoor or hold.
But i cannot point it at a white piece of paper and say "this is white!"

I have just buy a lighting kit, because i was confused about buying either a another camcorder, of a lighting kit. I have choosen the last one. But without manual whitebalance and shuttespeed controle... i dont know if this camcorder is any good with the lack of such important manual controles,

Any opinions or tips?

titaniumdoughnut?

If the 1CCD it does have gives you a nice looking picture without too much grain I think you'll be fine setting the white balance in post production. Color correction is very powerful.

The picture looks fine, and the camcorder has got great reviews, but because iam not going more into lighting (i have bought a lighting kit) i was worried about the lack of White balance and shutterspeed controle, but i gues your right, post production can do allot of thinngs.

I think iam not going to buy another cam.