-
December 6th, 2001, 10:41 AM
#1
Inactive Member
i dont know your level of experience or how much money in the bank balance - but i will presume that your a bit like me and just an amature with not a lot of cash...
GO FOR DV! with DV you can shoot it, edit it, distibute it for next to nothing - film is for the big boys who have ?20,000 budgets and know exactly what they are doing.. i'll go into a tad more detail
seriously look into the Cannon XM1/XL1 and spend the rest on a mic, tripod, a Power Mac G4 and Final Cut Pro 3 to edit your material on - DV is a good platform to start out on and learn on because it does not cost much compaired to film - a 16mm camera will cost a few thousand $ but then you need to bear in mind the cost of film, the processing costs, the cost of buying the kit to edit 16mm on, the problem of recording sound - the amount of knowledge nessesary is huge, and the potential to mess it up too great and too expensive
if you want to dabble in "real" film editing then get a cheap second hand Super 8mm cine cam and editing kit all for under ?100 and try it out, but dont expect it to be as good quality as DV or as easy...
wow i could go on forever but the choice is up to you.
------------------
Dead girl's dont say no!
-
December 6th, 2001, 04:43 PM
#2
Inactive Member
I Need help please. should i get digital or film. i am looking into the canon gl-1 or a used arriflex 16mm. please help i could really use it.
------------------
00
|__|D
-
December 7th, 2001, 07:32 AM
#3
HB Forum Moderator
Your $2,000 will get you in the door of DV, but you will still need all the editing elements to make your film fly.
I believe film is an excellent first step in learning about the story making process.
Once you make one film on super-8..by all means, get the DV camera.
------------------
Alex
-
December 9th, 2001, 12:58 AM
#4
Inactive Member
>but dont expect it to be as good quality as DV
super 8 is higher quality than mini dv
-levi
------------------
-
December 9th, 2001, 05:28 PM
#5
Inactive Member
levi, shirt is right - from my experience s8 is open to all sorts of problems... but im not denying that film is better, im just saying that film is less practical and more expensive for the first time film maker...
------------------
Dead girl's dont say no!
-
December 9th, 2001, 08:18 PM
#6
Inactive Member
thanks for all the help guys...now i just need to find the right camera...anyone know anything about the panasonic ag-dvc15 or the canon GL-1...I was looking into those
------------------
00
|__|D
-
December 10th, 2001, 04:35 AM
#7
Inactive Member
Levi.. I think he is referring to the fact that someone will
a.) scratch the shiat out of the film when editing...
b.) transfer it with a layer of dust and hair as thick as my palm on the film.
------------------
-
December 10th, 2001, 08:31 PM
#8
Inactive Member
Isn't 16mm open to the same problems?
------------------
-
December 10th, 2001, 10:37 PM
#9
Inactive Member
yes levi - that's why we told him to go for DV...
------------------
Dead girl's dont say no!
-
December 12th, 2001, 04:00 PM
#10
Inactive Member
All film can be scratched.. 16mm, 32mm, 8mm, etc, etc, etc....
If you are young, and inexperienced why not learn to tell a story first (with DV), before going to film and learning to help tell it visually... ie. Colours, lighting, etc.
Film is ultra expensive to shoot on, so if you were to go that route you would be stupid not to transfer it all to digital and edit it... then if you had to, transfer it back to film...
------------------
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks