-
April 2nd, 2001, 10:46 PM
#1
Inactive Member
I'm woking on a couple of film projects and was wondering what kind of Do it yourself equipment some of you had tried.
I need lights and stands and a boom mic for starters.
-
April 2nd, 2001, 11:21 PM
#2
Inactive Member
For our film 'Psycho Babble' we bought two lighting stands from jessops..cheap ones...two light bulb mounts and a load of 275 watt photo flood bulbs. We did not use any proffessional equipment...we nicked this method from rodriguez (el mariachi). Get down to Jessops and get a catalogue!
James
Find out more about 'Psycho Babble' @ www.undergroundfilmworks.com
-
April 3rd, 2001, 10:06 PM
#3
Inactive Member
mixer you can get away with but seriously youll be surprised at what you can blag for free, this week i have managed to add to my equimpent list for the shoot im doing in less than 10 days time
2 Blonds
3 Redheads
and a mizar
all for free
Chance
------------------
5YLAC Films
www.itkoa.co.uk
http://www.lookingglass.atfreeweb.co...ghts/index.htm
download the deadlights trailer at
<http://www.lookingglass.atfreeweb.co...s/images/deadl
ights_trailer1.rm>
-
April 4th, 2001, 01:27 AM
#4
Inactive Member
Dont go with the torch idea as this will produce a flat lifeless image. Try good 3 point lighting which will actually model the actor's face and give good illumination thus reducing the grainy look. Why not rent a small 3 redhead lighting kit ? The main thing people forget is to get the correct look/strength by adding nd/difusion gels and using the inverse square log system when deciding the distance from the object.
marti
-
April 4th, 2001, 03:38 AM
#5
eddie
Guest
Ive tried many different things with different success.
A torch taped to the camera pointing at the subject can be good enough to light them, borrowing portable stage lights and stand can be excellent,
Black and white is more forgiving than colour,
You can record reasonable sound from a video cameras microphone, but only if its a really quiet location.
To be honest whatever you can borrow will be perfect for you, work around it. Try and get three lights for 2 point lighting, if you cant get three lights then use one, if you cant get on then use a torch, or none, just wack up the gain, use an image intesifier or use fast film.
You definatley need a tripod for your camera. A boom mike and a mixer (for mixing out the background noises and getting the recording level perfect) is good too.
Use coloured gels for special effects. blah de blah de blah
-
April 7th, 2001, 11:30 AM
#6
Inactive Member
Where did you manage to get them from chance1234?
-
April 9th, 2001, 06:13 AM
#7
Inactive Member
Blondes and redheads are great if you can get them, but the following is a good cheap substitute that you wont have a time limit on returning.
I found some 500w tungsten security lights at B&Q. They are supposed to mount on the wall, but I wired them up with long extension cables. They work a treat for shooting on tungsten balanced film and are only about 7 quid. The glass on them gets pretty hot, so try not to touch it. Its easy enough to make your own stands and barn doors for these. And you can apply gels to the glass.
I also got some old Super 8 lights. They are 1000w tungsten lights and they get EXTREMELY hot. You can only run them for 5 minutes at a time. But they only cost about a tenner, so I got 3 of them, and I use one while the others cool.
The stupid thing is that I am convinced most film equipment is expensive merely because the people usually making films can afford to spend that much. There are usually cheap substitutes for most things.
Exceptions are microphones and cameras. But it is relatively cheap to rent a good mic. Cameras are the really tricky bit. If you are shooting on film, my recommendation would be an Eclair ACL. They are often available for less than 2000 pounds and are great sync-sound cameras. Light, quiet and easy to use. Not very sturdy though, so don't drop them.
They can be modified to super 16 too. (I have one, you never would have guessed)
Later
Stephen
Old Ones Productions
[This message has been edited by sdchown (edited April 09, 2001).]
-
April 9th, 2001, 08:04 AM
#8
eddie
Guest
I agree. The formal equipment is really expensive. With some improvisation you can make do with other things. Thats why I suggested the torch above. At low budget level I think what matters is the story you are telling and that there is 'something' special about how you tell it. I firmly beleive this. It might be the only film you make totally by yourself, make it special, make it personal, if by chance you do ever get a job in a studio or somewhere in the future you will be answerable to so many other people it will be impossible for you experiment, or take real risks, so do it now!
If you look at successful low budget films I think that 'something' special is usually a result of improvisation, and working around lack of cash, within the filmmakers means. Bad Taste, Blair Witch, PI, Monty Pythons Holy Grail, Dog bites Dog, La Haine, Clerks....
Also you HAVE to make your film stand out from the rest somehow.
Equipment is expensive, but ideas are free, and with some luck you can work around the problem. I guess thats why this forum is so useful! (if annoying at times!)
Perhaps someone can answer why photography equipment is so expensive, it always has been. Perhaps it is a catch 22 because so few people actually use it it has to be expensive to hire, and those that do hire it can make a lot of money, or are stupid/driven (delete as applicable) enough to get the money together.
blah de blah de blah. I guess Im just saying viva low budget films! Cecil B Demented forever!!!
-
April 9th, 2001, 08:27 AM
#9
eddie
Guest
by the way if you watch Evil Dead, and look at the external scenes of the shack you can see clearly all the lights they used around the shack. Does it matter? Not in the slightest. You only see them if you are looking for them, otherwise, its just magic, or weirdness illuminating the hut. Thinking about it, there are only a few lamps in the hut. But Sam Raimi couldnt care less, so he lit the hut, because it had to be seen, and its an irrelivant continuity 'mistake'. Most people would be just lost in the film, so not even think it odd that you can actually see this hut in a dark forest at nighttime.
I guess thats what Ed Wood meant when he was talking about the 'small details dont matter you gotta look at the big picture!'
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