Flip Flop Gorilla

The last few years have been really interesting for me, at least as far as equipment goes.  Regarding DSLR video, I went from they're nice but not video-friendly enough, to basically swearing by them for certain styles of production...

I now am of the camp that HDSLR (Canon, particularly) cameras are among the best options for guerilla and low-profile filmmaking - as long as you know how to focus and expose manually (those out there who are used auto focus, exposure and other auto features as a crutch should stay away).  Here's why:

• In "guerilla" or run and gun filmmaking we often don't have time or permission to light.  The DSLR cams have the ability to shoot at a very high ISO (sensitivity).  And they're so good that the digital noise typically associated with doing this (raising your gain on a conventional video camera) is often hardly noticeable, and rarely distracting.
• Shallow depth of field.  Now this is where I really sound like I'm flip-flopping.  I used to be of the opinion that the shallow DoF was a pain for doc shooting... don't get me wrong, it does make things difficult for those out there who are used to letting the auto focus work.  However, I discovered on a recent shoot that the shallow DoF actually made things easier for a run 'n gun shoot I was on.  I was shooting footage on a nighttime police ride-along (awesome, yes, I know) and much of the interview was done while the officer was on duty, patrolling in the squad-car.  I used the shallow DoF (especially shallow because I needed to be wide open for exposure) to let the world outside of the vehicle get milky.  It let lights and signs blend together for this beautifully milky wash of moving, breathing color in the background.  It really made for a beautiful shot in a pinch.
• They're SMALL.  DSLR cameras are tiny and they look like still cameras.  Ok, fine, they are still cameras.  In the first bullet point, I mentioned lack of permission regarding lighting.  While most of my projects, big and small, are on the up and up as far as permits and permissions go, there's a good 10% that are done on the DL.  On those few projects, there are always any number of valid reasons for going that way, but we're not here to discuss those sorts of things.  Whether you're not supposed to be filming or you've been asked to be inconspicuous, the small form factor of DSLR cameras lets you be just that.  It's not a whole lot more than you just standing there.  In addition to avoiding attention, it also lets you shoot differently than you would with a larger camera.  You can essentially shoot anywhere your body fits - while a large-format camera ads considerable depth to your figure, so you're limited.

Below are some grabs from a recent run 'n gun shoot on a police ride-along - this shoot was the motivation for writing this post.  I basically encountered all of the above advantages over the course of that night.  This was footage for a segment in a PBS-bound documentary, "Small Matters," directed by Matt Wechsler.  It's a film about a young man with Tourette's Syndrome who's become an advocate for TS awareness with this segment showing some "success stories" of people who grew up with TS and made something of themselves in spite of the hardships and setbacks.  The producer wanted a very intimate feel, with the interview segment being shot inside the car with Brian (the officer).  Also, since I was working with Brian while he was on-duty, it was a huge advantage for me to be able to maintain a low profile.  Add to that shooting at night (LOW LIGHT) in an active police car and having absolutely ZERO control over anything... Thank heavens for the DSLR...

As I've said in previous posts, I'm not an advocate of any do-all camera or format, but the current crop of DSLR cameras, in particular, are certainly establishing a solid footing in professional video production.

New Doc Reel

Here's the new doc reel, a montage of clips from various projects through June 2011.

Russian Invasion!

A few weeks ago I traveled to Nürburg, Germany with Kinetic Fin to shoot material for a documentary series on Jim Glickenhaus and his Ferrari P 4/5 Competizione, a remarkable one-off supercar.  In June, the car will compete in the 24 Hours Nürburgring endurance race.  Last week was qualifying and testing.

Going into this first trip (we'll be going again for the 24H, and possibly one more time before), very few details were known by the crew.  Where were we to stage?  Where could we shoot from?  What exactly is the schedule for the race?  We knew the car, we knew what it set out to do in Nürburg, but we were in the dark as far as logistics went.  So we considered this trip somewhat of a scout and just went into it open-minded, ready to adapt.

I knew that even if there were prime press areas to shoot from, I'd need a lens on the long end to get great shots of the car and the action.  I already had an 80-300mm zoom in my arsenal, but it's a long and thin beast and can get a bit wobbly on occasion.  Ideally, I'd use that on rods with a lens support but with Kinetic Fin, we like to roll light and scaled back as much as possible.  Also, I wanted closer than 300mm.  Enter the Russian-made Zenit 3M-5CA 500mm f/8 lens...

This beast is a reflex lens, that is, it accomplishes its focal length with the use of mirrors in the lens, rather than the traditional design.  This allows it to be lighter and -let's not dance around it- cheaper than comparable-length telephotos.  The problems with reflex lenses are that you usually sacrifice some contrast and the bokeh is ellipsoidal.  The bokeh thing was not a problem for me.  I don't mind interesting stuff going on back there.  The contrast issue, however, was a concern.  So I researched and researched and stumbled upon the Zenit.  A few videos later and I was sold.  A quick search found me a mint one for a reasonable price and a week later, I had the lens in my hand...

As you can see from the video, it holds up nicely.  Being on the longer end, there is considerable "jello" (DSLR sensor-related wobble) but while following fast cars or completely locked off, that is hardly an issue.  The biggest problem I found was that the lens is a fixed-aperture lens.  It's f/8 and f/8 only.  Normally, I would've loved to stop down on a long lens like this and increase my DoF.  But of course, compromises must be made if you want to save literally thousands of dollars on a telephoto lens like this.  So I had to rack focus.  Luckily there was time to practice - if I had to roll live, this would not have been the ideal lens, but shooting to edit leaves room to rehearse your shots and practice your racks... let me tell you, maintaining focus on cars going this fast towards and then past you is no easy task.

Anyway, I managed and got what I needed for the job.  I'm definitely looking forward to shooting with this bad boy again in June.  Here are some selects using this lens (there's a lot more good stuff on this lens but until the film comes out, I'm limited to what I can show).

Adapting

Just to get it out of the way, the title is somewhat of a pun.  This post covers improvisation in filmmaking and lenses (and adapters).

One of the most taught lessons in film school is about preparation.  Preproduction sets the pace for everything else.  For our various projects, we had to submit tons of prep material for approval - scripts, script breakdowns, shot lists, storyboards and so on.  Typically by the time we got around to shooting, the film was already made on paper.  For college kids who were new to the process, this was totally valuable work but teaching it like it was the unbreakable law was a bit much.

I've learned in my years working predominantly in documentary, that forethought is great but unexpected things always happen.  In doc, you don't have the time to worry about the last minute changes or complain.  You have to adapt or you don't make your day.  So you go into these shoots with ideas of sequences, shots you want to get and other hopefuls but you always remain open to change, even looking out for it.  Surprisingly, in my own recent fiction endeavors, this way of thinking has come in handy and produced some good results.

This recently came up in a discussion with a good friend and colleague of mine, Bret the Sound Guy.  He had recently worked on a short with another D.P. and we were talking about the project.  The director and D.P. had come up with the idea that as the film progressed, they would shoot with wider and wider lenses (to support the themes of the film).  I made a joke about over-thinking the process and Bret and I got into a bit of a debate.  The thing I kept coming back to was the idea of organic filmmaking.  I've discovered a real joy in improvising on set and going with the flow.  Using mistakes to your advantage, finding little gems in what, at first, appears to be a problem.

Beyond the storytelling aspect, I've found that I like to carry these ideas over into the technical aspects of production like lighting and composition.  In a lot of documentary work - particularly in verité work - the camera is a part of the story.  The perspective and movement of the camera become character traits and there is no pretending that the camera isn't there.  Contrary to the modern belief that in doc the cameraman just gets whatever it can, there's a method to good doc shooting and this depends on the part the camera plays in the story.  I often like to carry that over into narrative work (when applicable).  This often shows itself in subtle punctuated reframing (à la "Boston Legal" - though not quite as frequent).  Today I saw rough cuts of scenes we shot Sunday for "Director's Cut."  Whether by accident or necessity, two shots where I had employed this sort of camera technique made it into the rough cut and they worked quite well.  Another sequence where three characters start arguing was completely shot this way and it really helped the tension.  Having seen the cuts so far, I can anticipate a lot of upcoming scenes where this style of shooting will really work.  And though it's not exactly how Elana first pictured the style, she's very open to the idea and willing to adapt her vision.

Now that was a good segue.  So I recently bought a Canon 550D to test the waters on the DSLR filmmaking revolution.  I knew early on I wanted to go with an APS-C sized sensor instead of full-frame because the former is almost identical to motion picture 35mm film.  Full-frame 35mm is wider and therefore has a much shallower DoF.  That sort of razor-thin focal plane can be problematic with my style of shooting and the fact that I don't often have the luxury of a focus-puller or setting marks or measuring at all.  In the recent Gevalia shoots that really turned me on to DSLRs for video, I had a great time but man, I wish I had more wiggle room than the full-frame 5D allowed.  I was constantly pulling focus because the slightest moves (like sitting up straight or an even smaller forward/backward motion) would have made the subject go completely soft.  So knowing APS-C was my choice, I had a decision to make between the 7D and the 550D.  As far as video goes, the two are basically identical.  The differences that allow for the almost double price tag of the 7D are all about the stills capabilities.  So, knowing that I would rarely be doing stills work, I went with the 550D.  So I tracked one down (one of the last in stock in the greater NY area) and picked it up.  Nobody, and I mean nobody had the body-only kits so for $100 more I got a kit with a very crappy zoom lens.  Piece of junk.  I decided to pick up a Nikon to Canon lens adapter and see how my old 70s Nikkors would fare mounted on this modern digicam.  And the verdict was... wow...  I haven't used the kit lens since.  I went and picked up more adapters (one for each lens) and began a search for other vintage lenses with character.  Got a couple of leads on some Russian primes that, from stills and footage I've seen online, seem to be very interesting.  Cool bokeh, nice contrast and consistency throughout all the stops.  Sharp enough, but subtly soft when it should be.  I'll be posting stills very soon with the Nikkors and whatever else I'm able to pick up.

Also to come are screen grabs from "Director's Cut."  Day 5 is Thursday and we're basically shooting every day (weekends off) through May 21st.  Reports and stills from the set to come...

I'm sold...

My recent work with Kinetic Fin has really turned me around on the whole DSLR for video thing, especially the Canon models.  The first two shoots I did with them, I saw the 5D, tweaked and tinkered with it and lit for it as the A cam, but ultimately the camera was confined to sticks or operated by the director (while I operated C cam - my trusty DVX).  I knew that the cam was getting really good results, but the experience was far from hands-on.  However, on the Gevalia shoot two weeks ago and another one yesterday for parent company, Kraft, I actually got the chance to operate a 5D in a doc setting.  This was something I had many reservations about - mainly form-factor and stability.  I had seen videos online of handheld DSLR video and it's not too great on it's own.  The shape and size just do not allow for smooth handheld work and stuff gets jittery very easily.  So, knowing about this issue, I brought my Tiffen Steadystick aboard both of these recent DSLR shoots.  (Just as a side note, I picked up that contraption so that I could operate hanheld cameras like the DVX and others in a way similar to shoulder-mount cameras.)  The stability it affords is fantastic.  And based on my recent experiences, it really helps DSLR shooting.  I was able to get really nice handheld stuff on the 5D and I am told by Kinetic Fin editor and shooter extraordinaire, Gene, that the footage from the 5D I operated was smooth, stable, and looked great.  With the setup I used, I was able to operate in a very familiar way and get really great results.

So that's that.  DSLR video can be really great.  And especially for Kinetic Fin's very intimate and honest style of filmmaking, shooting with a DSLR is the perfect combination of small, unobtrusive form and unbelievable cinematic quality.  As there appears to be a lot more work with them in the very near future, and since I now know I can operate the way I like to, I will be investing in a DSLR for video very soon.  Until then, though, here's a pic from the Gevalia 5D shoot.  You can tell even in just a picture of the screen of the cam, it takes some great video.  (And yes, those are my hands on there).

photo by Michael Lussos

A discussion of "format-agnostic"

In my last post, I referred to myself as format-agnostic when discussing the choice of camera for one of the projects I'm currently working on.  For a variety of reasons, lately, I've been thinking a lot about the multitude of cameras and video formats and film stocks available for motion-picture production.  As a note I enjoy shooting both film and video, though the breadth of my recent work has been exclusively some form or another of digital capture.  I am not, however, pro-digital.

So what is "the right format?"  I think every filmmaker has an idea of what is the best format for their project.  To some it's just whatever is the best quality, highest definition they can afford.  To others, it's what looks the most appropriate - a gritty, grainy stock for a post-apocalyptic drama?  Maybe a slick, clean, noise-free format for a romantic comedy?  All these requirements they have are certainly valid, but ultimately for me, the right format is neither of the above.  If I'm hired to shoot a project, I am responsible for delivering the image.  If the production has no money and I insist on shooting 35mm and we run out of money before we're done, I've failed in my job.  If the production blows their money on a RED package I wanted and then skimps on lighting, production design and other stuff that goes in front of the lens, all I'll be able to deliver is high definition crap.  See, there are so many more important look-related elements than just the format we shoot on.  With right stuff in front of the camera, it almost doesn't matter what's inside.  Good lighting, good composition, good production design, and good talent can help even the cheapest camera look great.  That's not to say that a Flip cam is the next wave of filmmaking gear.  But if there's a story to tell and the talent is all there, maybe a handycam could work if that's all the filmmakers can afford.  That said, there is one basic requirement I do have for the format I work with; control - the camera must not be Full AUTO.  I must be able to control iris, focus, shutter speed (at least to lock one down) and whitebalance.  With that, anything can deliver a good look for your film.

In the last 6 months, I have gladly shot the following formats and delivered results that very much pleased my clients with their respected release and exhibition types:

• Panasonic DVX100 (mini DV, 480/24p).  Webisodes, feature documentary, TV segment.
• Sony EX1 (XDCam EX, 1080/24p).  Feature documentary, TV segment.
• Sony EX3 (XDCam EX, 1080/24p).  Wide-release DVD/Blue Ray concert, music video, live multi-cam concert (big screen projection)
• Sony Z1U (HDV, 1080/24f).  TV segment.
• Canon 5D MkII (1080/30p).  TV spot, webisodes.
• Panasonic HMC150 (AVC-HD, 1080/24p).  Feature film.
• Panasonic HVX200 (DVCPro HD, 720/24p).  TV spot.
• Sony V1U (HDV, 1080/24p).  Webisodes.
• Panasonic HDX900 (DVCPro HD, 1080/24p).  TV segment, feature documentary.
• Samsung Piece-of-Crap-Quicktime-Camcorder.  Viral video for the web.

Again, as a final note, I must reiterate that every format needs good lighting and appropriate visual design like sets, costumes and such.  A cheap handycam with no (or bad) lighting will look terrible.  But the same thing goes with a pro HD cam.  But that very same handycam shooting a well lit scene and exposed right can look really nice - and if that handycam is the only thing you have that will shoot your story, it's the "right" format for you.

Karma?

So in my last post I mentioned something on the horizon that would be very exciting.  That something was a trip to Sweden for the Gevalia work.  Well, unfortunately, that trip fell through about a month ago.  It's still happening but for a variety of reasons, the director has to now do it on his own.  So I was a little bummed for a bit.  Then, less than a month after Sweden went away, I got an opportunity to go to Budapest, Hungary for a shoot with a different client.  I was reminded of the "even steven" episode of Seinfeld - it all tends to work itself out.

So Budapest was last week and it was cool.  It was a very brief stay, arriving Wednesday afternoon and leaving for home very early Saturday morning.  Thursday and Friday were shoot days and we did a lot of shooting.  It was an industrial for an ad agency, Wunderman, involving one of their big clients, Nokia.  Same sort of idea as my Texas trip last November.  Anyway, all in all, it went well but it was definitely an eye opener.  Early Thursday, about 40 minutes before we were due to roll, some of the producer's gear began acting up - a wireless mic that was do be on a key player in this shoot.  Needless to say, this was a serious problem.  Luckily, we had a great P.A. on board (a local) and within minutes, she was on the phone to a rental house arranging to rent a replacement wireless system.  By the end of her conversation, we figured out the problem with the producer's gear and the P.A. arranged to have a replacement part also sent over.  Within 20 minutes, the gear was there and we were rolling.  The next day, we were presented with another issue - as it turned out, there would be two key players in that day's shoot (which was not the original plan).  Luckily our system was working again and we had the rental on hand so yet again, things worked themselves out.  Had we not had the unexpected and somewhat stressful mic failure occurred the day before, we wouldn't have had the second wireless system.

All in all, it was nice.  With the work schedule, I didn't get to do much touristy stuff but I had some fantastic local food every day, saw a great gypsy band and stayed in a very nice, historic hotel (the Hotel Gellart).

Anyway, the weekend before Budapest, shooting commenced on a feature film I'm working on, "Director's Cut."  It's a low-budget film with a rather small crew and the weekend was a great icebreaker.  My frequent cohort, Bret Scheinfeld, is aboard as sound mixer and I've got a pretty nice support crew.  Marcus, my gaffer, is cool, and I've got a couple of G&E-dedicated P.A.s that are really into it and very quick learners.  I think the Spring shoot will go pretty smoothly.

So the most important rule we've got to follow for this shoot is the K.I.S.S. principal ("keep it simple, stupid").  There's just so much to get done on such a short schedule, so the setups need to be versatile and quick to change.  So we're lighting things in broader strokes and keeping things relatively high key.  It's a comedy, anyway, and the director definitely wants a brighter feeling for most of the film.  Below is a still from one of our scenes.

A 4bank fluorescent for the key and a large diffused window for fill and ambiance.  Behind the actor, a small HMI for edge.


We're shooting on the director's camera, a Panasonic HMC150.  It's a prosumer model that shoots 1080/24p video to SDHC cards.  If time and money allowed, I'd shoot 35mm for this - or at the very least Super16 or RED.  But the budget is what it is and the schedule is tight so the best format available to us is what we've got so that's that.  Besides, I'm a pretty format-agnostic cameraman.  I really believe that with the right lighting, composition and settings (including digital tweaks and optical filtration), you can make great images no matter the format.

Coming up later this week is another shoot for Gevalia with director, Bradley Farrell (again with Bret on board for sound).  It's a tasting party for a new blend and apparently there will be some "celebrities" there.  3 camera shoot at Gevalia's corporate kitchen with a Canon 5D and two HVX200.  With the amount of coverage and the fact that at any one time a camera could be shooting in any direction, the lighting approach has to be pretty simple (and of course, good).  The available light is pretty nice there - high ceilings with warm fluorescents for an overall base level.  Accent lights under the cabinets and these small frosted pendant lights positioned over the granite islands.  I'm thinking I'm going to fly a couple of 250w fresnels (flooded) crossing as back/edge lights (they'll be attached to the drop ceiling).  I'm hoping that'll be enough but I'm prepared to bounce something into the ceiling from the front of the space if necessary.

So that's all for now.  Pictures from Gevalia to come.

Bye!

Testing, testing...

"Hi, my name is Dave, and I don't own an HD camera." "Welcome, Dave. We're all here to help."

(from a Cinematographers Who Haven't Made the Jump to HD Anonymous meeting)

I've shot HD before and it sure is lovely. I've actually used just about every different HD format currently available - they're all great. But they're not for me. I must admit, I'm wary to make an investment. Things are just shifting so rapidly, that I don't think I can safely make an investment that will pay out over time. If I always had my way regarding shooting format, I could get something, but for most of my for-hire shoots, the production decides. What if they want to use a different camera?!

That said, I think the time may be fast approaching when I should buy an HD camera - so, what to do? There are a plethora of options. If I wanted to spend more than ten grand, the decision is easier, but frankly, that's not what I want.

One of the current trends is HDSLR cameras - small cameras intended for still photography that are also quite capable hidef beauties. So, lately, I've been researching the different cameras out there - particularly the Canon 7D and 5D, and the Panasonic GH1. Number one research method is searching online for sample footage. So, I go on www.vimeo.com and search "7D." Results come up - countless videos titled "7D test." Great. Someone did the work for me. Click, open, load the video... WTF?!

By now, I've seen hundreds of shaky, out of focus, poorly lit, crappily composed, unstable footage set to great music. This tells me nothing. Just like when 35mm lens adapters were coming out, none of the videos online help me at all. What I need is real world film-style testing. Good composition, good lighting, appropriate camera movement - stuff that reflects what I'll be doing with the camera. Among the thousands of 7D videos online, but a few dozen are appropriate for my research, and they're damned hard to find.

So that's it for this post. Sorry it's just a rant, but that's what I felt like today. Tomorrow I'm shooting some product work for Gevalia coffee - I think I'll have a nice amount of freedom to do my thing, so I'm looking forward to it. If I remember, I'll take stills and finally have some shots to share.