tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-66917922255786802712024-02-07T20:37:49.720-05:00Cin-posium by Mikel J. WislerCin-posium by Mikel J. Wisler: An indie filmmaker's perspective, from filmmaking to film viewing.Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.comBlogger46125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-71208288176890982652012-12-17T14:30:00.000-05:002012-12-20T13:14:27.112-05:00Is The Hobbit the Future of Cinema?<div style="text-align: justify;">
High Frame Rate, or HFR, is the latest "new thing" being pushed to try to draw audiences into the movie theater. <i>The Hobbit: And Unexpected Journey</i> is the first blockbuster film to be shot and released in 48 frames per second (fps). It does this in combination with being shot stereoscopically for release as a 3D movie. The HFR of <i>The Hobbit</i> doubles the long-time US film standard of 24 fps (in Europe it has long been 25 fps). So is this the future of cinema? Well, I've got a theory about what has worked so well about the long-time cinema standards of 24 fps and 25fps.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhI9ymPJeRUz3WUmltdnFJBkDhGlbODDj_ASn449cJCStLbjMdawnau3KXHo_aw5pnqwvPvgYht_-RPtGgYWv7ATB-LxKuhUt7_lvcxcTSS5MXwR5c3_V0oR-D6RHi_SAesYIZaCc5VrMY/s1600/HobbitGlasses.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="160" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhI9ymPJeRUz3WUmltdnFJBkDhGlbODDj_ASn449cJCStLbjMdawnau3KXHo_aw5pnqwvPvgYht_-RPtGgYWv7ATB-LxKuhUt7_lvcxcTSS5MXwR5c3_V0oR-D6RHi_SAesYIZaCc5VrMY/s400/HobbitGlasses.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Allow me to make some general observations about this first film of <i>The Hobbit</i> trilogy. I'm not going to review the film in depth. In fact, my friend and movie critic Daniel Carlson does an excellent job reviewing the film and the problems brought about in dedicating the same amount of screen time as was given to the whole of <i>The Lord of the Rings</i> trilogy to this one much thinner precursor to the epic saga that is <i>LOTR</i>. You can <a href="http://www.pajiba.com/film_reviews/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey-review-the-road-goes-ever-on-and-on-and-on-and-on-and-on.php">read his review here</a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I liked the film overall in the end--maybe more than Carlson did. But I do see definite problems with the first half of the film and I suspect the first choice to make two movies out of the novel <i>The Hobbit</i> would have been a superior choice in terms or pacing and story structure. Possibly, had Peter Jackson and company set themselves the limitation that each of these three films could not be any longer than two hours, we might have had a tight and well crafted trilogy that is exciting and well paced. But as it is, and as much as I really love a deliberately paced movie (I am a Terrence Malick fan after all), the first half of <i>The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey </i>quite literally nearly put me to sleep at times. It was a conscious effort to stay awake and invested during the first 45 minutes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
I made a point of seeing the HFR 3D version of the film. For my camera tech-inclined friends out there, the film was shot with duel RED Epic cameras at 48 fps. Having been a long time fan of RED's cameras, I see once again how the cameras really do not disappoint in creating amazing visuals. But I must admit that with this film as with so many 3D films I have seen in the last few years, the addition of 3D does not add enough to the experience to justify the choice or added ticket price, in my humble opinion. Cinematography by its very nature has always been about creating a three-dimensional image through lighting, depth of field, camera placement and movement. 3D is supposed to create a more immersive experience for audiences. Yet, something about 3D movies feels forced and unreal to me. I remain mostly unimpressed and unconvinced that 3D is where we should be headed with cinema. Rare exceptions are animated films like <i>How to Train Your Dragon</i>. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So what does this have to do with my theory about why 24 fps has served cinema so well? Well, a few years ago I picked up the book <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Power-Movies-Screen-Interact/dp/1400077206/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355768814&sr=8-1&keywords=the+power+of+movies">The Power of Movies: How Screen and Mind Interact</a></i> by philosopher Colin McGinn. The book is fantastic and I highly recommend reading it. The basic premise that McGinn spells out in his book is that one fundamental reason why cinema has so effectively drawn us in is that our minds interact with the movies screen much the same way our minds engage in dreaming. This is natural territory for the brain--a familiar language. McGinn makes some pretty compelling arguments in his book (published before <i>Avatar</i> and the current crase over 3D movies) that anything that takes cinema away from its dream-like qualities and tries to make it more real ultimately makes it unappealing to us. He specifically sites previous attempts at 3D movies and explains that trying to make movies more life-like will ultimately strip films of their power to draw us into them as they cease to be the lucid-dreams they once were. The point of cinema, it would seem, is not to be virtual reality.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So here we are facing a similar issue with HFR. Already we hear that James Cameron is planning his <i>Avatar </i>sequel with the intention to push the HFR envelope even further by shooting and releasing the film in 60 fps. And 3D of course. Don't believe me? <a href="http://www.movieweb.com/news/james-cameron-to-shoot-avatar-2-at-60-frames-per-second">Check this out</a>. It would seem that HFR may well be the future of filmmaking if James Cameron and Peter Jackson have anything to say about it. Well, I at least hope it is not.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Let me express why I feel this way by explaining what did and did not work about <i>The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey</i> in HFR for me. First of all, there is an inherent drama and emotional weight that comes with the standard film frame rate that gives us a specific dream-like quality in that moving images seem to at the very same instant both move slower than reality but somehow magically in fact move in real time. More on that in a moment. But <i>The Hobbit</i> in 48 fps lacked that emotional weight and visual drama that I feel belongs to the fantastic and epic lucid-dream that should be a film of this nature. Instead, it often felt contradictorily too real which made it feel fake. Especially on many of the sets that are clearly built on sound stages and carefully lit, the 48 fps lent the movie this cheap, soap-opera look that didn't help the sets and characters look real. Often, in those moments I felt like I was watching not the film itself, but the behind the scenes footage. And of course, that pulled me out of the experience of the story as I found myself wishing I could watch the "actual movie" ... until I reminded myself I was watching the "actual movie."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Any time the camera moved, panned, or followed a character, the movement felt too much like video (normally shot 30 fps) and gave it this documentary or home-video feel that I, at least, don't find all that appealing. The way characters moved in 48 fps dialogue scenes felt too much like a soap opera (again, lacking the emotional weight and drama inherent in 24 fps). Some action scenes felt too much like a cartoon or video game. The movement felt comical. Many of the VFX shots felt hyper-fake because of the hyper-real nature of 48 fps. And that really bugged me.<br />
<br />
The scenes that worked for me were ones with little movement where I could forget I was watching a 48 fps movie for a second but could still appreciate the amazing clarity and enhanced details of having twice the amount of information available to my eyes and brain every second. But once the camera started moving again, I wasn't as drawn in.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So all of this got me thinking as I watched the movie. First of all, this is my biggest complaint about the whole experience. I did not lose myself in the movie watching experience. The whole time I was keenly aware I was watching a movie and I couldn't help but analyze and ponder things as I watched. So ... all of this analyzing got me thinking: What is it about 24 fps that has worked so well?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As I mentioned above, I agree with McGinn's take on 3D and anything else that might move cinema to a more "real" experience that the likely result is the opposite effect of making movies feel more fake. My friend who I went to the movie with expressed he often felt he was watching a play instead of a movie. Pushing to make movies "more real" will strip films of their inherent connection to how our brains dream.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In addition to this, I recall that as a child who was always very interesting by all things visual, that when the sun began to set, I could move my hands and wave them in the air, and there was a distinctly different quality in how they looked and moved as daylight gave way to night. The way my eyes and brain worked together to interpret the images of my hand moving infront of me caused an increase in motion blur. In a way, with the decrease in light, it was as if my brain and eyes had to compensate by seeing the world at a slower frame rate. And this added motion blur to my movements. This also added intrigue and interest to my moving hand (I swear I never got high as a kid) and all moving objects in low light.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If McGinn is right and cinema draws us in so naturally because it mimics the dreaming state of mind, and he even makes the connect that movie watching seems to be something we are most inclined to engage in <i>at night</i>, than it makes perfect sense to me that one potentially important reason 24 fps has worked so well for movies up to this point is that 24 fps mimics the way we see the world at night as we wrap up our days and head off to sleep, to dream.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
So is HFR the future of cinema? Dear Lord in Heaven, I sincerely hope not. I go to the movie theater and make movies to experience grand dreams. HFR feels like yet another gimmick that's right up there with the 3D gimmick. Hopefully, talented filmmakers like Peter Jackson and James Cameron will eventually abandon HFR and return to the much more powerful "gimmick" that keeps audiences coming back to movie theaters again and again: grand, beautiful, moving, and expertly well crafted <i>storytelling</i>.</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-5521530567080919392011-12-24T15:23:00.002-05:002011-12-24T15:34:12.803-05:00A Christmas Eve Reflection<div class="p1"></div><div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1">At the end of this summer, I spoke on a Sunday morning at the new church plant I am involved with in Quincy, Massachusetts, called The River. I talked about this word that linguist and <i>The Lord of the Rings</i> author, J. R. R. Tolkien, coined. The word is “eucatastrophe.” It means “good will overcome.” Tolkien coined this word because of his own Christian worldview. If you would like to hear that talk, please check it out here: <a href="http://theriversouth.org/sermons/entering-the-third-act-when-all-hope-seems-lost">http://theriversouth.org/sermons/entering-the-third-act-when-all-hope-seems-lost </a></span></div><div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1"><br />
</span></div><div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1">Wrapped up in the word eucatastrophe is this idea that redemption only comes about by the facing of great obstacles. Tolkien saw the central eucatastrophe of human history as the birth of Christ, what we have taken to celebrating at this time of the year. And for Tolkien, the central eucatastrophe of the life of Christ on Earth was his death and resurrection.</span></div><div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1"></span></div><div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;"><br />
<a name='more'></a>As an artists, Christmas holds a very powerful significance to me. For people like me in the arts and academia who also seek to follow Christ, there is an important and on-going discussion about the mingling in art and life of the “divine” and the “profane.” What I mean by this is that in art, as in pretty much all of life, there really is no clear dividing line between that which is truly sacred and truly profane, or “merely of this world.” Instead, we find eucatastrophe: redemption in the unlikeliest of ways. We find hope in the middle of hopelessness, love in the middle of so much hate, forgiveness where none is deserved, beauty in the ugliest places. Even a quick read through the Bible will show how much grace abounds among those seeking relationship with God despite how profane they are, and just how much God exists in and works through the messiness of life.</div><div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1"></span></div><div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;"><br />
Does this mean there is nothing that is profane and nothing that is divine or sacred? Not at all. But it does mean that these two ideas do not exit in complete exclusivity of each other.<br />
<br />
</div><div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1"></span></div><div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1">What I’m reminded of at Christmas is that the central meeting place of the divine and the profane is in fact in the earthly birth of Christ. What could be more absurd, more profane, than the notion that the son of God would subject himself to being born as a helpless human baby in a dirty stable. What could be more profane than the Creator of the universe being subjected to living out a human life in a world filled with hate. In Jesus, we find the true collision of the divine and the profane. And in the ultimate gesture of obedience to his Father, Jesus brought about the most profoundly beautiful and most despicably profane of eucatastrophies: his death on the cross.</span><br />
<span class="s1"><br />
</span></div><div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1"></span></div><div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1">This most basic aspect of the Christian worldview can be easily glossed over with cute stories about baby Jesus. But for me, this gesture on God’s part to directly connect with us even in our broken and profane states informs everything about who I am and how I approach my work a storyteller. I celebrate Christmas as a reminder that God does not shy away from the profane. Instead, he seeks to redeem it. He has and will continue to reach out into our world and our lives to redeem that which is profane, transforming it into something beautiful and true. As an artist, I want to partner in this eucatastrophic work of the divine.</span></div><div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1"><br />
</span></div><div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1">Merry Christmas!</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-57160765874043286492011-07-11T15:49:00.003-04:002011-07-11T16:09:59.782-04:00Shooting a Sci-fi Thriller Guerilla Style - Part 2<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">As promised in part 1 of this series, I want to explore in more depth the use of Magic Lantern firmware for Canon DSLR cameras as well as Technicolor’s CineStyle specifically designed for use in Canon DSLR cameras. In May, I show a new short film called “Stop.” It is a a sci-fi thriller, and I opted to shoot with a minimal crew and do the cinematography and directing myself. There are new tools that open up new possibilities for DSLR filmmakers. So read on, and find out what I learned about using these tools in conjunction with my Canon T2i.</span></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But first, if you haven’t had a chance to see “Stop,” I want to invite you to take a look at the short film right here for free. It’s only eight minutes, and you will have a much better idea of what I am address as I discuss the shooting process using Magic Lantern and CineStyle.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">"Stop" - a Mikel J. Wisler short film</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="300" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/24355900?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="600"></iframe></span></center><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now that you’ve seen the film, I hope you’ll take a moment to rate and comment on it over on IMDb by going to: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1954853/">http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1954853/</a> Honest feedback is welcome! It’s how I learn and grow!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Two exciting things happened as I prepared to shoot this new short film. I was introduced to Magic Lantern and Technicolor’s CineStyle. I had been doing a lot of cinematography for a good year with Canon DSLRs and I wanted to push myself to new level of technical achievement even as I focused on telling an intriguing, fresh, and admittedly complicated story in such as short span of time. I had been experimenting with picture styles for the Canon DSLRs, and had shot a whole short film for director Raz Cunningham back in November of 2010 using the SuperFlat picture style that has been circulating around the web.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The idea of a picture style like SuperFlat is to provide a means to capture as much detail as possible since the camera is going to compress the footage so much in order to save it to CF or SD cards. As a result, when compression kicks in, it can be easy to lose detail information int he shadows or highlights, even when exposure is spot on, and especially if you’re shooting a high contrast scene. But the basic idea is to shoot with as flat of a picture as possible so you can color correct the footage to your heart’s content with as much flexibility as possible given the compressed footage Canon DSLRs generate.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">So I chose SuperFlat for Cunningham’s project. And nothing really tells you how well something works like having to shoot with it in real-world situations for several days. In the end, I was overall happy with footage we got, though let down by how SuperFlad seemed screw skin tone a little too much. The detail information is there, but now we’ve got some extra work to do in color correction to make sure skin tone looks right.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Then along came CineStyle, released mere days before we shot “Stop.” In this next video, I explore why I opted for CineStyle, and how that relates to my choice of using Magic Lantern firmware in conjunction with CineStyle.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/25042973?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="600"></iframe></span></center><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Magic Lantern is a third party firmware for Canon DSLRs (available for most of the Rebel and pro cameras except the 7D). As mentioned in the video above, it give DSLR cinematographer tools normally available in prosumer video cameras. The fact that Technicolor recommended using CineStyle in ISO 160 or multiples of 160 meant that I could not use CineStyle in its ideal settings on my T2i without using Magic Lantern. And having been interested in experimenting with Magic Lantern anyway, I was happy to take the plunge.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">So how does this all work out? Shooting went quite smoothly for the most part. The biggest challenge to using Magic Lantern is that it must be run from the SD cards. So instead of being able to format my SD cards in my T2i, I had to always copy the footage to hard drives on-set (using my MacBook Pro as my DIT machine), and then manually delete the files from the SD card before it could be returned to camera for use. The reason for this is that you must make your SD cards bootable so that when you star your Canon DSLR up, it finds Magic Lantern on the bootable SD card and runs Magic Lantern in conjunction with the native Canon firmware for the camera. If you format the card in camera, it will delete Magic Lantern from it. There’s nothing wrong with doing this and it will not damage your camera at all. It just means you will not be running Magic Lantern. I used three 8 GB SD cards while shooting, so I was never waiting on a card. But it took a little getting used to not formatting my cards in camera.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I only encountered a few bugs using Magic Lantern, and they constantly update it, so lately I have not had issues. Certainly, one feature many shooters appreciate about ML is that it does provide manual audio recording control for cameras like the 5D and T2i, which do not natively have that. Ironically, I prefer to record my audio with my Zoom H1, as it can record a higher bit rates and is made for audio recording, where as the electronics in these DSLRs did not have high-end audio recording in mind. Remember, Canon didn’t really make these cameras for filmmakers, even indie filmmakers.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">As for Technicolor’s CinceStyle, I found that It was prone to peaking in the highlights quite quickly. As a rule, I tend to underexpose my DSLR footage a little anyway as they seem prone to clip (that is, he brightest parts of the scene become a white devoid of all detail). I often take exposure readings with a light meter and then double check it against the camera’s light meter. Usually, I will shoot 1/3 to 1/2 stop bellow what the camera thinks is idea exposure. And with Magic Lantern, you have the option of turning on zebras to show you where your highlights are, as well as using false colors to better understand how the camera is exposing the shot. Being a so used to my of the light meter, I used these two option seldom for this particular shoot. And I am quite happy with the results.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Skin tone in CineStyle looks good. The details look great. And I had plenty of flexibility in how I wanted to color correct the footage in post. And that’s a very good thing! Because plans changed mid way through post. Find out why in the video bellow:</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/25352124?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="600"></iframe></span></center><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Suddenly, with this change in how I wanted the film to look, having as much flexibility with the footage as possible really mattered! In conjunction with this, thanks to fellow producer and lead actor, Trevor C. Duke, who found a great color correction tutorial, I had a better grasp of how to manipulate specific things in each frame as I worked on getting the look I wanted for the film. I made two complete passes of color correction, and the result is what you see in the first video posted.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The tutorial, which is really worth checking out, is here: <a href="http://library.creativecow.net/articles/maschwitz_stu/red-giant-blockbuster-film-look/video-tutorial">http://library.creativecow.net/articles/maschwitz_stu/red-giant-blockbuster-film-look/video-tutorial</a></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">To find out more about Magic Lantern, go to: <a href="http://magiclantern.wikia.com/">http://magiclantern.wikia.com/</a></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I did all of the post production using Final Cut Studio 3. In other words, Final Cut Pro 7, Color, and Soundtrack Pro. This was all before the new FCP X. And in light of what in this humble indie filmmaker’s opinion amounts to some serious oversights on Apple’s part when creating FCP X, I have yet to bother buying the new program and am currently exploring my options for other possible NLEs for future use. One of the things I am saddest to see go is Color. I find it a fantastic program once one learns it (and it does have a steep learning curve for sure, but it is a pro app, that’s to be expected). FCP X seems to have tried to roll some of the tools of Color into it Final Cut. But from all reports, these tools seem to be limited compared to the number of rooms for primary in, secondaries, color effects, geometry, and primary out in Color that allowed me to have such great control over my footage. We’ll see what happens next. For the moment, I’m still cutting in Final Cut Studio 3 and using Color for projects.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But I hope the above information is useful. By all means, if you have questions or comments, please leave them bellow! I’ll do my best to respond in a timely manner.</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-43267759016950259852011-06-12T15:00:00.001-04:002011-06-12T15:10:53.411-04:0012 Movies that Changed MeRecently, I was reflecting on films the have profoundly changed or redefined how I watch movies and approach filmmaking. I thought it would be interesting to assemble a list of the films that have been of most impact for me. So here is a dozen films, and reason why. But being a person that has a hard time making lists of such things, I hesitate to call these the definitive top twelve movies that have changed me. The top six certainly have been of such deep and lasting impact to me that I feel confident in listing them in such high ranks, and have indicated in italics the prime reason I feel they have been of such formative influence on me as a film viewer and filmmaker. There are, of course, a vast number of notable films that did not make it on to this list. That is not to say I haven't found profound value in them. But I thought I would put this out here for discussion and further exploration.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
12. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069293/combined">Solaris (1972)</a> - pacing, use of environments and sets, visual storytelling.<br />
11. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071315/combined">Chinatown (1974)</a> - storytelling, characterization, tragic tale.<br />
10. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/combined">Blade Runner (1982)</a> - storytelling, use of sets, visual effects.<br />
09. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0015324/combined">Sherlock Jr. (1924)</a> - early visual effects, visual storytelling, metafiction, early exploration of dream/cinema connection, exceptional comedy.<br />
08. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0027977/combined">Modern Times (1936)</a> - visual storytelling, comic genius, profound social observation/commentary.<br />
07. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0243664/combined">Wit (2001 - HBO)</a> - performance, simple yet universal and profound story, profoundly captures the human condition in a unique way.<br />
06. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119177/combined">Gattaca (1997)</a> - pacing, <i>character-driven sci-fi</i>, use of environments and sets, use of original soundtrack, storytelling.<br />
05. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0268126/combined">Adaptation (2002)</a> - <i>metafiction</i> that explores the craft of screenwriting and filmmaking.<br />
04. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/combined">Children of Men (2006)</a> - <i>cinematography</i>, use of environments and sets, character-driven sci-fi.<br />
03. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034583/combined">Casablanca (1942)</a> - <i>storytelling</i>, characterization, exposition and careful and subtle decimation of backstory.<br />
02. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120863/combined">The Thin Red Line (1998)</a> - <i>pacing, visual storytelling, editing, visual metaphor characterization and the externalization of the internal lives of characters </i>(when it comes to Terrence Malick, his blending of all these elements is what is so amazing, so all are italicized).<br />
01. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0247425/combined">In The Bedroom (2001)</a> - <i>crafting an artistic yet utterly realistic experience</i>, pacing, characterization, visual storytelling, tragic tale.<br />
<br />
What are films that have profoundly changed the way you think about movies?<div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-74936608079416229472011-06-10T15:00:00.002-04:002011-06-10T19:26:05.918-04:00Shooting a Sci-fi Thriller Guerilla Style - Part 1<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">This past May, I took on the challenge of making a new short film. It had been three years since I last directed a narrative film. I was itching to get back into some of my own creative work. Intrigued by the idea of making a really short film, I took on the challenge of being the director and cinematographer for this new project called “Stop.”</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Here is the teaser trailer for the film, which will be released on the web on June 24:</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="300" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/23597808?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="600"></iframe></span></div><a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">In light of the fact that I’ve been doing a lot of cinematography work these past few years, particularly this past year with DSLR cameras, I felt it was time to get back into the work of telling an original story of my own and incorporate what I’ve been learning. I feel I’ve grown significantly in the last few years when it comes to the craft of lighting, camera placement, and editing. It can be tough as a filmmaker who is always trying to learn new skills and perfect old ones to look back at previous projects now three or four or more years in the past. I’m no longer in the place I was as an artist and a person when I made those films. Now, it’s not that I don’t enjoy those films or find merit in them, its just that in my mind’s eye, they feel dated--like looking at a picture of yourself from several years ago.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">So it was high time to take on a new story as writer and director. And while I was at it, I opted to do the cinematography as well. Why? Well, take a look at the two videos below for a little more on that.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Here is a quick look at where the idea for this Sci-fi short came from:</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/24736940?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="600"></iframe></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">As fellow producer and actor, Trevor C. Duke, and I prepared for this film, we opted to work with a minimal crew. We want to be light and mobile. All the exterior locations were shot with available light, with the occasional flagging or bouncing of sun light for the desired effect. Production took place over two days in early May in New England, so we of course encountered rain and continuously shifting cloud cover and changing sunlight intensity. For the interior scenes, we did light with chinese lanterns, some practicals, and a SourceFour 750w was used outside the window during our night scene.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Here is a glance at the shooting process with such a small crew:</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/24830048?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="600"></iframe></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">We will be releasing “Stop” on the web for free on June 24, 2011. Please check it out, tell all your friends about it if you like it, and feel free to send me feedback. You can also rate the film and leave comments about it on IMDb: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1954853/">http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1954853/</a></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">In my next blog entry I’ll be talking more about shooting this film using Magic Lantern firmware and the new Technicolor CineStyle. In the mean time, you can learn more about “Stop” by visiting the film’s official website: <a href="http://stop.mikelwisler.com/">http://stop.mikelwisler.com</a></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHBj_fHFgprfI0JPzj0FRdDV1zKwa1kVhaAvZc3zGodM8TQ1-hRwcCe4S4DvWenvQM3c1SV0KYdveq11b1qqaAoaWONYxAcpyet6Yxe2whKGlQpfD3vz97x09WBkiaOEjQntUmt-UAHXo/s1600/Stop+Poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHBj_fHFgprfI0JPzj0FRdDV1zKwa1kVhaAvZc3zGodM8TQ1-hRwcCe4S4DvWenvQM3c1SV0KYdveq11b1qqaAoaWONYxAcpyet6Yxe2whKGlQpfD3vz97x09WBkiaOEjQntUmt-UAHXo/s640/Stop+Poster.jpg" width="361" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzTf34rl14ZVLT2_epMA7SFf_X-lLb4LsnTiAXaMSnUgqmmrBz05KqnvGD8J31DOLWS_mjA9aOYFt-k6S-b0zq-cXhNx_YeCnz0Gs1DL-hDGdrsvIJmGDd5DqAiiMRtq7TJECHsRwg4J0/s1600/Wide+Poster+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzTf34rl14ZVLT2_epMA7SFf_X-lLb4LsnTiAXaMSnUgqmmrBz05KqnvGD8J31DOLWS_mjA9aOYFt-k6S-b0zq-cXhNx_YeCnz0Gs1DL-hDGdrsvIJmGDd5DqAiiMRtq7TJECHsRwg4J0/s400/Wide+Poster+2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />
</div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-77612367886567338502011-05-02T13:04:00.005-04:002011-05-02T15:31:02.475-04:00Technicolor and DSLR Filmmaking<div style="text-align: justify;">In my last post, I talked a little about Canon's announcement that Technicolor would be releasing a custom-made Picture Style for Canon DSLRs specifically designed for HD video shooting. The idea is basically to shoot with a flatter, less contrasty picture setting so as to acquire as much information as possible since the camera will significantly compress the video information before writing it to CF or SD cards. Why do this? So you have as much detail to work with when you are ready to color correct your footage. This is something that much nicer, higher end cameras like the RED cameras, the Arri Alexa, or Arri D21 allow for as they can record or output uncompressed signals.</div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div>As I've mentioned before, I have been shooting with similar settings for a while. Specifically, I did all the cinematography for a short film back in November (directed by Raz Cunningham) using the Superflat mode that has been circulating around the Internent. While Superflat did give me plenty of detail to work with, I wasn't happy with what it did with skin tones under certain lighting situations. While the detail level might be great, now we've got even more correction work to deal with just to get our footage to neutral before we push it towards our final look. That's why as of late I have been shooting with my own Picture Style concoction I created using Canon's Picture Style Editor.<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Now comes Technicolor's Picture Style just released this past Saturday. So far, my tests with the new Technicolor CineStyle have given me better results. I'll have even more intimate knowledge of how well CineStyle works soon as I will be shooting a short narrative project later this week using the new Technicolor CineStyle. If you want to read more about this new Picture Style and even download it, head over to: <a href="http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2011/04/29/technicolor-cinestyle-profile-available-for-canon-5dmkii/">http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2011/04/29/technicolor-cinestyle-profile-available-for-canon-5dmkii/</a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Here is a quick test a friend of mine and very talented DLSR cinematographer, <a href="http://www.bnaro.com/">Bryant Naro</a>, shot this weekend using the Technicolor CineStyle on his Canon 7D:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: center;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/23117835?color=ffffff" width="600"></iframe></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Like I said above, the idea here is to be able to acquire images with as much information or detail as possible. This is by no means a replacement for shooting with better motion picture cameras that can handle raw recording. One of my favorite things about working with footage from the RED One for a project a while back is that I could hop into RED's free program, RED Alert, and quite simply change the ISO of an already recorded file. The information is all there, but if we felt a shot was underexposed, we could actually bring up the ISO and still have a clean, beautiful picture. That certainly is not the case with any DSLR cinematography I've done. And this is just one of many reasons why in regular conversations I have with fellow filmmakers I stress my rather significant reservations about shooting feature films on DSLRs (never mind the fact that 20% of the films at this year's Sundance were DSLR shot).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">But, let's face it, we're not all in the position to own or rent cameras like the RED One or Alexa for all of our projects. I am currently engaged in making some bold and fast short films with only the resources readily available to me. Why am I doing this? Two reason: I feel narrative storytelling is a craft I should keep honing and practicing in my pursuit of artistic excellence, and doing such projects provides me new opportunities for potentially creating something great that can be seen by more people and help open up new opportunities for further professional filmmaking. Both of these things have definitely been true of friends of mine who have done what I am doing now.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">So, at this present moment, for me, this means shooting with my Canon T2i. Why? Because that's what this broke filmmaker has at his disposal. And tools like Technicolor's CineStyle are certainly very welcome!</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I also plan on shooting this new project later this week using Magic Lantern on my T2i. There are several reasons for this. First of all, Technicolor recommends shooting at 160 ISO or a multiple of 160 when using CineStyle. Unfortunately, with Canon's firmware for the T2i, the ISO options are 100, 200, 400, 800, and after that who cares 'cuase it just gets too damn grainy anyway. That means I should in theory only be shooting at ISO 800 if I'm using CineStyle on my T2i. That makes exterior shooting rough, even with my ND filters. So I've opted for Magic Lantern, a third party firmware addition that runs off of SD cards. In addition to giving me many more ISO options, including the 160 multiples recommended for CineStyle, Magic Lantern also gives me many of the functions associated with normal prosumer HD video cameras I am so used to such as zebras, peeking, manual audio, and even different quality settings for the camera's video compression.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">If you want to learn more about Magic Lantern, head over to: <a href="http://magiclantern.wikia.com/">magiclantern.wikia.com</a>. It is available for the Canon 5D and T2i only at this time. So, 7D, 60D, and T3i shooters are out of luck at the moment.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I plan on blogging more about the process of making this new sci-fi (very) short film as we shoot this week and then enter post-production. So, come on back if you're curious. I will be exploring the ups and downs of working with Technicolor's CineStyle and Magic Lantern.</div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-28975355822501547142011-04-27T15:11:00.001-04:002011-04-27T15:12:00.493-04:00Canon’s HDSLR News<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Canon recently announced some updates for DSLR filmmakers. You can check out the video bellow if you are curious as to what was said exactly. But the two main things that are of immediate effect are that Canon has released a new E1 plugin for Final Cup Pro for Log and Transfer workflow right from Canon DSLRs. The second is the introduction of a new Picture Style for HD video created by Technicolor for higher detail levels.</span><br />
<a name='more'></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><br />
<center><iframe frameborder="0" height="281" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/22594205?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="500"></iframe></center><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Let’s talk about the new Canon E1 plugin for Final Cut Pro first. They supposedly have added more camera support as they have put more cameras on the market. On top of this, they new E1 plugin is supposed to allow editors to Log and Transfer DSLR footage that has not been copied over to hard drives in such a way as to maintain the exact same file structure as the CF or SD card it was originally shot on. This last bit of news is exciting, and I’m interested in putting that to the test, though at this point I’m so used to copying over my SD cards in their entirety to my hard drives that it’s no big deal. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The truth of the matter is that the new E1 plugin only introduces to the mix the newer D-series cameras. In other words, they added the 1D and the 60D to the mix. Wow, thanks Canon ... Sorry for the sarcasm here. But I had already hacked the old E1 plugin anyway so I could Log and Transfer footage from the Canon T2i and T3i. So imagine my surprise when I sat down today to Log and Transfer some footage for a new project I’m shooting and found that the new E1 plugin didn’t allow me to Log and Transfer my T2i footage. What was Canon thinking? </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But the good news is the that fix is easy. I just hacked the new E1 plugin like I had done with the old one and was up and running, transcoding footage to ProRes HQ in a few minutes. If you are like me and many, many, many (getting the hint, Canon?), shooter/editors out there who are using any of the Rebel line cameras for projects, you can quickly fix this problem by following the steps in the video I’m posting bellow. This is a tutorial for the original E1 plugin, but I followed these exact steps for the new plugin as well. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" height="300" src="http://blip.tv/play/heRBgc%2BRNwI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480"></embed></span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"> </span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, about the Technicolor picture style ... This is pretty interesting. I have been shooting with two custom picture styles for HD video for a while now. The idea is that you want to lower contrast and retain as much detail as possible because, lets face it, the compression in these Canon cameras leaves something to be desired. You do this in order to have a much information in your shots as possible so that you can later color correct to your hearts content without quite the same loss of detail or introduction of noise. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">There is a Super-flat picture style that has been circulating around the web for a while. It is fairly effective, and I even DPed a short film with it back in November. I’ve since then come to think that Super-flat throws off the white balance of the chip too much for my liking. So these days, I’m shooting with my own flat picture style I created using the Canon Picture Style Editor (for which there is a newer version available on the Canon website). </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I am curious, however, to see how this new Technicolor picture style works. You can read more about it<a href="http://www.technicolor.com/en/hi/about-technicolor/press-center/2011/technicolor-canon-usa-form-strategic-alliance-to-leverage-technicolor-color-science-for-canon-eos-dslr-cameras"> here.</a> It is supposed to be release this Saturday, April 30th, 2011. It might be just in time for principle photography for the new short film I’m directing. We’ll just have to wait and see.</span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-11358653411751037882011-04-13T16:04:00.004-04:002011-04-14T21:57:44.828-04:00Should We Be Waiting for the Scarlet?<div style="text-align: justify;">It's been quite a while now since RED announced their 3K prosummer priced Scarlet camera after the very successful introduction of their RED One camera. I've worked with the RED One, and it truly is as amazing as all the hype. That's hard to find in this world. But here we are, three years out from first hearing about plans for the Scarlet and still no sign of it. By all reports, it sounds like the camera is still being worked on. And there are some prototypes out there being used. However, RED has pushed back and pushed back their release date of the camera. They made the choice to delay release and go back to the drawing board to be able to compete with DSLR cameras that can shoot HD video when the Canon 5D Mark II first took off as a new tool for digital cinematographers. Ironically, this might have been the first stept toward the failure of the Scarlet as so much time as gone by, and more HDSLRs continue to hit the market.</div><a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">I count myself as one who was once in line for a Scarlet, eager to get my hands on one once released. Now ... well, I'm shooting more and more these days on DSLRs. I own a Canon T2i, and while there are loads of limitations to these cameras, its not like any camera is free of limitations or issues. On the other hand, for a fraction of the price of a Scarlet, I can shoot some pretty cinematic material. I'll let this reel I put together speak for itself.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/22308516?title=0&portrait=0&color=969696" width="600"></iframe></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Now certainly, if given the option, I would prefer to shoot most projects on a RED One or Epic. But let's face it, most projects do not have that kind of budget! At this point, most people I know have given up on the Scarlet. There's no point waiting any more. One of three things will happen. Either the Scarlet camera will be abandoned and never released, or the Scarlet will be released but not make nearly the splash RED hoped it would, or they will go to the drawing board yet again and create something new that really blows us away (if Sony, Canon, or Panasonic don't beat them to it first).<br />
<br />
The last one, while a possibility, seems unlikely. My gut feeling at this point is that the Scarlet is destined for abandonment. From the perspective of the indie filmmakers that have been hoping to shoot their projects on a Scarlet for the past three years, we'll only believe the Scarlet will be released when we're holding one. And even then ... we might be too busy shooting our films with something else just as good or better.<br />
<br />
The evolution of camera technology is happening so fast these days, that delays like the Scarlet has faced, while potentially reasonable, also allow for other companies to seise the opportunity to introduce a new product that pulls the rug out from under a delayed product. HDSLRs have done just this to the Scarlet. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate RED's inovation and the Epic looks absolutely amazing. And when it comes to shooting a feature film, I have to admit I'm quite leery of doing so with HDSLRs. Yet, when on a micro-budgets, we all have to work within our limitations. But as for the race between the Scarlet and Canon for the HDSLR market ... I have to go with Canon as the clear winner. If you want any more details on all of this, I recommend reading: <a href="http://www.kurtlancaster.com/dslr-cinema/03/01/2011/why-i-dropped-the-red-scarlet-dream-and-got-a-canon-5d-mark-ii/">http://www.kurtlancaster.com/dslr-cinema/03/01/2011/why-i-dropped-the-red-scarlet-dream-and-got-a-canon-5d-mark-ii/</a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">And for those who are still skeptical about the image quality of DSLR cameras when compared to higher end cameras like the RED One, I'll leave you with this video:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/7559839?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0&color=969696" width="600"></iframe></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-90375493513469424172011-04-06T11:41:00.007-04:002011-04-06T11:53:05.612-04:00Video Production Evolution<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">It seems like video is everywhere these days. As the Internet evolves, bandwidth speeds increase, more and more companies, organizations, bands, and individuals opt to integrate video into their web presence. For someone like me, where my day job is freelance video production (while I passionately chase my long terms goals as a filmmaker), this is good news. </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">So I was little surprised when a friend sent me a link to an article titled: "Video Postproduction is 'Dying Industry.'" My friend, also a video production professional, wondered what I made of this article. Here's a link to the article, if you're curious: <a href="http://www.governmentvideo.com/article/104614">www.governmentvideo.com/article/104614</a></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Here's essentially my reaction ...</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I had to read the very end to finally get what the article was saying. And even then, I think I was helped out by some critical thinking skills from college, as the article was not exactly clear. What this article is actually saying is that places that offer strictly post-production facility and services (editing suites and editors and motion graphics animators) are in decline because people like me who are filmmakers and videographer own shooting AND editing gear. In other words, we can do everything without having to go to such a facility.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">That is actually ... ANCIENT news. That's been happening for several years now. The very high end places that offer years of professional expertise and expensive editing gear small outfits can't afford, will likely stay alive as long as they evolve with the needs of their clients. But they have already seen declines as far as the kinds of clients they used to draw in as more and more smaller video production companies or individuals have moved to having everything they need for post-production in house. It is just more cost effective. It isn't until you being to deal with large amounts of data-heavy workflows for uncompressed HD, 2K, 4K, or 5K for feature films and TV shows that a large specialized post-production facility starts making sense. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But the truth is, video post-production is alive and well! The article is short and convoluted and really does a lousy job of making its point. Fact is, more people than ever are having videos created for their companies, websites, and organizations. But again, they're going to people like my friend and I who have the gear and experience to do it all from pre-producing, shooting, through editing and delivery.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">My friend joked he was having a crises after reading that article. I laughed and went on to explain the this ...</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">2010 was a record year for me as far as freelance video production work. And the vast majority of the work I did was editing! But here's the thing, I was generally the one shooting or producing what I was then brining into my Final Cut Studio 3 system. So yes, I wasn't going to a big post-production house. I never have, in fact. It just isn't cost effective for the type of video production I tend to do. It makes more sense for me to own my own iMac and Final Cut Studio 3. In fact, I would not make any money if I had to got to a post-production facility. And for the my freelance HD workflows, my iMac cranks along beautifully.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The trends I see from experience and interaction with people is that as more businesses, organizations, bands, non-profit entities, and other such places continue to expand their Internet presence, there is and only will be MORE NEED for video creation. Especially when it comes to professionals that can see a project from start to finish. People are into this one-stop-shop approach, which works great most of the time. It only becomes a problem when some clients ask freelancers to do the job of three people: "Oh, can you shoot, and monitor audio recording, and boom, and do DIT work, and make sure lights are set up at the second locations in advance so we can get there and start shooting right away?" Generally, this is born out of inexperience or lack awareness of what actually goes into professional video production. One person with lots of experience can do quite a bit, but at there are definite limits. At some point, quality is sacrificed in the name of trying to keep things to a one-person crew, which for some projects is not realistic. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">On top if this, we also have the DIY phenomena. More people than ever fancy themselves capable of creating professional level videos. Sure, the technology is cheaper now, and if someone really wants to do a weekly video podcast, they can go buy a camera and get iMovie, or Final Cut Express, or Adobe Premiere Elements, or Windows Movie Maker and do that themselves. In fact, I have recommended this exact approach to at least two people who asked me about creating a regular video podcast for them.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Why did I do that? I'm a professional. Video production is what I do. I have to make my day rate or its not worth booking the project because it takes up precious time I can be working on my film career long term goals or doing another gig that will pay me my day rate. On top of that, if such people were to pay me to do their weekly podcast, they would spend a lot of money hiring me to do that week after week. Plus, it's a little video podcast, you don't need a pro to make that. Just learn some basic principles of camera positioning, audio recording, and lighting, and you can create something that's adequate. After all, the quality expectations for video podcasts are pretty low, and the people who were approaching me about doing this didn't have the budgets for hiring pros to create their weekly podcast. Had they been large corporations, it might have been a different story (and potentially worth it for them depending on their marketing approach).</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But, what most people are doing is getting sleek and polished, well shot, well edited short videos created for their websites, in house use, or for TV commercials and so forth. These are a totally different ball game that the above mentioned video podcasts. These videos HAVE to be done by pros with experience. That hasn't changed at all. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Of course, some more naive folks out there think they can pick up a camera from BestBuy, shoot something that will be seen as good because they're using an HD camera, edit it on iMovie, and that it's going to be on par with professionally produced videos. That will happen. Eventually, however, most such people realize, "Oh, there's so much more to this professional video creation thing than having an HD camera and an iMac." So yes, digital video gear has come down in price and become more accessible. But that can't replace professional experience, artistic sensibilities, and business savvy required to pre-produce, light, shoot, and edit something that is polished and effective.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now the area where I do see some change, which is no surprise I should add, is that some organizations that utilize video a lot are making that a department in their structure. That only makes sense from a business perspective, because they can save money that way. But a lot of times, they are only able to get entry level people who do those jobs for entry level pay in order to gain experience. Such people often move on in a few years. So when they need a creative and very professional touch ... they often turn to freelancers with impressive reels and client lists.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Often time, even with companies that might have their own video post-production department, the still need professional videographers with appropriate gear to actually go out and do the shooting for them. I do a good bit of work like this for a few different companies where I pack up my car with my lighting, audio, and camera gear and head out to location where I shoot carefully prepared and lit interviews or live events and then hand off the footage. The company that hired me takes it from there. And this works for everyone concerned. I get my day rate for shooting for them and the next day I'm right back in my office working on either other projects or the feature film I am currently developing. They get a professional with years of experience to shoot good quality footage for them, and then they can save some money by having their in-house editor take it from there. Frankly, I see this as a win-win.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">And of course, there as are still plenty of projects and clients that need the complete package from planning through editing. So fellow videographers out there, do not disappear, and do not sell off your editing systems. Yes, I would say the landscape is changing, but I would also say that the article that inspired this whole blog post in the first place does a terrible job of addressing what is actually going on n the video production market these days. After all, the landscape in the world of business and technology is always changing. But as I look into the future, I only see more need for high-impact and expertly produced video content by creative professionals who know how to take the new tools available and put them to great use (sometimes even pushing the limits of what such gear was originally designed to do such has been the case with the HDSLR revolution).</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-66238374589394113562011-04-04T10:10:00.000-04:002011-04-04T10:10:12.338-04:00Interview About The River Film Forum<div style="text-align: justify;">This past Sunday afternoon, I had the privilege of being a guest on the web radio show “Cultural Diplomacy” by <a href="http://www.ceasefirestrategies.net/">CeaseFireStrategies</a>. Host, Eric Bumpus, asked me to come on to the show so we could chat about the work I’m doing with The River Film Forum. This is a quite an honor, and I had a great time explaining a little bit about what The River Film Forum is all about and what we have been doing as well as some of our plans for the future.</div><div class="p2"><span class="s1"></span></div><div class="p3"><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s2"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s2">Listen to the interview here: <a href="http://www.ceasefirestrategies.net/2011/04/river-film-forum-mini-interview.html"><span class="s3">www.ceasefirestrategies.net/2011/04/river-film-forum-mini-interview.html</span></a></span></div></div><div class="p2"><span class="s1"></span></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div class="p1"><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1">For those not familiar with The River Film Forum, it is a monthly event where we show a movie and then discuss the film as a group, engaging with the themes, ideas, and worldview of the filmmakers as well as our reactions to the films. It is open to the public; anyone is welcome. The River Film Forum is part of the The River Church, in Quincy, Massachusetts. Check out more information about The River Film Forum on Facebook or by going to: <a href="http://theriversouth.org/">theriversouth.org</a>.</span></div></div><div class="p1"><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="s1"><br />
</span></div></div><div class="p1"><div style="text-align: justify;">Here is a video I just recently produced for The River Film Forum:</div><br />
<center style="text-align: justify;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/21133371?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0&color=969696" width="600"></iframe></center></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-33169671672883622712011-03-04T12:54:00.000-05:002011-03-04T12:54:27.253-05:00On Making a Director's Reel<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">As I dive into developing my first feature film and seek to connect with investors and other potential team members, I have decided to put together a new demo reel that specifically showcases my work in directing narrative film projects. In fact, just this week, this new reel just hit my <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2457058/">IMDb profile</a>, along with my <a href="http://www.imdb.com/video/demo_reel/vi1850645017/">Cinematography Reel</a>. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/video/demo_reel/vi296787225/">Click here</a> to see the reel on IMDb or watch it bellow:</span></div><br />
<center><iframe frameborder="0" height="266" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/20256914?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="625"></iframe></center><center><br />
</center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">But an important question comes to mind. Are demo reels as effective for directors as they are for cinematographers, editors, and actors?</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><a name='more'></a></span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">For the editor and cinematographer, demo reels can quickly show off both technical expertise as well as aesthetic ability to create something with polish and style. For the actor, the demo reel is a quick way to showcase types of roles one has played and glimpse variety and range as well as the type of productions one has been cast in.</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">But what about the director? I have seen a few reels out there for directors. But it can be a little more tricky. If I'm being honest ... Yes, I did put together a director's reel, and I hope it can be useful for grabbing some people's attention. But does my director's reel really provide a good look at whether or not I have what it takes to carefully and artfully direct a feature film? Probably not.</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">The truth is, I don't kid myself. If someone <i>really</i> wants to see for themselves if I have any chops as a director, their best best is to actually <a href="http://alwaysreaching.watchime.com/">watch</a> a couple of my short films so they can see the flow of a whole story from start to finish, see how the pacing and choices in camera placement, acting, editing, and so forth all affect the telling of the story. In essence, they need to see a whole film to see the choices of the director and determine if these choices helped or hurt the telling of the story. Only in doing this can someone ultimately figure out if a given director has talent. I'm no exception!</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Another perspective is that often trailers for one's films are a better attention grabber than a demo reel when it comes to one's work as a director. I certainly see the point here, and this why I do have a <a href="http://mikelwisler.com/Mikel_Wisler/Films.html">Trailer Reel</a> page on my <a href="http://mikelwisler.com/">website</a>. In fact, as far as grabbing people's attention and gaining their interest in seeing more of my work, I would say, trailers are probably far more affective than a demo reel.</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Here's a trailer for my short film, "Always Reaching," for example.</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
<center><iframe frameborder="0" height="352" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/4045999?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="625"></iframe></center><br />
</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">So why do I have a director's reel? Because, in the words of a good friend of mine, "it can't hurt." In this day and age, it is best to have multiple means by which people can be introduced to your work. It took me very little time to put together my director's reel and having another tool in my arsenal is helpful. So basically, why not have one? It's all about trying to make a good first impression.</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">In the end, my hope is that people who are genuinely intrigued by my trailers or demo reel will take a crack at watching one of my films. Especially if they are considering whether or not I might be worth the investment when it comes to funding a feature film. I would hope they make an informed decision. </span></center><center style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></center><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-17661573720642203612011-02-27T17:05:00.011-05:002011-03-01T15:09:13.869-05:00Micro Budget Features and Film Festivals<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Probably one of the most daunting things any independent filmmaker has to deal with is finding funding for projects. This is why many new filmmakers opt to make what I would call <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-budget_film#Micro_budget">micro budget</a> features (films with production budgets in the tens of thousands). I've done several short films to date, and all of those have been projects that my fellow producer <a href="http://runawaypen.webs.com/andrewgilbert.htm">Andrew Gilbert</a> and I have funded ourselves. I would definitely classify them as micro budget shorts. But you can do that with short films. Most often the main expenses are some rented gear, a location or two, and food. Everything else is either borrowed, donated, or deferred. In our case, we've done a lot of deferred deals with cast and crew looking to gain more experience in filmmaking. In those cases, the act of being involved in the project tends to be payment enough with the added bonus that should the film manage to turn a profit, there could be some payment down the road. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But what about feature films? Can you do this with features?</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">It is definitely possible. Any indie filmmaker can list off films like <i>The Blair Witch Project</i>, <i>Clerks</i>, <i>El Mariachi</i>, <i>Primer</i>, and others. The last such film to supposedly pull off being produced on a micro budget fit maybe for a short film is <i>Monsters</i>. It is also probably the freshest take on the ultra-low budget movie as the film's writer and director, <span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 16px;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2284484/">Gareth Edwards</a>, skillfully crafted a story that played to the strengths of such a limited budget and circumvented many (though not all) of its weaknesses. </span>But actually getting a straight answer on what the budget really was on such films can be hard. For <i>Monsters</i>, I heard while attending the American Film Market (AFM) in November that the film was reportedly produced for $10,000. <a href="http://www.nj.com/entertainment/movies/index.ssf/2010/10/monsters_review_minuscule_budget_of_monsters_shows_only_thing_this_movie_has_going_for_it.html">NJ.com</a> says $15,000. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1470827/business">IMDb</a> lists the estimated budget at $800.000. Clearly, there's some discrepancies here. It could be that much work was done on deferred payments, meaning that the film's actual budget is closer to to $800,000 when everyone actually gets the money they're owed for the work they did, while money actually spent during preproduction, shooting, and cutting the film might be much closer to the $15,000 mark. So what's the <i>actual</i> budget of the film?</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">There's a temptation for the indie filmmaker to say, "Well, clearly it's the ten or fifteen thousand spend while shooting and editing." I'm right there with you. I want to believe this is true too. After all, it's the money spent, right? But it is not that simple. Investors may not agree with this perspective. Even your cast and crew might not see it like this. It all depends how contracts were arranged for deferred payment for the cast and crew that agreed to work on the film for little or no money up front in hopes of getting money later. Do they get their money once the film is sold to a distributor? Do they have to wait for the film to turn a net profit once a distributor releases the film? Whose definition of net profit will they go by? </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The investor wants to make as much money off of this investment as possible. Your crew and cast that worked for deferred payment are hoping to get a good payout from this (possibly a better payout than had they been paid up-front). Lets say you make a movie that costs $15,000 to make. But you sign deferred payment contracts with the cast and crew that states that once the film is sold to a distributor, they will get paid. And lets say that once all those people are paid, that will actually make the budget of the film $800,000. But you are proudly bragging about your $15,000 feature film, which distributors pick up on and decide that they can offer you $400,000 and it will look to you like a huge win. But, in reality, you're actually significantly in the red! You cannot pay in full on all the deferred payments you are under contractual obligation to pay. And your investor is empty handed, having actually lost all $15,000 of his or her original investment.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, not all contracts for deferred payment are structured this way. In fact, most investors will insist that there be clear language in the contracts that makes it certain that the investor will first recover his or her investment before any deferred payments are made. But even in the above scenario, your cast and crew would not get the money they hoped to get if the movie had been sold for $1 Million. I'm just trying to make a point here. Clearly this micro-budget business is in fact a little more complicated than at first glance.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The tricky business with these low-budget-sweethearts is that often times hyperbole drives the marketing. So while it's quite possible that a film like <i>Monsters </i>was in fact made for an initial cost of $10,000 to $15,000, there's also a very good chance that film actually cost significantly more than this to be made, but clever marketing likes to play that number as lower to drive curiosity and tap into the ever-present American fixation on the "underdog story." So, in a sense, the film itself becomes an underdog we want to cheer for and see succeed.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, I don't mean to say that there aren't indie feature films made for micro budgets like this. Such movies are made. In fact, judging from the many e-mails about micro-budget features looking for cast and crew I get each week from various networks I'm associated with as an indie filmmaker, there are a lot of micro budget features being made. It's just that hardly any of them go on to enjoy the kind of success that the above mentioned movies have enjoyed. It's a tough gig for sure. There's probably a better chance of the producers of such a film winning the lottery than actually getting such a film to be a run-away hit. But at the same time, not all producers of such films are looking to make a runaway hit. They just want a good solid feature film under their belt they can take to festivals and maybe get a DVD deal and enough niche attention that will help pave the way for the next, bigger budget feature. I'm definitely on board with that ... if the script is any good.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Those looking for the runaway hit, while their passion and dreams are admirable, are most likely in for heartbreak. Chances aren't good. In fact, they've never been worse. Since <i>Primer</i>, the film festival environment has been in flux. These past years of financial turmoil and the increasing use of the label "indie" by the studios as a genre (not as a business term indicating the film was funded independently of major studios) have brought some serious changes to the film festival landscape.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">What does this mean for indie filmmakers like us? Want to get some attention at Sundance Film Festival these days? You better have some highly marketable house-hold names in your cast, or be a highly marketable house-hold name filmmaker yourself. I suspect, though I may be wrong, that the days of a feature film with no stars that was made for a few thousand dollars getting huge recognition from a festival like Sundance have come and gone (and likely to not be coming back too soon, sadly). What's more, I've heard it again and again: Distributors are no longer attending festivals. Distribution deals are not being made at festivals all that often any more. Why? Distributors are flooded with inquires as is. They do not need to go looking for more, most of the time.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, I don't mean to be all doom and gloom here. I'm merely making some observations. The truth is, there are also many new means of distributing movies these days. For our short films "<a href="http://alwaysreaching.watchime.com/">Always Reaching</a>" and "<a href="http://coldoctober.watchime.com/">Cold October</a>," we've definitely tapped into such new distribution means as <a href="http://www.watchime.com/">Indie Media Entertainment</a> and <a href="http://indieflix.com/">IndieFlix</a>. Both films can be inexpensively rented as VOD in very good quality and "<a href="http://indieflix.com/film/cold-october-30410/">Cold October</a>" is currently <a href="http://indieflix.com/film/cold-october-30410/">available on DVD</a> through IndieFlix. That's just two examples!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">New developments in the distribution of independently produced films continues each year. With more opportunities for filmmakers to make a low budget feature and find independent distribution through the Internet, the viability of making a micro budget feature and having it actually be seen by people and possibly even make back its money and maybe even turn a profit is within reach of more filmmakers than ever. Will we hit the big time doing this? Probably not. But can we possibly show our storytelling skills and build solid footing for the next step to a bigger budget feature? I sure think so!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The other question I feel I must ask, and I do not know the answer to this at this time, is this: In light of all this change in the film festival world, new distribution opportunities, and the fact distributors by and large don not seem to be going to festivals ... are festivals still relevant to new indie filmmakers seeking to get that first or second feature film out there? Or are all those submission fees wasted money? What do you think?</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-31087402032009339172011-02-17T11:55:00.001-05:002011-02-26T22:28:05.000-05:00Cliches and Lazy Filmmaking<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Recently, I was drawn into a conversation with a friend about this idea of “cinematic shortcuts” or “film cliches.” These are some highly visual devices used in storytelling in movies and on TV fairly often. Like all cliches, they were at some point effective in communicating an idea. But now they have been over-used. And savvy audiences roll their eyes and grow tired of seeing these cliches time and again.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Want an example? A couple in a movie gets into a fight. As the fight reaches its climax, they storm off to separate rooms and slam doors. Cliche. How many times have we seen people slam doors in movies? Sometimes it can have its place, especially if the filmmaker works out a way to make this not a cliche but something new and fresh because of how its playing out on screen.</span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Another classic cliche of the action movie is the crashing vehicle that blows up into a big ball of flames as if the entire body of the car had in fact been made out of C4. Its visual, it’s cool looking. So I get it. I understand the temptation to do this. But we’ve seen this now so many times that it has in fact lost its impact.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But what I really want to explore here are the unique cliches that I would suggest become cinematic shortcuts because they are visual means of conveying a deeper idea, but they have also been over-used. My objective as a filmmaker is to find fresh and creative ways to communicate without the use of cliche or tired shortcuts. But to do this, I need to first figure out what are cliches and how they have been used.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></b></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The Kiss</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The first one that comes to mind for me is kissing. We see it in movies all the time. And there’s a reason for this. It is visual, which works perfectly on-screen. And don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge fan of a good movies kiss!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But often characters kissing is used a a shortcut for showing that they are attracted to each other or that they are now in a relationship. I’ve seen it in many movies, and often feel like it looses its power and impact because too often it feels like a shortcut, like lazy storytelling. Could there be another way to get the same idea across, even a very visual way, without it having to be the stereotypical kiss?</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, if you build up, and the kiss in your film becomes a true moment of catharsis, a release of emotion as we’ve been waiting for these two characters we know are in love with each other to finally and openly express their love, then the kiss has its power again. Though here to we have to be careful. Far too many movies have also relied on a big emotional kiss at the climax of the movie where the music swells and the lover embrace. So, obviously, it becomes a question of how unique and fresh the story is over-all. Can we make such a scene with a new sense of life and excitement, or will it feel like a rip-off of dozens of over films with the same climatic kiss scene?</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></b></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Throw It Out</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Another shortcut I’ve seen a lot in TV shows and movies goes something like this: Man is in love with woman. He plans to propose to her. At what feels like the right moment to him, he pulls out the ring box and pops the question. But woman, while professing her love for him, breaks his heart and says no. They part ways, because how could their relationship remain the same now? In his heart-broken state, needing to move on, the man stands near a body of water. He takes ring box and throws it out into the water. Splash. The ring, and with it, the relationship is gone.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">It’s visual, right? Absolutely. In fact, the above scene I just described is directly from a recent episode of the TV show <i>Bones</i>. As I watched it, and I saw the character look at this ring box post break-up, I began to mutter something along the lines of, “Oh no. Don’t do it. I feel a cliche coming. Oh. There it is. There it goes. Damn it! Had to go for the cliche, didn’t they?”</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">This type of scene takes on many forms, but specifically the throwing out of a engagement ring is quite common. The trouble is, often times the characters that perform these acts don’t strike me as the types that would do this. In all other areas of their life they seem to behave pretty pragmatically. This is certainly the case with the above mentioned character from <i>Bones</i>. So suddenly to toss this expensive and powerful item out seems a wee-bit melodramatic for an otherwise level-headed character. In other words: out of character. But I get it. It’s a visual shortcut. A quick way to show that this is definitively the end of this relationship. Nonetheless, I feel it is lazy writing.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Another manifestation of this type of scene is one where a character is angry with another character who calls them on their cell phone. And what do they do? They throw their cell phone over a cliff, or into a poll, or off the peer. Again, it’s visual. I get it. But I guess the beauty of being a fictional character is that you don’t have to be concerned about buying a new cell phone and making sure you get all those phone numbers and contact information off the old phone you just tossed off that boat or into the deep-end of the pool and into a new phone.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Sometimes this scene is about freedom. A character chooses to divorce themselves from their workaholic life, even if just for a while, and so they toss that ever-ringing phone. Again, great visual picture. I understand why movies have used scenes like this in the past. But I’ve seen it too many times now. So I’m hesitant to use it in my own films.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></b></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Sex</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The final cinematic shortcut I want to address today is sex. Lets take a moment and acknowledge that movies and sex are pretty good fit in many ways. Let’s face it, movies and TV are visual mediums, and what could be more visual than sex, right? And contrary to what some of my Christian friends might suggest, I do believe there is a proper place, use, and context for on-screen sexuality. But our topic today is how sex has become a movie cliche, so I won’t get into that right now.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Two characters are in love. Their relationship is becoming more intimate. So how do we show that? How do we show they’re really in-love? Or that their relationship is moving into deeper waters? Here comes the sex scene.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Again, I get it. And in some movies it makes perfect sense that this would be the next natural action the characters might take. But in a lot of movies, its a lazy, lazy, lazy shortcut. It is a means for quickly trying to say, “See, they’re really in love.” Two characters meet at the start of the movie. They flirt right away. Fifteen minutes into the movie, they’ve kissed. And before the end of the first act, they’ve slept together. And what’s more, these people who have only known each other a short while, somehow seem to manage having mind-blowing and amazing sex. They seem to innately know how to perfectly please their partner. Yeah right. My BS detector just went off the charts just now.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Things like this sure look like lazy storytelling to me. The challenge I embrace for my own writing is to seek out other means of showing that two people are in fact growing closer together. What other visual means can I come up with to communicate the idea that they are becoming more vulnerable with each other? That they are becoming more committed to each other? It is my drive and hope to do something new and fresh, not just come up with an excuse for another sex scene.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">What Else?</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><b></b>So what other cinematic shortcuts or movie cliches do you see? What do you try to avoid in your own storytelling? Or what just bugs you when you see it in a movie? Feel free to share. Who knows, I might have to write a follow-up blog entry with some of the most notable examples.</span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-68651303737203478572011-02-11T11:43:00.003-05:002011-02-27T14:19:10.207-05:00My New Cinematography Reel for 2011<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">2010 was a great year for me where I got to do a lot of new, challenging, and exciting cinematography work. So I wanted to take a moment share here my latest demo reel for such work. For those of you who have been following this blog, you've seen my entries on shooting narrative films with the Canon 7D and T2i. Here, you can see some footage from those projects as well as some other projects I'm sure I'll be writing about soon as well.</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: center;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/19769436?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0&color=969696" width="600"></iframe></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-54210305071957154262011-02-04T15:08:00.003-05:002011-02-17T12:17:36.856-05:00Favorite Video Projects of 2010<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">2010 was busy year for me on the freelance video production side of things. It was also a year new things both in terms of types of videos and in terms of starting to shoot a lot of material on DSLR cameras. Here's a quick look through some highlights of projects I worked on in 2010 in my freelance video work.</span><br />
<a name='more'></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The River Church:</span></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I created four short videos for the River Church's website. This has to be the most aesthetically unique video project I did in 2010 as it used several distinct techniques ranging an all DSLR shoot to video rear projection during the interview shoot. You'll also notice that we went for a very film-like look in both the colors, film reel transitions, and the 2.35:1 wide aspect ratio more reminiscent of big action or cinematic films. Bellow you can see the first of the four videos. To see all four, head over to <a href="http://www.theriversouth.org/">www.theriversouth.org</a>.<br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="255" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/14241971?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0&color=969696" width="600"></iframe></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Shot with two Canon Rebel T2i cameras.</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><b>The Back Bay Hotel in Boston:</b></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><b><br />
</b></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I created a short video for the Back Bay Hotel this past year. This too was entirely shot with DSLR and is featured on Citysearch.com. I did all the sooting and editing.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/11727799?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0&color=969696" width="600"></iframe><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Shot with two Canon Rebel T2i cameras.</span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><b>AOL Travel Boston: </b></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">This series of short videos for AOL Travel's new website was shot all over Boston, all using the Canon Rebel T2i. My thanks to host Matt Rodrigues, sound recordist Mike Lamantia Jr. and producer Raz Cunningham! I did the shooting and editing. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" height="231" id="AOLVP_us_643267415001" width="410"><param name="movie" value="http://o.aolcdn.com/videoplayer/AOL_PlayerLoader.swf"></param><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"/><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="flashvars" value="playerid=61371447001&publisherid=1612833736&videoid=643267415001&codever=1&stillurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpdl%2Estream%2Eaol%2Ecom%2Fpdlext%2Faol%2Fbrightcove%2Faolmaster%2F1612833736%2F1612833736%5F650999394001%5Fari%2Dorigin05%2Darc%2D171%2D1288213198514%2Ejpg%3FpubId%3D1612833736"></param><embed src="http://o.aolcdn.com/videoplayer/AOL_PlayerLoader.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" wmode="transparent" allowfullscreen="true" bgcolor="#000000" width="410" height="231" name="AOLVP_us_643267415001" flashvars="playerid=61371447001&publisherid=1612833736&videoid=643267415001&codever=1&stillurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpdl%2Estream%2Eaol%2Ecom%2Fpdlext%2Faol%2Fbrightcove%2Faolmaster%2F1612833736%2F1612833736%5F650999394001%5Fari%2Dorigin05%2Darc%2D171%2D1288213198514%2Ejpg%3FpubId%3D1612833736"></embed></object></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><a href="http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states/massachusetts/boston-videos-how-to-visit-boston-harbor-vid-643267415001/">Click here to see the rest of the videos.</a></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: left;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">AOL Stylelist: Hot In My Salon Episodes:</span></b><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span></b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I shot and supervised the editing of two episodes for the Stylist web series, <i>Hot in My Salon. </i>This was all shot run-and-gun documentary style with my Sony HDR-FX1 camera.</span></div></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: center;"><object 231"="" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" id="AOLVP_610200045001" width="410 height="><param name="movie" value="http://o.aolcdn.com/videoplayer/AOL_PlayerLoader.swf"></param><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"/><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="flashvars" value="playerid=61371447001&videoid=610200045001&publisherid=1612833736&codever=1&stillurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpdl%2Estream%2Eaol%2Ecom%2Fpdlext%2Faol%2Fbrightcove%2Faolmaster%2F1612833736%2F1612833736%5F691713255001%5Fari%2Dorigin07%2Darc%2D106%2D1291043595280%2Ejpg%3FpubId%3D1612833736"></param><embed src="http://o.aolcdn.com/videoplayer/AOL_PlayerLoader.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" wmode="transparent" allowfullscreen="true" bgcolor="#000000" width="410" height="231" name="AOLVP_610200045001" flashvars="playerid=61371447001&videoid=610200045001&publisherid=1612833736&codever=1&stillurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpdl%2Estream%2Eaol%2Ecom%2Fpdlext%2Faol%2Fbrightcove%2Faolmaster%2F1612833736%2F1612833736%5F691713255001%5Fari%2Dorigin07%2Darc%2D106%2D1291043595280%2Ejpg%3FpubId%3D1612833736"></embed></object></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><b>Westwood Patch:</b></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">As AOL rolls out new specialized websites in their <i>Patch</i> brand, they hired me to shoot videos for two of the area editors for specific <i>Patch</i> websites. I created videos for Westwood and Brookline, Massachusetts, this past summer. Both videos were shot with the Canon Rebel T2i.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><object height="231" width="410"><param name="movie" value="http://westwood.patch.com:/swf/external_video_player.swf"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="flashvars" value="flv_url=http://o3.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/patch/44ba877b1c58b2776dbff5beafc8a02/video.flv&video_url=http://westwood.patch.com/articles/welcome-to-westwood-patch#video-525159&publication_url=http://westwood.patch.com&twitter_status=http://patch.com/A-t9k+v-gqZB&auto_play=true&full_screen=true"><embed src="http://westwood.patch.com:/swf/external_video_player.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" flashvars="flv_url=http://o3.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/patch/44ba877b1c58b2776dbff5beafc8a02/video.flv&video_url=http://westwood.patch.com/articles/welcome-to-westwood-patch#video-525159&publication_url=http://westwood.patch.com&twitter_status=http://patch.com/A-t9k+v-gqZB&auto_play=true&full_screen=true" width="410" height="231"></embed></object></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">There is definitely other material I shot this past year, specifically for narrative film projects, that I wish I could include here at this time. However, those projects are currently in post-production and will be rolled out some time later this year. And when they are rolled out, rest assured I will put some samples here as they do represent serious new achievements in my own work as a cinematographer.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Thank you to all my clients this past year. Here's to a great 2011!</span></div></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-69135558900779299782011-01-15T16:09:00.013-05:002011-02-03T21:56:09.800-05:00The River Film Forum<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">As 2011 begins, I find myself in an exciting and unique position of being able to help run a program that feels unique, new, and sort of throws out some old conventional ideas of what it means to be a follower of Christ (or in the more common terms, one of them church-going folk). For the last portion of 2010, I helped launch and lead something called The River Film Forum, hosted by The River Church (<a href="http://www.theriversouth.org/">www.theriversouth.org</a>) in Quincy, Massachusetts. We gather once a month, pop some popcorn, and watch a movie. When the movie's done, we hang out and discuss the film as a group, reacting to what we've just experienced. Some very exciting things have been happening with all of this, and I have some very high hopes for 2011's full year of Film Forums.</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a>This is open to the public, so if you are in the south shore area of Boston, please do no hesitate to contact me. We meet the third Friday of every month. You can look us up on <a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-River-Film-Forum/142104749180734">Facebook</a> and keep up with the latest news and information about the movies we're watching and other special events we're planning. The film forum is geared at encouraging open dialogue about life's big questions through the shared experience of watching movies and talking about the ideas and issues brought up in films. This is open to anyone interested, you don't have to be part of our church, or any church. This is about appreciating film and making friends through fun and constructive conversations.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Films we have screened and discussed so far include: <i>The Book of Eli, Bruce Almighty, The Matrix, Dan in Real Life, </i>and <i>The Family Man. </i>We kick off the new year of RFF films on January 21st with <i>Inception, </i>followed in February by <i>The Social Network</i>.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">As a film lover, this is a dream come true being able to help share a deep appreciate for cinema with others. As a filmmaker, this is highly educational as every time we have a film forum discussion I learn a lot about how other people watch and think about films. As a Christian, I find it fascinating how profound and real (removed from the realm of esoteric platitudes) our discussions of the films we watch are each time.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Along those lines, I'm tinkering with some ideas for writing about this film forum experience some more and explore how this is all working. Things are slowly developing with that, but only time will tell how that shapes up. In the mean time, we've got our year essentially planned out, and we'll be introducing some exciting new things to the film forum this year, including an exclusive screening of an independent film in March.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">If you're curious about what this whole film forum thing entails, I've written a brief explanation on The River Church's website: <a href="http://www.theriversouth.org/classes-programs/river-film-forum">www.theriversouth.org/classes-programs/river-film-forum</a>.</span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-51657143883498785702010-12-03T17:46:00.008-05:002011-02-03T21:57:00.383-05:00Distribution for My Lastest Short Films<div style="text-align: justify;">Just released in the United States today by <a href="http://www.watchime.com/">Indie Media Entertainment</a>, my award-winning (Best Screenplay at Terror Film Festival) psychological thriller short film, "<a href="http://coldoctober.watchime.com/">Cold October</a>," and my dark and dramatic short film "<a href="http://alwaysreaching.watchime.com/">Always Reaching</a>" are now available as VOD (Video on Demand) on-line streaming rentals. For "Always Reaching," this is the first release of the film. It has played in festivals and had special on-line test screenings, but has not been made widely available to the public until today.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
<a name='more'></a>In the coming weeks, Indie Media Entertainment will also be releasing both films on DVD through Amazon.com and as VOD available on TiVo. The exact release date for the DVDs and the TiVo VODs are still to be determined.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">To rent "Cold October" on VOD today, go to: </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://coldoctober.watchime.com/">coldoctober.watchime.com</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">To rent "Always Reaching" on VOD today, go to: </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://alwaysreaching.watchime.com/">alwaysreaching.watchime.com</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I invite you to check the films out. Your support is deeply appreciated! If you happen to have followed my sporadic blogging, you understand that filmmaking is a profound passion and dream of mine. I cannot fulfill this dream with out the support of all the amazing people who have contributed to the making of these films and all the scores of other people who support my efforts by renting and buying copies of my films. I also rely on word of mouth from people who enjoy my films to get the word out there to other people who I just cannot reach otherwise. So please, pass along these links to any of your friends or family!</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Thank you,</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Mikel J. Wisler</div><div style="text-align: justify;">co-writer and director of "Cold October" and "Always Reaching"</div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-53299168082011590822010-06-29T23:35:00.007-04:002011-02-03T21:58:37.445-05:00Is Your Movie Ticket a Vote for Lousy Cinema?<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Summer movie season is upon us again. And, as has been the case off and on in years past, I find myself almost paralyzed with boredom by the offering of films this year. Yeah, sure, there’s a few movies that look interesting, and even a couple that look definitely worthwhile. But the majority of films coming out this summer have little appeal to me, or at least don’t seem worth paying the price of a first run movie theater ticket to see them. Now that’s just my opinion.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a>All the same, if you watch movies at all, and most Americans do, you’ve seen your fair share of films you found disappointing. What’s more, I’m positive you’ve seen trailers to films and have thought something along the lines of: “Oh my gosh, I can’t believe THAT got made! Why would I ever waste time watching that?”</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">So, let’s explore a couple of theories about why bad films get made. Well, these are really two ideas that combine in my view to form a sort of market driven theory of bad cinema.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">The first idea is something you may have read on this blog before. It’s simple really. It’s more of an observation than a theory. It is the idea that basically something along the lines of 80% of anything produced in large quantity is lousy. Now, obviously, this doesn’t apply to a specific item, like a particular model of automobile. But when it comes to unique items, especially things that involve a lot of creativity, talent, and good taste, most such things miss the mark of excellence. Consider the number of books in any book store. Are even 50% of those books something you might consider worth the time it would take to read them? Chances are no. In fact, the actual percentage is probably far lower!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">You can say the same about music, works of art, TV shows, video games, oratory presentations, and movies. It seems, to me at least, that this is the case particularly when it comes to the types of things that are significantly dominated by industry. Once the focus shifts away from mere creativity and more strongly to making money, I think there’s a definite increase in lousy creative choices made by the people seeking to create such works, especially when such works involve not just one person, but a committee of people. In the studio system in Hollywood, where money is definitely a major concern ... correction, 99% of the time it is THE concern ... this is a significant issue.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">So yes, I do think that a natural byproduct of the film “industry” is that honestly most films made are actually quite lousy. Now, I feel I must point out I’m not some sort of artsy-fartsy avant-garde guy who only likes movies that look like David Lynch’s <i>Eraserhead</i>. On the contrary, I’m a firm believer in the intersection of art and pop culture. Most of what we admire as great classic works of art now where once in fact part of the popular culture of its day. So, I definitely don’t want to sound like I’m poo-pooing all forms of popular expressions of art.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Now, having said that ... most film trailers I see do seem to land in the category of films I’ll never bother to watch. And I watch a lot of films (admittedly, I watch a lot of trailers too). In my view, most movies are this way not because I have an insanely and unreasonably discriminating taste in films, but because most are genuinely not that good. It’s part of my theory here that at least 80% of all movies are just frankly ... not that good. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Now, I should point out again, I am a film lover! The five to ten percent of films that come out each year that I greatly enjoy make it all worthwhile for me. They are gems worth seeking after! So, as I’ve said before, just because 80% of the offering of a particular medium are lousy, this does not mean we should abandon that medium. That’s like saying that because so few paintings can be “Starry Night,” we should as a society give up on painting as an art form. Absolutely not! </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Now, if at least 80% of films aren’t good, then is all hope lost that more films can’t be better? Are we doomed to having at best only 20% (keep in mind these are just rough round numbers) of all films that good, with an even smaller percentage of those that are truly great?</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">I want to say no.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Which leads me to my second theory. If the film industry is in fact an industry, it does indeed concern itself significantly (even primarily) with making money, then what kinds of movies make money clearly must affect the subsequent kinds of movies that will get made in the future.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Just think about it: Say I own a business--a restaurant. I make pizza. But my pizza isn’t very good. Obviously business is not going well. But now, say I discover that instead of pizza, my cooks are excellent at making magnificent chocolate cake. In fact, the chocolate cake they make is just out of this world fantastic. We start serving it at my restaurant. People rave and start coming in just to get some cake. It would be completely foolish of me to insist on being a pizza joint that just happens to make excellent cake and continue to only make a few cakes each day. My business will do much better if I make the switch to focusing on cakes and get the word out about this, not my pizza. In fact, I bet my cooks that make great chocolate cake also make other amazing cakes as well. And if it’s what people want, I stand to make a significantly better profit than I ever could selling second rate pizza. You see where I’m going?</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">So we have two key factors: what people want, and how well I can deliver that.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Now imagine if I make lousy pizza at my fictional restaurant but for some reason people in my neighborhood keep buying it. What motivation do I have to change? None. My system works. I mean, even if in theory I could make more money selling cake, is that a risk I’m willing to take when my crappy pizza is doing just fine? I think you know the choice most businesses will make in a scenario like this.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Hollywood is no different.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">So here’s the part where we can come in to the system and actually have an affect. Business is predicated on people paying for something (a service, a good, a ... you get it). In the case of theatrical films ... paying for movie tickets. In particular, studios are quite concerned with opening weekend box office. In fact, the obsession with opening weekend box office is so big that studio executives in Los Angeles will hold their breath as a large scale and very expensive film that needs to sell hundreds of thousands of tickets to actually make a profit opens on the East Coast. With anticipation, they watch ticket sales in those first few hours of Friday evening on the East Coast. By the time it’s eight or nine that night in New York City (that first day of the film’s opening), a film can be declared a failure. That means, before the clock strikes 6:00 PM in LA, the film can be considered already a flop.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Movies that don’t fare well that first and second weekend run the risk of being pulled from theaters in subsequent weeks. Why? Well, theater owners need to make way for other potentially more profitable films. If a film isn’t bringing in an audience, theater owners are going to want to put something on that screen that will draw an audience. Simple economics, really!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">But when a film is brining in loads of people each week, that’s a film sure to keep playing. As long a its selling tickets, no theater wants to get rid of it. Now, there are those rare films that manage to even gain more theatrical distribution because theaters showing a particular film keep selling out and other multiplex theaters want a piece of that pie! They might start slow and only play in a few theaters, but if ticket sales suddenly jump, good things can happen for that film. Along with great review and the all illusive but so powerful “good-word-of-mouth,” a film that starts humbly on only a few screens can grow to national distribution. This happened with <i>My Big Fat Greek Wedding</i>. But, before we get all excited about that, we have to note that these films are the definite exception to the rule. They’re not just rare. They’re practically unheard of.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Lets take a normal Hollywood summer film. An action film. It manages to do well, it makes good money. And maybe it deserves it. Maybe it was quite entertaining and even intelligent. It deserves its success. The people who created this film, or at lease financed it, are going to be pleased. And of course, they’d like to repeat that! So they want to take what they believe worked about that film and they’re going to want to repeat that. But not just them ... other people in the industry will want to as well. Especially when a film is a really big success. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">This is how trends get started. What’s hot right now? Vampires. Just look at <i>Twilight</i> and <i>True Blood</i>. So along comes ABC with their carbon copy, <i>The Gates</i>. Only ... the thing about carbon copies is that they’re never as good as the original.* That is not to say that seizing what works about a particular film and seeking to make more films that contain those winning qualities is a bad idea. It’s about how it is done. In other words, instead of just trying to make “another <i>Dark Knight</i>,” filmmakers (and audiences) are better served trying to identify the things that have drawn such audiences in to that particular film in the first place. What got them to tell all their friends to go see it the following weekend, and the weekend after that. What is it that actually drives people watch a movie and then the next week drop what their doing and actually pay full price to see it again (I think the last movie I did this with was <i>Children of Men</i>). A more careful analysis is required to figure these things out. And I suspect that ultimately you can’t just look at one film, but what is working for several films. Then try to see what’s the common themes or elements that might be connecting so well with audiences.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">This is a lot of work, for sure. But the results can be very worthwhile. In the end, the filmmaker can walk away understanding what audiences are drawn to and why it might be worth while making something new that taps into those elements. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">But, really, most often we end up with a diluted product. If it flops, the trend is dead. If it succeeds, however, the trend lives on, possibly growing even stronger.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">In other words, there are plenty of movies that come out each year (often sequels to movies I thought were a waste of time the first time around) that are just diluted junk. But as long as there are people willing to pay good money to go see the movies in large enough numbers, such movies keep being made. If I had the space here, I might even explore the idea that too often young audiences just like what they’re told to like by clever marketing.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">But what I am focused on here is this: when you buy a ticket for a movie it is in fact a way of casting a vote. That vote in essence is saying, “Yes, make more movies like this. I’m willing to pay to see movies like this.”</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Now, the flip side of that is true as well. Don’t bother to go see a film, and its a way--in principle at least--of saying, “No, don’t waste any more time or money on stuff like that. I’m not interested.”</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Uh-oh. Does that suddenly add some weightiness to our movie going habits? Well, maybe it should. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Now to what degree, that’s something no one can determine for you. That’s a matter of personal taste and conscious choice. Of course, keep in mind that sometimes you’re going to buy a ticket to see a film, and it will turn out to be a huge disappointment because the film appeared genuinely good when you saw a trailer or a friend told you about it. But upon watching it you find it is in fact quite a hackneyed second rate movie. That’s a risk you take when you buy a movie ticket. But really, that’s a risk you take with any purchase.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">But again, how much should we be thinking of our movie ticket purchase as a vote? I argue that this type of thinking should factor in for those of us who do make it a regular part of our lives to head out to a movie on a weekend. After all, if we don’t particularly like the films being offered to us, but we shell out the money to see those films anyway ... we are helping to perpetuate the creation of more lousy films. We really have no one else to blame, folks.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Again, the flips side of this is so very true as well. We might hear of a film that looks like exactly the type of thing we’d really enjoy seeing. But maybe it’s a film with a more limited release and not as big of a marketing budget as many other films offered to us by the large studios. And we think to ourselves, “Oh, I’d like to see that.” But the movie comes out, and we’re busy, and we forget, and the next weekend, we don’t get around to it ... and before we know it, it’s gone. It’s no longer playing in any local theaters. Not enough people went to see it, and the local theater dropped it in favor of something that will sell more tickets and popcorn. It’s a blip on the radar. Forgotten almost instantly by the film industry. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Why is this? Well, that’s because the industry is still primarily concerned with first run box office receipts. Which means that while some movies do take off and have a great life in home video form as rental and/or sales, the big money the industry is really looking at is box office, and specifically that opening weekend.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">I also hear periodically form people something along the lines of, “Oh that movie looks really good. Maybe I’ll go watch it when it hits the ‘dollar theater.’” Now, for those of you who don’t know what a “dollar theater” is, that’s a theater that plays what is referred to in the film industry as “second run films.” These are films that have already had their shot at first run, full price theaters, and are now being shown (usually months later) for a significant discount (it used to be a dollar, but few places actually charge only one dollar these days). The city I live in now used to have such a theater. It went out of business long before I moved here. Too bad, because I really do like going the movies and spending less money.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Which brings up a good point. I, just like anyone else, want a good bargain! We all need to save money. We all need to choose what is a priority and was isn’t as far as what we’re willing to pay for. And for many movies, seeing it in a “second run theater” or renting it on DVD is probably a good idea. I don’t want anyone to think I’m not advocating frugality. Like I said, most of what comes out isn’t all that great anyway, and if you think it might end up just being “okay at best” instead of “fantastic,” than you’re better off waiting to see it when its cheaper to do so. That is in fact a very smart move!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">But here’s the lesson: When we do head out and catch that brand new movie that’s coming out this weekend, or maybe just came out last weekend, do we ever think beyond the next two hours and ten or fifteen dollars of our lives? </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">I often hear people complain about how many lousy movies come out each year. But when I ask them if they went to see a particular film that is something I know they would greatly enjoy (even a film I know they expressed interest in seeing), the answer is too often ... no. Worse yet, they end saying something like, “Oh, that looks great! I really want to see it. Can’t wait to rent it.”</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">And I cringe a little when I hear this. I want to scream, “Do you realize that you and everyone else making that same choice is essentially ensuring that fewer films like this will get made? You want better films to come out, but then when they do, you don’t go see them! Meanwhile, movies like the <i>Saw</i> franchise keep making money. So that’s what keeps getting made and shown in theaters, while fantastic and profound films continue to just fall by the wayside!”</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Pardon my passion here. But beautiful and profound cinema is something I am passionate about. I think it is something very worthwhile. And it honestly hurts me to see spectacular films like <i>Levity</i> or <i>The New World</i> or <i>Brokedown Palace</i> or <i>Rabbit-Proof Fence</i> fall by the wayside when they could at least be significantly helped out by attentive film audiences making the choice to go watch such films in first run theaters instead of watching the new big studio sequel. Now granted, with some of these films, the distribution companies are as much at fault as any of us when they fail to mount an appropriate marketing strategy. This is one reason why I think Terrence Malick’s fantastic film, <i>The New World</i>, did so poorly. I know people who went to see it thinking it would be an action movie, not a beautifully introspective film. But, unfortunately, a discussion of lousy marketing is not what we’re engaged in here. Maybe a some other time.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">If cinema is something we value (and I assume you do or you wouldn’t be reading this ridiculously long blog entry), than we have to be ready at times to put our money where our mouth is. Am I advocating we not be frugal? Again. No! But what I am advocating is that we think more clearly about our box office choices. I for one am sick of movie remakes of things I didn’t really think were that great to begin with. So I’m not heading out to the theaters this summer to see <i>The A-Team</i>. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">I am, however, utterly excited about buying my opening night ticket to go see <i>Inception</i>. Is it guaranteed to be an amazing film? No. But everything I’ve seen and heard about it leads me to believe that this is a gamble well worth taking.</span></div><div><br />
</div><div>-- -- -- --</div><div><br />
</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">End Notes:</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">*Here’s where I add my own two cents and declare <i>Twilight</i> a carbon copy of a much more interesting romance between and girl and a vampire ... <i>Buffy the Vampire Slayer</i>. I mean, come on. She’s not just a girl in love with a vampire. She’s the flipppin slayer! But that’s just my nerdy two cents.</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-18994511907884988932010-05-14T13:52:00.016-04:002011-02-03T22:36:37.648-05:007D and T2i Cinematography<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Okay, let’s talk narrative filmmaking with these new DSLR cameras. You may be hearing a lot about the great video capabilities of DSLR video cameras like the Canon 5D, 7D and T2i (aka 550D in the Rebel line), as well as such cameras from Nikon and Panasonic. But how do these cameras really perform when it comes to the careful art of cinematography?</span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><a name='more'></a>In January, I directed a short documentary project produced by Bryan Felty (Good Bones Productions). Felty and I both agreed we that we wanted a definitively cinematic look for the project. Four factors played into our camera selection: HD, 24p, Depth of Field, and cost. And so we landed on the Canon 7D. I hired a couple of shooters I’ve worked with before, David Kruta and Jeff Melanson. We used two Canon 7Ds for duel camera coverage for the interview and b-roll. I was extremely impressed with the 7D, and it wasn’t long before I was on the prowl for my own HD video capable DSLR.</div></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I have not worked with the Nikon or Panasonic cameras yet. I have heard good things about the Panasonic models. But Nikon ... I’m sorry, Nikon. I loved shooting still with Nikons. But when it comes to HD video, Nikon is at least two years behind Canon, which clearly is leading the way in this particular technology. The main shortcomings: Max resolution of 720p at 24 fps, no manual control over exposure in video mode, and serious complaints of rolling shutter issues. I was actually considering a Nikon DSLR to use for video until I heard of these three factors. I have to admit, I didn’t even have to think for a split second. I immediately ran in the opposite direction (Canon)!</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I jumped on the Canon Rebel T2i and got my pre-order in right away. I have now been the cinematographer for two narrative short films in the past couple of months. On both projects, I ended up using both my T2i and a 7D. So how do these cameras stack up when it comes to actual work of shooting narrative films?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><b>The Quality</b></span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: justify;">In terms of image quality, the 7D and the T2i are virtually identical. They are basically the same brains inside the camera, and they use the same EF mounted lenses. The 7D does provide more flexibility on the low ISO. Where the T2i offers 100, 200, and 400 ISO as the lowest three ISOs, the 7D does provide all of those in addition to 120, 250, 320, and 360. So, the 7D has a little more precision and flexibility in that way, though I will say I haven’t felt I needed that level of flexibility too often. There’s also some other nice features the 7D has that the T2i does not. But, frankly, they don’t really affect video shooting too much. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">The most notable difference is the two camera bodies. The 7D is metal and hardier. It gives you a little more to hold onto. The T2i is plastic. It’s lighter, not as weather resistant, and not quite as large of a camera to wrap your hands around. But, keep in mind that no DSLR is actually designed for hand-held video shooting. So, again, I don’t feel much of a loss here with the T2i.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">For a nice comparison of the 7D and T2i go to: http://stembridgemill.com/2010/03/09/7d-t2i-compared/</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Where these cameras really shine when it comes to video is that they can capture 1080p (full 1920x1080) HD video at 30 fps and 23.98 fps (aka 24p). The Depth of Field is fantastic, allowing for a much more traditionally cinematic look than any 1/3-inch, 2/3-inch, or even 1/2-inch chip video camera can allow for. So, coupled with good lenses, the quality and clarity of the HD video these cameras can shoot is quite fantastic.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">They do have their shortcomings. The FAT file format the cameras use to store data to Compact Flash or SD cards allows only up to 4 GB files, which comes out to about 12 minutes of 1080p video. So, a single uninterrupted take cannot be any longer than 12 minutes. But, when you’re dealing with narrative filmmaking, an industry used to dealing with film reels that often don’t last more than 11 minutes ... the frank answer is ... big deal.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div></span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">And, as I mentioned before, these cameras are not ergonomically designed for smooth hand-held video shooting. You just can’t hold it steady enough. Micro-jitters come through. I either shoot on sticks, with a counter-balance system that adds weight and smoothness to the camera’s movement, or a shoulder mount rig.</span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div></span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The colors and contrast these cameras are capable of achieving is pretty remarkable. The more important thing is to get all the vital information, though, and then do your color correcting in post. The Canon cameras generate QuickTime files using the H.264 codec. Yes, these fils are compressed. However, when compared to most other compressed HD codecs out there being used in much more expensive cameras, the results stand up quite well. If you happen to be like me and used to shooting highly compressed video in the form of HDV (or as I like to call it, “bastardized HD” due to it’s 1440x1080 resolution and extreme amount of compression), than the H.264 footage these Canon DSLRs are able to generate is quite an upgrade. Granted, it’s not like shooting R3D files with the Red One where you can literally change your ISO in post. But then again, my T2i cost a fraction-of-a-fraction of the cost for a Red One kit--and still has the same size chip as the Red One. </span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><b>The Art of DSLR Cinematography</b></span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">As I mentioned above, in the past couple of of months I’ve had the privilege of being hired as the director of photography for two narrative short films that were I shot with both the Canon 7D and T2i. I’d like to discuss what I’ve learned so far when it comes to not just understanding this technology, but actually bending it to your artistic will. After all, as much of a nerd as I might be about cameras and workflows, I got into all of this because of the art, because of the beautiful images and magnificent stories that can be created and told through the medium of motion picture.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">The first of these short films was a student film written and directed by Trevor Duke as a senior project for Easter Nazarene College in Quincy, Massachusetts. Duke attended the Los Angeles Film Studies Center recently, the same semester abroad program I attended while in college in Indiana. Coming back from that experience, he wanted to create a high quality senior project and had gained a definite appreciation for the need to work with a good crew even for a small project in order to achieve a high production value. Through a mutual friend, he contacted me about being the cinematographer for his project.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I won’t lie, for reasons I won’t get into here, it takes a lot for the average indie film project to really hook me. However, when Trevor Duke contacted me and told me who he was and what he was up to, I liked the sound of it right away. Once we met, I was sold on the project. Duke has talent and vision, and it is very exciting to work with someone like that, who may be new to filmmaking but is actively trying to take the right steps to make professional level films even as a student. His film, “Torn,” is a character driven drama about a son and mother reunited after a long separation. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">When he brought me on, I wasn’t sure we’d be able to shoot with a DSLR camera. My T2i was on pre-order and wasn’t supposed to ship until two days after we wrapped shooting. But I knew I was tired of shooting narrative film projects on my HDV camera. The look wouldn’t be cinematic enough for the emotional depth of Duke’s script. Ultimately, we were able to bring Rajah Samaroo, a filmmaker out of Rhode Island I’ve worked with several times. Samaroo came on board as my Assistant Cameraman and brought to the project his Canon 7D. Then, much to our surprise, Canon decided to ship out the T2i about a week early. It arrived in time for it to be at my disposal for "Torn."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><b><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><b>Shooting "Torn”</b></span></div></b><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">We crafted a moody atmosphere for “Torn.” Duke chose to shoot the film for 2.35:1 aspect ration and we shot everything in 1080p24, mostly with prime lenses at low f-stops for great shallow depth of field. Because of wanting to shoot with the lenses nearly wide open, we shot almost everything around 100 ISO. We started out using the camera grid markers on the LCD screen to frame up our 2.35:1 frame (which is wider than the native 16:9 the camera shoots). However, as soon as the camera starts recording, the grid vanishes. And since we shot nearly everything with a very hand-held "in the moment" feel (either on a hand-held rig or rocking on sticks), it got hard to keep track of where exactly the top of the 2.35:1 frame was going to be once it was cropped in post. So, I made the choice to frame my shots for the top of the 16:9 frame, leaving extra at the bottom to be cropped out in post once the 2.35 matte was applied. This made the shooting much easier.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">We shot 75% of the film with the Canon 7D. At times we would break out my T2i and shoot with two cameras. At other times, the lighter T2i became the primary camera for specific scenes. I didn't have my additional batteries yet, so we couldn't shoot with the T2i all day like we did with the 7D. We always checked our settings to make sure we would match ISO, shutter speed, and f-stop, as well as white balance. We shot everything on the “Faithful” mode on the 7D and T2i. There’s no sharpness boost in this mode, creating a very clean image. While we definitely wanted to have a very film-like contrast to the film, especially given its emotional weight and mood, we were careful to shoot with fairly even footage with plenty of information from the blacks to the highlights so that Duke would have the maximum flexibility in post when color correcting.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div></span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The cameras performed beautifully. The footage looks fantastic. We used All Canon lenses: 20mm, 35mm, 50mm, 18-55mm, and 28-135mm. We made sure to always use the camera on sticks or with some means to add mass to the camera for hand-held work. We lit “Torn” mostly with soft lighting sources like Chinese lanterns. I generally will drop in a 200 or 300 watt lamp into a 26-inch lantern or bigger. We also used 200 watt pars for back light, and a SourceFour 750 watt par as a strong hard light coming from outside when the door to the apartment was opened. Most of the lighting was slightly warm and allowed me to pick up good skin tones with the camera, aside from one scene I purposefully lit with a fluorescent light to give the scene a green and sickly tone. Most of the colors on set were warm and somewhat muted. The result fits the mood well for the film.</span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">One the important things to keep in mind, especially if you are used to shooting actual film stock, is that HD video seems to work in the opposite way of film when it comes to ideal exposure. When shooting film, many DPs tend to overexpose the film stock just bit, resulting in better looking raw footage to manipulate in post. HD video tends to hit the ceiling much quicker than film, when it comes to highlights. Overexpose the brightest parts of your HD video frame, and you quickly start loosing detail in those highlights. It just becomes an even white (this is called clipping). </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the blacks, though, these DLSRs in particular maintain a good amount of detail. Thus, I’ve begun regularly underexposing my footage by up to 1 stop (though generally between 1/3 to 1/2 stop under “ideal” exposure according to the camera’s light meter). This provides great contrast and saturation with a lot of details from the black to the highlights without any clipping (unless you’re shooting a backlit subject against the sun lit sky). This was the exact exposure philosophy of my next venture as a cinematographer.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><b>Shooting "Pork Chop Night.”</b></span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Fellow filmmaker and friend, Raz Cunningham, had written a short script that picked up an award from a Sundance screenwriting workshop. As he embarked on the journey of producing and directing this script, he expressed interest in having me DP the film. I jumped on board right away, having worked with Cunningham before.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">“Pork Chop Night,” Cunningham’s short film, is significantly different in style and tone. It’s a comedy about the role reversal of parents and children. We shot it with the Canon 7D and T2i like “Torn.” However, this time, the T2i was A-Camera from the start, with the 7D technically labelled as B-Camera. The truth is, we shot almost 90% of the film with two cameras simultaneously.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">We shot the film in 1080p24 for 16:9, in the “Faithful” mode again, using a variety of lenses, mostly primes. We had two Canon 50mm lenses which were the most used lenses. I find I shoot at least thr3ee quarters of all my footage with my Canon 50mm 1.8f prime. I do have the Canon 18-55mm zoom and the Sigma 70-300mm zoom (which I mostly use for still photography or extra macro close-up work). Bryant Naro, my 2nd Camera Operator and AC brought on board his 7D along with his lenses: Canon 50mm 1.4f prime and Tokina 11-16mm 2.0f zoom, (which was just amazing).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Brandon Meadows was our Gaffer, and he utilized my lighting kit quite well. This was our second project together in these exact roles. Again, we tended to use Chinese lanterns quite a bit, with carefully bounced lights for fill or back light. The house we shot in was mostly white walls, aside from the dinning room, which had blue walls. Despite the director’s dislike of the blue walls in real life, he is in love with how they look on camera. The tone of this film is much lighter, so we definitively didn’t want to go with as moody a look as I had gone for with “Torn.”</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Naro, the 2nd Camera Op, and I consistently matched camera settings, making sure to shoot always on the same ISO, shutter speed, and f-stop as much as possible. We only varied when the use of particular lenses didn’t allow for an exact match in settings. We also consistently underexposed our shots by about a full stop. As I review the footage (I am also the editor for “Pork Chop Night”), I have come across a few shots that I feel are slightly darker than I want them to ultimately be. We mostly underexposed by 1 stop, and looking back, I think I prefer to stick to the 1/3 to 1/2 stop under in the future.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I also tend to use a Minolta incident light meter. The readings can be slightly different at times from the camera’s built-in light meter. But they are quite close. The light meter is definitely helpful with measuring the contrast ratio between key light and fill, or key light and shadow. You can look all you want at the camera's LCD, but some times just doing the math is best.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Speaking of the LCD screen, I do appreciate the 7D and T2i’s built in display of luma and RGB levels for stills and video. I often would snap a quick still shot of a lighting set-up with characters in place, and then check the luma and RGB levels for that shot.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">One particular challenge at times was the lack of a good field monitor. We did use my MacBook Pro with the Canon software. We could attach the T2i to my MacBook Pro via USB (I used an long extension) and get a live feed from the camera on screen, and even control the camera, which was useful for a few shots where the camera had to be in a corner or closet and I couldn’t manipulate it easily. The problem is that once you hit record on the camera, the camera’s processor is so focused on recording and saving the HD file that the playback on the MacBook Pro is extremely jumpy. For a stationary shot, we made due with this as a monitor. However, you cannot use the playback on the MacBook Pro to pull focus!</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">For one particular scene, I was shooting with a counter balance rig so we could be hand-held and move about, following the movement of the actors. I was using the T2i’s LCD screen and having a bit of a hard time telling if I was hitting my focus dead on or not. I tended to shoot about 1 stop closed up from wide open. Lenses tend to be sharpest around there. I began to wonder if I should close up more, and give myself a wider depth of field. I tried this, but I still didn’t feel right. As Naro and I talked through what to do, Naro suggested I go the opposite direction and shoot wide open with the shallowest depth of field possible. I did just that and found that, in fact, it worked very well. I was either in focus or clearly out of focus. There was no question about it. I found that I had to search much less.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">The two camera set-ups were at times quite frustrating for the grips, since lighting for two cameras is not the same as lighting for one. Such set-ups took longer to accomplish for sure. However, looking at it from the perspective of a fellow director, allowing the two actors to shoot their individual close-up shots simultaneously meant they could each give it their best effort and know it was being filmed. Especially using child actors, this was a great advantage to us. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Considering the cost of these DLSRs, someone undertaking an ambitious short film should definitely consider buying two T2i cameras for the price of buying one 7D, and be able to shoot a lot of two camera setups. We made great use of the two cameras on “Pork Chop Night.” At times I would take the wide master shot and let Naro go hand-held with a 50mm, letting him get mediums and close-up shots of the action. We got more coverage that way with fewer takes. As I’ve started the editing process, I can already tell that this film will not look at all like it was shot in two (relatively speaking) short production days.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">We also did utilize a dolly and jib for certain shots. I own both, and brought them to set. The jib is pretty light weight, designed ideally for prosumer HD cameras. I’ve used it before with the Panasonic HVX200 and a lens adapter system. That’s about the maximum weight I would ever want to put on that thing. The nice thing about going down to a light camera like a DSLR is that we put no strain at all on the jib and got very smooth movement.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div></span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Final Thoughts</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">These DSLRs are definitely great tools. They do have their limitations. I know that for some editors not used to dealing with the new tapeless workflows, dealing with footage from these cameras can seem a little problematic at times. However, I have found the process of transcoding from the H.264 original footage to Apple ProRes for editing and color grading to be a very painless step in the process, and it ultimately beats the socks off of real-time tape capturing (which then has to be transcoded again anyway to get the footage to be true 24p since shooting to tape can only be in 29.97 fps).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Shooting narrative projects like this, I have yet to run into any takes that need to be longer than 12 minutes. In fact, most takes are in the range of one to two minutes. Only in interviews do I concern myself with that particular limitation. These cameras are small, and do require some accessorizing to be more ideally suited for video shooting. However, the benefit of shooting with a chip the size of a frame of super 35mm film and getting to use prime lenses far outweighs such limitations.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">And if that’s not enough to convince you, than maybe you should tune into the final episode of House this season, which was all shot on the Canon 5D Mark II (the big brother to the 7D and T2i, but still a DSLR). In fact, I have read that they shot with Canon lenses, despite the available PL mounts for these DSLRs that allow you to use pro cinema lenses.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Ultimately, a tool is a tool. How you use the tools available to you define greatly your artistic abilities. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-18393571094176998582010-03-30T10:32:00.019-04:002011-04-08T20:09:03.851-04:00The DSLR Revolution<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">If you happen to be like me, a total camera nerd (or at least an enthusiast), you’ve probably been following some of what’s been going on with new DSLR still cameras that are capable of shooting HD video. These cameras are now being referred to as HDSLRs. Some of you, however, may not be following this quite so closely, or may have heard of the concept but are wondering ... what’s so revolutionizing about DSLR cameras that can shoot video?</span></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Allow me to briefly explain. I want to start with the most obvious--and yet most totally overlooked--aspect of a good camera. The lens. The glass you shoot your image through is really at least 70% of how good your image is. Forget about all the stuff behind the lens, and those great digital sensors that are amazingly light sensitive and have great resolution. All of that is naught if you’re lens is junk. Want proof of concept that lens really is so important? Go look up the price for the Red One camera. Then look up the price for a PL-mount professional grade cinema lens by, say, Carl Zeiss. A great prime in that category will easily cost as much as the $20,000 to $30,000 Red One set up (depending on how you customize it). Try buying a set of such prime lenses, and now you’re talking about the price of a house.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, we’re not dealing with those kinds of lenses. I just wanted to prove a point here. But the first revolutionary idea these new HDSLRs present to us is the option of shooting with some great still photography lenses. Depending on your budget, you can easily spend between $100 and $5,000 on a single lens for a DSLR. What’s more, renting still photography lenses is really quite affordable. I’ve done it for two projects (back when we were shooting with lens adaptors that allowed use of still photography lenses on a regular HD camcorder).</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">In fact, quite some time ago I wondered why no one was making a video camera like the HVX200 that could shoot HD video but simply had a mount for still photo lenses. What I didn’t realize at the time was the issue of sensor size. DSLR lenses just aren’t designed to work with a 1/3-inch chip that most prosumer cameras have. It’s just far too small!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">And then lens adaptors came along. And I have worked closely with those, though I never bought one. And here’s what I have to say about lens adaptors. At the time, they were a gift from God. You could use still photo lenses and get great depth of field, achieving a wonderfully cinematic look for your project. However, they also were a total pain in the ass. They suck up light. The last project I DPed with a lens adaptor, I tested and rated the set up to be the equivalent of 50 ISO film speed. For those of you who understand ISO (or ASA) numbers ... you know that that’s about as slow as film stock comes. The lower the number, the more light you need. Most people shoot still photos around 400 or 800 ISO. My new DSLR doesn’t even drop bellow 100 ISO. So, when shooting with the adaptors, it always felt like we had to set our sets and actors on fire to get an image at minimum exposure. We also had to shoot with the DSLR prime lenses wide open, which didn’t allow for them to be at their peak performance (which is usually about one or two stops up).</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">The other problem with lens adaptors is that they were noisy--and I mean the image. The system works by allowing the DSLR lens to focus on a ground glass that has grain. That ground glass vibrates or spins. The video camera is focused on the ground glass. Thus, the ground glass stood in for the larger chip size needed to use DSLR lenses. But you definitely had grain. Now, it managed to look pretty organic, like film grain. But even shooting with a 1080p camera, I think you’d be lucky to have an image shot with a lens adaptor that looked no better than 16mm film once it was projected on a movie theatre screen.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/10903074?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0&color=969696" width="600"></iframe></span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But here we are, and DSLRs are shooting HD video. In fact, it’s been going on for more than a year now. Slumdog Millionaire effectively used the Canon 5D Mark II to shoot sequences of the film. Since then, other models have come, and there’s been a lot of good competition, though frankly Canon has lead the way, with Nikon lagging behind only managing to put out 720p capable cameras (aside form one that shoots 1080p but only 20 frames per second--what the heck is that?). In fact, Red was forced to re-evaluate their Scarlet camera and they went back to the drawing board to make a Scarlet that will compete not just with the prosumer video camera market, but the DSLR market as well. So far, however, I have this sinking feeling Red’s letting things get away from them by continuing to push back the release of the Scarlet. Meanwhile, more HDSLRs hit the market at lower and lower prices, making the prospect of buying a Scarlet for guys like me more of a ... “meh, we’ll wait and see what it does compared to what I have” kind of thing. Of course, it will be worth keeping in mind that having worked with the Red One I believe the Scarlet still stands a chance to really blow us away.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, I don’t want to get too drawn in to discussing the specifics of these HDSLR cameras. If you are interested, here’s a great rundown of features and what to look for in a camera: <a href="http://nofilmschool.com/dslr">http://nofilmschool.com/dslr</a></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But I do want to touch on the other features that make these cameras so fantastic. The CMOS chip inside the Canon 7D and the T2i (the latter of which I own), is in fact just a smidge bigger than the sensor inside the Red One. And if you spring for the Canon 5D Mark II, the chip is a full 35mm frame size, a good bit bigger than the Red One’s M sensor.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, I’ll speak from my experiences here. I own the Rebel T2i (aka EOS 550D). It just hit the market. In fact, Canon moved up the shipping date by a week, so I got it sooner than expected. In fact, just in time for it to be 2nd camera on a short film I DPed with the 7D. The guts of the 7D and the T2i are pretty much the same, and having spent last weekend shooting with both cameras side by side, I cannot honestly see a difference in picture quality. We shot in 1080p24, and I’m impressed with how clean the image looks and how effective these cameras are in lower light. Now, compare the 18 megapixel CMOS sensor of the T2i to my Sony FX1 prosumer camcorder with something like 2 megapixels, and you start to see that my new T2i, which cost a fraction of what my FX1 did when I first got it, is miles ahead in capturing a beautiful image.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">And that's the final revolutionizing aspect of the DSLR cameras is their price. Compared to the prosumer HD cameras out there, most of these HDSLRs are cheap. So, for the filmmaker on a very tight budget, buying the T2i for $800 and getting a couple lenses for another two or $300 sounds a lot better than spending six, seven, or more grand on a video camera with a fixed zoom lens and a small sensor that makes getting shallow depth of field next to impossible.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><iframe frameborder="0" height="338" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/10543112?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0&color=969696" width="600"></iframe></span></div></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Having said all of this, there are drawbacks to the DSLRS. They are tools like any other, and one needs to know their limitations. For the shooters wanting to cover long live events, ENG style shooting on the go, and hand-held documentary work, HDSLRs present more challenges than advantages. For that kind of work having a shallow DoF is actually kind of a pain, and potentially a hindrance. With my T2i, I cannot zoom while shooting video without having noticeable changes (as in jumps) in exposure due to the lens’s iris adjusts as I zoom (a personal note here: when it comes to narrative filmmaking ... I hate, hate, hate zooms anyway!). Takes are limited to a max of 12 minutes because the maximum file size the camera can create is 4 GB (or 12 minutes of 1080p HD). The cameras are also small and pickup micro-jitters when working hand-held. So you need some shoulder mount system or counter balance to smooth things out. And the video is quite compressed using the H.264 codec, which as of yet isn’t really supported natively by most editing systems. I transcode to Apple ProRes (regular or HQ depending on the project) before editing.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, all those drawbacks in mind ... if you are an indie filmmaker trying to make your next short film or low budget feature, I think you really need to take a look at the options and advantages an HDSLR can bring to your next project. The cinematic look one can achieve is spectacular. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But allow me a final caution. Again, these cameras are just tools like any other. They won’t do the work for you, or magically make you a great cinematographer or filmmaker. Yes, they will shoot a very nice image. But you still must know the cinematic language of shot composition and selection, good lighting, editing, and aesthetic style and storytelling craft. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I think there’s a temptation among many new filmmakers to look at tools like this and think, “That’s it, I can now make my movie and it will look amazing! People will love it! I’ll get into Sundance! I’m on my way!!!” This happens every time a new breakthrough in cameras happens. When HD first came into the prosumer market, it happened. I witnessed it personally and was even party to it. The truth is, these are just tools. Tools can be used well and they can be used poorly. These are also not perfect tools. They have definite limitations. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">So I caution new filmmakers to keep these things in mind: A camera that can shoot beautiful footage is no excuse for not properly lighting a scene. A camera that can shoot beautiful footage doesn’t make up for not knowing how to shoot for your edit. And ultimately, nothing replaces or makes up for bad storytelling. Wanna see a great film shot on a less than fantastic camera ... watch Once! Always make your tools servants to the story you are telling, not the other way around.</span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-17437270476474622522010-03-07T17:15:00.017-05:002011-02-04T09:35:57.668-05:00On Offending People.<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">In contemplating what it means to be a filmmaker and a consistent adherent to a Christian worldview, inevitably I have been forced to deal with the delicate issue of offending people. There’s really no easy way to actually categorize the people you might end up offending, which makes this issue all the more complicated.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">There’s a couple broad and quite crude generalizations I can make, however. There are those people I might offend because of openly acknowledging my discipleship to Christ. There are also fellow followers of Christ who I might offended by not living up to their expectations of what it means to be an artist and a disciple. This, in a general sense at least, is what it can mean for a guy like me when I use the expression “between a rock and a hard place.”</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Let me quickly make a very important point. I’m not actually interested in offending anyone. It’s not high on my list of priorities. I try to take to heart the New Testament passage that expresses the notion that, “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.”*</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But here’s the key, “If it is possible ...” The truth is, it’s pretty hard to figure out what can and might offend everyone out there in the world. Particularly when you’re making something like a film (or even a blog entry) that might be seen by many people, most of whom you may have never met and may have very different perspectives from yours on all kinds of things.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">So, how’s a guy like me to make sure I don’t offend people?</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I’ve already indicated that offending people is no an objective of mine. Now I’m going to let you in on a little secret ... NOT offending people is also NOT an objective of mine. I do want to do all I can to live at peace with everyone. But even this passage of Romans leaves open the notion that you’re not always going to succeed at living at peace with everyone.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">First of all, let’s face it, we all know people who just are looking to be offended by something. It kind of makes their day. So, when I do come across this kind of personality, I have to borrow a notion Jesus taught to his disciples about visiting a town that wasn’t particularly welcoming to them. He instructed them to shake the dust from their sandals. In other words, just move on. It’s not your problem, it’s not your fault, just move on. So, if you happen to be someone looking for something in this blog entry to be offended by ... huh, yeah, you really should get a life. There’s many better things to do with your time.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, there are people that may be offended by my open expressions of my Christian worldview in my films. That’s understandable. We live in a particularly secular and humanist society where someone expressing their religious worldview in art can be perceived as pushing that particular religion or worldview.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Okay, I’m going to let you in on another secret. Call it pushing, promoting, advocating, endorsing ... preaching ... call it what you will, but yes, I am in my own way expressing my worldview as food for thought for audiences because I do think it has great value (and not because of anything I bring to it but because of what it brings to me). Think of it this way, if someone out there discovers something great that helps life in very practical ways, wouldn’t you want them to share this idea? This is why, I for one am not in any way offended by works of art, conversations, blogs, or anything really that someone from a different worldview may wish to use to express and promote their ideas. That’s great by me. Dialogue is what I’m about! And at the end of the day, I’m a seeker of Truth. There is always more I can learn! I don’t have life all figured out! So, let’s talk!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">So when it comes to someone being offended because I may present ideas derived from my Christian worldview, I can only say, I’m sorry if it offended you. However, I’m not loosing any sleep over it. We live in a diverse and exciting world and people of all worldviews should have the opportunity to express themselves, regardless of whether or not I agree with them on every point or their conclusions about this world, this life, God, or humanity. I should be able to respectfully hear them and engage in loving dialogue about our differences and even celebrate our similarities. That’s why I’m not all that worried about offending people because of my faith. If it happens, it happens. It’s not the end of my world. I hope it’s not the end of yours.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But what about the other side of that crude generalization I made above? What about the people that I supposedly share my worldview with (and I say supposedly here because far too many Christians I have met and interacted with throughout my 29 years so far on this planet actually don’t really adhere to a Christian worldview as might be derived from careful reading and study of Christ’s teachings). </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">One reason this generalization into two camp (Christians and non-Christians) I might offend is so crude and problematic is that there are far too many complexities and variants of the “kinds” of Christians out there and how I might offend them. I’ve had this recently brought to my attention by a particular small Christian publication that will soon be running an interview with me. While I appreciate this, I have to admit frustration upon learning that this article will not include a link to my website in light of the fact that my films use offensive language. The excuse used was that they would like to promote my philosophy of filmmaking without necessarily promoting my films.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I’m pretty sure I don’t have to point out that this is completely contradictory logic on their part. However ... whatever ...</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">I get why they have made this choice. It’s a real concern, especially when you officially stamp the label of “Christian” upon something like a publication or institution, that you not offend your ... “constituents” (for lack of a better word). And given that a large cross-section of American conservative Christians do find certain words in the english language to be offensive, I can see why this publication made this choice. However, I can’t help but shake my head at the underlying contradictory logic in running the article about me at all if they’re worried about their readers being offended by my films’s content. But they’re running the article without the link to my site. Ironically, this is only for formality's sake. Let’s face it, I’m pretty sure almost any one of their readers could just Google my name upon seeing the article and still be offended by what they discover.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">But beyond that, I philosophically come from a totally different perspective on language and semantics than what has been upheld by conservative (usually evangelical) Christians in America for several decades. Without getting bogged down by a lengthy philosophical examination of semantics, let me just express here that I do not in any way think any one word is evil in-and-of itself, nor do I find any support for this idea in Scripture. However, what I do see in Scripture is a consistent warning that we not use words (any words) to hurt other people. I’ll put it this way, the real issue to me is not specific semantics (I can’t say the word shit because it somehow is evil), the real issue is the Golden Rule (I don’t call someone a piece of shit because that is a hurtful thing to call someone). So, all I’m saying is that when it comes to the whole issue of Christians getting offended because of language I use (myself or in my films), I attempt to respect such people’s perspective, but I’m not about to tip-toe around them either.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">And then there are issues of sexual content, violence, corrupt characters, and so forth, that have long divided Christians when it comes to the kind of entertainment and art they expose themselves to. I’m not an absolute authority on these things. I am merely an artist struggling to make sense of the human condition and the world we live in. In struggling with the very harsh reality of the world we live in, I just see little point in sugar coating things. I would point out that careful reading of the Scriptures exposes one to such horrible things as murder, gang rape, genocide, adultery, war, torture, and many more horrific things.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Now, this is not to say I’m interested in any sort of pornographic presentation and reveling in things like violence, sexual content, foul language, and unethical or immoral behavior for the sake of glorifying those things. Absolutely not! My Christian worldview gladly guides me to seek redemption from these terrible things, to find what is good in a world filled with so much that is bad. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">So, let me say this: I do seek in all possible ways to live at peace with everyone. But that’s not always possible. Heck, that’s not even the most important part of being a Christian, now is it? So, as an artist, I seek to make the best possible work I know how to make in a manner that is true and authentic to myself, my worldview, and the world around me.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Finally, I am not in any way interested in offending any of my audience by making films that are untrue to the world we live in. Do I want to present hope, joy, peace, love, and redemption? Absolutely! But I want to present these ideas in the context of the broken, fallen, hurting, and frankly all around fucked up world we live in. If some find that offensive ... I am very sorry. But I’m not losing any sleep over it.</span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">* Romans 12:18, NIV.</span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-37898088065757801072010-01-13T14:15:00.016-05:002011-02-03T22:02:47.247-05:00Broader Horizons for Short Film Distribution<div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">I’ve met a lot of new and aspiring filmmakers in the past several years, and one thing I’ve noticed is a particular drive in many of them to jump with both feet into feature filmmaking. There are a few (very few, in fact) that due to past experiences and a passion for learning through reading and observation are able to jump into directing or producing their first feature film without the trail and error of making some short films first (though, most eventually recognize having had more experience wouldn’t have hurt either).</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Now there are many reason such filmmakers list for not wanting to “waste their time” with short films. But in this entry, I want to address one particular myth that exists in some indie film circles. There’s this idea floating out there that “there is no market for short films.”</span></span><br />
<a name='more'></a><span style="font-size: 100%;"><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms'; font-weight: bold;">No Market for Shorts? More Like, No Market for Crappy First Features.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">First of all, I want to point to any first-time filmmakers reading this blog that there’s much more of a market for well made short films than there are for first feature films that fall far short of the mark of excellence. Allow me to quote a book I’m currently reading, <span style="font-style: italic;">The Reel Truth</span> by Reed Martin:</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"></span></span><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">“Indeed, getting accepted to Sundance remains an incredible long shot, something filmmakers often choose not to acknowledge. For 2009, there were more than 3,600 feature films submitted to the festival--up from 2,600 in 2005--with only the same 120 accepted in dramatic competition, a 3.3 percent acceptance rate that is far tougher than the acceptance rates at Harvard (7.1 percent), Princeton (7.8 percent), Yale (8.3 percent), Columbia (8.7 percent), or Stanford (9.5 percent).” *</span></span></blockquote><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><br />
Now, consider the potential mistakes a first time director makes on that first project or two (and believe me, I know them well; I’ve made all those mistakes and then some more). In other words, unless your feature film really stands out (and there’s really only a couple of ways of standing out these days: an amazing and well told story, or big names in your cast), the chances that it will be premiering at Sundance are, well ... virtually non-existent. However, there are still many filmmakers out there every year scrapping together a few thousand dollars and shooting their digital indie feature hoping it will be the next <span style="font-style: italic;">Primer</span>, or <span style="font-style: italic;">Pi</span>, or <span style="font-style: italic;">El Mariachi</span>. What these blindly hopeful filmmakers (and I was once one of them) fail to realize is that the indie film world, and Sundance specifically, has changed dramatically since <span style="font-style: italic;">Primer</span> made it’s splash there. Not only that, but such movies are the exception. They are long shots to say the least. Feature filmmaking is already such a high risk investment of time and money and energy, that adding to that the need for your film to be an exception to a rule is asking for disaster.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">So, if you’re worried that your going to waste your time making a short film or two because there’s no market for short film, let me point out that there is in fact no market for poorly made first features. Sure, you’ll learn a lot making that first feature, but the amount of time, money, and energy invested in that one project that’s all too likely to never see more than rejection slips from major festivals and a humble premiere at small festival or local screening may not end up being worth it. Sure, you may think it’s worth it, but your producer, investors, cast members, crew members--all people who sacrificed immensely to help make your dream come true, may come to think that in hind sight it wasn’t worth it. Good luck working with them again.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Add to that the fact that distribution companies are inundated every year with first feature films seeking a distribution deal. Many good indie features are not finding distribution. So, you owe it to yourself and all the people that may work with you on your first feature film to stop and ask yourself, “what separates my first feature film from all these other films that fail to find distribution every year?” And be really honest with yourself. Who knows, the answer may still be a good one and you may still find that it’s worth proceeding. But it’s always best to really stop and educate yourself about the industry and honestly asses your chances of breaking in. Let’s face it, the deck is stacked against us starting out. Making big rash decisions can be fatal to your career while it’s still in gestation. </span><br />
<br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms'; font-weight: bold;">New Markets for Short Films.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">When someone tells me that they don’t want to make a short film to gain more experience because once they’re done with it they wouldn’t have anything to do with it because there is no market for short films, I want to scream, “Bullshit! Thank you for clearly demonstrating how little you know about indie filmmaking!”</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">First of all, and I’ve written about this before, even if you make a short film and it just becomes a learning experience that you never show anyone else because you’re too embarrassed by it, at least you took a project from concept to completion now. That’s invaluable experience. And, think of it, if you have a short film you’re embarrassed to show anyone (and I have a few of those), that could have been your first feature right there that you struggled to make only to end up being ashamed of its existence.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">But, that’s not what this blog entry is about. No, this is about markets for short films. With the Internet and television merging into a new single entity, short content readily available on the web is growing in demand. With the quality of equipment available to the aspiring filmmakers, the standard for content generated by new filmmakers is also improving. This means more people are willing to take a chance on watching an indie film if they think it will entertaining and polished.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Now, I’d like to speak from experience here. Just this week, my short film, “Cold October,” was released on DVD and Video on Demand on <a href="http://www.blogger.com/www.indieflix.com.">www.indieflix.com.</a> Now, Indieflix, as a rule, seeks films that have been accepted to at least one film festival. However, they clearly state on their submission form that they will still consider films that may not yet have made it into a festival. So, it didn’t hurt that “Cold October” has played at several festivals and was honored with the Best Screenplay award at the 2009 Terror Film Festival in Philadelphia. But honestly, it seems to me that if you made a good enough short, Indieflix would still accept it for distribution. But really, chances are that if you made a short film good enough for Indieflix to distribute, than it’s bound to get into some festivals out there. Just keep scrapping the cash together and submitting.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">To see what the “Cold October” distribution page on Indieflix looks like, check out: <a href="http://www.indieflix.com/film/cold-october-30410/">http://www.indieflix.com/film/cold-october-30410/</a></span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">One thing that attracted me to Indieflix is their non-exclusive contract for distribution as well as their net-profit percentage they keep verses what goes back to the filmmakers. They do a 30-70 split of the net profit generated by a film. They keep a 30 percent fee, and 70 percent goes back to the filmmaker. They track the sale of DVDs and VOD (video on demand) streaming payments, deduct expenses involved with DVD creation and shipping, and calculate net profit. Under this model, the filmmaker actually stands a chance of recovering some, if not all, of the money invested in making his or her short film. On top of that, it’s a non-exclusive deal, so the filmmaker is free to seek out other avenues of distribution in tandem with Indieflix.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Another opportunity that drew me to Indieflix is the possibility of gaining exposure for “Cold October” on Hulu. We are seeking to go forward with distribution on Hulu, but as of this time we are still working on the details of that branch of distribution through Indieiflix. Maybe, once that has gone through I may have more to report about that here. However, the point remains that VOD on sites like Indieflix and Hulu is a growing means for filmmakers to find an audience for their short films. There are also a whole lot of other new websites out there focused on distribution for short films and webisodes, many with means to generate income from the content you are creating.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">More opportunities are bound to open up in the near future as places like iTunes and other online video providers continue to look for new content to present to their customers. There are already distribution companies focused on gaining exposure for indie films, shorts and features, on places like iTunes, Netflix, AmazonVOD, as well as print-on-demand style DVD sales.<br />
<br />
But be careful to do your research before signing on with just anyone to distribute your short film. There are some places out there that charge fees for setting up the distribution. Places like Indieflix, that require no money upfront but only make a profit when your film actually make sales, seem like a much better idea to me. So, be sure to read up on what you're agreeing to before you jump in.</span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">A while back, <a href="http://weatherlightblog.blogspot.com/">Raz Cunningham</a> (who has his own film blog worth checking out) passed along to me a list of possible distribution companies for short films. Here's that list:</span><br />
</span><br />
<blockquote style="font-family: verdana;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><a href="http://www.indieflix.com/">Indieflix<br />
</a><a href="http://www.shortsinternational.com/">Shorts International</a><br />
<a href="http://www.newvideo.com/">NewVideo</a><br />
<a href="http://fansoffilm.com/">Fans of Film</a><br />
<a href="http://www.ingrooves.com/partners">Ingroves Pure Digital Media</a></span></blockquote><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">So there you have it. There is a real market and demand for short films. Think about it, you can make a short film which affords you some great opportunities: First, you gain valuable experience in the craft and business of taking a project from concept to script to set to editing suit to distribution. This experience will be invaluable! Second, you actually stand a chance of recovering the money invested in making such a short film, which shouldn’t be more than $30,000, and honestly should be made for a fraction of that cost if you know what you’re doing and can work with people on deferred payment (which if you show them these distribution possibilities they may be more open to). And third, when you’re ready to make a feature film, you are able to show potential investors that you know something about taking a film from start to finish and that you can market your idea in order to reach your audience. </span><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Now, start brainstorming. What do you want to tell the world in 10 to 30 minutes? And if you feel like supporting this particular indie filmmaker, pick up a copy of <a href="http://www.indieflix.com/film/cold-october-30410/">"Cold October"</a> on DVD or stream it on the web. My cast, crew, and I certainly appreciate the support!</span><br />
</span><span style="font-size: 100%;"><br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-size: 85%; font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">End Notes:</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: 85%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"></span></span></div><span style="font-size: 85%;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"><span style="font-size: 78%;"><br />
* <span style="font-style: italic;">The Reel Truth: Everything You Didn't Know You Need to Know About Making an Independent Film</span> by Reed Martain. Faber and Faber, Inc. New York, NY. Published 2009. Page 33.<br />
<br />
For more Info on the short films Mikel J. Wisler has made, see: <a href="http://runawaypen.webs.com/">RunawayPen.webs.com</a><br />
</span></span></span><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-16140355777395644962009-10-09T13:42:00.020-04:002011-02-03T22:03:18.358-05:00An Interview with Kyle Prohaska, Director of Standing Firm.<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;">Some time ago, Kyle Prohaska, an independent filmmaker, who has been following this little blog of mine, contacted me. Kyle has his <a href="http://praisepictures.com/">own website</a> and <a href="http://www.praisepictures.com/blog/">blog</a> and we got to talking. We’ve kept in contact and Kyle has shared with me some things about the feature film he’s directing, <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span>. I’ve seen some scenes from the film and the trailer, and the level of professional achievement is really remarkable. For all of you new filmmakers out there struggling to find your path and for all of my fellow Christians hoping to see some interesting new voices in the filmmaking world, you are in for a treat here. I did a little interview with Kyle.</span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 16px;"></span></div><a name='more'></a>Please be sure to go check out <a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/">www.standingfirmmovie.com</a> and watch the trailer for the film.<br />
<div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;">And now, the interview ...<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 100%;">--- --- ---<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MJW:</span> Tell me what <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span> is about. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Kyle Prohaska:</span> <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span> is a story about suffering primarily. Not the most comfortable subject to cover, but an important one. It follows a man named Dave who's recently lost his wife in a car accident. Angry at God for his wife's death, he turns away from all things church related, making life very difficult for Steven, his college-aged son who continues to try to reach is father for Christ, but comes out empty handed each time. While Steven tries to cope with his fathers attitude and figure out what God wants him to do, Dave tries to find the answer to the greatest question about his wife's death...WHY. The film covers a lot of different angles on family, and tries to be very honest about the outcome of life, with Christ and without.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/media_photo.php" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5390661366458591746" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIPbZPVwbnmZaSGEkT-1sXqI0DgZ16wJHDLxeUBa9K6Ej6CLNlc2NkBtCs1aMLY_rKdsJq66JivIR831Nne9SEVtEsJ72ZhQY5sJleHcf9lueBuda1Z2t8jmv7IIc_6iVFG34imO91FmA/s320/funeral3.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 146px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 345px;" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 78%;">Still from the film. Used with permission.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: 100%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MJW:</span> What drew you into filmmaking? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">KP:</span> I think it was the films I grew up on more than anything. I would watch them and go “wow that made me feel good” or “that depressed me, but taught me something great ... I wonder how I could do the same for someone else?” I just noticed myself recognizing and seeing deeper into films than most folks around me, and the art grew on me as time went on. I just wanted to give to someone else the same awesome feeling that my favorite films gave me, and teach them something while I'm at it. The power of film is monumental, and the ability to evoke emotion and thought really excites me. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MJW:</span> How did you go about preparing to make Standing Firm? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">KP:</span> I think the beginning of <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span> was well before I put pen to paper. The story is built from my own experiences as a child in an un-equally yoked marriage. I had two parents going in two directions, being taught similar lessons by each parent, but from a different angle. That made for an interesting childhood, and spiritual childhood at that. The entire story of the film (besides the death of the mom) is built from a lot of real life experiences that I think will relate to many folks. In regards to the preparation of the actual film, it was an insane task.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" face="verdana" style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/media_photo.php" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5390661967466920114" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAtlkjrOTD9sbe2yLVayzXabt40LII9JAPeQ9BmWX4alJzqXg5imFCpK_Ibu0GJXCUoXQEiTUKx_zs-nyViZ7KMIzuatipBCpBpD4dBCPOTj0tzLxNSrv05fP8N1W_0GPkTLTvJ4SKma0/s320/steven_look.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 145px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 344px;" /></a><span style="font-size: 78%;">Still from the film. Used with permission.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MJW:</span> How long was production? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">KP:</span> LONG. Very, very LONG. The length of shooting on this film was excruciating, and I take full credit for that, hah. I did it with a purpose though, and one that I think benefits the film immensely. I won't schedule a film like this ever again, because you really shouldn't do it this way, but it was worth it. Let me explain what we did ... <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;">We have minimal crew, minimal access to locations, inexperienced actors, inexperienced crew (including me), tough weather (western New York is incredibly hard to predict and changes constantly), and a ton of other factors. I scheduled the film in the most unconventional way not to annoy everyone, but to give the film the highest quality possible. Instead of shooting out each location (or even rooms in that location), I scheduled the scenes in an order that regarded the difficulty of completion. I didn't give my actors any difficult scenes for weeks, to allow them to get comfortable and gain some experience as well as myself. I had less than four people on set most of the time. About 75% of shooting was done with myself, my Gaffer Shaun Smith (that doubled as our sound man), and my actors who were always helping unload and move equipment. We were jumping from location to location, room to room, inside then outside, etc. It was murder on everyone, but in the end I can see the difference in the cut of the film. The difficult scenes were shot last, and hold the greatest acting quality. Some of the scenes we shot first we ended up reshooting to bump them up in quality as well. It wasn't that I didn't know how to schedule it right, but I knew that if I had, it would be a disaster (the end result).</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/media_photo.php" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5390670642539330098" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRy1BlMYNFjLr5dTaYsgmRyddbj5fSHe_2gJqbxJodBa0UxSLih0j97hIoqxm7JzGWCdWttn2B_2tn6SUWONx4FMINCbFt0yVWwrX5T3U5LkW0bKgREQRVcDBqOiZ-I7d6k9HWO0THBxs/s320/_MG_5735.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 248px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a><span style="font-size: 78%;">On the set of <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span>, Kyle Prohaska is second from the right.<br />
Picture take by Shaun Smith. Used with permission.</span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;">Everyone had jobs, families, and all sorts of other things to do outside of the film. It was very much a group effort. In the beginning we shot many more days a week but after the first three months, it dwindled quickly. Bit by bit we gathered what we needed and production ended at the end of May 2009. We started in the beginning of June 2008. It was a long haul, but everyone grew immensely and the quality of the film was brought up a huge amount given the way we did things. Not all of it was planned either. Even given the way I wanted to schedule it, it still took three times longer than I thought. Nobody could give me a really good gauge on how long it would've taken, because nobody makes movies this way. Next time around, it'll be five weeks with everyone doing the movie fulltime, with way more crew, and way more control over locations.</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/media_photo.php" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5390663437913864562" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1rfv9WF_aGZeCc-4mNmHeNwXc0rJ3fQ8_heOaOSB7ADUMRfMzJNppagUeVFXv8QIy0wIOQQMyuKEbwQKFcgRtgYeRJRGsPYe2V1naxm_B8zUg7cd9eAftUBKzzaHKDg00caHmEWTvlGs/s320/window.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 146px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 345px;" /></a><span style="font-size: 78%;">Still from the film. Used with permission.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MJW:</span> What did you shoot with and who was your cinematographer? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">KP:</span> We shot Standing Firm on the Canon XH-A1 with the Letus Extreme and Nikon Primes. People underestimate what you can pull off with such an inexpensive setup. I wanted to achieve something unique with the tools we had. Something cinematic and “legit” looking, not amateur. Although the film does come across as something lower in budget, the actual working budget is very well hidden I think, and mostly due to the presentation of the film cinematically. I was the cinematographer on the project, which is something of a dream for me, and I'm very happy with the results. I worked very closely with a good friend of mine named Shaun Smith, a professional photographer from Buffalo, NY to light the film. Shaun was the Gaffer and has very much to do with how the film actually “looks” in regards to color and light. I needed his help to get this film completed visually and with a quality I would be happy with. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;">This was the very first time I've shot a film, but I think I have a very good sense of how things should look and what looks good. I tried to squeeze out quality from every shot no matter how trivial it was to mask our budget and invoke a “pro” feel to the film. It's amazing how quickly people judge content now. In just a few seconds they decide if your film looks “real,” and by real I mean like something they'd go get at Blockbuster. I think with what we had (which wasn't much, and the lights we had were few), we pulled off something I've yet to see anyone else do at this budget, with this setup specifically. I'm very happy with how the film looks given the time, money, crew, locations, etc. we had. I can't wait to get behind the camera again!</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/media_photo.php" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5390671293376113778" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnZkKtZ1PBH-ErK73EJawFJgrmiw9R6YVj9Hx2q4_x-sN6dOLD_wFD6gu92MM9zKAdhZizcBrWNFuFRxCa9PecZwWyMPocB3fAtSzOlCSGefilzM_4JOrZi_s8uIeci7lGBuSK92VnJHA/s320/_MG_8764.JPG" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 214px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 78%;">Kyle Prohaska o</span><span style="font-size: 78%;">n the set of <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span>.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: 78%;">Picture take by Shaun Smith. Used with permission.</span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; font-weight: bold; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; font-weight: bold; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MJW:</span> What did you use for editing? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">KP:</span> I'm editing on Final Cut Pro using Final Cut Studio 2 on a MacPro. The editing process started on our first shooting day and continues to be refined day by day. I wanted to have a working edit as shooting progressed to see how the film was coming together, how the camera work was turning out, whether I had any problems within my story, and a ton of other things. Since this was a first go for everyone, I wanted to have a handle on where we were and what we were achieving. Editing this film has been an interesting challenge since some scenes are combining shots from all four seasons. Because of how insane our schedule was and what we were getting done, I was looking at incomplete scenes for months at a time waiting to drop in that last piece to see how it worked together. It's been very nerve-wracking to say the least, but everything seems to be coming together very well. With a lot of scenes it's a miracle that everything came together the way it did, God had his hand on this thing and covered our mistakes. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MJW:</span> What are your goals for Standing Firm? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">KP:</span> I set out to make the best film possible, like anyone else. Everyone has their personal goals as well, but in the end I really just hope God does some great things with the message he gave us to tell. Exposure is always nice, having a good project in the can is always nice, but seeing the rippling impact it could give would be far more enjoyable and satisfying than any personal goals I might have set for myself and achieved. I'm looking for things of eternal value, the lives impacted in the end is what it's about, so that's what I'm looking forward to. It's always easy to get wrapped up in the dollars and the revenue. Everyone has to eat, make a living, and for many in this industry provide for a family. I think that's a definite struggle, trusting God to guide in the business end of things when it comes to our “goals.” If you want to know my personal financial goals for the film, I hope to make enough on it (over time) so I can pay my bills while I make another. That's the goal everyone wants to shoot for, I think.</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/media_photo.php" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5390670919036971986" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwIHSy5nBrr4UaCh0cakTsWl-mvg85TVRv6ocy_hihwcpR9LVuYs7QYyx8tNOcT0t8bV4qTdR2DhT-RMh3diyfId_2RUrsQRxFqoKoPE_0bDMESriknBLN5QcA81OyKwUaHsRe7r52jQs/s320/_MG_9295_sm_blog.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 136px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a><span style="font-size: 78%;">Kyle Prohaska o</span><span style="font-size: 78%;">n the set of <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span>.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: 78%;">Picture take by Shaun Smith. Used with permission.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MJW:</span> How can people see your film? How can they help it gain more exposure? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">KP:</span> The film is not completed yet so it's not available to be seen. However, there are a ton of things people can do to help us get exposure. We setup a page on our site with specific instructions on how to do this. Some people just want a magic button they can hit to tell everyone they know, but that's not reality. If you have to take fifteen minutes out of your day to invite all your Facebook friends to our fan page or send out some mass emails...do it! I'm finding that Facebook is one of our greatest ways to tell new people. Some of you have huge friends lists, and in just a few minutes you could tell them all about the film and invite them to the fan page. Don't hound them, just send it out once. If just a few people did that, we would double or triple our fans in a matter of a week. I'm not sure why people don't just take advantage of what they have available. It's a piece of cake. :) View our share page below for other options. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/share.php">http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/share.php</a> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" face="verdana" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MJW:</span> What's next for you? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: verdana; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" face="verdana" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">KP:</span> Honestly, I'm not sure. I would like to continue making films, but even from this interview until a release time I still have to figure out a way to live. I'm trying to stay afloat with website jobs mostly. <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span> will really be an indicator of where my career will go I think because I can't put this kind of time and money into something again if it can't deliver in some way financially. Again, that's not the main reason for making films for me, but if I want it to be a career I do need it to eventually begin taking care of me. We'll see how Standing Firm does, and what doors God opens from there. Because I have no steady job, I'm always looking for more work and would love to end up on-set with others. I'm just searching for what God wants me to do. One thing I will say is although I want to make more films, if he doesn't give me a story that he clearly wants me to put my time/money into, I won't be making a thing. It's just impossible to imagine giving two years or more of your life to something that has no eternal value. I have a hard time with that. We only have so much time here, make it count.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: center;">--- --- ---<br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: trebuchet ms; text-align: justify;">For more on <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span>:</div><ul><li style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"><a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/" target="_blank">Official Website</a><br />
</li>
<li style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"> <a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/register" target="_blank">Join the <span style="font-style: italic;">Standing Firm</span> Email List</a><br />
</li>
<li style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"> <a href="http://www.facebook.com/standingfirm" target="_blank">Fan on Facebook</a><br />
</li>
<li style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"><a href="http://www.twitter.com/sfmovie" target="_blank">Follow on Twitter</a><br />
</li>
<li> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/praisepictures" style="font-family: trebuchet ms;" target="_blank">Subscribe on YouTube</a></li>
</ul><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.standingfirmmovie.com/" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5390668003254205634" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoF3C4xMalsk0C9URe37sDLvFT9Pa_dhRj_ohMPBO2XipPDPNLot88xxVGcFWOn4WcgbSxzem6ZEmCSLJWNyt4kfFF6tVUYOdMj5LRfpde7qhJesMrynWmYOGYzqY0_flj_TbJqJ8Zibw/s320/poster_ver4throwout.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 364px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 244px;" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><br />
<o:p></o:p></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-70656774903487073672009-06-16T12:52:00.015-04:002011-02-03T22:04:36.352-05:00Christian Cinema ... An Adventure in Missing the Point.<div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"></span><br />
<blockquote><span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">“Are our churches and broadcasts and books and organizations merely creating religious consumers of religious products and programs? ... ”</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">- Tony Campolo & Brian D. McLaren, <span style="font-style: italic;">Adventures in Missing the Point: How the Culture-Controlled Church Neutered the Gospel</span></span></blockquote><br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">As a film lover and filmmaker, I am ever the student of the craft. As such, I try to invest time in continued education. So, I’ve been reading a particular book: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Directing-Fourth-Techniques-Aesthetics-Screencraft/dp/0240808827/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245171202&sr=8-1"><span style="font-style: italic;">Directing: Film Techniques and Aesthetics</span> by Michael Rabiger</a>. Let me tell you, it’s a fantastic book loaded with great information about the process of filmmaking and how to go about equipping yourself to best accomplish the work of making a movie. It’s not light reading, but very worthwhile!</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a>Just recently, as I was reading from this book’s section on preproduction and rehearsing with actors, Rabiger divulged some ideas I thought were quite fascinating. He’s addressing the idea of discussing your film’s theme with your cast members early on in preproduction. But what he says has huge implications for the whole process of filmmaking, and specifically very important implications for the Christian filmmakers that have come from the tradition of making films as a means of evangelism.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Rabiger writes, “Telling a story is really a way of constructing a working model of one’s beliefs. If others are moved to conviction, the principles behind the model have been shared, acclaimed, and may be accepted as having merit. That is the best anyone can do.”*</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Rabiger is not writing about Christian films here, for sure. But what he says in the above quoted text seems to indicate the potential validity of trying to make films that persuade someone to change their minds or hearts. However, Rabiger goes on to write this:</span><br />
<blockquote><br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">A thematic purpose for your work need not try to encompass universal truth (“in our Western way of life the rich get richer while the poor get poorer”) or be morally up lifting (“if people would just vent their real feelings, everyone could be free”). Audiences will feel they are being preached at especially when the scope of the film falls short of the global nature of its message.*</span></blockquote><br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Rabiger goes on from there to express that, “Modest, solid, specific, and deeply felt aims are likely to have more impact.”* The point Rabiger seems to be making here, and I think it really applies quite well to Christian films, is that when we try to communicate something as esoteric, abstract, and huge as grace or redemption, a humble film can hardly get a grip on these things, let along wrap its arms around these ideas in an adequate way. And in the face of this recognition, the temptation of the Christian filmmaker is to then spell out what the audience is supposed to be getting from the film, the message or the point of the film. Doing so is just plain bad filmmaking.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">What Rabiger suggest to all filmmakers here is that, “By taking a small truth and deeply investigating it, you can invest it with life and indicate larger truths of wider resonance. Put another way, <span style="font-style: italic;">a thoroughly absorbing and convincing microcosm will effectively create a macrocosm</span>.”*</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">So, think of it this way: Say I want to make a film that tells a story about grace. Rather then get too caught up in all that grace means to me as a follower of Jesus, the better thing to do is to set about telling a very specific story of grace in action. So maybe I tell the story of a criminal who is shown grace by one of his victims. You can really come up with many ideas. The point is, now I have something specific to do. Take a look at the film <span style="font-style: italic;">Brokedown Palace</span>, and you will see a powerful story of grace in action. And in this focused story, the universal implications can come about (if only we could all treat each other with this level of grace and forgiveness, what would the world be like?)</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">The important point that I think a lot of Christian films I’ve seen miss is that it is better to focus on a very specific story, and let the actions and characters progress naturally through the story. The story itself, if executed well, will generate a deep resounding connection to those things we already naturally long for as human beings. I’m not convinced that cinema is the proper place to proclaim the gospel, but rather a place to explore truth and it's impact on our lives. Obviously as Rabiger has indicated by his statement that a “story is really a way of constructing a working model of one’s beliefs,” the Christian filmmaker is already presenting his or her worldview through the construction of their story to start with. To try to go beyond this, attempting to merge the mediums of cinema and sermons, is to try to make a Frankenstein monster that is both clunky and unnatural in almost every example I’ve seen. Ultimately, to the non-church going audience that might happen upon such a movie (and the likelihood is extremely low, even for such supposedly successful film as <span style="font-style: italic;">Fireproof</span>) this thing that is presented to them is so foreign and otherworldly, it stands no chance of connecting and making any impact. And as such, if the goal of such a film is to proselytize, it is in fact a wasted effort.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Rabiger says something interesting in a previous section just before the section of his book I have been quoting here. He has a section called “Directing by Asking Questions.” He’s specifically addressing how a director can best go about guiding his cast in discovering their characters and fleshing them out. However, what he says I think really is ultimately one of the best ways of directing as a whole, of making a film at all. He encourages the director to give guidance by engaging the cast in dialogue, by asking them questions. I think this is true too of the audience. One can have an amazing impact on an audience by guiding through asking questions, by showing the audience focused microcosms and then asking if this is true of life once they walk out of the movie theater.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">Basically, to a great degree, I see this as a cinematic application of the Socratic Method. The reason I think this approach is so valuable is because of what Rabiger expresses in this particular section. He says that, “people seldom forget what they discover for themselves.”**</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">This is where I have seen so many Christian films fail. They do not provide the audience with an opportunity to discover anything for themselves. There is little or no room for this. The film is too busy blindly telling the audience what to think. Maybe if Christian filmmakers became less consumed with trying to make a point, and more consumed with making excellent films as an act of worship, more films made by Christians would have more of an impact on secular audiences by providing a common meeting ground of appreciation for the cinematic medium. Until then, however, I fear we may continue to make films that miss the point all together of what cinema is.</span><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">“Are our churches and broadcasts and books and organizations merely creating religious consumers of religious products and programs? Are we creating a self-isolating, self-serving, self-perpetuating, self-centered subculture instead of a world-penetrating (like salt and light), world-serving (focused on the ‘least and the lost,’ those Jesus came to seek and save), world transforming (like yeast in bread), God-centered (sharing God’s love for the whole world) counterculture? If so, even if we proudly carry the name <i>evangelical</i> (which means ‘having to do with the gospel’) we’re not behaving as friends to the gospel, but rather as its betrayers.”</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: 'trebuchet ms';">- Tony Campolo & Brian D. McLaren, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Adventures-Missing-Point-Culture-Controlled-Neutered/dp/0310267137/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245171388&sr=1-1"><span style="font-style: italic;">Adventures in Missing the Point: How the Culture-Controlled Church Neutered the Gospel</span></a> (pg 12)</span></blockquote><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 85%;">End notes:</span><br />
<span style="font-size: 85%;">* Directing: Film Techniques and Aesthetics by Michael Rabiger, (second edition) pg 287.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: 85%;">** Directing: Film Techniques and Aesthetics by Michael Rabiger, (second edition) pg 286.</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6691792225578680271.post-2333649334407331532009-05-20T18:50:00.022-04:002011-02-04T09:47:24.933-05:00Preproduction: A Neglected Art.<div style="text-align: justify;"><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">One often-underappreciated aspect of filmmaking is what is commonly referred to as preproduction. It really amounts to that planning phase of filmmaking, once the script is finished or selected and before principle photography begins. For those who might have been working in the film industry, this should be nothing new. However, I have noticed a disturbing trend among indie filmmakers. Preproduction often gets very little focus.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
<a name='more'></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Talk about starting off on the wrong foot. Filmmaking is all about overcoming limitations. There are only so many hours in the day; your budget is only so big; your experience only so deep. Planning is possibly the most important part of making a film. The more prepared you are, the more creative freedom you allow yourself. And while this may seem quite obvious, I’ve been involved and observed too many projects that lack real planning. Often, preproduction is a rush-job done quickly in order to get to “the fun stuff.” As one crewmember on a project I worked on a while back put it, there is this tendency to end up with a reverse pyramid among many indie filmmakers.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">Here’s what he means. Think of a pyramid, with its wide base and narrow top. Let the wide base represent the amount of time ideally spent in preproduction for a project and the top portion of the pyramid represent the amount of time spent in postproduction (editing and sound mixing, and so forth). The middle then is production, or the amount of time spent actually shooting the film. So the pyramid is divided into three sections. This is just a visual guide for the relative amounts of time we might ideally invest in a project. Spend a good bit of time in preproduction planning your film’s shooting carefully, securing locations, finding actors, getting contracts signed, and working out all of the other detail needed to make your film. This way, you can spend a concentrated amount of time shooting, where you and your crew are able to make the most of the time you have to shoot the film because things have been carefully planned out ahead of time. Even when unexpected surprises pop up (and they most certainly will), because of your preparation, you will be ready to address these surprises and work through them. Then, once filming is done, because things have been planned out well in advance, you can go into the editing room and have the film cut in about half or a third of the time it took you to preproduce the film. Can you see the pyramid?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Now, I know, this is an ideal scenario. And of course, films with quite a few visual effects shots to be created in postproduction will not fit this pyramid scenario exactly (but that’s a different story). But I do think this pyramid servers to demonstrate my point here. What the crewmember I mentioned above meant by his reverse, or upside-down pyramid, is that too often inexperienced indie filmmakers invest very little time planning their production. Then shooting doesn’t go smoothly—big surprise—and production falls behind schedule.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In the end, not knowing if what was shot is going to actually cut together as a coherent and effective film, the filmmakers spends quite a long time in postproduction trying to salvage the film in the editing room. This can often be three, four, or five times (if not more) the amount of time they spent in preproduction. There are plenty of nightmare stories of projects dragging on in postproduction for years as the filmmaker behind it tries to come up with a finished product that is coherrent and effective.<br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that this sounds like a pretty self-refuting route to go, as well as being a great way to develop a heart problem from multiple stress attacks that could actually be avoided. Yet, for the new filmmaker the temptation is to shoot first and ask question later. This may be fine for film school, but is not acceptable when you have investors putting money into your project and have hired professional cast and crew.<br />
</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">The Advantages of Planning</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">Now, let me share with you from personal experience why I love preproduction. The most successful of the short films I have made have all had serious periods of preproduction leading up to a very concentrating production time, always mere days. The longest production period for any short film I’ve directed was five consecutive days. And even that short film would not have been accomplished without serious planning ahead of time. For all of my short films, we have always had months to plan ahead.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">One of the things I love about having a lengthy preproduction period is that all of us involved are able to have a life outside of the film itself. More importantly, this also allows time for flaws in the script to come to light and affords us the opportunity to do re-writes because, well, golly-gee, we’ve got the time to do so. In the end, we’ve always arrived at a stronger film because of this.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">Having time also allows for a chance to address other problems that may come up. Maybe a location falls through, maybe an actor backs out. Either way, having set aside time to prepare, you and your crew are better able to address these issues.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">Planning leads to freedom. There are those out there, and I’ve met some of you, who think that planning stifles creativity. Not true. Not true at all. Quite the opposite. The more you plan, the better you see your options, consider all angles (literally). Let me give you an example.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">I am a big proponent of detailed shot lists. I can’t draw very well, but I will even create storyboards for complex scenes, or scenes with a particular camera moves or special effects. The shot list is my guide on set. It allows me to communicate with my cinematographer about what needs to be shot, and how. It allows me to communicate with my actors about what the game plan for the day is. It allows me to communicate to the sound department about where they can best capture audio and what actor they should be covering. The shot list keeps us all on the same page. That’s why I distribute a shot list to all these departs on my films.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">But do I always stick to the shot list? No. Filmmaking can be unpredictable. But because I have a game plan and know what I would like to shoot, I am better able to know what shots on my list I can cut to make up for lost time should we (more like, when we) fall behind schedule. At times, I have found that a particular shot we have just taken accomplishes all I wanted from two or three shots I had listed. Suddenly, I may realize I actually don’t need quite as many camera set-ups as I had thought I would. This is a fine position to be in. Ultimately, my shot list is an ideal mental checklist of what I want to accomplish, but I am still free to deviate from it when schedule dictates or serendipity presents a better option.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">I can see it already, those of you who don’t like all this planning business are thinking: but Mikel, if filmmaking can be unpredictable, why plan at all? Here’s why. I’ve been on sets before with directors that have not planned, who do not have a shot list. And this is what happens: they stand in the middle of the room, or pace about, scratching their heads or their chins, looking around from one spot to another, and finally thirty, forty, or fifty minutes later, we at last do the first camera set-up for the day. Then, we might do the next set-up the director came up with on the fly, maybe another ... then ... everything stops again while the director tries to think about what to do next and whether or not what was just shot accomplishes all he or she thinks is needed for good editing.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">Don’t kid yourself. Unless you are a veteran director, you’re not going to show up on a set and just know what needs to be covered. You’ll either error on the side of thinking you’ve got enough when you don’t (and painfully discover this in the editing room), or error on the side of shooting far too many camera set-ups and fall way behind schedule, wear your actors and crew out, and have more footage than any sane editor wants to deal with. Thus, the best bet is to plan!<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">Again, I think it is worth repeating that planning does not mean you are locked into a specific method of doing things. It just means that you have already thought through what you’d like to get out of a scene and how to go about getting this. If you show up on set and find something totally new, you at least have a shot list mark and “x” through, flip over to the blank back side, and start writing a new shot list. You can at least eliminte the previous means of shooting a scene and move on to a new means.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">Another important part of preproduction is having time to think through the emotional beats of each scene in your script and how you plan on communicating with your actors when shooting. This is something almost totally overlooked by new directors. As Judith Weston points out in her book, <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Directing-Actors-Memorable-Performances-Television/dp/0941188248/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242856595&sr=8-1">Directing Actors: Creating Memorable Performances for Film & Television</a></span>, planning how to shoot your film is so much more than just sitting alone in your living room reading the script and picturing the movie in your head. Big deal. So you can see the finished film in your mind. That’s doesn’t mean a damn thing to your cast and crew. Why? Because you haven’t thought about how to communicate this vision! You have the vision, and that’s great. But have you thought about how best to communicate this vision? Because until you have, you are <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">not</span> ready to direct. I believe this is one thing that separates the wanna-bes from the real directors.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">I recommend picking up Weston’s book. She really dives into specific techniques like using metaphors to communicate with actors that open up so many possibilities for creating great performances. But again, seeing how best to go about this means dedicating time in preproduction to breaking the script apart, scene-by-scene, beat-by-beat, so that when shooting, you are prepared to actually give direction.<br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">Finally, having ample preproduction time allows for less stress. Having time to rehearse with actors, to talk through the script with them, eases concerns and helps everyone know what needs to be done. Having more time to plan also means that the less-than-fun things like contracts, location releases, union paperwork, call sheets, and all the other managerial work involved in making a film can be accomplished in a timely manner without having to be crammed into a couple of long, stressful days right before the camera rolls. The last thing you should be doing as a director is showing up to the first day of shooting already stressed out and half awake.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif; font-size: small;">As I have gained more experience, I have honestly come to really enjoy preproduction. It is a time where anything is possible. We haven’t started shooting yet, we’re not behind schedule, we’re not facing weather delays or equipment issues. We’re just laying the foundation on which to build a great film. But without that foundation, everything we build on top of it will be shaky, and could even all come tumbling down on top of us mid-process. Great preproduction allows for time to find the potentially unique pitfalls of a given project and gives you the chance to address them well before they cause real problems on set.</span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">Presented by Mikel J. Wisler (http://mikelwisler.com)</div>Mikel J. Wislerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00056038813556389976noreply@blogger.com1