Saturday, June 9, 2007

Element video

Go here: http://filmscout.org/kendra_element.mov
for elementeden.com

Heres that promised video i shot of my wife Kendra for Element Skateboards and Clothing. Its too low rez in parts, but one of my hard drives fried today.

Friday, June 8, 2007

great editing example

Black Narcissus here on YouTube (rent the DVD) is an example of great editing, which I prefer instead of the jumpy editing of today.

notice the reply below the video: the fabulous scenery is all mattes, on glass! It was all shot in the studio, in the Greater London area, and the only 'location' work was in someone's local suburban garden.

Lenses for a look like Children of Men

Another important nugget I compiled by David Mullen, ASC:

David, I was really impressed with the look of Children of Men, and read that the DP used very little in the way of movie lights. In my upcoming feature I would love to get away with minimal production lights and go for a more realistic, documentary feel, yet still maintain a "filmic" quality. There will be many day interiors, some outside day and night, and a few low light interiors, including hallways.

Given the speed (t3) of the 18-50 red zoom, which I plan to use shooting mostly on the shoulder, how realistic is it to assume I can get away with mostly available light? Particularly if I want shallow DOF on occasion with wider lenses...

Being able to move quickly and shoot a lot of set ups each day with a small crew is a factor as well. (not to mention budget)

Thanks in advance!
thinkbug

David Mullen ASC:
T/3 is a bit slow for low-light work, unless you are willing to live with some noise from underexposing and having the brighten the image in post. You can gain another stop of speed by turning off the shutter (360 instead of 180) but with an attendent increase in motion smear which some find to be very video-ish (see some of the action scenes in "Apocalypto" for an example.) You can also gain exposure by undercranking, but then you have motion problems.

If you are determined to use very low levels of available light, like for night exteriors or candlelight scenes, you should get some high-speed lenses (T/2 and faster.)

For day interiors, T/3 is probably fast enough most of the time. And well-lit night interiors.
__________________
David Mullen, ASC
Los Angeles

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Directing methods

From David Mullen, ASC:

Just a description of some of the styles of directing I've come across, regarding being organized:

One director drew his own storyboard on index cards, white for day and blue cards for night scenes. At the start of the day, he'd lay out all the cards and we'd shuffle them around in what we (the AD, DP, and director) thought was the best order. The director would label some cards as less important than others (some he would tear-up right on the spot). During the day, he kept the cards on a metal binder ring on his belt loop and would flip through them, crossing off the ones we finished.

I've done a number of movies where the director and I would sit down and draw up a shot list for the week's work, for each day, and try and put them in shooting order. This was a quick way of seeing if the days were balanced properly, that we didn't have an excessively heavy day that perhaps could be re-organized, a scene moved to another day. I've even done a shot list for an entire feature during prep, but that's almost too much work.

When I did my first feature, I asked Allen Daviau, ASC for some advice and he said "Know your first week backwards and forwards." It's the best advice I've ever gotten. After the first week, you fall more into a groove where you can deal with upcoming work and know how long things take to do with this particular cast and crew, but it's great if you start the shoot out running, and know where you want to be minute by minute during the day, know exactly how you want to shoot every scene, etc. It also impresses the crew and cast when they see how organized the director and DP are and sets the right tone. By the end of the shoot, though, you are more in a reactive phase where you are picking up the pieces of what's still missing, etc.

On the TV series I just did, I worked with seven directors and they were all very different in style and temperament.

One director used little Post-It notes on his script for storyboarded shots and ideas, so he could transfer his notes to each draft of the script that came along. Other directors would email me and the AD a shot list for the next day's work. With the alternating DP approach, I could walk all the sets and locations with the new director a few days before the shoot began, and plot out how we were going to shoot each scene. But some directors didn't want to be nailed down too much, and some directors wanted more time to think. I had one director who wanted the key people on the scouts (DP, production designer, AD) to be quiet for stretches of time and just contemplate the location, rather than spit-out ideas quickly. Other directors would just march into a new location and start saying "the camera goes here and then here..." immediately without discussion.

I have worked with very inexperienced directors too -- I remember one guy who would constantly ask me whether we should cut the camera once the scene was over and the actors had left the frame and we were rolling on a blank wall for a minute. And then ask me what we were doing next. But when it came to talk to the actors about performance or story, he was one of the best directors I've ever seen at work.
__________________
David Mullen, ASC
Los Angeles

Tuesday, June 5, 2007

Kendra on Element's site



Go to Element Eden to check her out. We'll be sending them the video soon.

tips for shooting

Most people know this but forget:



1. Shoot into the sun--directly into it. Having someone backlit by the sun can really make things look dreamy and it will greatly improve your production value.

We just shot a video for Element Skateboards last night and the best footage was the backlit stuff. I'll post it here as soon as we're done editing it.

2. Use uninflected photography: make a shot of a spoon a spoon! Not a whip pan-dolley-zoom! Steady shots look so much more pro.

3. And Please! Please! Invest in a good tripod--one with a fluid head. They're around $400.

Monday, June 4, 2007

cool tip

While I'm thinking about it:

1. Every day, spend time visualizing your film. Both making it and the film itself.

A big part of it is making it. Think of it as a lifestyle.

2. Keep it as small as possible. If you've never made a film before, try to have as few people on set as possible. Too many people can clutter an already cluttered mind. It will get real cluttered on set. But the more films you make, the better you'll get at this. If you are swarmed with people everywhere, I've noticed its alot harder to focus, obviously. Thinking small early on will pay huuuuuuuuuge dividends when you're on bigger projects.

Saturday, June 2, 2007




Bizrro is the best character ever, and a great inspiration for me and my films. Check out this amazing wikipedia page about him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro

adding to technorati

Technorati Profile

I suggest if you have a blog to add to technorati for more eyeballs. and post it here by replying! I like checking out others art!

you may never see your influence


Teach others along the way. You may die a penniless miserable artist, but who cares?

Worrying about the sharks?



No you're not. Don't worry about getting screwed in the industry. Trust your instincts. Don't agree to a deal where you feel over your head. Get a lawyer instead.

freeze the moment




An actor of mine once told me after a good screening, "No matter what ever happens from here on out the rest of my life, I'll always have that moment. Thanks." That moment where everyone is enjoying them on the silver screen. Moments like that are addictive. It seems so easy.

procrastinator!




What do you need to get started working on your film RIGHT NOW?

A camera.

Something to point it at.

Do it!

PRIMER – Secrets to the Film’s Success




PRIMER is a perfect example of what you can do with a little bit of money, a good idea, and plenty of prep time. For those not in the know, PRIMER is the hot new indie that has already developed a significant buzz and loyal cult following akin to The Blair Witch Project, El Mariachi, Memento, Pi, et al.

The difference is: this one’s smarter than all of them combined. It is the brainchild of former engineer turned filmmaker Shane Carruth from Texas, and is about two engineers who accidentally create a time machine in their garage.

Shane’s story is already the stuff of legend in the indie world: unhappy engineer quits job, teaches himself filmmaking, and makes a $7000 film that wins Sundance, gets distribution and secures a 2 million budget for his next film. PRIMER has become, for Shane, a near perfect calling card for the cerebral, art house sci-fi director.

Many a filmmaker is, at once, jealous and inspired by Carruth’s savvy, as evidenced by a lengthy visit to the film’s site (primermovie.com). There, film geeks are slugging it out–hotly debating whether the film is crap or genius, a testament to the film’s ability to—God forbid—make you think. They all agree on one thing, however—it takes at least two viewings to begin to understand it.

Instead of another “I loved it! I hated it” review that you can find links to on your own via the film’s lively “forum” section, I am going to focus on what makes the film such an incredible achievement for a first time filmmaker, what Shane does correctly behind the scenes and where this film historically fits into the indie equation. That is, what it means for the filmmaker in all of us.

After El Mariachi (1992), many expected to see copycats of the winning formula: (super) 16mm films significantly prepped and storyboarded to a “T”–then shot in 1 or 2 takes, shipped to fests and distribs, and seen worldwide by an endearing public hungry for something different. But it never happened. Where were they—the geniuses that would save American filmmaking and start a new Renaissance? Enter Shane—a guy outside of filmmaking. An engineer.

But what did he do right? Attached are the secrets to his success, a sort of “primer” for the industry…

1. After he finished the film, he went to L.A. for a few weeks, just picked up the phone books and started calling. The difference: he kept calling. He contacted 100 people a day for a week–agents, managers, and reps in LA. Why? Because he was once told that “it’s important to have one of those.” His indomitable spirit proves that, once again, you make your own breaks when you believe in something.

2, That helped in meeting people at Sundance.

3. At Sundance, when the bidding war began and he wasn’t happy with giving up so many rights, he walked away. Not out of arrogance, out of respect for the film and the actors and crew. This showed he meant business.

4. He held strong and secured a deal he was happy with, but it was a long month after the dream makers in Park City had packed their bags and headed back to their warmer climes. (That month must’ve felt like years.)

5. Technically and creatively, he practiced “a hundred times” before he photographed—mostly using just one or two takes.

6. He embraced techno babble in the film, which, arguably, gives the film an air of believability. He didn’t dumb-down the dialogue for a broader market.

7. He scored his own film. The tone is reminiscent of THX-1138—using sounds as music.

8. He uses the jump cut effectively. And except for one nighttime interior car scene, his lighting works. El Mariachi, however, hardly used lights, which makes Primer quite the achievement.

9. He didn’t dumb-down the editing. It’s super tight. Scenes are missing purposefully. It’s masterful editing for a rookie.

10. He uses real people effectively, not actors. In interviews, he says he saw 100 actors but that they were all “acting.” Not “being”–the crucial missing element in most acting.

11. He spent one full year writing the script.

PRIMER, admittedly, is not for everyone. Many raised on Hollywood fare from their local Cineplex will dismiss it as “too difficult” or “choppy storytelling.” But Shane swears everything is in there and I believe it for this one reason: its ingenuity is that the film is told in the cut, not in the camera move—something missing from today’s storytellers.

It is economical in shot selection and pacing and keeps your riveted to the screen. It is also economical in budget. He says he would’ve loved to have had 3 grand more—how 3G would’ve made such a difference. You just gotta root for a guy who says that, and now has 2M to play with for his next one. Oh, how suddenly things change…

PRIMER is not without its faults. The eyelines were off sometimes. A few medium shots were slightly too tight. Some shots could’ve been more uninflected. Too many dolley shots for an already-heady movie. A big problem: it can leave you yearning for more on the morality of it all and less on the specifics.

It sometimes feels like a film for engineers, by an engineer. But to pick apart such a solid film is petty. Remember, because he didn’t have any money, each shot was only given 1 or 2 takes and this is a complex film here, with complex dialogue. This alone is a testament that the film works wonders. And it’s all done by a first time filmmaker. Is it worth 154 minutes of your life? (77 minutes times 2 viewings.)

You better believe it.
3.5 out of 4 stars