A Major Motion Picture in HDV

[Richard Herd]

[Asmund Voll Tesdal] “Just one thought; how does the cost of extra time spent grading less-than-ideal footage compare to the savings of renting cheaper cams?”

Correct!

It depends your final deliverable. “Crash,” of course, went to a film print. The overwhelming majority of microbudget movies are lucky to get an audience, much less a film print.

I’m repeating myself, but here’s the answer for a DI: At monacosf.com the price ranges from .55 per frame to $1.20/frame. at 24fps
24*60*120=172,800 frames * .55 = $95,000 and at $1.20 = $207,000.

And transferring video to film costs about $3000/minute. 120 minutes * 3000= $360,000.

Question is, with half a million dollars in services on the table, is it possible to get a reasonable discount?

I think we call that question “a grinder”?
So there you go!

[Richard Herd]

The American Cinematographer magazine reported https://www.ascmag.com/magazine_dynamic/digital_edition.php the footage went through a digital intermediate process, which, if you haven’t looked into, is a very expensive process.

[Alan Lloyd]

While it’s not great art, let’s remember one thing: They didn’t make the movie for us, and most of the audience will not care if it was shot on Canon XH-A1’s or Whoopty-Doopty HyperWiper 3700B/v1.5’s (with the latest firmware update) or whatever.

This is the business forum, right? Imagine that! People made a film for a specific audience! It will likely be briefly successful, certainly make back its negative cost, and then that audience will move on. And a very, very small number of them will pick up a camera and say “I want to do that!”

I worked on a low-budget actioner a while back, we shot it in a week, in SD, for deliberate direct-to-DVD release. Know what? It’ll make money. Not a lot, but it’ll get into the black. And we…made…a…movie. the highest mountain on earth is the half-finished projects out there. We made a movie. And somewhere, there’s an audience for it. They’ll find it, and probably enjoy it. With luck, they’ll want us to make another one.

It’s not about us, guys, it’s about them.

[Dan Asselin]

Alan, while I understand your point I think it is misplaced. It is my opinion that any development which can have an effect on how we plan to spend our equipment and production dollars has a place in the business forum. The people who have stated that the bottom line is that it’s all storytelling and has nothing to do with technology haven’t spent much time opening their wallet and deciding how much to spend recently. If you knew a distributor would take on your movie while you quarter your camera costs I’m betting you’d be in a better position to make more movies. (P.S….I do a fair amount of direct-to-dvd myself but that’s not where “Crank” was aimed)

And congratulations on helping to get the low-budget actioner done.
You are right that the size of the pile of half-finished projects is
incalculable.

Dan

[David Roth weiss]

[Dan Asselin] “It is my opinion that any development which can have an effect on how we plan to spend our equipment and production dollars has a place in the business forum.”

I agree, and the reason I posted that review was that it specifically was not just about the bad story, but was critical of the film on a technical level. I didn’t think anyone should be selecting a camera based solely upon hype about the movie, especially if the movie was, let us say, “technically challenged.”

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™

A forum host of Creative COW’s Apple Final Cut Pro, Business & Marketing, and Indie Film & Documentary forums.

[Alan Lloyd]

Well, lots of outright slagging of it having been made on XH-A1 and other HDV cameras. And while I would not try to make Lawrence of Arabia in HDV, and I will in all likelihood not go see Crank, I think the question really should be one of what the audience goes to the movie for, since without them there is really no film business, just film making.

It’s like caring more what brand of wrenches your mechanic uses instead of whether your car gets fixed right.

I’m an audience advocate, and will always be one. They are our customers.

(And to tell you the truth, when it comes to spending these days, my inclination is to let the rental managers have the headaches!)

[David Roth weiss]

[Alan Lloyd] “I think the question really should be one of what the audience goes to the movie for, since without them there is really no film business, just film making.

It’s like caring more what brand of wrenches your mechanic uses instead of whether your car gets fixed right. “

But Alan, the original post was from a guy asking about buying a specific camera. He was in fact interested in the brand of wrenches. That seems to make your argument a non-sequitur, or am I missing something?

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™

A forum host of Creative COW’s Apple Final Cut Pro, Business & Marketing, and Indie Film & Documentary forums.

[Alan Lloyd]

At this point, the discussion has moved some distance. And my comments are/were to those who got on their high horses and started slagging the movie, and sniffing disdainfully at anyone who uses smaller tools and emphasizes the storytelling.

Late to the discussion, true, but there’s some stuff that needed to be said here.

To address the original question, he should buy the format his clients want and need. Less won’t help, more may well be wasteful.