[Bill Davis]

I’d say it’s NOT the best use of the camera.

You just can’t get around the fact that it takes some time to expose the full frame. So fast motion moves WILL often cause the shot geometry to change over the course of the frame scan.

Now, you might not find that objectionable at all – and the only way to REALLY decide is to try it and see.
There are enough folks shooting in REAL war zones with the 5dmk2 and if the footage was completely unacceptable, they wouldn’t do that.

But I doubt I’d take mine out if it wasn’t on some sort of motion limiting (steadicam) rig and I’d keep the moving shots to a minimum.

But that’s just me.

YMMV.

[Bill Davis]

Scott,

Man, I couldn’t disagree more. It’s not about the editors ideology. It’s about the willingness not to address the ideas or issues, but to simply tear down the person behind them. What ethics class and debate class used to teach as the “ad hominum” attack. Which while arguably often effective, is a form of obfuscation and miss-direction that doesn’t solve any problem other than promoting people with the fewest scruples into positions of power.

Every editor here knows that we could take anybody – ANYBODY – from our next door neighbor, to Mother Teresa, and with a few well selected effects, portray them as the polar opposite of who they actually are. I could make YOU look like a child molester and project that image world-wide. And you could do exactly the same to me.

So what stops us? Essentially it’s ethics. And when we observe ethics lapses – I think it’s CRITICAL that we call them out. The general public has NO CLUE that a cutaway shot indicates that content was likely removed and the interview stream might have been re-ordered to imply the opposite of what the interviewee was saying.

And you can take a photo of anyone – and slap the digital equivalent of a few herpes sores on the face and make anyone seeing that image feel disgusted.

Again, in my view this is NOT Right or Left – Republican or Democrat. EACH (and most other parties!) have done their share of character destruction. It’s HONEST verses MANIPULATIVE. And WE’re the people sitting in the seats with the power to do the manipulation.

This particular example, for me, crossed the line. And I think it should be called out with EXACTLY the same ferver as when some Democrat Congressman is found to be a slum lord or is taking a kickback from the city council – elements that, BTW have both happened in my state.

We know political abuse happens. But this time, it was done purely through EDITING. That’s why I think it’s important to discuss here.

Where do YOU guys draw the line? Or do you draw any lines at all? Will you edit kiddie porn if the price is right? How about drunk college kids stomping baby chickens to death? Will you cut that image piece for the local chemical plant to show the jury when they’re facing the EPA sanction for polluting the groundwater with something toxic?

The Gizmodo/iPhone prototype story has ethics in media front and center.

Since most people come to this craft without much formal training in these topics at all – when does this stuff even come up if we don’t talk about it here?

Or is the COW community going to opt NOT to discuss stuff like this?

Personally, I think it’s important. But I’m just one voice.

Time for others to chime in.

[Bill Davis]

I agree with Walter, primarily.

The exception is the situation where I think the OP finds themselves. They have not yet acquired much beyond the most basic means of production so that they’re still building basic capabilities. So a “budget” of investing a percentage of after tax profits toward basic capital expenses like grip gear, enhanced audio assets, and editing upgrades makes some solid business sense.

Depending on your cash flow, I’d bet most of us who’ve been in business for a while had a significantly larger percentage of profits that we re-invested in equipment in our early days. I don’t think 10%, 20% or even 50% is unreasonable – particularly under Walter’s reasoning if you don’t have camera, grip and audio done at a level commensurate with the work you expect to do and you have a workflow that will support it.

The tradition was that you ate Ramen and road a bike early in your career in order to afford the VERY expensive tools of the trade. Now that tools are more affordable – it won’t be as long before you move from Ramen to Spaghetti, then to actual Chicken.

But fundamentally, Walter is spot on. After you have the basics, buy ONLY what your market tells you is CRITICAL for on-going production. NEVER think that the mere purchase of a piece of gear will automatically bring in the work to pay for it. That era is DEAD.

Good luck.

[Bill Davis]

Also consider in these days of pretty cheap merchant accounts through organizations like Sams Club and Costco – you might consider expanding the ways that you can BE paid.

Setting up the ability to take Credit Cards, PayPal, and even direct bank transfer payments from larger clients can make collections a LOT easier in the modern era.

It’s quite possible to build a simple web page that ONLY allows your client to download finished work when a valid credit card is used to do so.

They can do a debit, and pay at time of service, of use a credit card to get “net 30” – it’s THEIR call.

For what it’s worth.

[Bill Davis]

It appears we have discovered a previously unknown hole in the lingua franca of editing.

Therefore it must be filled before we move along….

My recommendation?

BoogieCut

As a noun – Horatio knew his first edit was lacking so he drank a Red Bull, chewed his third Snickers bar thoughfully, and swiveled back to his glowing Cinema Display determined to create the ultimate BoogieCut.

As a verb – “Jennifer could BoogieCut with the best of them – perhaps that’s why she caught the boss’s attention. Then again, perhaps not.

As a beat-poet wannabee device.
…all them drill-team junkies – laptops unfurled – boogiecutting across the visual cortex of America like ancient drummers summoning the little village children to dance…

As a trade show taunt… You think you can boogiecut? Please – my grandmother could cut tighter than THAT — on a Steenbeck — from her wheelchair!

Personally, I’m punch-drunk tired, so you folks have to step up with something useful if we’re ever going to fill this awful terminological void.

Carry on.

[Bill Davis]

Nearly any mic sold has a MAX SPL figure listed in it’s specs.

That’s the sound pressure level it’s rated at.

Small diaphragm mics tend to rate higher than large diaphragm mics, but there are units like the Sennheiser MD-421U that can handle up to (iirc) 135db without breaking a sweat. That’s a level where your hearing is in instant danger. So the band should be well below that.

Next, you want to carry some form of PAD to attenuate the signal between the mic and the input if necessary. In-line switchable attenuators from TecNec or Audio Technica with 10-20-30db pads are ideal for this.

But also don’t expect to get a FABULOUS “studio sounding” quality recording via Mics in a live situation. Live audio is pretty messy – being created and mixed for the crowd, rather than to be recorded and played back later for critical listening.

Good luck.

[Bill Davis]

Shane is spot on.

Also – never forget that the production is always the EASIEST part of any video production.

Getting a consistent stream of actual money from people to support said production – THAT’s the hardest part.

Always. Always. Always.

Success starts and ends, not with the show itself – but with SALES. Period.

[Bill Davis]

Fresh off the DSLR threads might be skewing my perspective, but this sounds TAILOR MADE for DSLR video.

Light and mobile. The 5dMkii in SD mode takes a SUPERB picture – even in low light – especially if you combine it with fast glass.

And you’re working with very cheap and accessible media.

Seems like a match made in heaven for a project like this.

FWIW

[Bill Davis]

Arne,

Not wanting to extend this discussion too far, but you’re going to have to confront a peculiar reality pretty soon.

The ONLY people who I hear arguing about the lack of effective video making ability in the DSLR space are people who ARE NOT CURRENTLY SHOOTING CONTENT ON DSLRs.

It’s a little bit like sex. Attempting to judge it’s value based exclusively on READING about it is doomed to miss the point.

It’s really as simple as that.

[Bill Davis]

Sorry, but not holding my breath for RED ever again.

Once upon a time I remember seeing an early MacWorld with a product called Wingz. The next big thing in databases. Big Booth. The following year, an even BIGGER booth. Year 3 – a HUGE booth. Year 4 – the booth AND the company were gone.

I know RED shipped (finally!) a very, very nice camera. MUCH more camera than they promised. Which was precisely the problem. They hinted, and teased at the second coming of video for EVERYONE – then delivered a beast that only the top few percent of the market could make sense of.

RED OWNED such a HUGE space of mindshare from shooters like me waiting for that great AND affordable camera – for so long – while satisfying so very few – that as much as the product, OUR disappointment allowed Canon the time to come in and BLOW Red, along with everyone else, out of the water with the 5d.

RED has lost me so thoroughly – that whatever they finally ship in the inexpensive camera space is pretty much gonna have to have wings and “out of the box” fly over a very high mountain of lost trust to earn a spot in my shop.

Canon, OTOH, promised me almost nothing – just a still camera that folks said also shot nice video. That when we discovered how insanely wonderful it’s video was – it truly realized the promise that RED failed to deliver. Superb video for EVERYONE – CHEAP!

Red may redeem the line in the future. Who knows. Anything’s possible. I keep an open mind. But trust is one of the hardest things to build in business, and one of the easiest things to lose. And they completely lost me long ago.

“Under promise and over deliver”, RED got that totally wrong. Canon got it totally right.

My view, anyway.