What a nice camera. It must make good stories.

You know I was with you on that whole post until I got to the end of the short and there way that big Canon 7D logo. Maybe the filmmaker made this as some co-ip deal with Canon and had to brand the camera at the end but for me I was totally engaged until that logo popped up. At that point I thought … “oh, it’s nice but it’s an ad.” That diminished the filmmaking a bit for me. The images were beautiful but to me they were captured to sell a product and not sell a story.

I’m with you on the advertising aspect, but my issue isn’t with the advertising this time. I think it is a great thing that some filmmakers got paid to make a short, even though it is to advertise a camera. I’m just trying to say that there are more important things that most filmmakers aren’t paying attention to. And to become better at our art, we should pay attention to technique before tools.

I’m with you on the advertising aspect, but my issue isn’t with the advertising this time. I think it is a great thing that some filmmakers got paid to make a short, even though it is to advertise a camera. I’m just trying to say that there are more important things that most filmmakers aren’t paying attention to. And to become better at our art, we should pay attention to technique before tools.

Great post Paul, I agree. This fetishization of camera equipment has gone completely bonkers. Go out and shoot something and stop waiting for some magical piece of equipment that’s supposedly going to make your work look like a Fincher movie.

That being said, anyone wanna buy a Nikon D300?

Great post Paul, I agree. This fetishization of camera equipment has gone completely bonkers. Go out and shoot something and stop waiting for some magical piece of equipment that’s supposedly going to make your work look like a Fincher movie.

That being said, anyone wanna buy a Nikon D300?

Great post. I hear you all the way. There is to much independent filmmakers’ credit, lots of pressure to put out the prettiest picture possible. I continually find myself struggling between getting “that shot” and “does it add to the story?”

It’s story, 100%. We should start critiquing story over shot quality. I’m going to reblog this myself I think.

Great post. I hear you all the way. There is to much independent filmmakers’ credit, lots of pressure to put out the prettiest picture possible. I continually find myself struggling between getting “that shot” and “does it add to the story?”

It’s story, 100%. We should start critiquing story over shot quality. I’m going to reblog this myself I think.

I was going to write a blog post about this but now I don’t have to. You did it perfectly. I was having a conversation with my buddy Dave and we’re gearing up to shoot something. We decided to not let anyone know what we’re shooting on because nowadays, that’s not really important. It’s funny how (with the 7D) people are complaining about the sensor size. Man, look at Kenn — he shoots the Dog Files on 1/3″ sensors and it’s an amazing show. I shot our Diary of the Dead film on 1/3″ sensors in SD. Now that we have 24p, big sensors, and HD at less than what I paid for my DVX100a, people are STILL complaining? Go out and shoot something instead of complaining.

Anyways, enough of the rant. Paul, I love this blog post and it couldn’t have come at a better time.

I was going to write a blog post about this but now I don’t have to. You did it perfectly. I was having a conversation with my buddy Dave and we’re gearing up to shoot something. We decided to not let anyone know what we’re shooting on because nowadays, that’s not really important. It’s funny how (with the 7D) people are complaining about the sensor size. Man, look at Kenn — he shoots the Dog Files on 1/3″ sensors and it’s an amazing show. I shot our Diary of the Dead film on 1/3″ sensors in SD. Now that we have 24p, big sensors, and HD at less than what I paid for my DVX100a, people are STILL complaining? Go out and shoot something instead of complaining.

Anyways, enough of the rant. Paul, I love this blog post and it couldn’t have come at a better time.

I work primarily producing documentaries and Reality TV. A network or studio will let me put up the crappiest footage with the worst sound ever if it happens to be a brilliant story moment. But try to substitute story for slick shots and shallow depth of field, and they’ll instantly balk. (So will I, for that matter!)

I AM excited that tools to make our docs and unscripted television are evolving and giving us the ability to make our pictures pretty. I do think only laziness is to blame these days if your work looks like crap…the tools are around, at every budget level, to make every project shine. Just have to do your homework.

But, like all new toys, some folks get carried away with the bells and whistles and forget a camera is just a tool to help convey artistic vision, not replace it. Really great post. Keep up the good work.

Biagio
Twitter: @jokeandbiagio

I work primarily producing documentaries and Reality TV. A network or studio will let me put up the crappiest footage with the worst sound ever if it happens to be a brilliant story moment. But try to substitute story for slick shots and shallow depth of field, and they’ll instantly balk. (So will I, for that matter!)

I AM excited that tools to make our docs and unscripted television are evolving and giving us the ability to make our pictures pretty. I do think only laziness is to blame these days if your work looks like crap…the tools are around, at every budget level, to make every project shine. Just have to do your homework.

But, like all new toys, some folks get carried away with the bells and whistles and forget a camera is just a tool to help convey artistic vision, not replace it. Really great post. Keep up the good work.

Biagio
Twitter: @jokeandbiagio

Having been one of the people who made a comment on twitter about the small sensor size of the HVX200, I totally agree that we often focus on the tools instead of the story. Over the past few years I have frequently complained about trying to shoot in lowlight, or not being able to control depth of field. Having never had success with any of my indie projects, it’s easy to be seduced into believing that the newest widget will magically make things better on the next project.

Thanks for posting a reminder to stay grounded.

Terry

Having been one of the people who made a comment on twitter about the small sensor size of the HVX200, I totally agree that we often focus on the tools instead of the story. Over the past few years I have frequently complained about trying to shoot in lowlight, or not being able to control depth of field. Having never had success with any of my indie projects, it’s easy to be seduced into believing that the newest widget will magically make things better on the next project.

Thanks for posting a reminder to stay grounded.

Terry

Advertising can still tell a story.

Well said. I don’t think we can get too carried away with camera tests and story lines but this is the difference in a sea of camera enthusiasts that its the story tellers with cameras that make the difference.

Well said.

Advertising can still tell a story.

Well said. I don’t think we can get too carried away with camera tests and story lines but this is the difference in a sea of camera enthusiasts that its the story tellers with cameras that make the difference.

Well said.

[...] It’s titled What a Nice Camera. It Must Make Good Stories. [...]

Guilty as charged. I traded in my DVX100 to buy a Z1 and a small Panasonic TM300. With an iMac, Final Cut Studio, 2 x Sennheiser wireless mics and Manfrotto tripod I still look at gadgets like the 7D and wonder about buying them… next year. Meanwhile time passes and my next documentary doesn’t get made (my first was shot with a basic DVX and edited on a laptop in Vegas. I wasn’t too concerned with kit then and the film is out there, selling well).

I can think of many technical reasons why the 7D actually won’t do what I need, but I can convince myself it looks like what I want. Is it a “bloke thing”, or some kind of procrastination?

One of the greatest movies – The Godfather – employed static tableaux shots, dark lighting and only moved the camera when the subject moved.

My partner is saying this to me all the timw. I know instinctively that we will watch a poor image with bad audio if the story is strong – try Pasolini.

A good story still deserves the best image we can manage, but thanks for reminding me to think more about the subject than the equipment.

Guilty as charged. I traded in my DVX100 to buy a Z1 and a small Panasonic TM300. With an iMac, Final Cut Studio, 2 x Sennheiser wireless mics and Manfrotto tripod I still look at gadgets like the 7D and wonder about buying them… next year. Meanwhile time passes and my next documentary doesn’t get made (my first was shot with a basic DVX and edited on a laptop in Vegas. I wasn’t too concerned with kit then and the film is out there, selling well).

I can think of many technical reasons why the 7D actually won’t do what I need, but I can convince myself it looks like what I want. Is it a “bloke thing”, or some kind of procrastination?

One of the greatest movies – The Godfather – employed static tableaux shots, dark lighting and only moved the camera when the subject moved.

My partner is saying this to me all the timw. I know instinctively that we will watch a poor image with bad audio if the story is strong – try Pasolini.

A good story still deserves the best image we can manage, but thanks for reminding me to think more about the subject than the equipment.

Keep me in the loop on the STORY movement.

Keep me in the loop on the STORY movement.

The whole DIY thing is incredibly exciting and empowering.. yet generously affords rewards from a lack of disciplined basics…

Now more than ever, everyone can jump into filmmaking with the perceived “needed elements” of what it takes to tell stories on film* – but it somewhat mirrors the sequel making process in Hollywood. To borrow and paraphrase from J.J. Abrams at TED, we duplicate the obvious elements, the shark, the water… therefore we have accomplished the goal…

Educationally, we can literally get from position A to position G so fast now, B thru E never happens… and if we continue to reward the proficiency of cosmetics (FX, Customs Looks, etc.) as the filmmaking END GAME via gushing adoration or worse yet, Box Office dollars, the need for B thru E will – and is – becoming irrelevant.

* the term “film” meaning whatever acquisition or presentation method in current fashion

The whole DIY thing is incredibly exciting and empowering.. yet generously affords rewards from a lack of disciplined basics…

Now more than ever, everyone can jump into filmmaking with the perceived “needed elements” of what it takes to tell stories on film* – but it somewhat mirrors the sequel making process in Hollywood. To borrow and paraphrase from J.J. Abrams at TED, we duplicate the obvious elements, the shark, the water… therefore we have accomplished the goal…

Educationally, we can literally get from position A to position G so fast now, B thru E never happens… and if we continue to reward the proficiency of cosmetics (FX, Customs Looks, etc.) as the filmmaking END GAME via gushing adoration or worse yet, Box Office dollars, the need for B thru E will – and is – becoming irrelevant.

* the term “film” meaning whatever acquisition or presentation method in current fashion

See… I even forgot about “F”.

See… I even forgot about “F”.

I was worried at first after I got my DVX100B used. Not so much now. It’s a camera. It’s not the “be all end all”. That camera comes out next month. And the month after that. And the month after that.

I was worried at first after I got my DVX100B used. Not so much now. It’s a camera. It’s not the “be all end all”. That camera comes out next month. And the month after that. And the month after that.

I agree with the sentiments to a certain degree. However, there is a dual nature to film making that, at this time, is somewhat unique to it as an art form. There is something of an expectation that a piece has to conform to minimum technical requirements. Those expectations are implicit in the term “broadcast quality”.

We are also aware that different cameras produce different images. 35mm looks different than a 3ccd standard definition camera which looks different than a VHS camcorder which looks different than 8mm film. The degree to which your finished product looks like any of those bears some relationship to its marketability. It’s one of the reasons Hollywood didn’t quite jump onto digital video until it had been engineered enough to look approximately like 35mm.

If story and drama were the ONLY concern, the major studios could have gotten by making movies with cheaper-to-shoot video cameras 30 years ago. Could David Lean have gotten away with shooting A Passage to India on a consumer level VHS camcorder? I kind of don’t think so. A lot of the technical stuff does produce it’s own psychological effects.

I agree with the sentiments to a certain degree. However, there is a dual nature to film making that, at this time, is somewhat unique to it as an art form. There is something of an expectation that a piece has to conform to minimum technical requirements. Those expectations are implicit in the term “broadcast quality”.

We are also aware that different cameras produce different images. 35mm looks different than a 3ccd standard definition camera which looks different than a VHS camcorder which looks different than 8mm film. The degree to which your finished product looks like any of those bears some relationship to its marketability. It’s one of the reasons Hollywood didn’t quite jump onto digital video until it had been engineered enough to look approximately like 35mm.

If story and drama were the ONLY concern, the major studios could have gotten by making movies with cheaper-to-shoot video cameras 30 years ago. Could David Lean have gotten away with shooting A Passage to India on a consumer level VHS camcorder? I kind of don’t think so. A lot of the technical stuff does produce it’s own psychological effects.

My intent here is not to say that story and drama are the “ONLY” concern. Only that is should be put in line ahead of technical considerations.

My intent here is not to say that story and drama are the “ONLY” concern. Only that is should be put in line ahead of technical considerations.

The reasons the studio spend so much money on films is partly to make up for the lack of story and drama.

What you shoot with one doesn’t really matter to most audiences, especially if it’s an incredible story.

The reasons the studio spend so much money on films is partly to make up for the lack of story and drama.

What you shoot with one doesn’t really matter to most audiences, especially if it’s an incredible story.

You know I was with you on that whole post until I got to the end of the short and there way that big Canon 7D logo. Maybe the filmmaker made this as some co-ip deal with Canon and had to brand the camera at the end but for me I was totally engaged until that logo popped up. At that point I thought … “oh, it's nice but it's an ad.” That diminished the filmmaking a bit for me. The images were beautiful but to me they were captured to sell a product and not sell a story.