quote:

---

Originally posted by JoeSixpack

Hi, I was wondering, if I was real serious about making a movie for the film festivals with a digital camera that would get noticed, maybe even bought by a distributor that liked it, what camera should I shoot for? Canon 5d? Is a Canon HF G10 good enough? Does it gotta be some CineAlta F900? Please don't tell me I have to sell a kidney for a Red One. Really, I wanna shoot something that will play in Cinemas if bought. How impressive does the picture have to be to be a blockbuster? Thanx

---

Dear JoeSixpack,

For a movie to become a blockbuster, the STORY is more pertinent than the image quality. I'd also add that MARKETING means a lot to project if it is to become a movie that will be seen by a wide spectrum audience.

So, "blockbuster" aspirations aside, it seems that what you are really asking is what acquisition format is "good enough" to project on a standard theater screen? Theoretically, if your story is good enough, you could shoot your movie on nearly any format and if the studio (or other distributor/buyer) has enough confidence in it, they'll spend the money to polish the image and sound to the point where it can be shown in traditional theaters. This has been done previously with newbies, like Robert Rodriquez.

That lottery aside, the question really boils down to what you can reasonably afford and/or what kind of investors you can attract with your project. If we start at the perceived "top" regarding "best" image quality, some may say that 70mm or IMAX projects the "best." Next down the ladder is 35mm film, as most feature films are shot with still. Down from that, some may suggest that true hi-def electronic cameras, like Genesis or Alexa, would be on par with 35mm. For various reasons, RED would come next under those followed by the lower resolutions of an F900 and 16mm film. Below those you'd find DSLRs and other compressed video formats.

So, arguably we've seen nearly ALL of those above used in feature films, either in totality for the entire movie or in part for portions. Assuming that the best image quality possible is obtained on set (with expert lighting, lenses, quality operating) and the best care is taken in post-production with image processing, etc, then almost any acquisition format can be polished up to look "good enough" for mainstream audiences.

All that aside, if you are an aspiring Director, then you shouldn't even really be thinking about purchasing a camera in the first place. The cost of a camera body isn't the only expenditure you'd need to build a quality and useful camera package. You also need quality lenses, batteries, tripods and camera mounts of different sizes, heads, cables, etc. Then what about necessary lighting and the support electric and grip gear to power and control the light? And sound? Will you purchase a quality mixer, recorder, mics and support gear for that package?

As an aspiring Director, you should not be spending money on ANY equipment and instead your funds should be invested in developing your project (writing, casting, production design, some logistics). When it comes time to staff your departments, IF your project is good enough to make, then quality PEOPLE will come to you AND they likely will either own or have access to quality equipment, like cameras, that can be used.

Buying the "best camera you can afford" likely means buying a camera that really isn't good enough and it means that you also have NOT purchased the rest of the "stuff" that you really need as well. So don't bother even trying and instead concentrate your efforts and your money on developing the STORY and the rest of the elements in order to sell the project to PEOPLE who will bring additional resources to you. If your project is truly good enough and worth the time, money and risk for others, then it will happen. If your project is NOT truly good enough for others to believe in, then you shouldn't bother, even with a camera that is just "good enough."

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com

Why did I expect any other type of answer? Hey, I'm not a noob, I'm just going from a "film only" to "Maybe I'll try Digital" mentality. Stop giving me "work on your STORY" answers, there's nothing wrong with my stories. I just don't want to waste a good story on a movie that should have been shot with a better camera. I'll ask again, which DV camera BODY is the most affordable and will still look good in theaters? I don't want people to think that my movie was shot by a bunch of kids with a FlipUltraHD. Is a 5D good enough or do I have to think F900 level?

Let me add this, I don't trust trying to get others to like my idea & make the movie. They can steal it or just brush me off. I want to make things happen myself & not beg people that are too busy to produce my project. If you were alone with no big connections, but you had a great story, cast & crew, which DV camera would you go for so that the movie would look great in regular theaters? Simple question, save your filmmaking theory lessons for the noobs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by JoeSixpack

Let me add this, I don't trust trying to get others to like my idea & make the movie. They can steal it or just brush me off. I want to make things happen myself & not beg people that are too busy to produce my project. If you were alone with no big connections, but you had a great story, cast & crew, which DV camera would you go for so that the movie would look great in regular theaters? Simple question, save your filmmaking theory lessons for the noobs.

---

If you were anything beyond a "noob," you wouldn't be asking this question. Sorry for trying to help you.

Beyond that, the answer to your question IS in my first response. Good luck!

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com

Against my better judgment, I'll attempt to guide you in the right direction once more. Instead of asking a technical question like this on a generic filmmaking site, why not ask working professionals at cinematography.com and/or cinematography.net? I'd advise putting the attitude away, though, when visiting those sites.

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com

Hey, I wanted a simple answer Brian. I write great and do lots of sculpting & molding & video fx great as well. I've got lots of experience under my belt, but I'm not a cameraman like you. I wanted your wisdom here, and now you are directing me to another site? This one isn't good enough? Buying a camera better than the 720p I'm use to using is an investment & I want to spend my money wisely. I'm leaning towards a Canon 5D Markii, used well will that camera's picture look great at the festivals? Will a distributor buy a 1080p movie that is a well shot good story?

quote:

---

Originally posted by JoeSixpack

Hey, I wanted a simple answer Brian. I write great and do lots of sculpting & molding & video fx great as well. I've got lots of experience under my belt, but I'm not a cameraman like you. I wanted your wisdom here, and now you are directing me to another site? This one isn't good enough? Buying a camera better than the 720p I'm use to using is an investment & I want to spend my money wisely. I'm leaning towards a Canon 5D Markii, used well will that camera's picture look great at the festivals? Will a distributor buy a 1080p movie that is a well shot good story?

---

Cinematography.com is populated by professional cameramen and camera assistants who know and use the technology for a living. If you really want to use a specific format, there are experts there who have used a Canon 5D Markii who will tell you the reasons why it might work for your needs and reasons why you shouldn't.

A distributor MIGHT buy a movie that is shot with a Canon 5D. I know that there are technical issues which dissuade most professional cameramen from wanting to use it except for specific shots, like some stunts. Again, it does tend to be about story and marketing as to what kind of risk a distributor wishes to take. There's no predicting what a distributor will choose to do at any given time with any project. Making a movie is a lottery in many respects so anything you can do to improve the odds goes a long way toward finding success.

I might suggest that you also look at www.wordplayer.com which is a wealth of information from the story and business side of creating a project with potential for success.

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com

Also, specific to the DSLR, I suggest http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/. Shane has taken the lead in testing out this new format and arguably has the most experience in using them amongst professional cameramen.

Brian Dzyak
Cameraman/Author
IATSE Local 600, SOC
http://www.whatireallywanttodo.com
http://www.realfilmcareer.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by JoeSixpack

Hi, I was wondering, if I was real serious about making a movie for the film festivals with a digital camera that would get noticed, maybe even bought by a distributor that liked it, what camera should I shoot for? Canon 5d? Is a Canon HF G10 good enough? Does it gotta be some CineAlta F900? Please don't tell me I have to sell a kidney for a Red One. Really, I wanna shoot something that will play in Cinemas if bought. How impressive does the picture have to be to be a blockbuster? Thanx

---

With excellent lighting, great acting, perfect audio and a compelling story
you can use just about any HD camera on the market today and get into
a film festival. Even end up with a theatrical blockbuster. The 5D is real
possibility, so is the HF G10. You do not have to own a Red or CineAlta
to make a movie that could end up in the theaters or a film festival.

Have you considered finding a DP who already owns a camera? Or finding
a DP and then renting? If you want to buy a camera what is your price
range? I can offer some suggestions if I know what you can afford.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

Thank you very much Brian, that was a very good response. I'll follow your links and take your words to heart.

Certified, I am not trusting to chance on finding a good DP that already has a nice camera, if I do I'll feel blessed. I don't like to rent, I like to know I have the power in my hands at all times. The budget varies, I'm thinking 5D is in my range for sure and all extra money will go to the over 50k I'll need to get a Red Cam workflow system eventually.

The 5D seems to be the right choice in this case.
When do you start shooting?

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

The problem I see with buying a 5DmkII (or any other consumer or "prosumer" DSLR, or even a camcorder) is what one eventually does with it.

As Brian said, features have been shot and released (in wide theatrical distribution) on everything, all the way down to MiniDV and even Super 8 film. Assuming that the ultimate goal for the film is NOT to look like the infamous "Blair Witch Project", these bottom-end devices will likely be out of the question.

The above-mentioned 5D has become a darling of the indy filmmakers' circuit, and there are some good reasons for that. Main ones are that, if images are acquired very carefully with it, they won't totally fall apart by the time they make it to the big screen. The key word here is acquired carefully. The only reason all the Hollywood movies look as good as they look on the big screen is because of the people who shot them. Obviously, 5DmkII will most certainly NOT create such good looking image if you just point it at your actors and press 'REC'. Neither will Steinway piano make incredible music if you sit any 9-year old in front of it and tell her to play something.

As Brian had already suggested, in addition to that 5DmkII, you will need many other things in order to get images that will look good in theatre (lenses, lights, filters, tripod). Buying 5D and nothing else won't be nearly enough to shoot decent moving images.

Finally, it has often been said that the image quality in a movie is nowhere near as important as is sound; audiences will almost always forgive (or ignore, or sometimes not even consciously notice) poorly exposed image, but will very quickly get tired of poorly recorded audio, where they struggle to understand the dialogue. It could be argued that it is more difficult to get acceptable audio than it is to get acceptable picture. Fortunately, in recent years, digital audio equipment has become inexpensive enough to make the audio issue easier to solve.

In slightly different ways the three of us are saying the exact same thing.

It isn't the camera, it's the skill of the people. No matter what camera JoeSixpack
chooses; to make a movie that would get noticed or maybe even bought by a
distributor he is going to need to make a great movie. That's not what most
people who ask this question seem to want to hear. Just recently David Levy
got a movie he shot on a Flip released in theaters.

Certified, I start shooting after I get the 5D & all the other equipment. Then gather a cast & crew from around my area. I already have plenty of stories.

Vasic, I'm aware of all the little intricate details of the process, I just wanted some knowledgable advice on a camera. I wanted to know how cheap a camera I could buy and not be scoffed at by the festivals cuz my equipment was too cheap. I found the answer here suitable and will recommend this forum if someone asks.