A while back I bought a really nice used still camera with 3 lenses for $cheap$. Whenever I went out I always used to come across great locations that would work perfectly for filming but over time forget about them. Now I just take a few snap shots of the location and write down where the place is. Over time I have collected a scrap book stuffed full of great locations for filming. Instead of going location scouting I can just flip the pages untill I find a place I like. I also use the camera at locations to snap shots of the angles I would like to use while filming. This works sorta like a storyboard. I reccomend a still camera for any filmmaker as it is very useful. I would imagine a digital camera would be even better as you can store the images on your computer instead of a book but alas I like saving money and the camera I have works just fine. If you can think of any other use for a still camera feel free to add onto what I've said.
What? $1000!! That's crazy talk!!
What? $1000!! That's crazy talk!!
Still camera is an expensive way to collect snaps for locations as every time you get snaps developed you are spending on films and towards its development. However, digital camera's are a better investment and cheaper option for the long term as you can keep digital snaps on your PC as well as do a quick comparison on photo suite softwares of different locations.
So far so good
So far so good
I always wondered... wouldn't it be easy to shoot a models frame by frame using a still camera... wouldn't the quality of the image better as well?... u know instead of acctually using a video camera for a low budget shoot.
Life is the art of making movies without editing
Life is the art of making movies without editing
This would probably work however like elhi said snaps aren't exactly cheap and the number you would need in order to have a smooth moving shot would be just too expensive. Plus you would need to scan all the images into a computer for editing and that just doesn't seem worth it to me. This is something that should be tried with a digital camera if your video camera can't shoot frame by frame. It will take lots of work either way.
What? $1000!! That's crazy talk!!
What? $1000!! That's crazy talk!!
Sorry i did mean a digital camera
Life is the art of making movies without editing
Life is the art of making movies without editing
Film cameras should be used for movie stills though, definitely.
the portfolio idea is quite good, mabe with a digital camera thenit could all be done digitally and you could even search the archives.
Make Love Not War!
Make Love Not War!
I totally agree with this idea. I was going to take a bunch of stills so that way I could use as an advantage for my paintings and drawings, but I like the scrap book of locations idea too. I personally don't like digital cameras and I could totally see something going wrong like some kind of chip malfunction or something and then all the pictures are lost.
Also, I'm not 100% sure if this would be cheaper, but you could also go all "Memento" and take polaroids. It would be quicker and possibly less expensive.
I have to disagree, using film would be far more cumbersome and expensive, with digital you can just group them all into a folder and then subgroup them and vola, you can search potentially thousands of pictures at the touch of a button doing it the traditional way would take hours.
Make Love Not War!
Make Love Not War!
