Messed up the previous thread because I had to redo the op after accidentally making it too long.
Previous thread >>4383164

Last thread was great, can we top it?

Okay experts of /vid/, give me your hardest truths.
>made a low budget feature film
>just finished editing
>haven't submitted to any festivals or screened it yet
Should I research some relevant festivals and then just blindly submit it to them? Should I hire a pr consultant to handle this for me, spending assumedly thousands in the process? Or should I bypass all of that and just try and set up some local screenings and accept that I won't make any money?

>>4391824
Is it your first film?
Option 1, gonna cost some cash to submit, then throw it on Tubi

Second film?
Option 1 and 3, theater rental will also cost cash but it’s more of a vanity/celebration moment than money making, then throw it on Tubi

Third film?
You kinda already fucked up and should’ve hired them during preproduction, do this only if you think there’s remotely a chance to make money off this film (genre, big hook, etc). Otherwise, just throw it on Tubi

>>4391826
It's my 2nd film. 1st barely counts but it is what it is.
You don't think there's any value in reaching out to a pr consultant? Aren't they basically the only way to screen your film in a festival that's actually worthwhile?

>>4391833
>screen your film in a festival that's actually worthwhile
Define “actually worthwhile”. You’ll need to have already had them in your pocket during preproduction, you need ATLEAST a b-level actor in your film, etc. Define “low budget” too, I’m assuming a lot here.

>>4391837
I was thinking something *like* tiff, sitges, raindance etc.
The semi-indie well-known festivals that curate low-budget films of questionable quality without recognisable actors, as well as the bigger stuff.
My film is super low budget (sub £10k) but I think, maybe naively, that isn't obviously so and that most people would assume it had a budget north of 50k.

But maybe this is a good point. A pr agent doing their job properly would probably cost more than I spent making the film...

>>4391842
>tiff, sitges, raindance
lol, lmao even
those are out of your range buddy
look for smaller ones

>>4391860
But if I got a pr manager, wouldn't they be in range? I've seen some of the films that air at these festivals, and they're crap from a technical perspective as well as on an artistic level. No matter how biased/deluded I am, I know my film is better than that

But how much influence does eyour average pr manager actually have? Do they get films into festivals by having the right connections or is it just a case of knowing the right festivals to blindly submit to based on quality?
Do you need specific pr managers to get into the above ones or can any competent one do it?
And how much does this shit cost? They never state their rates and I'm scared of being laughed away/rejected if I try and enquire

Does anyone know any UV filters that don't flare up at night ?

>>4391842
lol
lmao

I have an AG-DVX100 and I want to make a film with it. I was gifted the camera when I was in highschool so it's sentimental to me and I want to use it. I used to have basic understanding of uploading the footage to my old pc with a firewire port and editing on old 00s software. What's the best way to edit and use the footage today for modern audiences?

>>4391919
>What's the best way to edit and use the footage today for modern audiences?
What you did back then is still the best way around it. Get a PCI firewire capture card for your PC and a cable. Capturing via firewire provides original quality as recorded to the tape. You only have to make sure to process the telecined 24p/25p correctly in your editing software so you don't accidentally lose half the fields or have framerate problems.

>>4391870
I don't know anything about pr managers, producers are the ones who do this stuff and who have connections
Blindly submitting regardless of if it's with a pr manager or not is gonna be a tricky one
And the quality of your film is practically irrelevant unfortunately, connections are king
I guess just suck it and see

>>4391919
>AG-DVX100
A kino machine: https://cinema-scope.com/cinema-scope-magazine/tiff-2014-horse-money-pedro-costa-portugal-wavelengths/

Test

Which digitally cinematographed film has nailed the Black and White?

Most of digital bw look flat asf bros. Why is that? It is so easy to make digital bw look good in photos.

>>4392479
A Cold War and Roma both spring to my mind. A Cold War is kind of mid otherwise, but it looks nice. Roma looks brilliant.

But like everything it comes down to preference. They don't "look" like film because they aren't trying to. If you just want b&w that looks like film, it's painfully easy but they don't go for that look for a reason (possibly the same reason why they moved to colour film over b&w in the first place).
If you just want to argue that film looks better than digital, go back to /film/ because this isn't the place for that.

>>4392494
>If you just want b&w that looks like film, it's painfully easy
How?

>>4392497
Apply the resolve film look simulator, adjust the contrast and bump up the grain. Maybe soften the image before adding grain if you want to be really authentic.
Colour is a little more difficult because the colours acted very weirdly/uniquely in film and a lot of the admiration is just nostalgia for the flaws caused by the dated development process. People who "love" the film look don't tend to love modern films shot on film because the process has been so cleaned up that it's very hard/impossible to distinguish from digital.

>>4392479
I disagree, I see a lot of digital bw that jacks up the contrast to hell and back (I guess since they don’t know what else to do with it since it’s bw, might as well pump up the contrast!!)

>modern films shot on film because the process has been so cleaned up that it's very hard/impossible to distinguish from digital.
This is very true. Modern film stock itself is so fucking clean compared to what it used to be, combined with everything else.

>>4392516
Second part meant to quote >>4392500

>>4392516
The flatness is in highlight

File: ida-3411404430.jpg (18 KB, 640x360)

18 KB JPG

Lifeless

File: the-tragedy-of-macbeth-16(...).jpg (120 KB, 1280x720)

120 KB JPG

Flat puke

>>4392518
>>4392522
Trying to emulate film highlight roll off?

File: 1721304089596430.png (21 KB, 1280x897)

21 KB PNG

Quick Q... is anyone here a Youtuber? I'm starting out and I'm overwhelmed and I don't know what's important to pay attention to and what's not important. I'd like to turn it into a career and grow mu channel.
Are there any books/videos/courses on how to succeed?

>>4392545
Hi, I’m peter mckinnon

Be sexy that’s it or you’ll end up like tony and simon making videos telling kids to use auto ISO

>>4392547
kek'd.
I used to be subbed to his channel long time ago. Unsubbed when the fame got into his head. Still check out few vids when someone links them to me but man... he's changed.

I think digital b&w looks great

>>4392479
MacBeth
The Lighthouse
The White Ribbon

>>4392545
keep making shit, audio is more important than video, the algorithm works in mysterious ways

>>4392521
i saw this in the theater, this is cherry picking you faggot

>>4392545
what kind of videos are you making? what niche?
make sure you deliver on your thumbnail/title expectation within a few seconds (or preview it or at least talk about it) or people will click away
other than that just be good somehow (stimulating, interesting, beautiful, have some tits on there, etc)

The outline of my script for a shortfilm is ready but I don't have the balls to finally sit down put that shit in order because I keep thinking about how I have no money, no camera, no actors, no audio, no crew...I see no point in completing the script. FUCK! I also have the fear of writing too.

I'll probably JUST DO IT tonight.

>>4392599
>The Lighthouse
>The White Ribbon
Both shot on film
>Macbeth
>the Macbeth where there's a basketball American playing the ye olde Scotsman for some reason
Don't know, don't care but lol@ you for watching it.

>>4393054
>I keep thinking about how I have no money, no camera, no actors, no audio, no crew
You’ll continue having none of those things if you can’t even complete the script

>>4393067
I am sorry for saying mean words, anon.

>>4393070
Apology not accepted until your script is finished

>>4392949
If you make any videos that people actually care about YouTube will block your channel for violating some stupid policy they just made up or refuse to monetizing the video. That is if you make videos anons wanna watch—if you make shill shit for normied YouTube won’t care and let you puke out video after video as you lose your creative drive because you make the bland stuff for normies that YouTube loves not the edgy stuff for anons that you probably want to make.

I refuse to put my work on Tubi because I hate the idea of ads interrupting my film

>>4393074
Unless you pay for Vimeo or the person watching your stuff pays for no ads or you host your video on your own website, you can’t avoid ads ruining your film. The internet isn’t about creativity and sharing anymore. It’s all about ads or getting people to pay a fee to avoid ads.

>>4393076
You can purchase the digital file or disc directly from me, or yes I’ll have it on Vimeo without ads

>blackmagic pocket 4k gets a permanent price drop
kek, blackmagic must be making every other camera manufacturer seethe so hard

>>4393466
i want my cinemadng back you cunts

>>4393466
>Buying the pocket 4k over the Pyxis
You guys don't actually do this, right?

>>4393501
Since Red ain’t in business anymore so I don’t see the reason why blackmagic can’t put cinemaDNG back on their cameras unless, of course, some technically limitations is what’s preventing them from bringing it back since they no longer have to worry about Red suing them.

>>4393574
Cinemadng, unless I'm mistaken, wasn't removed due to red. It was removed in the pocket 4k at the same time braw was introduced and, again unless I'm mistaken, had had the option to compress it up to 4x.
That's the part that would've been messy for them. There was never a problem with it in the og pocket I don't think because it was ever compressed in that.

There's no real reason to put regular cdng in their cameras when braw exists. It's fucking huge and a pain to work with. And there's no reason to undermine braw (which they probably spent a fine penny developing) by reintroducing compressed cdng to their cameras.
>But they may as well put it in their cameras for the few people who want it since adding uncompressed cdng would cost nothing
True. But. and I'm completely guessing here, it could cause confusion. Cinematographers and videographers are not "smart" people. If they see a format that is "uncompressed" and takes up more space, they will assume it's better. And so the 'serious' filmmakers will just use cdng which will lead to frustrations and a bad user experience. And then they switch over to red or arri and the experience is pleasant and they move away from blackmagic.
Don't give them the option and they have to use braw instead and they get a nice lovely experience (and literally everyone I hear talk about it says braw is a joy to use, second only to redraw). Pretty sure this is why the best quality of braw is 3:1 compression too.

File: IMG_20241217_084319418.jpg (3.22 MB, 4096x2304)

3.22 MB JPG

Can anyone tell me why the banding on my camera disappears at 1/40 but not 1/60 orr 1/50? I'm in the US so everything I've read says it disappears at 1/60, but it's still visible, especially for my desk lamp

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	motorola
Camera Model	ThinkPhone by motorola
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Sensing Method	Not Defined
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	23 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4096
Image Height	2304
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:12:17 08:43:21
Exposure Time	16666667/1000000000 sec
F-Number	f/1.9
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	388
Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Brightness	0.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	D65
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	5.56 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4096
Image Height	2304
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4393584
Forgot video: https://youtu.be/rhtJAY6HlFA?si=vq5fshGMbtV8Dhcu

>>4393577
Since Red is no longer in the picture why can’t Blackmagic make a lossless version of braw for people into vfx. Or is it hard to make lossless law work with the 4k or 6k or 12k camera. I know when I got my pocket 4k it came with cinemaDNG before the update that added braw. How hard would it be for Blackmagic to make a lossless version of braw?

>>4393539
I unironically bought the 6KFF over the Pyxis. Cheaper (even when buying cage and accessories still came out cheaper) and being able to carry it on a strap around my neck and not draw attention is 100% worth it

>>4393593
3:1 is considered "lossless" as far as I'm aware.
They don't do uncompressed for the reasons I stated above. As well as risking people actually using it and thinking it's necessary to get the best quality, it would increase the data rate by 3x for literally no reason. And it would also risk overheating because of this. Again, it's about optics. If you give people the option to do something, you risk them actually doing it and then complaining about the obvious flaws. If there's something that's objectively better in every way, don't give them the worse alternative.

A better question is can they make braw into "real" raw since the patent is no longer an issue? No idea. Seems like there's no reason why not but also, is there any point? As far as I can tell, there's literally no benefit to 'real' raw over braw.

>>4393613
>And it would also risk overheating because of this.
i had a pocket 4k on launch and didn't have this issue

>>4391803
I jjust took videos with my shitty 2012 GoPro for my Final. You know what, out of the park. Bc bitch, transfforms, jack the colors, layer 5 or 6 of those on top of ea other, and create collages, + tie it all together with some stills & analog film scans, and it doesnt matter what fucking cameras you used. I'm making fucking art here, not some boring faux-journalism stand-in for reading a book. Just read a fucking book.

>>4393072
I still haven't started it...

>>4393732
Then I’ll say some mean words- you son of a bitch. Write the script you son of a bitch.

>>4393584
>>4393585
What sort of light are you using? I would avoid using LED and florescent for video indoor like that but slower shutter speeds help negate the flicker. Absolutely fuck governments for trying to kill glorious tungsten lighting also, the more I think about it, the more I think they're trying to alter people's state of alertness or something with that flickering bullshit.

File: 1734022037008126.jpg (323 KB, 854x859)

323 KB JPG

I have discovered that I don't enjoy fimmaking. I was only after money and fame.

It's over.

>>4393804
Good, better to realize this now.

>>4393732
what got me to do mine finally was advice from the book "naked filmmaking": just write it out of order. decide some plot points you want in there, write those first since you know those already, and then just fill in the gaps. once I read that it felt really easy to go and write mine.

I just got done filming my first outdoor scene actually. shit felt more real, but there's a lot of stuff I hadn't considered before:
I'm pretty sure I had the cops called on me. I shot in a residential area on a street with a dead end, and a cop car rolls by shortly after first shot, passes me without any obvious eye contact, goes down to the end and u-turns, and leaves in the same direction. Maybe one of the houses felt creeped out as I did start out pointing at one waiting for my actor's car to roll by, I realized it and turned the camera down until it was there. idk might just be me being paranoid. of course we weren't doing anything illegal, it was in public.
I kept running back to my car to look at my storyboard. I'm assuming you guys carry yours? I could put mine on a phone or tablet and maybe put a sling on the tablet but I like the paper and pencil and being able to erase and change on the fly and I don't really like digital drawing. What do you guys use? my google results were shit, except maybe clipboard with strap?
I brought a small whiteboard to use as a clapboard but just for the information parts and didn't use it at all as it was also in my car, and time was precious as one of my actors (my son, a child) had tantrumed when presented with today's shoot, even though he was eager af soudning last weekend and the weekend before, and the weekend before.
I set manual focus for my first shot but forgot to check it for the subsequent fucking shots. I need a checklist.
It felt really cool to yell "cut" and "one more take" a lot though, shit feels so real now, also this is my first time shooting with a storyboard as I just winged it last time with the screenplay.

>>4393942
Congrats on filming something. Yeah there are plenty of apps you can use for story boarding on your phone/tablet. Can also take pics or scans of drawn paper/pen storyboard and mark off digitally. Good job working with kids, I’d never fucking do that shit.

>>4393819
Should I continue with this guilt?

>>4393970
sometimes you only enjoy something once it's done, and the sense of accomplishment comes
sometimes you only enjoy something when you're good at it

>>4393970
Absolutely not. Money and fame can cone from many other means. Any movie you make for the sole reason of seeking these things will be a massive piece of shit that shouldn’t exist in the first place. Do the world a favor and don’t add on to the mountains of shit that already pollute the earth.

>>4393970
Yes. But you’d probably need very stiff drinks or hard drugs to drown out the guilt. But Hollywood does the exact same thing—check out “Leaving Los Vegas” if you don’t believe