My recent shoots with the HVX-200 don’t look good just because of the camera. It’s how we used it.
Today, on the CML-Basics list, someone posted that they liked the look of my recent HVX-200 projects so much that they were thinking of asking for an HVX-200 on their next low-budget feature project. This was my response:
A few weeks ago I shot a music video project with director Jono Schaferkotter. The project turned out spectacularly well in spite of working with an eager, but inexperienced, crew and an HVX-200. Between picking shots that worked within the confines of what we could achieve with the gear we had, along with some basic color correction in Final Cut Studio using Magic Bullet Looks, the project looked much better than it had any right to, considering the budget was about $200.
Our former studio in Los Angeles, circa a few years ago.
The reason we haven’t been posting up here for the past couple of weeks is because we’ve been packing up our home/office/studio and putting it into storage while we buy a new home in the East Mountains section of Albuquerque, just down the Turquoise Trail from Santa Fe. There are many reasons we’re undergoing this major life change, several of which we’ll be elaborating upon in the upcoming weeks and months. If you’re curious, here’s a few of the reasons why:
Olympics Researchers get their physics messed up, twice. Here’s why it matters to every filmmaker.
According to an article in yesterday’s New York Times, Olympic sprinters who are closer to the starting gun get better results. Researchers at the University of Alberta wondered why. They thought it might have something to do with the starting gun: obviously, the runners who are closer to the gun hear it louder than those farther away, and volume can affect neural response.