My time at university as a film student

I started university at a very interesting time for film/video technology. It was 2009 and I had only been using a solid state video camera for 9 months. This was around the time when 35mm DOF adapters were the craze and the must have accessory for getting that coveted "film look". Many people were still using mini-DV camcorders, the same format that many of the early high def camcorders used. There were no separate tapes for high definition, HDV was a format that simply recorded high definition footage onto a standard mini-DV tape. My only experience using HDV was in sixth form that year when the school bought an entry level "professional" Sony camera to use for the newly founded (and short lived) school television channel. At the time, I had just about forgotten how awkward and annoying tapes were, since I had transitioned to the SD card format only three months prior.

However, when I started my film technology course at university, September 2009, they were still issuing first years Canon XL1 cameras. This camera was used extensively in Danny Boyle's 2002 movie 28 Days Later so it was interesting to make use of the same technology. The footage from the camera was okay with decent colour thanks to the 3CCD spec but the picture was 4:3 only. Its saving grace was the ability to changes lenses, something that was quite rare for the format. Despite this, we only ever used or had access to the default lens. Another interesting implication was when our lecturer told us not to use Sony brand DV tapes...Even though these were the only brand sold in the Student Shop. So there we were, a class full of students, eagerly waiting to take these cameras home for testing but unable to do so because of dodgy tapes. Thankfully, I had an unused Panasonic tape knocking about in storage at home so didn't have any issues. However, I believe some students took a chance and used the Sony tapes but later encountered problems with corrupt video/missing audio. 

In second semester, we had the opportunity to use a slightly better video camera, whose name escapes me. After first year, we never touched tape again and it wasn't missed. We now had access to the infinitely superior solid state high definition Panasonic HMC-151. During 2011, the DSLR revolution had begun, and my fellow third years were spending their students loans and grants on Canon DSLRs and lenses. That coveted film look was now a doddle with a T2i and 50mm 1.4 lens. Because it was now so easy, our lecturers sighed at the sudden influx of shallow depth of field films that saturated assignment submissions that year. Apparently a poor narrative could be forgiven when the background (and actors' ears) was out of focus. Gone were the days of complex, cumbersome, expensive and exposure darkening depth of field adapters. You could now make nice looking films using equipment worth only a few hundred pounds.  

I'm no stranger to the DSLR craze. I used borrowed ones for assignments before finally getting my own in 2012 and made good use of it for my Final Year Project film. I still use it to this day, for corporate videos with a shoulder rig to make up for that fact that it's not a proper video camera. It seems many of the major camera manufacturers became aware of the DSLR's popularity and subsequently released dedicated video cameras that offer the same large sensor and interchangeable lens capability as their DSLRs. The DSLR video revolution may be over soon but it's still a preferred solution among many film makers. Will it head the same way as mini-DV? A few years ago, I felt nostalgic about the tape format and dug out my venerable JVC camcorder. I thought it would be quite interesting to apply my current cinematography and tech knowledge to try and make something with this camera again, hopefully producing something better than my 12 year old self.

What's a matte box? (and what is it used for)

To put it simply, a matte box is the square thing that you see on the end of movie/video cameras. They have three uses.

1. It prevents lens flare
Unless you want it in your shot, a matte box is designed to cut out lens flare. Usually, a matte box will have adjustable fins on the top and sides. This is its main purpose.

2. It holds filters
More expensive matte boxes allow you to slot filters, like neutral density filters, in front of your lens. This allows you to replace filters faster than the ones that screw directly onto your lenses. Obviously this doesn't really work well if you're using a zoom lens that extends in and out since the matte box is usually fixed to rails beneath the camera.

3. It looks pro
You put a matte box in front of your camera and it automatically looks 100% cooler. Yeah, I know this isn't a proper reason for having one but it does make a DSLR look less like a photography camera and more like a proper movie camera. Image is everything and you should do everything you can to disguise your DSLR when you take it to a video shoot.

Panasonic AG-HMC151

Well I finally did it and got a proper video camera. The Panasonic AG-HMC151 is a full HD solid state video camera and I chose this one because I've used it throughout my time at university. The HMC151 is a few years old but the build quality and the image quality is great. The camera has three CCD sensors instead of a CMOS chip which is what my DSLR uses. The DSLR has a few problems that are not present in video cameras like this one. I realised that I needed a proper video camera to do certain projects. For a start, the weight and size of the video camera means it's easy to keep steady handheld. Handheld DSLR footage is atrocious sometimes and this problem forced me to use a tripod when making films. Also, the shallow depth of field capability found in the DSLR is good for cinematic shots but keeping a moving subject in focus is hard work.

The HMC151 pretty much stays in focus all of the time because of the greater depth of field and auto focus feature. Yeah, the Canon 600d does have auto focus but it's useless for video. I still love my Canon 600d to pieces though and I'll continue to use it for making films because the image quality is fantastic. Thing is, the Canon DSLR's data rate is 42mbps but this Panasonic camera is only 24mbps. This is almost half but it doesn't bother me because the pros outweigh the cons in my opinion. With the Panasonic 151 you get 13x optical zoom, dual XLR input for audio, manual control (no navigating through menus), HDMI output, half a dozen HD formats, zebra pattern and waveform monitor (for checking exposure). I have the zebra pattern feature in my little Panasonic video camera and it's a feature that I found very useful. Unfortunately, my DSLR doesn't have this feature and I struggled for awhile with exposure. 

I've done a few tests with the camera already and overall the footage is good. Getting this camera once again reminded me of the importance of having well lit scenes and subjects. With dull afternoon light coming through a curtain, my footage looked flat and average but when I attached my LED light, the camera was able to capture a lot more detail. I'm definitely going to have to invest in some proper lights for future projects. University has taught me a lot but the most important lesson learnt is about lighting. A lot of amateur productions overlook this and suffer in quality as a result. Anyway I'm digressing now so back to the camera.

I've tried mixing footage from this camera with footage from my DSLR (which is currently having a new LCD screen fitted). As I suspected, it's very hard to make a seamless transition between each shot because to the trained eye the differences are blatant. Footage from my DSLR is softer with certain parts of the shot out of focus (shallow depth of field etc) but footage from the Panasonic is sharp and not just the subject but the whole scene including the background. This is the most obvious difference but the colours and contrast (which can be adjusted in software anyway) are also different. Data rate (as previously mentioned) is also different with the Panasonic having half as many megabytes per second than the DSLR. 

Despite these differences, I'm confident that I can use footage from both in the same projects. I'm tempted to label the Panasonic my A camera and the Canon DSLR my B camera but for different reasons those labels should be swapped. I would definitely favour the Pansonic for moving shots where there's a lot going on and I need the greater depth of field. Conversely, the Canon DSLR would be better for close ups where the shallow depth of field is needed to blur the background for cinematic effect. Chances are, I will end up doing whole projects with just the Panasonic in the same way that I have done whole projects with just the DSLR.           

Film shoot with Canon EOS-1D C camera

Today I helped out on a film which was shot on Canon's top of the line DSLR, the EOS-1D C. This is a serious camera and they were using thousands of pounds worth of equipment. The hire package featured several different prime lenses including 100mm, 50mm and 35mm. There was also a matte box, follow focus, shoulder rig, external monitor and viewfinder. It also came with 128gb compact flash cards and I've just googled them and they cost something ridiculous like £500+ each. 

The hire package cost was about £700 for the week, quite a lot of money. And here's me using a £400 consumer DSLR with £80 lens. This doesn't bother me however because I stand by what I always say. You can still create a brilliant movie with inexpensive equipment. All you need is a great idea and determination. 

New Phone

This post has nothing to do with film but it's sort of related. I realised 2 months ago that my humble Samsung d500 was outdated and I just could not keep up with the modern world. I needed a phone with more connection ability. So, I decided to upgrade and it was a very big jump. I had my Samsung d500 for 7 years and I noticed an advert for the Samsung Galaxy Ace smartphone in the newspaper. So, I got myself down to the phone shop and bought a Samsung Galaxy Ace on contract. 

I like the phone, especially the touch screen and virtual keyboard. The best part is being able to connect to the internet easily. My previous phone could browse the internet but it was slower than dial-up and cost me a lot of credit. It's also very handy being able to connect to the internet wherever and whenever. The video camera is nothing special (not even HD) but I don't plan on using it much so that's alright. I have problems with the signal sometimes so really that's the only negative point I've got. Overall I'm happy with it (9/10). Chances are, I'll still be using this phone in another 7 years.