How Hollywood shot an entire MOVIE on this $1,200 Camera?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 чер 2024
- GET FILMIC AND CINEMATIC LOOK + DISCOUNT WITH THE CODE "ERMIA10" : www.dehancer.com
Hollywood made an entire feature film with a $1,200 mirrorless camera and made $45,000,000 in Box Office, against a production budget of about $7.7 million! and the image LOOKS REALLY DAMN GOOD! But How they did it?
BEST PLACE TO GET MUSIC FOR ALL OF YOUR VIDEOS ( + 2 MONTH FREE ) : bit.ly/3XInBqE
EASY, FAST AND HIGH QUALITY MOTION GRAPHICS ( + 2 MONTH FREE ) : bit.ly/3j2r18L
00:00 - Intro
00:25 - The Film
00:44 - Magic of ANAMORPHIC
01:19 - Mirrorless vs Cinema Camera
01:44 - a Way to Best Quality
02:06 - CAMERA MOVMENT
02:33 - COLOR & 8 BIT FOOTAGE
03:13 - RISE OF A7S III & FX3
03:22 - BATMAN CINEMATOGRAPHER & FX3
04:04 - THE POINT
04:19 - 5 MAIN ELEMENTS
04:40 - DONT FORGOT TO LIKE!
YOU CAN LISTEN TO GREIG FRASER PODCAST HERE : • Greig Fraser on Dune, ...
shoutout to : @StudioBinder @dslrvideoshooter @cammackey
CONTACT ME:
eriduble7e@yahoo.com - Розваги
![3 Epic [Budget] LENSES for Cinematic Video | Sony A7IV / A7III / A7S III / FX3](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9SsN6qRy7L8/mqdefault.jpg)
It reminds me of how '28 Days Later' was shot on a Canon XL1, which was, at the time, a high end consumer MiniDV camcorder. Just goes to show you that gear is not a hindrance to producing something great.
exactly! While making this video, I saw a list of movies shot on DSLR cameras back then!
even on WHIPLASH (2014) & 127 Hours (2010) they used canon cameras
That camera enhanced the feel of the film heavily. Such a good choice to create a classic zombie film.
@@mjgfromdallas exactly... it was so perfect
@@ermiaramez976 can u please link the interview with that top director who’s going use the Fx3
@@Sweatmonkey513 ua-cam.com/video/K2UQjPZK_ZE/v-deo.html
Only proves that with a 40000$ lens set, a semi truck full of lighting, and another semi truck full of set dressing, you can shoot on a shoe and make it look good. Oh, and post production budget!
youre kinda right, but 7 milion is not a very huge budget for a feature film, i still think they did a very great job.
@@ermiaramez976 The big hurtle is gettig over that $500k mark. 7 million is a tonne. enough that they could afford to have a camera per lens
@@marrowfilms6187 yeah 7milion is not a super low budget at all. according to producer they had 4 or 5 camera bodies (a7sii) that cost less than 10K usd combined back then. but the budget of horror movies are relatively higher. for example:
IT : 80milion
The Nun : 23million
US : 20million
@@ermiaramez976 they shot whiplash with 3 million
7 million is a bunch of money
@@daviddn5631 they shot reservoir dogs with 1 million
A lot of aspiring filmmakers are obsessed with the wrong gear. Lighting and sound will make a far bigger difference to your film than the camera. And of course story, composition, pacing and editing
I remember taking pictures of a Cadillac from the late 1960's with my LG Fortune (it's a very cheap phone). The owner saw my photos then he asked what camera I've used, he was completely speechless when I showed him the phone. I had great natural lighting, composition that got me some great shots.
agree, big time
Not only obsessed with the gear but with making YT videos to show only the cons, instead of making something great.
Oh my yes, amen brother.
Say it louder for the folks in the back!!!
With or without anamorphic lenses, the crew makes more difference than the camera, and it would all be pointless without a good story. Hard to live by these principles even though I believe them
youre 100% right. even a phenomenal cinematography is nothing without a good story. The focus of this video was primarily on the look of the film
Wonderful comment. A happy, heartfelt crew is a miracle and a delight.
DSLR guide always with the truth!!!!!!!
The Camera you use doesn't matter much, all you need is Anamorphic Lenses and Good lighting.
thats exactly what i learned. also thanks for watching, man
@@ermiaramez976 I’m going back to shooting anamorphic, haven’t done it in 3 years. I’ve got a custom setup. Thanks for the video💯
That is not all you need...good sound, great location, great story and writing, good overall team, good cinematographer, good preproduction, good actors, and make up, etc etc......
@@Studio23creation Shooting like this is a gimmick in Al honesty. I mean 1 lens is 10x more expensive than the camera, which means they can afford to use a normal cinema camera. So who is this for?
@@OfentseMwaseFilms that is usually false, one expensive cinela lens is usually around 15-30kusd/lens. The new arri 35 is 80k usd. But your point is valid. All the tools around the camera (lens set as a whole, all the expensive accessories, sll the very expemsive lightning, all the crew, all the expenses for every aspect of production) make the price of renting the camera a very little percentage in all that. To that level of production. Price is not relevant. But size and weight is relevant. And that is what greg fraiser is saying abiut the a7s3/fx3. Very little camera But great quality. It can be freeing to work with it. And if you work faster, it can ne important for production budget, at the end.
We are SOOOOO spoilt by equipment today, and equipment becoming cheaper at high quality simply emphasises the fact, that it isn't about the gear that makes something great, it is about you and your collaboration
and im trying to remind myself these words everyday...
Yep.
But its not too long ago that "good" VIDEO (!!!) gear was affordable to be honest.
I just entered the videography "properly" recently, so about 6 months ago since i even considered 2000$+ as pretty expensive for a basic hobby without earning money with.
But since about a year its really affordable - in 2019 i had to choose between good but slow stills camera or a "hybride" camera which was not too good at photos and video as well but capable. Now in 2022/2023 not only good hybride cameras with AMAZING photo and video quality are affordable, but also some very nice "cinematic" lenses.
I dont talk about cinematic lenses now btw about Arri, Sirui etc, i just talk about "basic" camera lenses like Sigma 18-35 1.8, all the "better" kit lenses with 2.8 aperture, some fast 24, 35 etc fast primes, many of these are finally below 500$ or in some cases for 50-200$ constantly, at least 2nd hand. And at this point im also getting very interested since it doesnt blow a hole in my pocket and i can easily resell them without a loss if i dont like or use them.
It's not only the gear, but comon, check any 90's or even 80's blockbuster, or the Apocalypse now from the 70s, what a picture quality on film, which you cannot achieve with digital cameras, because everything just looks so digital, artificial without the little imperfections, let's not talk about the color accuracy, they just colorgrade everything until the point it has like 2 colors and that's all...
Isn't it amazing? I go on Flickr and see wonderful images made with a Canon 7D that I can buy for under $200 today at MPB - or a 5D II for the same price. The real difference is the glass. I've given up on almost anything but L lenses, because they are so much better at bringing out the humanity in faces.
Yet the quality of films are getting worse... lucky to get 2 or 3 brilliant films a year...and a classic maybe every 5 years. Jaws , Godfather, rocky , shawshank ... no one's cares what they were shot on...its just brilliant film making... films these days in general suck
This is not an A7sii with a kit lens.
As others had said, the cost of the body is irrelevant when you need to consider thousands on lenses, rigs, gimbals, lights, and all the human power needed to produce a movie.
The title obviously misleads like if an A7sii is all it takes to achieve that level of imagery.
Well not to be too semantic about it, but it is literally the only body you need to capture images like this.
Heard one of the benefits of cameras like the Sony FX-3 is that you buy it and keep it. No more renting. Lenses also are getting very affordable even for the newbie. It's crazy.
that insane I watch this film a few years ago and never notice
yeah, they did a great job!
Awesome and inspiring video with actual substantive information about how this can be achieved. Reminds me of the season finale of "House" being shot with the 5D Mark II back in the day.
wow, i didnt know that! i love that show! thanks for watching, bud
Notabbly with magic lantern not at stock!
@@TheRealHarrypm this magic lantern firmware is really sick
@@TheRealHarrypm Not sure why that's notable lol. First, I don't see where there is any proof that's the case. PetaPixal has the interview with "House" director about using the 5DMII on and there's no mention of the Magic Lantern firmware being used. But even if so, it didn't change what the sensor captured or the frame rate or anything that critical. The 5DMII was also used in some shots for the first "Avengers" movie. It was really WAY ahead of its time.
@@AllgoodthingsTv You're right that Magic Lantern doesn't change the physical sensor but if you think ML doesn't significantly improve the end result then I have to ask, "Do you even ML, bro?"
Watching this video now, realizing Fraser is talking about shooting "The Creator!" 😆
This video shows that if you can spend 100.000$ on lenses, 50.000$ on lighting, 10.000$ on rigging, 50.000$ on stabilisers and another 1.000.000 on crew, you don't have to spend another 50.000$ on camera. Nice! Encouraging!
I don't understand why if they had all that budget, why they didn't just use a pro camera instead? I'm wondering if Sony produced the feature and this is just promo for their consumer cameras.
Mate, I love your work! I’ve watched your other videos, including the ones shot on the A7IV and was blown away!
Mate, if you did a DaVinci Resolve rundown on how you develop your look(s), that would be legendary!
I love how perfect the timing of this video is for me :)
I got myself an a7s2 a couple days ago for 630€ and this video really motivates me to just use any possible moment to shoot with a camera to get a better understanding of photography and videography as well as of the camera itself.
I also have a question: would you say that an anamorfake lens could give a similar feeling to an anamorphic one? Sadly I can't afford myself a real deal because I'm just a casual student :D
i think sirui anamorphic lenses are pretty good at this point, you can rent one of them and test it yourself too
So nice Ermia! Thanks for putting this together. This video entices me even more to shoot quality films with my A7siii :)
glad you liked it, man.
go for it, a7s3 is my favorite camera of the last couple years
@Ermia Ramez had it for a month now and I'm loving the image quality, after a few years shooting with A6500 and A7iii, this is another level. I've started in 10-bit 4:2:2 and now I have found my sweet spot at 10-bit 4:2:0 which still gives high-quality footage with less heavy files :) What are your go-to settings?
@@ClaudioDesideriFilms Now that you mentioned that you only had it for a month, what made you decide on the 7S rather than the FX3? Bought my 7S in September and I kind of having a remorse because in October they announced the ability to use LUTs on the FX3
Agree 100% 😊
That’s why I’m enjoying shooting with my old Canon eos-m with Magic Lantern. It’s amazing the quality I can squeeze out of this $100 camera.
Just upload a short doc all shot with the EOSM + 15-45mm kit lens & the TTartisan 35mm f1.4. 😅
just watched it! its great, man
Great video straight to the point.
thanks for watching, man
First i love the video, and after that Ermia haves the voice that makes me calm and get more in to understand what he wants to show me by this video! thanks dude!
Thank you for your kind words, man. deeply grateful
Recording to an Atomos Shogun Flame in 4:2:2 was a key part of the workflow. I don’t know why you neglected to mention that because without the external recorder you lose 2 times as much color information. Also the film was basically a Sony Alpha demo reel to sell more cameras and make a mediocre horror movie seem more special with a gimmick.
This is very inspirational thanks for posting this!
glad you liked it, bro
had no idea. this is insane. what a great highlight you’ve done!
thanks for watching, man
As someone who works in the industry as a gaffer. The camera system plays such a small role in the look of the film or show. Sure it matters, not saying that. But truly lighting, lensing, movement, location, and set dec are such an immensely more impactful tool to achieve a cinematic look.
I will say the one time I did notice a difference with a body was using the Ursa Mini 12K on a film I shot last year in Greece. We shot most of it at 400 asa with darker skin talent. This was daunting for lighting knowing we needed a lot of dynamic range to achieve the look we were going for. Sadly this body did not help in achieving that.
At the end of the day these things are tools. Pick the one you have and if you have the opportunity to chose a body go for one that limits you the least.
Excited to see more projects on smaller more affordable bodies.
very intresting! i thought Ursa Mini 12k had the best dynamic range among all the Blackmagic cameras.
Hey fellow film guy! I work as a motion graphics artist. Thank you for saying what you said. People that don't really work in our industry don't get it and I think are disappointed when they go rent gear like this and can't understand why their video doesn't look like a hollywood blockbuster. It takes an entire army from the director to the P.A. on set to make things happen.
I found this video greatly informative, and most importantly very motivational.
Hell Yeah Ermia! Excellent video.
thanks for watching, bro
Wow, great video and great facts!🙌
thanks a lot, buddy
"Upstream Color" by Shane Carruth was shot 10 years ago on a Panasonic GH2.
damn, i should watch that
Great video! Really makes me want to stop looking at new gear all the time and start creating with what I have
im guilty of that too, tbh. we all should stop that lol
Fascinating video that really inspires to use what you have to create great films!
thats the whole point, thanks for watching
Got to watch that, for inspiration. Thank You!
glad you liked it, man
Sometimes all you need is to hear someone else say what you were already thinking. Thanks for sharing this clip.
thanks for watching, man
First time coming across your channel. Great video. Definitely subscribing and looking forward to more.
thanks a lot, man! glad you liked the channel
Thanks for sharing...love the tips
thanks for watching, man
Great video thank you
thanks for watching, man
Thanks Love the vid, bro! inspiring😇
glad you liked it, man
Love it, thank you!
glad you liked it, man!
My DOP instructor taught me it's better to overexpose than underexpose but 1.5 stop? That's a surprise to me. Great video Ermia!
your instructor is right, you cant do anything with an underexposed footage, in case of Sony cameras, i think 1.5 stop is the best choice
In "Atlanta" they under exposed about 2 stops and thats show looked nice
Great informative video!
glad you liked it, bud
Awesome and inspiring 👏
Just subbed. Very nice video Ermia!
thanks, bud!
love your content
Great info
thanks for watching!
Thank you for this inspiring video. Everyone can nowadays start filming and work their way up, the only limitation is their creativity.
PURE FACTS.
thanks for watching
One word. Sublime
thanks, man!
So inspiring and beautiful
thanks for watching!
Well said!
Wow, I did not know this. That's amazing.
yeah, its very impressive! thanks for watching
that soundtrack at the END...to our problems in life 🔥
Gr8 video bro!❤
thanks for watching, bro
Thanks for inspiring me man.
really glad, bro
How did they do it you ask? Well, with super expensive anamorphic lenses, trucks upon trucks of expensive hollywood lighting, video, and audio equipment and expensive professional actors. That's how.
Fun fact: the hawk lenses used don’t actually cover the full frame sensor. But in order to get an 2.39:1 image you have to get rid of a lot of the left and right part anyway (2x squeeze of the lenses would result in a 3.56:1 image) so it works but you are loosing a bit of resolution.
one of AC's said
"Attached to the body were Vantage's Hawk 65 anamorphic models, Those squeeze the normal 16:9 4K image down by 1.3 times to a widescreen size (2.40:1), allowing for a more cinematic look while still using most of the sensor"
@@ermiaramez976 ah alright. I thought the video showed the classic v-lites. These are meant for super35. Thank you for clearing me up 👍
Amazing job ...btw which camera you prefer between sony and the fujifilm one you reviewed in a more recent video?
Lovely inspiring vid.
glad you liked it, man
It’s funny how much emphasis people put on the camera. Lighting is the biggest factor.. You could make great images with pro lighting on a canon gl2. If you can’t make good images today then something is wrong..
cant be more agree with you... i think LIGHTING is first, CAMERA MOVMENT is second, COLOR is third.
Lighting and glass
Great video
thanks for watching!
Great advice!
thanks for watching!
This is a beautiful video. This guy edits.
thanks!
We need more vids like this.
I just shot a feature-film on a Sony A7iv using the DZO Catta-Zooms. Thats all we needed, along with strict attention to lighting 🙏
cant wait to see your film, bud!
leave us a link here if its available anywhere
Thank you. Inspiring. Need to watch The Possesion of Hannah Grace soon.
glad you liked it, man
Again an excellent video!
thanks, man!
@@ermiaramez976 your welcome!
@@emielkeultjes 🙏
Thats really wild.
it is
At 1200$ we could get the bmpcc4k wich provide 12 bit raw internaly. Or 10 bit 4:2:2. Or you can go thurther with the 6k for super35 sensor. Anyway making movie is still expensive, believe me, it's not just the gear, we'll have always to pay the crew. Every day expenses during shooting, dresses and production design.
true, this movie cost 7 million dollar. and about bmpc6k, its one hell of a camera for 2500$
@@ermiaramez976I am about to go for fx30 for music videos, UA-cam contents and also want to try film making. Along with that I have checked sigma 18-55 2.8 and sirui 24mm 1.33 anamorphic lens for the fx30. I have planned for tiffen 55 BPM14 filter for sigma as well. Hopefully it’ll be a good start.
its really hard to believe some one ever could do this !!!
mad love to you
Wow, that was a great video. Thanks for reminding us that modern mirrorless cameras are capable of creating Hollywood visuals.
Just one thing, I think you should let us know that some of the footage you used is from fellow UA-camrs.(Studio Binder, DSLR Video Shooter etc.)
youre right, big shoutout to them. im gonna add all of them to the description.
All i can say is , mega inspiring video . cheers .
glad to hear that, pal!
@@ermiaramez976 Cheers for reply .all the best to you .
@@minorrhoads5318 same, bro
The idea behind their film project was maybe a channel like ER you would make a video about the A7S II, so they could gain some audience 2 years after the film release.
Kind of new strategy.
Sheer delicious ideas and imagery. I, for one, welcome our new digital masters, if only because at age 81 I can no longer bend, carry, run, hold, or see anything as well as when I started in still photography in 1967 at age 25. I notice that my brain hasn't aged a day and that i can still rejoice in this scrumptious visual splendor. I rushed to subscribe with alacrity.
thank you so much
Plenty of movies are shoot on cheap cameras and phones since mid 2000. Even before that there was people shooting on home equipment. We reached point with 4k capable cameras/smartphones and cheap powerful home computers/software where anyone can shoot and edit beautiful movies. I hope that more talented people take advantage of those soon so we get to see some fresh stuff.
It's not about the camera, it's about the CMOS. Lenses don't really matter, it's all about the lighting.
I love the aspect ratio of this video
my all time favorite
That was interesting!
agree!
Grieg Fraser used re-housed soviet lenses on Batman. Skip the re-housing and de-click a Helios or Mir, use a follow focus. I should mention that the A7s iii and FX3 are $3,000.
The rig, the lighting, the audio, the operators and assistants and the God know what else would probably cost 100 times or more than this naked camera. When it comes to the proper setup for any production of good cinematic quality, the camera body alone is normally ranked pretty low in the total financial scheme of things. Even if one gets to shoot with the IMAX 70mm film camera.
A lense can make so much difference,especially an anamorphic.Even a smartphone camera with anamorphic lens can result in much good looking shots.Tangerine was shot on iphone 5 with anamorphic adapter attached to it.Really its the lens that draws the line.But yes ,no denying the camera compatibility .Hope to see something more amusing in future of fimmaking.
yes, anamorphic look is something else. and i think i should watch Tangerine asap
im in the process of shooting with an s1h with a ninja v and pictures are amazing. biggest problem is to become the footage steady wich can be done with a thanos 2 for example. after that its for sure lighting but before all of that its the story and the talent and many many hours. i think the quality of a movie shows in the love of each aspect it is getting like audio, cinematography and just allover the work that gets put in it in each regard. if someone starts small he has to do a lot alone to get the quality he looks for. once you reach bigger heights its the big crews that work together on the quality. i dont let the big task decourage me everything is possible.
I remember reading about this and I was impressed. Now I need to watch the movie.
honestly its another exorcism kind of of movie, and storywise, although it isn't super good, it is worth watching for the cinematography
@@ermiaramez976 my entire reason for watching it lol
@@JaymesMedia 🙏 go for it, bro
@@ermiaramez976 just finished, it wasn’t to bad at all. The cinematography was done very well
I need that FX3, dream cam fs
its very great
Really inspiring video! Thanks for sharing your process 🔥
thanks for watching, man!
Love the vid, bro! inspiring af
thanks, bro!
I'm curious to see the anamorphic lenses on a newer Sony mirrorless camera with the bionz XR processor just to see how it turns out in comparison. Great vid.
exactly! i think i would be great on A1 & Fx3
its all about the story and the technique
facts
Set design, story, lighting, and so many more go into making a compelling and beautiful story, the camera body becomes far less important
facts
Thank You!
I am newbie. I recently purchased a7IV. What does overexposed 1.5 stop mean?
It simply means shoot a bit brighter than what you actually want the image exposure to be
love my a7s ii
still a great camera
That was great.
thanks for watching
Thanks for this info. I still have the a7s II. How did you do the effect on all the text in this video?
no problem, man.
its a template from MotionArrey, you can find the link in the description
I like how this video was uploaded in 2:39:1 too
im gonna stick to 2:39:1 ratio for a loooong time
Hi there..i have a question..so i have been shooting photography and video by myself with my Sony a6100 but im looking to expand into a full company. To shoot a music video what camera and equipment should rent out and who should i add to the team besides myself ive always created alone..someone please help 😅
1. Story
2. Crew
3. Lighting
4. Lenses
5. Camera
cant be more agree
Film guy here that actually works in the industry. Making a movie look like a movie ISN"T all about the lenses. It's about an army of people coming together. You have so many factors including lighting, wardrobe, make up, post, props you name it. The idea that it's about a piece of glass just gives people the idea that they can go do the same without a team and produce something high quality. It's not true and if we've seen anything from youtube from people attempting this by renting some lenses it's that it fails everytime. It takes a crew of skilled individuals.
great
That's not a hospital that's Boston City Hall. LOL at 2:12
every place in Boston looks good
I still have this camera, but I also got a S5 which I prefer
This doesn't cover how they finalize the image color grade. Did they print the digital to film the way they do in a lot of cases? I've seen some really good a7 stuff but it still has that UA-cam video look to it.
I know the batman and dune are shot digital and printed to film.
Does the audience care though ? Probably not. The UA-cam video look is irrelevant when the movie made close to 50 million. There are 50 million + dollar movies that look like film that bombed badly. It goes to show that a good story with good post production/acting etc. is more important
@@Rsp42 this movie didn't have a good story. but I was saying th cinematography looked good. better than youtueber cinematography. like there were extra steps or unaffordable ones that separate this movie from youtube. The Audience may or may not care. They know when a movie feels cheap. I've watched plenty of Amazon uploaded low budget features and friends or girlfriends say "change this shit" without even getting in to what the story is.
I get what you mean by that youtube look cause "The Batman" has that mirrorless camera look too, one may think it doesn't until you put it next to literally every Batman before it, especially "Batman" to "Batman and Robin" those movies look like it was shot with an expensive cinema camera.
Prosumer cameras really are challenging bigger and more defacto standard Hollywood cameras like RED and ARRI. Its insane
thats what Greig Fraser said exactly in the podcast
Just another sign to follow, "know your tech with software", not just tech.
FACTS!
I've got a question. If you overexpose an 8 bit 4:2:0 footage wouldn't you'll likely get highlight clipping, in particular in the sky?
for the intro of the video, i overexposed my shots 1.2stop in SLOG2 ( i used a7s ii for those video ) , and it turned out good imo
What is the name of the music used at the end of the movie credits?
most of us can't get an image like that with 2 million dollar cameras. Because most of us are videographers, not a cinematographer.
facts
Incredible video, Respect for the camera assistant having to navigate Sonys menu-maze 😅 Give that thing or the FX3 an Alexa style menu and it’s a great camera. I think the UI / usability is what really holds cameras like these back. The sensor itself isn’t bad at all.
cant be more agree with you on that. sony's menu is one of the biggest downside of it
The new Sony FX3 menu are so much better now, quite Cine menu-like. you get all the settings on 2 pages, which are laid out really well.
@@soocmedia That’s cool to hear! Maybe I should give that camera a second try now 💪
@@soocmedia oh right they updated the firmware of fx3 recently.
@@ermiaramez976 Yea, well they released 2.0 around 6/7 months ago which really pushed the camera forward into the Cine realm and set it apart from the A7Siii.