Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
First feature film: BMCC or the GH3?
  • azza_actazza_act

    Hey guys, well I'm close to making a decision on weather to upgrade from the GH3 to the BMCC. It's going to cost me around $6500 to do so... I love the look of the blackmagic but I'm just a little nervous that it might be over kill for our first feature film. And that money could go into lights and/ set design. Our film will likely have a $20,000 budget. I've been making short films for 4 years now and we are just about to finish the 2nd draft of the feature film script, and move into preproduction shortly after. We are planning to start filming in 4 months. After 4 years of shooting with the GHx cameras , I have all of the equipment and lenses to suit the panasonic eco-system. So we have all the kit right now to shoot the film on the GH3 if we wanted to. I use all of this equipment for work too: weddings, real estate videos and showreels. So I can't just sell it all in order to get the blackmagic. I'll have to have both systems. Plus, if I was going to getting the bmcc, it would be the EF version so as to have IS. There will be a lot of handheld shooting and quick setups at different locations. So I guess my question is: is the bmcc worth the extra cost for a first time feature film or should I put those resources somewhere else and use the GH3? Cheers Aaron

  • 65 Replies sorted by
  • vicharrisvicharris

    Not sure you're still searching but I just got my pocket cam in and I think this might be a real STRONG contender here as well. Just amazing for the price. I threw up a still from the first thing I shot with it on the pocket cam thread. Took about 20 sec to get to that grade. Gorgeous.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @Lambo @shian

    Just check topic title. Red One is not among cameras author asked about, and it is really harly an option.

  • shianshian

    I've never had a problem with it. Others have, but unless you're shooting in the desert at plus 95 degrees, it's not really an issue. I've shot all day and all night with it, and never had it overheat or get so hot it was uncomfortable.

  • LamboLambo

    @shian RED ONE MX very nice pictures ;-)....but....the sucking " Hot Body " problem is very ugly !!! :-(

  • kazuokazuo

    @imaginate

    Congrats dude, you did a fine job. To me, this is as good if not better than BMPCC footage, some of which I have seen turned out to be rather washed out, and blunt looking. I have both the GH2 and BMCC 2.5k. It's true the BMCC 2.5k yields better DR, but so much depends on who is using it as well.

  • dgfdgf

    Besides all that...if you can afford the BMCC (now it´s really cheap), and deal (edit, storage, hard Drives...) with Uncompressed RAW footage. I would take it. Like the image of that camera.

    But... GH2 with good lenses and Driftwood hacks still capable of amazing things.

    Just my very personal opinion.

    Once I shooted with the old HVX200, with 35mm adaptor and a amazing set of Cooke lenses. Image was beautiful,,, But I should put a lot of more money in props and costumes. Image was nice, but the look inside the movie was cheap.

    Public doesn´t understand or care that much about image. If the movie es good, or entertaining, doesn´t matter that much.

    I saw 6 months ago a Korean short film shooted with 2 Iphones 4s... was great stuff. Really good.

    If you want to see a spanish movie called REC, you will see how good can be a movie shooted with 3 Pana HVX200 (all interiors!!), really low budget and the most succesful ever in Spain. Even USA buyed to do the remake. A bad crap called Quarantine, much worse (and expensive) movie. The director is Jaume Balagueró, leaves near my house, and he explain me that he need to save all the movie to get the best he could for production, and the image he wanted was as dirty as possible and needed fast shooting so he got what he had. But he is an awesome storyteller.

  • dgfdgf

    @Imaginate That looks really nice. And nice answer too.

    I agree with you, it's good to try to get the best tools... but not compromising other areas. Specially Sound and taking care of the crew. Specially if they work for free. Make up also very important.

    Think about all the budget, be realistic! and expect some non-planned situations. Safe some money for that too.

  • SuperSetSuperSet

    Imaginate - dude, I think that looks great!

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    @Imaginate Congrats on making it happen! Clip looks good, you're DP definitely did a good job in avoiding the harsh feel often present on outdoor shots (for both video and film). Both actors in this clip have an interesting screen presence. Once you've released to the film, please be sure to share where we can watch. Rock on!

  • ImaginateImaginate

    I'm 98% complete for principle photography on a micro budget feature film shot almost all exterior in the wilderness. We shot with Two hacked GH2's running Moon T5 and T7. I fought so hard right up the last days before we began shooting to work out some kind of deal for a RED or BMCC camera package because I knew that daylight exteriors can be challenging for any camera but I wanted to give my DP a tool that had as much dynamic range as possible. In the end I didn't get the camera I wanted but I wasn't about to wait another year for more finance to come through or for the stars to line up perfectly. The DP had to work a lot harder to make the shots work for the GH2, and he had a good attitude about it and never had the attitude like " I cant do my job unless I have a Red"

    When cast crew and locations start to line up you have to pull the trigger with or without the perfect tools. This is not only camera wise but soundwise , crew, food, transportation.

    In your case I'd fight for the camera upgrade if you can get it, but like others have said... it could end up being a very small difference in how the film ultimately turns out. Fight for the best tools you can get your hands on but at a certain point just be thankful for what you do have both gearwise and peoplewise and focus on maximizing and getting the very best out of those.

  • jrdjrd

    All the rules and expectations people bring to filmmaking -- "great" script, etc. -- tend to fall apart when there's not much money. Look at low and no-budget successes, and you'll see scripts well-suited to minimal resources -- slacker films, mumblecore, low tech horror, etc. -- but not great writing. A great script, in the literary sense, with intricate plot and "character development" is useless, you'd never be able to realize it on a garage budget.

    What succeeds at this level has always been something of a mystery. Production value can be completely irrelevant -- Paranormal Activity, Blair Witch, Once, etc. -- or it could be absolutely essential for the film to work (say, "The Unbelievable Truth", for a a very dated example, or "Upstream Color", for a current one).

    To Shian's point, audiences may be indifferent or blind to the difference between GH3 and BMCC (or to 35mm or Red Dragon, for that matter), but most people end up spending years making/marketing one feature, and at least some people go into the medium for the visual aesthetics. If looking at the footage all those months is going to make you sick, it might make more sense to invest a little more in the camera -- consider the expense of your time, if nothing else -- whether or not it's going to make any difference to the fortunes of the movie.

  • lolololo

    100% agree with what Vitaliy said, a better camera doesnt make a better movie, and if the budget is limited i think is wiser to invest the money on what can improve the storytelling of the movie

    @shian is not about being perfectionist, is about what is best for the movie with the resources at hand

  • kazuokazuo

    There was a time when we had little money and all we could tweak and fuss over was the script. The story was the only thing that we had control over, cos ideas didn't cost money. Back then we would beg, borrow or steal any camera just to turn the story into reality. And when it was made, we would be so proud, even though so many things in the film were far from perfect.

    In an ideal world, we would love to have the best story, best camera, best crew, and cast, everything the best, but reality bites. Sometimes, throwing away some of the technological pretensions, and going back to one cheap camera, three lights and a great script helps us unlearn all the fucking bullshit that the industry has tried to force feed us.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @shian

    I am sure audience mostly see acting, lighting, camera work, props and costumes, not camera model used. And this is things were most of the budget goes in practice. The smaller it is, the most important is to ditch idea to invest in cameras.

  • shianshian

    A lot of these things won't bother you until down the road, and then you begin to second guess yourself. I've been there, you get to the point where you can't even watch certain films you shot cuz you're so angry you could kick yourself.

    BUT it's just my opinion. If you're not a perfectionist like me. Shoot with whatever's on hand.

  • azza_actazza_act

    @DrDave yeah, I'll still be keeping my GH3 handy.

  • DrDaveDrDave

    I would go with at least one camcorder that has focus lock, tracking, IS and so on as a B cam.

    As V says stick with something you know. The main thing is lighting, doesn't matter what cam you use if the lighting is not right.

  • flabloflablo

    The GH3 image sometimes seems strange also to me. The only way I could describe it is that it reminds me of those old b/w photographs that were hand-coloured. http://all-that-is-interesting.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/old-images-recolored-lincoln.jpg

    This effect becomes more prominent when using Panasonic lenses

  • lolololo

    @shian I hardly think that what you are saying bothers a normal spectator, as it is even hard for you to define what bothers you

  • RRRRRRRR

    Depends on the script / your needs really.. Though it´s good to use a tool you know inside out, having the additional latitude / response e.t.c. can make it possible to light / subtract light more sparingly. But it all depends on the level of control you can assert a.s.o. (your time schedule as well)

    Don´t go into making a feature without extensive testing, with your overall game-plan in mind. Try out all potential options, if possible.

  • shianshian

    @SuperSet - head over the ColorGHear Thread for answer - http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/comment/142042#Comment_142042

  • tnguyenleadtnguyenlead

    @shian Must agree with you on this. I have worked with Sony fs700 excessively recently and I do dislike their color science. Though some post work can help it a lot, I just love Panasonic color much more. Unfortunately, I haven't found a perfect personal camera for me. For the image and color, I love GH1 the most but it has many technical issues. Gh2 with hack is a beast but can't compare to GH1 in terms of image cleanness and texture reproduction at low iso. Actually I haven't seen any camera with better texture reproduction than GH1. I'm currently waiting for the GH5 as my next camera.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Tips to improve the plasticine/bluish look using ColorGhear? :)

    Do not even start it here.

  • SuperSetSuperSet

    Tips to improve the plasticine/bluish look using ColorGhear? :)

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @shian

    I think it won't be hard to organize you to get GH3 for test from one of members. And I do not mean just visual comparison. I mean planned, scientific color tests with measurements.

Add a Comment