January 2023 - From the archives
Welcome to 2023! It’s a new year, I’ve got new updates, and yet another new email template. I hope you’re enjoying the variety!
This time, I have our first promo piece to share with you (skip to the end if you’re impatient to see it)! But I think this piece needs an introduction, so I’ll start there.
There are plenty of camera nerds and filmmakers out there who have asked me what we shot NEXT TIME on. It’s a question I’ve asked a lot of film friends, too. Shooting a low-budget movie requires a lot from one’s camera choice. It has to be low-maintenance, lightweight and flexible enough to shoot quickly; ideally, it will be pocket-size and not draw too much attention to us in those (unpermitted) exterior locations; it needs to be cheap to rent (that’s a given); and it has to look good. This last requirement is a bit subjective, and depends a lot on the lenses it’s paired with, its dynamic range, and - ironically - how easy the camera makes it to change the look in color grading. But most importantly, it has to deliver a “cinematic look.”
What did I find when I asked my low-budget-indie director friends about this? Usually, they ended up using a medium-range, lightweight DSLR camera like a Blackmagic Pocket, Canon 9D, or Lumix to shoot their film. Mostly, it was just whatever their DP owned. Paired with nice lenses and thoughtful lighting, they could make their cameras look really nice. So I asked my DP, Stephanie Hardt, what she thought about it. She told me her version of that “whatever’s available” camera was Sony’s FX3, but she didn’t own one, and anyway, she thought we could do better.
She called a contact at Sony, and we waited. He was on summer vacation, so I kept on looking at other options. Two weeks later, he was still on vacation. Steph kept calling, but summer seemed to last forever. I looked into renting a much nicer camera, but it would have eaten our entire budget for breakfast. I asked around to see what friends could offer us, but Stephanie didn’t know the camera my friend was volunteering very well, and wasn’t comfortable with it. Six weeks of summer had passed, reminding me that Europeans take their summer holidays very seriously, and we still didn’t have a camera, or anything more than an answering machine at Sony. Maybe we should shoot the movie on my phone, I thought.
Finally, Stephanie called me one day, three weeks before our shoot. Her contact (after a remote summer holiday in Greece) was offering her Sony’s VENICE 1, free of charge, shipped to us for the length of the shoot. Great! I had never heard of the Venice, but it seemed to fulfil the most important requirement of an indie camera - that being, it was free!
Then, I looked it up. It was a camera that didn't seem to need a lot of free publicity. Recent films shot on VENICE include Top Gun: Maverick and Downton Abbey. As a director, I was elated! We were going to be shooting at a different level, moving up to a new standard - cinematic, indeed. My slow-and-steady approach, using simple building blocks and doing what I know, well, was out the window - it was time for more! As the producer, I was worried… This camera arrived in 6 different boxes. It was massive and heavy. It might require half the crew to assemble. And who knows what kind of fancy post-production requirements it wanted from us?! Steph hadn’t used it either, which was also unnerving.
Was it the worst possible choice for a movie of such minor scale?
But, of course, Steph had a plan. The camera breaks apart into its own “mini” camera in front, with the rest of it worn as a Ghostbusters backpack (pictured below). Our brilliant camera assistants, Kriti and Toni, were both obsessive Sony nerds. And for our dynamic bike-shooting days, we went back to our good old matching friend, the FX3.
Meanwhile, Steph’s magic continued. SIGMA agreed to give us a full set of prime lenses, also for free, for the duration of the shoot. Although more known for high-end photography, Sigma’s cinema lenses are optimized for high-resolution shooting without that too-sharp see-every-pore look that I hate. They provided just the right balance of softness and sharpness, which is what, in the end, really gives “that cinematic look” to a project. And they didn’t take up nearly as much space as the Venice, either!
So what did I learn about the right camera choice for a project? Well… things don’t always go as planned in filmmaking - especially on a really small scale. But when one is open to new and challenging surprises, one realizes that every single one can transform a film! Part of directing is to take in new information, resources, and ideas, and make sure they work for the project to help create something that is maybe more than what you even initially dreamed. Because there will also be moments when circumstances conspire to make it less than what you hoped. And you have to learn to take what’s traded - the more - and give up the less - what’s on the cutting room floor, or in the remains of the scrapped schedule at the end of the day.
So, after all that, here it is: Sony interviewed Steph about her experience with the smashing VENICE, Sigma, and her work as a cinematographer. You can see it and learn more about her by clicking on the image below!
Until Next Time…
Emily + the Next Time Team
Want to receive blog/newsletter updates like this directly to your inbox, every time they’re fresh?
Just hit the button below to…