So lets say you have a budget of $1400....

[Distortedrumble]

You have:
Canon HV30 w/uv filter
Rode video mic
rayonox 6600 w/uv filter
cheap tripod from walmart
2 batteries
bag
canon A1 lens hood

If you were shooting some short films, what else would you get?

My thoughts are: (prices from B&H)
another hv30 $599
uv filter $13.35
2 glidecam pro2000s $529 (both)
Beachtek DXA-4 audio adapter $179

or

ntg-2, ntg suspension holder, rode boom, couple of cables for $500 (americanmusical.com)
another hv30 $599
uv filter $13.35
beachtek DXA-4 $179
and another cheap tripod


Thoughts? Opinions? suggestions?

[mrgreed202]

a better mic with a boom.

[Distortedrumble]

better mic with boom? not the ntg2 and rode boom? not the mini boom, the full 10' boom

[mrgreed202]

Forget RODE, get something like Sennheiser or Audio-technica. and yes get, (or make, id prefer) a full 10' boom.

[Distortedrumble]

specific models?

[dcman]

I'd get editing software, a script, and food for my actors.

dcman

[d1rockwild]

if your tripod's head is crappy, i'd get a tripod with a smoother head (under $80)

2-3 fluoresent light units (5500k bulbs) with tripods ($250-400)

a juicedlink adapter, not beachtek ($189)

Rode NTG2

cheap boom pole (depending on what length you'd want. $100-150)

oh btw, if u get another tripod, u can use your old tripod to hold the mic.(duh)

don't be fooled that you think you can get a glidecam without anything else for it. you'd need the arm brace, AT LEAST. and ideally a vest. (single-armed, considering your budget). The bodypod is absolutely useless in terms of thinking you should hit "record" when its on it.

Also, two cheap, great investments, if you get a glidcam are a mini level
http://www.amazon.com/GREAT-NECK-101...362695&sr=1-77

and a bit more expensive, but makes adjusting a lot easier on your fingers, and makes u faster at balancing, is something like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/4-way-Macro-Shot...3%3A1|294%3A50

[Distortedrumble]

I'd get editing software, a script, and food for my actors.

dcman

lol thats why i said my budget was 1400 and not 2800 or 3k. editing softwar, script and and supplies are covered

[HueyNRolf]

Don't get a second camera. A lot of big productions are shot with one. I'd get an AT875R, juicedlink, the new Zoom H4n, and one good fluid-head tripod with a claw-ball mount.

[fishops]

If you don't own lights, own lights. If you don't own sound, own sound.

[Distortedrumble]

If you don't own lights, own lights. If you don't own sound, own sound.

covered. not worried about that.

[Distortedrumble]

Don't get a second camera. A lot of big productions are shot with one. I'd get an AT875R, juicedlink, the new Zoom H4n, and one good fluid-head tripod with a claw-ball mount.

really? interesting call. I'll research that

[Distortedrumble]

if your tripod's head is crappy, i'd get a tripod with a smoother head (under $80)

2-3 fluoresent light units (5500k bulbs) with tripods ($250-400)

a juicedlink adapter, not beachtek ($189)

Rode NTG2

cheap boom pole (depending on what length you'd want. $100-150)

oh btw, if u get another tripod, u can use your old tripod to hold the mic.(duh)

don't be fooled that you think you can get a glidecam without anything else for it. you'd need the arm brace, AT LEAST. and ideally a vest. (single-armed, considering your budget). The bodypod is absolutely useless in terms of thinking you should hit "record" when its on it.

Also, two cheap, great investments, if you get a glidcam are a mini level
http://www.amazon.com/GREAT-NECK-101...362695&sr=1-77

and a bit more expensive, but makes adjusting a lot easier on your fingers, and makes u faster at balancing, is something like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/4-way-Macro-Shot...3%3A1|294%3A50

got it, looking into it

[orchidsofwrath]

So I'm assuming your not paying actors or crew members? And don't have any costumes/props/set design materials to buy? If you have that to spend on gear alone, I can't believe a 35mm adapter hasn't crossed your mind. If its a narrative I think a shotgun mic and boom (doesn't really matter which one because what matters is how close you get it and how well you mix it in post) should be absolutely first on your list. Then second an adapter. Selective focus is crucial for narratives. A second camera is a nutty decision imo.

[jmorton]

You have:

Canon HV30 w/uv filter

(SNIP)

2 glidecam pro2000s $529 (both)

Thoughts? Opinions? suggestions?

Yeah. Let me give you $400 just because I'm a nice guy.

Watch the videos about 3/4 the way down the page on the left. The last one is really good.

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/steadycam/

Now go spend your $400 on something else you really need.

JM

[Erik Bien]

You have:
Canon HV30 w/uv filter
Rode video mic
rayonox 6600 w/uv filter
cheap tripod from walmart
2 batteries
bag
canon A1 lens hood

If you were shooting some short films, what else would you get?

Hands down, I'd splash out for the best tripod I could possibly afford (XFR is offering a b@da$$ Miller that looks practically new for an awesome price right now in Trade & Exchange) before going for a second camera (and I daresay most of the experienced 'narrative filmmaking' style shooters here would concur). Skateboard wheels, plywood and PVC pipe can yield dolly shots which are all but indistinguishable from high-end pro gear, but the only way to get professional-looking tilts and pans (which you'll probably need more than twice as often) is to suck it up and buy a nice fluid head!

I've worked on a few multi-cam narrative projects, and there are some very sound reasons to have two cameras: a "back-up body" on the truck can save a shoot when your "A" camera goes down, a small second-unit can go out to shoot pickups and inserts on the "B" cam if the production falls behind schedule, and of course multiple coverage of big stunts, crowd scenes, pyro FX and any other scenes which would be expensive, difficult or impossible restage.

However I gotta also say even when you have a skilled professional operator with years of experience for each camera, the savings in production time is minimal, the additional post time logging and cutting double footage for each take is massive, it makes the director's job much more difficult, and the final result is often compromised in terms of lighting, camera movement and placement, etc. compared to if you'd been able to place your lights, sound boom, et al for the maximum benefit of one camera.

Unless you really know what you're doing (for example, Ridley Scott nearly always shoots with two, three or even four cams rolling simultaneously these days; but then, he's Ridley Scott, and you're not ... ), IMHO adding a second camera is likely to make your process less efficient, not more.

[netzero19]

Buy Adobe Premiere.

[Dust'n the Callipygous]

Don't get a second camera. A lot of big productions are shot with one. I'd get an AT875R, juicedlink, the new Zoom H4n, and one good fluid-head tripod with a claw-ball mount.

I'd have to agree with this. Juicedlink makes a great xlr adapter with pre-amps, and the zoom h4 or h4n are better recording solutions than the hv30. the at875 is a pretty decent shotgun. the ntg2 isn't bad either. you could even look around for used shotguns. i've seen at4073a's and ntg3's for $400. for interiors, you may want to consider a hypercardioid as well, something like the oktava mk012. it's great for the money, but a little more difficult to handle.

bad audio will kill any production value you could achieve with all the lights, adapters, and overpriced tripods in the world. People will forgive mediocre camerawork. Can't say the same for mediocre sound.

[Distortedrumble]

So I'm assuming your not paying actors or crew members? And don't have any costumes/props/set design materials to buy? If you have that to spend on gear alone, I can't believe a 35mm adapter hasn't crossed your mind. If its a narrative I think a shotgun mic and boom (doesn't really matter which one because what matters is how close you get it and how well you mix it in post) should be absolutely first on your list. Then second an adapter. Selective focus is crucial for narratives. A second camera is a nutty decision imo.

ah, good call. yes, I've accounted for actors and crew. a 35mm was definitely thought of but my impatience is the killer. as for the incident that happened with the last guy making adapters whose name will not be mentioned, that kinda scared me away from buying some of them. Crucial narrative, yes I would say that i am setting the bar a little high on this. when I have everything in place, I'll lay the concept out there but it will follow the concept of a normal fight film. I am a sound engineer from the basics so I trust a soundman that has his own stuff more than a guy I pay to use my equipment. that has been accounted for.

Just to clear everything up. Sound, lighting, crafts, actors, crew, locations and food have been accounted for. all locations have bathrooms on site that are accesible by cast and crew. This budget is only for equipment. Thank you to all who respond. I have my own ideas but seeing as how I haven't become cocky, any ideas are applied to the theory

[Distortedrumble]

Yeah. Let me give you $400 just because I'm a nice guy.

Watch the videos about 3/4 the way down the page on the left. The last one is really good.

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/steadycam/

Now go spend your $400 on something else you really need.

JM

I keep putting that concept off. LOL I think neccesity will be the mother of invention in this case. anything i can get cheaper will be done. Im still in the day dreaming phase.

[Distortedrumble]

Hands down, I'd splash out for the best tripod I could possibly afford (XFR is offering a b@da$$ Miller that looks practically new for an awesome price right now in Trade & Exchange) before going for a second camera (and I daresay most of the experienced 'narrative filmmaking' style shooters here would concur). Skateboard wheels, plywood and PVC pipe can yield dolly shots which are all but indistinguishable from high-end pro gear, but the only way to get professional-looking tilts and pans (which you'll probably need more than twice as often) is to suck it up and buy a nice fluid head!

I've worked on a few multi-cam narrative projects, and there are some very sound reasons to have two cameras: a "back-up body" on the truck can save a shoot when your "A" camera goes down, a small second-unit can go out to shoot pickups and inserts on the "B" cam if the production falls behind schedule, and of course multiple coverage of big stunts, crowd scenes, pyro FX and any other scenes which would be expensive, difficult or impossible restage.

However I gotta also say even when you have a skilled professional operator with years of experience for each camera, the savings in production time is minimal, the additional post time logging and cutting double footage for each take is massive, it makes the director's job much more difficult, and the final result is often compromised in terms of lighting, camera movement and placement, etc. compared to if you'd been able to place your lights, sound boom, et al for the maximum benefit of one camera.

Unless you really know what you're doing (for example, Ridley Scott nearly always shoots with two, three or even four cams rolling simultaneously these days; but then, he's Ridley Scott, and you're not ... ), IMHO adding a second camera is likely to make your process less efficient, not more.

interesting point. yes the original plan was to buy the sound equipment, crane, ext. monitor and a battery, a Manfrotto tripod with a 501 head ($440 at B&H) and keep trucking. yes I noticed from interviews i did at work where we used multiple cameras, my work took longer. The thing is, i was doing it for work and not for my craft. by comparison, we would spend 3 hours on our hobbies that took us 45 minutes to do at work. from everyone's responses I should put it into equipment that is upgradeable rather than a second camera. second, just get the sound equipment rather that paying the sound guy and still having no equipment. Sometimes the orginal plan is the best plan. Thanks guys, keep it coming.

[Distortedrumble]

I'd have to agree with this. Juicedlink makes a great xlr adapter with pre-amps, and the zoom h4 or h4n are better recording solutions than the hv30. the at875 is a pretty decent shotgun. the ntg2 isn't bad either. you could even look around for used shotguns. i've seen at4073a's and ntg3's for $400. for interiors, you may want to consider a hypercardioid as well, something like the oktava mk012. it's great for the money, but a little more difficult to handle.

bad audio will kill any production value you could achieve with all the lights, adapters, and overpriced tripods in the world. People will forgive mediocre camerawork. Can't say the same for mediocre sound.

The Octava mk012 had an interesting stigma when i was doing music. It was kinda like banging a midget. Its fun til' you get caught doing it. However, in film production, I'm learning that its a whole new ball game. In sound engineering, I refused to own a rode mic. now, I use it every day for work. Change, gotta love it.

[Erik Bien]

just get the sound equipment rather that paying the sound guy and still having no equipment.

If you really have an experienced sound recordist with his or her own gear and who's willing to work on your project for what you can afford to pay, I actually think that's the better option. They might well have already thrown more than your entire equipment budget at a recorder, mixer, boompole, bag and an arsenal of mics, to say nothing of (hopefully) having some vague notion of how to use them!

[Distortedrumble]

lol he has and i work with him everyday

[Distortedrumble]

Yeah. Let me give you $400 just because I'm a nice guy.

Watch the videos about 3/4 the way down the page on the left. The last one is really good.

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/steadycam/

Now go spend your $400 on something else you really need.

JM

yeap just built that steadycam. cost about $20-$25 bucks if you already have a vise. just ran around my place with it right quick, it works! AND DONE!