A plug for two companies that support Portland's creative community

Portland is the home amazing companies that support the creative industry. They want us to be successful. It's good for the community that they serve, and they like to be associated with people who are able to gain traction with their work. It is also good for their business for us to be successful.

A couple standouts that I've had the pleasure of working with are 3DV, led by Kurt and Mark Macey, and Red Giant Software, managed locally by John Kerr.

3DV is a vendor of Autodesk products, which include 3DS Max, Softimage, and Maya...the heavyweights in the 3D animation and effects industry. Their post-sales support is phenomenal, and they'e great guys to work with.

Red Giant Software is the creator of the famous Magic Bullet image treatment program. Their software library is impressive, and their support is right here in Portland. They also want to see how artists are using their software, and they'll bring lunch!

Both of these companies support the industry financially and with knowledge. They both donate to local groups dedicated to growing our industry, such as Portland After Effects User Group, the Portland Cutters, and Portland 3D User Group. This support allows users to grow and learn in a market that isn't yet moving at the pace of Los Angeles, Vancouver, or New York. They help our local market grow to serve the national market.

I'm asking everyone who reads this blog to keep this in mind as they decide which tool to buy, or where to buy it. The global market allows us to buy software and hardware more cheaply if we go online. But the big superstores don't support our local talent base in any way other than by selling to it. Please support those who support you.

New project in the works

I have a long list of projects that I can't shoot because of the cost involved. So far, all of my scripts are either features, or they are longer shorts with a lot of physical and digital effects. I don't write small. So I have the challenge is writing something that I can shoot.

I’m intrigued by the idea of shooting an entire movie in a single space. It can either be really boring, or psychologically intense. It all depends on the skill of the storyteller.

I'm particularly interested in the work of Takashi Miike for his use of narrative and photographic style in emotional counterpoint to each other. My take is that you don't know what lurks in the emotional recesses of a character, despite how rosy or dismal their surroundings are, or the photographic style is.

My criteria were that the project had to be:
1) Easy to shoot and quick, preferably in a day or less.
2) Cheap
3) Can be shot at a moment's notice
4) Strong aesthetic value

So, to solve these problems, here's how I worked it out:

The short is expected to be four minutes long. This is just an arbitrary number that I came to. It could be longer, but I think that I’d lose the emotional intensity of the piece with a longer narrative.

It will take place in 3 rooms in a single location (my apartment), using available light, or, if needed, lit for action. No complicated action, and any real specificity would be handled in the edit, where I have all the time in the world. No sync sound or dialog. That's right. I'm shooting this silent on a DSLR, probably a Panasonic GH2 because of the crispness of the video image and its mobility, but possibly on a Canon 5D, simply because it has a better menu of lenses. There are also technical and creative reasons for these choices, which I'll discuss further as I start blogging about the projects. While I do have access to more purpose-built tools, such as the Sony EX3 and the Red One, the SLR form factor and optics simply suit this project better.

The more people are involved, the slower the project moves. Therefore, the on-set team will include myself, my director of photography/camera operator, and my onscreen talent. We are also shooting with the edit in mind, and the editor will be involved from the start. This choice solves several problems: two people are a lot easier to get to a location with a few day's notice than a crew of 20. Also, it significantly reduces expenses, and creates a much more intimate environment for collaboration between artists. It also allows us to be very nimble on the set.

The project will be storyboarded using the stills from our camera tests. We will record temp audio and fit it to the 4-minute run-time, then create an animatic from the stills. This allows us to be efficient on the set and make sure that we have the shots that we need. We also have the opportunity to discover what we can do with the shots visually, and if we need to explore other framings and focal lengths to accomplish some of our visual goals. This process also allows us to make sure that we are shooting each room in an order that makes sense from a daylight availability perspective.

The real challenge at this point is that my apartment doesn’t look inhabited by a woman. I’ve visited a few single friends to see what their spaces look like so that I can properly dress the space.

I'm excited to be working under these constraints! They will help me hone my processes and ability to communicate, while being over short enough duration that the project is still manageable.

Getting wrapped up in the toys

I'll be the first to admit that I'm a bit of a geek. I love technology, and the more it bleeds, the more excited I am.

However, in this day of bells and whistles one-upmanship between Canon, Panasonic, and Sony, the role of the artist is being lost in the dustcloud. Many of us struggle just to get that one project completed so that we can show it in our living rooms on our 32" 720p TVs. Being tempted and distracted by the latest and greatest chunks of technology does not help us as artists. Frequently, it's enough of a distraction that we are paralyzed into inaction. We hear through the blogosphere and through the myriad video forums that what we have just isn't good enough, and we believe it.

A while back, Stu Maschwitz, a guy who is a lot smarter than me where the technical side of film is concerned, and someone whom I respect tremendously, posted a mellow rant against Canon about their approach to the market. You can read his comments here (and I suggest that you follow his blog).

While I do agree that the 4k solution is ill-conceived, I disagree with what I perceive to be the spirit of his sentiment regarding the 7D and 5DmkII cameras. The gist is that Canon hasn't properly handled the job of combining the technologies required to pull a usable picture stream out of the camera. While I agree that they could have done a better job, I think that this blog post might panic and immobilize recent buyers of one of these cameras. "Oh, my God, what did I just buy?"

To be fair, the unmodified Panasonic GH1 has a problematic image processing stream as well, resulting in muddy shadows and moire effects.

This is just part of the deal with a hybrid camera like this. We want sensor size, high sensor resolution, and a pristine 1080p image. Someplace in there, something's gotta give. You see, in order to keep the shallow focal depth of a full-frame sensor, the manufacture needs to use the full sensor to capture the image. This image then needs to be downsampled to fit the HD format. Data must necessarily be tossed for that to work. It's just the nature of the beast.


Blah, blah, blah. My eyes glaze over. The cameras serve their purposes.

Could it have been handled better? Probably. But it's important to take a step back and realize that the image looks really good for a $2000 camera with so much operational flexibility. Is it up to Hollywood standards? Probably not, but the image quality is good enough that George Lucas is using Canon DSLRs on his new film... Point being, the image quality is good enough for us.

As is the image off my old Panasonic PV-DV953 miniDV camcorder. The picture is a tad small, but it can be gorgeous!

It is a tool that captures the image and sound that corresponds to all that stuff we wrote between Fade In: and Fade Out:

Don't get wrapped up in the tech. Use what you have, and tell your story.

Mutual goals, compromise, and when to stick to your vision

Last night I chatted over beers with a very enthusiastic special effects buddy. I asked him what it would take to do a car crash at highway speeds into a concrete barrier, edge-on. I said that I wanted a very simple crunch, with the rear being lifted up, swinging sideways a bit, and dropping to the ground. An understated yet visibly lethal crash.

This artist is a friend of mine, aims to please, and as I mentioned earlier, very enthusiastic. I said simple crash, crunch, a bit of aerial swing. What he wants is to do something like this, with a flip (sorry about the ad in the video):



The effect would be spectacular...flashy, noisy, lots of smoke, and a bit of flame. But, my vision is much simpler, because the nature of the scene demands that it not be flashy. It must almost look mundane, as if it is background action.

I should also mention that this will be an "out of pocket" effect. We will need to be very creative about how we stage it so that it doesn't become a multi-tens of thousands of dollars effect. So, he will likely need to sacrifice a bit to make it cost effective for me. Essentially, he will be doing me a big favor if we are going to get it done at all.

The challenge becomes how we both get something we want. He has been looking for a platform to perform a specific effect...a car hitting a sloped barrier and flipping sideways onto its roof, then sliding on the asphalt.

So, if he offered me the effect essentially for free, but done the way he wants to do it, would I take the offer?

No. I wouldn't.

All too often, the cohesive style and vision of a project is sacrificed because there are too many interested parties with their spoons in the batter. Our intimate scene with an understated, yet lethal car crash suddenly becomes an action scene, and in doing so, it loses its identity.

In business school, the end result would be called a "sofa-bed". It's effective as neither one nor the other; it's a bland hybrid.

So, my message is to be clear about your vision, and communicate the vision well. Do no turn this into a turf war or personality conflict. It's about the cohesiveness of the look and pacing of the film, which is the master that you and all of the other artists on your film are serving.

Another take-away is this: if someone agrees to do something specific for you at a reduced rate, karma requires that you do the same. In this situation, if he did the stunt that my vision calls for, and in a way that I can afford, my solution would be to write and direct something for him that uses the effect that he is dying to execute.

Me + Blogging = grrrr

So, I lead a filmmakers' group in Portland that meets every month. I typically have some pearl to bestow, just some nugget to crack the shell of their collective experience and help them grow for themselves a larger conceptual world in which to navigate and explore. My ideas are frequently geeky and are usually a bit off the wall, but that doesn't matter. I just want to stimulate those grey cells so that people realize that realizing their vision is not necessarily bound by the bits of flotsam and jetsam that we frequently view as being "video tools".

I've thought about teaching workshops, and there has been interest. This is cool.

However, how will I teach a workshop if I can't even handle the simple task of maintaining a blog?

Perhaps this is because I am a recursive thinker...I value the art of conversation and brainstorming...how to take a bit of braindust and bounce it around with others until an idea is formed, and if we're lucky, is workable. I thrive on interaction, and blogging feels like it is done in a vacuum.

What does the future hold? Well, I have seventeen stories in my writer's morgue, three of which are currently being written as features. Another one that I just cooked up will likely be a short, and I hope that the script is done by the end of next week. I'm already talking shop with some of my pals, cronies, and fellow artists. But, I'll discuss those in other posts...

Finding inspiration

The first time I dove into a "diving pool", which is considerably deeper than the average backyard pool, I had the simple goal of touching the bottom. Easier said than done. I'm asthmatic, so my lungs aren't as strong as they should be. Beyond about six feet, my lungs were prodding me to ascend, to return to the surface. This is the natural response of a land-based creature, but especially so for someone who isn't conditioned to be under that kind of pressure.

It feels, at least to me, that writing is a similar push. On the surface, it is easy to write. Granted, there is the challenge of creating all the elements of a satisfying story, but a writer can get there without a deep personal challenge. But, to create something emotionally challenging, the writer needs to do the same thing a diver needs to do:

Descend.

You need to push past your personal pain, the places that remind you of what has hurt you, the places that embarrass you, and find the truth within yourself before you can create anything that anyone else will care about. If you don't cry as the tragedy of your hero unfolds, then nobody else will care about your hero. You need to feel it first.

You need to find the points of resistance, the points that you tell yourself are too much, and stretch past them. If you are afraid of someone judging because you feel as you write, you are back at square one as far as being a writer is concerned. Emotional freedom is what makes us capable to write in the first place.

So, you write your script, and are very proud of it. And you should be...it is a precious few who actually finish a script. But, your next responsibility to yourself is to ask of those you trust "Did I reach you emotionally? Did you feel a connection to the story?" If the answer is no, you need to break through your own emotional barriers, look again at your story and characters, and find the emotional truth behind what motivates them.

On Humbleness

So, you have written a script, you have a camcorder, and you’re ready to go. You assemble a production team and a cadre of actors. Maybe you’ve done this on your own, or maybe you found one key person with contacts that really helped you to pull this together. Either way, remember that your team will carry you across the finish line, not the other way around.

Several years ago, I had the opportunity to produce a short film. This was my first time at the wheel, and, with the birth of my two kids, to date it has been my only project. In short, I dreamt the content of the story, wrote it over a weekend, got an AD on board, and she really ran with it.

The problem is, I didn’t trust her. Not for anything that she had done or indicated that she would do. On the contrary, she did a lot to get the project going and taught me a lot along the way. My problem was that I craved control of my baby, and this prevented me from trusting the people who managed the shoot for me.

True, my crew was composed of a bunch of humans who were doing everything they could go grow their careers in a small market. I think that’s reasonable. Hell, if they were serious about their work, they should have been motivated to do everything they could to learn and prove their value. But I saw it differently. I saw attempts to do more on the set as empire building. I undercut the people that I depended on.

This happens on a lot of shoots. There are a lot of sensitive people with their own needs and reasons for being on your set. I guess the message I’m trying to convey here is to pay attention to the needs of the individual who is working with you. If there is a conflict, or even the perception of a conflict, communicate. Talk it through, and don’t dance around it. You may find that you enhance your personal and working relationships by doing this. In the least, you will have a happier set.

The good news is that I made a bunch of good friends on that project. Bad news is that I burned my share of bridges. Good news is that I learned a lot about the process of film-making, likely more than I would have in film school. Bad news – I prevented others from doing the same. Live and learn.

Final thoughts: Film-making is a beautiful, personally meaningful, and highly energizing and dynamic means of self-expression, for everyone involved. Invite people to participate and contribute what they bring to the show. And leave your ego at the door.