/vid/ sticky june 2017

/vid/ sticky – June 2017 edition

This sticky is a guide(!) on what you need and what you need to know in order to start making videos of a presentable quality.
90% of stupid questions you have can be answered by going out and filming and seeing for yourself. It's easier to buy lots of expensive gear and convince yourself that you're not properly prepared to make anything yet. But all the gear in the world can't replace actual experience. So the number one piece of advice is to start filming shit. And if you can't afford a fancy camera, use your phone (yes I'm serious).

If you're at the point where you're trying to decide if a Canon c200 is worth the pricetag, you shouldn't be reading this sticky. Or you're nowhere near ready to be considering spending that much money on a camera yet. Your choice.

Cheap beginner cameras:
http://learnaboutfilm.com/making-a-film/equipment-for-low-budget-filmmaking/filmmakingcamera/

The best DSLRs available at the moment:
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/best-dslr-top-cameras-by-price-and-brand-944543
The canon 5diii is an oldie but a goldie, now with the ability to record internal 4k raw using magic lantern.
The sony a7sii records internal 4k and has insane low-light capabilites.
The pansonic GH5 is probably the best DSLR available for filmmaking today (factoring in price). It has internal 4k up to 60fps, internal body stabilisation, an mft mount which can adapt almost any lens, and internal noise reduction. But it's a panasonic.

In general, we tend to advocate DSLRs and mirrorless cameras due to their large sensor sizes (super 35mm is the standard for cinema cameras, many DSLRs' sensors are this size and larger), interchangeable lenses and relatively cheap prices.
DSLRs have frequently been used on the set of several feature films, often as B-cameras, including the Avengers (canon 5dmkiii) and Black Swan (canon 7d). On top of that, Shane Carruth's highly-praised feature-film 'Upstream Color' was shot on a Panasonic GH2.

What gear do I need?:
http://learnaboutfilm.com/making-a-film/equipment-for-low-budget-filmmaking/
Start with a tripod and a microphone.
After that, there’s all kinds of fun things to invest in, from external sound-recorders(the pre-amp in most cameras is kind of shit) to glidecams and gimbals for stabilisation. And don’t forget lenses, they aren’t cheap. You won’t know what you need until you start filming shit and from seeing what you can’t do that you want to do. (Also, I seriously recommend ND filters for your lenses if you plan on shooting outdoors during the day. They’re relatively cheap.)
In general, better sound quality goes a very long way.

What editing software should I use?
This is up to you, based on what you can find/afford.
Industry standard is Avid  Media Pro, but it’s on its way out.
Adobe Premiere Pro is extremely powerful and relatively easy to use. But a license is very pricey. Arguably 'worth' it for its cross-compatibility with the entire adobe family (such as after effects and adobe audition).
Final Cut Pro is the preferred program for MAC users and renders videos stupidly fast.
Sony Vegas gets good results.
DaVinci Resolve 14 is free (as of last time I checked) and is also the best colour-correcting program available. It also has a powerful sound editor, Fairlight Audio, built in. And it's a pretty decent NLE. Did I mention it was free?

What is colour-correction/colour-grading?
http://www.redsharknews.com/post/item/3294-beginner-s-intro-to-colour-correction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzQmpHAln6g

When you shoot footage, it often won’t look how you want it to for a number of reasons. If you’re shooting on a bad consumer camera without paying attention to the picture profile, you’ll want to correct things like contrast and saturation.
If you’re shooting on a flat picture profile (which is advised to maximise the amount of available dynamic range), or shooting RAW (unlikely unless you’re a professional cinematographer or bought a Blackmagic pocket cinema camera) then colour-correction is needed to properly align the colours with what you saw when you were shooting. Colour-grading, on the other hand, is there to make the picture pop in a way that you specifically want.
One way to look at it might be to see correction as a science whereas grading is an art.

Anything else I need to know?
Loads. But that’s why film-school exists and why cinematographers/directors/grips aren’t born overnight.
Standard is to shoot at 24 frames-per-second in the US and 25 fps in the UK. For both, you want your shutter speed to be 1/50 of a second. This is roughly a 180 degree shutter-angle, which is easier to use when talking about it (and some high end cameras only let you change the shutter speed in this way rather than give exact shutter speeds). It's easier because it lets you stay consistent when you're changing frame-rates. There’s an equation for figuring out what the shutter angle, it’s pretty simple though. Google it.
Using ridiculously shallow depth-of-field for every shot is the calling card of an amateur filmmaker using a DSLR.
Be careful of moire when shooting on canon cameras. Be careful of the rolling shutter effect when shooting on sony cameras.

Pretty much every camera can get better results if you use an external recorder. That's why there's a difference between what a camera can do internally and externally. Most good DSLRs/mirrorless' can record uncompressed 4:4:4 footage with an external recorder. As far as I'm aware, none can do that internally (ignoring hacks because magiclantern is great).

This sticky also hasn't really touched on lighting, that could be an entire new sticky by itself. Experiment. If you find yourself unable to properly expose your subject, it's often easier (and cheaper) and will look better to light the scene correctly than to buy a camera/lens that can perform better in low-light situations.
https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/5-diy-lighting-tips-for-filmmakers-on-a-budget/
http://learnaboutfilm.com/making-a-film/equipment-for-low-budget-filmmaking/lighting-low-budget-filmmaking/
http://nofilmschool.com/2016/01/how-make-film-look-cinematic-when-your-lighting-setup-less-ideal

Here’s some final helpful vids/articles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njeCxUspmHk
http://nofilmschool.com/2015/03/15-common-mistakes-amateur-filmmakers-make-fix
http://nofilmschool.com/2016/12/8-things-new-filmmakers-should-learn-making-their-first-film
http://nofilmschool.com/2012/05/dslr-beginners-guide-exposure-diffraction
http://nofilmschool.com/2011/05/what-is-a-look-up-table-lut-anyway
http://www.redsharknews.com/post/item/2966-the-beginners-guide-to-luts
(LUTs are for colour-correction, normally used on RAW footage. They save time.)

Can we talk about RAW video quickly?
http://www.instructables.com/id/A-Complete-Beginners-Guide-to-Raw-Files-And-Raw-Pr/
Yes, we can.
RAW can be recorded in many different ways depending on which camera is used. Some pro cameras record RAW internally (all REDs and the Alexa65 for example), some don't. The original Alexa doesn't record RAW for example, only ProRes 4444.
On top of that, exactly what RAW is varies from camera to camera. In essence, like with photography, RAW records all the infomation that the sensor receives.
RED cameras, for example, record in REDCode RAW which uses their own compression algorithm to slightly (or not so slightly depending on the setting) compress RAW into a proper video. You can record from 3:1 compression (which is, for all intents and purposes, lossless) to 18:1. And you can record sound at the same time of course.
Conversely if you record RAW from a hacked Canon 5dmkiii, you'll find yourself with a series of still images and no sound.

A lot of people wonder if RAW allows you to get away with massively over/underexposed shots that can just be fixed in post. You should think about it differently with RAW. RAW just records the entire capability of the sensor at once, but you can still underexpose and fuck it up. If you bring gain into it in post it will still get noisy, you only have more leeway. Really what RAW is best for is color, because since there is little to no compression, gradients are smoother and you really capture as many colors as the sensor can handle. One of the issues with the 'digital' look of DSLR's is that because of low MB/s compression a lot of color information is thrown away. RAW bitrates are extremely high (hence the huge file sizes) and so it has huge information retention.

RAW is not something that the amateur short-filmmaker needs to be particularly concerned with. Having said that, the low budget filmmaker's best options for RAW are the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera and the Canon 5dmkiii (with the magic lantern hack). Anything else will be extremely pricey. If you're determined to shoot RAW, do considerable research in advance.
[In general, if you need this sticky to know what you're doing, RAW is almost definitely not a concern for you]

Frequently Asked Questions
Q. I only have x amount of money, what camera should I buy?
A. Buy a used canon t3i/600d. If you can't afford that, use your phone.

Q. I have no budget, what camera should I buy for this professional job I'm doing?
A. A Red Helium 8k

Q. Okay, what's the best camera that is affordable?
A. Define "affordable". The more you're willing to spend, the better a camera you can get. The blackmagic pocket cinema camera is a sub $1000 video-camera that provides RAW 1080p footage without requiring a firmware hack. That's probably your best bet. But it's not for beginners who have never used a video camera before. That's your only warning. I'd do some research before dropping that much money on a product but then I don't have cash to burn.
The Panasonic GH5 has just dropped with some very nice specs (internal 4k video at 10-bit 4:2:2). The Sony A7sii is the short-filmmaker-with-money's go-to camera due to its internal 4k video on full-frame sensor with insanely high ISO capability. That's all I'm saying about the camera.

Q. Do I really need a larger sensor? My mate uses a camcorder and he says it's good and I trust him
A. Then why are you coming here? Get him to buy all your shit if he's so smart. Larger sensors let more light in and tend to provide better image quality. You can record great video with a camcorder. You can get better quality with a larger sensor. Your choice.

Q. My friend says 4k is more important than good audio. Is he right?
A. See above. Decide what you think is more important

Q. Is 4k a meme?
A. No, it's a resolution. It has a much larger file-size and requires more powerful processing. Clients like it cause it sounds nice on paper. It gives you more breathing-room in post. But consider that most theatrical masters are only just becoming 4k standard. For the last decade, most digital films were mastered in 2k. Whatever you make isn't going to be a Hollywood blockbuster being shown in a movie theater.

Q. Should I buy a Sony?
A. Maybe. Which sony and what do you need it for? Research.

Q. What's the best lens?
A. No such thing. Buy the lens that does what you need it to. Faster apertures alone don't necessarily mean that it's a better lens.

Q. What's the difference between a T-stop and an f-stop
A. An f-stop is an approximation. A T-stop is an actual measurement taken.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYRJVRMlIe8

Q. I hate the sticky
A. That's not a question

Q. Make it better!
A. Neither is that. But if you want to make it better, be helpful and make suggestions please

Q. I'm triggered by your attempts at jokes in these FAQs
A. That's also not a question. These aren't jokes, these are sarcastic answers based on the stupid questions that get asked every thread. If you ask a stupid question, you get a stupid answer

Q. Well I probably make more money than you/have more experience than you!
A. Great, then write a new sticky