Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Disappear: short film on hacked GH1
  • arnarfjodurarnarfjodur

    Here is a short film I was cinematographer on some months ago. Any feedback welcome.

  • 34 Replies sorted by
  • tinyrobottinyrobot

    Nice cinematography controlling the depth of field. Can you tell about the camera and choice of lenses?

  • endotoxicendotoxic

    WOW, this is really nice work. Yes, the controll of depth of field is very well executed. Im amazed how GH1 has the more cinematic look of the GH series. That sensor is so grate at low iso, it gives you a texture GH2 or GH3 cant achive. I think its the lack of detail and sensor size that gives that overall look.

    Can you please tell us about the patch used in this shots, and more about the lighting used, type of ligh, watts, etc.

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    @anarfjodur Nice film. Where was this shot? Thanks for posting

  • Manu4VendettaManu4Vendetta

    Good job. Look like from an Arri. I love this look and not digital look. What about lenses and post? I speculate that some old optics in the digital lenses I think only with Zeiss or Leica would be possible.

  • arnarfjodurarnarfjodur

    Thanks all!

    @matt_gh2 Shot in Reykjavik, Iceland.

    @endotoxic Probably most used lenses was Voiglander 25mm F0.95 - after that Canon FD 50mm 1.2. Used the 14-140 some places where I needed a wide angle. Sorry, it was actually shot some time ago and hacked even longer ago, just used some generic hack, think "C" or something like that.

    I have a kit of Arri Tungsten lights with a soft box. From 150 to 1000 watts. Also a lot of natural lights and a reflector. Quite simple as I did not have any gaffer to work with me, although some crew helped me set up lights and stuff. If possible, I played around with curtains, found objects and practicals to manipulate the light, and chose locations and shooting times with that in mind. I did much more of containing light than increasing light. The blue screen for the cinema scene was simply moved around in a sports hall with big windows until I got an even lighting from the sunlight.

    I was actually ALSO the producer of this short, which I thoroughly don't recommend.

    @Manu4Vendetta I did not do the post myself, although I participated in the process as well as the director. The muted look, softness and graininess probably has a lot to do with the post.

    There are some beind the scenes picks here, perhaps they give some idea: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.213580765344126.47685.160040357364834&type=3

  • producerproducer

    @arnarfjodur:

    This is the best of the best ever I've watched shot with GH1, GH2, GH3, etc.!!!

    You don't even need any hack, you simply proved that the battles for patches with higher bitrates are not the truth for creating a valuable production! If I didn't know, I'd swear that this film was shot with Canon or Sony high-budget cinema cam but no Panasonic GH1.

    And, of course, the post processing is the right one! No artificial gradings, vignettes, thin sharp colors and shapes with digital characteristics.

  • arnarfjodurarnarfjodur

    @producer wow, thank you. Of course, a lot of the credit for the look goes to Jonni, the colour grader. And the director and everyone else.

  • endotoxicendotoxic

    @arnarfjodur thank you for the information.

    im amazed by the 14-140. I really didnt thought you have used a zoom, less that one. Taking post production away, the way the light and the lens was set up really impressed me, seeing the facebook page, all was simple and clear. Well done, you have good eye.

    I had a Gh1 but got robbed last year. I think it has the best looking sensor of the three.

    congratulations.

  • arnarfjodurarnarfjodur

    @endotoxic Don't remember how much I used the 14-140 - but definitely in the cinema lobby scenes, as in on: 04:50. Needed the wide angle to create the awkwardly flat an symmetric look. In that case you don't need shallow depth of field, cause the frame is anyway quite 2D.

  • EYESOULEYESOUL

    @arnarfjodur great looking images wow! @endotoxic I was thinking the same thing about the GH1.I was going through my harddrive and came across some of my old GH1 footage and was taken back on how great the images looked at low iso's.I have yet to get this feel or texture out of my GH2.It's really something I can't explain but the images it produce seem less digital with the same lenses I presently use with my GH2.I know there was a lot of talent behind this finished product but you have to admit these images look 20 times better than the gh3 bloom video and I'm sure the budget was a lot smaller also.I really wish they had just improved upon this sensor and called it a day.@arnarfjodur great work!

  • endotoxicendotoxic

    @EYESOUL i completely agree with you. GH1 produces amazing images at low iso. GH1 prossesing was also a little bit different from GH2. I think that is why on GH2 there are patches with less detailed matrixes.

    Im buying 2 GH2 on monday, and was considering to get a GH1 also. The right framing on it, gives very pleasent imagery.

  • bumsklumpenbumsklumpen

    outstanding!

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Will be sticked for a day. At least we need to show people that their camera can do more than shoot their cat.

    Get GH1 for $300 used, get metabones reducer and set of old lenses, and learn.

  • HallvallaHallvalla

    congrats, looks great

  • fehafeha

    @arnarfjodur amazing work!

  • tinyrobottinyrobot

    @arnarfjodur The GH1 does pull out a great image, but I suspect this is more to do with the talent of the grader. Would it be possible to ask your grader what he/she thought of the GH1 image compared to other cameras such as the GH2/GH3 if they have had experience.

    And a little insight into the grading would be great.

  • arnarfjodurarnarfjodur

    @tinyrobot pretty sure he has not worked with GH2 or GH3 - but I'll forward this thread to him in case he wants to chip in.

  • suzressuzres

    Simply a very beautiful film, so well photographed. Thank you for sharing

  • AriaAria

    @arnarfjodur, As a GH1 user myself, I must say that films like yours inspire me to keep learning how to shoot. There's so much more to the process than having the latest and greatest cameras. I find that developing my eyes is often the most important part of the process. Learning how to get the most out of the GH1 is a constant process and of course just some good old basic principles of how to use light and shadow and working within the limits of the GH1 are huge. GREAT WORK!

  • DanPVDanPV

    I hope this isn't a stupid question but I noticed that the scenes at the cemetery gate are somewhat monochromatic except for the actresses large red purse. The bright color adds a nice little bit of color and draws your eye to her. Was the color of the purse chosen for that reason or am I just reading too much into it?

  • rockroadpixrockroadpix

    Nicely done!

  • ragnarragnar

    What I liked: Good actors. Nice editing. Framing of shots. The movie theatre scene was especially nice. Kept me wanting more.

    Not so good: That loud audio hiss took me out of the picture a bit.

    Harold House

  • kronstadtkronstadt

    @EYESOUL Totally agree with you. This is what I've been saying all along http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/451/hacked-gh1-vs.-hacked-gh2/p4 and

    This has been my approach all along: if you already have a GH13, instead of spending time and money on the latest camera and lenses, get a good lighting and audio kit, find passionate and reliable people and go out and shoot a movie that is actually a movie, rather than a cinematography demo reel.

    @arnarfjodur Congratulations on a great piece of work! Thoroughly enjoyed it! And very inspiring to just grab my GH13 and shoot a mood/plot based short. This reminded me of Michelangelo Antonioni actually. How much did the whole production cost and how many days were you shooting?

    I'm wondering what was your shooting setting -- "Nostalgic", "Smooth" or something else and what were the contrast, saturation etc settings ? any settings at -2?

    I'm also wondering about your audio setup--what microphones,mixers, recorders? (I have to admit, though, I didn't like the audio too much. A bit to "cold", but maybe it was a deliberate artistic choice, like in British Social-Realism films.)

    Wishing you good luck in your future productions!!! You demonstrate that you have a lot of directorial resource. Are you doing to take this film to festivals? Best of luck and thank you for inspiring us!

  • RRRRRRRR

    @arnafjodur

    Very nice little film! Reminds me a bit of Kaurismäki in that the driving force of the actors is so clearly present. Well executed cinematography also.

  • arnarfjodurarnarfjodur

    @DanPV A very good question. Iris, the costume designer, suggested having the mother wear a colourless coat with a very stark red bag. We liked this approach so we tried to shoot accordingly, and work with this even more in the colour correction. You'll notice there are some red flowers, candles, cross, etc that are the only thing that get to be saturated.

    @kronstadt Think I had it in smooth and all settings down -2

    Shooting days were four, but rather short if I recall. Everyone volunteered or got a symbolic payment. Of course, we provided food. I used my own equipment but rented some filters and some dolly tracks that didn't end up being used much. The cash budget was maybe around 800USD - but mind you that this never is an accurate representation of the "real cost".

    Couldn't tell you about the audio equipment - wasn't involved with that.

    Thanks for you compliments. Mind you I did not direct it - I was cinematographer/producer/co-writer.

Add a Comment