Would it be possible......

Post by **sonickel** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 3:43 am

..... to make a feature film on a Kodak M2 Instamatic camera at 18fps, record sound on a DVcam, get it telecined at a "home movie to DVD" kind of place, and edit on Windows Movie Maker,..... and have a watchable film at the end?

I've been reading all the techie stuff on here, salivating over expensive gear for the last 18 months. But I'm wondering if it's really worth it after all?

Thanks

Post by **Cranium** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 4:43 am

Possible? Yes.
Easy? Nope.
Worth it? That's entirely up to you.

What's your goal?

Post by **super8man** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 5:44 am

A feature on an M2? nope...but perhaps a teletubbies belly short would be more likely...even then the younger viewers may protest.

Post by **sonickel** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 6:17 am

To answer Cranium's question.....

I suppose what I want to do, is make a film from a good script (3 act structure, etc) but about unconventional characters, and disturbing, subversive themes. To shoot a drama using uni students and unemployed graduates as actors, using consumer level equipment, cheap telecine, for the best quality affordable, for less than $1000.

(Ok you can stop laughing now) :oops:

I'm just frustrated with reading about filmmaking, and I want to do it!

To ask a question of super8man, why would a Kodak M2, (or similar) give bad pictures?

Post by **ccortez** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 6:45 am

sonickel wrote:To answer Cranium's question.....

I suppose what I want to do, is make a film from a good script (3 act structure, etc) but about unconventional characters, and disturbing, subversive themes. To shoot a drama using uni students and unemployed graduates as actors, using consumer level equipment, cheap telecine, for the best quality affordable, for less than $1000.

Do all of the above, but with the goal being a 5 minute short rather than a feature. You can even shoot it with the M2 if you want.

Website · Post by **BigBeaner** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 7:47 am

Ya seriously keep it to 5-10 minutes, thats what i plan on doing. Although, Windows Movie Maker isn't a great editor even for free it wasn't very intuitive to me.

Post by **super8man** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 8:01 am

You would have to keep the subjects very large on the screen to avoid the obvious limitations of the rendered image the M2 would give.

No, even a Canon 514 off ebay for $20 would be a 10X better camera than the M2. Let's face it, there are 10's to 20's of different cameras you can choose from on a no-budget film. Think GAF505, 805M or ST1002 for example. They can be had for the cost of shipping plus perhaps 10 bucks.

No, the M2 could not maintain an even flow of motion for the length of time you would need for dialog shots.

Nope, can't be done. Use it for angles where you have to hide a camera - like inside a glove box shooting out into a car interiof for example. It would be your number 2 camera.

I think you get my point.

Cheers,
m

Post by **Patrick** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 9:52 am

Whatever you do, don't get your footage telecined at Keepsake Video, no matter how cheap they are!

Post by **filmbuff** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:04 pm

super8man wrote:You would have to keep the subjects very large on the screen to avoid the obvious limitations of the rendered image the M2 would give.

No, even a Canon 514 off ebay for $20 would be a 10X better camera than the M2.

I disagree. Those Kodak cameras can produce some excellent images. My parents shot all their films with a Kodak M28 and the KII/K40 ones look awesome.

The limitation with the M2 is that it only has one speed and one focal length.

Santo · Post by **Santo** » Sat Jan 15, 2005 5:46 pm

It would be an interesting experiment to test a bottom of the barrel fixed focal super 8 prime lens against a Japanese zoom lens at the same focal length. Say, the Kodak M2 against the Canon 1014xls. Telecine it to HD and post stills. Having just gotten some tests back and projecting them last night, I now know 100% that good primes represent a towering visual advantage compared to 1970's zooms in super 8. It's pretty damn amazing, actually! Kodachrome 40/plus-x shot on a Cinegon 10mm is simply sharper than anything else I've used (including Canon, Schneider, Angenieux, and Zeiss zooms). A cheap Kodak prime might be a lot closer than most think to a decent zoom from the same era?

It's a shame I don't have more disposable income, because this board would become one very lively place with all the sadistic "shoot outs" I'd do. :twisted: