Reddit reviews The DV Rebel's Guide: An All-Digital Approach to Making Killer Action Movies on the Cheap

Get this book and read it.

It is a great base and starting point that incorporates the actual filmmaking side of visual effects as well as the software.

Well like I said you can either get a variable ND and eyeball it (more or less) or get a set of filters and your calculations will be a bit more precise. Someone below suggested to get a full mattebox/4x5 filter kit and I can't recommend that, necessarily. I have one and I only use the mattebox to hold my Digicon, which they don't make in 72mm unfortunately. There are a lot of REALLY good screw-on ND filters out there like the ones from B+W. As a cinematographer you don't want to find yourself using photgraphic TECHNIQUES necessarily, as they are slightly different, but the technology that's been there and tried and tested for years is plenty usable (we already do so with lenses). So yeah, stick to a screw-on ND filter, just make sure it's optically clear. A reputable manufacturer (like I said, B+W or Tiffen/Schneider for instance) will be fine. But the guy's right, a bad ND filter will make your image look shitty. Also, be wary of IR polution in your image; the more you use non-IR ND, the more likely your image will pollute with IR light. Many higher-end cameras have an IR-cut feature/filter of some kind, but many many cameras in general do not. So be careful.

In regards to your coloring, don't worry about what people "say" is cinematic. Think of it this way: there are two sides to the filmmaking spectrum-- cinema and documentary. On the left, we have ultimate control: every light, every action, every sound, every object is there intentionally. On the right, we have no control: we are there and hope to capture everything in a way that will edit together and give the APPEARANCE of some semblance of control. Most people shoot in that mindset without fully learning the "left" side of the spectrum.

There is no "go-to." There is no right answer. There are wrong answers, but there's no right one. Does that make sense? If you like that look, then that's your look (as David Fincher once said: "Film is Fashion.") But it's also everyone elses look. I would challenge you to go back and re-color your reel just fucking around with the sliders in Lumetri (hell even the built-in LUTs if you really want) and just play. See what comes out and see what makes you sit up straight. Find your "look." Find what language you want to use with the audience (that's where knowledge of the history of the artform comes important as the audience speaks the cinematic language unconsciously but for some reason has very strong conscious opinions about it).

The teal/orange look was popularized by Stu Maschwitz back in the early days of DV (look up his book The DV Rebel's Guide, he now is a part of Red Giant's team and developed the "Prolost" presets), but really that color contrast should from light temperature and gels used on set. This picture I took on Kodak 5219 (Cinestill 800T) of a sushi restaurant, for instance: you'll notice the lights are green. They're not green in person, or on digital, but they're fluorescent so they're green on film. Digital doesn't render color temperatures as distinctly, so we use gels. Your color GRADE, on the other hand, should take us the rest of the way there. Think of it this way: back in the film days all you could really adjust after filming was tint/temperature/secondary exposure. Secondary color correction as a whole is an artifact of the digital era (I said that exact sentence a few days ago somewhere on here haha). When I go to color an image, I'm more just trying to give it more "pop," but not necessarily in the saturation sense. If you've got a LOG image, technically you could just boost the contrast to 100+ and raise the saturation and that'd give you basically the image your camera "made for you" and then from there you can color and adjust as needed (or use Magic Bullet or whatever.) To avoid raising the blacks, just don't do it! There's no need. Have your black point be around 2-8 IRE on your vectorscope. Again there's no "right" answer, but if you want to avoid being cliche, have your blacks be black, not gray. Maybe in 5 years that'll look retro and people will come back to it, we already see it happening with the VHS look.

As a fellow filmmaker I suggest you check out This, This and to a lesser extent, This. The first has a lot of good tips about shooting with airsoft (example, their film Losses).

>Is after effects a software worth investing in if I want to get into filmmaking?

Depends. After Effects is like Photoshop in motion, meaning that it's a layer-based application that lets you manipulate layers to your liking, but it does this all within a timeline. I use it frequently and would be lost without it when it comes to adding in muzzle flashes, blood, etc. It took me a while to pick up After Effects simply because, as someone that had no experience with it, I found its interface to be a bit challenging. I wouldn't look at it as a non-linear editing software, but more as a complimentary video finetuning software. If I may make a book suggestion, I would absolutely recommend The DV Rebel's Guide even if you're not into action filmmaking. It's got a pretty awesome crash course to AE that sets a solid foundation in the software. To answer your initial question though, it's not worth the investment initially, but you'll find that as you challenge yourself as a filmmaker you're going to want to have more control over the final product, and After Effects offers you this control in post.

>What are the minimum specs required on a camera in order to get decent looking video quality?

Again, depends. Most of my films are shot with a Canon T2i (you can get it for like ~$400 used) w/ a set of Canon / Rokinon lenses. Most cameras nowadays offer high video quality at an affordable rate. Hell, 28 Days Later was shot with a Canon XL1 (that camera doesn't even shoot in HD!) Getting a top dollar camera doesn't make you cinematic. Check out this film that was shot with a RED and see for yourself that equipment can only take you so far. There's obviously a threshold you want to pass, but for the most part it comes down to lighting and art direction to really give you that "film" look (of course, this is all in my own opinion). If you wanted my own personal opinion on what would be the minimum, I prefer a camera that allows for interchangeable lenses, shoots 24p, and has a resolution that's at least 1080i. DSLR cameras offer these specs, but have their own set of caveats.

1. That depends, film school is only really worth it for the connections you'll make. For me, it was worth it. I'm from a very dead film less part of the world and University helped me meet people I can go out and make films with now. But if you're living somewhere were you can already pick up a camera and go, then no.
   
   
   
   
2. Yes, read, research and pick up a camera.
   
   I'm not going to post any sites related to the art of making films, rather the act. So how to use a camera correctly etc.
   
   [Phillip bloom] (http://philipbloom.net/)
   
   
   [Stu Machwitz] (http://prolost.com/)
   
   
   [Vincent Laforet] (http://www.laforetvisuals.com/)
   
   
   [Nofilmschool] (http://nofilmschool.com/)
   
   There's many, many more. but you can start with these and see where they send you.
   Remember this is about how to use a camera correctly, not how to make a great film.
   
   Books:
   
   [DV REBEL] (http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-DV-Rebels-Guide-All-digital/dp/0321413644/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1335343450&sr=8-1)
   
   
   [Rebel without a crew] (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rebel-without-Crew-Robert-Rodriguez/dp/0452271878/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335343468&sr=1-1)
   
   
   
   
3. The best resources for an aspiring film maker is a camera. I will give you an example
   
   I started by learning about DP and cameras. Like I said, I don't know lots of people who will pick up a camera and film for me. So I depend on me. I bought myself a camera, lenses, filters, shoulder mount. Downloaded editing software, watch lots of videos and just went from there.
   
   I was the best camera man anyone could ask for (in university), and now. When I make my own films that's worked out really well because I'll pick up the camera and make a film. I just need to find a couple of actors on the internet and ask a few friends to come out for the day.
   
   Goodluck
   

The DV Rebel's Guide is the book JinxPutMaxInSpace is referring to, and it's essential reading for all budding film makers. You shouldn't be allowed to even press the record button on a camera until you've at least read this book.

The book does indeed have some great suggestions for dollies (9 pages, in fact!) ranging from wheel chairs to carts and skateboards. You're only limited by your ingenuity when it comes to film making, this is true of no budget indies to high end features. It all comes down to problem solving at the end of the day.

As far as books go you really need to check out Stu Maschwtiz's The DV Rebel's Guide. It's proably one of the best books on filmmaking I have ever read.

Stu's book.

School really only helps to get name recognition and/or networking. I started making cheap ass home movies with friends for years too. You don't need good equipment, you just need any equipment. As long as you have a story, you can make a film :) I highly recommend you check out Chase Jarvis and his project "The Best Camera" - he says "the best camera is the one you have with you." And also Stu Maschwitz's book and blog "The DV Rebels Guide." Awesome inspirational stuff for all levels.

http://www.amazon.com/The-DV-Rebels-Guide-All-Digital/dp/0321413644

The Rebel's Guide to Filmmaking is a pretty good introduction to cheap filmmaking - although more geared towards hollywood-like filmmaking.

Good tips on how to do things on the cheap though.

Mind you: if you're just getting into filmmaking you're looking at at least 3-6 years of short film/music video production, before you can even consider going into business. There is also the hassle of applying for money from different grants. This alone is just as important as your talent...And you'll probably spend lot's more than what you are going to earn. You also have to keep at it all day, every day - which means you can't have a normal job on the side... You can teach yourself anything, but a film making school might be a better alternative in terms of learning stuff fast and with the least amount of hassle: mentors, crew and equipment all available for free.

As far as the next big art movement I'm not sure what you really mean. But great leaps in art history is usually produced by accident by a small group of talented people working together. Where the next big thing in film will come from (and when) is anybody's guess: New York, Brussels, Paris, London, Tokyo, Sidney or Seoul...

Make sure this is really what you want though! Are you a good storyteller? Verbally? In my opinion most directors started out with the desire just to get the status that comes with calling themself a director. There are, however, some exceptions!

Good luck though!