Tools for the "REAL" Filmmaker

     When 1080p resolution was starting to became the standard, people really made a big deal out of it.  Now I don't know all the technical details, but having a high definition camera was what separated amateurs from "real" filmmakers.  Now granted it was really just for bragging rights on Youtube at the time and people loved slapping that little "HD" icon on their videos.  That was 2006 and I would have killed to have a camcorder that was reasonably price that could do 24 frames per second much less high definition. Fast forward seven years later and HD is starting to become a thing of the past.  That's not saying that it will go away overnight, but with all this new 4K, 5K, 101010101010K(doesn't exist...yet) people love having the best picture possible.

     I own two camcorders now, a Sony VG20 and CX900, and they are both 1080p.  With doing videos mainly for youtube there really isn't a reason for 4K for someone like me and the billion other people on the website.  Now if I were making a movie that actually had a budget that would be a different story.  The "RED" cameras are starting to become a staple in the film industry and now if you want to be a real filmmaker you need a RED camera.  When these camera first hit the scene they were beyond what a typical American could afford.  Does someone who does video for a hobby really need a $70,000 camera to haul around and watch like a newborn child to make sure that it is protected and cared for?  Or does a $700 camera work just as fine for your needs that you can get from Best Buy gently used?  That is the $69,300 question.

     RED cameras have been around for a while now and are an established company.  Hollywood blockbusters have gone to the digital format for awhile now because of cost saving versus film stock cameras.  Hollywood can record Chris Pratt running by himself in the morning and then start to work on the frame work for the velociraptor in the at night as opposed to filming in the morning and waiting weeks for the film stock to be processed digitally.

     Now $6000 isn't exactly a steal when you think about what niche would really need a 6K camera to make their materpiece on.  I have sat through a number of short films at the local festivals in St. Louis with varying formats from standard definition to I could probably count blackheads on faces clarity.  To me it doesn't matter really matter about the resolution so much as having a coherent story and at these festivals 90 minutes of shorts films back to back starts to make the idea of a sudden heart attack not such a bad thing.  Usually I can fill my time by thinking about what load of laundry I did that morning or reflect back to a time an old fling got topless for the first time in my old Grand Marquis.  Life is full of little moments like that. 

     Having a $70,000 or even $6000 camera doesn't mean that your production will hit all the high notes and bring acclaim from the masses.  But what do I know, I'm not a "real" filmmaker.  

Link to article