Tweet movie camera and film editing

where is the best place to find a film camera that can do wide screen film (like the last few minutes of napoleon).
i have my own ice hockey team and i would like to do a film and have the last period of the game be like napoleon (i own the vhs copy). i have a friend who had a film company (its was longthrow media LLC). look up the movie, he game comes home. its about the return of baseball to dc. its a very good film (has old films from the old baseball teams in dc). i made my own film (using pinnacle film editing systems). if i have to save a lot of money i can do it.
thanks

[Mike Gebert]

Do you know how Napoleon was done? It wasn't a widescreen camera. It was three cameras side by side, and three projectors side by side.

Frankly, if you want a wide image, just put a wide angle lens on an HD camcorder that can take a lens, which is already 16:9 proportions, and you'll capture a pretty wide image. Then if you want a wide, Cinerama-like shape, frame it so everything happens in the middle vertically, and then mask it off if your editing program allows it.

This can be done very simply by genlocking three video cameras side-by-side, and split-screening them in editing in a 16:9 frame.

[Christopher Jacobs]

If it is actually a film camera, as you said, and not a video camera, you can get a similar effect much more easily than synching up three cameras (and then requiring three interlocked players and three monitors or projectors to view them).

All you need to do is to shoot the first part of the film on regular 16mm (or 35mm) film in the 1.33:1 ratio, and shoot the last portion with a 2-to-1 anamorphic lens, giving you a picture twice as wide (2.66:1 for 16mm and 2.35:1 for 35mm after the soundtrack is allowed for).

Hollywood films still use this aspect-ratio shifting technique on occasion, with films such as GALAXY QUEST, ENCHANTED, and others. If you're only shooting in video, you could still use a 2:1 anamorphic lens for the last part, which would turn a 16x9 image (1.78:1) into a 3.55:1 super wide-screen image. You'd need to add the lens to your video projector at the right moment, or switch over to a second projector that has the proper anamorphic lens mounted. But the easiest way is like Mike said, to compose it in the camera for the different shaped screens and make all the changes artificially by adding masks in the editing process. That way you can also animate the side masking moving out to reveal more picture, instead of having a sudden jump from narrow to wide.

what camera and widescreen lens would be the best for a film then (might have do some editing so i can get a napoleon type screen, 2 different photos taken during the game on both sides of the screen and the game in the middle). i have a friend that i think could help me with this.

If you're going to shoot separate takes for the triptych, why not just shoot three separate shots and put them together in editing?

[Christopher Jacobs]

Yes, if you plan to shoot it on video, you might as well just use the widest angle, near-fisheye type lens you can get for your widescreen segment and be sure to compose it knowing you'll be blocking off the top and bottom in the editing. Then while you're editing the video you can superimpose whatever other shots you want on the two sides of the picture, reversing one to a mirror-image like in NAPOLEON if desired.

To make it match with the rest, I'd shoot the first part of the game in 4x3 but edit everything in a final 16x9 frame, so the sides will be windowboxed or at least pillarboxed until your widescreen portion fills the width (and suddenly becomes letterboxed at the same time to get the 3x width you seem to want). If you can stand all the black borders on your TV screen, you may actually want to reduce the 4x3 section height so it will match the height of the widescreen portion and look heavily windowboxed until the widescreen part, which will merely look letterboxed. If you or your audience don't like all the wasted black space, use the full 4x3 height pillarboxed in the 16x9 frame for the first part and merely expand to 16x9 for the last part without any letterboxing. You'll just have narrower split screens for your triptych. Split screens and masking of the image are quite easy to do in computer editing software like Final Cut or Premiere and probably others as well.

does anyone know how much filming like napoleon (1927 since there was a few before and after name napoleon) would cost using the type of filming gance did at the end of the film cost. will save my money to do it (since i am not married or anything).

[Christopher Jacobs]

Professional 35mm film in the 1920s was pennies per foot to shoot, develop, and print. In 2011 it's over a dollar per foot, depending on the film stock and kind of lab work you'll need done, and if you'll be editing a workprint of the film itself or having a digital transfer done, followed by a 4k or 2k hi-def digital intermediate and print-out back to film. Film runs at a foot-and-a-half per second. You can figure out the cost by how much you plan to shoot (which will usually be three to ten times the amount used in the final film after it's edited.

so use a vhs type camera (the film would be entered in a local film contest).

[Christopher Jacobs]

so use a vhs type camera (the film would be entered in a local film contest).

Can anybody still play VHS? How do you plan to edit it? (Sounds like it's a video contest rather than a film contest. I thought you were talking about film since you asked about Able Gance's filming.)

i was talking about how to do the film with todays camera's.

[Christopher Jacobs]

i was talking about how to do the film with todays camera's.

Well, I don't think VHS-type cameras have been made for close to ten years. Every year there is a new type of video camera with new formats that will be obsolete in another year or two. You can still buy brand new film cameras, however, that shoot the same format of film that was manufactured 115 years ago and is still manufactured today with much improved picture quality. You keep talking about shooting a 3-panel film like Abel Gance did, which was shot on 35mm film with three cameras, and you have already been told various ways of doing something similar with either film or video equipment. What is it you really want to know? You'll have to read the instruction manual with whatever camera(s) you wind up using, if you want to learn how to use them. We can't tell you how to use something you don't seem to have and aren't even sure whether it's even film or video. If you didn't understand any of the various replies different people gave to your questions, you'll most certainly need to read quite a few filmmmaking and video production handbooks and basic terminology references before you attempt to do anything further, and might even want to look around for any local video production workshops offered in your area. As far as cost goes, it will depend entirely on what system(s) you decide to shoot with and edit with and how much footage you plan to shoot.

i meant with todays film camera's (not vhs camera's since i believe they have gone the way of the dodo) and camera's that people can buy at best buy. also what film editing system would get the best napoleon effect with 20 frames a second. if need be for the camera, a widescreen camera lens can be bought too. i dont want to spend a lot of money (not professional but your average person).

[Mike Gebert]

I don't think the answer exists to the questions as you've posed them. Basically, I guess you need to decide where anyone is going to see this three-screen hockey game, and work backwards from there in terms of what format you need to create in to suit the venue.

[Christopher Jacobs]

i meant with todays film camera's (not vhs camera's since i believe they have gone the way of the dodo) and camera's that people can buy at best buy. also what film editing system would get the best napoleon effect with 20 frames a second. if need be for the camera, a widescreen camera lens can be bought too. i dont want to spend a lot of money (not professional but your average person).

Best Buy does not sell film cameras or anything related to film. Today's film cameras will set you back about $50,000 to $100,000 apiece and you'll either need three of them or could instead get an anamorphic lens and use one camera as we've already suggested. You might be able to find a used 16mm home movie camera or semi-pro camera for a couple hundred to a few thousand dollars, depending on the model and condition. I'd recommend starting with a Bolex or Arriflex. If you don't want to spend a lot of money, basically you won't be buying a new film camera, and certainly not a 35mm movie camera. If you want to shoot video, just get any of the AVCHD home camcorders on sale for $500-$1000 and edit the material on any decent new home computer with Adobe Premiere elements or the like, following the suggestions for incorporating widescreen that several people have already made. Home video cannot shoot 20 frames a second. It shoots only 30 frames per second (actually 29.97 frames per second) although some cameras will simulate 24 frames per second. A high quality video camera that can actually shoot at different frame rates will cost between $20,000 to $100,000, or about the same as a 35mm film camera.

You still just don't seem to grasp the concepts of "film" and "video." You need to do a lot more research and background before you'll be able to understand what we've been trying to tell you.

thanks for the info. i will try to get a home movie camera. also i have pinnacle studio 12. would upgrading to a higher pinnacle studio be a good idea.
thanks
also this is part of a film i made:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9VSABQLz6g&" target="_blank
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RTHcpdkr6I" target="_blank
edit,
its a student type film so the editing might not be the best.
also used copyrighted music. i would like to try to make a film for a local public access station in the area.

[Christopher Jacobs]

These days with any home movie camera, you'll most likely need to order the film by phone or online unless you live in L.A. or New York, and will need to send it away to get processed. If you plan to edit the film itself, you'll need to buy a set of rewinds, splicer, and picture viewer. If you plan to edit film on your computer, you'll need to make sure you tell the lab to give you a digital video transfer from the film negative instead of making a workprint, and you'll need to tell them what codec you need for your editing software. The newer your editing software, the more likely it will support the newer codecs, which will also be important if you decide to shoot on a home video camcorder instead of a home movie camera, as it seems almost every other camcorder these days has some different new codec than the "standards" that were used a year or two ago.

i would like to buy a camcorder. would like to make my own films. would like to spend about $125 for one. what camcorder do you all think i should get. here is what i would like:
1: a camcorder that can film up to 75 minutes of footage (would just be for hockey games).
2: be able to transfer the footage to my laptop and edit the footage with pinnacle studio.
3: be able to shoot in black and white.
thanks

i got a sony bloggie for my 30th birthday (which was a few weeks ago). does anyone else have one. if so, what type of holder for the camera do you have (ie tripod).

When I was a Super 8 hobbyist in the
late seventies (the demographic
depicted in the movie Super 8 )
shooting film was easy while
editing was hard. Complete analogue
means having to lose precious frames
while fixing a broken splice if you used
camera original. Having to physically
cut film and apply splices. Running it
through an editor to preview your
cut and being careful to minimize scratches.
Running it, again, through a projector to show
interested parties your movies.

I would do such a thing again in a heartbeat.
I don't know if the digital generation would.