EventDV.net
Search EventDV

EVENT-DV 25
2010 Awards Show
2009 All-Star Team
2008 All-Star Team
2007 All-Star Team
2006 All-Star Team


RELATED SITES
Streaming Media Producer
OnlineVideo.net
Streaming Media
EMediaLive Archive


PRIVACY/COOKIES









Copyright © 2004 -
Information Today, Inc.



Comments Posted On :Field Recordings

Comments

Posted By ricky martine on 12/15/2010 3:45:11 PM
Awesome video, dudes. Cheap and easy to make, too.

Posted By TODD GUKELBERGER on 12/14/2010 1:54:32 PM
I applaud these cinematographers for staying away from the overdone "big" production that plagues so many wedding and event videos these days. After all, we don't really need to have a jib crane and Steadicam to cover a wedding artistically, do we? I think not. The same holds true for music video. Or, should I say music film? We are all cinematographers, now, correct? Music should be pure. I for one, couldn't stand the drawn out, overly fictionalized story style music videos that became mandatory beginning in the 80's. Think Michael Jackson's "Thriller" video and you'll know what I mean. It's too much. If you have to wait 17 minutes for a three minute song to start, there's something wrong. So, while I like what these gentlemen are doing, I think we need to stop short of saying it's anything earth shaking or groundbreaking. I've been shooting local musicians since the early 1990's with one camera and no budget. I'd make VHS copies of the raw concert footage and distribute them to the bands and their fans absolutely free of charge. I am a musician, too, and did it for the love of the music. It's nothing new. The only thing new is the quality of the capture and the ease with which the clips can be shared these days due to the internet. And to say these videos are raw is a false statement. By their own admission, these cinematographers shoot these clips with multiple microphones recording the audio. That audio is later mixed and balanced back in a video suite. Audio editing is STILL editing. Jet Kaiser "colors" his films. Color correction still qualifies as editing in my book. These are not truly raw videos, so can we please just call these clips "micro-budget pro-shot one-camera music videos" or some other term that describes them better? And before this article I had never even heard of the boneshow, so to say there's a "wave" of these one-take shows "sweeping" the web is quite a stretch. I'm all for this type of approach, but I think there are a lot more cinematographers like the persons in this article, myself included, that have shot their fair share of no-budget music video in their careers. Taking the musicians to run of the mill locations and having them perform live and acoustic is novel, but not groundbreaking. I've got a closet full of live, one-camera, one-take, music performance video that was shot in all different places; basements, kitchens, garages. All of it was captured with one video camera and nothing more than the on-board camera mics. The only image manipulation came via the built in camera effects. So, I find it hard to understand why there is so much attention being given to this. It's been going on for years.

Posted By John Markert on 12/14/2010 1:07:48 PM
Raw = cheap shit. Just about any idiot with a flip camera can shoot one. It's totally unprofessional and is symptomatic of the general decline in literacy brought about by the democratization of production and the Internet. It's also boring. Shooting with one camera is okay as long as it's done film-style with cut-aways layered in post. But one-cam one-take shooting is bogus and won't become a trend. It reminds me of the shaky-cam shit that some TV shows are offering up these days. A little edginess is okay and gives a sense of immediacy and urgency, but when the whole show is jerking around, that makes for a headache.


Return To Article