Kevin |
07-09-2004 08:33 AM |
Quote:
Originally posted by James
Thatsa good question. A lot of that stuff is cleaned up in post production though.
But yeah, it seems like digital lense options haven't quite caught up. OR at least thats thats what the traditional Directors of photography keep saying anyway.
|
I dunno. There is only so much that you can do in post production -- especially where color and camera work are concerned. Although AVID (a nice pro-sumer editing program) has some reallly sweet color correcing features, It doesn't seem to make up for a cheap camera. From what I've seen of his stuff, the camera work is OKAY. A few notches above the Blair Witch stuff because perhaps they used a tripod. If it was shoulder-shot, I think whoever did it did a pretty good job.
But from what I've seen of Moore, he's kind of partial to those little canon pro-sumer type cameras. The news guys say that they're just as good as the big thing, but you don't get the same kind of attention and respect from interviewees (I can attest to that). It's also nice to have enough battery juice to operate a halogen light if needs be.
I've shot on both, and I'm still a lean towards the digital cams.
|