Hey i believe gear in the end, is not what counts…theres a lot of movie made with the best gear in the market and yet sucks a lot in the content.
youtube show this a lot. the most watched movies are made with simple a cheap gear.

I actually think gear and content are rather far away from one another. I mean, gear can be purchased but content has to be conceived and created.

I have been thinking about this subject matter a lot. I started out being a gear fanatic. I was simply fascinated by the possibilities of what you can do with gear.

Then, at one point I was feeling highly dissatisfied with the short movies that I made. They looked pretty good. I was really getting a sense of how to make the most out of the gear available, but it always felt shallow and empty.

No one really laughed, no one really cried. No one gave a tiny rats ass emotionally about the short. People watched it, liked the images but forgot about it right afterwards. I was highly discouraged but started to change my perspective. I stopped attending IBC or Cinec in Munich. I stopped following all the latest news about the latest whatever. My new goal was to understand what “art” (I define as art that has an emotional impact on me) is … and that is the point.

I realized that art is “the expression of experience”. So, if I don’t have anything to express then it really doesn’t matter. It’s like having the alphabet and putting randomly words one after the other – it doesn’t convey anything. It doesn’t move or upset anybody. And that’s the worst that can happen. Whether people love or hate it – that’s okay – but if people don’t give a shit – that’s the worst sign.

I still love gear but it really has one purpose – it’s the tool that I use to express something. Mastering the art of using that gear – and the very personal way of doing that – can become an art itself though. It’s like learning to move a brush and develop your own style – the style of the brush stroke but without a motif that expresses something about life eve Picasso’s brush stroke would be quite a bore.

What I learned is that I got it wrong at the beginning. I had access to gear and thought what I could do with it. I wanted to shoot something for the sake of shooting. But now, I know that the only purpose of shooting something is not to make pretty pictures (analogues to decorative art) or worse just use the gear available but to express something using the tools in the best possible way that serves the greater purpose.

Just some thoughts. 🙂

Thanks, Nino. The problem with a lot of films these daze is that it is all about geewiz and not story. (particularly Hollywood – look at anything Micheal Bay does) This best films are the small independent film because they have to focus on story. That is what filmmaking is all about – telling a story. But this is not new. I remember working at a theatre in the early ’80’s and the owner and I were complaining back them about the lack of story in Hollywood films. Why is Pixar so successful? Story!

Gear is the ends to a mean. It helps you tell the story. The better you know your gear, the better you can craft your story. This is why it is very important to have the right gear for your abilities. Some require less and others more. I am of the less. I grew up with SLR’s and 16mm cameras, so I know them well. Some grew up with video cameras so they know them well and want their camera to be like that. I do not recommend everybody use a HDSLR. It is more like a film motion picture camera than a video camera. It requires the patience and practice the a film camera requires. Some just do better with a video camera. The manufacture’s are responding to that need of a large sensor video camera the does not rob the bank. But, it will still require good focus techniques because of the shallow depth of field.

Learn your craft so you can tell a great story.

Of course the story/directing is the most important. Charlie Chaplin’s movies still make money after 70 years. No color, hardly any sound.

I do feel gear is important. That is to say, knowing the possibilities and limitations of the gear. Without a fast lens, no shallow depth. No walking around without stabilizing gear. Sound is important, so some gear is needed there as well. For an amateur like me it is interesting to read what will give me the most ‘bang for the buck’.

Anyway, I do have a challenge for Nino, and all other DSLR blog writers. Instead of writing about gear and telling it is not that important, write a tutorial about story telling/cinematic techniques/editting, anything that helps create a ‘great movie’ what is not about gear.

Gear has it’s place, but I’ve seen some amazing stuff done with the camera, kit lens and a tripod. In the end, most people are not going to care if you had the best follow focus device, or the best LCD monitor with which to pull focus.

And Philip Bloom is a pimp… One of THE Pimp Daddy’s! 🙂

Hi, first can I say that I know nothing about cameras and filmmaking. I came to this site because I know Joshua Beattie and like the film he made. My humble opinion is this. The average Joe, doesn’t know about lenses and stuff like that. He just looks, listens and feels. So you guys look at things through different eyes – which is right because you are pros. I honestly think that To Claire;from Sonny would have worked even on a cheap camera and a sure mic. Why? Because it’s the story, the lines, the love, the death, and the music. Remember that the first song was sung with a piano and an elementary school choir in an hour. Pro musicians would hate it. But….remember the audience. Mostly women (and then a lot of teenage girls), love the words and have gone so far as to have written them out. What gives? I think Josh Beattie could have made a different story with the same gear, and had no effect – the difference is that women love a love story. I’ve read lots of the comments. Women love it. The few critics are men, who complain about the speed of the car and the improbability of it all – why was she in the middle of the road, wearing headphones etc. Get it? People look at different things.
In other words, you could have all the movie and sound gear in the world but a 30 min film about the budget session in parliament isn’t going to light up youtube. Another thing is the youtube dynamic. Seems to be young people who see things differently.

For me there is a lesson in this for most professionals. My job is the same. As you said, you might like an apple. But you don’t know where it’s from. Maybe an apple industry expert would look at the apple totally differently and not even eat it? So, I think it comes down to the difference between peer review and the consumer. Sometimes you can get so caught up in your own profession that you lose sight of the simple.

Josh will be using a lot of gear at his film school. I hope he learns from what people liked about his first film. In fact, that’s a cool thing about youtube. You can see the comments from people who know nothing about the industry, but see why they liked the film.

Feel free to delete this post, as I’m not a film guy. But I liked your post, and it’s made me reassess my own job, and what works.

P.S I think Josh Beattie would welcome any suggestions. His real passion is making music though – which comes across in the film.

Also, what I wanted to add in my last comment. I don’t think that it’s hypocritical of Nino to write a post like this on a gear heavy blog. Quite the contrary is true. I think it adds credibility and depth by providing multiple perspectives and questioning the status q. It counter weights the blog which is always a good thing. And there is really nothing wrong with being a gear fanatic. I think it’s great to have a passion for something whatever it might be – but make sure that you are still aware of the wood by focusing on all the trees. 🙂

On my collaborative blog at NeedCreative.net we try to focus on storytelling, techniques, project stories, short film showcases, etc. But we do gear stories too (ironically they are the most popular). If the craft is so key why focus on gear at all?

It’s really simple. If you want to build a house you need a good architect with an artistic vision. Then you need goos builders with the right tools. There’s an interplay of art and gear there. Now in our little admittedly indie film world, many of us do both jobs. We create the artistic vision and then we build it using tools available. It just so happens that recently the tools have vastly improved as well as come way down in price. This is exciting because it allows those who previously could imagine the house but not build it.

Wanting to create something, anything including art, requires resources and tools as well as vision. What seems to being lost in many blogs and conversations is half the story. Many concentrate on this new breed of inexpensive but professsional-result-producing gear. Is this is problem? No, because sites that focus on the craft part are plenty.

What I see lacking a bit are sites blogs workshops and conversations that integrate the concepts of story art.. The craft basically with tips on how to use the new breed of digital tools to enhance that craft. Lots of people are working this angle and that’s a good thing. Conversations about one side or the other alone aren’t trash though.

I think the frustration I see in many people is they think the gear discussions are nothing but a money grab. I doubt this is the case. Some people are interested in architecture and some in building. Thats not an issue. I just think that the more architects learn how to use a hammer, the better their buildings may become because they have a better understanding of the practical applications of their visions.

So all the fighting is silly. No one point is correct. I think it’s prudent for people to try to learn everything they can. I think the focus on the craft can’t be lost, but if you have a wonderul story but dont know how to show your visions then the result may be the same as someone who knows gear only but has no talent: nothing worth watching.

As long as people like the work, who cares what it was shot with? Only the filmmakers should really care because, if people like it, the filmmaker will continue making films and if they get access to better equipment they can use it to make more films. If people don’t like their work, the filmmakers will either try harder with content and/or get better tools to do so.

Whoa! Nino you weren’t kidding about the heated comments.

All I have to say is that everyone starts with the cheap gear. As a teaser what you can do.

Respect to Philip and Nino.

If it wasn’t your blogs I would not ever tried make a short on my own. Using HDSLR as a tool to put my short together.

Thank you Guys.

great post, Nino, and thanks for exposing me to the videos. i’m a photographer who is dipping his toes in to video, and the same conversation pops up regularly in the still world, as well, and some of the comments are similar, too. people seem to look for any example of something having a price tag to provide the counter argument. “sure, these kids made a video with a 7D, but they had thousands of dollars worth of software!” but it misses the point. yes, you need to have some gear: a camera, a tripod according to Mr. Bloom, and if you want to get on youtube, a way to get the video out of the camera on to the site. yes, a better camera has more options. a better lens may let you get better DOF. better software may work faster on a better computer and provide for more effects. but as you said, if the story isn’t great, who cares? i’ve been spending a lot of time on vimeo and there are a lot of really pretty videos that were probably done on really nice cameras and edited on really nice computers with really professional software, but at the end of the video (if i even make it to the end), i’m left feeling unmoved, unaffected, bored, or otherwise thinking “um, ok.”

the internets is great for finding a lot of technical resources on HOW to do stuff. how to do time lapse, how to pull focus, how to edit film, and with the accessibility of all of the technology, there are a lot of people out there that make movies. same in the photography world. there are fewer sites that focus on the WHAT, so i feel like we’re getting saturated with noise that has no meaning, no purpose. the story isn’t sexy, it’s not geeky, it’s not something you can make a tutorial about, so it gets ignored, uncultivated.

ramble, ramble…

it’s easier to focus on the gear and to complain or be pessimistic about not being able to make a film without the latest and greatest technology than it is to find a story to tell with what you have. thankfully, there are people out there doing the latter.