Life of Kyle Prohaska

This is what MY GOD can do!

So it’s 11:38pm and I’m sitting here writing.  I just checked ChristianCinema.com again.  One of the biggest Christian movie/video sites on the internet.  Look what I saw (to the right).  There you’ll find Letters to God and To Save A Life, two of the biggest Christian movies that will come out this year, both released a matter of days ago.  Both cost millions to make and market, with huge distribution companies behind them and loads of support from all over.  Then you have The Secrets of Jonathan Sperry.  That’s Rich Christiano’s new film, another huge seller this year and probably one of the biggest Christian movies of the year as well.  Then sitting at #5 you have a film called STANDING FIRM, a film that was made in the bedroom of a nieve and inexperienced (now) 22 year old kid who felt a calling (an 18 year old at the start), cast/crew’d by a slew of passion filled volunteers, and a wealth of support on all levels by folks in the community and all over the internet.  The film isn’t even out yet, it has 10 days to go.  THAT’S MY GOD!  It just gets me all pumped up, seeing what God had done and could be ramping up to do.  Ugh my blood gets flowing hard, let me tell you what!

I realize that ChristianCinema.com isn’t the standard for how the film is selling around the US right now, but it sure tells me something.  Perhaps I’m just blowing this out of proportion and if so I don’t even care.  God is good, and is faithful and dragged this film kicking and screaming to the finish line.  Not a single attack from the enemy has stopped it.  No wickedness from anyone involved (including me) or uninvolved caused it to fail.  It IS DONE, and IT IS RELEASING. What a feeling, amen.  I feel like 2 Timothy 4ing this post (if I can say it that way) but I’ll refrain ha ha

The church screening kits start shipping monday morning, and that’s an awesome feeling.  I can’t wait to get testimonies from Pastor’s around the US (and some foreign) on how the screenings went in their congregations and what souls were saved through the film.  It’s going to be a humbling and emotionally gratifying to see.  That’s really what I’ve been waiting for.  Yes I talk about the business side here a lot and worries on that end and so many other things but the main goal here, the goal that started this project was getting the truth of God’s Word to those that need to hear it.  Man I can’t wait for some of those initial life changing stories.  The reviews thus far have been amazing to read, and I’m so thankful the film is being enjoyed by people.

All of this is only the beginning, and that’s an incredibly sobering thought.  This film might have been made in NY and made via the help of volunteers from NY, but God has taken it and will continue to take it far and beyond NY and into the homes and lives of countless people around the nation and the globe.  HE IS GOOD!

And any recognition or hand shakes that might come my way I’ll happily except, but only with the understanding that any ability I have, any skills I may possess, and any “determination” that it took to bring this film to the finish line and beyond was only because God supplied it, and injected it into this otherwise lifeless and wretched body.  Praise Him!

Kyle Prohaska,
Writer/Director/Producer of Standing Firm…and a wretched sinner whom God chose in eternity past for a time such as this to be used for HIS GLORY.  I am unworthy of such things.

This article in many ways is a reflection of me and how I used to be.  God has done much work on me in this area of negativity and slander amongst others in my field.  As I remember writing about a long time ago, the SAICFF in 2009 was a big experience for me.  I had been responsible for some serious bad mouthing of some people there, and having met them and shaken their hands, I felt a serious smack upside my head that broke me down.  A friend actually found me sitting on some steps crying pretty hard.  He assumed something awful had happened back home or something and I had just found out.  Instead I told him how terrible I had been in conversation against some of the folks I had met, not realizing that the films I might have been bashing were made by real people…with the same dreams I had.

Listen, I don’t care how much you know or what you’ve done that makes you think you have some sort of ultimate authority on how things should be, God knows all and far and beyond what you do.  We can still make guesses based on experience, but I’ve tried to stray away as much as I can when I state things….as if they were fact.  As if I know the future and can predict God’s Will.  Please!  None of us can.

I’ve been in many conversations about Christian films, what should’ve been done differently, how it should’ve been sold, whether or not it should’ve went to theaters (because of the difficulties in doing well without losing a lot of money), or even just the quality of the films as a whole.  Sometimes we’re right in our guesses, and sometimes we’re wrong.  BUT, the way in which we spoke about it was sinful, I admit this outright.

I’ve also had bitterness towards other folks in the past and even wrestled with it currently because of their nature of success.  A Christian looking at another Christian who’s being Blessed by God and wishing he had the Blessing.  That was me.  What a piece of trash I can be…why God would still Bless me with what he has in the last few years I have no idea.  He is merciful, that’s all I can say.

Even in the times when I know I have good information, my guesses being spoken of to the wrong people has gotten me into serious trouble…multiple times.  Even one recently, where my negativity built up over time and then exploded in my face…even if I wasn’t being negative anymore.  The damage was done in the past.  Although my heart had changed on the issue, it still showed it’s ugly face.  My sin found me out and that’s that…

Negativity is a dangerous fungus.  Even if we don’t have much confidence in something, we should keep our eyes open to the possibilities.  God can do all things, and even if we’re right in guessing what might happen with this film or that film or whatever…that is no place for us to boast or say “I told you so.”  Especially in this arena of filmmaking where as brothers and sisters in Christ we need to be encouraging and helping each other.  Speak your criticism in love and not in anger or pretentiousness.  That is not of God, and I’m sorry to say I’ve been responsible for more of it than anybody else I know.  It’s uncalled for and will destroy this industry.  I don’t care what you think SHOULD BE done.

It’s no wonder so many look at Christian folks and think “why do I need Christ…they don’t seem much different?”  We treat each other so poorly sometimes it’s disgusting.  We need to be the light if we hope to reach others and build up a better reputation for Christian films.  If you really want to improve our “genres” reputation, then show it in your conduct FIRST…then worry about your film.

These kinds of problems have cost me friendships, previous jobs, a ton of money…and MANY future opportunities over the last three years.  Please, I’m begging you, don’t think and act like I have.  Pray that God continues to work on me as well, because I need it.

Interesting title enough for you?  In light of the recent article God vs. Good Art I wanted to write something else…something I think is important.  UNITY.  One of the greatest enemies to a Christian today unfortunately is another Christian.  Religion overtakes Jesus, legalism builds walls between those who could be beneficial to each other, and chaos ensues.  How does this apply to the Christian filmmaking world?

If there’s one thing I’ve learned in the past few years, it’s that people have very differing opinions on what kind of filmmaking Christians should be involved in.  I’ve heard that it’s wrong to work in Hollywood from some, while others consider it a mission field.  I’ve heard that “Christian film” is worthless and dying since it doesn’t seem to target the lost and instead targets churches, while others view it as the perfect mission field saying that now-a-days there seems to be more and more sick people IN the church.  I’ve heard that movies should be made with more of a Christian “worldview” than anything else, while others hold a torch for the Gospel.  Then there’s debate on what the Gospel is in a film, and how it should be communicated (parable vs. outright gospel presentation).  I’ve heard people arguing about movies not being for preaching while others see it as the perfect opportunity to preach.  Surely we can all agree on one thing though, that there are lost people out there that need a Savior?  I would hope that amongst all this fighting with each other, we can see a common goal.  We might disagree on how people reach that goal, and whether or not they’re as effective as they should be, or even whether they’re effective at all…but at the end of the day that is our goal right?

Even if your goal is to attract those to the church or christianity who otherwise would never have anything to do with it, it’s just another degree of separation from the goal.  Some don’t like that and they want the Gospel in every film, while others think their film should be more of a billboard for church or Christianity in worldview, and consider it the churches responsibility to do the “preaching.”

I’ve seen some very heated arguments on forums and in articles like this one.  Christian yelling back and forth, telling each other off, saying why they’re right and why the other is wrong.  When was the last time a film was made?  Shouldn’t we be working towards the goal instead of spending all our time arguing over how to actually go and do it?  We spend so much time amongst each other debating how to do things and at the end of the day when our head hits the pillow we accomplish nothing.  There seems to be so many talking about how to do things and nowhere near as many giving it a try.

We all have our own viewpoints on how things should be done, and understanding that point alone should douse some of the fires that we all start.  We’re not all going to agree.  I try and keep that fact firmly in mind.

To all who have varying viewpoints on how to go and make their films I would simply advise them to ask the Lord what HIS WILL is in that situation, story, job, market, etc. and where they fit into it.  I’m speaking to myself here as well, because it’s easy to look at things from the outside and say “they should be done like this,” when I know that in the past I’ve been 100% certain that I was in the right and God quickly and swiftly knocked me off my high horse.  We need to be acknowledging him in all things, and he will direct the way we should go.

The bickering won’t cease, as I know that some simply don’t have the will power…but I hope to see a bit more unity of spirit in this industry we’re all trying to break our way into.  If we can’t break down some of these walls and pop a few of these bubbles we’ve put ourselves into because of our disagreements, you’ll see this market die out in time.  There needs to be a support of one another, a willingness to listen to others comments and viewpoints or critiques, an understand of where people are coming from, and most of all a heart for the Lord and a focus on what His Will may be in each of our lives/futures.  If everyone in this industry that is a Christian (I don’t care whether you say you make Christian films or your a Christian who makes films) would simply humble themselves and truly seek His face in their work, you would see an explosion of God honoring, and EXCELLENT art flood this world again.  Is that what you REALLY want?  Then do something about it.

Some thoughts came into my head only moments ago so I want to share them with you.  I was thinking about filmmaking, life, the opportunity someday to have a family, etc.  Just thinking about things in life that mean most to me.  Then I started thinking about film, and what it means to me as well.  As I had said in a post a few back, just honor and privilege it is to make films that can honor the Lord.  What I’m about to say here could be controversial but my conscious is clear, and for the most part…much of this article is a wakeup call for myself.

There is much argument around Christian filmmakers (or filmmakers who are Christians, even that title is debated amongst folks) about what is heavy handed in regards to your art.  When you state something in such a way that it makes the audience out to be a fool as if they couldn’t understand what your trying to communicate.  I would agree, but I might disagree given what the Lord has just helped me to realize in the context of what can actually or should be considered heavy handed.  Why is it that the name of Jesus can be considered heavy handed?  I understand that bad writing and delivery have a lot to do with what people consider heavy-handed in films with a faith-based message…but really, what is it that makes it so difficult to hear?

Why is it even if the lines are written well and even performed by a great actor, can people (even Christians involved in art) wince in their seats?  ”Oh he’s using the name of Jesus again…o brother.”  How far have we fallen?  When did we get to the place where the Lords name is like an intense glaring light that we have to shield our eyes from.  Shouldn’t His name be sweet?  I have fought with this so please hear what I’m trying to say.  I just kept thinking about the people who buy things in the Christian market.  I see many films that I would consider terrible, somehow getting rave reviews from consumers and praise.  Why is that?  The story wasn’t that great, the writing and dialog was poor, the delivery was pretty bad, etc.  I’ll be honest, the elements in the previous sentence can ruin a film for me, but I hope I never get to the point where the message of a film falls silent because I can’t look past the ART and see the TRUTH the “bad art” is trying to communicate.  One could argue that because it’s poorly presented that the TRUTH’s ability to shine through is diminished.  I can see that point of view but let me argue the latter.

I see it like this.  I’ve had many discussions with folks where we’re talking about people with ministries out there that aren’t ran biblically or their doctrine has a lot of heresy or whatever else.  Well someone always carries a torch for that person because they’ve seen some eternal results (salvation of someone or groups of people, or even thousands of people).  To that I’ve always presented my view that even in a flawed setting, God’s Word shines through.  I also swing to the Calvinist side of theology, so to me, I refuse to believe that one verse in a sermon taken out of context, or that one word that Pastor flubs up while speaking, or that person who’s cell phone goes off during the message, has anything to do with whether or not God’s Truth will speak to those whom He has ordained to hear it.  I don’t condone doing things the wrong way, and it doesn’t excuse anything, but who is the one who impacts the soul?  GOD IS.  Nobody comes unless the father draws, and he could use an old Christian film from the 1980s with poor acting and everything to draw someone for himself, he doesn’t need the next Shawshank Redemption (which is my favorite film by the way).  I would apply that to films of a faith-based nature.  While I can look at it and say “O come on, that movie is awful,” I need to remember that regardless of it being a film without a good story, with good acting, good cinematography, etc….JESUS is in that film.  The creator of the universe, the one who died on a Cross for my sin, the one who made all things and to whom all things hold together.  God’s eternal truths are communicated in this “bad film.”  Should I therefore dismiss it for the reasons I decide?

I think we all have things very wrong here.  I love art, I love film, I love GOOD film, and I’m not a fan of BAD film, but when GOOD film/art overtakes GOD we have some reflecting to do.  Filmmaking means nothing.  Right?  Some filmmakers reading this are going “but…but…well no you see.”  Just stop and think about it.  Filmmaking means NOTHING.  Good art isn’t the prize, Christ is the prize.  This is why despite seeing flaws in others films I recognize their commitment to truth.  They commit to the truth first, art second.  This is the order in which we need to live life let alone make our films.  God first, everything else second.  I wouldn’t trade the truth in Standing Firm for the greatest composer, the greatest cinematographer, the greatest actor, or whatever.  I don’t care if Tom Hanks walked in and said “I’ll be in this film, put money into it, market it up the wazoo with my name all over it and make you a millionaire…if you’d only take out JESUS.”  It would be difficult to say no but I know in my soul that I would have to.

For once, shall we take off the artistic glasses by which we seem to be viewing everything and instead put on God’s spectacles for a moment?  When you look at others films…what do they tell you through that point of view?  By all means put on the artist glasses afterwards and make all the critiques you want, but don’t let your love for art get in the way of what God could be trying to teach you.  I don’t look at my bible when I crack it open and go “blech…black text on a plain white page…that’s boring,” and not read it.  We need to rearrange our priorities a bit I think and understand what’s important and what lasts.  Many like to think that God appreciates good art and what it looks like more than how His Glory is communicated through it.  That isn’t the case.  If that were true than God wouldn’t burn everything when this planets runtime is over with, you’d be walking into heaven and seeing the Mona Lisa hanging on the wall.  Gotta save some of it you know?  Because it’s worth something…you know…it’s good art?

Christ is the prize, Christ is the goal, Christ is where we aim and His Glory is what we strive to make much of.  Nothing else…not even art.

Cinematography is more than just camera movement, framing, and lighting, it’s what you choose to show. Anything outside of the window you choose to show your film through, doesn’t exist for the audience member. If you don’t show it, they don’t know it’s there. Sounds simple, but it’s critical.

“Once we get the audience to imagine that what exists within the frame extends beyond the frame, we have a new and powerful tool to create unreal realities on the screen” - Chuck Peters

Be mindful of what your pointing your camera at and for what purpose. Everything shot should have a reason attached to it. If there is no reason, especially if the viewer is supposed to be gathering an emotion or feeling from whatever they’re watching…you’ll lose them, bore them, and pull them out of whatever you were trying to build to in the first place. Very rarely is a shot left in a film because it “looks cool.” Is that 10 second epic shot really worth it if it doesn’t do something for your audience memeber? No, especially if you are working on something that depends on specifically placed and paced action, reaction, and flow. Keep all this in mind when your shooting something. What goal are you going for?

Why are you shooting your film the way you are? Why are you in a wide instead of a close up? Why are you dollying the camera (this is very overdone in films), or why are you handholding it? Examine your story and figure out a way of telling it that fits the type of story it is.

Cloverfield is a great example to use. Whether you like the film or not, the Blair Witch Project type of shooting that it entails fits the kind of story they were trying to tell. You are going through the adventure and horrific events with the main characters, running right along with them. Not only that, but almost every sequence in the film is shot in a way that shows you only little bits of things as the director saw fit. Because your watching the film from a camera that is being run (in the film) by the main characters, you have a unique experience as an audience member. Shaking of the camera, quick zooms, autofocus problems, etc. were all used to feed the audience member specific pieces of information. When the camera is having a hard time focusing on something and there is grain and some movement, your left squinting at the screen saying “what is that?” Then BOOM your hit with something you didn’t expect. It’s a great example of using a camera in the proper way, and to the full potential of the source material.

Road to Perdition (one of my favorite films, and one of the greatest cinematic pieces in history) has lots of great camera work but for this article the place that came to mind was the father and son riding to Chicago. The city is revealed to the audience by the reflection in the windows, before the camera eventually ends up behind the car as it drives into downtown. There is a moment before the buildings show up where your not sure what your looking for because the windows reflections are barren, then in an instant the first building hits and the reflection is covered in windows moving by.

If you have seen those 2 films, or have other films of your own that you love for their cinematography, go pop in the DVD and find your favorite shot. What is it saying? Then write that down and figure out other ways it could have been shot to convey the same thing. It’s a good exercise, give it a try. If your a junkie for things like that (like me), then it’s something you probably think about already. Even if you aren’t a cinematographer, thinking about these things as a director can really help things along, especially if your on a low-budget film where your wearing lots of hats. There is a reason why Directors & Cinematographers have a unique bond. They’re both doing 2 different jobs with the same goal, and they need to work together to pull out the proper result. Constantly ask yourself why you are shooting what you’re shooting, before you plant your sticks, pick your lens, etc. What is your OBJECTIVE?

Objective -> Information -> Decision -> Result

If your objective is off (from the story), so will your result. Your objective determines where you go for your information and from your information you make your “informed” decisions. The same applies to life but it applies to all things.

What about your lighting? Without light all you have is darkness. What are you choosing to light and why? What kind of light are you putting on that subject? Is it the proper color? What can be done to further accent the desired mood? Do you want hard light, soft light, or a mix of both? People play with white balence all the time either on set or in post to get the effect they want. A dark alley with a suspicious man walking would probably benefit from a high contrast ratio, blue tint, and limited fill. Granted that is just an example, you could do things many different ways. I’m not here to tell you how to light or compose, I’m trying to get your juices flowing about why you do what you do.

What about camera movement? Besides all the other things involved in shooting, camera movement is a powerful way to tell your story. Something I want to touch on first though is a lack of camera movement. A static shot has just as much purpose as a tracking, handheld, or crane shot. Lets see how many different ways we can convey the same type of feeling with the same subject.

Objective: Loneliness

Place/Subject: A man at a 4 way intersection out in the middle of nowhere.

Option 1: Wide static shot of the man standing there. Showing how big the surrounding farm land is and how small the man is will convey just how alone he really is. Being static, it can make the environment feel dead and have less life to it with this one human being in the center of it all.

Option 2: Start on a closeup of the man and pull back to a wide showing the surrounding area. This would allow you to slowly reveal how alone the subject is (the same as Option 1) but choosing to reveal is slowly might have a purpose. Say your scene has the man waking up on his back at this intersection not having a clue how he got there. Pulling back slowly from him to show the entire environment allows the audience to realize where he is at the same time he does. This differs from Option 1 also because of the way you would edit it together. Cutting from a close up on an actor looking around directly to a wide would hit the audience in the face with loneliness a lot more abruptly than Option 2 where the camera movement would reveal.

Keep in mind how your shots will edit together and what cutting from one shot to another actually says. It’s not just your shots, it’s the relationship from shot to shot.

Option 3: Start on a closeup of the man and as he turns to look around, the camera dollies around him in a circle revealing the environment in 360 degrees. Normally this is done to convey confusion or worry if the character is looking for something but if done properly and at the proper speed, it can convey wonder and beauty in the environment (depends on what your looking at). If you are able, starting in a super close up of his head and zooming out slowly as you dolly around adds another dimension to the shot.

There are many other ways to shoot that kind of thing but those 3 can show you just how different you can tell your story if you think about what you want to say. None of them are wrong, but one of them might be for your intended feeling. Option 1 would have you hitting the audience in the face with the environment, Option 2 slowly reveals it (what if he woke up on the top of a mountain, wouldn’t it be more effective to slowly reveal the beautiful scenery and get that WOW factor?), and Option 3 might work to show the environment, the situation, the beauty of the environment, and the motion itself could show some confusion and worry if that is what your going for.

Never lose sight of what your shots need to say. If your not moving the camera, should you be? When your not saying anything…what are you saying? Filmmaking is decisions, one right after another. Each decision you make will either push you towards the story your trying to tell, or away from it. Don’t mess this part of the process up. A great script, with great actors, and great environments is all well and good but if you aren’t sure how to use your camera to present those elements, all that hard work by everyone else is for nothing…or takes a serious hit. The audience can only see what you show them, so make sure they see what they need to, and in the way they need to.

By: Kyle Prohaska

Choosing an aspect ratio can be an interesting task. The amateur takes a look at something that is framed in 2.40 and says “wow it looks like a movie, I should crop my video to that!” They fail to understand the reasons for Aspect Ratios (I’ll abbreviate it as AR in this article), and when you should use which size.

There are a few standards that are used way more than the others, and with good reason. I wont go explaining what Aspect Ratios are and the standards used because you can find that information anywhere. Look here to read all about Aspect Ratios and their different standards.

This article will focus on the importance of choosing an AR for your film, and what kinds of things you need to have in mind. Why is this important? Well the AR you choose determines the window your viewer will watch your film in. It also gives you the power to use certain framing and camera techniques to compose your film. What happens if you choose the WRONG framing?

How The West Was Won - Pan & Scan Crop

Well for one you could be setting yourself up for major problems on set. Choosing an anamorphic sized aspect ratio like 2.40:1 could really mess things up for you in a family drama if you aren’t sure how to use it. The common mistake is people like to choose aspect ratios that don’t fit their story. There is no set aspect you should use based on what kind of story you have, only

the way in which you want to tell it. That is the difference. We chose 2.35:1 (Basically 2.40) for Standing Firm because we wanted a bigger budget feeling. However we didn’t just choose it and go for it, we made sure it would suit our needs and fit with the story we had to tell.

What about your environment? Large landscapes look fantastic in anamorphic and super wide aspects. Old westerns years ago were shot in aspects that aren’t even touched anymore. How The West Was Won (1962) was shot in 2.90:1 which is a really wide format. The film however shines and looks amazing, beautifully capturing the landscapes of the west. If it was shot in simple 16:9 things would look great as the landscapes are beautiful no matter what, but the actual scope of the landscapes would not be seen without moving the camera or panning it horizontally. Imagine the exact same film in 4:3 to fit a standard TV? You begin the see my point. The film itself would still look the same but the way in which you watch it is changed significantly.

This is easier to see when your favorite film is shown on television in a Pan and Scan format. Most films that are shown on TV now are broadcast in 16:9 but for years it was cropped to 4:3. Fullscreen DVD’s do the same thing. You can’t really even find a fullscreen DVD anymore, 16:9 is the new 4:3. If you saw your favorite film a million times, then saw it on TV in 4:3 you would see a huge difference. It completely changes the original vision of each shot. What your supposed to see, what your not, and when your supposed to see it…all changes. It ruins the original intent of the cinematographer.

Standing Firm (2009) - 2.35:1 Aspect Ratio

Analyze your films story, which format would benefit your film the most? Besides the more epic feeling, we chose 2.35 for Standing Firm because of the house we shot in. The entire downstairs is open, without doors. Just hallways and a very open layout. This means that everywhere you look you can see deeper into the house, your not looking at a wall. This made 2.35 a great choice because you could really see the design of the home and see deep inside it. Also because of that layout the format allows nice camera movement and dolly moves with more talent participation. Being able to do extreme close-ups and still show the environment is also a plus, including over the shoulder movement. Others argue that 16:9 and greater is similar to how we see the real world with our eyes, so it’s simply better as a standard.

Choosing the incorrect aspect can hurt your film if your camera work isn’t up to par. You might choose a more epic styled standard like 2.35 just to find out you can’t make the framing interesting with what you have to work with. Films that would benefit from an epic aspect and don’t get one aren’t necessarily hurt, but they could be shortchanged in the end. You want the maximum impact from your story.

Good acting, lighting, sound design, production design, etc. all factor into making your film great…and what aspect you choose to view all that in is just as important if not more so. The point of the matter is if you can’t figure out a beneficial reason to use a wide aspect then don’t use it. Besides wide aspect simply looking “cool,” make sure you don’t make the mistake that others make…choosing an aspect without realizing their story to tell can’t use it properly.

By: Kyle Prohaska

So you want to use a 35mm adapter? You’ve heard of these incredible pieces of equipment that give you that shallow DOF everyone raves about. You want to look professional, you want to have high production values, you want someone to watchyour film and go “ok…who made that.” Hold the phone, there is much that needs to be known before you venture into the complicated and EXPENSIVE world of 35mm Adapters…What Do 35mm Adapters Give Me? (that I want) - If you didn’t know that, I’m not sure you would be reading this, but it seems relevant to answer it anyways. 35mm Adapters allow you to place lenses that aren’t standard to your video camera, on that camera. The DOF is just the result of that, but the main idea is to use lenses that your camera wouldn’t normally be able to use. This allows you to get a “look” and DOF that your camera on its own could never give you. Something positive about GG’s in adapters (Ground Glass is explained in the next section) that I should mention is that they add a certain texture to the image. It’s extremely subtle but some people are very good at spotting what footage was shot with what adapter, they often have a flavor of their own. I personaly like the texture my adapter gives me, it gives the footage a film texture without that texture coming from the result of digital noise or digital grain.

Don’t forget about your lenses as well. Lenses don’t just get you closer or farther away from the target subject, they give you different looks between each of them. The relationship between what is far away and what is close, is altered with each different lens you use. Even if its a slight shift, the difference can be seen. Keep that in mind when you go and buy lenses, what are you looking to achieve?

So…you get:
- Shallow DOF
- Different Lens Options

What Do 35mm Adapters Give Me? (that I don’t really want) - You’ll find the disadvantages of an adapter are in greater abundance than the advantages. Along with the advantages of using an adapter, ie. the “look,” comes the wonderful world of Ground Glass (or GG). It’s a fine glass that resides inside the Adapters housing. There are different kinds of 35mm Adaptersthat use the glass in different ways. The GG is visible to your camera, something you obviously don’t want. So each Adapter has its own way of “hiding” that. Some spin the GG, some vibrate.

Along with having a GG comes light loss, some adapters losing more light than others. Keep that in mind when you purchase, as each kinds of Adapters lose different amounts of light. The Letus Extreme is what we used on our film (Standing Firm) and it looses the least light of any adapter currently on the market, 0.5 stops. HOWEVER, put it on the camera, and you have to zoom in on the ground glass to the proper position. That means I gotta take the F1.6 20x Lens on my Canon XHA1 and zoom into the proper place causing my lens to stop down to about 2.8-3.2. Your already at 1.5 stops…but no that’s not all. You haven’t added a lense yet. Add the lens and pick the widest setting it has and your probably adding another stop if not 2 easily. That means bare minimum…2.5 stops of light loss, in most cases with the lenses you’ll use you’ll be at 2.8 or more so that means even more light lost. This is why the GG in an adapter is so important, the manufacturing of the GG itself is extremely important to the adapters eventual image and how easy or hard it is to get the image to where you want.

Adapters also make noise, some more than others. They all involve motors, and they all make some sort of noise. They don’t sound like a power drill, but they aren’t necessarily silent. Some being released now are, but I’m just stating it so your not surprised if you can hear yours. Odds are any well manufactured one is no louder than the tape drive in your camera(assuming that’s what your using, not Hard Drives or P2 Cards).

Don’t forget about weight, adding an adapter…adds weight to the camera setup. “Well duh Kyle! I’m not an idiot! Of course adding any mass to anything means more mass! I’m as buff as Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime, I can handle it.” Take it easy killer, let me explain. Using an adapter means you need to support the adapter. Adapters are DELICATE, expensive machines, and should be treated as such. If you have a decked out Adapter setup with all the thing you really should have (in my opinion) your talking about a big monstrosity. Some people have really figured out ways to mainstream the setups but no matter what, it ain’t no homemovie camera your gonna be swinging around during the family party, or sneaking onto your favorite roller coaster (although…eh nevermind). Just be aware that you need much more than an adapter to use one, and overall useability becomes more difficult. NOT IMPOSSIBLE! If you want the advantages of using an adapter, you better get used to the disadvantages.

Don’t forget what else using adapters gives you, a shrinking bank account. These things are expensive. What expensive means is different to many but as I said, using an adapter doesn’t just warrent an adapter purchase, but purchasing of other things as well by default. (I’ll talk about that later)

So…you get:
- Light Loss (The power must be out, I can’t see)
- Noise (Minimal)
- Weight (Oh! My Back!)
- A Lower Account Balence (yippie)

Something I will say…DO NOT LET THE DISADVANTAGES DISCOURAGE YOU! With the proper preparation and tools, 35mm Adapters will give you something incredible. The hills to climb to use them properly (and the money spent), are well worth it in the end.

O Brother Where Art Thou? (2000) - First Feature to use DI Process

By: Kyle Prohaska

Color is a powerful tool in creating your films and videos. Lots of beginners just assume that having a certain look in your film means success and that simply isn’t the case. Color can make or break a film. If implemented poorly, your viewer (regardless of the other factors quality) can become distracted. I have a very sensitive eye when it comes to those things. For the average joe I think the effects of color on the brain is unknown to them. They don’t know why certain scenes or looks in films make them feel things. It goes over their head. Regardless it does its job when done properly, subconsciously or not it means a great deal for your film.

The ability to push color in post is so much easier than it used to be. Film used to be chemically altered to achieve certain looks, and some people prefer this method still. A DI (Digital Intermediate) is much more common and used almost all the time now. This allows the film (or if you shot digitally your already in the digital world) to be altered in the computer using software to change colors. It might be as simple as a saturation boost, but the fact you can pick a slider and instantly alter your footage for the better or worse means you have a powerful tool in your hand. Just a tweak here or there can mean big things for your footage.

If you shot flat on you camera then there are some things that are common to change. Shooting flat means shooting your footage with lowered contrast and color, more in a neutral setting. Normally flat footage isn’t the most beautiful stuff to look at and looks bland. However it allows a lot more control in post to adjust your values.

What can you do to instantly make your footage look better? This is a tough call because it depends on what your looking for but if your just looking for nice rich looking shots your best bet is to optimize the contrast in the image, crushing blacks if necessary…and adjusting saturation to your liking. If your white balance and other things are correct this really gets you a long ways in terms of making the footage more beautiful. In my opinion there is nothing worse than flat, milky looking footage with no contrast and grey looking blacks. I like deep, rich color.

As the title of this article states, color is visual music. Remember the last time a sunset made you all fuzzy inside? It looks beautiful because the mixes of oranges, reds, and yellows gives your brain something to respond to. The same goes for your film/video. Just like a film score fits the story and sets a mood, the color does the same. A film set in the wild west probably wouldn’t look right if it was given the “Saving Private Ryan” look with tinted grey scales, adding slight desaturated and green to the image. It might fit but odds are it doesn’t. Pick a color scheme in your film that fits the story and the movement of the story.

Pleasantville (1998) - One of the first films to use selective CC using Rotoscoping & other advanced computer techniques.

Lighting is a big part of making this successful but that’s a different article. Use the power of color to create contrast in your story. If your hero is being beaten up by the enemy only to die and end up in heaven, wouldn’t it be very effective to light/color your footage gritty and darker only to present the audience with well balanced, brightly lit, rich and saturated visuals afterwards? It would be like a punch in the face. Tell the story with color, present what you need to say just like you do with actors and with camera movement, but use color. Factor it all in, and don’t leave anything to chance.

Do your film a favor and consider what kind of color the film should have. Don’t just assume you’ll figure it out later, bring it in beforehand. Your lighting and color will go hand in hand towards the end. Make sure you decide what is best for your film and stick to it. Only so much can be done in post. Color correction can fix images but only in certain circumstances. Color-correction won’t really fix bad lighting or lighting that doesn’t gel with the kind of correction you want to add later.

Don’t forget to consider the format you are shooting in. This will depend on the kind of camera you have and the settings you choose. Some codecs are limited in their ability to be corrected. Sooner or later, some codecs fall apart and show digital chunks and other exciting anomalies. Keep this in mind as well. The Canon XHA1 (used to shoot Standing Firm) had a custom preset applied that was to my liking. This way the footage turned out almost 100% like I wanted before it hit the tape and became compressed with the HDV codec. This was the ideal way to go since correction on the film is minimal. Using the preset also saved time in post that would be spent color timing the entire film. For those of you that are on a tight schedule or are spending more money on films, saved time = saved money.

Other factors that can affect the color in your film is your environments, production design, and clothing. It’s interesting how film brings in all other forms of art into a sort of community. Every factor hangs on another. Where you shoot will determine a lot in the end for your film. Keep in mind the texture and atmosphere your sets/locations give away in terms of their color (shape as well and structure). What people where will be a big deal. Does it work well with the locations you’ll be putting them in? Would it be wise to put your male lead in a green shirt among the jungle leaves? Unless you want a floating head bobbing about I suggest not. Create contrast within the frame as much as you can before you hit the editing suite. Being a tech geek will only get you so far.

Color is just another tool a filmmaker has in his arsenal to tell his story, so take advantage of it. With the many different tools available in your editing packages already there is no excuse. Approach the color used in your film just like you would any other aspect of it, with purpose, intelligence, heavy thought, and with strong ties to your story.