SHORT ZOMBIE MOVIE CHALLENGE - Possible Contest

[DjfunkmasterG]

There has been some discussion about a possible zombie movie challenge, which started via another discussion. I have started this thread to get some buy in on the subject. I have sent Neil an email about this to get his thoughts, and details will be forthcoming very very soon. So far this is what is shaping up to be. THESE ARE NOT THE OFFICIAL RULES YET! The Movie will be a short film: No Longer than 5-10 minutes with credits. All music must be legally cleared, meaning licensed or 100% original. All audio must be original Footage/Audio from any Zombie film already released will be prohibited, this includes Night of the Living Dead. Films made previous to the contest are prohibited. Films must be in the English language, or at least contain english subtitles if in a foreign language. Your budget should not exceed $250.00 USD Films must be framed in one of the two cinema aspect ratios (1.85:1 or 2.35:1) Meaning, no 4:3 films. Your film must contain zombies. They can be runners or shamblers. Films with Explicit language, Gore, Nudity, or Sex must contain a warning to warn viewers. Films can be any genre format.(Romance, Comedy, Action, horror, Documentary, Western, etc) MORE TO COME STAY TUNED The winner of the contest will be awarded a zombie prize pack. it will include all available editions of the Romero Dead films on Blu-Ray, courtesy of Gary Ugarek and WETNWILDRADIO Films. As of yet we do not know how the films will be judged, or who the judges will be. That will work itself out in due time. Thoughts and opinions below. OFFICIAL RULES AND CATEGORIES TO BE LISTED ON MARCH 16th 2009.

[Danny]

hmm, i did just get my swank ass new pro camcorder. I did write something almost 6 years ago that i put off using due to lack of equipment.

[Mike70]

i'd further suggest that anyone who wants to enter the contest has to have been a member of HPOTD prior to a given date - maybe something like 1 feb 09. people that pop in here just to show off their films and then never post again really irritate me (and not to speak for anyone else, i'm probably not alone in that feeling). i'd be willing to help organize this, so DJ let me know how i can help out. i think judging should be done by the members of the forum and to keep it fair, moonsylver's idea of a blind viewing, where each film is given a letter or a number so no one but the organizer (who wouldn't be allowed to vote) would know who made an individual film, is probably the best way to go. that would help prevent any voting shenanigans.

[Danny]

i'd further suggest that anyone who wants to enter the contest has to have been a member of HPOTD prior to a given date - maybe something like 1 feb 09. people that pop in here just to show off their films and then never post again really irritate me (and not to speak for anyone else, i'm probably not alone in that feeling). i'd be willing to help organize this, so DJ let me know how i can help out. i think judging should be done by the members of the forum and to keep it fair, moonsylver's idea of a blind viewing, where each film is given a letter or a number so no one but the organizer (who wouldn't be allowed to vote) would know who made an individual film, is probably the best way to go. that would help prevent any voting shenanigans. aye thats a good idea, but i'd say maybe base it on post count and not date joined. I think it would be more fun to have people who contribute more to enter, see there work yknow?. not just some douche whos been registered for years but only posts once in a blue moon to advertise there stuff yknow?

[kchertu]

Well, I agree that it'd be cool to limit the entrants to people who are members of the forum as of today or some point in the past. But as far as number of postings, I definitely don't like that one for obvious reasons. Just because I'm not posting doesn't mean I'm not lurking and reading up and checking out everyone's posts and videos nearly every day. I hope this happens because I've been dying for a reason to make a zombie movie!!!

[3pidemiC]

I may contribute my failed attempted at a zed movie from a few summers ago.

[MinionZombie]

I may contribute my failed attempted at a zed movie from a few summers ago. I believe it has to be a brand new short.

[krakenslayer]

Man, I hope I get a new job soon so I can purchase a camera and get to work on it. I'm looking at this model - it looks like it has about the right balance of cost and features for my needs/budget: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Panasonic-HD...0746347&sr=8-1 What do you guys think? I've seen some footage shot on the camera and it really does have very good picture/colour quality, almost film-like.

[DjfunkmasterG]

My thoughts are if you are just starting out save money and do not shoot with HD cameras, however, since a majority of the market is HD that is hard, but save some money. You can achieve the film look through most editing programs if you have the right tools, and know how to adjust your cameras settings. In order to get a film like look you need a camera that shoots at least 30fps, UK people should try to get anything that shoots 25fps. Then you need to adjust gamma and chroma levels in the camera, lighting on set is another factor and then the rest of it is post production. Also, Neil sent me back a PM and is interested in doing the contest. We are hashing out the details. I will put up the prize, for the winner. Still undecided if the films should be judged by a panel, or by forum members. I am leaning more towards judges because of forum friends backing people up, and people can sometimes get a mass rush of friends to come vote for thier stuff, so that will be worked out in the next two weeks.

[MinionZombie]

But then - who would be the judges? Although aye, it's probably a better way of doing it, and the judges would not have to have done a film of course. ... As for cameras - I agree, I don't get all this fuss about HD cameras - and starting out, SD is perfectly good, if not groovy, on a good camera (*cough* DVX100B *cough* ) - Magic Bullet and a 2.35:1 can do a whole lot more with SD footage, than just some HD on it's own. I don't really see a lot of point in HD at an indie level at all, to be honest. It feels more to do with the cache of having the label of "HD" attached to it, than it actually being necessary at an indie level. But then - looking at the link - you probably couldn't go far wrong with that. Although being able to have a shotgun microphone connected would be good (didn't look at the spec directly, but I assume that would be tricky) ... and if that's your budget level, then it probably is quite hard to find a good SD camera in that range - which is more a consumer level, so the trend goes toward the gadget-obsessed HD angle, rather than anything else particularly. So you'd probably get a decent camera out of that - a good tripod would be necessary though, a cheap one can never deliver, so that could run you an extra £100 to £150 perhaps. ... And then it's not just about the equipment - as you know, of course - it's also (I'd say mainly so) to do with coming up with a good idea, getting nice shot compositions and presenting it well on the back end in editing. It's also about working within your means (because trying to do something too big, with not enough/nowhere near enough, just looks cringey or flat-out awful), and using what you have at your disposal - kind of like what Rodriguez said about El Mariachi - he had access to a bus and a guitar, so both of those things were going in his movie. ... Back to your budget level, aye, you'd most likely end up going HD - because finding a 3CCD SD camera at that budget range, which is of good enough quality, will be tricky. Hope my ramblings have been of some use.

[krakenslayer]

My thoughts are if you are just starting out save money and do not shoot with HD cameras, however, since a majority of the market is HD that is hard, but save some money. I agree with you on that. The fact that the camera is HD was just incidental really - it's basically the cheapest camcorder I could find that was 3-CCD, was able to save directly onto SD card (to save pissing around with tapes) and had enough features to play with to get things looking nice. You're right though, maybe I should just buy an el cheapo shitty camcorder for the competition and use it to practice with...

[kchertu]

The reason to do HD at the indie level is because, from what I've heard, distributers don't want to buy a low-budget film unless it was shot on HD. But of course if you aren't looking to distribute, then it really doesn't matter. Krakenslayer, The SD9 is a GREAT camera for the price. My company bought me one when I went to Romania for Perkins 14 so that I could document the experience and it has been nothing but awesome! Not a GREAT example as we were rushed (2 days of filming) and this isn't my ultimate edited version, but here's a link to a film I made with the camera: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAJpwM-48kw And here's one of my Joker films that was done with the camera (we actually had to make the footage look way worse than in its raw form so that it would be believable that it was a handheld camcorder... it really looked unbelievable): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf5_cr-DH3k The fact that it saves to the SD card is one of my favorite things and that I can just delete a bad take if I want, never to worry about it again is really nice. One drawback, as MZ pointed out, is the lack of input for a mic. However, the mic on the SD9 is surprisingly good (all the audio from my films linked above is from the camera itself).

[krakenslayer]

But then - who would be the judges? Although aye, it's probably a better way of doing it, and the judges would not have to have done a film of course. ... As for cameras - I agree, I don't get all this fuss about HD cameras - and starting out, SD is perfectly good, if not groovy, on a good camera (*cough* DVX100B *cough* ) - Magic Bullet and a 2.35:1 can do a whole lot more with SD footage, than just some HD on it's own. I don't really see a lot of point in HD at an indie level at all, to be honest. It feels more to do with the cache of having the label of "HD" attached to it, than it actually being necessary at an indie level. But then - looking at the link - you probably couldn't go far wrong with that. Although being able to have a shotgun microphone connected would be good (didn't look at the spec directly, but I assume that would be tricky) ... and if that's your budget level, then it probably is quite hard to find a good SD camera in that range - which is more a consumer level, so the trend goes toward the gadget-obsessed HD angle, rather than anything else particularly. So you'd probably get a decent camera out of that - a good tripod would be necessary though, a cheap one can never deliver, so that could run you an extra £100 to £150 perhaps. ... And then it's not just about the equipment - as you know, of course - it's also (I'd say mainly so) to do with coming up with a good idea, getting nice shot compositions and presenting it well on the back end in editing. It's also about working within your means (because trying to do something too big, with not enough/nowhere near enough, just looks cringey or flat-out awful), and using what you have at your disposal - kind of like what Rodriguez said about El Mariachi - he had access to a bus and a guitar, so both of those things were going in his movie. ... Back to your budget level, aye, you'd most likely end up going HD - because finding a 3CCD SD camera at that budget range, which is of good enough quality, will be tricky. Hope my ramblings have been of some use. Thanks MZ, I missed your post the first time around because you posted it between me replying to DJ's post and actually clicking "submit". I really appreciate the good advice and will take it on board. The reason to do HD at the indie level is because, from what I've heard, distributers don't want to buy a low-budget film unless it was shot on HD. But of course if you aren't looking to distribute, then it really doesn't matter. Krakenslayer, The SD9 is a GREAT camera for the price. My company bought me one when I went to Romania for Perkins 14 so that I could document the experience and it has been nothing but awesome! Not a GREAT example as we were rushed (2 days of filming) and this isn't my ultimate edited version, but here's a link to a film I made with the camera: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAJpwM-48kw And here's one of my Joker films that was done with the camera (we actually had to make the footage look way worse than in its raw form so that it would be believable that it was a handheld camcorder... it really looked unbelievable): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf5_cr-DH3k The fact that it saves to the SD card is one of my favorite things and that I can just delete a bad take if I want, never to worry about it again is really nice. One drawback, as MZ pointed out, is the lack of input for a mic. However, the mic on the SD9 is surprisingly good (all the audio from my films linked above is from the camera itself). Both films were GREAT, and visually they looked even better than the footage I had previously seen from this camera. I might have to cough up for the SD9 after all :

[DjfunkmasterG]

I think Minion used to use a Hi-8 camera when he made the first I am Zombie Man. I would look around, you should be able to find a good used SD camera for what you're going to spend. 400 pounds is about $800 here int he states, you should be able to grab at least a canon Gl1, which would be a great camera to start with. The reason to do HD at the indie level is because, from what I've heard, distributers don't want to buy a low-budget film unless it was shot on HD. But of course if you aren't looking to distribute, then it really doesn't matter. Krakenslayer, The SD9 is a GREAT camera for the price. My company bought me one when I went to Romania for Perkins 14 so that I could document the experience and it has been nothing but awesome! Not a GREAT example as we were rushed (2 days of filming) and this isn't my ultimate edited version, but here's a link to a film I made with the camera: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAJpwM-48kw And here's one of my Joker films that was done with the camera (we actually had to make the footage look way worse than in its raw form so that it would be believable that it was a handheld camcorder... it really looked unbelievable): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf5_cr-DH3k The fact that it saves to the SD card is one of my favorite things and that I can just delete a bad take if I want, never to worry about it again is really nice. One drawback, as MZ pointed out, is the lack of input for a mic. However, the mic on the SD9 is surprisingly good (all the audio from my films linked above is from the camera itself). That is not entirely true about Low Budget distributors wanting HD content, as most won't even fork up for a Blu-Ray release, and although shooting in HD will give you a good master, it will be degraded as hell because most won't fork up for anything more than a DVD-5 transfer. Try cramming a 90 minute flick, plus features on a DVD-5 and what do you get? Shitty picture quality.

[Mike70]

Also, Neil sent me back a PM and is interested in doing the contest. We are hashing out the details. I will put up the prize, for the winner. Still undecided if the films should be judged by a panel, or by forum members. I am leaning more towards judges because of forum friends backing people up, and people can sometimes get a mass rush of friends to come vote for thier stuff, so that will be worked out in the next two weeks. i am all for the forum judging the films. make it a blind viewing where no one knows who did a particular film. a panel is way too impersonal (and smells of elitism) and removes one of the main reasons for members to give a shit about this contest. if they can't vote on the winner, why would anyone pay attention to the contest. far better and far more inclusive to have the forum membership at large do the judging. there are ways of limiting shenanigans. again, i'd be willing to help out on this in any way. i don't plan on making film (i barely know which way to point a camera), so i'd be available for any behind the scenes duties.