C i neJournalVolume 1, Issue 1 Summer/Fall 2014

Universi ty of California, Los Angeles

Table of Contents

1

2

A Letter from the President

Televising the Revolution

A Critique of the Movie Goer

TFT: Thoughts from Three

“In Every Job That Must Be Done”: The Animated Feature

Notes from the Bandstand

CineJournal Interview: Francesca Holland

Camera Circle

3

4

5

6

7

8

Why does Delta Kappa Alpha exist? Storytelling and Collaboration. The passion to tell stories collaboratively sparked an idea in our ten found-ers to create this fraternity. And it is that same passion that drives the success and continual growth of DKA across the country. All cinematic art forms can be traced back to the simple desire to tell a story. Whether we create opportunities in camera technology to improve our cinematography or develop shading techniques to produce realistic animations, we all strive to help each other become better storytellers. We help each other love the lifelong process of learning, sharing, and growing.

Delta Kappa Alpha already has an extraordinary and distinguished story. Some of the greatest names in cinema were a part of it since its founding. Presently, we are in a time of growth and bloom as we build upon our history and pursue a limitless future. Carrying our 78-year-old heritage, we now contribute our own pages to the incredible story of DKA.

I am humbled to serve as the new President of the Delta Colony. Having seen the progress made since Delta was re-founded a year and two quarters ago, I could not be more excited for our future. Our mem-bers look forward to supporting our fellow colonies and chapters, the UCLA campus, and the surrounding community. The seed was planted, our colony is growing, and it is just a matter of tenacity and time before it blossoms. Connecting with organizations like Monday Night Mission and Reading to Kids, our story is already beginning to spread. All of this exciting development and growth will have its ups and downs, but I have complete confidence that Delta Kappa Alpha at UCLA will not only prosper, but will also thrive.

Fraternally yours,Catherine Collins

A Letter from the President

As an artistic medium, television is fairly new. Coming to prominence in the ‘50s, the way we viewed television remained fairly unchanged over the past fifty years. Until now.

You would be hard-pressed to find a millenial these days that actually pays for cable. With a rocky economy, skyrocketing housing prices, and the crushing weight of student loans, more and more young people are turning down cable companies and their bundling packages. But they’re still watching television.

In fact, many would say we’re in a new Golden Age of television. The quality of television pro-grams nowadays is perfectly capable of competing with the cinematic epics at the theater. Huge hits like Game of Thrones, The Wire, and, Boardwalk Empire have made up the lineup of HBO. And even basic cable networks like AMC have been able to produce award winning dramas like Mad Men and Breaking Bad. Not to mention that the stigma surrounding movie actors working in television has gradually faded over time. Now even big name stars like Kevin Spacey, Matthew McConaughey, and Woody Harrelson are gracing our screens in critically acclaimed shows such as House of Cards and True Detective.

Which brings us to the nature of television watching today. The aforementioned House of Cards is one of Netflix’s most popular original series along with Orange is the New Black. Both shows have rocketed into the public eye for both content and their unique online releases: every episode of both series were released all at once allowing viewers to watch the seasons at their own pace.

Netflix is brilliantly tapping into the way that television shows are consumed nowadays, especially among college-aged people. With the Internet, people have more freedom with the flexibility of their viewing schedule, often opting to watch many episodes in a row rather than waiting. An as-tounding 670,000 people, or 2% of all Netflix subscribers, binge-watched the entire season in one weekend.

And there has been a shift not just in consumption, but also in production. Online series are increas-ingly more popular, with hit shows like The Lizzie Bennett Diaries having more than one hundred episodes or popular web series being adapted into cable shows like Broad City.

It is an exciting time to be a television fan, watcher or creator. While the format is changing, our collective passion for the medium has not changed at all.

Televising the RevolutionBy Ashlyn Thomas

Cr itique

Movieof the

A

GoerBy

Ryan Elk ins

Especially with people frequently

raiding social media sites with their

own take on the most recent f i lm, it’s

often said that everyone’s a critic.

And it’s true. These days, just about

every moviegoer has an opinion that

they w ant to s har e. So rather than

joining in and giving my laundry list

of critiques of the f i lms of 2013, I

thought I’d critique all the people out

there who are giving these f i lm cri-

tiques. Take this, al l you f i lm critics

clogging up my Facebook newsfeed!

Realism Shpealism – I don’t care if a film correctly portrays real life or not!

1Especially in 2013, a year packed with historical fictions (and a space movie), I hardly went a week without reading some article or Facebook status complaining about the fac-tual errors in a movie. “The Butler’s son character didn’t re-ally exist” or “Captain Phillips was less likeable in real life” or “the science behind some scene in Gravity didn’t make sense” or “the Lone Survivor heroes didn’t really have that conversation” or “Saving Mr. Banks was too fictionalized by Disney.” The list goes on.

Given the fictional nature of films with screenwriters and actors, why has there been a recent trend with people obsessing about a film’s realism? As far as I’m concerned, I expect a film to make me feel and to make me think. And when buying my ticket, I surrender my imagination to the filmmakers and give them the creative freedom to do whatever it takes to do those two things. If my goal was to learn the history behind Mary Poppins or the science behind space travel, I’d simply read a textbook or watch a documentary on the History Channel.

What these “But it didn’t really happen like that” people do not realize is the emotional importance of fictionalizing ele-ments of these stories. By creating the Black Panther son in The Butler, writer Danny Strong allowed audiences to com-pare two opposing views during the Civil Rights movement, and thus sympathize with both. And how could Billy Ray tell the suspenseful, heroic tale of Captain Phillips’ hostage situation if the audience didn’t even like the protagonist? And are the miniscule background details in Gravity really worth discussing endlessly or is the beautifully crafted char-acter arc of Dr. Stone overcoming death more important?

2013 was also a year with some big flops including Universal’s R.I.P.D., Disney’s The Lone Ranger, and Sony/Columbia’s After Earth. I agree that these (and even others which didn’t flop) are painfully formulaic, overdone, and eye-roll worthy. But why do people continue to go and see these films if they are looking for originality and great characters? Unfortunately more often than not, big budget studio films simply suck.

These films unfortunately give our era of filmmaking a bad rep. People constantly complain that there are no good, original movies being made anymore. But that’s entirely untrue and I’m tired of hearing it! Instead of seeing the next superhero quad-sequel reboot remake, people should be going out to see the indie films of the year that receive lots of crit ical buzz. Attach yourself to the dynamic characters in the uniquely di-alogue-driven Before Midnight, watch a snippet of real life in a children’s residential treatment facility in Short Term 12, or enjoy the far-from-formulaic coming of age tale Mud. These Oscar snubbed indie films (and more) are terrifically original and definitely prove all those “films suck these days” people are wrong.

So if you want some simple enjoyment, go see the next White House Down. But please do not walk out complaining about Hollywood’s lack of originality and weak characters. This has been one of the best years in indie filmmaking, so you simply aren’t looking in the right places.

People nowadays have such repulsion to boredom. They hate having a minute to breathe and think, and rather demand con-stant excitement and an action-packed plot. Just think back to when you saw Her, 12 Years a Slave or Nebraska and I bet you can remember someone dismissing the whole film simply because they were bored. Sadly, terrific films like these receive negative attention for choosing dialogue and subtle character development over constant action and plot.

I personally hope for a time when people judge films based less on how stimulated they were every minute and more based on the quality of the dialogue, the story, and the characters’ devel-opments. This public pressure to never have a slow moment leads to films like Wolf of Wall Street, which frankly suffer from hardly any character development and a lack of great dialogue. Sure Wolf of Wall Street was more entertaining than Her, but Her’s dialogue focus made it a far more lovable and interesting film. In fact, the slow beats in Her were beneficial in helping me better engage with the characters and re-analyze love and technology. So next time you are “bored” in a film, consider taking the down time to appreciate the characters or to think about the film’s intentions, rather than hoping for a crazy scene combining a threesome with a gun shootout.

“But it was so boring !”

There are st i l l g reat, or i g inal f i lms be i ng made, just stop seeing the big blockbusters !

2 3

Matthew Camello When I entered UCLA, I was a headstrong freshman with lofty medical aspirations and an egregious science curriculum ahead of me. Ardent in my belief that I would not succumb to the stereotypical change of major, I was wrong. Core Chemistry and Calculus classes were tolerable but led me to believe I’d be happier in a more creative-based field: I was right.

I applied to UCLA’s School of Theater, Film and Television on a whim my second year and fervently believe it is the best choice I’ve made. The hands-on and collaborative classes are ideal for the anti-lecture hall student such as myself; similarly, overarching projects tend to dominate classes, and the professors are equipped with impressive backgroundsw and insight to the industry. As a student interested in animation, the opportunity to work alongside Chuck Sheetz (The Simpsons) is invaluable. I would strongly encourage students to apply to this program; for me, it embodies the quintessential college experience.

Nerris Nassiri My experience in UCLA’s film major has been a truly one of a kind experience. On the very first day, we met in TV Studio 1 in Melnitz and were thrown into the fire of Television production. Through lots of trial and error, laughter and tears, and guidance by Professor Neema Barnette (Director for The Cosby Show, Gilmore Girls, 7th Heaven), by the end of the quarter we each knew the ins and outs of television production and had our own short skits on video.

In quarter 2 our fast paced journey has gotten even faster, with classes in editing and cinematography (taught by DKA faculty advisor Professor McDonald), as well as screenwriting and stylistic studies of cinema. Our final project for cinematography class is shooting and editing 100 feet of 16mm film on an Arriflex 16S movie camera. Film cameras require much more detailed work than the digital workflows we’ve all come to know and love nowadays, but it definitely helps us appreciate the art form much more. All in all, the film & TV major has been a simultaneously stressful yet amazing and immersive experience with incredibly talented classmates and quite possibly the best faculty in the world.

“The Film & TV major has been a simultaneously

stressful yet amazing and immersive experience with

incredibly talented classmates and quite possibly the

best faculty in the world.”– Nerris Nassiri

TFT: THOUGHTS FROM THREEMembers of the Class of 2015 on their experiences in UCLA’s School of Theater, Film and Television

Searit Huluf I remember freshman year, going to my first class of the quarter, which was Film 106A (History of Amer-ican Motion Pictures). I already had an interest in pursuing a career in the film industry, but after my first lecture, I was convinced to apply to the film program. When I received the interview email a year later, I was shocked. I couldn’t believe that I passed the first round, but what was worst was finding out who didn’t make it. It was hard because I wanted a lot of my friends to be in the program with me, but they didn’t receive an email. I was scared to tell my friends I got the interview when they didn’t, but they were all very supportive and congratulated me. The day of my interview was really stressful; I was in a soundstage with one spotlight pointing at me and three faculty members sitting across from me. It was very intim-idating and a weird experience. They asked me a lot of strange questions, like “What did I eat for breakfast?”, that really threw me off and I was so sure I wasn’t going to get in. But during my brother’s graduation, I had about 10 missed calls from one of my friends. I already knew what it was about. I quickly went on my iPhone to see if I got in. I was shocked to see my petition to change to a film major got approved. I was so excited and wanted to tell my family, but I decided to wait until after my brother’s graduation. I didn’t want to steal his day. The most difficult aspect about film school is the workload. My first quarter consisted of 9-6 block classes with only 10 minute breaks in between, and critiquing a film everyday, Monday through Thursday. I also had a production class twice a week where I had to direct short films in class. I was pretty much never home, nor did I have a social life. But I gained a real friendship with my classmates. Since the class size was only 30, we got to know each other really fast and on a deeper level. Sure, there were times when we pulled all-nighters in the editing rooms, but we were together and understood the difficulty of the workload. I honestly don’t think I would have passed all my classes if it wasn’t for my classmates who stood by me and helped me finish all my films.

What I love and so far have learnt most from film school is the importance of writing. Writing every single day, for at least an hour. I use to hate writing because I didn’t feel like I was a good writer. I would always do my papers last minute, not giving a second thought to re-read it. But during orientation, the dean gave a speech about what they expect from us new admitted TFT students and that was to be storytellers. Her speech convinced me to be a screenwriter because I want to be able to create films that are not just for entertainment, but also to share my stories and views of the world.

“I want to be able to create f ilms that are not just for entertainment, but also to share my stories and views of the world.”

– Searit Huluf

O ften dismissed as a “kid’s movie”, the animated feature film’s primary purpose is thought by many

to be nothing more than a baby-sitter. It is often passed off as merely something colorful and stimulating for the young and naïve to idly stare at. While this may be true for a selection of child-oriented films, further ex-amination reveals that the modern animated film can be so much more. John Lasseter, Chief Creative Officer at both Pixar and Walt Disney Animation Studios, once said, “Animation is the one type of movie that really does play for the entire audience”. The implication of Lasseter’s words is that a product appropriate for children need not exclude an adult audience. I instead propose that these alleged “kid’s movies” be thought of as a r tistic feats of extreme collaboration, boundless creativity, and fine-tuned storytelling with depth and performances enjoyable by all ages.

Fables have been in circulation for millennia. With their fantastical characters, compelling stories, and underlying moral lessons, they are in many ways rein-carnate in the animated film. In no other medium, can one tell the story of a kidnapped fish, a royal lion, or a less-than-sisterly snow queen. Furthermore, in no other medium, can you manipulate an audience into empa-thizing with each of these characters. Fantastical as these characters may be, their stories do not deviate from that which we, as humans living a complex world,

can relate to. For example, Pixar’s Finding Nemo tells of an overbearing father’s path to learning to let go and trust, after death and disability led to a parent-child relationship based upon fear. Thus, it’s hardly the fare of entertainment designed to target the 8-12 (years old) demographic exclusively.

So, how do they do it? How do these teams of hundreds of artists convince an audience to identify with a fish, robot, or an icy empress? They do so with upwards of four years’ worth of hard work and joint effort. An animation stu-dio houses several different departments, each with their own set of goals and each knowing their place within the pipeline of the film’s production. Among these depart-ments, within the context of a CG (Computer Generated) f ilm, are look development, modeling, lighting, effects, technical direction, rigging, animation, and, unanimously understood as the most important, story.

The story artists ideally spend years perfecting the narrative into something that moves its audience. It would be incredibly wasteful to throw away the work of the other departments when a sequence needs to be rewritten or cut entirely. For this reason, the story is first created in the form of roughly drawn storyboards that resemble a comic book and when every approved sequence is strewn together, an “animatic” has been created. An animatic is a very rough version of the entire film with temporary visuals. Its sole purpose is to ensure that

All Graphics Created by Andrea Nguyen

“In Every Job That Must Be Done”: The An imated Feature

By Andrew Sibner

a gripping story has been written. If an animatic is itself entertaining to watch, then the studio can rest assured that the final project, animated and polished to perfection, will be well received. The individual shots are then divided up and assigned to the animators who’ll bring every character to life.

Character animators, those who bring their unique performances to the animated characters that you see on the screen, have long since been referred to as “actors with pencils”. Depending on the studio, individual ani-mators may be the designated animator for a given charac-ter. In other cases, an animator must animate, and step into the mindset of, every character in their shot. Given how many different artists contribute to the portrayal of one character, it’s partially the job of the Animation Supervisor to ensure that characters are acting consistently from one shot to the next. Once assigned their shot, the animator receives the rigged character model. This means that the animator is given what is essentially a puppet – static in the hands of a layman, but a living, breathing character in the hands of an animator. The animator may record themselves acting out their shot or refer to their own expressions frequently. This is why the vast majority of animators keep a mirror at their desk. The process of animating a character can be a very long and labori-ous ordeal. As a result, animators first roughly “block

out” their shot with only the most essential poses. This crude and blocky rendition is shown in dailies. Dailies, a central part of each day’s production process, take place in a room that emulates a theater and are a time for review and critique. If the blocked-out animation is approved, the animator is then free to chisel away at and add further detail to their shot until it resembles the smooth animation that you ultimately see in the films.

The plight of the CG character animator closely resembles that of all the studio’s employees. Long hours, stress, and extreme attention to detail are required of every artist. The entertainment industry with its stresses and financial pressures may not seem like an environment conducive to free-flowing creativity. However, it is commonplace for the top animation studios to invest in the happiness of their employees. Bonfires, swimming pools, buffets, concerts, massages, scooters, and endless bowls of cereal may await those employed by Disney, Pixar, or DreamWorks Animation. Frequently, it is the goal of an animation studio to create an environment for their artists that most resembles a college campus. And hey, who can argue with that, right? Needless to say, working in the ever-growing field of animation can have its ups and downs, but for those willing to offer their services to the creation of an artistic collaboration like none other… “Adventure is out there!”

Hayao Miyazaki’s newest film The Wind Rises came out this year,

and he claims it to be his last film. The film follows the life of Jirô

Horikoshi, the man who designed the Japanese fighter planes used

during World War II. The film quite deliberately focuses more on his

love life and the joy and inspiration brought to Jirô’s life in the pur-

suit of designing planes, with less of a focus on the war. Composer

Joe Hisaishi, who has written the scores to many of Miyazaki’s most

beloved films, specifically begins the film with three themes that

convey Jirô’s character development throughout the film.

The film opens with Jirô’s beautiful dream sequence, flying around

his town. The first notes we hear in the soundtrack are essential-

ly Jirô’s theme, plucked with the modest instrumentation of simply

guitar, mandolin, accordion and a plucked acoustic bass. It is a sim-

ple, yet incredibly beautiful melody that conveys all the inspiration

of his aviation life and all the passion of his love life without be-

ing even the slightest bit over the top. The mandolin plays a trem-

olo (technique where the hand moves rapidly back and forth on a

single note) out of which we hear the violins lightly tremolo. This

accompanies him gently entering the plane in the early morning.

The strings then take the theme previously plucked and erupt into a

grand rendition of what we just heard as we watch Jirô fly through

the city in his beautiful dream.

The next important theme to the film is labeled as Caproni’s theme on the soundtrack, though more specifically refers to how Jirô’s

inspiration as a jet designer is fueled from his readings and dreams about the famous aviator, Mr. Caproni. This theme starts out in the

bassoon with the strings playing in ricochet (a technique where the bow literally bounces after hitting the strings). This grows when the

trumpets join on the melody and the flute and piccolo join in on a faster counter-melody. The meter (length of the measures) shortens as

the more instruments join in on this rising melody and within 18 seconds of the song we’ve had this glorious build. This build perfectly

accompanies and signifies Jirô’s bubbling excitement and inspiration with the art of aviation and designing planes.

Perhaps the most important theme of the film is Naoko’s theme, the theme for the girl he falls in love with. The first time we hear this

melody it’s played alone on a solo piano. The melody alone suggests more than just a love theme. There is an element of sadness to it. It

is in a minor key, and although it is slow and lustful, there is clearly some sort of fate suggested by the music in regards to his relationship

with Naoko. Without spoiling the film, just note that their fateful relationship becomes a major theme in the film.

So we have these three themes. Caproni’s theme, the theme for Jirô’s professional ambition, Naoko’s theme, the theme for his love life,

and Jirô’s theme, which conveys both of these in the most beautiful way. This soundtrack goes beyond accompanying the editing of the

film. Every note tells you how Jirô evolves, grows and feels throughout the film. It’s not music that “works” with the film, it’s music that

“enhances” the film and is a large part of what defines the character of the film

NOTES FROM THE BANDSTANDBy Stephen Spies

The thought of life after college is pretty daunt-ing. As a current senior, I’m experiencing a mix of emotions. There’s excitement, anxiety, wonder, and occasionally, pure dread. How does one go about living… as a real adult? What happens when you can’t just sleep through your alarm, or ditch class for some pizza at 800 Degrees? One day in the not too distant future, a morning alarm will ensure you’ll be waking up to get paid, and there will be no more class to ditch. You’d be lying if you said you ar-en’t even a little bit worried about life after college. Fortunately for DeKAs like me, we have fraternal brothers and sisters to serve as alumni, and prove that after college we don’t just disappear into a black hole that is the real world. In need of some words of wisdom I went to the best example I know, my very own big, Francesca Holland. She’s the only Delta Kappa Alpha alumna of Delta Colony here at UCLA, and she’s making life in the real world seem easy breezy. Frannie, as we call her, graduated in June 2013 with a B.A. from UCLA’s Theatre Film and Television program, with an emphasis in directing. Here’s how our interview went down.

DeeAnne Ferraro: I’m gonna get right to it…how is life after college? Can you survive out there?Francesca Holland: Yes, you can. You def initely become an old person and go to bed earlier so that you can get more stuff done the next day. Even if you don’t get anything done, you still go to bed earlier. (Laughs) You do few-er things. You look back at, oh man I did class and this extra curricular and

that extracurricular, and with life after college you can barely fit your social life around working and sleeping. I like that you do have, on one hand, more free-dom because being outside the college bubble it actually enables you to get to more places. I’ve been able to experi-ence Los Angeles in a much more or-ganic way. I’ve actually been seeing all of it. But at the same time you miss that amazing companionship that you had 24/7 at school. D: What have you worked on since school ended?F: I was a PA on the pilot season of a show called Saint George, and also on Hell’s Kitchen. Gordon Ramsey is awesome, by the way. One day he told me I had cool combat boots. In December, I assistant directed a short f ilm project… for no pay, but to put that on the resume is nice. I was unemployed for a few months, but am now current-ly an administrative assistant at NBC Universal for pilot season. It’s not exactly where I want to be for my career, but it’s at an entertainment company, and the of f ice job pays better than other jobs that I’ve had. So there’s that. (Big smile)D: Where do you look for work?F: I do look online, but the only way I’ve been hired so far is through personal contacts that have put me in contact with someone directly hiring. Networking def initely comes into play here.

D: How did DKA help you?F: Wow, that’s a big question. DKA helped me by showing me how much is possible when you unite a group of passionate people with common values, more than just a common goal. There’s an amazing fraternal atmosphere that you can create when that happens.D: What is the biggest lesson you learned at UCLA?F: When you have an opportunity such as a university or anything, that puts you in the path of a really big group of diverse and unique people, really make the most of it and work with people. Meet everyone you can and really try to forge those connections. Don’t be afraid to work with them and love them. I’ve definitely learned the most about myself from all the friends and colleagues I’ve interacted with at UCLA. D: What advice would you give your senior self ?F: Even though it’s really easy to forget it because you’re at a really big school where thousands of other people are having the same amazing experience that you’re having, recognize i t’s a really unique experience to be in a place where you can take any class you want or make any project you want and you’ll always find a group of people who will be able to do it with you. D: Any f inal thoughts?F: I miss DKA!

CINEJOURNAL INTERVIEW: FR ANCESCA HOLL A NDa c a n d i d c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h o n e o f D e l t a c o l o n y ’ s a l u m n a

“Meet everyone you can and really try to forge those connections. Don’t be afraid to work with them and love them.”

“DKA helped me by showing me how much is possible when you unite a group of passionate people with common values, more than just a common goal.”

“I like that you do have...more freedom because being outside the college bubble it actually enables you to get to more places. I’ve been able to experience Los Angeles in a much more organic way.”

Pros: The BMCC is an incredibly affordable option for im-

age quality on par with some of the biggest players like ARRI

and RED. The sensor allows for 13 stops of dynamic range,

with a crop factor of only 2.39x. It can shoot in 2.5k RAW and

1080p in ProRes HQ, which allows for a more detailed image

and greater flexibility in post-production. While the BMCC al-

ready performs well in low light and achieves a wide field of

view, the new Metabones Speedbooster can enhance the image

even more! This addition lowers the crop factor from 2.39x to

1.5x and increases the sharpness and lowlight sensitivity of your

lenses by a stop (depending on which Speedbooster you choose)!

However, the Metabones Speedbooster is only available on the

MFT mount version of the BMCC and not on the EF mount ver-

sion. As for other factors besides image quality, the BMCC uses

conventional laptop 2.5” SSD’s for storage, which makes it the

best bang for your buck in regards to GB per dollar!

Cons: This is not a camera you use straight out of the box. Ergo-

nomically, the BMCC is not meant for handholding and requires

a rig for those kinds of shots. An external battery is also recom-

mended due to the anemic internal battery. With poor internal au-

dio as well, external audio equipment is a must, or at the very least

a pre-amp. These solutions add significant weight and size to the

setup of the BMCC. There are a few other annoying qualms that

come with using the BMCC. It does not have the ability to see how

much storage is left on your media drives, nor does it allow the

user to delete any clips or format the drive. This can be a problem

on set shooting scenes and not knowing when and if the camera

will reach its full capacity mid take. Since the BMCC shoots on

2.5” SSD’s, you will need to purchase readers for those drives to

be able to access/delete the footage on your computer. There are

also no audio meters to monitor the audio levels, if you decide to

use the internal audio solution. There are only a few presets for

white balance, which prevents you from choosing the exact color

temperature you want. The MFT mount version does not allow

for the use of Image Stabilization on any lens, and it can’t use

electronically controlled MFT lenses, which rules out most of the

Olympus and Panasonic lenses. While this only allows for manual

lenses, the BMCC MFT mount version can mount just about any

lens due to its mirrorless flange distance, unlike the EF mount ver-

sion. Another consideration is the fact that this camera only shoots

up to 30FPS, which eliminates the option to shoot in slow motion.

With many purchases necessary, the BMCC may not be for you if

you cannot afford a serious investment. If you are looking for an

all in one solution, run away!

Camera CircleAre you up-to-date on your cinema technology? We all know about the high-end ARRI and RED cameras, but what use are those to aspir ing filmmakers? DKA is here to help! Check out these alternatives that allow you to achieve a high quality look without burning a hole in your pocket.

Blackmagic Cinema Camera

By Catherine Collins

Pros: The BMPCC is a compact version of the BMCC that does

not sacrifice much yet still maintains great image quality. While

the sensor is slightly smaller than the BMCC, it still maintains

13 stops of dynamic range at a crop factor of 3.02x. However, as

mentioned before, the Metabones Speedbooster can make up for

this difference, as it changes the crop factor on the BMPCC from

3.02x to 1.7x and increases sharpness and low light sensitivi-

ty roughly by a stop. The BMPCC can shoot in 1080p for both

RAW and ProRes HQ. While this is slightly lesser resolution

than the BMCC, it is not a huge loss since 2.5k is not a standard

resolution and you normally downscale to 1080p anyway.

Cons: Many of the negatives of the BMCC also affect the

BMPCC. This camera requires top of the line SD cards to

storage, which are expensive and inefficient for holding much

data. Unlike the BMCC, the BMPCC’s internal battery is in-

terchangeable but still inefficient. An external battery solution

would be recommended. The internal audio is also poor and

requires an external solution, just as the BMCC. Even though

this camera is more compact, it is not designed for handheld

shots and requires some sort of rig. The BMPCC also has the

same problems with inability to delete footage, lack of audio

levels, few white balance presets, and loss of slow motion

capability. Just as the BMCC requires many purchases, the

BMPCC is not a camera to use straight out of the box.

Pros: For stills the Canon 5D Mark III is top of the line. The

warm and beautiful images that the Canon produces are unri-

valed in the photo department, but this magic doesn’t exactly

transfer to video. Originally, this camera was condemned for

having a soft video image and was bested by the much more

affordable GH3. That is, until the Magic Lantern hack came

out! With this hack, the Canon 5D Mark III can shoot in RAW

and achieve a much sharper image than its original picture.

Cons: While the Mark III now has the ability to shoot in RAW,

that was incorporated into its original design. Since the camera

requires Compact Flash Cards for storage, shooting in RAW can

get quite inefficient and expensive per GB of data. When shoot-

ing events or larger productions, reliability is key, so using a third

party hack may not provide you the most confidence. The Mark

III does not include an articulating LCD, so viewing your shots

in abstract angles will be a hassle without an external monitor.

Overall, if you want amazing stills first and video second, with the

ability to shoot RAW footage, this camera would be a good choice.

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera

Canon 5D Mark III

Pros: The GH4 possesses a powerful 16.05 Megapixel sensor

that not only produces exceptional photos but also beautiful 4K

video in a form factor that’s smaller and lighter than the more

expensive 1080p capable Canon C100 and Canon 5D Mark III!

It has an MFT mount, which means that you can mount just

about any lens to it. With this mount of course, you can use a

Metabones Speedbooster to make your applicable lenses wider

and faster, resulting in better lowlight performance! Another

great aspect of the GH4 is the pre-colored internal 100mbit co-

dec, as it subtracts the need to color correct and will save signif-

icant space when shooting 4K. The GH4 has audio meters and

a headphone jack to monitor audio. Panasonic will be selling

an add on accessory that adds SDI and XLR inputs, making it

a true professional camera! This add on will also allow you to

record into a higher bit rate codec like the Pro-Res HQ! To sum

it up: the GH4 is a workhorse: it can shoot internal 4k, external

4k in 10-bit, up to 96fps (with a slow-motion playback function

in camera), multiple compression/codecs to fit any job (events,

narratives, etc), it’s weather sealed, takes great stills, and the

battery life is great!

Cons: Not many, besides the fact that the GH4 cannot shoot in

RAW and the colors are hard to work with. It is difficult to find

a color profile that fits all of your needs. This results in more

time in post-production in order to color grade footage. Howev-

er, with all things considered, these set backs are easy to work

with when the GH4 delivers in all other areas.

Winner: GH4! The GH4 is the BEST all around camera for the money and quality for this comparison.

Panasonic Lumix GH4

CineJournal CommitteeEditor-in-Chief: Ian Colvin

Layout: Rachel Bender

Cover Art: Hope Stutzman

Writers: Matthew Camello,

Catherine Collins, Ryan Elkins,

DeeAnne Ferraro, Searit Huluf,

Andrew Sibner, Stephen Spies,

Ashlyn Thomas