It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Am I the only one who isn't in complete awe of their work? I mean it's gorgeous footage without a doubt, but artistically I get nothing. The main thing I take away is that they spend a lot of money on nice toys.
I agree with you on those reels that were show. But the stuff in the art Of flight was artsy IMO. Some crazy shots that came out of the south american segments
Perhaps. I just think helicopters are generally an awful way to shoot landscapes. Although some of the ones from That's It, That's All were mind bending. Still, I've seen more amazing stuff from a simple tripod + camera setup.
Agreed. One thing i do dislike about the brain farm movies is like you said, they never have stationary shots. Its basically all shot from a (multiple?) helicopters. If they did shoot AK lines just on a tripod, it could add a bit of change to their movies in a good way.
'artsy,' yes. but i have to agree with landis here.
brain farm definitely has a lot of stunning footage, but it isn't put together in a way that brings out any sort of emotional response from me. it's just high budget, red bull extreme stuff. life cycles, on the other hand, was put together in a much more beautiful way than anything i've seen from brain farm and i always feel a lot more while watching that film. obviously they still shot on REDs and had elaborate forest cable cam setups and such, but their budget was undoubtedly much smaller.
I cannot relate to their high budget videos. They don't inspire me as a filmmaker at all. Being a snowboarder their movies are not the kind that get me excited to ride either.
I know Landis likes the film The Fall. granted it was shot in amazing locations with good gear, but the shots are far less complex than brain farm's in terms of movement, frame rate, etc. a lot of the shots are simple static shots, but the framing is unreal. the shots in that movie are more powerful to me than brain farm stuff.
I like this example because it shows action without any fancy stabilization techniques. Just beautiful colors and skillful cuts between stationary cameras. Particularly the quick cuts from 0:30 - 0:37
I love these examples because the illustrate how a good static shot looks like a beautiful painting (the film that the last clip was taken from is entirely based on Renaissance paintings). Of course there's more than one way to skin a cat, but in my opinion a good tripod shot takes more skill and finesse than any other form because you aren't relying on camera movements to communicate depth. You're limited to using only the fundamental principals of design: color, composition, gesture, and form. In a monotonous sequence of ever-changing shapes motion blurring in different directions (steadicam, heli), the geometry of an unchanging frame sticks out. It's striking and majestic.
I don't want to sound like I'm ragging on Brainfarm because I'm not; they make awesome videos and produce amazing footage. However to me their footage is more of a technological achievement than an artistic one. You could theoretically have any unskilled person operating a Cineflex and the audience will be equally as amazed at the footage as if a refined cinematographer had shot it. On the other hand, without expensive toys you have to step up your shit and use your primitive sense to create beautiful images-and funnily enough, these images tend to withstand the test of time despite the progression of technology (Hitchcock, Kubrick, Welles, etc.)
Just watched on how brainfarm started out... Incredible!
How the hell did he manage to land the budget he has now? Seeing where he got from and where he is now is incredible. I'm really curious if he's had any sort of education regarding filming...
I wouldn't go that far. So many kids on here don't even know how to compose a shot, set exposure, and get a proper white balance.
Brainfarm is generic but they are DAMN GOOD at that generic filming style they have. Not my style, but there's no denying the guys behind it have ome talent.
Funny, I just discovered Brainfarm the other day and have been addicted to their videos. Footage is all pretty amazing, mainly due to their expensive equipment. But you can't overlook their unbelievable pilot skills and use of the phantom camera. If I were a client I'd feel pretty good about hiring them to do video work for my company.
Then again, wonder what some of us could do if handed half a million dollars worth of gear...
As far as making things go, for me: not much. I know shit about video. But even in the hands of more capable users on here, getting a nice image out of all those sick camera's isn't really easy. You'd need MONTHS to slightly learn what those guys know and can do.
I agree with pretty much everybody here that brainfarm is sick but much more of cinema porn than true art. In fact in the interview for the creators project curt morgan says "at this point I'm almost more of a tech geek than a filmmaker"
I think the epic proportions of their shots match what they are filming perfectly.
The avalanche in this video was amazing and I don't think there's really a better way to film its power
Filming something so vast that has so many directions (that avy) in an "artsy" way is done with his budget, not a tripod-camera setup.
Why not add to the dimension of a shot with the use of a helicopter?
Now of course getting dimension in a shot is obviously possible with a tripod-camera setup but IMO the situations they are in and the subjects they are filming require some extra dimension.
Everyone is criticizing them for not making emotional, "true" art...but it doesn't really seem like that is their goal.
When shooting extreme sports, if you can alienate the viewer than you make the feats that the athletes are doing seem even more unbelievable and amazing. I have not seen shots from many other companies that are of the same quality, for what they are doing, and doubt that many other companies could pull off some of the shots they get.
It seems to me that because no one on this site can relate to them because of their budget, technology skills, etc. everyone has been fairly quick to criticize them. For me though, they are on the cutting edge of extreme videography and are out there doing things that, really, no other company can do or has ever done, which is more than can be said for a lot of companies. Yes, they may not be out getting emotional, hipster shots, but they are out there pushing the boundaries of what filmers and film technology is capable of and for that, I think they should be commended.
I think you're missing the point. I am criticizing them in the sense that I am expressing a well-founded judgement; I'm not attacking them because I can't relate to it.
The design of their footage makes sense considering the subject matter. The riders are doing some groundbreaking stuff, and omnipresence and production value compliment that nicely. I can only imagine how frustrating it would be to some if they shot in a more limited and romantic way. Parts of the act simply wouldn't get covered, or it would send a mixed message: extreme stunts from a graceful, artistic perspective. I don't think they should change their style because it works well.
Still, this doesn't change the fact that some of us aren't emotionally moved by it, and that's okay because I don't think that's their top priority.
Although to be fair, they aren't doing anything new. They're the first to do it in the action sports world, but this has been done before in a much more artistic fashion (Planet Earth).
We're still years away from using UAV's as a tool in cenimetography. The FAA still doesn't allow commercial use. It's my understanding the FAA doesn't spend much time investigating companies already using rc helis as a commercial tool or other wise these kind of shots wouldn't legally be allowed in the US. On a side note, the company I work for will be getting a cineflex in a couple weeks, for science purposes but I'm crossing my fingers I'll be getting to operate it.
You specifically said they are the first to do it in their sport. That means they are the first to do it. In their sport. ya dig bro?
I'm not "acting" at all. You are reading my posts in your own tone making it sound as though I am the one attacking your criticism of Brain Farm. I'm simply on the other side of the argument.
most of us aren't criticizing their 'shooting technique.' we've acknowledged that they get gorgeous footage. i'm just saying that their films as a whole trigger no emotional response for me. i'm sure brain farm wouldn't really care, and that's fine. just expressing my opinion.
And I'm expressing my opinion. We all are and we all know that. Brain Farm triggers an emotional response for me. I don't think they need "artsy" shots in their work. (even though they have a ton of those shots.) Maybe the real issue with their videos not standing out emotionally is their post work?
Using well-established technologies and techniques to film a new subject is not a technological innovation. If I use a Glidecam to shoot a porno does that mean I'm the first person to use a Glidecam?
1. Not once did I ever resort to name calling simply because I don't have to. Everything I have written has been a well warranted claim. I never said your opinions were groundless; I said your claims were (and still have yet to be substantiated).
2. Calling my opinion bogus and ill-minded is vague and doesn't really tell me anything other than the fact that you feel the need to resort to name calling when you paint yourself into a corner.
I'll continue this when you're ready to sit at the grown-up table.
Normally I would just say shut the fuck up if you have no contribution to brain farm criticism and continue.... but this sounds good. I have to go take a test. Peace ya angry bitches. +K to all for vocab expansion.
You called my logic circular and posted a spiderman meme.
Where are my "groundless claims?" I don't see claims, I see opinions. When I read your post I simply connected your definition of "claim" with my definition of "opinion."
Calling your opinion bogus and ill-minded fits them perfectly.....Vague and they don't really tell me anything other than the fact that you're an extremely opinionated person. Which IMO isn't very sought after.
Haha yes he does, but I was referring to the post you made earlier with the Fountain clip and such. (I just didn't want to quote it because it was large)
