Indie films suffer all the time due to first time film makers failing to use proper film formatting when they present their first project, whether its a film released on the internet or their film trailer released for anyone to see on an international level, making an impression on people [and indie judges] will come from how you present your film. This blog is presented to you from the notes of any first semester of film school. Your knowledge of Aspect ratios and compression etiquette can help you make the first best impression at the start of your presentation...so take notes!
Aspect ratios in film and television have changed over the years, but the one thing that stays consistent is people's desire to create and show their work in the proper format. So if you're making movies, short films, commercials, TV shows, or just shooting with friends, make sure you know the aspect ratio where you're going to upload or project.
Cinerama was the first widescreen format to be introduced after the Academy Ratio became a standard in 1932. It involved projecting images from three synchronized 35mm projectors onto a deeply-arced screen. It utilized aspect ratios of 2.59:1 to 2.65:1 to make images seem huge.
CinemaScope used aspect ratios of 2.35:1 to 2.66:1. It only had to use one projector to get the image on the screen, so it was preferable to Cinerama. Developed by Earl Sponable, who was the head of research at 20th Century Fox, CinemaScope was last used in 1967, the term "scope" is still used by projectionists and filmmakers to refer to any movie that uses anamorphic lenses or with an aspect ratio of 2.35:1 or more.
It's funny to think that even in the 1960s, theaters were trying to find a way to get people to watch less television and to come to the movies. Especially since we're having similar troubles today. Nowadays, if you want to go to the theater to see something projected, you can choose from 35mm or the much larger 70mm.
70mm has caught back on recently, since Tarantino, Nolan, and Paul Thomas Anderson have all elected to have their films projected in the huge format. 70mm boasts an aspect ratio of 2.76:1 – twice as large as the standard 35mm film. 70mm was what put Ben-Hur on the map in 1959, and now it's a way that filmmakers are getting people out to see the spectacle. 70mm is often combined with IMAX formats.
The modern IMAX design uses 70mm film that is shown horizontally with a massive 15 perforations per frame, giving it approximately six times the resolution of 35mm film. The average IMAX screen size is approximately 72' x 50' (22m x 16m), which is significantly larger than traditional movie screens of approximately 50' x 20' (16m x 6.1m).
TV boxes were 4:3 until widescreen televisions debuted in the 2000s. Many older programs had to convert their 4:3 shows to 16x9. But people who watched movies on TV rejoiced. The theatrical experience had finally come home. And as TVs grew in size, aspect ratios began to reflect the change.
So now we're in the digital era. We don't have to rely on the size of the film stock to reflect our aspect ratio. And if you have the money to shoot in 70mm, you still might not want to. People are creating lots of different media content. We're shooting shorts, digital series, movies, TV shows, commercials, Instagram videos, Facebook posts, and Snapchats.
We all love to shoot stuff to post on Facebook. Whether its the trailer for your new venture or a web series, you want people to be able to like and share the best content. Facebook supports:
You can upload phone videos, movie trailers, and fluidly share videos from all other social channels if they occur in the aforementioned formats.
Like Facebook, Twitter is a great place to get your message out there. It's great to get retweets and social engagements. Twitter is one of the best places to get your message put to the people and to interact individually. Twitter supports the following aspect ratios:
So here's the deal: lately, some streaming services have been cutting off almost 25% of movies by reformatting them to fit 16x9 televisions. While this practice is supposed to stop, with letterboxes being added to share the proper format, you should still be aware. If you're creating content for Netflix, Amazon, or HBO, you should know their aspect ratios. That way you'll know how your work is presented on the screen.
Netflix, Amazon and HBO shows almost everything in 16x9. So if you're trying to watch a movie that's natively in 2.39:1, you're going to get the black bars. They also have been known to use 2:1 aspect ration. This aspect ratio is also used in many new Netflix series and is less wide than scope, but still gives the viewer the sense of a wide screen.
Okay, we've gone through lots of different kinds of aspect ratios, but now it's time to talk about how aspect ratio can help your story. Think about how Christopher Nolan used IMAX and 70mm to give Dunkirk the largest aspect ratio possible. Making Dunkirk huge wasn't just to drive people to the theater. It was to envelop audiences in the heat of battle, to make them feel the pressure of these men, and to give the entire story scope.
Squeezing that movie into a more boxy proportion makes you feel the claustrophobia of the world we're in. We're under pressure and going through our passion with Reverend Toller. It also gives the movie a more classical feel. It's a throwback, like the church, and an homage to Hollywood of yesteryear.
Your aspect ratio is not just a mathematical tool. It's also a way to enter your story and add another layer. First time film producers should consider a director that knows the required formats to any project that lands a prospective film project. It takes more than learning the lingo to get your film in the right Aspect Ratio to impress the right people. Don't shoot a film just to shoot it on video, learn to do the shit the right way before you come off looking like some amateur idiot in the local Indie Film Scene. So think about what you really want to do before you start shooting!
Good luck out there!
D. R. Quintana
Director/Producer
Yeah, it's that time of year again when Indie film teams across the country start submitting their projects into film festivals across the internet. Many of those teams are filled with the overwhelming urge to get an awards laurel stamped on their indie movie poster as "evidence" that something they filmed was produced with "professional prowess." Chins are often held higher with every new laurel that is set on their poster, like an award pendant that is proudly pinned on the chest of a soldier in front of his unit, because he was the guy who went out of his way to do the job, who did his job without complaint and left his family for months while he was on deployment. But is simply receiving a laurel for an "official selection" really something to brag about? Do these awards actually help an indie film reach the next level of success?...No, not really.
Seriously, getting selected just means that someone paid for the admission fee and the check cleared, the indie film submitted by a team hasn't been reviewed at any point of the acceptance procedure. It's not like there's a group of judges that watches each submission and says, "Oh yeah, this one HAS to be in our festival!" - But I am sure that there are films on the submission line that ARE expected to raise eyebrows if the right name is listed in the credits. For now, for anyone to brag about their film "being selected" for this or that festival is like someone getting an award laurel for filling out an application for a 5K run that won't start for another month. Remember, "selection" films are not reviewed for required film format, legal paperwork, legitimate film making experience...nothing. As a matter of fact, a large quantity of films aren’t even previewed by judges.
Furthermore, members who pay for their film being submitted to a festival, must also pay extra fees for "nominations" in their own application. That's right, studio teams have to pay cash and submit for their own nominations! Positions that are paid for consist of various genres film categories for Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Producer, Best Director, etc, etc, etc. And again, judges for these festivals don't recognize "instant performances" in every indie film that was entered or selected and giving them awards for their performances. Plus there's no reassurance that all of the films submitted into a film festival are even previewed by final judges at all. I've known all about these "festival follies" for many years; and a solid reason why I never entered into film festivals since I began working on my own indie film productions.
It's a known fact that meta-data has proven the members of how an indie film team love to watch their own films over-and-over again, trying to help build the numbers of the viewing counter on their YouTube account. These issues were investigated on in the Quantum Storm .357 E-Magazine [QSE .357] Issue 5, a few issues back, where we proved in a studio video investigation on how to check someones meta-data on YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and any other online platform, to see what the real outside viewers numbers were to a film teams "successful" trailer or full feature film. When internal numbers are removed from the equation of viewers, industry professionals will know what the real numbers of views are; and trust me, they do look at all of the meta-data they can on any project submitted to them.
What I honestly like to see are the amateur first time leading indie actors who also enjoy the ride of tasting success through the fruits of their limited experienced performances; most of whom have never really worked on a real production or were never educated on set through experienced directors or assistant directors. Most of these people will never see the light of day as a lead or supporting role on a film project that is a step up from the film they just finished. Most are complete no-bodies who are given roles and promises of "riches to come" when they "ring that bell" of success. And unfortunately, where there is one; there is also a slew of other cast and crew members who are on that ride of just hoping that the film was "selected" by the film festival in question.
I like watching indie movie trailers. Seriously, I enjoying watching them as much as I liked being a child and walking though the toy aisle of a grocery story, looking at all of those hollow plastic cars and airplanes, saying to myself then, "Why would anyone want to buy that crap?" - Amateur indie film trailers are the same. They often boast of "film producers" you've never known [or truly want to know], credits are displayed on top of actors performing their parts, the sound is bad, the nauseating music selection is as horrific and reoccurring as the swishing sound of the ocean being replayed over and over and over. Plus I like the fact that right away, even an unbiased outsider will tell you that someone in that film production never made a film trailer in their life...but it looked like certain people in their group HAD to be presented in it; you know, people that you've never seen before in any film what-so-ever, except in their own film community.
And even IF the film wins an award or two, what is the next step for the amateur film makers? Do they post another link on their Facebook page to show the film to the outside "millions of local fans" who are dying to see their film? Has their number one "film producer" ensured that he's paid the yearly subscription to his website to post the film and bring in that lucrative meta-data to provide to future distributors the large numbers of future fans who are wanting to see the film in question? - Something that we introduced on the QSE .357 [Issue 4] is that amateur indie film producers and directors who have no knowledge of what meta-data is or where to get it and are just people who are winging their indie film productions along. But you can bet your ass that after seeing this blog, they'll google it and be the "purveyors of knowledge" the next time you ask them, because they'll have read this blog entry too.
 |
| Current Meta Data for QSE .357 E-Mag |
Editorial by D. R. Quintana-Lujan
Editor in Chief
🎥🎞MOVIE REVIEW🎞🎥 - CONTINUUM - [PG-13] -Peacock - This nice little gem from 2013 fell under my scope of reviews shortly after I was doing a copyright search for stories that involved Quantum Time Traveling plots and short stories. The film stars John Paul Rutman, Rufus Sewell, and Gillian Anderson. This film can be found on Peacock under "I'LL FOLLOW YOU DOWN."
The plot is simple but very mysterious, a loving and well respected father is dropped off at an airport by his wife [Anderson] and young son. In previous scenes, the young boy is proven to be pretty intelligent far beyond his years. But the father [Sewell] boards a plane and never returns home. Th son's mother is horribly worried and her love for her husband is without question, but questions arise after his arrival to the city of destination; he's never checked out of his room, his wallet, cell phone, and other items left behind, and the husband has just disappeared. The father has disappeared like a whisper in the wind and his young son has to struggle through life with a damaged mother and a childhood sweetheart who will eventually become his wife.
Years pass and the young boy grows up questioning important decisions in his life, due to the mysterious loss of his father. Rutman - the once little kid also known from the brilliant movie, SIX SENSE - has a love interest that is constantly being put on hold due to his mother [Anderson] still grieving over the disappearance of his father. Eventually the story passes onto the boys grandfather, played by Victor Garber, who tells the young son that his father had stepped through a worm hole and traveled into the past. There are very few details about how the father was able to create the worm hole, but only that he sustained a power source to get him there.
In my opinion, the writers lost faith in their script and the screenplay. There was no real character development of any of the characters, save the young boy who was now in love with a childhood sweetheart, both trying to live a life of being parents. The son missed a lot of school, but was too smart for college and apparently progressed though school only by "passing all of the tests."
What bugged me the most about the time traveling, was there was no real attempt to show details of the 1940s, save a change in clothes, some women walking around, introducing an old restaurant with a guy who wore paper hat and served coffee. There also wasn't a memorable scene in the film that made me want to remember this dud of a production. Rutman tried to be a leader in this film, but the lack of solid character development made him all of the other cast members seem like they were just going through the motions to finish this film.
⭐️⭐️💫 [2.5 of 5 Stars]
The series is well developed and presented to viewers with precision story telling and character developments which make you feel comfortable with the direction of the show at each new turn in the story. Kudos go out to Willa Fitzgerald, who plays Deputy Roscoe, and does an impressive job assisting Reacher in his introduction into the show. She’s definitely presented herself as a formidable and sexy police officer that has more to offer than just a natural sense of duty to uphold the law; and to Malcolm Goodwin, who plays Police Detective Oscar Finlay, a hard nosed investigator who rubs Reacher the wrong way at first, but whose true colors surface after they both begin to work together to solve a case of murders.
Season one was well produced, well located to fit the narrative of Grant's intended character description; at this point I will agree with JACK REACHER fans that Tom Cruise may have had the right temperament for the character, but not the right size and massiveness described in Grant's books to sustain a realistic preview of what the actual character has to offer readers and future fans of the series.
I would recommend you to read the JACK REACHER books before you watch the series, but in this day and age of the mindset that reading is just way to painful to endure, be sure to avoid the JACK REACHER movie with Cruise before watching this series, you will be pleasantly surprised at the new reboot of the character!
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ [4 of 5 Stars]
Thank you for stopping by!
I found myself sitting on the edge of my seat during the last three episodes of season six thinking, “Wholly mother, this series is rewriting SciFi to an all new level!” - As each season passed, the character development was ironed out with stunning precision, the creative and robust CGI definitely helped carry the series in shocking “real life” art territory, and well, just the whole thing was leaning towards the “this could actually happen” arena of future history. The SciFi technology for this series is not too far off from what we, as space technology-minded idiots we truly are, have currently in our lives.
Led by actor Steven Strait, who during the the first season acted like he really didn’t want to be part of the show, tore through the mud and filth of obscurity and became a well polished leader of his crew. Over time, you would learn that his cold shoulder mannerisms were what the writers wanted all along. His part of the series was over shadowed by the acting talents of Thomas Jane, who played a Mike Hammer-type private detective who was trying to solve one of the biggest mysteries in the known universe, an item called the “proto molecule” - which unfortunately was never explained thoroughly.
However in Season 5, who actually cared about the mysterious molecule? A fresh and cold new bad guy arrived on the storyline, played brilliantly by Keon Alexander, who started a terroristic and perfect onslaught of mayhem to the series. For a time, the mysterious molecule was only briefly mentioned and the total dangerous from its exposure was only partly explained. The writers did a great job using the mystery to keep you off your toes, making you believe that the molecule could turn the tide to some major events that unfolded, costing the live of millions of innocent people in the series.
But, it all wasn’t meant to be. As the series entered towards the last three episodes, the main story was turned towards a poignant revenge story which could proved to the shows fans that some revenge endings can be filled with cold-hearted ruthlessness and severe actions that seem tasteless, as compared to the actions of other grimy shows like Game of Thrones. In part I’m referring to the payback potential for the character, Cammina Drummer, played brilliantly by Cara Gee, who had learned of the death of her great leader, Klaes Ashford, who had been set out into space without air or protection, by the terrorist leader, played coldly by Alexander.
In the end, the writers strayed from the revenge factor of giving Cammina a much deserved chance to end the terrorists life with her bare hands or a knife to the gut (which would have been epic) and just ended the bad guys life in a way that just made me say out loud to myself, “Oh…C’mon!” - After that the last episode just made a political charade of the ending, where there were no real answers, just another few ideas to ponder where the series “could go” from that point forth.
I guess I expected too much after seeing so many good series flop with fruitless, well thought out endings. But I guess that this series at least had a good ending and they will be handed a good review for not completely wasting our time over the course of six years.
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ 💫 [4.5 of 5 Stars]
PRODUCER/DIRECTOR/EDITOR
D. R. Quintana
2021 COMPLETED PROJECTS:
Havoc 114 Feature Film
Awards: Best Director, Best Editor, Best International Film, Best Trailer, Best Music Video,
Best Movie Poster
Havoc 114 Music Video
Awards: Best Music Video, Best Song [by AWAKE]
IN PRODUCTION FOR 2022 and 2023:
Grey Panic, Lions Den, Angelika5 [The Movie], Iscandar [Mini Series], Terminators [Mini Series], Pieces of 8 [Mini Series] & Werewolves in Montgomery County.
BE SURE TO WATCH THE VIDEO MESSAGE FROM QUANTUM STORM PICTURES CEO
D. R. QUINTANA
YOU MUST BE A SUBSCRIBER TO THIS BLOG TO WATCH THE SPECIAL VIDEO MESSAGE
HAVE A FANTASTIC NEW YEARS!
Honestly, I didn’t know what to expect when I hit play on the TV. I had seen so many promotional trailers and sneak peeks for this film, that I have to admit that I was a little peaked with excitement, waiting for the release date to finally arrive. With a little relief, the opening sequence started off on the right step. But this mess then steered off course with a “time travel” type start, then was referenced by the characters as a historical video “element,” and then…well…who knows what the fuck people were thinking when they put this god awful mess to film in post. What I was looking forward to seeing was Reeves’ “John Wick” personae kicking a little ass thought the films run…but sadly, it wasn’t meant to be. I will admit that there some traces of a stunning plot that could have brought the entire house down, just like the brilliantly delivered surprise in the first film, but this film fell apart after all of the talk about the "blue pill and the red pill" was being reinforced over and over again. And prepare yourself for the constant flashback scenes from the previous films; like Wachowski really had to remind someone…anyone, of the brilliant first films and what stories they told.
The visual effects were stunning, some stunts were again brilliantly thought out into a conceptual dance of perfection, but other effects were old and have been seen so many times already, that it got a little old to view. As mentioned before, the slow motion scenes were in abundance, most of the time delivered as a joke in a "real world" presentation, like the original film didn't already receive a lot of that. There was nothing memorable in the new action scenes, most were sadly choreographed and delivered in diverse angles that you might have seen in other films.
I’d like to tell you that this film is full of cheese and that it’s good entertainment, but I just can’t lie to you or myself. This film is beyond a rare disappointment, and that one, cold nightmare that Hollywierd is becoming a cesspool of bad rewrites and reboots has now become a reality.
This movie didn’t just tank, it actually sank before leaving dock. Be glad I didn't post this review before Christmas, it certainly put a small dent in mine.
⭐️ ⭐️ 💫 [2.5 of 5 Stars]
