I love my casablanca prestige. As I am not so intelligent - my technical capacity
is zero - I cannot work with a computer system. When members in my club
talk about Adobe Première and Pinnacle it's always too complicated for me.
It's just as if they are speaking Chinese to me. But when I talk about my
casablanca they don't understand me I must say. Last year I crashed with
my casablanca but I had done something wrong. I had been told that it's better
not to change wires when the machine is on. But yes, I was in a hurry,
and ... bang ! My film was gone ! Luckily I had made a copy of it, but I
could not change my documentary anymore. I had worked on it for about 5 months
! It was a film about the European Schools. My boss was not happy with the
statement in the film that the tax payer had to pay for the new school buildings.
I told him that I had not made a promotion film. I just wanted to "describe"
real life in European schools. Afterwards I wanted to change my film in order
to please that man, but alas ...
Last year I bought a sophisticated computer system Pinnacle Studio 8. One
of my professional friends had recommended that system. After one month I
felt depressed ! Luckily I could resell my Pinnacle Studio 8 and I bought
a "casablanca prestige". Not because it was called "prestige", but in particular
because it has 5 audio lines (I don't remember the English word for it) under
the story board. So now I can mix 5 different sounds ! I was a happy man
again until last week. I could not make copies of films anymore. Films on
DVD or on mini-DV with a length of more than 20 minutes. I felt punished
because I had made a long film. I went to the casablance salesman who lives
120 kilometres from my house (that's about 85 miles!). He laughed when I
explained everything. I bought this machine in January 2004 and he already
called it outdated ! It was time to upgrade my casablanca, he said. I should
have
done it more than once he repeated a few times. After being upgraded the
problem would be solved. Unfortunately at home I already thought of giving
up film making. It didn't work. I tried to make a copy of my film (length
29 minutes) on mini-DV and it stopped after 21 minutes and 32 seconds.I checked
my film and I discovered that after 21 minutes and 32 seconds I had two
"still images" that blocked my Arabesk system in my casablanca. How they
could steal their way into my film ? That's a mystery. I deleted the two
"still images" and I could make copies again, copies on mini-DV and even
on DVD ! Strange isn't it ? I hope that you can understand everything.
In my club most film makers work with Pinnacle 9.3. This system is rather
cheap. It costs about £60. A casablanca machine is much more expensive but
in my opinion it is very user-friendly. About 10-15 years ago I had two groups
of film makers in my club. The ones still using super 8 or super 16. The
very conservative film makers. The other ones using video. The more progressive
film makers. Now we discuss a lot about the choice : a casablanca or a computer
system. Really, the film makers that use adobe or other computer systems
seem to have more problems. They're always complaining about problems they
are faced with. But perhaps I'm prejudiced ! One of the English movie makers
told me that he had just bought a "screenplay" machine. In my country a lot
of publicity was made for this machine some years ago, but I don't hear about
it anymore. I've been told that this machine is super. Are there also any
discussions in your club about these things ?
I love my casablanca !
-
Peter Rouillard
Re: I love my casablanca !
I am very pleased that Willy has written about his Casablanca Prestige, because
I will be upgrading to this machine also very shortly. I presently use the
Casablanca Kron which I have had for more than 3 years. This has been virtually
trouble free, but after reading the specifications on the Prestige the advantages
are very clear - more hard drive space, much quieter, built in DVD burner,
inputs and outputs on the front of the machine (I'm forever turning the Kron
around to get at the back!),more options, such as audio 'rubberbanding' etc,etc.
I too am a bit of an idiot with computers Willy.My brother Richard also uses
a PC with Adobe Premier - we used this to edit our latest film - and he had
many problems, - I was there throughout, so I know! I love the Casablanca's
simplicity in comparison, with large clear icons, and its DV quality is excellent.
So thank you Willy for your story of recommendation (after your initial glitch).
I look forward to getting a Prestige - with those front inputs!! Lastly,
I must congratulate Willy on his 'Guernsey Lily' trophy award - plus 'Best
Photography' award. Well done Willy - well deserved!, you see, you can make
award winning movies with a Casablanca!
Peter (Casablanca fan) Rouillard
I will be upgrading to this machine also very shortly. I presently use the
Casablanca Kron which I have had for more than 3 years. This has been virtually
trouble free, but after reading the specifications on the Prestige the advantages
are very clear - more hard drive space, much quieter, built in DVD burner,
inputs and outputs on the front of the machine (I'm forever turning the Kron
around to get at the back!),more options, such as audio 'rubberbanding' etc,etc.
I too am a bit of an idiot with computers Willy.My brother Richard also uses
a PC with Adobe Premier - we used this to edit our latest film - and he had
many problems, - I was there throughout, so I know! I love the Casablanca's
simplicity in comparison, with large clear icons, and its DV quality is excellent.
So thank you Willy for your story of recommendation (after your initial glitch).
I look forward to getting a Prestige - with those front inputs!! Lastly,
I must congratulate Willy on his 'Guernsey Lily' trophy award - plus 'Best
Photography' award. Well done Willy - well deserved!, you see, you can make
award winning movies with a Casablanca!
Peter (Casablanca fan) Rouillard
-
Michael Slowe
Re: I love my casablanca !
Willy, I am getting on in years rather like you and have had similar problems
to you but went a slightly different way to solve them. I had been working
on film since the 1960's, first 8mm. then 16mm. I had a proper cutting room
at home and could edit as the professionals did. Finally when the picture
quality of video became good enough and we could edit accurately frame by
frame as with film I made the change. A well known amateur film maker here,
David Percy, who later went professional, advised me to edit on a mac computer
using the Media 100 system which he used. It was the nearest thing to film
editing and replicates almost exactly how we worked in the old days. I had
never, up to that point, (1999) even turned on a computer, having not joined
the revolution hoping it would go away! However, with some help from the
people selling the kit and others, I soon learnt enough to do the job. You
don't have to be a computer expert (I still am certainly not that) provided
you can use the programme you need. I get expert help for computer problems,
not that the Mac gives me much trouble. Media 100 is a wonderful editing
tool and I am just up grading to their high definition system which gives
tremendous flexibility such as using HD or DV on the same timeline, multiple
video and audio tracks and the facility of making copies from the timeline
in both 16:9 and 4:3 aspects. This is important because, although more and
more people will be shooting in 16:9 as new cameras come in, most festivals
will be looking at our films on older 4:3 tv screens so they will have to
have 4:3 copies. But films in 16:9 do look better and it is the format of
the future. By the way Willy I am horrified by your story about losing a
film from your system. If you had some sort of back up external storage
drives you should be able to 'park' media there and if your system crashes
the media would be un affected, that is standard practice with computer editing.
If you 'save' during your working isn't everything safe in the event of
a crash?
Finally Willy, we both make rather longer films than many of our fellow amateurs,
I get criticised for this even if the film is successful, do you?
to you but went a slightly different way to solve them. I had been working
on film since the 1960's, first 8mm. then 16mm. I had a proper cutting room
at home and could edit as the professionals did. Finally when the picture
quality of video became good enough and we could edit accurately frame by
frame as with film I made the change. A well known amateur film maker here,
David Percy, who later went professional, advised me to edit on a mac computer
using the Media 100 system which he used. It was the nearest thing to film
editing and replicates almost exactly how we worked in the old days. I had
never, up to that point, (1999) even turned on a computer, having not joined
the revolution hoping it would go away! However, with some help from the
people selling the kit and others, I soon learnt enough to do the job. You
don't have to be a computer expert (I still am certainly not that) provided
you can use the programme you need. I get expert help for computer problems,
not that the Mac gives me much trouble. Media 100 is a wonderful editing
tool and I am just up grading to their high definition system which gives
tremendous flexibility such as using HD or DV on the same timeline, multiple
video and audio tracks and the facility of making copies from the timeline
in both 16:9 and 4:3 aspects. This is important because, although more and
more people will be shooting in 16:9 as new cameras come in, most festivals
will be looking at our films on older 4:3 tv screens so they will have to
have 4:3 copies. But films in 16:9 do look better and it is the format of
the future. By the way Willy I am horrified by your story about losing a
film from your system. If you had some sort of back up external storage
drives you should be able to 'park' media there and if your system crashes
the media would be un affected, that is standard practice with computer editing.
If you 'save' during your working isn't everything safe in the event of
a crash?
Finally Willy, we both make rather longer films than many of our fellow amateurs,
I get criticised for this even if the film is successful, do you?
-
AnimatioN
Re: I love my casablanca !
"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
4x3 is the format of the future....the distant future!
Why have film makers allowed themselves to become so
brainwashed into thinking that 16.9 is a creative format
when compared with 4x3 it's utter tripe?
16.9 gives me a sick feeling in my creative guts.
Albert...cutting a piece of 4x3.
Your much too young to see proper like, Michael!Willy, I am getting on in years......
But films in 16:9 do look better and it is the format of
the future.
4x3 is the format of the future....the distant future!
Why have film makers allowed themselves to become so
brainwashed into thinking that 16.9 is a creative format
when compared with 4x3 it's utter tripe?
16.9 gives me a sick feeling in my creative guts.
Albert...cutting a piece of 4x3.
-
Willy Van der Linden
Re: I love my casablanca !
Yes, I do. I get criticised for it even if my film is succesful. We've alreadyFinally Willy, we both make rather longer films than many of our fellow
amateurs,
I get criticised for this even if the film is successful, do you?
talked about it in previous messages on this forum, Michael, but it's good
that you tell me. I have the same feelings. What people sometimes forget
is that the longer your film is the more "risks" you take. In a film of 25
minutes you can make more technical mistakes than in a film of only 5 minutes.
The story is very important, but in Belgium quite a lot of "hair-spitters"
always try to find even the most minuscule technical mistakes, in particular
when you have already been succesful many times. Then they always tend to
use their magnifying-glasses. In a long film they have more chance of finding
something. In my "Together with Yoda" one had seen that Colin Howett's wristwatch
showed different times and that some trees didn't have any leaves. The first
remark was ridiculous. And the second ... it was not a mistake in the continuity.
On the contrary even. I start my film in spring time. In the month of May
or April. "Oh, to be in England now that April is there", Wordsworth said.
I prefer April to shoot films in England. I love daffodils. In that season
not all trees have leaves. I finish my trip through the Cotswolds in summer
time. I'm not complaining about the results for this film in my own country,
you know. I was second in the regional competition for the fourth consecutive
time (about 70 entries) and the national competition takes place at the end
of this year. But I just want to illustrate that making long films may arouse
certain individuals to utter exaggerated criticism.
-
Michael Slowe
Re: I love my casablanca !
"AnimatioN" <AnimatioN@btinternet.com> wrote:
all plasma screens? Actually the 16:9 aspect is much more comfortable to
view and is regarded as the more natural aspect the way our eyes capture
what we see. Sorry but 4: 3 will disappear eventually, but then so will
we I hear you say!
Albert, why then are all new TV screens in the 16:9 aspect, together with"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
Willy, I am getting on in years......
But films in 16:9 do look better and it is the format of
the future.
Your much too young to see proper like, Michael!
4x3 is the format of the future....the distant future!
Why have film makers allowed themselves to become so
brainwashed into thinking that 16.9 is a creative format
when compared with 4x3 it's utter tripe?
16.9 gives me a sick feeling in my creative guts.
Albert...cutting a piece of 4x3.
all plasma screens? Actually the 16:9 aspect is much more comfortable to
view and is regarded as the more natural aspect the way our eyes capture
what we see. Sorry but 4: 3 will disappear eventually, but then so will
we I hear you say!
-
Nigel Cooper
Re: I love my casablanca !
I know what you mean about computers being complicated.
I struggled with Windoze PCs for years using Premeire, Media Studio Pro and
a couple of other irrelevant programmes. I bought a Casablanca Avio to relieve
the pain of Windoze. The Avio was a pleasure to use, though somewhat limiting
if you need to get into any complex FX work.
I soon found that I had outgrown the Avio and so looked at the Kron and even
the Screenplay range, but decided they coudn't do what I really needed them
to do. Don't get me wrong, they are fine for cutting films etc.
Then I discovered "Apple Mac" computers and Final Cut Pro. I have been using
Final Cut Pro since version 1.2 on Mac OSX. Today I use Final Cut Pro 5HD,
DVD Studio Pro 3, Shake, Motion, Logic Pro 7, Final Draft, Photoshop CS (8).
I am going to be totally honest here; I have owned about 10 Macs over the
past 4 years, today I have a Dual 2Ghz G5, a laptop, 2 Mac minis and a G5
iMac as well as an 3 year old iMac. In all that time I have not had a single
crash, hang, lost file, nothing. The older iMac has been online via NTL broadband
for 3 years none stop, it's never been switched off and has always had Safari
and Mail open, in all that time, not a single bug, virus, crash, nothing.
At the end of the day, the Casablanca's and Screenplays of the world basically
have computer components inside them, so why don't they crash very often?
because there are not loads of other peices of software like Word, Photoshop,
Excel, Internet Explorer etc to screw up the configuration and cause conflict
problems.
HOWEVER! Apple Macs do not suffer from this like those horrible crash happy
PC things. You can load up tons of software, go online, send/recieve emails
and edit using iMovie or Final Cut Express all at the same time and if you
listen carefully you will almost hear the computer say "Come on, is that
all you got, give me something to get my teeth into, I'm Unix based, didn't
you know?".
That's my happy crash free story that in my opinion not only equals Cassy's
and Screenplays, but beets them both hands down in terms of reliability/stability
and ease of use.
I struggled with Windoze PCs for years using Premeire, Media Studio Pro and
a couple of other irrelevant programmes. I bought a Casablanca Avio to relieve
the pain of Windoze. The Avio was a pleasure to use, though somewhat limiting
if you need to get into any complex FX work.
I soon found that I had outgrown the Avio and so looked at the Kron and even
the Screenplay range, but decided they coudn't do what I really needed them
to do. Don't get me wrong, they are fine for cutting films etc.
Then I discovered "Apple Mac" computers and Final Cut Pro. I have been using
Final Cut Pro since version 1.2 on Mac OSX. Today I use Final Cut Pro 5HD,
DVD Studio Pro 3, Shake, Motion, Logic Pro 7, Final Draft, Photoshop CS (8).
I am going to be totally honest here; I have owned about 10 Macs over the
past 4 years, today I have a Dual 2Ghz G5, a laptop, 2 Mac minis and a G5
iMac as well as an 3 year old iMac. In all that time I have not had a single
crash, hang, lost file, nothing. The older iMac has been online via NTL broadband
for 3 years none stop, it's never been switched off and has always had Safari
and Mail open, in all that time, not a single bug, virus, crash, nothing.
At the end of the day, the Casablanca's and Screenplays of the world basically
have computer components inside them, so why don't they crash very often?
because there are not loads of other peices of software like Word, Photoshop,
Excel, Internet Explorer etc to screw up the configuration and cause conflict
problems.
HOWEVER! Apple Macs do not suffer from this like those horrible crash happy
PC things. You can load up tons of software, go online, send/recieve emails
and edit using iMovie or Final Cut Express all at the same time and if you
listen carefully you will almost hear the computer say "Come on, is that
all you got, give me something to get my teeth into, I'm Unix based, didn't
you know?".
That's my happy crash free story that in my opinion not only equals Cassy's
and Screenplays, but beets them both hands down in terms of reliability/stability
and ease of use.
-
AnimatioN
Re: I love my casablanca !
"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
and if the industry can bully everyone into buying new
equipment then they will!
Don't fall for subtle con tricks.
the aspect I perceive is much closer to 4.3 than to 16.9
I don't suffer from vertical tunnel vision!
If you really think the world through your own eyes looks
like 16.9 you ought to visit your optician!!
Open your eyes and take a look.
I really, really do not understand, Michael, why you, a talented
film maker with an eye for COMPOSITION, prefer that awful 16.9 aspect.
As I have said many times, 4.3 gives a pleasing balance between
horizontal landscapes and vertical scenery/buildings etc.
It's a satisfying frame to view the photographic/cinema world
through, probably as i said, because it closely matches our eyes
outlook on the world.
Maybe pigeons would like 16.9 though!
Do you really *prefer* 16.9 if all other things were equal?
Sorry but 4: 3 will disappear eventually, but then so will
who foisted 16.9 on the world, destroying the art of
natural composition, just to make money.
Albert....
http://www.retinascope.co.uk/index.html
"AnimatioN" <AnimatioN@btinternet.com> wrote:
"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:
Willy, I am getting on in years......
But films in 16:9 do look better and it is the format of
the future.
Your much too young to see proper like, Michael!
4x3 is the format of the future....the distant future!
Why have film makers allowed themselves to become so
brainwashed into thinking that 16.9 is a creative format
when compared with 4x3 it's utter tripe?
16.9 gives me a sick feeling in my creative guts.
Albert...cutting a piece of 4x3.
Because everything is driven by money I would suggest,Albert, why then are all new TV screens in the 16:9 aspect, together with
all plasma screens?
and if the industry can bully everyone into buying new
equipment then they will!
Don't fall for subtle con tricks.
Well your eyes are old like mine, but when I look at the world,Actually the 16:9 aspect is much more comfortable to
view and is regarded as the more natural aspect the way our eyes capture
what we see.
the aspect I perceive is much closer to 4.3 than to 16.9
I don't suffer from vertical tunnel vision!
If you really think the world through your own eyes looks
like 16.9 you ought to visit your optician!!
Open your eyes and take a look.
I really, really do not understand, Michael, why you, a talented
film maker with an eye for COMPOSITION, prefer that awful 16.9 aspect.
As I have said many times, 4.3 gives a pleasing balance between
horizontal landscapes and vertical scenery/buildings etc.
It's a satisfying frame to view the photographic/cinema world
through, probably as i said, because it closely matches our eyes
outlook on the world.
Maybe pigeons would like 16.9 though!
Do you really *prefer* 16.9 if all other things were equal?
Sorry but 4: 3 will disappear eventually, but then so will
But it will return one day and so will I to haunt thosewe I hear you say!
who foisted 16.9 on the world, destroying the art of
natural composition, just to make money.
Albert....
http://www.retinascope.co.uk/index.html