Feldman in the office noticed the same thing.

Its too bad I'm not in NY, I could lend a hand for filming for sure.

while watching this i thought, "oh man, drpiranha is gonna be touching himself all over when he sees this joint."

Better, two 16gig cards.

And he will eat baby dolls while doing all that!

mmmmmm.... yes.

Shooting holes is kickass!

I don't think Jakob necessarily thinks what he's done is considered filmmaking.

The killing has already been carried out by the philosophy that informs your comment. The idea that filmmaking is more than making films; that some special knowledge, available only to a select few, is the true way to produce legitimate work. The victim of this murder is the 20 years of inspiration in the minds of amateur filmmakers who listened to comments like that and decided they should put down their home video cameras and leave it to the experts.

I am so glad you posted this comment Gus. Something that has been on my mind for about a year now... I went to school to be a film maker, digital but still learned all the fundamentals of classic film, and when I got out in 04 I felt like I was one of the elite. I knew how to light and setup shots, plan a shoot, run a set, and most importantly put it all together in the editing bay. However as time went by more and more great things were coming out from people who had not gone to film school and were not using $5000 cameras like the one I had. People were making great pieces of work and people were loving them. I used to get so mad because it looked like video and not film, because their backgrounds were blown out, and because their editing was sloppy.
Again, as more time passed more stuff was coming out that didn't follow "the Rules" and more and more people didn't care.

The point I am trying to make is: like most things these days the lines have been blurred and there are no more rules. ANYONE can pick up ANY camera and point it at ANYTHING and tell a story; may not always be a well told story though. Now I'm not saying all video tells a story or constitutes as a film, but styles have changed and the audience's perception has changed. I know people who have been given movie deals and/or paid to make a movie solely based on a youtube video. That should tell you something both about the people making the content and the people looking for it as well.

duplo, I don't really know where all of that came from. Personally speaking, I started picking up a video camera and for many years did nothing but shoot short films on the weekends with my friends... that's where I learned the nuts and bolts of things. It took a long time.

My reaction is to, as I guess you mis-understood, the people who aren't looking for inspired stories to tell, but are either going to film school or purchasing fancy equipment and calling themselves filmmakers. I don't know how many you run into on a daily basis, but I run into many of them.

More than most people I know I encourage kids to throw the rules and budgets out the windows and go shoot. It's the way you learn.

My comment is to the people who consider themselves experts because for some reason or another they've surrounded themselves with the capabilities to be experts. Not necessarily to Jakob, just a reaction.

And I don't even know what you mean by the word 'experts'.

I think you went a little off in your response.

Clint, I know that story really well... And I know that there's little difference anymore in many strata of the film world between film and video. Anyone can make a film and it's an amazing thing for most. For the short film circuit it's gotten a little congested, but for the rest of humanity it's been a real gift.

The only thing I would say to speak to your comment is sometimes there's a difference between just not being able to know and follow the 'rules' (due to a lack of resources) and just throwing out the rules due to carelessness. That's the part that, sadly, even people who do have the fancy equipment and go to film school do.

9/10 I'll see a short that just looks bad, and it will be bad, coincidentally. The plot will be uninspired, the actors are awful, the direction and cinematography are loose. And it all kind of comes from how much care the filmmakers put into their work. And how much pride, really.

This all has nothing to do with Vimeo, btw. I'll delete it if you guys want me to. The original comment was aimed at, as I said above, the people who think that toys precede inspiration. I don't think Jakob was doing that, but I don't know, for some reason I guess I felt I needed to get a point across, perhaps for another audience...

So, Clint, you're right. But there's still another side to that story.

Abteen, I know. I hope I made it clear above who it was intended for.

I celebrated the fact that it was easy to shoot this video, and your response was a point about disqualification for "filmmaking". I interpreted that as a reference to this video, since no other video or filmmaker was under discussion. If you are referring to some unnamed filmmakers who act as if technology were a substitute for inspiration, I understand your comment, but I wish you had made that distinction initially.

Or, maybe you were calling me out for neglecting to mention that a vision preceded the production of this video. I suppose I did sort of make it sound like the video was created by the camera itself.

No, it was Door #1.

Sorry about this pandamonium...

Well, for stock footage filmmakers it is just about finding something pretty and pressing the red button.

point taken and made. sorry to go off the deep end there.

not a problem. but, hey, those people who've gotten development deals off of youtube... you're right; it does happen.

i worked on a 'sketch' that got picked up by MTV. it's actually on this site, too. shot it on DV in 2 hours, haha, but we did it the right way. :)

good points all around. i think most of us prefer content over gloss but also understand how fun it is to play with a new tool that helps whittle our creativity. :)

It *should* be pointed out that choosing the right technology DOES enhance the ability of the artist. The quality and atmosphere of this video simply wouldn't have been possible without the camera Jakob choosed to use.

This is not a knock:
If Reggie Watts got up on stage with a handheld tape recorder and created his loops that way, it would be remarkably less impressive than his work with the line 6 sampler and 2880.

Artist + Correct Technology = better art.

Of course; you're right, Tommy. But it's (and this is still a seperate issue to me) the emphasis you put on the technology vs. the subject matter vs. the impetus behind producing it. Why someone uses an extremely expensive camera is more important to me than 'can' they use it.

... Put I like shooting on 16mm and 35, so really I guess my argument can work against me. Although I feel like I could make good arguments for them.

-- Not to be a buzz kill, but filmmaking isn't just buying a 6,000$ piece of equipment, finding something pretty to shoot and pressing the red button... --

That's MY method damnit!

There was a lot of carrying involved in this!

i love duplo's comment... when will i be able to comment on a comment!

mcq made the drum kit from scratch for Occurrence #2 (see jakob's other clips). the costume is from a show Mcq and I co-wrote called "Dig Nation", which is premiering in Edinburgh this August. If you're in Scotland, check it out!

who designed the costume, Tommy?

if you did, give yourself a credit!

althought the entire costume from the show is not here, i must still mention "Elohe" -- the awesome designer who designed the bulk of the clothes in "A Day in Dig Nation" ... elohe.com -- her work is dope... check it... the gas mask was made by the Swiss...

Any relation to diggnation (Kevin Rose)? Or "A Day in Dig Nation" playing in The Flying Carpet Theatre?

Tommy is right on.

Something is certainly amiss here.

yikes - we just investigated and there was a bug with stats. We are restoring them now.