Yeah, the original concept was more complex, but hell, one more bit of story and the film would go from mostly to totally incomprehensible :)

I am! Thank you for the crit!

Thanks for watching it twice! I know the story is tough to swallow, I definitely tried to cram a little too much into five minutes

Thanks I will!

1.4

It was a 24 hour project and had its issues, but I'm happy I was able to produce what I found in my head without having to sacrifice too much

Thanks!

Yeah, we were still working out sound with the HV20 and had electrical issues while recording. This is one of the films I think sounded better on set than it does in the final product unfortunately.

Actually, the sound recorded on set was mostly destroyed, but since we had time constraints, we had to deal with it. The corrections made created the rumble.

Never underestimate the power of the audio. it is 50%. Good audio makes everything come together. Be prepared next time. You learn from experience. The best thing is to use an external device ...not only for backup if something goes wrong with the camcorder's microphone, but instead of using the cam as first choise, use a shotgun for first choise or a lavalier whatever

I used a professional Rode Shotgun mono mic for the dialogue - unfortunately, we didn't notice that the camera input line in was picking up the electrostatic field from the camera charger brick (we shot half the film with the camera plugged in, a stupid rookie mistake).

From now on we'll use XLR balanced mics since I found out the hard way that 3.5mm is never the way to go for audio input.

If only the volume was higher, we could hear the pro quality of the Rode. I love their microphones. They are very sensitive too so it is just so nice to hear the details of everything...especially speach. Use the rode for ambience too for editing in POST....and of course, you can use it for audio effects too like closing doors, lighting a match, stuff like that. I have both 3.5 and xlr mikes and I love the XLR...they never fail me.....so pure, direct....love it. Good luck.

While I agree that the piece has all sorts of issues (sound and digi-grain being HUGE errors in production) I would not say that the methodical pace is one of them. The film was intended to be shown in theatrical form rather than transmitted over the internet - and if you have seen shorts in festivals, you'll notice that their pace is significantly slower than shorts intended for personal viewing.

The reason for this is screen size - when the size of the screen is 60 feet across, then the pace of the film must be significantly slower to carry itself. The larger the screen, the faster the film appears to move.

Of course, the film never managed to worm itself into any theater due to its myriad *other* issues which I'm still somewhat peeved towards. :)