Cloud Video Footage Storage – Why You Should Backup Everything to the Cloud

Cloud Video Footage Storage – Why You Should Backup Everything to the Cloud

Storing your footage online, in addition to physical backups is key if you want the ultimate in secure, stress-free storage of your footage. This is where Cloud video footage storage comes into play. That’s a real mouthful!

This article aims to introduce Cloud storage from a beginners POV. We’ll offer tips and strategies and show you how to get started backing up your footage to the Cloud.

Technology has done so much for us, from allowing us to connect to the internet from our phones, to installing cameras in our homes for additional security, and even storing all of our files online.

That last part is about using “the Cloud.” We have been using the cloud for a very long time now, and most of the time, we don’t even realize it.

Do you realize that your emails are likely to be stored in the Cloud as well? You may not be aware of it, because it is heavily integrated in our lives, but we actually huge users of the cloud.

So, why not take advantage of cloud services already available to back up our video footage? There are so many benefits to having your videos backed up on the cloud.

Here are some of the top reasons why I have long been taking advantage of this technological innovation and how you can make your projects safer and more secure.

cloud video footage storage

1. Removes the risk of old fashioned backup methods

Traditionally, raw footage was usually stored on tapes. And this becomes the basis for editing, and eventually back upped into tapes again.

However, there was a lot of risk that went into storing projects on tapes. Firstly, you have to be very conscious about how the storage should be, deterioriation of tapes is a real problem, especially for tapes that are over 20 years old.

Not to mention that during all this time, you will have to always be aware that your tapes be kept with the correct cooling conditions, away from other magnetic devices to avoid corruption of the files, these tapes also need to be stored in a very secure place so that it is not easily stolen or lost.

After videotapes, we moved to other methods involving physical storage – internal & external harddrives, USB memory sticks, DVDs and other physical storage solutions.

As we’ll cover later on, these physical storage methods are no better than the old fashioned tape method when it comes down to it. Physical storage solutions can be stolen, damaged or lost. Just as easily, they can get corrupted and be rendered useless overtime.

Cloud storage removes those issues, as there’s not one central storage location. Whole servers would need to fail all at the same time. And, short of a major worldwide apocalypse, all those servers disappearing at the same time is very unlikely.

cloud video footage storage

2. Time and Space Saver

Going back to our old fashioned comparison with storing projects on tapes, as well as a safe location, you also needed a lot of space and the correct storing conditions.

No matter what size your tapes are, they still need to have some physical space. Years gone by, many video production houses would need at least one dedicated room for all their video tapes. Because they had not yet converted into digital, it was a pretty crazy situation.

Well, this was also about 20 years ago, when being analog was still a big thing. But, since everything went digital, we now have much easier video storage options.

In fact, some cameras and equipment already allow you to store your footage into digital format, that can easily be downloadable.

Back in the day, there was also an additional task of categorizing your tapes into a catalog and following some order, kind of like having a dewey decimal system, like in libraries for your tapes. Putting labels on these tapes would be necessary, as opposed to just having simple file names on your computer.

If you frequently needed to come back to some old tapes, you would have to ensure that they are easily retrievable, and then returned properly into their correct places.

Not to mention, what if you would like to extract a part of a video, but unsure if it is found in the first of five tapes, or in the second? You then have to physically rewind, fast forward, replace tape after tape for searching for the correct footage you wanted to use.

Doesn’t that sound like an expensive and very taxing task? Well, I’m glad I didn’t have to live through that era of video production.

Having your videos backed up in the cloud eliminates the time consumed to search and find where everything is. Instead, you just use a good filename labelling system and keep everything onsite and on the Cloud.

The only thing you need to access your backups is a stable internet connection to allow you to view and download your videos quickly.

cloud video footage storage

3. Viewable on multiple platforms

Living in the age of technological advancement, have you noticed that you are able to do a lot of things while connected to the Internet? You can access your emails, view your various social media platforms, you can even listen to music and watch and share your own videos from any gadget that connects to the Internet.

We already have a ton of gadgets that allow us to be connected, from our laptops, to our smartphones, our tablets, our smart watches, and even through our eyeglasses. And having your footage backed up on the cloud will also allow you to do that, too.

With having your videos stored online in the cloud, you actually are able to view your videos, in any gadget possible. Technology also allows adjustment to the size of your videos, and having access and being able to edit anywhere on-the-go is super powerful.

cloud video footage storage

4. Overall Security

As mentioned earlier, there is a constant threat of theft, corruption, and other nasties, if you only back up with footage physically. This is a big risk with hard drives and other physical storage solutions.

However, storing your video files in the Cloud, you can take advantage of many benefits that are offered alongside storage.

Every file that gets stored in the cloud can be encrypted as well, and password protection is an option, too. This limits the number of users who can access the file to only those who have the password, or are shared the link to view the file.

Even viewing the file has its limitations, because you can also take out the feature of anyone else being able to download the file aside from the super user, or the creator of the file.

There are many options within your control that you can take advantage of, and limit the access to other people, without sacrificing the overall quality of your footage. And without the worry, as well, of the security of where your footage is going and who is viewing it. This is especially key if you’re working on projects that might be sensitive in some way.

cloud video footage storage

5. Reduce Overhead Costs and Safer for the Environment

Aside from being able to save on costs for not having to make physical space for storage of physical backup solutions, backup to the Cloud also offers a Total Lower Cost of Ownership.

You benefit from a lot of savings on the operational expenses when we look back at the old days of videotape storage. Nowadays, there are clearly less resources required to support and maintain your backups with small hard drives and the Cloud.

You also benefit from other indirect, but significant costs, like the actual amount of time it would take to search for the right kind of footage, as well as the potential need to recover some corrupt footage, etc. Knowing that all your footage is securely stored on the internet is certainly reassuring.

With having your videos backed up on the cloud, many providers provide a guarantee of a high guarantee of uptime, to reduce impact on their users. These cloud service providers give an alertif there’s any downtime, scheduled or otherwise.

cloud video footage storage

6. Easy transfer to soft copies

Finally, transferring your initial video footage is really easy via Cloud storage. Just offload your memory cards, or whatever you’ve been shooting with, to your laptop or computer. A lot of cloud storage solutions, like Dropbox for example, can be setup to start backing up folder as soon as you drop files into them.

Let’s look at a few recommended Cloud storage services:

Cloud Video Footage Storage – Wrapping Up

Overall, the benefits are evident with Cloud storage. If you haven’t yet gotten onboard with Cloud storage, now has never been a better time to start migrating your footage.

It’s quite obvious that we moved away from the analog age long ago, and digital is the way to go. As explained in this article, Cloud storage offers a level of digital storage far above standard digital physical storage solutions.

Losing important footage is a very real risk, especially when you’re shooting a number of different video projects a month. As well as good labelling and cataloguing practices, Cloud storage in combination with a solid RAID storage system onsite is the way to go.

Believe me, losing footage because you didn’t take that extra backup option is an absolute nightmare. You definitely don’t want that to happen, and you also don’t want to be left behind and become obsolete because you didn’t roll with the ever-improving tide of technology.

It’s about time to move to the Cloud!

We hope you’ve found this article on cloud video footage storage helpful. What kind of storage setups do you use? Let us know in the comments just below here.

You Should Try:

Published at Mon, 30 Jul 2018 12:02:35 +0000

Fair Use in Documentary Films: Two Helpful Rules of Thumb to Help You Navigate Copyright Gray Areas

Fair Use in Documentary Films: Two Helpful Rules of Thumb to Help You Navigate Copyright Gray Areas

by Steven D. Zansberg, Ballard Spahr, LLP

Using outside footage in your documentary – it’s an effective editing technique that can add relevance to your film. Clips from a newscast, or a montage of different clips edited together can add historical perspective or other impact to a segment. A poignant photo that helps to capture the essence of your storyline, or a musical passage that triggers a specific emotion . . . these are elements to consider in editing a documentary. But is it legal to use content that doesn’t belong to you? The answer is yes, no and maybe.

The crux of the issue is copyright infringement versus fair use. How much of another person’s work can you use, without a license (permission), and how much is too much? Can you use an entire photograph, or must you use only a portion of it? And these are only the most basic of the questions, before others that follow: Does it matter if your film will be distributed exclusively in movie theaters, shown only at festivals, or aired on HBO or PBS? Are you “off the hook,” legally, if you provide an end credit to the author of the work?

Before delving into these and other complicated issues, let’s start with a simple question “what, exactly, is ‘the rule’ on fair use?” A lot has been written and devoted to this subject. And if you want to dig deep into the legalities of fair use, there are literally hundreds of published judicial decisions applying the four-part statutory exemption for fair use (17 U.S.C. § 107) to a broad range of circumstances. In theory, at least, this material provides useful guideposts in helping you determine fair use. But then, you may not have earned a law degree. So, let’s start with some basic definitions.

The Basics

  1. What is Copyright?

Copyright is the intellectual property right of ownership in original expression (text, photos, painting, music, sculpture, etc.) created by a human (not a monkey or a machine) that attaches (springs into life) the moment the creative expression is “fixed in a tangible medium.” The right of ownership exists, under the law, the moment one creates expression (not merely an idea) and records it in some way in a “tangible medium.” Among the so-called “bundle of rights” the owner of a copyrighted work possesses is the right to prohibit others from making copies of that protected expression, without the owner’s prior permission. An additional right of the copyright owner is the right to prohibit others from creating, without prior permission, a “derivative work” that is generated by express or implicit reference to the original copyrighted work. Additional rights, including statutory damages as high as $150,000 per infringement, plus attorney’s fees, come to a copyright owner upon formally registering the copyrighted work with the United States Copyright Office, but registration is not necessary for the right of ownership in the intellectual property to exist.

  1. What is Fair Use?

Recognizing that a 100% prohibition on the copying of original expressive works by others would stifle creativity and the generation of new expressive works, Congress enacted an exception to the copyright owner’s right to grant (or deny) permission to others to reproduce his/her copyrighted work. Section 107 of the Copyright Act states that:

[T]he fair use of a copyrighted work, including . . . by reproduction in copies . . . , for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching . . . , scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include –

(1)       the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2)       the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3)       the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4)       the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. . . .

These legal definitions may appear cut and dry, but it’s the way in which these factors interact and are applied to real-world applications that creates the gray areas concerning fair use. One of the biggest challenges is the difficulty in predicting how your case may hold up if it ends up in court. The truth is, when it comes to a particular use of another’s copyrighted work in a documentary film or news reporting, there are wildly disparate outcomes reported in published judicial decisions to date.

Let me give you one example. Step back a quarter of a century. An infamous home video emerged of police officers beating Rodney King in Simi Valley, California. Rodney King was black. The police officers were white. In 1993, the officers were all found not guilty. This set off rioting in the streets of L.A. that was documented by local television stations. Perhaps the most famous incident of those riots was the beating of a truck driver, Reginald Denny. The entire incident of African American rioters pulling Denny out of his truck and almost beating him to death was captured on videotape by a helicopter news crew. The footage was seen everywhere, on every national and local newscast for weeks after. The copyright owner of that footage, Los Angeles News Service, sued several different companies who had incorporated that footage into their reports. In one case, the usage was found to be a fair use and therefore not copyright infringement.[1] In the other case, decided earlier by the same appeals court, the inclusion of the same footage (though a longer clip) in a different broadcast report was deemed not necessarily a fair use, and therefore it was up to a jury to decide whether it constituted copyright infringement.[2]

The difference between the two cases’ outcomes turned largely on the factors of “nature and purpose of the use” and the amount of the footage that the two defendants had used. In the earlier case against Los Angeles television station KCAL-TV, the defendant used only 45 seconds of the 4 minute footage, but it was “the heart of the matter,” showing the brutal assault on the helpless truck driver as he lay in the street. And, that defendant’s use – on a nightly news broadcast that competed directly with the news reporting of LANS, was found to present an open question (for the jury to decide) whether the use was “fair” or infringing.

In contrast, in the second case, the defendant, cable channel Court TV Network, used only a few seconds of the Denny beating footage, in a promotional spot advertising the networks’ coverage of the trial of one of Denny’s assailant’s (for that assault), and also in a stylized promo for the network’s nightly program of courtroom coverage from across the nation. These two uses were found to be “transformative,” used a much shorter length clip than KCAL’s usage, and, perhaps most importantly, Court TV was not in direct competition with LAN in delivering nightly breaking news. Thus, Court TV’s use was held to be “fair” as a matter of law.

The lack of predictability of fair use safety is compounded by two additional facts: (1) Judges have made it loud and clear that no one of the four statutory factors (items (1) – (4) above) is itself dispositive, and all four factors must be considered, in tandem.[3] So, judges or juries must independently determine how much weight to give to each of the four statutory factors. (2) Also, the courts have crafted a legal doctrine – the “transformative use test” – to guide the factfinder’s decision-making. The transformative use theory claims that use of copyrighted work is deemed “fair use” if, considering the totality of circumstances, the use in the new work is “transformative” of the original purpose, intent, or effect of the original.[4] In other words, have you created a new work with new meaning and/or context? This doctrine has garnered a significant amount of judicial recognition and adoption,[5] notwithstanding the unquestionable subjectivity of its application. The added difficulty of predicting whether a judge or jury will find a particular use sufficiently “transformative” to be deemed a “fair use” hardly moves the ball forward.[6]

The bottom line, there is no “simple, easy test” that a documentarian can apply to a proposed usage, without permission, of a particular copyrighted work in a particular documentary. In live training sessions, I like to say if two lawyers are presented with a particular use of a copyrighted work in a particular film or broadcast report, they are likely to offer a minimum (there is no maximum) of three different opinions whether the fair use exemption applies.

Four Factors and Two Rules of Thumb

Okay, if you’re comfortable living with this uncertainty, there are some reasonably reliable guideposts that are helpful to documentary makers.

First, ask yourself this question: “Is my documentary a commercial or non-profit educational commercial nature?” In the non-profit or educational universe, the usage of materials for a journalistic or educational project is more likely to be deemed a fair use under this factor than a profit-making commercialization (e.g., selling tee shirts, posters, or coffee mugs bearing a copyrighted image). However, as one of the judicial outcomes described above makes clear, merely because copyrighted work is incorporated into a news report, or a documentary film, does not automatically exempt it from copyright infringement.

The news agency Agence France Presse learned this lesson the hard way in 2011, when it distributed, without the photographer’s permission, the only photographs taken of the devastating earthquake in Haiti in the immediate aftermath of that tragedy; the photographer, David Morel, recovered the maximum statutory damages of $150,000 for each of the eight photos that AFP distributed to news outlets across the globe, for a total award of $1.2 million.


In light of this significant financial exposure for using others’ copyrighted works without permission, what “rules of thumb” can guide documentarians as they ponder whether to use copyrighted work in their documentary films? I offer two that my clients have found both practicable and understandable.

Rule of Thumb No. 1: Determine what you are reporting or commenting upon.

This rule is perhaps the best way to determine, with a fairly-high degree of certainty, that any usage you make of another’s copyrighted work will be deemed a fair use, under Factor 1 and the “transformative use” test. Fair use of a copyrighted work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, [or] news reporting” means, essentially, that you are permitted to report on, or provide criticism or commentary of, the copyrighted work itself.

Here’s an example:

Voiceover: “The student protests against continued American involvement in Vietnam garnered an extensive amount of media coverage, both in daily newspapers across the nation, and on the evening news.” Clearly, a documentary focusing on historical events of the 1960s and 70s, or the anti-war movement more specifically, could make a fair use of existing newspaper articles, headlines, and brief snippets of news reports that were broadcast by major news outlets to illustrate this narration. The voiceover makes clear that the documentarian is reporting/commenting on the existence of those copyrighted works.

In contrast, use of the exact same set of copyrighted images and news footage to illustrate the following narration is less likely to be deemed a fair use: “The 1960s were a turbulent time in which society wrestled with profound issues of war and peace, civil rights, and generational change.” Certainly an argument could be made that the use of such footage to accompany this narration is also a fair use. However, in this latter scenario, the press coverage of Vietnam War protests would be considered more in the nature of “wallpaper,” or “B-roll” – visual imagery used to depict the underlying events captured in those news clips, not the fact that such footage was broadcast or the impact that such prior press reports had on the narrative of the documentary. Although this distinction may be subtle, in some cases, it is of crucial importance to distinguishing between whether the footage is being utilized to illustrate a narrative distinct from the existence of the copyrighted work, i.e., the underlying subject matter of that copyrighted work (i.e., the turbulent events of the 1960s), as opposed to discussing the amount and nature of press reports covering those events at the time.

Another example would be file footage of legendary prize fighter Muhammad Ali engaging in verbal jousting with sportscaster Howard Cosell, including Ali’s trademark “float like a butterfly, sting like a bee” eloquence. Using such a clip in a documentary that addresses the evolution of boxing as a sport or, even, perhaps merely a biography of the late “The Greatest” Ali, may well be deemed, again, wallpaper or footage found to highlight the content or substance of the clip. However, were the documentary to focus more on Ali’s transformation of the sport as a result of his deft handling of the press and being a master showman/self-promoter, the use of a clip or clips is more likely to be deemed a fair use, because it is comment or criticism of or about the copyrighted work.

A couple of cautionary points with respect to this Rule of Thumb. First, it is not a “necessary” condition for coming within the fair use safe harbor. Instead, it is, more likely than not, a sufficient condition for being a fair use. Second, the distinctions can be quite subtle. And, merely changing the voiceover narration in a documentary on history of professional boxing, for example, to reference the fact that Ali was a frequent guest on ABC’s Wide World of Sports program, in order to “set up” that clip, could be deemed an artificial “foundation” for using the clip, and therefore, a flawed claim of fair use.

Here’s a good takeaway. If there is a legitimate “need,” within a documentary, to address the existence and/or significance of a prior copyrighted work itself, then showing a small portion of that work (see Rule of Number No. 2 below) is far more likely to be deemed a fair use than the claim (which documentarians frequently espouse) that “the public is entitled to see” the content of the underlying work merely as illustrating a point made in the documentary.

Rule of Thumb No. 2: Use only what you need and no more.

This rule relates primarily to the third statutory factor, which examines “the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.” Taking merely a few frames or seconds out of a two-hour feature film or a six-minute song is far less likely to be deemed copyright infringement than copying the entirety of a photograph, a 20‑line poem, or a 30‑second television advertisement. Using only a small portion of a copyrighted work, even if merely to illustrate a point, is also far less likely to be deemed a commercial substitute for the entire copyrighted work that is considered under the fourth statutory factor. But even a small portion, if it is “the heart of the matter” (as in the Reginald Denny beating footage) can be deemed a substantial amount, subecting the person copying to liability.

Republishing a photograph (100% of the copyrighted work) is a riskier proposition for fair use than reproducing only a small fraction of a longer song, film, book, or painting. This does not mean that photographs or entire paintings can never be used under the fair use doctrine without the photographer’s or painter’s permission, but it is, obviously, a riskier proposition.

Perhaps the easiest way to convey the rule “Use only what you need to illustrate your point, and no more,” is the famous quotation from Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird: “You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view . . . until you climb into his skin and walk around in it.” So, when filmmakers and news producers ask me whether their incorporating ten or twelve seconds of another company’s video clip constitutes a fair use, my question back to them is, “How would you react if that was your footage that some other filmmaker incorporated into his or her production?” Documentary producers understand, viscerally, what it means to have their work reproduced without permission, and they appreciate that their copyrighted works should not be used by others without permission (and, perhaps appropriate licensing fees) unless the usage is, in fact, a “fair use.” So, even if the inclusion of the copyrighted work in a documentary is for the legitimate purpose of “comment, criticism, or news reporting” on the existence of the copyrighted work, the documentary must use no more of the copyrighted work than is necessary to make that point. If a full sound-up of Muhammad Ali’s “I’m so fast that last night I turned off the light switch in my hotel room and was in bed before the room was dark” is sufficient to demonstrate his verbal prowess in the media, then stringing together two or three additional such clips, especially from the same source, runs the risk of “taking too much,” under the third and fourth statutory factors.


These two rules of thumb are, once again, by no means the end-all and be-all of fair use. Others have presented robust and persuasive positions, with which I agree, that fair use in documentaries is not narrowly limited to merely commenting on and demonstrating the existence of prior published copyrighted works. So, please do not mistake these two rules of thumb as exhausting the universe for fair usage of copyrighted works in documentaries. Put another way, the diagram below shows that Rule of Thumb No. 1 describes merely a subset of the universe of uses which constitute a fair use.

Nevertheless, Rule of Thumb No. 2 applies to all uses outside the smaller inside circle of fair uses contained under Rule of Thumb No. 1 above. In other words, one should always strive to use the smallest amount of the copyrighted work being reproduced without permission that is needed to illustrate the point for which the fair use is being made.

I hope you find these two rules of thumb of use to you as you proceed in selecting material for inclusion in your future documentaries.

[1] L.A. News Servs. v. CBS Broad., Inc., 305 F.3d 924 (9th Cir. 2002).

[2] L.A. News Servs. v. KCAL-TV Channel 9, 108 F.3d 1119 (9th Cir. 1997).

[3] Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 578 (1994) (“Nor may the four statutory factors be treated in isoloation, one from the other. All are to be explored, and results weighed together, in light of the purposes of copyright.”).

[4] Pierre N. Leval, Toward a Fair Use Standard, 103 Harv. L. Rev. 1105 (1989-90).

[5] Neil Netanel, Making Sense of Fair Use, 15:3 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 715 (2011)(surveying case law and presenting data “showing that since 2005 the transformative use paradigm has come overwhelmingly to dominate fair use doctrine”).

[6] As one university’s guide states, “the outcome of a court’s fair use analysis can be hard to predict since the test is subjective and open to interpretation.” Basic Information on Copyright and Fair Use for Using Works of Others at 3, U. So. Cal. (2006).

For more than two decades, Steven D. Zansberg has represented media companies, online publishers, and individuals in defending claims based on content, fighting subpoenas, and seeking access to government information and proceedings. He represented the national news media in connection with coverage of the Aurora theater shooting case, the Oklahoma City bombing trials, and the Kobe Bryant rape prosecution. He secured access to public records related to the murder of JonBenét Ramsey and the shooting at Columbine High School. Steve also litigates copyright and trademark matters. Steve has also defended dozens of defamation and invasion of privacy cases in both state and federal courts across the nation. He has successfully briefed and argued appeals to the Colorado Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth and 10th Circuits.

Steve is an active leader in the national media law bar. He is a past Chair of the American Bar Association’s Forum on Communications Law, and has chaired several other committees within the ABA and the Media Law Resource Center. Steve also serves as the President of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition, which educates about and promotes greater transparency in state and local governments.

Steve has taught media law and internet law at the University of Colorado and at the University of Denver’s Sturm College of Law.

Prior to attending law school, Steve Zansberg was a professional documentary producer, for KQED-TV, and PBS. Attorneys in Ballard Spahr’s Media and Entertainment Practice Group regularly work with non-fiction filmmakers and documentarians, across the nation, to reduce legal risks associated with, and (if need be) to defend claims premised on, such productions.

Published at Wed, 22 Aug 2018 07:44:18 +0000

TUTORIAL: Create Han Solo’s laser gun

TUTORIAL: Create Han Solo’s laser gun

Do you find yourself day dreaming about owning Han Solo’s laser gun? With Red Giant’s Trapcode Particular 3 you can get you pretty close! Check out Red Giant’s new tutorial on creating laser gun blasts with Trapcode Particular 3 and get your pew! pew! on. Watch the tutorial here: 

Published at Mon, 13 Aug 2018 11:42:21 +0000




This First Live-Action Adaptation of the Nickelodeon Franchise Stars Isabela Moner and Eugenio Derbez with Muppets Director James Bobin at the Helm

Paramount Players announced Friday that the motion picture adaptation of Nickelodeon’s Peabody award-winning children’s animated series, Dora the Explorer, has begun principal photography on location at the Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia. The production, being directed by 11-time Emmy and four-time BAFTA nominee James Bobin (The Muppets, Muppets Most Wanted, “Flight of the Conchords”) marks the lovable Latina character’s big screen debut (and first live-action adaptation on any platform) after fourteen seasons (2000-2014) and 172 episodes on Viacom’s enduring children’s cable network. The film is a Paramount Players and Nickelodeon production in association with Walden Media. The film is being supported by the Queensland Government via Screen Queensland. Paramount will release the film on August 2, 2019.

Dora the Explorer stars Isabela Moner (Transformers: The Last Knight, Sicario: Day of the Soldado, Instant Family) in the film’s title role. Having spent most of her life exploring the jungle with her parents nothing could prepare Dora for the most dangerous adventure ever – High School. Always the explorer, Dora quickly finds herself leading Boots (her best friend, a monkey), Diego, and a rag tag group of teens on a Goonies-esque adventure to save her parents and solve the impossible mystery behind a lost Inca civilization.

Seventeen-year-old actress Moner is joined in the film by one of Mexico’s biggest stars, Eugenio Derbez (Overboard, Instructions Not Included, How to Be A Latin Lover), who plays Alejandro, a mysterious jungle inhabitant who tries to protect the teenagers from the marauders. The film also features big screen newcomer Micke Moreno (Escobar: Paradise Lost), in the role of cousin Diego; Nicholas Coombe (“Spy Kids: Mission Control,” Midnight Sun) as Randy, a fellow high schooler who develops an immediate crush on Dora; Madeleine Madden (Picnic at Hanging Rock, Tidelands) as the school’s snooty class president, Sammy; and Academy Award® nominee Adriana Barraza (Babel, Amores Perros, Thor, The 33) as Dora’s grandma, Abuelita Valerie. Temuera Morrison (Green Lantern, Moana) will play the role of Powell. Additional key casting announcements are forthcoming.

The film is produced by Christopher Robin producer Kristin Burr, who is joined by longtime Bobin associate, executive producer John G. Scotti (The Muppets, Muppets Most Wanted, Alice Through the Looking Glass) as well as executive producers Julia Pistor (The Spiderwick Chronicles, A Series of Unfortunate Events) and Eugenio Derbez.

Bobin has assembled a talented team behind the camera that also includes reunions with Oscar®-winning production designer Dan Hennah (Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit trilogies, Alice Through the Looking Glass) and costume designer Rahel Afiley (The Muppets, Muppets Most Wanted, “Flight of the Conchords”). The pair will be joined by six-time Goya Award winning (and BAFTA nominated) cinematographer Javier Aguirresarobe, A.S.C. (Secretos del corazón, The Others, Blue Jasmine, Thor: Ragnarok), film editor Mark Everson (Paddington, Paddington 2) and BAFTA-nominated VFX supervisor Andy Brown (Black Panther, House of Flying Daggers, Moulin Rouge!)

Dora the Explorer will film entirely in Australia’s Gold Coast, in the state of Queensland on the country’s east coast, south of Brisbane. Village Roadshow Studios, where the production will headquarter, has been host to several major Hollywood movies in the last few years, including The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, The Shallows, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, Marvel’s Thor: Ragnarok and, most recently, DC’s Aquaman. In addition to designer Hennah’s stage builds, the production will utilize Queensland’s diverse landscape, notably tropical forests near Tamborine Mountain and Tallebudgera, to portray Dora’s jungle habitat.

Paramount Pictures is a subsidiary of Viacom. Nickelodeon is part of the Viacom Media Network, also a division of Viacom. 

Published at Mon, 13 Aug 2018 11:47:51 +0000

Best Gaffer Tape: Why You’ll Find Gaffer Tape on Every Set

Best Gaffer Tape: Why You’ll Find Gaffer Tape on Every Set

Gaffer tape. That time-tested trademark of the filmmaking industry. Helpful for a whole tonne of reasons. This article offers tips and advice for getting the best out of every strip of gaffer tape.

One of the most critical keys to success is to be prepared. Popularized by the Boy Scouts and other volunteer and youth groups, the motto can serve anyone well.

In any situation, from minor inconveniences to full-blown disasters, the best are always prepared. From stashed-away tool boxes to full-on contingency plans, it’s important to be be ready for any situation that might be thrown your way.gaffer tape

When you’re shooting video, specifically, there are many different types – events,, interviews, vlogging, short films, full-length features … just to name some – and different things to keep in mind.

With so many moving parts, it can be difficult to stay organized. When you’re filming a short, for example, you’ll have talent, props, lighting and sound on your mind – just to name a few.

Event videographer? Your subjects are already lined up, but the space and lighting might not be as you envisioned. And that’s not even considering the gear required.

Whether it’s a one-day event or a weeks-long production, staying organized and being prepared are two things that can go a long way towards completing a successful project.

gaffer tape

When it comes to being prepared, however, one thing you’ll see on any set or in any gear bag is gaffer tape. Productions both big and small rely on it for a variety of reasons.

It’s used in both live and filmed productions, popular for theatre, film and television projects. Named for the gaffer, or chief lighting technician, many will go through meters and meters of this tape from the first shot to the last scene.

So, all the pros are using it. But why? Here are five of the top reasons that you’ll find gaffer tape on every set.

gaffer tape

Gaffer tape is versatile

Usually made from a cotton-backed adhesive, gaffer tape is strong and long lasting, with an adhesive that sticks firmly. Since its backing is made of cloth, it isn’t reflective, and can blend in seamlessly on set.

While it’s made to hold down cables to ensure they stay in place, gaffer tape can be used on set for other purposes as well:

1. Indicate actors’ marks on stage or set

Since it’s non-reflective, the tape is virtually unnoticeable. It also comes in a variety of colors, so you can mark multiple actors’ placements without having to make different symbols or mark manually to indicate spots.

2. Repairs and fixes on set

From affixing props in place to masking holes, repairing curtains and covering cracks on stage, there’s dozens of uses to keep gaffer tape around. Patch up a bean bag weight, create a makeshift tripod plate, the list goes on!

gaffer tape

3. Supporting the lighting team

The team that supports gaffer tape’s namesake will surely appreciate having it on hand as well. Gaffer tape can hold lighting gels in place, holding projectors at a certain tilt, replacing strain reliefs on connectors and more.

4. Assisting the sound crew

Gaffer tape is also great to use to hold microphone packs in place, fixing microphone stand positions, patching up speaker drivers and other uses.

gaffer tape

5. Helping out wardrobe and stylists

Kim Kardashian herself has endorsed it as the best choice to keep, shall we say, her assets in place, and gaffer tape has definitely earned itself some more fans with that testament.

However, it’s a good quick fix for the wardrobe department when they need to fix or add grips to shoes, covering taps, covering small logos on clothes, and more.

When you’re starting out, you might find yourself fulfilling more than a couple roles on the above list. It just makes gaffer tape that much more indispensable when you’re packing your gear for your production.

Gaffer tape is like the Swiss Army Knife of gear on set – if it needs to stick, chances are gaffer tape will do the job!

gaffer tape

Gaffer tape is strong

High quality gaffer tape holds and sticks to anything. Coated cables, dusty stages…anywhere you can think of on a set! (Note that when using cabling, however, any exposed wires should be taken care of with electrical tape, lest there be an incident.)

The adhesive is made to last whatever a production can throw at it. Despite its strength, gaffer tape can be easily ripped without the use of scissors or a blade, meaning that you can put it down quickly and easily.

In addition to creating a strong bond, gaffer tape can hold up against more than the regular wear and tear. It’s hard for the elements to wash it away, because…

gaffer tape

Gaffer tape is water-resistant

Even though the tape is cloth-backed, the highest quality gaffer tape is made to withstand the elements. This makes it ideal for productions both indoors and outside, and won’t force you to resort to a rubberized or plasticized tape which can catch the light.

gaffer tape

Gaffer tape leaves no residue

With the heavy-duty properties of gaffer tape, you would think that the adhesive is sticky to the point of leaving its mark wherever it’s applied.

However, that isn’t the case at all! It’s easily removed without leaving a trace behind, making it a great choice when using it in spaces you need to leave in better condition than when you started. No need to spend time scraping residue away, when it’s not even left there in the first place.

Gaffer tape isn’t only plain

Gaffer tape comes in a wide variety of colors, which makes having several rolls on hand a good idea. Color coding stage markings, labels, and any other directions on set can be immensely helpful when trying to keep your head on straight during production.

Having a variety of colors can help you avoid having to make a ton of labels that correspond to the use of the tape. However, it’s easy to write on, so even if you have only one or two colors on hand, you can still stay organized.

Another benefit to having brightly colored gaffer tape is that it can be easy for cast and crew to see from a distance. Make sure possible pitfalls are easily seen by drawing attention to them using gaffer tape, especially when the tape is a fluorescent color.

Gaffer Tape – A Conclusion

Lightweight, versatile and indispensable – it’s easy to see why gaffer tape is found everywhere. When you’ve got about a few hundred things on your mind, trying to get your video production together, anything that makes your life easier is probably a good thing to try.

Amateurs and professionals alike swear by the stuff: you’d need at least a roll each of duct, masking and hem tape each to do only a part of what gaffer tape does.

With a tape that can multitask like that, why not lighten up your gear bag and get yourself a roll or two?

You Should Try:

Published at Wed, 01 Aug 2018 14:24:36 +0000

Best Full Frame Mirrorless Camera: 5 Great Mirrorless Cameras On The Market

Best Full Frame Mirrorless Camera: 5 Great Mirrorless Cameras On The Market

When looking for the best full frame mirrorless camera, you need to consider a number of things. Our detailed guide to the best full frame mirrorless cameras will answer your questions and give you some camera suggestions to make your buying decision more straightforward.

Mirrorless cameras are an alternative to traditional lens technology, with all digital capture electronics rather than a conventional viewfinder. The image is portrayed on an electronic viewfinder, after being refracted through a traditional glass lens.

Mirrorless cameras tend to be better for video production, however fewer lenses are available and the viewfinder generally isn’t as good  – for example, there’s normally no auto-focus sensors or pentaprism, because these are all replaced with the single image sensor. Mirrorless cameras are usually lighter and more compact because of this.

We’re going to cover a number of top full frame mirrorless cameras in this article. We’ll get into the details of each camera, as well as cover the pros and cons of each. In addition, we’ll mention any specific projects that a certain camera is great for.

Best Full Frame Mirrorless Camera on the Market

We have selected a range of mirrorless cameras with a variety of different price levels. We should also note that we’ve chosen mostly prosumer cameras for this article, as opposed to the more professional level cameras (covered in another article).

Canon have a reputation for great lens quality and progressive picture quality as you move towards professional EOS range. The M6 is no exception, with a high quality solid metal and highly durable plastic build, this is a professional quality 24-megapixel camera.

Features like object tracking, additional lenses and HD performance make this camera a highly fun and excellent quality tool for a lot of your filmmaking (and photography) needs. As an added feature you can even record HD 60 fps videos, which is great for all the media heads out there!

I have had a similar prosumer camera and the HD video function is great for family BBQs or suddenly when you need a camcorder and you have your camera to hand. This isn’t a professional level camera for pro video production work, by any stretch of the imagination, though.

The Dual Pixel technology for the CMOS sensor adds an extra level of smoothness when recording HD 1080p videos.

The digital image viewer on the back of the camera is large and accurate also. The camera feels sturdy and the buttons responsive. This is a solid prosumer offering which is built to last and the viewer is touch activated which is really useful.

Canon cameras have been a favourite of mine, and many other professional and yet again, the camera build quality and lens performance proves why. With good expansion and all optical zoom, built in Wi-Fi and high-quality image sensor make this camera a high recommendation for an affordable, entry-level camera.

This camera stands out, it looks sleek and modern. I really like the design and the adjustable large rear viewfinder. This model takes image of 16-megapixel quality and also has advanced feature options, including excellent macro (7cm close shots) features.

The X-A10 is at the top end of the Fujifilm mirrorless camera range. The integrated pop up lens and manual focus give this a retro futurist, other-worldly feel and again the build quality is very good.

Like with any piece of camera equipment, your choice boils down to your personal preferences. However, with optical zoom, good battery life and weighing just 500 grams, there isn’t much difference between the X-A10 and the M series Canon.

The Canon has a greater MP capture ability. But, for a couple hundred bucks more expensive, you’d expect that. And if you’re just using this for prosumer use, it isn’t really a consideration. Like the M6, this isn’t a camera for professional video production work.

Occasionally, the buttons can have a slight flimsy effect and the unit doesn’t have an SD card provided. However, the image quality is great, with optical stabilization, quiet operation and accurate focus.

This isn’t quite as smooth operating as the Canon, but not by much. And at almost half the price, this remains a solid price point for a still a highly capable camera.

Extra lenses are available and it features very easy to use camera operation, so definitely worth a look.

High quality build and solid features are the main selling point of this mirrorless camera. This is closer to the Canon M6 than the Fuji X-A10 in robust feel, but also in price point.

The Alpha 6300 offers a nice 25-megapixel image quality, with cutting edge autofocus technology. It’s quiet and like the Canon feels professional, with a sensor speed of up to 120fps, which is great for those action shots.

The Alpha 6300 is made from a magnesium alloy, so will not damage or rust easily. So expect this camera to last a long time if it’s the one you choose to purchase. And if you’re after a compact professional grade mirrorless camera, with very high quality Exmor image sensor, why not?

The OLED display size is high quality, an optional lens mount is useful and the optical viewer again is quite futurist in style, which seems sleek and up to date.

The Alpha 6300 has BIONZ high speed image processing, 425 phase detections, again good for detail and action. All demonstrate Sony’s commitment to professional quality image capture.

4K Video recording is on offer here and again touch controls for accurate and effective use. The features, like the other models, offer compact mirrorless image capture, with enhanced image processing and DSLR quality in a compact design. This gives you a lot more freedom and greater shot opportunity.

This model and the M6 are top level cameras for prosumer purposes and useful in fairly demanding environments.

Whilst not as high quality as the Alpha 6300, this mirrorless 20MP Zeiss Lens digital camera is certainly worth a look. It’s still equipped with the great Exmor R sensor, solid build and x3.6 optical zoom, all in an aesthetic compact and high image quality camera.

In fact, this camera is so compact, the 3 inch LCD display on the back looks gigantic, when compared with the proportions of the rest of the camera. It has a x14 digital zoom, great focal length and Wi-fi options.

Being a compact, it’s not the most versatile. However, for this price point, it’s a fairly solid advanced camera and it’s difficult not to like it. Highly recommended!


Sony RX100 20.2 MP Premium Compact Digital Camera w/1-inch sensor, 28-100mm ZEISS zoom lens, 3” LCD

  • Approximately 20.1 megapixels , Exmor CMOS Sensor, 28-100mm equivalent F/18-49 lens, ISO 125-6400…
  • Operating temperature:Approx. 0°C to 40°C (32F° to 104F°).1080p video, Steady-Shot image…
  • Burst Mode (shots)-Approx10 fps,(VGA) Moving Image Size -640×480 30fps Approx3Mbps. Flash range:ISO…
  • Bright F18 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T lens with 36x zoom, Full HD 1080/60p video with manual control…
  • Dimension: 1016 mm x 581 mm x 359 mm, Weight: 213g (75 oz)

A new contender with 4K image quality, 30fps HD video options, high ISO support and strong lens range, the YI M1 looks impressive on paper.

Built in Wi-fi, IMX269 image sensor and superb high-grade build and 20 megapixel image quality all make this camera attractive. And with the chance to compete with the likes of Sony, Canon and other top camera makers, the YI M1 has pulled out all the stops to become a real contender here.

I like the fact that this has Micro Four Thirds lens options for dedicated use, something that expands your lens selection and helps to really develop your style through experimentation. There are, after all, an awful lot of cheap micro four thirds lenses available on places like eBay.

The M1 comes with a 12-40mm lens and has a battery life of between 8-9 hours. The mic for video is extremely high quality and the 4K image quality is superior, especially compared to the image quality of other cameras mentioned here.

Semi-assisted image processing allows for advanced processor assistance features, but also the option to fine tune the manual control of your shooting (through manual lens adjustment).

It weighs just over 1kg, making it heavier than other models discussed here, but a positive here is that this just adds to the quality of the design and professional feel compared to the others.

I like the build, design and support with extra lens. For a relatively unknown manufacturer, though, the price point is a little steep. But in a world where you get what you pay for, this hardware certainly delivers.


What makes a good mirrorless camera? It’s not that different from DSLR cameras and remembering the technology is newer, the design will be less developed and certain features will be priced at a premium.

Due to consumer confidence system specifications orientate around the digital image sensor, promoting the simplicity and quality of the mirrorless camera. And the price point will get lower with these prosumer cameras as the technology develops and gets more commonly used.


Stabilization generally is in two forms, Lens or IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization). Models like Canon or Nikon (VR or vibration reduction) are focused on Lens Stabilization, whilst Sony and Pentax have worked on the IBIS, or in body method.

Lens stabilization methods prove more effective in low level light situations. However, IBIS works with all lenses because the feature is not part of the lens itself, so more flexible as a whole. This means lenses are cheaper with IBIS, less fragile and quieter.

Lens stabilisation produces especially good results with super telephoto (or long range) lenses, where the focal distance demands a good stabilization method.

Focal Length Multiplier

The focal length multiplier, or crop factor, is essentially the size of the frame. Based on the hardware of the various camera technology, it controls detailed camera adjustments for framing the image captured by the sensor.

The 35mm is the diagonal frame of the actual image. Crop factor allows us to compare different camera hardware and the flexibility of the image sensor within the camera’s hardware.

Common focal length multiplier ranges from x1.5 to x6 magnified adjustment. This is heavily controlled by the quality of the image sensor and the model’s technological ability.

Sometimes you see higher factors. This is usually a little white lie, where camera performance mixed both digital and optical processing to enhance the multiplier, with varied results.

This is why it’s always important to physically test camera performance before purchase and research well.

Focus system

Each mirrorless camera is different. However, there is usually an autofocus system (or similar) that refines your adjustments to the image quality post camera processing for the best image quality possible.

Contrast and focus are values altered here by either yourself or, in some models, completely processor controlled.

Auto focus systems use a combination of IR (Infrared) / ultrasonic to measure distance and focus the shot. This is common for the majority of cameras and is processor controlled for when you just want everything to be done for you by the camera. This makes sense with prosumer models, but as you take the step up to more pro camera options, you’ll want more manual control of the image.

Passive assist uses IR, but is less accurate and usually with focus controls to allow the operator fine adjustment options over the final quality of the shot.

Sensor size and type

The sensor’s ability varies greatly from model to model, with the technology highly guarded and developed in house by most manufacturers.

The larger more detailed the sensor, the more flexible the focal length / cropping ability of the image (real time). Full frame is industry standard 35mm. This is dictated by the quality of the sensor and in general the size and price of the camera.

The CMOS sensors usually vary slightly between manufacturer. Canon has APS-C, Sigma has a APS-H. Nikon also has a APS-C, but with a slightly larger frame size.

Sensors are usually 2cm x 2cm approx. However, it is important to realise their quality is directly related to the image picture quality, especially in mirrorless cameras.

There are other factors like dynamic range and dark noise, etc. However, these are topics for further research. The more expensive CMOS sensors work better in low light levels.

Best Full Frame Mirrorless Camera – Thoughts and summary

The standard quality of shots from all these mirrorless cameras are very good! If you’re on a budget, look at the Fuji X-A10 or the newer YI M1.

There are slight tradeoffs with build and megapixel ability. However, the shot quality is there due to the high quality image sensors, being very similar across the spectrum.

A lot of people always recommend Canon cameras and it’s true once you get used to the build and high-grade image quality, people find it difficult to accept others.

However, it’s not difficult to pull off professional level shots with all of these models, so if price is a factor then go for those that are at the more reasonable price points.

As always, it’s important to consider the type of uses and projects that you’ll require any video equipment for before you purchase. As we’ve mentioned throughout, we’ve covered prosumer level cameras here (as opposed to the pro level mirrorless cameras covered in another post).

We hope this article on the best full frame mirrorless camera offerings on the market has been instructive for you. Did we miss out your favorite mirrorless camera? Let us know in the comments below.

You Should Try:

Published at Thu, 02 Aug 2018 12:16:48 +0000



Australian pro audio giant RØDE Microphones launches the brand new SC6-L Mobile Interview Kit, the latest Lightning connected recording solution for Apple iOS Devices.

The SC6-L is a compact duo-3.5mm TRRS-to-Lightning Mobile Interface that enables broadcast-quality audio recording with two RØDE smartLav+ microphones; a compact solution for on-the-go interviews and podcasts, both for audio only and filmed scenarios. It’s a pro-quality pocket podcast studio!

Thanks to the 3.5mm headphone jack, you can both monitor in real time and listen to playback. Download the free RØDE Reporter App to adjust input and monitor levels, along with a suite of other settings to reduce work in post – you can even share it immediately. The Mobile Interview Kit will also work with other iOS recording software. Simply plug-set-&-record.

The SC6-L Mobile Interview Kit comes packaged with the new SC6-L Interface, 2 x Clips, 2 x Windshields, 1 x Storage Pouch, and 2 x smartLav+ Microphones – RØDE’s professional-grade lavaliers. These discreet and portable miniature mics are made with omnidirectional condenser capsules and Kevlar® reinforced cables – the ideal choice for a wide range of film, TV, podcast and broadcast applications.

“We’re thrilled to announce the launch of RØDE’s new additions to iOS audio capture,” comments Damien Wilson, CEO of RØDE Microphones. “Following on from the VideoMic Me-L, the SC6-L Mobile Interview Kit is perfect for both media pros and emerging content creators, providing broadcast-ready audio on Apple devices at a stellar price. These products further cement our position as the choice for Today’s Creative Generation™.”

The SC6-L Mobile Interface and smartLav+ microphones are also available for purchase separately.

Published at Fri, 10 Aug 2018 00:37:47 +0000




Friday August 3, 2018: Australian pro audio giant The Freedman Group– home to the world’s number one audio capture brand RØDE Microphones – is proud to announce the appointment of legendary audio innovator Chris Woolf as a Senior Innovation Engineer, exclusive to RØDE.

Formerly a Senior Engineer for the windshield and microphone accessories company Rycote®, Chris Woolf is the inventor of, amongst many other patented noise-reduction solutions, the ‘Rycote Lyre®’ shock-mount and the ‘Rycote Cyclone®’ Windshield system.

Mr. Woolf is rightly considered the world’s leader in developing advanced technology to control noise in microphone systems generated from vibration and handling, and of course wind noise. He has been collaborating with RØDE since April of this year, and has already developed some revolutionary technology that will be revealed very soon.

“I am delighted to announce that we have secured Chris and his enormous talent,” says Freedman Group Founder and Chairman, Peter Freedman AM. “I am truly excited with what Chris has developed with us at RØDE over the last few months, and look forward to being able to reveal what I believe will really shake up this category!”

Mr Woolf says, “RØDE’s dominant position in the on-camera market – as well as in film, broadcast and in studio recording – places them in the right place at the right time for innovation in the wind noise and structural borne vibration reduction field. The opportunity to work with such an amazing company, that has unique in-house manufacturing resources to explore new possibilities in the practical science of microphone noise reduction, is just wonderful.”

Published at Mon, 06 Aug 2018 08:02:29 +0000