May 29, 2013

Cannes Palme d'Or Winner 'Blue is the Warmest Color' Shot on the Canon C300

Blue is the Warmest ColorThe Cannes Film Festival has finally come to an end, and the festival's top prize, the Palme d'Or, went to Blue is the Warmest Color (also known as La Vie d'Adèle: Chapitre 1 & 2). The film, a small intimate love story, made history for a number of reasons, including being the first Palme d'Or winner based on a graphic novel, as well as the first film shot on a Canon digital camera, specifically the Canon C300. Click through for more on the film and some clips below.

Thanks to Jon Fauer, ASC at Film and Digital Times for the heads-up, here are some clips from the film (unfortunately I can't seem to find anything higher quality):

An interview with the director and stars of the film:

The production apparently purchased two C300s from PhotoCineRent (who we have previously featured on the site for their BMCC rig setups) and two Angénieux Optimo 28mm-76mm zooms with Canon EF mounts. Why purchase the cameras instead of renting them? It seems the production lasted a very long time -- at least 4 months -- so it made more financial sense to buy the cameras and lenses rather than rent them over such a long period of time.

PhotoCineRent - Blue is the Warmest Color

While most previous Palme d'Or winners have been shot on film, the last two years have seen films shot only on digital -- certainly a sign of the times. It's definitely interesting that the production chose the C300, most likely for its ease-of-use, low-light abilities, and flexibility on set, as they recorded internally to CF cards. The C300 is a frequent rental of choice for many productions, and is often a lower-budget alternative to the Arri Alexa. Though a camera usually has nothing to do with what people will think of the final film, a chief argument for many against using the C300 has always been, "What films have shot with it?" That question might finally have a legitimate answer in Blue is the Warmest Color.

Links:

[via Film and Digital Times]

Your Comment

62 Comments

Easy camera to operate...Sundance Film Fest had a lot of features shot on the canon 5d mark 2 and I think one on the C300.

May 29, 2013

1
Reply
DIO

The C300 is just an awesome camera! It's sad its price range, however It is a pro market success.

Now... When ML RAW turns to be usable in a pro enviromnent if ever, We'll see lots of MKIII movies with that feature. It's just too good to be true. But still not nearly as friendly as C300 workflow...

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
Alex Mand

I was thinking about this last night and I think a lot of the slack people gave Philip Bloom for his oppinion is unjustified, I have messed around with RAW files in timelapse sequences (granted 18mp not 2mp images) and my ssd + hdd, 16gb ram, 2011 macbook pro took forever to process the images all for a 20-30second clip. The sheer processing power, cf card price, cf card size is going to be a massive restriction for 90+% of the people raving about this.

The lowlight performance does sound good but in an industry where time is money the C1/300's offer probably a more attractive alternative.

Surely Canon will have to patch some kind of 2k mode into the C300 or the same 4k mode as the 1DC is using in response to recent events?

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
Chris Lambert

Im sorry but the 8bit limit of the c300 and canon 1dc is just not good enough, not to mention the headache of banding and a lil moire in shots, even shane hurblurt did an article on the banding contributing it to 8 bit limit.

Im sorry i just feel canon could have gave more internally higher than 8 bit color space limit, its a documentary camera only in my opinion.

When and if the black magic pocket camera comes out and releases a firmware for lossless raw dng , then it will truely become the #1 indie camera. It can utilize super 16 lens, small sensor / raw ouput would be friendly to green screen work, and no dropped frame due to sd internal cards, it stills boggles me why they did not choose to use cf cards but if SD's work then ok fine

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
jay clout

sd's is C100 only. C300 i CF.

8bit looks fine in video above to me.

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
Chris Lambert

my bad long day didn't read properly.

May 29, 2013

1
Reply
Chris Lambert

Glad the film got the Palme d'Or,

although the film had quite some bad publicity, as the director has seemed to treat the film crew like shit.
(no credits, eating oyster and champagne with the actors during shooting times...)

May 29, 2013

0
Reply

"eating oyster and champagne with the actors during shooting times" Now that's just too funny. And the film itself does look awful, BTW, what a HORRIBLE title. Pretentious nonsense.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
James

It's common for lead actors to be treated well, and for the director to sit down with his two stars to discuss the film over a glass of wine, what could be wrong with that?

As far as looking awful, I have yet to watch a Palme d'Or winning film, or any of the selections, that was "awful". Quite the contrary. But the number of people in the industry who have no clue about any of the great auteurs in international cinema is astonishing.

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
Markus

Get your facts right, he was actually eating oysters with the actresses because one of them couldn't stand them and he wanted to film ~the reality of her throwing up~ and shit. He treated them pretty horribly too, not just the crew.

October 2, 2013

1
Reply
May

Not surprised in the slightest. A lot of so-called independent filmmakers cheat the people who work on their movies by refusing to pay even a single nickel as it would cut into their latte budget ( or I should say oyster and champagne budget) . Say what you want about studio level films or TV, at least they pay their crew.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
eyemo

Who here has seen the film. Pretentious? Nonsense? Have some humanity and at least see the film before you trash it.

May 29, 2013

1
Reply
Matthew

For some reason amongst users here there is an escalation in anti-art bleatings. Zero tolerance for the so called 'artsy' films. You lot who are so threatened by art lose so much, in life and love and should look for new work away from film like maybe interning at Fox News.

"when I hear the word culture, I reach for my gun"

May 29, 2013

1
Reply
Dan

Boy, you must take a peek into Hollywood productions, that's gonna rock your world.

May 29, 2013

1
Reply
Natt

In the end is about the story and the Directors vision for the film.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
jayBw

In the end, it's about the story and the director's vision for the film.

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
jayBw

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
DLD

Wow, that's a lot of warp stabilizer!

May 29, 2013

0
Reply

Wow... it's not there in the youtube clip, but is definitely very apparent in this download clip!

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
Brian

LOL yeah the film was kinda shaky .

Just pulling for BMC to not only deliver pocket cam but the firmware for raw dng, because prores does not do it for me sorry, 12 bit 13 stops would be amazing, the only thing i would use the c300 or 1dc for would be low light and maybe not even that if magic lantern delivers a stable hack with sound

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
jay clout

Not bad at all, I'm not really a fan of the C300 for narrative type stuff as it seems to look a bit awkward for a film, but it came out decent enough here. I think RED, BMCC or even the F3 might have provided a better aesthetic though. As to the film, it looks quite good, can't wait to check this out!

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
Peter

is it just me or is the story played out and done a million times, yet the festivals eat them up.
The outside shot looks terrible.......

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
stanley

I played with a C300 a while ago at an abelcine event. Ergonomics are cool but the images it makes are soap-opera like. But hey, can't argue with cannes

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
john jeffries

Amen. Straight out of the camera, I've never seen anything shot with a C300 that said "filmic" to me. I have a C100 with a Ninja 2. In C-Log with the G-R channel and Phase tweaked a notch, it looks awesome. Throw Filmconvert over it with a little grain and voila.

June 1, 2013

1
Reply
Jeremy

I don't understand why people say the shots look terrible. They look great to me. What's truly amazing are the performances the director got out of those young actors. You don't even have to read the subtitles and you can emotionally understand everything that's going on with them. This is what we should strive for in our narrative work.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
Gavin

Oh gosh... How a film not shoot in 8 bits not raw won this...

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
Gabriel

Gay rights maybe, it's so important to our society, right? Way more important than the failing economics and intellectual degradation.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
Natt

Human rights versus economic stability versus intellectualism?
They're all important; I don't see why humanity can't progress on all fronts.

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
Blah

I'd venture a guess that the criteria for consideration for the Palme d'Or simply didn't include discussions weighing the merits of different bit depths per color channel as recorded to the source footage of their submissions.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
Blah

hahahaha!

May 31, 2013

0
Reply
ryan

I have seen it. Its a TERRIFIC film. Don't be fooled by the Cinemax logline.
Those Optimos are a fantastic combo with the C300 (and PhotoCineRent are one of the few places around that have them in EF and F mount in stock!). Just the best short zooms in the world.
Not once did the look pull me out of the film. They wanted a naturalistic feel - they got it, but without any artifacts that would have moved it into 'gritty'.
If you're shooting for an extended period (over 40 days) it makes real sense to buy the kit. And always buy two matching cameras.
And the C300 is really the best choice when you see this film. If the C100 had been around would not have shocked me to see that used too - its a very intimate film.

May 29, 2013

1
Reply
marklondon

the least reason why this film won is the camera it was shot with...
we are at a point where the camera doesn't matter anymore, Alexa, RED, BMC, Canon whatever. Anyone can afford a camera that can make good enough images.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
hansd

+1

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
avatar
Micah Van Hove
Writer
writer, director, dp

U$800 micro3/4 cmaera used to shot the magnificent "Upstream Color" film agrees with you!

May 29, 2013

1
Reply
guto novo

Yes, but that film definitely qualified as 'gritty'. There are some nice moments, but a few times I found myself wishing we'd lent him an Alexa.

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
marklondon

But that was purely down to aesthetic choices more than production ones. An Alexa could have yielded images with wider dynamic range, but other than that they'd be just as "gritty".

May 29, 2013

0
Reply

-1000
this is not a site for audience goers its a site for aspiring filmmakers. In good filmmaking, everything matters.

May 29, 2013

1
Reply
ryan

...and there's your troll winner for today.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
marklondon

-1000

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
ryan

I'm sure he'll miss dearly those thousand hard-earned points you've taken. He must be absolutely crushed.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
Blah

-2000

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
john jeffries

Story matters. Everything is subservient to that. Story is really the only thing that matters. Everything else matters only as it serves or detracts from the story.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply

Who cares what camera was used?

IT WON THE DARN AWARD!

Geeze.............boys and their toys.

Regards,

Rachael

June 1, 2013

-1
Reply
Rachael Dakoda

Just read the piece about how his crew absolutely hated him, and he loves to improvise so the shoot kept dragging on.
When the distributors turned up to see the discord on set, for them he reshot scenes they'd already done without letting on. Everything looked smooth (why not? Everyone had already worked out that scene)
Brilliant!

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
marklondon

I believe you meant to write, "Blue is the Warmest Colour." :)

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
Brian

I actually debated about that for a long time, seeing it written different ways. I guess since it's not the original title any way we can take some liberties with British/American English spellings.

May 29, 2013

1
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

A d7100 produce the same if not better picture externally for a fraction of the price of the c100 and alot cheaper than c300 minus ND filters

May 29, 2013

-1
Reply
jay clout

The C100 produces much more detail. While the D7100 is very clean in higher ISOs, it's nowhere near the video quality and usability of a C100. The D800 is the highest-resolving Nikon DSLR and it's still below the C100.

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

Who cares about 8-bit or 10-bit? Colorists? DITs? Plenty of DPs I know don't give a shit as long as they are shooting and getting paid. The audience could care less as long as it doesn't take them out of the story. George Lucas, Robert Rodriguez, and Francis Ford Coppola have all shot movies in 8-bit. Ever heard of Star Wars 2: Attack of the Clones? Once Upon a Time in Mexico? Tetro? Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (not my fave)? If it was good enough for some of the biggest directors in the world I'm pretty sure its good enough for the rest of us. I won't even mention the films shot on minidv (ha! remember that?!).

From my own experience the C300 is an amazing camera that can shoot anything you need it to. Features, music videos, docs, you name it. I even met a guy who bought one immediately after using it side by side with an Alexa. IQ is determined by the operator not the camera itself. Put a camera in a dark room with no light and they all look the same..... like crap.

Sorry bout the rant but pixel peepers get on my nerves :-/

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
filmisart

"The audience could care less as long as it doesn’t take them out of the story."

People always say this to justify particular cameras and it's just not true. The audience likes to be dazzled, they like colors and shit. You need a system that gives you freedom to make dazzling shit

May 29, 2013

0
Reply
john jeffries

Pages