|
Jumping in to bring some P2 love. It's a great recording medium and with the E-class cards the price drops significantly. I have to say I hate HDV. I got us to run away from that as fast as possible. Long GOP and heavy compression made shooting high contrast or high detail a nightmare. The breakup really bugged me. Really you've got to figure HDV is on its way out. The P2 cards are bombproof, and there's nothing like having a rack of cards in your camera and being able to shoot all day. Especially when you are outside, and you've got your camera wrapped in rain gear. I know people mess around with the EX1 and strapped on card readers and non-SxS cards. If they had something like that for P2 cameras I still wouldn't go near them. Too much risk. Also some love for the HPX-500. It makes gorgeous pictures. We've had our footage at a bunch of different events and they can't believe that the look we show is straight out of camera without processing. And as far as the whole pixel shift debate goes...meh. There is something about the Panasonic image that is so pleasing. 1080p, projected on 24 foot screen, straight out of camera...just amazing. Almost got our hands on a 3000 for an extended demo in the field, unfortunately the insurance for 85k kind of sunk us from taking the risk. Soon our trusty 500 is off to the Arctic. Here's some footage we threw together, again straight from the camera, no processing. http://vimeo.com/2507639 Also Steadiman, have you ever worked with stabilizers on boats? We recently went out with some kenyon labs gyros, and they took the edge off for a pretty low price. Wondering if you've had any success with other equipment. Also this steadicam guy is a golden god.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrTuW1O2eSg Walnut Crunch fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Jun 27, 2009 |
#
¿
Jun 27, 2009 22:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 04:22 |
|
|
Slim Pickens posted:Holy fuuuck, that guy is awesome. I wish you could see more of what it looked like, you can kinda see the shot on the monitor on the bottom right. Warning you have to actually suffer through Eurovision music to see the shot... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FoLR-So1no You can minimize the suffering by going to 2:41 in the clip. They use a bit of zoom in post to smooth the transition, but geez. Walnut Crunch fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Jun 28, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2009 17:00
|
|
|
Yeah if anyone has questions on: P2 workflow Final Cut Server Panasonic HPX-500 AVCHD and the canon hf11 (our underwater camera) Various delivery formats (we shoot 1080p, yet every producer asks us for a DVD of raw footage or uncompressed, both of which I'm sure will make their editors cry)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2009 22:05
|
|
|
I don't get the love for HDV. I really, really hate it. It just cannot handle detail or movement without getting mushy. Granted I haven't seen Canon HDV, but still it's 4:2:0, long gop, HDV. Blech. The difference between HDV and DVCPRO HD is quite noticeable. At least Sony Z1 style HDV. And as far as the roll your own memory for EX1's. It just seems to be too big of a risk. If you don't really care if you glitch, I guess it is a great way to save some bucks, but man, I would never take a chance that my recording media was any less then the most dependable.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2009 06:47
|
|
|
So the d300s is out and it is 720p at 24fps. Who wants to bet that the next full frame nikon is 1080p at 24fps with full manual controls and will absolutely gut the Canon prosumer line of video cameras? Nikon is the only maker without a prosumer video line to protect. I'm betting big things will come out of nikon before anyone else.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2009 05:30
|
|
|
CMOS problems have to do with the shutter. Most modern HD cameras are still CCD. Most consumer HD cameras are CMOS and there is a good mix in the prosumer world. RED is the standout in the pro world. I think VDSLR market has some real possibilities. Especially for Nikon if they get their act together. I don't think I'd ever use them to shoot anything, at least not yet, real video cameras are so much more flexible and reliable. But as special use cameras I think they'd work like a charm.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2009 03:27
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:CCDs are just as vulnerable to skew as CMOS, it's just less noticeable because tilts are less common than pans. It's ultimately up to how well the image processing firmware is capable of compensating for it. F900 and f950 and f23 are ccd cameras. So is the hpx-3000 and the new varicam. EX3 and EX1 are semi-professional cameras. So basically top end cameras, aside from RED (and I know nothing about the SI2K other than some posts about it being noisy) are all CCD. The highspeed phantoms are cmos. So I'm not sure CMOS is primetime yet considering that neither sony or panasonic have released a top tier camera with that technology. Shutter is a commonly used term with cameras whether it is physical or not. The top to bottom read of cmos creates many problems as opposed to the global shutter approach. Skew is a huge problem with CMOS as are strobes and vibrations. Some cameras handle it better than others. CCD's are pretty rock solid. There must be some reason they are still in the pipeline. Panasonic grudgingly went into the CMOS world though they themselves are still fully committed to the CCD. They basically said they went CMOS because of consumer demand, not technical need.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2009 06:19
|
|
|
True, that's why I think watching the whole Nikon, Canon, and to some degree Panasonic thing is interesting. Nikon is the only one that doesn't have a prosumer market to cannibalize. They don't really seem to get video yet though, and don't seem to know what a goldmine they are sitting on. All the other companies sell $3000 and up cameras to the prosumer, that a quality VDSL at $1500 would totally destroy. I think if the MK2 was a bit better of a real video camera, Canon's XL video line would cease to exist. I'm not sure they want to do that. Whatever Nikon releases next in the full-frame market, it's D700 replacement, will tell the tale of Nikon and video. If they release 1080p, modern codec, 24fps, full manual, they have a real chance of changing the market. If they just do a incremental like with the D300s, well, then nothing to write about. Right now, there is no CMOS camera that I can take out in the field for run and gun EFP, that I would trust for image. A couple of years from now, we'll see.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2009 16:55
|
|
|
HPX-500 can do pretty much any flavour of SD or HD but it can only do it to P2 card. No tape in the 500. That's why it is so awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2009 04:57
|
|
|
That there Wired article is full of inaccuracies. The biggest one is "shoots in 30 fps" which means you have to do pull down to edit. Editing programs don't care what fps you shot in. They'll edit in it. It's film types that care. They say 30fps looks too video, so to get that filmy thing you have to convert to 24fps from 30fps which is a royal pain. Anyone that thinks DSLRS are going to make for better movies, clearly missed the result of word processing. Not everyone became a great author once they used it. File size on DSLRS is tiny, processing need is huge. Those codecs (particularly h.264 from the Canons) crush processors. I've also always felt Laforet is a fraud. I never believed his whole "I saw a strange prototype camera and I asked to borrow it, and Canon said yes, then I shot Reverie" His whole schtick reeks of marketing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2009 03:02
|
|
|
I can't remember where I read the comment, but I tend to agree with the person that said shallow depth of field will soon be the latest overblown technique. Now that everyone can do shallow DOF everyone is going to, always, until everyone gets over the novelty.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2009 19:32
|
|
|
Tiresias posted:Just ask Vic Morrow. Nicely put.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2010 05:42
|
|
|
The Affair posted:So any of yous guys ever do the 'produce a show for public access' thing? The most noticeable difference working on a public access crew versus a professional crew... Body odour. Lots and lots of body odour on a public access crew.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2010 07:40
|
|
|
I think the whole public access has really changed what with the internet and lower cost cameras. It used to be the only way to get your hands on anything remotely professional was to work public access. The only way to distribute your video was public access. That's all changed now. I guess public access is still good if you want to get into a live truck, a control room, or on a studio or shoulder mount camera.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2010 05:37
|
|
|
Just got my invite to the Panasonic Pavilion at the Olympics. Their head of tech is going to be showing off their 3d displays and their new 3d camera. Pretty cool. It does only record in AVCHD but at $20k it's a pretty intriguing option. The best part I heard is that a $400 plugin will let you edit 3d directly in final cut pro. Post has been the big question mark in making 3d stuff as you have to go back to the old days of the mega-suites with the mega-per-hour rates. The complete workflow with the camera seems pretty cool. With any luck our request for a demo unit will be approved. I'd love a week to play with the system.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2010 16:38
|
|
|
Just saw the new panasonic 3d camera working live. Pretty impressive pictured, but I'm really unconvinced about the whole 3d thing. Until they figure out how to do it properly without wearing glasses (they are getting closer) it's not going to be a widely accepted thing. Watching with active glasses on a Panny 105 inch 3d plasma it was a little straining on the eyes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2010 18:54
|
|
|
A quick thrown together video of a bunch of footage I shot in Gwaii Haanas National Park. Used and HPX-500 for all above water, and a cheapo canon in a housing for the underwater. Whales and salmon and krill...oh my. http://vimeo.com/10209549
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2010 04:54
|
|
|
Alfalfa - He wants to take you, your facility, your look, and your skills, shoot it quickly (i assume) and make it into a DVD that he'll sell for at minimum $10 a pop for eternity. More than likely he'll try and sell it for $30 or so. On one hand, it does get your name out there, on the other, he stands to make a lot of money on your name, so you should probably charge accordingly or figure out a way to get a percentage. Normally it is the other way around, the fitness guys hire someone to produce the DVD, then they make the money directly. Or they get people to do it for $400 bucks out of film school and everyone writes it off as a lesson learned.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2010 20:37
|
|
|
I've been trying to figure out what is wrong with Canon's prosumer video division. With their DSLR's being pretty awesome and responsive to video needs their DSLR division seems to be cooking along in the still and video world. Meanwhile Canon video has announced some lacklustre updates in their line. It could be they are saving up something for NAB, but you'd think they'd take one of those nice CMOS sensors, pop it in a more traditional video body with proper video controls, and they would dominate. Why haven't they done it? The interesting rumour I heard, and please tell me if it is wrong, is that Canon actually makes the RED sensors. If they did then it could be possible that they are in a non-compete with RED for that sensor tech. Highly unlikely I know, but it would explain why Canon video is misfiring so badly. I mean as it is, the Canon DSLR line-up looks like it has taken a bite out of potential scarlet sales. Thoughts on completely unsubstantiated high level DP rumours?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2010 05:52
|
|
|
Isn't part of the reason that those lenses are so expensive is that they are such a small market? A lens with that range would be ridiculously expensive, and physically difficult to manufacture I imagine, but would they even need to try? Why not just move into multiple lenses, lower cost, simpler specs to cover the same thing. I know it's always more complicated than that, part of it has to be an auto-focus system. Professionally it's not needed but in the prosumer world they are relied on. But really the DSLR's are doing it with stock Canon lenses, why can't prosumer cameras go that way? Really in there is no pro market any more for secondary cameras from the prosumer range. Everyone seems to be shooting with the 7d or 5dmk2 when they need a low profile, cheap camera. They really are cannibalizing their prosumer cameras. I like watching it go back and forth. Truthfully I thought Nikon was going to be groundbreaking with video, because they don't have a video division to protect.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2010 07:22
|
|
|
I'm talking narrative or production of high-end commercials. That is where the market has died or is suffering or if you go even more mellow, is threatened. Those big boy commercials have a ridiculous amount of 7d footage in them these days because they are a very useful tool in their arsenal. But, yes I agree with ENG use, even the CMOS sensor is cause for concern and the form factor is really not run and gun ready. There is no way we'd use it. But I would look at one seriously as a secondary camera, even thought we are pretty thoroughly committed to p2. I mean my camera is an HPX-500, that is a pixel shifted, CCD, big rear end camera on my shoulder, with four XLR inputs, an awesome manual focus lens, nice weather protection, big controls that are manual, all the goodness you need for EFP or ENG for that matter. There is nothing out that makes me want to replace that camera yet. Maybe the varicam, but that's a bit out of price range. But yes there is no way I'd consider replacing that with a DSLR.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2010 15:50
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I'll say it again: Professional DPs are not the people buying prosumer cameras. If you're shooting high end commercials, you aren't using an HDV handicam for B-roll. If you're shooting narrative, you are renting everything anyway. The market you're saying has died never existed to begin with. I guess you are right on that. No HDV cam is going to be used on high end commercials. I don't do commercials. I sure as hell don't do narrative so I don't know. I did reality for a long time and I don't know, other than not being able to run time of day timecode, there is a lot one of those DSLR's could do that the various secondary cameras we carried around could not. If I was doing one of those shows now I'd certainly geta DSLR on set for low light alone. You could be right and the market really isn't threatened anywhere by these cameras, but it seems to me with narrative, commercial, and EFP, the need for a specialty camera whether it is an HVX-200, an avchd cam, or lord help you an HDV camera, is substantially less with the introduction of the DSLRS. Now the wedding market, and ambulance chaser, community cable market might be where the Canon bread and butter, hell what do I know. I don't sell cameras. I don't rent them to people either. All I know is that from independent drama types, to commercial production houses, these cameras are getting used a lot, and it has to be hurting someones product line doesn't it? I still don't understand why they aren't putting that sensor into a proper video body. Just because their prosumer cameras have ridiculous range lenses because of traditionally small sensors doesn't mean they'll have to have ridiculous range lenses with large sensors.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2010 18:29
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:... just looking for some do's and don'ts and things not to forget. Best advice ever - make sure the red light is on when you think you are recording. Especially if things start moving fast, that will save your rear end. I've seen so much footage where shooters have double pumped, or become otherwise reversed and ruined whole chunks of a shoot. They end up recording when they think they are off, and off when they think they are recording.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2010 04:59
|
|
|
Mozzie posted:no one is shooting tons of stuff with the 7D in the commercial world. There are dumb exceptions by morons but I guess they like terrible looking footage that can't resolve 720P line chart and has one of the worst codecs ever imagined for a native format. (wonder why AVCHD gets laughed at?) The moron and their beer company producing a spot for the 2010 games would like to have a word with you... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aQkrV3ppAw&feature=player_embedded Aerials not 7d, everything else 7d Your attitude is fairly making GBS threads and old school. DSLR's are in the professional production process, and rigid thinking is on its way out. The new video DSLR's are phenomenal tools for specific uses. They have their weaknesses but it all depends on what you are trying to do. To say they are just for pictures of dogs because your chart says so is missing the point. That commercial was shot mostly on a directors scout of locations and it was the perfect tool for the immediacy and and energy of the spot. Talking to people in the know, just the light issues alone are going to change a lot. They think in the next few years commercial crews will be dropping from in excess of 40 people to 9 or 10. The creatives will remain but the grip trucks, big rear end generators all that will be on the way out. There are severe limitations with the current crop of DSLR's, and shallow depth of field is going to be abused like never before, but they enable some amazing things in the right situation. Also I think their form factor is freaking awful
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2010 18:44
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I'll agree with one thing though, that commercial does look like poo poo. John Adams...true You're going to judge the quality of look off that encode? Really? That commercial looked loving phenomenal during the Olympics, and it created a huge buzz. By all accounts that commercial was a triumph. Also it goes to saying, use the tool for what it is good for. They wanted a rough look to it, and got it, but the footage they shot on the frozen lake is pretty iconic. The point of the link to the commercial was to show that the largest beer brand in Canada, with pretty close to the largest advertising budget, with the top tier production companies and ad agencies, had no problem using a 7d. Kind of going to prove the point, that DSLR's are in the pro workflow. Seriously asking though what's so lovely about it?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2010 03:54
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Maybe it looked way different for broadcast, but the exposure in the video in that link is horrible. It's the same problem with pretty much all consumer video, you just don't have the latitude to keep sky detail without pushing the blacks so far down they look like blocky crap when you try and bring them back in post. These guys did what most people do, which is just crush them beyond recognition and try and make it up in the mids. It doesn't fool anyone. It did look way different for broadcast. You can't really make those calls based on youtube. At least I don't see how you can. Even a one step compression process is bound to mess things up, even if done well, then hand it over to youtube and hope for the best from there. Pushed, pulled and twisted, it all happens in a largely uncontrolled and often haphazard manner when it gets sent to the web, especially youtube. We send our stuff to youtube in a variant of flash 9 video because we've had great results with it, but man all kinds of things happen in that process. That's why guys like Bloom (i think) and laforet post the untouched camera files so people can see for themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2010 07:14
|
|
|
I have no idea what was "supposed" to be in those blacks. I can say on my youtube it looks lovely, but it looked nothing but awesome during the olympics on TV. The wanted a user generated feel to the video, shot in the moment, so they might very well have trashed the video even further. As a final piece though it was powerful and cohesive, and watching at home, nothing jumped out as "what the hell?" Just shows though, a commercial director, with a 7d, on a scout, shot the majority of the footage for a huge budget, signature ad, for a beer company and no one complained or called him a hack. Happy accidents, or flexibility with the tools available. I still hold that DSLR's are changing the business. On the encode tip... we've been doing a flash encode for about a year now to great results. Youtube does transcode but since the switch to official HD youtube, it handles flash very well, and a lot of people choose that as their upload format. I should look again and run some current tests, but truthfully our uploads look pretty drat good. I was a doubter on the high bandwidth flash, but it looks pretty good. Everyone has a different recipe and I'm sure there are more than a few good ways to achieve nice results. It still holds true though, you send something to youtube that you cooked up, and hope they handle their end well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2010 18:25
|
|
|
butterypancakes posted:Man, typing AVID in all caps is a bad habit. AVID, AVID, AVID! Speaking of Avid (hah), I'm buying an edit in place system for our 3 seat FCP setup. It's ethernet based with a switch, a card for the server, and 24 TB of storage for $17k. That will give us a guaranteed 9 streams of realtime. I think it is a pretty good setup, especially considering our reliance on Final Cut Server. Our IS guy thinks I'm a fool and we could have got more for cheaper if we were on PC's running Avid, with Avid shared storage. As memory serves, Avid shared storage is in an entirely different price range. He thought it would be cheaper then the setup we are buying. Anyone know what Avid shared storage goes for these days? I'm edit software agnostic. We're FCP because when we bought in there was adrenaline or mojo, and nothing in between. FCP was really the only choice for us.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2010 20:11
|
|
|
Thank you both. I was arguing pretty strongly against it, but then I thought that I could actually be wrong because I haven't priced Avid in 4 years. He said he had quotes proving it was cheaper. I told him to send them my way. No quotes so far. Doesn't matter anyway. I bought the stuff. I just want some reinforcement that I still know what I'm doing when it comes to hardware. IS doesn't really understand us anyway. They put LANdesk on our OS X edit machines without us knowing. We just wondered why we were having problems all of a sudden, then they took it off. They also don't like my gigabit setup. They don't understand why we can't use existing switches, even though I tell them that we could but there would then be no guaranteed real-time, no lag editing. They counter with, nah it will be fine, and I counter with "if it even hesitates for a heartbeat when I push the "i" key I will lose my mind. We're actually buying our network hardware from small tree. They write the mac code for intel networking stuff apparently. I'm thrilled that I can get an edit in place system installed for under 25k. XSAN is in the 60-70k range installed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2010 21:38
|
|
|
ogopogo posted:Season final of House shot entirely on a 5D - http://photocinenews.com/2010/04/08/house-season-finale-shot-on-canon-5d/ I don't really get that. Seems strange to me unless they were taking on a different shooting style for that episode.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2010 00:53
|
|
|
Unverified on DVXuser says the price will be $6000. Since the display camera is just a prototype it's probably pretty unlikely that the price is accurate. Interesting, the comments from the product manager are funny: "First the sensor is the same as the GH1 Lumix camera, then we optimize it for HD recording. There will not be aliasing as we actually have a clue about what causes that and since we actually build video cameras, we can engineer in the resolution. so no aliasing." Seems like professional video at Panasonic regards the stills division as not having their act together.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2010 16:06
|
|
|
Mozzie posted:Finally amateur hour is over. This post implies serious rear end professionalism. Look out!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2010 07:44
|
|
|
Frost posted:
This holds true for directors as well. I generally do not trust drama directors to do doc or edutainment programming. Too often they are fixated on their independent feature. You can't ever meet with them, without hearing about their script for something other than what you are working on. They are out for their feature, or the reel that will help them with their feature. I love that term being "at the service of the story" I'm going to start using it a lot.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2010 23:44
|
|
|
Mozzie posted:stuff You sound like a PA
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2010 17:30
|
|
|
Interesting video of previs for 3d shoot. Annotations list their concerns about certain shots. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BosQR3jMRY0 We're getting the new Panasonic 3d camera in a couple of weeks and we've never shot 3d before so we're trying to learn as much as possible as fast as possible. I don't think shooting 3d is terribly easy.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2010 18:05
|
|
|
ogopogo posted:I'm wondering why they couldn't pump a little more light onto the set to stop down and cut out down on the super shallow DoF. It looks okay I guess, I'd agree with bland, and story and acting are horrible.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2010 04:41
|
|
|
Slim Pickens posted:I got the idea somewhere that the 5D had a 35mm sensor. Like I said, it was a pretty low effort paper since it only counts towards something like 10 points out of 300 for the class and I don't think the teacher is even aware of what a sensor is. Nice ethic. I'm old now I guess, but "got the idea somewhere" never really was acceptable for any kind of paper. I mean it doesn't even meet the standard of a forum post.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2010 18:50
|
|
|
Slim Pickens posted:Yeah, poor ethic on my part for going off the assumption it was smaller because its chart(posted a few pages back) was shittier. Your whole ethic comes down to you putting your "paper" on here and then making excuses about errors, then qualifying it with how you didn't put much effort into it because it wasn't worth much. That type of ethic will not serve you well at all in production. In production you do the best you can do whether or not it's bringing the van around or directing an episode of a show you don't really like. That's what pro's do and if you don't build a foundation for it early, you may never get it.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2010 16:30
|
|
|
Picking up the new panasonic AG-3DA1 3d on sunday for four days o' testing. Fun, fun. I'm hoping I can force myself through this "how to make 3d movies" book without my eyes crossing and my brain shutting down. Fun fact: The camera we're getting belongs to the factory, not to Panasonic.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2010 06:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 04:22 |
|
|
Just finished the first day with the 3DA1 and so far it is incredibly easy to shoot 3d. I mean ridiculously easy. Mess with the convergence and shoot. That's about it. It's as easy to cart around as a 200. Run and gun with 3d. We've been laughing our asses off at the image on the screen because we can't believe we're able to do this stuff. Granted we're 3d newbies, but I guess that's the point.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2010 21:04
|
|