Search Amazon.com:
Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«39 »
  • Post
  • Reply
ease
Jul 19, 2004

HUGE

DSLR video is a capability which is growing in popularity and professional acceptance. As everyone knows, the season finale of House was shot on a 5dmkII. There are companies like Redrock Micro who are making amazing products just for using these cameras in video mode.

The biggest pain in the rear end as I see it right now, is focusing the camera. Photo lenses aren't exactly designed for film focusing. My footage always gets hosed up by poor focusing. Practice is going to help with that.

I've heard rumors of film lenses being developed just for dslrs. Companies are selling follow focus rigs you can put on your regular lens, and there are tons of DIY examples out there.

Right now there are a few major DSLR brands making cameras with video capability:

Canon, who seems to be leading the race right now currently offers the 1dmkIV, 5dmkII, 7d, 500d and 550d. Canon uses the H264 codec.

Nikon, who I know much less about, has a few cameras as well. As far as I know, all Nikon cameras are using the motion JPEG format.

Panasonic, and Pentax also are offering DSLR video modes.

Anything else you guys want me to add to the op, let me know.

ease fucked around with this message at Apr 19, 2010 around 20:21

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Genderfluid
Jun 18, 2009

my mom is a slut

There are three Nikon models out right now that shoot video, the d300s, the d90, and the d3s, all of which shoot at a max of 720p at 30fps I believe.

Also, it's important to note that every vDSLR out right now can shoot some incredible, incredible video. Here are some examples.

1d Mark IV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48Ig59zgQkM
d300s: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIXb...embedded&fmt=18

Edit: Thanks for reminding me, there are FOUR models on Nikon, as the d5000 also shoots video. They shoot at 24 fps.

Genderfluid fucked around with this message at Apr 20, 2010 around 11:15

Covert Ops Wizard
Dec 27, 2006



I would really love some tips on how to use my d90's video capability to best effect, if anyone's got 'em. The best I got is to used a good tripod, the inability to use the viewfinder and keep the camera steady against your head makes the camera shake atrocious.

I'm thinking about making a ghetto dolly to get some good moving shots, cause only filming (skateboarding, mostly) from a static position is boring.

Beastruction
Feb 15, 2005


My dad has a D90, I wonder if he knows it has video (I certainly didn't think it did).

Obscurum
Apr 23, 2007
The world is not beautiful. But that in it self lends it a kind of beauty.

I have the D90 and the video is kinda cool to have but it can be a real pain to keep what your filming in focus.

Wooten
Oct 4, 2004



This seems really drat cool. Where would you get a little screen like that though? I checked around out of curiosity, but apparently I don't know what they are called or something because I couldn't find anything.

Jerk Tannon
Aug 15, 2001


Those "screens" are pretty drat expensive. They're LCD HD monitors. Marshall, Nebtek, and Ikan make the products that most people use.

pwn
May 27, 2004

This Christmas get "Shoes"


I love my D90. The only real pain is no full-time exposure lock, and it's full auto otherwise. Having to hold one of the EL buttons during shooting can be a pain, especially the longer the lenses get due to shake. That's my only complaint, pulling focus isn't hard.

I've found that older lenses made closer to the manual focusing era work better for pulling focus during shooting (because that's what you had to do during shooting anything.) I have a late 80s era Nikkor 70-210 push-pull and the push-pull/large, nicely-tensioned focus ring combo is invaluable for simultaneously zooming and tracking focus.


Click here for the full 950x950 image.


Cheap plastic kit lenses of today are almost made to punish you if you want to focus manually.

middle of the night edit: Nikons shoot at 24 FPS, not 30.

pwn fucked around with this message at Apr 20, 2010 around 07:20

guidoanselmi
Feb 6, 2008

I thought my ideas were so clear. I wanted to make an honest post. No lies whatsoever.

Don't forget Pentax K7, don't know if the newer Kx/Km have it.

Shoots 1080i/720p.

DaNzA
Sep 11, 2001

:D


Does anyone have their own personal guideline/tutorial/link they like on post editing with certain software. Also basically how to put a bunch of separate video into one?

DanTheFryingPan
Jan 28, 2006


JaundiceDave posted:

There are three Nikon models out right now that shoot video, the d300s, the d90, and the d3s, all of which shoot at a max of 720p at 30fps I believe.

There's also the entry-level Nikon D5000.

pwn posted:

I've found that older lenses made closer to the manual focusing era work better for pulling focus during shooting (because that's what you had to do during shooting anything.) I have a late 80s era Nikkor 70-210 push-pull and the push-pull/large, nicely-tensioned focus ring combo is invaluable for simultaneously zooming and tracking focus.

This is a solid piece of advice. For Nikkor lenses, AI and AI-S types were designed for manual focusing, so the ring tends to smooth and dampened, allowing for precise focusing. AF and AF-D type lenses tend to have horrible focus rings which feel too loose for any precision (telephotos tend to the exception here, pwn's image shows an AF-D lens). AF-S type lenses are usually better, though in my experience not as good as the manual focus stuff.

Of course, it all comes down the individual model.

I, Butthole
Jun 30, 2007

Well, hello there, game-changer!


There was a piece of news that came out a while back, with Zeiss making cine lenses for DSLRs; basically high end Zeiss lenses with interchangeable mounts (as in, you buy the lens THEN the mount you want) with E (Nikon), EF (Canon) and PL (cinematic cameras). From what I can remember, the prime lenses were made for full frame, while the zooms would be for crop sensors.

Owning both a 7D and a 5D Mark 2, I've been getting back into filmmaking (diverted from my studies and work in film and TV to get, funnily enough, into still photography). They're very very versatile cameras, moreso now that the 5D has proper manual video functions.

Nikon has some very very nice stuff available, but there's still the fact that they've said multiple times they won't focus on video for a few generations; I wouldn't expect to see anything surpass the quality of Nikon video outside of whats in the D300/D3s/D700s or whatever it'll be called. Canon is really the only option for a serious videographer on the cheap.

Pimping Rob Sheridan here as well; creative/art director for Nine Inch Nails, and filmed a whole bunch of stuff with a 5DMk2/50mm 1.4 live.

http://www.vimeo.com/8339376
http://www.vimeo.com/3420115

Very little rolling shutter for a high-movement situation. It's what prompted me to really get cracking with a 5D for movies.
e: should also mention that this is all handheld; I saw Rob on stage twice during that tour, and he's not using any of the Zacuto add ons or anything. I tried shooting a concert handheld while on stage, and that loving camera gets heavy as poo poo after about 20 minutes.

I, Butthole fucked around with this message at Apr 20, 2010 around 12:39

Pompous Rhombus
Mar 11, 2007


What's the deal with editing 1080p movies on a monitor with less than that resolution? Totally a bad idea, or can you get by? I'd like to be able to keep a copy at 1080p output for later, is it feasible to work on something with a lower-res screen? It'd just be hobby stuff messing around, not pro quality or anything.

I've been looking at a Dell Studio 15 for a while because those have the option for a 1920x1080 LCD panel, but if it's not 100% necessary I might like to expand my search, maybe consider a 13" Macbook Pro instead.

orange lime
Jul 24, 2008



Pompous Rhombus posted:

What's the deal with editing 1080p movies on a monitor with less than that resolution? Totally a bad idea, or can you get by? I'd like to be able to keep a copy at 1080p output for later, is it feasible to work on something with a lower-res screen? It'd just be hobby stuff messing around, not pro quality or anything.

I've been looking at a Dell Studio 15 for a while because those have the option for a 1920x1080 LCD panel, but if it's not 100% necessary I might like to expand my search, maybe consider a 13" Macbook Pro instead.

No matter what editor you're using, you'll only be using a small portion of the screen anyway. The timeline and clip viewer and bins and stuff will take up like 3/4 of the view. So, for your primary monitor, bigger is always better, but I do editing on a 1680x1050 screen just fine.

It's always good to have a monitor that can show 1080p for proofing, but a decent LCD TV should be fine for that.

didi-mau
May 1, 2007
"Hed sell you for a muffin"

Shot a short clip a couple of weeks ago on the 5DMk II.

http://www.riddip.com

There's also a couple of other videos I shot last year on there.

The hardest part for me is dealing with the H264 codec on a PC through Premiere. The timeline has to be re-rendered every time you adjust something on the timeline which makes the whole process painfully slow.

After all that it's still a trial to find the right export settings for uploading to vimeo or youtube.

orange lime
Jul 24, 2008



didi-mau posted:

The hardest part for me is dealing with the H264 codec on a PC through Premiere. The timeline has to be re-rendered every time you adjust something on the timeline which makes the whole process painfully slow.

After all that it's still a trial to find the right export settings for uploading to vimeo or youtube.

I think that converting your video to HDV or AVCHD before you start editing should let you do real-time stuff (as long as your computer is fast enough). Not sure though. I know that HDV is an older format and easier on your system, but I don't know if this is because the quality is worse or if it's just lower compression (= larger files but less CPU to decode).

Alternately, there is a way that you can make a low-resolution version of the video, edit on that (much faster and easier), and then automatically transfer all your edit decisions to the original high-resolution footage at render time. I'm not sure how to do it exactly but there have to be tutorials.

As far as export settings, once you find a combination that results in a good balance of quality and file size, you can save that as a preset and just automatically export to it every time. For YouTube stuff I think I usually export as 480x(height) 1 Mbps H.264 (variable up to 6) and 64-96Kbps AAC. Works pretty well for me and my slow internet connection.

orange lime fucked around with this message at Apr 21, 2010 around 02:06

didi-mau
May 1, 2007
"Hed sell you for a muffin"

Is it possible to convert the H264 files to AVCHD through through Premiere?

because a lot of the workflows I was looking at recommended doing that or converting it to another codec but they almost always recommended Mac software or Cineform which I don't really want to pay for.

I think the problem I had with export settings was that file types, including those that run in quicktime wont run properly from my HDD so I don't want to spend hours uploading files I can't even preview to see if they work on the net. Other video formats have stalled or been rejected by vimeo's auto-uploader.

my wmv preset is the only one that consistantly uploads and I'm pretty sure I'm losing quite a lot in the translation from H264 to WMV to MP4s or whatever vimeo uses.

waiting for things to export and having them look like complete shite or waiting for things to upload and then having them lag or not play at all has been very frustrating.

It ought to be easy though. I'm using a popular piece of hardware, a very widespread codec and a fairly popular editing application. There should be workflows out there.

Fragrag
Aug 3, 2007
The Worst Admin Ever bashes You in the head with his banhammer. It is smashed into the body, an unrecognizable mass! You have been struck down.

I, Butthole posted:

There was a piece of news that came out a while back, with Zeiss making cine lenses for DSLRs; basically high end Zeiss lenses with interchangeable mounts (as in, you buy the lens THEN the mount you want) with E (Nikon), EF (Canon) and PL (cinematic cameras). From what I can remember, the prime lenses were made for full frame, while the zooms would be for crop sensors.

Owning both a 7D and a 5D Mark 2, I've been getting back into filmmaking (diverted from my studies and work in film and TV to get, funnily enough, into still photography). They're very very versatile cameras, moreso now that the 5D has proper manual video functions.

Nikon has some very very nice stuff available, but there's still the fact that they've said multiple times they won't focus on video for a few generations; I wouldn't expect to see anything surpass the quality of Nikon video outside of whats in the D300/D3s/D700s or whatever it'll be called. Canon is really the only option for a serious videographer on the cheap.

Pimping Rob Sheridan here as well; creative/art director for Nine Inch Nails, and filmed a whole bunch of stuff with a 5DMk2/50mm 1.4 live.

http://www.vimeo.com/8339376
http://www.vimeo.com/3420115

Very little rolling shutter for a high-movement situation. It's what prompted me to really get cracking with a 5D for movies.
e: should also mention that this is all handheld; I saw Rob on stage twice during that tour, and he's not using any of the Zacuto add ons or anything. I tried shooting a concert handheld while on stage, and that loving camera gets heavy as poo poo after about 20 minutes.

Note the moments when the strobe lights are flashing. That's one thing the rolling shutters can't handle.

brad industry
May 22, 2004


DaNzA posted:

Does anyone have their own personal guideline/tutorial/link they like on post editing with certain software. Also basically how to put a bunch of separate video into one?

I'm learning this stuff now and my video friends have said the best bet is to use After Effects with Premiere because they integrate really well together. They said everything is pretty similar to PS which I have found to be true so far, it hasn't been a huge ordeal learning it.

ease
Jul 19, 2004

HUGE

Fragrag posted:

Note the moments when the strobe lights are flashing. That's one thing the rolling shutters can't handle.

I wonder how much you could combat that effect buy adjusting exposure. Probably not much in low light I guess.

AIIAZNSK8ER
Dec 8, 2008


Where is your 24-70?

There are after effects filters to remove the frames that have flash in them.

Beastruction
Feb 15, 2005


ease posted:

I wonder how much you could combat that effect buy adjusting exposure. Probably not much in low light I guess.

Slower shutter speed?

Cross_
Aug 22, 2008


When working on a DVD project last year I was not terribly impressed by the AE/PP CS3 integration. In the end I did most of my work in AE (filter, color correction, etc.) rendered out the footage using Huffyuv and then assembled multi-camera shots in Premiere. If AE wasn't so slow at previews I'd have skipped Premiere entirely.

fullroundaction
Apr 20, 2007

Drink beer every day


ease posted:

The biggest pain in the rear end as I see it right now, is focusing the camera. Photo lenses aren't exactly designed for film focusing. My footage always gets hosed up by poor focusing.

Total newb question I guess but: can someone explain this concept to me?

pwn
May 27, 2004

This Christmas get "Shoes"


fullroundaction posted:

Total newb question I guess but: can someone explain this concept to me?
Better still, read the Wikipedia page about it.

This is a basic, if quite oddly-formatted, video demonstration.

fullroundaction
Apr 20, 2007

Drink beer every day


The article seems to be talking only about technique and not really equipment. I'll check out the videos when I get home.

E: unless photo lenses don't have distance markers on the focus rings? I guess that makes sense then!

torgeaux
Dec 31, 2004
I serve...

fullroundaction posted:

The article seems to be talking only about technique and not really equipment. I'll check out the videos when I get home.

E: unless photo lenses don't have distance markers on the focus rings? I guess that makes sense then!

They do, but the movement of photo lenses is very small compared to movie lenses.

ease
Jul 19, 2004

HUGE

Yea follow focus rigs seem to have different gear ratios, to give you more precise control.

Also: http://cgi.ebay.com/Lens-lot-Zeiss-...=item519248fd61, http://cgi.ebay.com/Zeiss-prime-set...=item335caec12e

Dread Head
Aug 1, 2005
FILLLLLM

Saw this posted in AI, home made shoulder rig. http://vimeo.com/11435910

TheLastManStanding
Jan 14, 2008
Mash Buttons!

Dread Head posted:

Saw this posted in AI, home made shoulder rig. http://vimeo.com/11435910
Clicked this thinking it was just like every other diy home depot rig only to find out it's a man older than time sawing a rig out of a tree. Great video.
Also his the music from his video test reminded me of this video, which is off topic since it's film but it's what convinced me to upgrade my dslr to one with video.
More on topic. This guy has some amazing helicams videos.

TheLastManStanding fucked around with this message at May 9, 2010 around 21:30

ease
Jul 19, 2004

HUGE

Thats some guts flying a 700$ camera around on a RC Heli. Awesome.
e: Oh he's also got a mkII he puts up there. poo poo.

ease fucked around with this message at May 10, 2010 around 00:01

TheLastManStanding
Jan 14, 2008
Mash Buttons!

ease posted:

Thats some guts flying a 700$ camera around on a RC Heli. Awesome.
e: Oh he's also got a mkII he puts up there. poo poo.
mkII (2.5K) + 14mm (2K) + Heli (~1k+) = a lot of money floating in the breeze.
I've always wanted to take some videos like that since I love strapping my p&s to things, but that's way more money than I'm willing to risk.

dakana
Aug 28, 2006
So I packed up my Salvador Dali print of two blindfolded dental hygienists trying to make a circle on an Etch-a-Sketch and headed for California.

...where do I get a helicopter like this?

Those videos are awesome.

kefkafloyd
Jun 8, 2006

I call him that
because he waddles!

WADDLES!




A cheap interchangeable lens camcorder with a big sensor? Coming in the fall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUE_LzU7Thc

pwn
May 27, 2004

This Christmas get "Shoes"


kefkafloyd posted:



A cheap interchangeable lens camcorder with a big sensor? Coming in the fall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUE_LzU7Thc
40 seconds of content followed by nearly 3 minutes of black silent video.

Twenties Superstar
Oct 24, 2005

sugoi


That has really upset my viewing experience

Mozzie
Oct 26, 2007


Word of advice:

Never ever reduce the shutter speed below 1/40th of a second. 1/50 is a better number. There is a lot of art and science of why, but one facet is that without having any unexposed time between frames, the motion blur of one frame instantly matches the position of the next, screwing up the Persistence of vision and looks terrible.

An example of how it ruins a movie it is public enemies

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BawY4gjAdM

The brain needs the discrete separation of frames to interpolate the missing images, otherwise with a full open shutter the brain doesn't know anything is missing and ruins the illusion. The reason video can get away with it is that it's often played back at 60 interlaced which is close enough to the natural refresh rate of human vision that the brain doesn't need to interpolate. With the rise of 24 progressive it needs to be understood that there has to be the empty spaces to fill in the other 36 frames in our brain to create the illusion.

If people say otherwise it's because they are loving morons.

Cross_
Aug 22, 2008


Mozzie posted:

The reason video can get away with it is that it's often played back at 60 interlaced which is close enough to the natural refresh rate of human vision

No such thing as natural refresh rate.

orange lime
Jul 24, 2008



Mozzie posted:


If people say otherwise it's because they are loving morons.

You can call me a moron if you like, but you don't know what you're talking about. At all. Every line in your post has a mistake in it. Maybe there's something wrong with your brain, because not one of the reviews I've seen of Public Enemies said "film did not appear to be moving" or "no persistence of vision" or even "cinematography was poorly-executed". I don't even want to start arguing against you because literally everything you said is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

TheLastManStanding
Jan 14, 2008
Mash Buttons!

Mozzie posted:

The brain needs the discrete separation of frames to interpolate the missing images, otherwise with a full open shutter the brain doesn't know anything is missing and ruins the illusion. The reason video can get away with it is that it's often played back at 60 interlaced which is close enough to the natural refresh rate of human vision that the brain doesn't need to interpolate. With the rise of 24 progressive it needs to be understood that there has to be the empty spaces to fill in the other 36 frames in our brain to create the illusion.
-There is nothing wrong with an open shutter other than the fact that (just like in taking a standard picture) any motion or movement will be severely blurred and the viewer will be unable to focus on anything moving, which can be irritating. Given a static enough shot shutter speed is irrelevant. (Additionally there are physical limitation when shooting film since the film plane is in motion. Shooting open full at 24fps your slowest shutter speed will be around 1/90th.)
-60i is 30fps which is only 25% more than 24fps and isn't noticeably different unless pulldown is involved.
-It apparent you have no idea what you are talking about.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«39 »