16:9 and Frame Mode Together - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Canon EOS / MXF / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Canon HDV and DV Camera Systems > Canon XL and GL Series DV Camcorders > Canon GL Series DV Camcorders

Canon GL Series DV Camcorders
Canon GL2, GL1 and PAL versions XM2, XM1.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 15th, 2003, 09:07 AM   #16
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: sweden
Posts: 795
You havn't posted it yet have you? Either way I'll wait 'till you post it if you don't decide to e-mail to me. Thanks again.
__________________
Charles
'What we perceive to be may not be what we believe to be.'
Charles King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2003, 03:42 PM   #17
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 30
Answers...

To Charles:

>Oh, I posted it yesterday. The large post.

To David:

>What I wanted to say was, that they both - used TOGETHER look very good. I don`t want to say - "hey, man - it looks excellent" because then, someone who doesn`t like the "look" would attack me or something, and I don`t want to start flame wars - but yes, If you want my answer, here it is - it looks excellent. I`ve done tests (nothing scientific), just for me - to see do I find it good enough and I was suprised, not only that it was good enough, I found it excellent - saw no quality loss whatsoever.
Mike Ostracky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2003, 04:20 PM   #18
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: sweden
Posts: 795
If you are referring to the post within this very forum then, I thought I was expecting clips of photos. Am I mistaken?
__________________
Charles
'What we perceive to be may not be what we believe to be.'
Charles King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2003, 04:43 PM   #19
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Warren, NJ
Posts: 398
Mike,

Could post a result, preferably an unedit short (10 second) DV of them both used together?

I've been doing some tests, but I never seem to get a usable result from the GL1. Right now, the JVC DV300 seems to make the best images. In my tests so far, the cropped and zoomed image from the camera is the best 16:9 without an anamorphic lens.

Thanks,

David
David Ziegelheim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2003, 05:01 PM   #20
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lake Park, Florida
Posts: 202
Using my GL2 I did notice that the 16:9 mode was prety darn good looking.

I do however have a statement that needs addressing.

Recently I shot normal outdoor footage and converted it to 24p 3-2 pulldown and it looked pretty film-like. I noticed it does drop some crispness, but it's not blurry.

Now, if I use frame mode, which looks good on it's own, then move down to 24p, I noticed a crazy blurry effect going on. It's really hard to watch. I did use 3-2-2-3 and not 3-2 though.

Also, in Vegas if you use their cropping, effects and colors only affect what's in the letterbox. If the image is already letterboxed, the bars are affected by effects and other stuff. How can u prevent this?

Also, if 16:9 is not wide enough, and you want a panavision ratio of 2:35 what would be better? In camera 16:9 plus some extra cropping or all in Vegas??? And do you crop or compress it down??? I guess you can do either one. At least the GL2 gives you 16:9 guides to shoot with if you don't plan on using their 16:9 mode which is nice.

What have you guys experimented with?
__________________
http://www.veoh.com/channels/filmmaker
My clips and films.
Bob Benkosky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2006, 03:04 AM   #21
Tourist
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 4
16:9 and frame looks great

Im going to shoot a dokumentary projects soon and Im planning to use my old but still working XM1. I have done some testshooting with 16:9 and frame settings on and drag down the sharpness 3-4 steps, it looks great if I watch it straight from the XM1 to the 16:9 TV. This film-feeling is what Im looking for but...

Is there any better ways to get this filmfeeling than from the frame-mode? I have not tried Magic Bullet.

I understand that this 16:9 streach-thing is not the best way but the anamorphic adapter take to much tele away. Is there better ways?
Stefan Barkman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2006, 09:26 AM   #22
Tourist
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 4
The camera has limits I suppose. Next step maybe is a 16:9 chip camera with progressive mode...
Stefan Barkman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2006, 10:49 AM   #23
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: chattanooga, tn
Posts: 721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefan Barkman
Next step maybe is a 16:9 chip camera with progressive mode...
Yes. You would see a huge improvement.

I have a GL1 and an XL2. The XL2's (true!) 16:9 24p will blow away footage shot in the GL1/2's fame mode with widescreen-crop-n'-stretch in literally every way. I'm sure that's no surprise, but there it is.
__________________
-->jarrod whaley.
www.oakstreetfilms.com
Jarrod Whaley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2006, 11:37 AM   #24
Tourist
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 4
Jarrod

I think you are right! Are you satisfied with your XL2?
Stefan Barkman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2006, 12:32 PM   #25
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atlanta, Ga USA
Posts: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Ziegelheim
Both of these involve some image interpolation. Does anyone use them together? How is the image? Do you have samples with them together and them off on the Internet?

Thanks,

David
When it comes to my XL1 i dont even shoot with the 16:9, mainly because it "Cuts" off a good bit of my video on the top and bottom.
I do recomend "Frame Movie Mode" because of the "Film-Like" look......and i like the "strobe" it gives me when my subject moves

Garrison H.
Garrison Hayes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2006, 10:15 PM   #26
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 3,004
Hello,

I shoot a gl2 and an xl2. I shoot them both in 16:9 and shoot in 30 p with shutter speed at 60 (as much as possible) and I enrich the colors to my liking (it changes depending on the season).
I do not count pixels or resolution, I just want to make it look nice to my eye. I have no complaint with either camera's look.

I would prefer do as much of my work when I shoot and would prefer to do as little as possible in post.

It is a funny thing, I never really intentionall tried to make any footage look like film. I figured video is video, just go with what you got.

As it turns out as I have tweaked things to what looks right to me I have unintentionally made the footage more film like.
__________________
DATS ALL FOLKS
Dale W. Guthormsen
Dale Guthormsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2006, 11:14 PM   #27
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: chattanooga, tn
Posts: 721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefan Barkman
Jarrod

I think you are right! Are you satisfied with your XL2?
Yes, very much so. :)
__________________
-->jarrod whaley.
www.oakstreetfilms.com
Jarrod Whaley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2006, 05:30 AM   #28
Fred Retread
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 1,227
Mike, I'd still love to see the pics you refer to in your long post, but that page doesn't seem to exist anymore.
__________________
"Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence..." - Calvin Coolidge
"My brain is wired to want to know how other things are wired." - Me
David Ennis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2006, 03:01 PM   #29
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 3,004
clips resolution

I to would very much like to see some comparison clips along these lines!

The discussion of less resolution is not really an issue as when you letter box I was under the impression portions of the picture are removed (reducing resolution) but the resolution and quality of the picture is the same.

If that is not correct please enlighten me.
__________________
DATS ALL FOLKS
Dale W. Guthormsen
Dale Guthormsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 8th, 2006, 09:56 AM   #30
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Washington
Posts: 117
I just finished a :30 spot with a GL-2 that I used in 16:9 without Frame mode on. It left me the option to go for a "Frame" look if I so chose, but in the end was not needed. I was a little uneasy about how it would stack up to other spots but I was very happy with how it turned out! It looks great next to national stuff!

I will post some photos of the diifference when I went back and forth in and out of Frame mode to see what I liked best. To my eye the Frame mode looks less crisp overall, but warms the shot alot.

Tere is my 2 cents
Bradley D Barber is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Canon EOS / MXF / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Canon HDV and DV Camera Systems > Canon XL and GL Series DV Camcorders > Canon GL Series DV Camcorders

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:34 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network