Isn't this a filmmakers gem? What am I missing?

Glenn Gipson · July 1st, 2003, 04:05 PM

Eric is right,

In terms of a film transfer, this camera is a bad investment for any serious indie filmmaker because of the 30p issue. The best way to shoot an indie, that may go theatrical, is either with 60i, 50i, 25p, or 24p. Many people confuse 60i DV theatrical films with 30p, but they are two different animals.

Yang Wen · July 1st, 2003, 04:09 PM

<<<--
That brings up a question, though, which might be better addressed outside this thread. Why does the DVX100 have such a quirky look in 24P when other 24P footage seems to look fine? Do directors like Lucas have special instructions as far as shutter speed or other settings that make the judder less noticeable or is it something else?
-->>>>

24P is exactly what youre seeing. You can't hold the camera in your hand and wave it like a flag and expect smooth looking footage. Plus if you're only judging from the LCD, it is known to shutter much more than the Video Output. Also, your shutter speed is a contributing factor to the motion artifact you will see in the end result.

Robert Jackson · July 1st, 2003, 05:57 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Glenn Gipson : Eric is right,

In terms of a film transfer, this camera is a bad investment for any serious indie filmmaker because of the 30p issue. The best way to shoot an indie, that may go theatrical, is either with 60i, 50i, 25p, or 24p. Many people confuse 60i DV theatrical films with 30p, but they are two different animals. -->>>

I just assumed that anyone shooting with an XL-1(s) would shoot using "Frame Movie Mode" or whatever Canon calls it, and I notice quite a few movies shot on Canons have had film transfers.

Here's a question, then. If you have a 30P master, why couldn't you double the frames via software rendering and arrive at a 60P master for pulldown?

In any case, my point is that transfer to film is prohibitively expensive to the vast majority of people shooting movies on video and that there are a number of theaters and festivals that can project 30P.

Eric Bilodeau · July 1st, 2003, 06:10 PM

transfering 30p to 60p will not solve the problem since no new frames will be created in the process, there will be 2 identical frames consecutively wich will equal the 30p original footage.

Eric

Robert Jackson · July 1st, 2003, 07:01 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Eric Bilodeau : transfering 30p to 60p will not solve the problem since no new frames will be created in the process, there will be 2 identical frames consecutively wich will equal the 30p original footage.

Eric -->>>

Ah, that makes sense. Sorry. I don't have any experience going from video to film, it's all been the other way 'round for me. Never was very good at math and patterns, anyway. I look at the pulldown processes and thank goodness it's someone else's job to figure it out. ;-)

-Rob

Glenn Gipson · July 1st, 2003, 08:42 PM

>>I just assumed that anyone shooting with an XL-1(s) would shoot using "Frame Movie Mode" or whatever Canon calls it, and I notice quite a few movies shot on Canons have had film transfers.<<

Frame movie mode is actually terrible for film transfers, and most XL1 to Film movies were more then likely shot in standard interlace mode.

July 1st, 2003, 06:10 PM	#19
Eric Bilodeau Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chicoutimi, Canada Posts: 334	transfering 30p to 60p will not solve the problem since no new frames will be created in the process, there will be 2 identical frames consecutively wich will equal the 30p original footage. Eric __________________ Eric Bilodeau video SFX,DOP ___________________ http://www.fictis.net info@fictis.net

July 1st, 2003, 04:05 PM	#16
Glenn Gipson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Plainfield, New Jersey Posts: 927	Eric is right, In terms of a film transfer, this camera is a bad investment for any serious indie filmmaker because of the 30p issue. The best way to shoot an indie, that may go theatrical, is either with 60i, 50i, 25p, or 24p. Many people confuse 60i DV theatrical films with 30p, but they are two different animals.

July 1st, 2003, 04:09 PM	#17
Yang Wen Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 991	<<<-- That brings up a question, though, which might be better addressed outside this thread. Why does the DVX100 have such a quirky look in 24P when other 24P footage seems to look fine? Do directors like Lucas have special instructions as far as shutter speed or other settings that make the judder less noticeable or is it something else? -->>>> 24P is exactly what youre seeing. You can't hold the camera in your hand and wave it like a flag and expect smooth looking footage. Plus if you're only judging from the LCD, it is known to shutter much more than the Video Output. Also, your shutter speed is a contributing factor to the motion artifact you will see in the end result.

July 1st, 2003, 05:57 PM	#18
Robert Jackson Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, CA Posts: 390	<<<-- Originally posted by Glenn Gipson : Eric is right, In terms of a film transfer, this camera is a bad investment for any serious indie filmmaker because of the 30p issue. The best way to shoot an indie, that may go theatrical, is either with 60i, 50i, 25p, or 24p. Many people confuse 60i DV theatrical films with 30p, but they are two different animals. -->>> I just assumed that anyone shooting with an XL-1(s) would shoot using "Frame Movie Mode" or whatever Canon calls it, and I notice quite a few movies shot on Canons have had film transfers. Here's a question, then. If you have a 30P master, why couldn't you double the frames via software rendering and arrive at a 60P master for pulldown? In any case, my point is that transfer to film is prohibitively expensive to the vast majority of people shooting movies on video and that there are a number of theaters and festivals that can project 30P.

July 1st, 2003, 07:01 PM	#20
Robert Jackson Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, CA Posts: 390	<<<-- Originally posted by Eric Bilodeau : transfering 30p to 60p will not solve the problem since no new frames will be created in the process, there will be 2 identical frames consecutively wich will equal the 30p original footage. Eric -->>> Ah, that makes sense. Sorry. I don't have any experience going from video to film, it's all been the other way 'round for me. Never was very good at math and patterns, anyway. I look at the pulldown processes and thank goodness it's someone else's job to figure it out. ;-) -Rob

July 1st, 2003, 08:42 PM	#21
Glenn Gipson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Plainfield, New Jersey Posts: 927	>>I just assumed that anyone shooting with an XL-1(s) would shoot using "Frame Movie Mode" or whatever Canon calls it, and I notice quite a few movies shot on Canons have had film transfers.<< Frame movie mode is actually terrible for film transfers, and most XL1 to Film movies were more then likely shot in standard interlace mode.