The ultimate film look I've seen?

[Vinson Watson]

The Panasonic DVX100 24p is for us!


I'm guessing (considering this is a film look thread) that most of us here are indy filmmakers. If your goal is to do indy films with the film look then you should read this. I went and spent an hour with the Panasonic DVX100 at SMS a film and video rental house (and a Panasonic dealer). I'd made the appointment a few days ago and Thrusday I went to see the myth, the legend, the 24p in all her full glory. My conclusion:

Fellow indy filmmakers, the DVX100 is the best way for a filmmaker to get the film look without time consuming software questionable filter processes or special lighting set ups to get the film look. Before I continue let me explain where I?m coming from. First when I say the "film look" I don't mean the professional look and most indie filmmakers don't mean this when they say it. If John Woo used a basic 3 chip video camera say the VX2K and shot like he generally shoots his movies you'd have a very professionally done movie shot on video, but you'd still know it's video. With John Woo's name attached to it it might mean more but we'd still know video when we see it before it's treated with some kind of film look technique. So I'm not talking about a shooting style I'm talking about a look. This camera has proven to me without a doubt that it is the camera I will chose to save money to buy. The GL2 is nice and at this point remains second choice to this Panasonic powerhouse.

Somethings to take into consideration. I shot out doors and when I was inside I shot in basic "store type" lighting, so there were no special set ups for my test.

The Modes

Now I played with the Pana in 24p basic, 24p Advanced, and 30p. I didn't see much of a difference between the 24p settings but I understand the difference of one being used for straight to video use while the other is being used for film transfer (that being advanced mode). In 24p this camera reacted like film to colors and movement. Is it perfect? It's still video, but does look it. Is it better than Canon?s frame mode? Yep, because of the cinegamma. Fast pans will cause a blur, and fast movement is picked up without the heavy strobing some cameras have. The 24p modes look film-like even without the cinegamma which some may choose to shut off to keep control of other camera functions but this is a user choice and doesn't have the same exact look as 24p with the cinegamma on but by no means does it look bad either. I also did 30p with the cinegamma on and it too looked awesome, so those unsure about 24p don?t truely have to use it. Try 30p with cinegamma and see what you think. In normal mode this cam shoots a warm picture with sharp details that can be controled (there's a control called "detail"). In 24p -30p this cam is perfect for low budget indie filmmakers. In normal mode this cam is perfect for pro camera operators of most types and low budget indie horror film makers. (I like the video look for horror flicks but many people will just flick the cine-switch).

Colors

Absolutely vibrant. Saturated reds like some cams saturate greens. I like this (I'm thinking of a particular scene I have planned of a woman in a red dress) but some may not. Play with the Gamma. Colors are warm and accurate. I didn?t see any fringing but I hear you need to be in high contrast situations for that to happen. I was in an urban sprawl but there wasn't a ton of high contrasty things to go by.

Focus Ring

Some complain about it feeling to loose. It got the job done. Personally I would've wanted it to feel more snug myself but it's not a enough to detract from the value camera.

Sound

Many people complain about camera sound. These guys have put an awesome mic on this thing comparable to the one on the GL2. Plus manual sound controls.

16:9

I like to do everything in widescreen mode. The native 16:9 is hot to death. I've gone on about this before but you get to see exactly what you?re recording. No weird stretched picture just beautiful 16:9, especially when shooting in normal mode 16:9 ads a little something.

Gamma
There?s a lot of things you can do color wise by playing with the gamma.

Controls

Very easy to operate, it took me no time to figure out the controls. (I glance at the manual about twice), The button you operate the VCR fuctions with is the same you control the on screen menus with. Nice. Camera to VCR mode is done by pushing a button versus clicking that dial from VCR to CAMERA to OFF. The dial is there but it's just CAMERA and OFF. This baby has two zooms ( a ring and the handle). Didn't really work with the handle zoom, I used the ring. In a film situation I'd probably be more likely to use handle zoom while turning the focus rings. I didn?t test the manual iris.

Style

Several people asked me what I was shooting. If you're not looking to draw attention this cam may not be for you, but then again the VX1K or VX2K don?t exactly look like tourist cams. This is more the GL2's place because it's smaller and lighter.

Close

If you're interested in seeing a tape of this email me at artstar@jps.net and I'll tell you how to get one. If not just go down to your local Pana dealer and get one. I should warn you my shooting is shakey and sporadic. I was specifically interested in the film look. Sadly I taped over my pevious stuff so you won't get to witness my martial arts mayhem. Maybe if they make one of those 35mm adapters you'd have the DOF of film and that would be it for a lot of filmmakers. I think many would never use film again. I think a lot of people new to indy filmmaking should grab this cam provided they can afford it. Peace out.

-Vinson

[Dylan Couper]

So you're saying you like it? :)
What do they retail for?

How does it feel egonomicaly? Like when you are hand held shooting. Compared to an XL1?

[John Locke]

The short film mentioned in an earlier thread, "Familien Revier," has my vote. Nice lighting, smoked sets, desaturated color, some grain added...nice.

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

A few questions:

• What is "cinegamma"? The name implies it's a some sort of gamma adjust similar to automatic gain control to bracket the dynamic range of an image on-the-fly, but your description implies it's some sort of motion-smearing image processing routine.
• How does the "advanced" 24P mode work? If video is actually recorded to the MiniDV tape at 23.98 fps (or 24 fps), then the signal does not conform to the DV standard (or does it??). How does one get the 24P footage off the tape? And if not encoded using the DV standard, what codec is used to compress the footage, and is it less than 5:1 compression ratio?
• How does the camera derive 24P in both of its 24P modes? Does it clock off the chip at 23.98 Hz and then perform hardware 3:2 pulldown to record to tape? Or does it (as rumored in this thread http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthre...15&pagenumber=7) clock the chip at 29.97 Hz and then use some signal processing tricks to get at 24P by way of some inverse 3:2 pulldown?
• What resolutions does the camera deliver in each mode of operation?
• What's the (pre-encoding and post-encoding) image SNR in its various modes?
• Does the camera have any timecode capabilities? How does it record timecode in the advanced 24P mode?

These are all issues relevant to the discussion of the usefulness of a 24P mode in a prosumer camera. I'm interested in whether or not the new Panasonic camera can really do anything that can't be done without a Canon XL1 and a computer to process footage.

[Vinson Watson]

<<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : So you're saying you like it? :)
What do they retail for?

How does it feel egonomicaly? Like when you are hand held shooting. Compared to an XL1? -->>>

A retailer who supports DV Info (Zotz) has it for roughly $3400. The best price A little cheaper actually and that's with tax and postage. It's the best price I've seen for it. Never compared it to an XL1, but note this cam has to be held with two hands like a GL2 or VX2K and it's 4.4 lbs, feels good in the hands but as with any of these types of cams it can't be held too long. The cool thing about the XL1 is it can be supported by the shoulder, a position which isn't as taxing. The main buttons are all under the LCD screen and all on the left side of the cam and are easy to get to. You have to get used to scrolling with the tiny joystick thing but you'll probably get used to it in under an hour.

<<<-- Originally posted by Robert Knecht Schmidt : A few questions:

• What is "cinegamma"? The name implies it's a some sort of gamma adjust similar to automatic gain control to bracket the dynamic range of an image on-the-fly, but your description implies it's some sort of motion-smearing image processing routine.-->>>
  
  One thing that seperates the look of film from DV and video in general is it's gamma. The the DVX100's cinegamma emmulate's the gamma capacity of film.
  
  <<<--How does the "advanced" 24P mode work? If video is actually recorded to the MiniDV tape at 23.98 fps (or 24 fps), then the signal does not conform to the DV standard (or does it??). How does one get the 24P footage off the tape? And if not encoded using the DV standard, what codec is used to compress the footage, and is it less than 5:1 compression ratio?
• How does the camera derive 24P in both of its 24P modes? Does it clock off the chip at 23.98 Hz and then perform hardware 3:2 pulldown to record to tape? Or does it (as rumored in this thread http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthre...15&pagenumber=7) clock the chip at 29.97 Hz and then use some signal processing tricks to get at 24P by way of some inverse 3:2 pulldown?-->>>
  
  First you shouldn't even bother with advanced 24p unless your going to film later on. The camera performs an internal pulldown. From what I can gather it's recording at 24p and capturing at 30p. When you get ready to edit in your NLE the extra frames can be dropped and reconverted back to actual 24p footage. Final Cut Pro is coming out with software particularly for this. I'm sure Cinema Tools could probably preform the 24p recapture for you too. There's a little more to it but you'd have to talk to someone who can really give you the skinny on pulldowns and true 24p editing. Otherwise the regular 24p done the same way but only has the look of 24p (it's actually 30p with 24p motion if that makes any sense. Read the follow info).
  
  "The AG-DVX100 offers the freedom to record images in one of three modes.
  * 24p mode: 24fps Progressive for images with a film-like look and motion. Two 24p capture methods are offered:
  1. 2:3 pulldown-converted for a 24p captured image and 60i recording
  2. 2:3:3:2 pulldown-converted for a 24p Advance mode captured image and 60i recording (offers a smoother playback)
  * 30p mode: 30fps Progressive
  * 60i mode: 60fps Interlaced for standard images.
  Any one of the recording modes can be played back on a standard DV VTR and displayed on a standard monitor."
  -Panasonic
  
  <<--
• What resolutions does the camera deliver in each mode of operation?-->>
  
  I don't think there's a seperate res for each mode, I think it's just 500 lines period.
  
  <<--
• What's the (pre-encoding and post-encoding) image SNR in its various modes?-->>
  
  No idea.
  
  <<--
• Does the camera have any timecode capabilities? How does it record timecode in the advanced 24P mode?

-->>

Yes. "A SMPTE time code reader/generator is built-in. The time code generator records VITC on the sub-code area of the tape. DF/NDF (Drop Frame/Non Drop Frame) and Free Run/Record Run modes can be selected with preset or regen. User Bits (UB) are also provided, letting you record your choice of date, time, TC value, frame rate or user data."

<<--These are all issues relevant to the discussion of the usefulness of a 24P mode in a prosumer camera. I'm interested in whether or not the new Panasonic camera can really do anything that can't be done without a Canon XL1 and a computer to process footage. -->>>

The big difference I see is being able to go straight from camera to edit. Meaning I won't need any film look software and I can letter box incamera in every mode. So I can do my horror flick in 60i with 16:9 then hit the cineswitch (which isn't really a switch but going to into the menu and setting it up for 24p shooting) and do my action film in with the look of film. As with the GL2 you want to do slow pans if you don't want the blur other than that in my opinon it's better than the GL2 because of the in camera 16:9 and it's film look is truer than the GL2's (and the GL2 does a heck of a job). By the way, I know in camera 16:9 is considered a cheesy feature by some, especially on many lowend cams, but believe me with this cam it's a whole different ball game. Looking at your movie with the screen is like watching a 16:9 movie on DVD only you're filming it. My friend is a screen writer and I bought the footage to his house, hooked my cam up to the television and we compared the GL2 to the DVX100. I showed him the DVX's 16:9 film-like image. He didn't believe the DVX100 was video. And if you don't like the look the gamma controls can be played with. This cam doesn't come with an interchangeable lens but does come with a nice wide angle. With that one lens I could make a ton of movies before even considering another cam.

-Vinson

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

I can no longer edit my above post "A few questions," but there's a broken link inside it. The correct link is http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...5&pagenumber=7.

[Peter Moore]

Does anyone have any footage to post?

Also does 16x9 mode sacrifice resolution or does it have a native 16x9 lens?

[Mark Nicholson]

16x9 mode is a special effect, just like the other competing cameras in this category. One noteable thing about the DVX's 16:9 mode is that footage stays letterboxed even when viewing on a 4:3 NTSC monitor.

[Adam Martin]

"DVX's 16:9 mode is that footage stays letterboxed even when viewing on a 4:3 NTSC monitor."

Isn't this a good thing? Just checking.

[Peter Moore]

If it's what I think it is, actually it's not a good thing. That means that it is not real 16x9 but only that it is making the top and bottom portions of the image black.

What is desirable (what is on the Canons) is that the image fills up the entire screen on a 16x9 TV. It doesn't sound like that'd be the case with that mode on the 24p camera.

[Adam Martin]

I would think that there would be a program that would remove the black part above and below easily, or convert it to the same format as the others so it views right...am I wrong? If there is such a program then it would be exactly the same as a native 16x9...except some resolution loss (that I wouldn't think you could really even notice unless viewing on a large HD screen.). If I am way off base and being ignorant...please let me know. And if you can do what I just said above...please let me know. Thanks.

[Mark Nicholson]

While I don't have a Widescreen TV, I can tell you that it is marked as widescreen when imported into Premiere. Thus, I think it would be shown without bars on a widescreen TV... just like any Canon or Sony.


I like having bars on a 4:3 monitor because it is not as annoying as a strecthed image.

If you want to use 16:9 on any of these cams you have to remember that it will be at a loss of resolution. (all crop the top and bottom) That's why I do my letterboxing from a "standard" 4:3 image in post.

[Adam Martin]

What is the difference from doing it with the camera (being able to see exactly what your shooting) or fixing it in post. There shouldn't be any difference in resolution?...is there? You are still 'cutting' out part of the picture either way. Anyone know exactly what the resolution loss is and if it is really noticible (would any NORMAL person be able to tell the difference at all without a large HD widescreen). Also...you should be able to just 'cut' out those bars in the future if needed to be played on a widescreen...I would think.

[Henrik Bengtsson]

Well.. the fact that you loose the same resolution with incamera 16:9 is a truth with a few modifications. It all depends on how it does the blowup basically, before or after its been interlaced. If it scales before interlacing, then you will actually gain a tad more resolution (depending on how well the algorithm that scales is). If it does it after then it will prob be better to do it in post.

I read somewhere that Canon cameras does it before, and sony does it afterwards. I have no idea on the truth of that statement however.

The biggest advantage of shooting 4:3 directly and cropping in post is in composition of the shot. You have the opportunity to change the footage when doing the final editing, pan it up and down. Something i used extensively when shooting my latest musicvideo. I did a few steadycam shots where i went pretty close to the singer, and framed about his entire face in the camera. I could then pan the footage to focus on his eyes or the mouth etc. If i had shot 16:9 directly, i would have been "forced" to compose the shot directly in camera. As it was now i have drawn 16:9 markers on the glass of my monitor. So even if im shooting it in 4:3 i can see where the boundaries for 16:9 is.

Regards,
Henrik

[Frank Granovski]

Dylan,

>How does it feel egonomicaly? Like when you are hand held shooting. Compared to an XL1?<

The DVX100 is perfectly balanced, whether you hold it with 1 hand from the side, or hold it by the top handle. The cam is light (and balanced), so you can easily hold it steady for extended periods of time.

For each position (3), there are 3 separate zoom controls. (Really.) A lever on the right side, another lever on top, and a zoom control ring on the lens. I've never seen this many zoom controls on a cam before!