Sony V1 to 35mm film at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony HVR-V1 / HDR-FX7

Sony HVR-V1 / HDR-FX7
Pro and consumer versions of this Sony 3-CMOS HDV camcorder.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 21st, 2010, 08:22 AM   #1
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bradford, United Kingdom
Posts: 17
Sony V1 to 35mm film

I am trying to inquire about the best way to shoot my short film. I have been reading on this forum about Black Magic Intensity Pro. It shoots uncompressed straight from the camea. However, is this really needed? Sony claim that HDV looks good when blown up to 35mm.

Does anyone have any idea what HDV looks like when printed to 35mm film? Does anyone know of a feature film that was shot with the Sony V1E/U?
Jason Bagherian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2010, 10:24 AM   #2
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
I think in your shoes I'd work the other way around Jason. Assuming that you're sure you want the finished article on 35 mm film (and I've got to ask why in this age of digital projection), I'd talk to the transfer houses as to what they require in the way of digital camcorder settings to get the best 35 mm prints.

I suspect that they'll suggest you start with a bigger gate. The " V1 chip is far smaller than a Super-8 frame, and they didn't often do that as an upconversion.

tom.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2010, 12:44 PM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 240
nanoFlash recorder

Jason,

Also, check out the threads on this site regarding the Convergent Design's nanoFlash recorder. A very small portable unit with both HDMI and SDI inputs/outputs. It records with only slight compression. Color encoding is 4:2:2. Records at several different bandwidths, but 100 Mb/sec with long GOP seems to be the preferred setting.

Ken
Ken Hull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2010, 09:27 AM   #4
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bradford, United Kingdom
Posts: 17
nanoFlash

Tom thanks for the advice. I emailed a company called Swiss Effects about the best settings for a V1 to transfer to film. I will post the results, if they get back to me.

Ken do you use the nanoflash? Are you positive it will connect to the V1E/U? I am really excited about this product! I downloaded a clip from their site in 1080p 25fps (100Mbit Long-Gop). I imported the file in to Sony Vegas, first 2 frames were green, but the rest of it was perfect. The colour was amazing! I will render some tests with the clip tonight, uncompressed AVI, mpeg 2 etc. The only downside is the price. In the U.K it's the same price as a V1E. A must have though. Cheers.
Jason Bagherian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2010, 12:16 PM   #5
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 240
V1 and nanoFlash

Jason,

No, I don't have a nanoFlash ..... yet. The Convergent Design folks have assured me that their nanoFlash will work with my V1U, and that the resulting video will be significantly higher quality. Since there is an example 25fps video clip on their website, that implies that it would also work with the V1E.

See this thread:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/converge...nano-v1-u.html

I will probably get a nanoFlash in a few months, but I'm also considering another path. The nanoFlash path requires attaching it to the camcorder, and probably attaching a video monitor as well (I don't think there's any way to use the V1U's LCD monitor for nanoFlash playback). On-camera monitors with HDMI or HD-SDI input cost over $600. (HEY CONVERGENT DESIGN: How about adding a composite output?) And don't forget batteries for these add-ons. That's a lot of stuff hanging off the camcorder (well, I was going to get a heavy-duty fluid head anyhow). So the other path is to simply get a camcorder that already has low-compression recording built in, thus not requiring any add-ons. So far, the Panasonic HPX-300 seems to be the least expensive way to do that. A lot of money, but if I went with the nanoFlash, and later upgraded my camcorder to a Sony EX1, I would have spent at least that. And the HPX-300 records 10-bit data instead of 8-bit. Ah, decisions, decisions .....

Ken
Likely future nanoFlash owner ;-)

Last edited by Ken Hull; January 22nd, 2010 at 12:48 PM.
Ken Hull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 23rd, 2010, 11:39 PM   #6
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 506
Jason, I am curious as to where you saw Sony claim HDV looks good blown up to 35mm. I am not saying they did not say that but I don't recall ever seeing that claim and am curious where it was made by Sony.

I own 2 V1's and have been very happy with them other than their low light peformance and the jello effect when the camera is in motion.

I love the Sony build quality, features, etc. Before I get new cameras I probably will just buy CF units for each of the cameras. Would love to see the Convergent Nano come down in price to under two grand so I could consider that.
D.J. Ammons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2010, 06:36 PM   #7
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bradford, United Kingdom
Posts: 17
Hello D.J. Ammons I found what Sony says here......

http://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/assets/f...whitepaper.pdf

It's at the bottom of page 6, Sony say......

'HDV 1080i has a very high vertical resolution of 1080 lines. It is possible to deliver 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 film formats with excellent visual quality. The high spatial and temporal resolution of HDV 1080i produces very detailed 35mm film out.'

I have 2 Sony V1E's also. I think they are a very underrated camera. I don't know what you mean by 'jello effect when the camera is in motion'. I do loads of tracking shots (I'm a huge Kubrick fan), I was amazed at how clear the images were. May be I move the camera slower than you, I don't know. I don't think you will need to buy any new cameras anytime soon, I do like the sound of the Sony Z5 though. Your right, Sony's build quality is the best. I will only ever buy Sony, and won't ever touch a Canon again, it might break!

I tested a shot of the Nano Flash, shot in 1080p 25fps (100Mbit Long-Gop). I will be perfectly honest here, I think it's a massive waste of money. The only thing that looks better is the colour. Now I don't have a huge screen to compare the Nano to HDV, but I tell you now, I'm not impressed. Maybe if it was in 32bit, I would consider it, but Convergent Design won't be getting my money. I will get the Sony HVR DR60 instead.

Ken I wouldn't worry about less compression issues, I personally think HDV is stunning, would love to see how it holds up on a huge screen though. I believe that Paranormal Activities was shot with a Sony FX1. I didn't see it at a cinema myself, wish I had now. Has anyone reading this seen it? Any comments on the picture quality on a big screen?

I received a very pleasant email from Swiss Effects, they seem very shy about sharing their settings for the V1, for the best results to transfer to film. I will talk to them more and see what they say. Anyone interested in this should read this......

Sony : Advice from Swiss Effects on HDV : United Kingdom
Jason Bagherian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2010, 06:44 AM   #8
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 444
Tape to Film Transfer FAQ - DVFilm Digital Transfers

You may find this of interest.
Martyn Hull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2010, 11:03 PM   #9
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Tinton Falls, NJ
Posts: 749
NanoFlash recommendation

Having recently bought a NanoFlash I thought I'd throw in my impressions...
First of all, the Film Transfer FAQ's looked a bit outdated - or really aimed at the lower end of the marlket. Their recommendation of an HVX200 seems pretty marginal (on the sharpness side) these days, especially compared to the EX series.
Yes I have an EX1, which is why I got the Nano in the first place (and have already done some very successful blue and green screen shoots with that combo.) But I also have a V1u, and am planning to do some serious NanoFlash testing with it.
On paper, it makes a lot of sense. The V1's 45 degree chip array makes for a set of virtual pixels so that the camera processes internally at 1920x1080 (before reducing that resolution to the 1440x1080 which is then compressed and recorded on HDV.) The HDMI output of the V1u, however, outputs the full 1920x1080, before the camera starts compressing it. And of course the NanoFlash records 1920x1080 with better color depth (4:2:2) and far less compression. I've been very happy with the V1 in the three years I've had it, and though I don't think anything from it has been blown up to 35, I've used it as an additional camera for a dramatic feature ('Lifelines') shot primarily in XDcamHD, as well as a music documentary feature (where it blew the socks off the Z-1's it was being intercut with) and a number of tv show interview segments. But I've always been intercutting with other 1440x1080 recordings. I'm looking to the NanoFlash to potentially give it a new lease on life. I'd highly recommend doing a comparison (split screen) test with and without the Nano and just make sure that when you view the test it is on a VERY Large monitor - or blown up to 35 and viewed on a Big Screen. Don't try to make a theatrical quality decision on a small (20-30") computer monitor!
HTH
Dave S.
Dave Sperling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 5th, 2010, 11:21 AM   #10
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bradford, United Kingdom
Posts: 17
Dave, why would you need to use the Nanoflash if you are filming with the EX1? I believe it films 1920x1080, 35 Mb/s. Is this not enough quality? Is it really necessary to film at 100 Mb/s? I'm sure people will only compress the footage down at a latter stage of editing. Instead of spending money on a Nanoflash I was thinking about saving up for a Sony PMW-EX3. I really like MXF files, they play so well in Sony Vegas. I convert all my m2t files to MXF, rather than waste money on software like Cineform. I have a really tight budget at the moment, I do believe that it would be better to project this film digitally as Tom suggested, as converting to film would be very expensive.

I downloaded footage from a Canon 7D as people on this forum really like it. I personally don't like the footage that much. It looks a little softer than HDV, but it's really jerky if you move the camera. Dave would you say the footage from your EX1 looks better than from your V1U? If so, how much better? Is it really worth it for me to upgrade from my V1E to an EX3 or EX1?
Jason Bagherian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 5th, 2010, 11:35 AM   #11
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Billericay, England UK
Posts: 4,711
The upgrade from the V1 to the EX is a double leapfrog, and well worth doing. You've bypassed the 1"/3 chip brigade at a stroke. You'll be getting the far better dof control of " chips and amazingly better low light performance.
Tom Hardwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 5th, 2010, 12:26 PM   #12
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Tinton Falls, NJ
Posts: 749
Nano advantages with EX1

Hi Jason,
Several elements went into my decision to get the NanoFlash, and the fact that I had several uses for it within a two week period pushed me to make the leap -- and I'm glad I did.
Yes, the EX1 records 1920x1080, but the recording compresses it to 4:2:0. When I'm shooting normal corporate or documentary stuff that's not an issue, but I had a blue screen product shoot, followed by a green screen shoot for another client. The advantage of being able to record 4:2:2, plus the higher bit rate gave me a little extra assurance that my keys would be trouble-free.
For another shoot during the same period, there was no need for higher bit rate recording, but I was warned from the producer that there would be some client issues - 7 clients on set to be exact. He wanted a larger client monitor, and knew that the clients would want to see a fair amount of playback. My large HD client monitor is component or HDMI in, and I've used it successfully in the past with the HD component out from the EX1. But the NanoFlash offered me several advantages:
By taking HDSDI in and giving me an HDMI out, I only had to run a single BNC HD-SDI from the camera (looping through the director's NebTek HD-SDI monitor) to the client area (where the Nano-Flash resided.
Switching the EX1 from Camera to Media mode is not the fastest process in the world, and tieing up the camera for playback would have seriously impacted on staying on a schedule that called for about 13 pages a day - averaging a new setup every 15-20 minutes. By setting the NanoFlash to roll automatically based on sensing moving timecode (and keeping the camera on record-run) the Nano acted as a remote video assist. (I just had to have an assistant available to hit 'playback' for the group. Because it also recorded audio from the camera through the HD-SDI cable, there was no additional work for the audio person, and the clients could listen to playback through the monitor (connected via HDMI).
Though it wasn't something I had even thought about when I bought it, the fact that the Nano can record in MOV files has also come in useful, particularly for a project where we did a shoot with a CEO in the morning and the production company had to have the cut completed before the end of business that day. The MOV files went directly into their Final Cut system and they were able to start editing immediately - without the normal 're-wrapping' of the 'BPAV' files from the EX. The fact that they happened to be 4:2:2 rather than 4:2:0 was not an issue, just a nice addition.

Do I like the image from the EX1 better than that from the V1u? - Definitely. I feel I have more control, and for the price the EX series cameras are pheniminal. Remember, by the time you get your accessories together, you'd be spending twice as much on an EX as a V1. If you don't need genlock/ timecode sync options or interchangeable lenses (ie, the EX3), I'd recommend looking seriously at the EX1R - which adds some nice features over my EX1.

If you want to stay with the V1, then I'd say to definitely do a test with the NanoFlash and see what it can get you.
HTH,
Dave S.
Dave Sperling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 5th, 2010, 02:57 PM   #13
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bradford, United Kingdom
Posts: 17
Thank you Dave, you have given me quite a lot to think about. :-)
Jason Bagherian 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 > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony HVR-V1 / HDR-FX7

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:08 AM.


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