PDX10 shooters, unite!
 

No new posts here in FIVE DAYS??????
Outrageous!
Is everyone hibernating or what?
Well, it's time to break to break the silence, oh yes!
No sitting down on the job!
PDX10 users, out of the wood work with you!
Hup, hup!
On your feet, soldiers!
Single file!

I want to know about all projects, great and small, that have been or are being shot with the beloved PDX10. No secrets, here! State how long you've owned the camera, why you chose it over another, the general nature of related work, interesting discoveries and observations along the way, whatever. Any divers in there? Sky or sea? Stock car racers? Where's what's his name? Here, I'll prime the pump and go first.

Hi. My PDX10 arrived in the year of our lord, 2003, early August. I was recovering from a broken leg (still am), and just getting into dv and camerawork. I had just begun a long term training video series project with the father of a friend. We had only his Sony dcr740 d8 cam to work with, and, as a practice machine, it was fine, but after a few months, I had some money and the desire to get, use, and learn something more substantial, and also, in the process, help improve our images. Initially, I had set my sights on a PD150, but decided instead to get something for less money and in less time. I considered the Canon Optura 100mc, which proved to be too difficult to find, a pair of some other less expensive cam, the likes of which never quite seemed to be worth it, and the PDX10, which felt like a very logical alternative to the 150, despite some of it's apparent limitations.
This is to be a teacher training video/dvd. Most of the shooting has been and will be done in classrooms. Lots of tutor/pupil scenarios and speaker seminars, with some controlled home studio shooting of black and white graphics being manipulated by hands, with voiceover narration providing detailed descriptions of the materials and ideas being represented. Neither of us have done anything in the way of video production, and the budget is miniscule, at least for now, but I'm learning a ton. The PDX10 shoots well in live classroom situations, it's small form makes for less intimidation, although even with all of the overhead florescents on, there is a bit of grain. Not having a broad base of camcorder experience, I don't know exactly how much might be acceptable, although I am designing 2cam shoots for what we're doing more and more, and expect to be able to get a PD170 at the beginning of the coming year, so I think the PDX10 will be used in a more specialized way, making better use of it's latitude. I will rely on it for nearly all of the soundtrack work, and many of the "product" shoots, where the lighting can be controlled.

Just got a Century 0.65 wide angle for the PDX10 and a Century DV Matte box - it looks rather smart.

The Wide angle helps a lot and looks to be of good quality. I need to play around with it some more, but for the moment, it's stuck on the front of the camera and I don't think I'll be removing it soon.

The Matte box works great. Just got Tiffen 4x4 ND 0.9, Linear Polarizer and an Ultra Contrast 3 (will also be getting an Ultra Contrast 5). I really like the look of the ND and Ultra Contrast together - the Ultra contrast takes a very little light off the brights but seems to add quite a bit detail in the darker regions of the image giving a really good look to it. I'll try and post up some pages of images on my website if I have time next week.

Lol It has been a quiet week or so...

I'm still embroiled in transferring my old Super 8 films to DV. It's been fun, because I've been able to make things along the way, and research it all to my hearts content. I am always happiest when in the process, consumed by it, rather than when I have a finished product. Finishing simply means I have to start on something new, and the wonderful thing I was struggling with is a thing of the past.

I was working with the idea of shooting the films right off of the "screen" (white piece of poster board), and the results were fine, but I was in no hurry so I started thinking of reverse projection screens in order to get a geometrically correct image on tape--no keystoning, etc. I looked into different screen materials, starting with the frosted back of a school report cover, made out of clear poly. I finally graduated to a sheet of filter material--Lee #225 (ND Frost), a finely frosted ND diffusion filter. The diffusion makes any hotspot from looking directly into the bulb disapear, and the ND seems to even out a lot of the tones--skies are not too bright, etc. Colors a little deeper and richer, too. Looks good, and only $6. Made a frame for it from scrap wood. It doesn't seem to impart any addtional grain to the image. I decided to make the projected image about the size of an average TV screen, so there won't be any surprises when it gets shown on TV--if that makes sense. What I can see is what will eventually be seen on the TV screen. I mounted a mirror on an old tripod head with epoxy to reverse the image when seen on the reverse screen.

I also wanted to clean and lubricate the films--I'm afraid that they have not been kept in pristine environments these past years. The "good" cleaners are either out of production or too nasty to handle here at home, so I tried some isopropyl alcohol, which works fine for cleaning but does nothing about lubricating the film. I came across a product called Film-Guard that is used by professional projectionists, and managed to get a sample bottle (more than I'll ever need in a lifetime--it goes a LONG way). It seems to be a very fine oil of some sort--smells a little like WD-40, or lubricants like that. I've been applying it to the films (after editing them together into usable lengths--had to get a splicer off of eBay, not sure where mine went...). It seems to do a great job of cleaning and lubricating, and actually covers up some of the scratches!

So now I think I'm at the point where I'm ready to shoot them all with my PDX-10. I happen to have a projector with a variable speed control on it, so I get no flicker (and even without the control, it's not too bad, especially at shutter speed of 30). The whole setup is pretty funny--I wish I could post a picture for you guys. The projector shoots its beam into the mirror (mounted on a tripod) which bounces onto the back of the diffusion filter material, and the camera is on the other side of the screen, taping it all. I monitor the proceedings on my TV screen as I shoot.

A rather mundane use of a $2000 camera, I know--but right now, it's just another tool to get this work done. And I'm having a blast...

Very cool Chris! Nice homebrew solution to film transfer. This question comes up around here from time to time, so your post should be a good resource for others. It would be great if you could put a photo of the rig and some still frame from the video online someday.

Graeme: the Century mattebox looks really nice, but IIRC it's rather pricey, isn't it? I have been getting by with just screw-in filters and the included wide lens hood (which doesn't vignette with even a .45x wide adaptor), although one day I'd love to add a matte box. Awhile ago Blip Pio posted the results of his matte box quest in this thread. It would be cool if you get a chance to post a photo of your setup also.

So Shawn, looks like people aren't hibernating, were all just busy putting our cameras to use ;-) Personally I'm editing around 15 hours of performance footage from our last two operas, among other things. Am also still figuring out how to use my new Sony RDR-GX7 standalone DVD recorder. One reason I went this route was the ability to take firewire input and transcode to 480p component video out, which looks terrific on my 17" widescreen LCD.

The Century is a tad expensive, but then again, all matte boxes seem to be a lot of money for what they are. However, it does fit well on the PDX10, and it does seem to work without any bother at all, and it does look very cool - which is indeed one of the main reasons for going matte box rather than screw in filters!

I'm going to see about taking some better photos of the setup soon and posting them up to view.

I really think that the PDX10 is a better camera than most people accept, and that with careful use it can produce a most impressive image. I suppose that's why I don't mind so much paying for decent lenses and filters to go on the front.

Graeme

Well I've been lurking here for a while and just got my PDX-10 a few weeks back, in large part due to the comments and discussions on this board!

I feel like I need to thank everyone for their in-depth reviews. I absolutely LOVE the picture quality of this camera! All the quirks aside, and there are a few, this camera is a technological wonder.

I actually got the camera because I've been sub-contracted to shoot/edit a PBS documentary on the Hudson River. The station shoots exclusively in 16x9 on a Sony 709 Digibeta. After shooting some with that camera I was anxious to compare the image to the little PDX-10 as I thought it might compare quite well. I shot some footage with it and brought it to the station where most peoples jaws dropped when they saw the 16x9 footage this little beauty can produce! We put it on the scopes with the engineering department and they actually said to go ahead and start shooting with it! The image was THAT good. Now, I'm not saying it is comparable to DIGIBETA, it isn't quite. For this project all that Digibeta footage is getting transfered to DVCAM and edited on my system here. So to save transfering footage we did the comparison and it holds its own to the transfered DIGIBETA stuff!

I too am a bit frustrated with the vertical smear problem and with the exposure system/ND filter situation but for the most part this camera is the ONLY choice right now for sub-$9000 16x9 footage.

Thanks to all for their passion on here, and for those who are put off by the quirks, you should really look at this camera in person or at some of the footage it can create before disregarding it. I think you'll be amazed.

Wow, excellent post Paul!

>> this camera is the ONLY choice right now for sub-$9000 16x9 footage

I'm just curious as to whether you have a specific $9,000 camera in mind that shoots native 16:9? In its review DV magazine it made a similar remark about the PDX-10. The Sony and Ikegami 16:9 cameras sell in the $13,000 range without lens, JVC has the DV700W for around $9000 without lens. But even with a cheap lens you're well over $10,000, and of course things like batteries, etc are much more expensive for these "pro" models. The only less expensive model that comes to mind is the JVC HD-10, but that's sort of a different ballgame.

Are there some other options I'm not thinking of (aside from adding an anamorphic adaptor to a DVX-100)?

"Looks like people aren't hibernating; we're all just busy putting our cameras to use ;-)."

Of course! :-) I mostly felt some strong, dramatic language to be in order, for fun and inspiration. I was, after all, a stage actor first ;-). And look at these responses! You're all a bunch of geniuses!

Alert us, Paul, if you will, when the doc airs, I'm very interested to see final results.

I'm hoping to produce little community oriented ditties for the public tv channel somewhere down the line. I haven't contacted them or anything, but their website sounds like they'd be receptive to someone like me; what a great other way for a prosumer to continue to learn his craft of choice.

I feel like me ane my new TRV950 are left out :(. Only reason I didn't get a PDX10 is that I didn't need to spend the extra $$$ on features I'd probably never use. We just got done filming a cheezy driver's training video on Teen distractions in cars...I have to say it was a lot of fun filming it...but it probably won't turn out very well, I'm not the one editing it but I'll put a link so people can see it and critique ;)

TRV950 shooters, unite!
 

I actually am also very interested in what's being done with the 950 too, to be sure. It's just that I shoot with the PDX10, so that is where my curiosity naturally tends. There's something about the 950 that I like a whole lot, without having shot with it. I couldn't, however, do with unbalanced XLRs.
In fact, if anyone is still shooting with a PD100a, please speak up as well, I've read almost nothing about it in real world applications.
Why do you think the driver's training video lacks, Tim? Hoaky situation simulation (script and acting)? Was it a studio shoot, and/or other? Handheld/tripod/mount ratio?

Anyone else care to share?

Boyd,

I was indeed thinking of the JVC DV700W, but you're right, it still needs a lens! I have not seen any footage in person from the JVC HD-10 but I'm optimistic that this camera is a sign of things to come. I'm hopeful we will all be shooting hi-def soon at a fraction of the price that it is now.

Shawn,

I can't speak for the PBS station near you, but here in New York the PBS stations are VERY receptive to outside contributors. PBS is learning that to set themselves off from other similar commercial channels (A&E, Discovery,History Ch., etc.) they need to be making local productions.
They also don't have gobs of money to throw at these local productions so they will at least look at what independents have to offer. It's a great way to break into television programming if that is what you'd like to do.
I'd encourage anyone to call/visit their local PBS station and see whats possible. I worked at a local affiliate for 11 years before striking out on my own three years ago when I saw what DV could offer and at what price. Myself and another guy made a series called "The Hidden Adirondacks" where we travel around in an old camper going to "out of the way" tourist destinations, reality TV for PBS we call it! Anyway we managed to get it on over 35 PBS stations around the country! Including NYC! Check out our web site www.hiddenadirondacks.com. Shot the whole thing with a PD-150 and cut it in my basement edit suite!

So anything is possible, just set your mind to it and strive to do the best job possible, even though I've been doing TV for over13 years now, I learn something everyday...no, its not a cliche! The internet is a great resource for continuing education, places like this site are a fountain of info!

Thanks Paul, for insight and encouragement. I currently live about two hours north of San Francisco (KQED), so it wouldn't be a terrible stretch to connect with PBS. I suppose it would depend on the project, though.
I'm wondering, Paul, if you could elaborate a bit on your experiences with the PDX10, what sorts of settings you prefer thus far, that sort of thing. I'm recognizing finally the messiness that high levels of sharpness bring to the image. In fact any amount of sharpness seems to do more harm than good. I'm also happy to see how well this cam can suppress noise, when the shot is set up properly.
Regards,
Shawn

Well our little driver's video...if you've ever seen one...well its just like the rest. Basically you have to overexaggerate a lot to get your point across, ours was about teen distractions so in the car we had 4 people in the back seat. I was the driver and was on my cell phone steering with my knee while joking around with everybody in the back. Keep in mind this was done in a huge parking lot, the shots were one with the camera on the dashboard, another couple from outside, and one looking in from the sunroof, and hanging onto the side bars of the SUV while filming through the window...nothing fancy at all. There's music in the background the whole time I think anyways. I mean there's nothing horribly wrong, it wasn't scripted at all its just we had to overexaggerate it to such a point that I'm almost positive nobody drives like we portrayed it

I purchased my PDX10 in March for the purpose of shooting hunting videos and it is working quite nicely. I got my feet wet shooting hunting videos for the web with a TRV-103 (one of the original D8's) and when it succumbed to the abuse of hunting environments, I decided I wanted to step up from web productions to more serious platforms. That meant upgrading to a 3CCD cam. I originally considered the VX2000, Canon GL2 and TRV950. I also briefly considered the PD150, but decided that the compactness of the 950/PDX10 would be an asset over the other cams in consideration (I'm a one man bow hunter/cameraman, so that's a lot of gear to carry into the woods!) I liked the 16:9 aspect of the PDX10, and the fact that the body was black instead of silver/pewter of the 950 further swayed my decision (hey, it sounds trivial, but black is a much better "camouflage" than silver!). The price gap between the PDX10 and 950 narrowed back in March when I was making my decision, so that was the final selling point.

I've managed to get some good footage and have some decent clips for the web (I'm still learning my way around Premiere, so it's amateur at best), but I'll refrain from posting links since some folks on this site might want to avoid graphic bow hunting footage.

Anyway, I mostly lurk but have gotten some good info from the posters on this site that helped with my decision and have helped me with my videos.

Michael

<<<-- Originally posted by Shawn Mielke : I'm recognizing finally the messiness that high levels of sharpness bring to the image. In fact any amount of sharpness seems to do more harm than good. -->>>

I couldn't agree more.... but this was kicked around pretty thoroughly here, and I suppose it comes down to a matter of personal preference.

I tend to vary my settings a bit in the custom pre-set window but for the most part I leave sharpness down 2 notches, unless I use a WA converter, then I bring it back up a notch due to the inherent softness from the adaptor. I also bring color up one notch and have white balance one notch toward red. This gives a much more pleasing color balance (For my taste anyway!) I find Sonys to be too blue and cold. These settings really warm it up without going overboard. Subtlety is key here but the cummulative effect is superior.

I tend to run manual everything, though I start by putting it in auto then switch to manual and adjust from there. The focus ring is VERY frustrating on this camera, so this technique tends to work well.

<<<-- Originally posted by Paul Frederick :
The focus ring is VERY frustrating on this camera... -->>>


Amen. A major improvement is available here in the next iteration, if attention is paid.

Boyd,
I know sharpness has been talked about before, indeed you may have spotted my very own participation in the thread you referenced, but one or two previous discussions doesn't automatically forever neutralize the subject. That portion of my inquiry in this thread was intended for a specific person with specific preferences that I was specifically interested in, and it was only part of my inquiry, intended to act more as an example of what I meant when asking about likes/dislikes in settings. Just for clarification, with all due respect!
:-)
Shawn

Shawn,

I think Boyd was pointing out that thread in case others had an interest in it and didn't see that thread. That's how I saw it anyway!

I'm going to start a new thread based a topic we touched on in this thread and hope that is cool to do!

I'm curious what others have their custom presets settings at.

I think you're right, Paul. My mistake!

Yeah, really. I didn't mean not to discuss sharpness settings! Like Paul said I just wanted to reference the other discussion, and was resisting my own urge to post some comments when I realized I'd pretty much spoken my mind on that topic already.

I'm always interested to hear what others do and a thread on custom presets is a great idea... why wouldn't it be cool? ;-)

Hee haw! :-}

Graeme Nattress wrote:

"Just got a Century 0.65 wide angle for the PDX10 and a Century DV Matte box - it looks rather smart."

"The Matte box works great. Just got Tiffen 4x4 ND 0.9, Linear Polarizer and an Ultra Contrast 3 (will also be getting an Ultra Contrast 5)."

Great, someone has already solved my dilemma. I am maybe interested in getting similar equipment. I don't want to pay $1000 for the mattebox, though...

So, a few questions

1) Does the "Century DV Matte box" + "0.65x wideangle" combination cause any vignetting?

2) The Ultra Contrast filter is said to need good protection from stray light. Does the Century Matte box do the job? There will be a lot (like 25% of the frame) of very bright highlights in my footage, unfortunately.

3) Is there any smaller mattebox available? The PDX10 is a small camera - and I have to carry it - in the woods, for example. No tripod, that is. Would the "Century Rectangular Sunshade" offer good enough protection or do I really need a large, complex mattebox?

Without wanting to hijack the PDX thread, I can give you the set I've got for my 950, for those that might be interested and which must come pretty close in every day use to the PDX, without the 16:9 and DVcam (how many people actully use DVcam anyway?).

TRV950
Techpro 0.5 wideangle
Sign Video XLR Pro box
Shotgun Mic with Rycote cover
various tieclip mics (wired until I can afford a wireless set up)
Manfrotto tripod with 501 head....

This set up is producing pretty good images and sound. With hindsite I'd have probably gone for the PDX simply for the 16:9 (I like that a lot).
The XLR Pro box gives a good mix of sound and IMHO is better placed and balances the camera better than the PDX add on, on the hotshoe. (I can live with the few inches of unbalanced sound through the minijack.. as I'm not convinced that in practial shooting terms one can detect any difference). I've used upto 7 metres of balanced cable and the sound was as clean as a whistle.

I've not in all honesty found it's low light capabilities have hampered me...I've shot in lowish light of gyms and sports halls and not found any hassle....If I had to shoot in worse light than that I'd add some.

Voila that's waht I'm shooting with at the moment, until I progress to other cameras.. like the look of the PD170... dream on...

cheers
Gareth

Well I just finished 2 hours of shooting today for the Star Wars Fan Film I have been working on for the last month or so. atomfilms.com is having their annual fan film and I am almost done with the filming and then I have roughly 25 days to finish editing, music, sound, greenscreen, effects, color timing, and a host of other tidbits before it's done.

it's a monster growing out of control. today was a party full of teens, but I only had about 7 show up and so I tried to make it look like more by changing hats and coats, moving them around so you couldn't see their faces. now I have a host of greenscreen to do, mattes to paint, lightsaber or two, holoprojections, amputations, sand crawler and a jawa, and giant 100 pound garbage bags to create digitally. plus a few electically bolts for good measure

wasn't suppose to be this much work, but a few friends balked on the "work" part so I'm heading this one alone.

I must say the PDX10 and Century .65 wide is working great, even my poor attempt at learning to light is easliy fixed with some color curve tweaks. the Tiffen .9 nd works wonders outside, althought I still had to pull it down a bit, wish they made a 1.2 or 1.3 so you wouldn't have to stake a .9 and .3

shot for a few hours outside. it's very hard to make an untrained dog pee on you leg. so I fixed that with a cut of his leg going up, helped by a hand, and then a cut to a stream of fake dog pee (care of minutemaid lemonade and a pump water pistol)

it was little cold and sticky, I think I almost would have rather had real pee, at least it would have been warm!

:)

oh let's add the fact that one of my backup drives on my server died last night, oh, forgot, along with it's backup mirrored raid. so what are the odds on that? I don't know, both drives in a mirror raid dying at once. I didn't loose the project, but I lost all my emails for the last year, system install backups, last 4 months of photos, all the photos of my dog (sniff sniff) receipts, bookmarks, scripts, some client work (web sites), and all that jazz.

take it from me, I have batteries, fans, and mirrored raided everything with hardware raids to keep those harddrives happy, MAKE BACKUPS at all cost. 20 years of computer owning, 2nd time I've lost a drive, worst one yet.

oh I'm shooting in DVCAM for that extra little protection of running the tape back and fourth, not using Sony's new DVCAM tapes using the DVM-40Ns.

Also shooting in 16x9.

I have a few 500watt Smith Victors along with all my homemade stands and light I welded together. I use a big piece of poster board to do as much bouce lighting as I can when doing close ups. Helps fill in some shadows and smooth out the lights a bit. I tried my hand at colored lighting, but it didn't come out to well, I guess it was ok, but I think with some color timing tweeks it will be much better.

Also recording audio straight to he camera using a AT shotgun mic on a stand set off camera. For voice over recording I use my AT studio mic and pop filter in a walk in closet. (closet thing I have to a sound proof room, really good)

Everything is being edited on a custom AMD system with a MatroxRTx100 and Premiere Pro. It sucks, but right as I am finishing this PPro 1.5 will come out with all these new realtime things for the RTx100!!!! oh well.

Compositing and effects are being done in Combustion 3 and 3dsMAX 6.

I just hope I can do some good clean greenscreen mattes next week!!

New batteries on the way.
 

Been a long few weeks here too. Moving soon and with me just getting the studio built, man, it's going to hurt to move it. The good news is, it will be built better. The new pad will have a deeper lower level so I can do some nice acoustic tile work, carpeted and Sonexed walls and even, gasp - a sound booth!

Now, about those batteries... I am doing a wedding soon - I need the cash flow - so I need something a bit longer than the stock 1 hour battery. I went to Bescor and ordered the PRB9 12v 9aH battery with the CLC100 12v adapter cable.

Despite what's listed on their site, I walked away for $107 plus S&H. About $10 they tell me. Should arrive tomorrow. Film at Eleven.

Don't know if B&H sells these, sorry Boyd. I know my place doesn't. Bought them from Bescor direct.

On the studio side, buying either a demo DSR20 or a new DSR11 tomorrow too. Got folks backing up to get in the place and I need a deck to call my own.

Even more so since I still can't get the main editing system to talk back to the camera correctly. Still recognized by the PC as being there as a playback DV device but the signal still isn't getting back down the hose into the camera.

Once I clear the projects off and prepare for the move, she gets blown up and rebuilt.

That's it from these keys.

Get yourselves to http://www.weeklyDV.com and see the short called "At Confession". Pretty good stuff there.

Sean McHenry