Getting "film look" with EX1 - Page 5 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds

Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds
Sony PMW-300, PXW-X200, PXW-X180 (back to EX3 & EX1) recording to SxS flash memory.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 16th, 2008, 12:23 PM   #61
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Carl View Post
EVF on EX1 vs Z7? What is the actual difference?

From reading all the posts on "film look", I think that there is a wide range of subjective qualities but I think the point can be summed up as, "not video look". I agree that seeing the Show Scan 60p film projection demos, proved to me that for artsy stuff, I don't want film to look like reality. But for sports and reality shows, 60fps is the way to go, baby.
I second Carl. As there is so much superfluous and silly talk about what is "film look" the other side of the coin, IE "not video look" is so much more sensible as it is so easy to judge. I always say to myself "does this look like home video?"

Avoid the things video cameras can't do like high contrast or extreme bright light that kills shadow detail and you are well on your way. That's why I believe polaroid and graduated filters are a must.
Mike Stevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 12:28 PM   #62
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 4,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Carl View Post
EVF on EX1 vs Z7? What is the actual difference?

From reading all the posts on "film look", I think that there is a wide range of subjective qualities but I think the point can be summed up as, "not video look". I agree that seeing the Show Scan 60p film projection demos, proved to me that for artsy stuff, I don't want film to look like reality. But for sports and reality shows, 60fps is the way to go, baby.
Well, the actual difference is some 200,000 vs 1,200,000 pixels of resulution between the two.

Of course, this has nothing to do with the "film look", hence with the second part of your post.
__________________
Sony PXW-FS7 | DaVinci Resolve Studio; Magix Vegas Pro; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive
Piotr Wozniacki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 02:49 PM   #63
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki View Post
Well, the actual difference is some 200,000 vs 1,200,000 pixels of resulution between the two.

Of course, this has nothing to do with the "film look", hence with the second part of your post.
Piotr: And getting the film look is all about the skill to make 200k pixels look like 1200k pixels. The look is about photographic skill not pixels. I could make a 1200k pixel clip that looked like home video and there are lot of great cinematographers like Phil who can make 200k pixels look like 1200k film.
Mike Stevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 03:07 PM   #64
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 4,086
Mike, I only mean it's easier to judge focus with a higher resolution VF !

Hope this is obvius
__________________
Sony PXW-FS7 | DaVinci Resolve Studio; Magix Vegas Pro; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive
Piotr Wozniacki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 07:38 PM   #65
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Studio Alnitak, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 640
Images: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Stevens View Post
I second Carl. As there is so much superfluous and silly talk about what is "film look" the other side of the coin, IE "not video look" is so much more sensible as it is so easy to judge. I always say to myself "does this look like home video?"

Avoid the things video cameras can't do like high contrast or extreme bright light that kills shadow detail and you are well on your way. That's why I believe polaroid and graduated filters are a must.
Mike, quite right.
Serena Steuart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 07:43 PM   #66
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Studio Alnitak, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 640
Images: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki View Post
The answer is simple: the great EX3 wievfinder works best when the camera is shoulder monunted, i.e. with the EX1 body shape.

For shooting EX1 handheld, or on additional mount like the "El Cheapo", its original EVF would be better for me, should it have enough resolution.
Piotr, there is no impediment to shooting the EX1 on a shoulder mount when using the LCD. Not that I believe you wish to consider this.
Serena Steuart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2008, 03:45 AM   #67
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 4,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serena Steuart View Post
Piotr, there is no impediment to shooting the EX1 on a shoulder mount when using the LCD. Not that I believe you wish to consider this.
Serena, how on earth can you know about all shoulder mounts/shooting techniques one can use? Using either the PAG Orbitor, or the "El cheapo" shoulder mount (I have both), the camera is quite high and the LCD just too close to my eyes (I'm 53, so I'm getting more and more long-sighted). One way of course is to use strong reading glasses, but since I don't wear them permanently, and when you add the sun reflections problem to the equation - using the "tranditional" EVF is the best solution.

And all I am saying is that the EVF on the EX1 is poor resolution-wise, so replacing it with that from the Z7 would solve two problems at once.
__________________
Sony PXW-FS7 | DaVinci Resolve Studio; Magix Vegas Pro; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive
Piotr Wozniacki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2008, 04:58 AM   #68
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Studio Alnitak, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 640
Images: 3
Yes, Piotr, I understand that perfectly. I guess you'd be surprised that some body would have that breadth of knowledge. You have taken on a rigid rejection of alternatives and I respect your unwillingness to see other approaches. If you were to check out the photos I posted you might have to find more excuses, but that's OK. Good luck with getting Sony to re-engineer the EX1.
Serena Steuart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2008, 12:05 PM   #69
New Boot
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 10
re EX1 vs Z7 EVF resolution

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki View Post
Well, the actual difference is some 200,000 vs 1,200,000 pixels of resulution between the two.
Wow - that is unbelievable. How does that work out pixel dimension wise?
360x640 vs 1280x720 would make sense, but the numbers don't match.

What is Sony thinking, why would they do this? Now I am curious what the resolution on my Z1 EVF is, anyone know or where I could find out?
James Carl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2008, 12:52 PM   #70
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 4,086
The Z1 and EX1 EVF's are nearly exactly the same - i.e. very poor.

The Xtrafine one on the Z7 resolution is counted differently (multiplied x3 for R, G, B values) - but nevertheless, it's a marvellous viewfinder.

What were they thinking? Well, I guess they already knew about the EX3 coming soon after the EX1, and wanted to make the difference even bigger!
__________________
Sony PXW-FS7 | DaVinci Resolve Studio; Magix Vegas Pro; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive
Piotr Wozniacki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 06:16 PM   #71
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 62
Its great to see this discussion unfold! If I didn't know any better, I'd swear that Philip Bloom's stuff was film all the way. Whatever his formula is, it works! I remember reading in his blog that he shoots most of his stuff at 25p (PAL). he doesn't have a lot of fast-paced footage, though. He also is big on Magic Bullet Looks. Anyone know anything else about his methods/settings/work flow?

http://web.mac.com/philip.bloom/Bloo...2_29F3881EDCB6

Philip's entry is about half way in the comments.

Last edited by David W Williamson; May 19th, 2008 at 06:18 PM. Reason: adding a link
David W Williamson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 07:56 PM   #72
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by David W Williamson View Post
Its great to see this discussion unfold! If I didn't know any better, I'd swear that Philip Bloom's stuff was film all the way. Whatever his formula is, it works! I remember reading in his blog that he shoots most of his stuff at 25p (PAL). he doesn't have a lot of fast-paced footage, though. He also is big on Magic Bullet Looks. Anyone know anything else about his methods/settings/work flow?

http://web.mac.com/philip.bloom/Bloo...2_29F3881EDCB6

Philip's entry is about half way in the comments.
As an ex-Limey I can tell you one reason is the soft diffused (read cold and grey) English light. Secondly he avoids color - a lot of Phil's stuff is almost monochrome, and he generally has his camera locked down - no pans or zooms. I believe he told me he shoots 24p not 50 PAL. And yes he is heavy on the Bullet and I've asked his settings but he didn't (wouldn't?) tell me.
Mike Stevens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 08:08 PM   #73
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Decatur, GA
Posts: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Stevens View Post
I believe he told me he shoots 24p not 50 PAL. And yes he is heavy on the Bullet and I've asked his settings but he didn't (wouldn't?) tell me.
Bloom shoots 30p, and I am quite sure he has his picture profile listed in his blog. i know because i copied it onto my EX1.

You gotta love that Google...
http://web.mac.com/philip.bloom/Bloo...ngs_i_use.html
__________________
Sony EX1 v1.11, crap loads of SxS, Macs w/ Final Cut Studio
Andrew Hollister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 09:09 PM   #74
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Coronado Island
Posts: 1,452
Phil Bloom does (at least a while ago) use the Cine 1 profile detailed by Bill Ravins in the profile thread of this forum. He also nearly always uses the Letus adapter with 35mm lenses. He is virtually shooting in 35mm. I think this is a big factor in the "look" of his films, as well as the use of Magic Bullet Looks in post.
Robert Young is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 10:25 PM   #75
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Studio Alnitak, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 640
Images: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Hollister View Post
Bloom shoots 30p, and I am quite sure he has his picture profile listed in his blog. i know because i copied it onto my EX1.

You gotta love that Google...
http://web.mac.com/philip.bloom/Bloo...ngs_i_use.html
Phil Bloom: "I generally shoot 25p"
Serena Steuart 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 XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:25 AM.


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