More night footage in NYC

[Paul Kendal]

Hey Spencer....your sample footage looks awsome!
I have a feeling that the Sony V1 is going to have a hard time doing any better than that.
What cameras do you currently shoot your weddings with?
How does the new Canon compare to your current cams in the low light?
Thanks for the info....I am still waiting for the V1 to come out before I make a decision on which way to go.
Thanks for posting your clips and thanks for the info.

[Spencer Lum]

Can't say I've noticed any interlace artifacts, and I've been shooting on a DVX for the better part of the past two years. I'm also pretty familiar with how the interlacing looks. I did look over the full resolution files briefly, and I didn't see anything, though there was some blocking of the person wearing red on the scooter as the camera whips away from him. Otherwise the footage looked clean.

Thanks Paul. I shoot weddings with DVX-100B's currently. The A1 was about comparable - maybe just a small bit off the DVX in terms of lowlight sensitivity. However, because the image was cleaner, when I took two still shots into Photoshop, I was able to push the A1 image with curves much further without degrading, so that, combined with cleaner gain should amount to a better camera when it's dim. I'll know tomorrow, since two people from my team will be shooting a wedding then.

[Jason Michael Holly]

Spencer,

Amazing work!

What is the name of the song in the background?

[Chris Suzor]

Originally Posted by Chris Suzor

This 24F video shows the limitations of canon's approach, there are interlace artefacts on many fast moving objects.

What I mean with "interlace artefacts", as I see this video in QT, is that it is not as clean as 1/48s should be in progressive mode on moving objects. 1/48 in 24F appears to be 2 interlaced images "de-interlaced" by the camera. Many moving objects have a ghost, and a crisp edge at the ghost and the final object, which is what happens with deinterlaced video. Shooting in true progressive at 1/48 gives a cleaner image on moving objects than this 24F example. I suspect reducing this exposure to 1/125 (or even less) will not help because there are 2 different interlaced exposures which are merged, whereas in 24P 1/125 is dramatic, each image is crisp and frozen in time. Unless I am wrong about 24F? That is my question here, for those with more experience.

Other than that, it seems grain (oops, I mean noise!) is better controlled here than dvx, and sharpness is higher (dvx notoriously does not apply much sharpening on the video, and canon does, but even after sharpening the dvx lens is not up to the task). Not sure about color saturation or low light, I'll have to take your word for it.

Christophe

[Dave Lammey]

Originally Posted by Spencer Lum

Can't say I've noticed any interlace artifacts, and I've been shooting on a DVX for the better part of the past two years. I'm also pretty familiar with how the interlacing looks. I did look over the full resolution files briefly, and I didn't see anything, though there was some blocking of the person wearing red on the scooter as the camera whips away from him. Otherwise the footage looked clean.

Thanks Paul. I shoot weddings with DVX-100B's currently. The A1 was about comparable - maybe just a small bit off the DVX in terms of lowlight sensitivity. However, because the image was cleaner, when I took two still shots into Photoshop, I was able to push the A1 image with curves much further without degrading, so that, combined with cleaner gain should amount to a better camera when it's dim. I'll know tomorrow, since two people from my team will be shooting a wedding then.

Spencer: Hate to dredge up an old post, but how did the wedding shoot go?

[Spencer Lum]

I'll let you know as soon as I find out! My Mac died right after, so I haven't had a chance to work with the footage yet. It's just killing me!

[Harm Millaard]

Originally Posted by Spencer Lum

I'll let you know as soon as I find out! My Mac died right after, so I haven't had a chance to work with the footage yet. It's just killing me!

Better be carefull. We don't want two burials in one week.

[Rob Katz]

i'm getting to this dance late so i apologize in advance if this has already been a recent topic for discussion.

thoughts on how u use your hvx200 vs the a1?

strengths of each?

where each lacks?

any and all thoughts from any and all who care to share would be appreciated.

as u have already been told, thanks for the lovely footage.

be well

rob

[Bill Pryor]

This probably belongs in a different thread, but I'll give you my feelings about the HVX. I really like the camera and spend a lot of time working to figure out how I could make the P2 thing work for me. The main thing I like about the camera is variable frame rate--you can do slomo up to 60fps. That's very nice. The camera is also nice and solid and has a good feel, good lens, etc. However, forgetting the cost of P2, the data handling necessary is way too time consuming for me. Even using a hard drive instead of the cards (which would be necessary due to the small capacities of the cards) requires dumping the files to a computer on location if you are shooting long interviews, and then I'd have to load those files into the editing system and burn individual DVDs or DLT tapes. I don't always shoot and then edit immediately--I have to have permanant storage of my footage. So I decided against the camera and bought the XH A1. Some people are making the P2 concept work and that's great, but for me I need to record on something I can take out of the camera and put in a box.

[Rob Katz]

Bill-

I thank you for sharing your thoughts and I appreciate your thinking.

The ideal of a tapeless workflow is not something I've been able to incorporate into how I currently make my films. As tapeless evolves, I'm sure we will all need to change our workflows. But for me that moment is not now. That is why I'm selling my HVX200 and investigating the prospect that the A1 might be the next tool in helping me solve my client's media concerns while offering me a opportunity to use my imagination.

Be well

Rob

[Steve Nunez]

My A1 has your name all over it Rob!

[Luc Meisel]

I though that was inspirational to say the least.

But it brings to mind a few questions.

Firstly if that was 24f then it was a lower res than the A1 ia capable of, because the way 24f is created.

I was thinking that the real way to use this cam would be to shoot in 60i,
then transfer to HD then apply Magic bullet or Dvfilm maker to get the 24p.

Then its de interelaced and progressive with a 1080 rez.

How does that sound? :)

Also does FCP import 24f yet?
Or did oyu use another program.
We are all on Macs here right :P

thanks

[Philip Williams]

Originally Posted by Luc Meisel

<snip>
I was thinking that the real way to use this cam would be to shoot in 60i,
then transfer to HD then apply Magic bullet or Dvfilm maker to get the 24p.

Then its de interelaced and progressive with a 1080 rez.

How does that sound? :)
<snip>

Well, opinions vary wildly on that, but it sounds terrible to me. The motion signature of 60i footage just never, NEVER looks like 24P shot at 1/48th (or even 1/24th) shutter. Plus you usually end up with a resolution hit on motion, there's that weird stuttery thing (going back to the shutter problem) and - unless they've improved it - Magic Bullet can sometimes cause some serious artifacting in fine detail/pattern areas.

24F on the XH/XL HDV cams looks very, very good. It has the correct motion of 24P and it saves a ton of time trying to render 60i-->24P. If that's the route someone would want to take, I'd say hit Ebay and look for a cheap used FX1.

Just my two cents...

[Bill Pryor]

I agree with that. The limited shooting I've done so far shows the 24F looks great. If there is a little resolution loss because of the way it's created, you don't notice it in real world conditions.

[Chris Suzor]

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

The limited shooting I've done so far shows the 24F looks great. If there is a little resolution loss because of the way it's created, you don't notice it in real world conditions.

Has anyone experimented with higher shutter speeds and 24F? Does the "F" algorithm still render "P"-like frames, ie. sharp? I am a photographer, so my viewpoint is skewed, and for fast action I always prefer higher shutter speeds, usually 1/125, which still leaves some blurry motion but which is much sharper than 1/48 (or 1/50 on this continent with 25P). At times, I even go to 1/250 with the DVX, it a different type of film but the eye (the brain) gets used to it and sees a sharper image for action (and you can always hit pause and see a sharp picture).

I want HD, this camera looks right for me, but I am concerned 24F will not be sharp like 24P at high shutter speeds (which would be true the if canon's "F" means in-camera de-interlacing). Can anyone please advise?

Thanks
Christophe