Film Like Look
 

Since the HD10U cannot record in 24P what is the best settings to get that film like look. Thanks

Turn down the detail on the camera if you can. Then use a program such as DVfilmmaker to deinterlace the footage (or if you use FCP Nattress does a very good deinterlacer) Vegas is also okay.

For the rest, if you want a high end look, then good composition, lighting, editing, and VERY importantly, sound recording and final mix is the order of the day.

for PAL version owners 25p.

There is no PAL version of the HD10. The PD1 is similar to the HD1 (and it's PAL) but does not record HDV.

Deinterlacing should not be necessary because the HD10 also shoots 720/30p. So I recommend using the 720/30p mode of the HD10.

Marco

Thanks for that information. I just had idea that there is a PAL version and just planned to dig up more information about given camera. You made my life easier it's now out of my focus :)

You know, I doubt you'd even be able to find a PD1 from a reputable dealer. I certainly couldn't. Besides the usual film look methods, a 35mm adapter seems to add a lot of film-like qualities to the HD1/HD10U/PD1 cameras from what I've seen. Obviously, this would be something you'd expect from a 35mm adapter, but the results, if done right, really make a day and night difference with these cameras in particular.

Would adjusting the F-Stop help with a film look?
 

Besides setting the camera at 30P / 720, I notice that it can go down to 1.8 F what kind of an effect would that offer? Would that blur out the background? Would adjusting the color setting on the camera help? Someone posted that adjusting the gama settings (Not sure if this camera allows that) I did a search in the owners manual and nothing came up. Thank you all for you replies ...As you can tell that I am a novice but I learn quickly and appreciate your comments.

It will give You shallower depth of field. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field

I'm all for chipping in with hint/help, but when you know zero about the cam in question I would not suggest stock answers or any responce at all. First of all there is no detail setting, and the cam is progressive so de-interlacing is not required.
That said, 30p at 720p gives a very nice film look. 24p is not required. Lighting, lighting, lighting. Minimal camera motion. Slow pans. When you want slo-mo use the 480p60 mode. The cam is very filmic do to it being native progressive. I would suggest a tool like HDVrack and a good lighting kit including a soft box, as well as a full set of ND filters or dual polarizers which is a necessity with this cam. (search varialbe ND filter on this forum for more info) In fact go through the amazing amount of threads available here for a further understanding of the cam.
Bottom line is if you want a pro-look you must learn the cam. I mean really learn it. It isn't a easy tool, and I am constantly amazed at the number of people who will plan out a shoot, but not have a clue on how to run the cam. The best way to achieve a pro-look is shooting properly.

Sheesh :-(

Thanks for the info!
 

Thanks Ken, I do plan on shooting short films (2-8 mins.) for our church so this is great information. You mentioned using 480P at 60 FPS for slow motion. Does that mean playing in back in slow motion. Just curious on why would someone one to film in that mode ... for fast moving scenes like football games or a golf swing? On another subject ... What is the normal F-stop do you set to for film? This camera goes to 1.8. Thanks and I am trying to learn more about this camera

Your project will ultimately have a distrobution format, NTSC DVD? The 480p60 mode is obviously 60fps or double the output speed. So 60p played at 30p will be an automatic 50% slo-mo. But if you have good post software, the 60p will allow almost any slow down speed to be created. That said with good software 30p footage can be manipulated quite well at the expense of render time and trial and error.

"What is the normal F-stop do you set to for film?"

I don't really understand your question. For film?
Ideally you will want a F-stop of F4 or F5.6. Shooting too low of a light level will induce chroma noise and reduce sharpness in your image. I would not recommend striving for shallow depth of field through artificial means. Do it by lighting or camera position or set design, or watch any Orson Wells movie and realize that it is often not needed at all. Or invest in a 35mm adaptor if shallow depth of field is your thing. I would suggest learning to work within the natural boundaries of the cam and learning how to achieve rock solid results within those boundaries.

Something I forgot to mention with this cam is that top priority should be choosing a shutter speed to work with. The common choice's are 1/60th or 1/30th. 1/60th relates to the more common look we see, and 1/30th give's a more distinctive film blurr look (slightly exagerated). 720p30 essentially defaults to 1/30th, and 48060p defaults to 1/60th, given filtering in extreem lighting or else the shutter will climb if not shutter locked. Options are to minimize movement at 720p30 1/30th. Film with a Eisenstein minimalisim, and the motion blur will not be exagerated and low light performance wil be maintained. Option two. Shoot at 720p30 1/60th shutter lock. Downside is you can not lock exposure and a lower low light performance. Perfect for locked down shots when lighting doesn't change (no large movment, hence no lighting change) so the exposure does not pump in auto. Option three. Shoot 480p60 mode. A highly under estimated mode that delivers true wide screen SD (364,000 vs. 454,000 pixels) non anamorphic resolution. It upscales extreemly well to 720p, being true 16:9/progressive. If it is a high motion shot where shallow depth of field is not desired, the lack of resolution plays out perfectly. The cam is highly underestimated and often un-respected due to its first HDV cam status, but if the shots are planned, and executed with proper settings of the cam, amazing results can be achieved. Personally I would rather have two HD-10's for a complicated shoot, then one HD100. This comming from a filmakers (short) prspective. Although I drool daily after HD100's ;>) : Three will do :>)

PS- one last option that is best for heavy software compositing filmakers is, shoot at AE auto mode, sports setting. This setting locks the shutter at 1/250th/sec+. This essentially locks into a 1/250th shutter unless you have an extreem lighting source. This is easily minimized with variable polo's or ND filters. This mode give's an incredably crisp progressive frame, hence very good compositing ability (convert to uncompressed 16bit in AE and colour correct to you wildest dreams). The kicker is that in this mode (1/250th+/sec), the exposure is free to lock at whatever setting the operator chooses. Or simply put, full manual control is available. Only down side is you need "film" like lighting to work the fast 1/250th+ shutter. Chroma-key works very well this way given proper lighting (duh), and post blurr through proper software, looks very natual. Tweak to your liking. One last point. To repeat myself, get HDVrack and a softbox, and dual (variable polo's) or a true ND filter kit.
Good luck.

Wow
 

Here is a guy that really knows the HD10... Well done Ken...

Awesome
 

Thanks Ken for taking the time to post all that information. You do know your stuff! I will be trying these different settings out in the next few weeks. Thomas

1st - nice job Ken

2nd - if you're doing short films for your Church, unless they're spending $60,000 (what many professional short films cost) on each 2-8min project, don't worry too much about getting that "film" look

3rd - 24p is over rated (I know a bunch of people want to yell at me for now), why? b/c film is all but extinct. Once 95% of movie theaters convert to digital projectors no one will care about 24 fps, except the museums.

4th - the "film" look is pretty much a low depth of field (DOF). go to the library & get any book written in the last 50yrs. the physics of optics didn't change when video came out

the short version, to get a narrow DOF, you need a longer lens & wider aperture. ie zoomed in as far as you can go & you "f stop " the lowest number you can get.

although, if you're zoomed in all the way & want a wide shot, you're going to have to stand very far away & get some walky-talkies to talk to your actors.

if you don't have a set of ND filters, then you can turn on your shutter to decrease the light coming into the camera, so you can open up the iris & still get proper exposure

5th - VERY IMPORTANT, unless you have a really good eye & a good external color monitor, don't turn your shutter on under fluorescent lights. Fluorescent bulbs have a slight flicker that will cause the color temp of your picture to change back & forth & back & forth IF you have your shutter running. (you can see a similar physical effect by pointing your camera at a computer screen w/ the shutter on)

the best thing to do is to keep the shutter as slow (1/30 1/60) as possible under fluorescent lights


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

all in all though, as long as you white balance, focus & expose correctly, you will have a very nice product that the people in your church will probably think looks great

No it isnt. Try getting shallow depth of field with 8mm film.

Again, wrong. Depth of field is purely to do with imaging area (CCD or film size), combined with F-stop. Having a long lens has nothing to do with it. All a long lens does is enhance an effect that is already there, may not be as apparent due to resolution.

Are you joking?

Recommedations then ...
 

Simon, you posted "Turn down the detail on the camera if you can.... "

How do I turn down the detail on this camera?

From what others have said, you can't. I was referring to filmlook in general.

First backyard 1min test Look Like Film?
 

feedback would be nice! ANY

You must have a pretty huge back yard to fly that helicopter in!

Yeah, that looked pretty filmic to me. 35mm adapter?

yes flip enhanced thx for the feedback first test run with the HDR-FX1
no heli though!

You guys are speaking Greek to me
 

Steven, are you using the JY-HD10U or HDR-FX1? If you are using the HDR-FX1 does it have the same options? ie ... 30P ... 720? If it does, what settings did you use and just using the 35 MM adapter give that look? Where can I pick the 35MM up for the JY-HD10U for a good deal. Thanks

Thomas, you really need to start taking advantage of the amount of answers already available to you in this forum. Search this forum for key words that intrest you, or even scroll down the thread list for a page or two. 35mm adaptors have been one of the more popular threads here as of late.

Again I would like to state that shallow DOF does not equal "film-look", lighting does. If anyone disagrees, go watch Citizen Kane, which is the choice of most critics as the greatest film of all time. There is so much more to be gained by learning to use the tool you have to the maximum of its ability. The HD10 is capable of great imagery, but push it out of its sweet-spot and you will have crap.
Artistic styles can be achieved in post, which is equal to or greater in skill then shooting. What is the post workflow? What is the compositing software? What plug-ins? What codecs are used from capture through editing to compositing to render to output to DVD?

A little of this and that!
 

I am using a HDR-FX1 Import with Raylight and my best settings for 35mm Film transfer is ,1080i or 60i using DVFilm that converts 60i to 24p then I edit using Fusion5 or V7 The render that you see is my first 5 min shoot and render with these settings I did stay away from the Cine24 wich is not a true 24p just emulates..
I did use a CC in post V7 and will share settings if asked the adapter runs around $700 that I have from Quyen Le maker of the adapter but it is really just for the D.O.F I am using very cheap lens canon 1:2 50mm on that shot paid $35 for ,Nikon is what I want but Have no Budget for them...
Im not yet sure if I think it looks like Film yet Do You? any feedback would be great Trying to get my Ducks in a row before I shoot this Film Called NUMB!

The only thing video can do to get a film look is with regards to temporal motion. And even then it is a 'current' filmlook. If film was running at 60fps then proscan video at 60fps would also be a good match.

Lighting has nothing at all to do with filmlook. Does 8mm home cine footage look any less like film because it isn't lit with HMI's and shot with a camera off a jib or dolly etc?

Film look is progressive scan at ANY framerate without artificial digital edge enhancement. Anything above and beyond that is just high production value.

DOF has alot to do with my Film Look
 

DOF is the unreal look of a Film of course Lighting can play a factor as well ,but when you do not offer DOF it just looks like Video footage to me unless capturing a wide shot it can be usefull there! Film Look= DOF +24p motion + layered lighting + nearly 2k res can give you that =35mm Film Look
And if you are shooting with 720x480 will work fine for TV not theatrical on big screen not enough video lines unless you pay like $250 per min Transfer!!
So what I am saying DOF is a very important factor to get the High Dollar Look! Go rent any High Budget Film and you will see how much DOF is in it!

I guess we should clarify "film-look". To me it isn't making it look like actuall film (should we be adding grain and dust marks and scratches?) but the emulation of a high quality film production look, and all that intails. I think everyone would agree that is what is strived for in these regards. And I'll state it again, that means lighting, lighting, lighting. Yes progressive and wide screen are a given, and being what forum we are in not worth mentioning

And without proper lighting it will look like high contrast video junk shot by a noob.

Lighting is important You cant just shoot in the Dark!
 

Here it is! I am trying to achive the FILM LOOK as in the DOF that I see in EVERY Film I've Watched! Lighting plays a very important part in creating certiain looks.. But when I film outside I use only bounce cards no Lights durring the day ! I will shoot a test inside this week showing film lighting only then with DOF we can all check it out in still images..
Nice Chatn guys goto get back to Fusion5 I keep finding new software..lol
I've only been Filming for 4 months tests only so I can achive a Film Look before I schedule shoots!
Cya next week!

I'm not so sure about this. You can have a look at a lot of 'making of' and you'll notice how different the same shot can look super-videoish even with great lighting, only because most making of's are shot with 60i ENG cameras and no, or little, post.

It's the eternal Movie Look (production) vs Film Look (medium) debate that seems to go off every other semester or so.

Personally I think the 'shot with film' look is part of the Movie Look and more important than production values.

Motion cadence and DoF must be the most important things to 'disguise' when shooting with video, because they're also the most obvious video attributes. Buf if you use film you won't be really thinking too much about trying to fake the look you already have...

As to the Citizen Kane argument, that's the exception and not the rule. Most movies use shallow DoF because it 'comes' with film. And we're not talking about your average 'pay as you go' Hollywood director here, *edit I meant Orson Wells of course, but was thinking of Kubrick's Barry Lyndon as well* was an artist down to his soul. So deep DoF may not be for just anyone, even with film. Not just regarding the look but composition, framing, movement, acting, etc.

As I stated almost an year ago, shooting a film with Clint Eastwood using a $300 60i camera and no post will look crap, no matter how good the lighting, actors, etc. you get. Not that you don't need those (they're both crucial for a good movie) but first things first.

"making-of'" have great lighting? Not. They have adequate lighting to do the job, and in most cases use available lighting and adjust the cam for best performance. Nothing compared to what the "filming" camera on set has.

Hey Ken, I was mentioning when the making of is shooting the same scene as the film camera. Of course the angle is slightly different but still the difference is/can be huge.

One that springs to mind is 'The Grudge' where they show both scenes, final film scene and right after the making of shooting the same (with same lighting).

Obviously it looks completely different. I'll try to get a couple of pics and post them here but I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. I think they'd give quite interesting analisys (although a bit unfair the the making of didn't seem to have any post).

Don't get me wrong, I think lighting is vital. I'm just focusing on the 'getting rid of video look' thing.

The point is that the scene was lit for the film cam specifically, not the video camera. The lighting was not crafted for the 60i ENG cam, and the cam probably not configured much beyond making sure it had a clear picture. But I fear we have gotten away from the point which is, poorly lit video looks like crap, especially with the HD10 who's demand on quality lighting is its biggest demand. If you want a quality production with the HD10 it is lighting ,not shallow DOF.