Advanced adjust in Pana cameras
 

Can anyone please tell me what you get when you go, on your menu, from CAMERA FUNCTIONS to ADVANCED FUNCTIONS to PICTURE ADJUSTMENT?

From the manuals I downloaded (DV953 and MX500) you should be able to adjust sharpness and colour levels, but it doesn't say how.

Do you get numbers on the screen or what? Can you repeat a setup or go back exactly to how you were before?

What I'm trying to find out is if you can improve on the shadow detail in some way. Perhaps a low contrast filter, who does not influence resolution? Maybe someone tried one that does flare or cause halation.

These 1/6" CCD cameras are reported as not being so good in low light conditions, but what happens with the shadows in daylight situations? What about cloudy days?

Does the GS100 improve on that area in any way? I couldn't find a comparison between the 953 and the GS100 yet anywhere? Did anyone did it?

What about these "advanced" menus on the GS100: do they provide further adjustments?

It's a pity these manuals spend 1/3 their size in still photo situations, when this is a video camera. Who needs all that explanation?

On the other side, there's very little (and also confusing) on how you should set your sound levels when using "manual" option. First of all, if you are doing a digital audio recording, you shouldn't use a VU meter as they do. A digital level meter is very different and less forgiving than an analog meter. If you go over the top it's total disaster.


Carlos E. Martinez

In which Pana video camera? Do you want me to find you the answers for the MX300? Or are you going with the PV-DV953/MX5 manual. Decide which camera, and then I'm sure someone will be able to help you.Read what I wrote in my PV-DV953 mini-review/test, and search the threads for numerous reports from other members.

As someone who has studied film (which you mentioned in another post), I must point out that the filming I see set up around town here almost always uses artificial lighting, whether the filming is done at night, on a sunny day, on a cloudy day, on a dork foggy day---and even in the pouring Vancouver rain. I would assume then that this would be the avenue for achieving good results with shooting miniDV also.

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : In which Pana video camera? Do you want me to find you the answers for the MX300? Or are you going with the PV-DV953/MX5 manual. Decide which camera, and then I'm sure someone will be able to help you.Read what I wrote in my PV-DV953 mini-review/test, and search the threads for numerous reports from other members.-->>>

The cameras I was referring to, mostly, were the dv953 and GS100. Things might be a bit better on PAL versions, but not too much on low light situations.

<<<-- As someone who has studied film (which you mentioned in another post), I must point out that the filming I see set up around town here almost always uses artificial lighting, whether the filming is done at night, on a sunny day, on a cloudy day, on a dork foggy day---and even in the pouring Vancouver rain. I would assume then that this would be the avenue for achieving good results with shooting miniDV also. -->>>

You raise a very interesting point, because it has many ramifications. If you intend to say that whatever the camera I use, even one like the DV953 which is considered as so-so in low light situations, in a video to film project I would have to light (or lower the contrast ratio) in some way, you are absolutely right.

The question is that if your project has a very low budget, your lighting options are probably less than limited.

You are perhaps not so right in assuming that all film situations are artificially lit, as enormous advances in film emulsions and fast lenses allow you using just a minimum. Also lights like HMI types let you just fill in the shadow areas a little with not much gear as it was in the past (enormous arcs and so on). Available light becomes an important factor then in low budget projects.

Film also has a much greater latitude between blacks and whites (about 12 stops vs 5 stops for video), which let you get away with many things that would look bad in video. On the other side film is very very expensive and cumbersome, particularly on documentary projects.

It's been some time since I realized that video, particularly when you use less sophisticated cameras (like we do) has a very "16mm like" behaviour, like 16mm was until about 20 years ago. If you handle video as you had to with 16mm back then, you can get very good results. To achieve better results you have to:

1) Control the contrast of your scenes, through lighting or other ways (filters, framing, scenography, wardrobe, etc.)

2) Control the blocking you do, as you shouldn't go too wide on your scenes. Lanscapes or city views tell tale video limitations when blown up.

3) Test the lenses you use, using a lens chart, on every position and with every light stop. As a reference use what you get when you stop at two diaphragms above the more open lens stop, which is usually the best.

4) Do as many tests as you can with your camera and ask your lab to blow them to film. The lens charts should also be viewed on a microscope. Look at the tests on a large film screen.

These were basic things you did back then with 16mm.

There's one trick that worked for high contrast situations, used first by DP Conrad Hall on "Cool hand Luke" and by many since then, which is blocking your daylight exterior scenes in backlight. You open up your stop and use a reflector (or light) to fill in the contrast. That is a cheap and very good looking way to handle daylight high contrasts, but you have to be careful with skies, which will easily bloom. Graduated NDs help a lot to control that.

This trick would keep us away from doing just "Brownie style" framing, as you had to do in the old days with box Kodak cameras, using direct sun light for your shots.

The question with cameras like the DV953/GS100 is how they read the shadow areas in daylight situations. That is a low-light circumstance that is very important when you blow up. That is you can't think of low light situations only on poorly lit places or at night, but also on apparently well lit ones.

Sorry for this very long text.



Carlos E. Martinez

Okay, what I can do for you is to print out your post and go play with the PV-DV953 later today, since no PV-DV953 or GS100 owners have yet to answer you. (Allan had mentioned a few times that the GS100 menu is very similar with the PV-DV953 menu.)

As you probably have read from some of Allan Rejoso's GS100 posts, he claims that both the lux requirements and video quality of the GS100 is a little bit better that that of the MX5000/PV-DV953. For lower light shooting, I would never consider either one of these cams, though. However, I believe that the LUX requirements of the MX5000/PV-DV953 is better than the PAL version (MX500).

I tested the PV-DV953 during a dark rainy Vancouver afternoon, and noticed the footage was razor sharp with rich color saturation. Indoors, in low light, the footage was still sharp but the colors disappeared (almost B&W). I've played with the PV-DV953 several times and assure you that it is a solid, ergonomically well-designed camera. I think that it is a much better cam than my MX300. With the GS100, I can only go with what members report, like Allan; and with Tom Hardwick's indepth reports. (Tom tests and reviews cams for a British camcorder magazine, and I must say he does a thorough job.)

Carlos,

The Manual adjustments on the MX500 is in the menu.

You cannot adjust them while shooting, both image and audio, which is quite a pain. For example, while in daylight, sharpness at normal is OK, but in hi gain (+12db) a little softer will reduce graininess. So when you walk from the pool in daylight to teh inside of the house, in 1 shot, you won't be able to adjust the sharpness. Similarly, the saturation.

For audio, you have auto, manual gain with AGC (Auto gain control) and manual gain without AGC. My experience is that the AGC works well for the built in mic. But, being on the menu, you cannot adjust while shooting, which is another pain. What I am thinking of doing is to use an external mic with a volume control, and set the gain on the camera to +2db (I don't mind a little over the top).

I hope this helps.

<<What about cloudy days? >>

On a cloudy day you are able to get good captures as there is a flat lighting effect from the clouds.

"Can anyone please tell me what you get when you go, on your menu, from CAMERA FUNCTIONS to ADVANCED FUNCTIONS to PICTURE ADJUSTMENT?" You get the controls for sharpness and color level. "From the manuals I downloaded (DV953 and MX500) you should be able to adjust sharpness and colour levels, but it doesn't say how." It's via a display setup. "Do you get numbers on the screen or what? Can you repeat a setup or go back exactly to how you were before?" You get numbers, I mean "marks" with "-" or "+" on the screen; you can repeat a setup as many times you want until the auto shut-off kicks in---but like with any miniDV cam (as far as I know), you can't adjust anything while shooting. "What I'm trying to find out is if you can improve on the shadow detail in some way. Perhaps a low contrast filter, who does not influence resolution? Maybe someone tried one that does flare or cause halation." How can you improve the shadow detail when you've white-balanced something not in the "shadow detail?" Unless you white balance for something in-between. I don't know about any filter that will sharpen something in the "shadow detail" without effecting the undork areas. "What about these "advanced" menus on the GS100: do they provide further adjustments?" Yes, zebra, mic sensitivity, color bars---besides picture adjustment. "On the other side, there's very little (and also confusing) on how you should set your sound levels when using "manual" option." Not confusing at all, but for best results use an XLR adaptor, a good mic, a mixer and headphones (for the MX3 and MX5/PV-DV953). Don't know about the GS100. Ask Allan. :-)

<<<-- Originally posted by Yow Cheong Hoe :

The Manual adjustments on the MX500 is in the menu. You cannot adjust them while shooting, both image and audio, which is quite a pain.-->>>

That is exactly the same on all major cameras, the legitmate pro ones, sometimes only having adjustment for audio, which you can't reach during shooting.

The only things you should have externally is zoom, focus and F stop, and that is well dealt with on most prosumer cameras. You should have a well marked and precise barrel for each, which allows a predictable and repeatable correction of any of them during shooting. That's what camera assistants work with in pro shooting, particularly fiction, where you repeat your takes over and over.

<<<-- For example, while in daylight, sharpness at normal is OK, but in hi gain (+12db) a little softer will reduce graininess. So when you walk from the pool in daylight to teh inside of the house, in 1 shot, you won't be able to adjust the sharpness. Similarly, the saturation. -->>>

That would really push it, even if you worked with the best camera around. A situation like you describe is one where probably film is better, but in any case you should have to light the inside. Sharpness is something you should not mess around. You set it only once, as well as saturation, for the whole movie.

This I am saying is mostly visible if you have a large screen or if you blow up to film. If you will see this stuff on a large screen (video or movie) you should never go past +3dB in gain. And on the outside keep your F low, around 4 or 5.6.

<<<-- For audio, you have auto, manual gain with AGC (Auto gain control) and manual gain without AGC. My experience is that the AGC works well for the built in mic. But, being on the menu, you cannot adjust while shooting, which is another pain. What I am thinking of doing is to use an external mic with a volume control, and set the gain on the camera to +2db (I don't mind a little over the top).-->>>

If you want quality audio you should set it to manual for good. You should never adjust audio DURING shooting, only before. This is a serious misunderstanding among non-professional filmmakers, as audio is not given as much importance as it deserves or taken for granted.

There are several rules that should be followed in audio for video, starting for the mic you will be using and the position it will be in. The camera mic is only good for ambience, never for critical quality. Dialogue or interviews should never picked with it, as it will be severely lacking.

You should also use an external level control for the mics, be it a passive one or active one. And uou should use quality headphones.

There's another thing which should be provided on cameras like the DV953/MX500 or similar, which use a 1/8" miniplug for audio input. You should implement a short cable adaptor, to XLR or RCA, and leave it on all the time. This is very important: never plug the adaptor out if possible. All socket springs, those inside the camera, wear off and diminish pressure on the plug you insert. In time they become noisy or develop contact failure.

There's a lot more that can be said on audio recording, but I don't know if this is the right thread.


Carlos E. Martinez

That's one reason for getting an XLR adaptor.

What is everyone talking about?

You buy a professional Panasonic PV-DV953 camcorder and study the manual and you can make movies. What is it and why do you need this XLR adaptor on a professional camcorder?

"Professional" mics need an XLR socket. The PV-DV953's mic plug is too small. So the XLR adaptor is used as a bridge. See here:

http://www.beachtek.com

And it's black too. :-)

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : That's one reason for getting an XLR adaptor. -->>>

You probably mean a box adaptor like the Beachtek, which is a very good option.

I mean something even simpler and cheaper, which is a short (30cm) stereo cable with a quality 1/8" stereo plug on one side and two XLR-3 female connectors on the other side.

That should cost about $20 and do the job for a proper connection. It should be velcroed somewhere though, so it doesn't move.


Carlos

<<<-- Originally posted by Fred Garhart : What is everyone talking about?

You buy a professional Panasonic PV-DV953 camcorder and study the manual and you can make movies. What is it and why do you need this XLR adaptor on a professional camcorder? -->>>

You insist on calling the DV953 a professional camcorder, which it certainly is not.

Not even the excellent DVX100 is a professional camera. The DV953 is probably two steps below the DVX100, which is at the same time below from say a Sony DSR-570.

A new category was created for cameras like the PD150, XL1 and DVX100, which is "prosumer". But they are not really professional, they have many limitations that allow them being used on specific situations. But they would never be accepted on any broadcast, for say a news program or laugh in program.

You can study a manual and make movies, but you will be far from being a professional.

A XLR adaptor is something you will need if you want to interface your DV953 with any professional microphone. High quality mikes will quite likely be a lot more expensive than the camera itself.

In addition to that you will need to control your audio, so you will also need an external unit, like a preamp or mixer. The AGC is worthless for quality audio.

Professional quality is described by standards, which are quite rigid. Practically all the automatic settings on the DV953 are worthless for a quality job.

What we can do with a DV953 or any of those prosumer cameras I mentioned is a job that resembles what you can get with real professional equipment, just enough so you can show it through a TV channel.


Carlos

I disagree with that by 100 percent. If it wasn't for people with small cams and shooting for the moment (auto mode), we wouldn't have even seen those 2 planes flying into The World Trade Center. And how many times and on how many TV stations around the globe was this footage played?

One of the reasons I did buy the DVC200 was the full auto mode. The JVC500 did not have this. I wanted to be able to open the bag and grab it if there was a major news item or another type of situation.

I do like what Frank has brought up, full auto has it’s place.

See!!! I told everyone so. A professional camcorder needs to be used in automatic for good filming for television and all you have to do is read the manual and start shooting professional stuff for TV and for yourself. What does film stuff have to do with professional digital camcorders? Why do you have to go to film school to film with a professional Panasonic PV-DV953? You don't!

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : I disagree with that by 100 percent. If it wasn't for people with small cams and shooting for the moment (auto mode), we wouldn't have even seen those 2 planes flying into The World Trade Center. And how many times and on how many TV stations around the globe was this footage played? -->>>

That is news, and the quality on such moments is not THE important thing. It's only chance that several people were carrying a camera or went to get theirs to catch that moment.

That stuff where those white LA cops beat the black man at night also went around the world and put the guys in jail, but the only reason it made it there was because it was news.

Automatic cameras can certainly be applied to that end, but that's very far from what you see everyday in 90% of the TV programs.

In any case it's certainly an option that you can pick from. Professional cameras do not carry any of that, do you wonder why?


Carlos

<<<-- Originally posted by Tom Neumann : One of the reasons I did buy the DVC200 was the full auto mode. The JVC500 did not have this. I wanted to be able to open the bag and grab it if there was a major news item or another type of situation.

I do like what Frank has brought up, full auto has it’s place. -->>>

It certainly does: for news. Nothing against it.

Carlos

However, "news" is professional TV broadcast, watched by millions worldwide. And what about all of those reality TV shows professionally broadcasting all those consumer clips? :-) Don't carry any of what?

<<<-- Originally posted by Fred Garhart : See!!! I told everyone so. A professional camcorder needs to be used in automatic for good filming for television and all you have to do is read the manual and start shooting professional stuff for TV and for yourself. What does film stuff have to do with professional digital camcorders? Why do you have to go to film school to film with a professional Panasonic PV-DV953? You don't! -->>>

The Panasonic PV-DV953 is not a professional camera. You may call it that but not even the manufacturer does.

And when someone mentions professional features on these cameras as a selling point, they are never the automatic ones. Always the manual ones.

No one is stopping you from reading the manual and shooting stuff for yourself. Now for TV is a very different matter. If you were lucky to catch a certain event they may buy it, but as an isolated thing. On such circumstances they may let go of some demands. But try to sell other stuff that does not fit their demands and see what happens.

You don't need to go to a film school to learn how to handle a DV953. But you need to go there to learn how to tell a story with a camera. Any camera. And that involves a LOT more that is described on any camera manual.

The only relationship between film and digital cameras, particularly prosumer cameras like the DV953, is that filmmakers are using mini-DV cameras to shoot some of their films. Be it for economical reasons or for expressive reasons.

The only person that raised the question of using specifically the DV953 was me. Nobody is using it for film projects. But I only insist on it because it's a practical package and sometimes you have to find out how far technology can stretch. Right now I'm trying to get some help to carry on the due tests.


Carlos

Our 15-year-old member, Alex, tells darn good stories with his miniDV cam, and he's never been there (film school).

"Nobody is using it for film projects." (PV-DV953)

I beg to differ. The Vancouver Film School has a dozen of them. Plus cams like the TRV900 and MX3000 have been used for film projects.

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : However, "news" is professional TV broadcast, watched by millions worldwide. And what about all of those reality TV shows professionally broadcasting all those consumer clips? :-)-->>>

News have different demands. The engineering department on every broadcast will oppose any stuff that does not adjust to their patterns. Only that material whose content is really relevant will be aired.

Call any broadcast channel in a major city and ask them how many videos they get from amateurs every week? How many make it?

When a video is selected it has to be processed and improved to get to the standards a transmission demands. This process takes time and it's expensive, and only will be carried on if it's an important matter.

Reality shows are shot with professional cameras, real ones. Some specific on-the-action stuff, like climbing, swimming or running, may require prosumer cameras. But the results are expected to look as they do: overexposed, so so resolution, noisy, etc.

If by consumer clips you mean that stuff people send to broacast, with funny situations (falls, unexpected reactions, etc.), you said it: it's consumer clips. They look awful but are funny.

<<<-- Don't carry any of what? -->>>

Professional cameras, the real ones, have hardly any automatic control. You can not let stop, shutter and focus to work on their own. For such you provide proper control, like focus, diaphragm and zoom rings, with precise markings. This is what better prosumer cameras bring.

In any case this discussion is getting tiresome.



Carlos

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Our 15-year-old member, Alex, tells darn good stories with his miniDV cam, and he's never been there (film school). -->>>

Good for him!

<<<-- "Nobody is using it for film projects." (PV-DV953)

I beg to differ. The Vancouver Film School has a dozen of them. Plus cams like the TRV900 and MX3000 have been used for film projects. -->>>

Those cameras specifically have larger CCDs. I've seen scenes from a film shot with a TRV900 and they looked quite good.


Carlos

But the PV-DV953 has both higher resolution and less noise than the TRV900 and MX3000. (When transfering to film, the old rule garbage in, garbage out still applies. ---John Jackman, DV.com Film look article.)

"Professional cameras, the real ones, have hardly any automatic control."Well, Tom just mentioned that his "professional" AG-DVC200 does have auto and that's one of the reasons why he bought it. Yes, and for broadcast too. ($$$)

The professional Panasonic PV-DV953 camcorder is a professional camcorder with automatic and manual controls. I read it in my manual Carlos. You don not have to use manual controls and you do not have to go to film school to film great professional video with a professional PV-DV953 camcorder. Just read and study the manual and you will soon see how to use the PV-DV953 in automatic and in manual and shoot great film. It is not difficult. You can do it Carlos! Go for it!

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : But the PV-DV953 has both higher resolution and less noise than the TRV900 and MX3000. -->>>

Higher resolution, yes, less noise, depends.

If you compare between +3 db on the MX300/350 and +3db on the MX500 (sorry, I don't use NTSC here), the noise is les on the MX500. But for the same exposure, the MX500 will be +6db when the MX300/350 is at +3db. And the noise of MX500 at +6db is more visible than the MX300/350 at +3db. Sorry, again, I have no hard data, only what I have observed in the shops, testing the MX350 and MX500 side by side.

Good for you, Fred, to be a professional and film maker. I will write to you soon to learn from you. I am just a miserable wannabe with my MX350, a 2 year older camera, and shooting miserable weddings to stupid clients who doesn't know what the good stuff is.

Yow, I think the PAL MX500 may be more different than the NTSC versions. Look at the MX300 and MX3000. The MX3000 has less CCD pixels (than the PAL MX300), and there were no "firmware" glitches ever reported with it (like with the PAL MX300). Perhaps the 2 NTSC versions of the MX500 are designed better somehow? (I'm wondering.) Anyways, I noticed the PV-DV953 to have excellent video quality, compared with my PAL MX300. Just a thought.

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : But the PV-DV953 has both higher resolution and less noise than the TRV900 and MX3000. (When transfering to film, the old rule garbage in, garbage out still applies. ---John Jackman, DV.com Film look article.)-->>>

Can't say too much about the MX3000 (what CCD size?), but technology certainly improved a bit since those times. Though my guess is if it's worst in low light (washing out colors, as most describe) then noise might be given a different treatment. Can't say much more until I see it myself.

<<<--[/i]Well, Tom just mentioned that his "professional" AG-DVC200 does have auto and that's one of the reasons why he bought it. Yes, and for broadcast too. ($$$) -->>>

There's an upper grade prosumer cameras, which cost in the $5,000/7,000 range, which are some of the very best. So they should share a few things with their poorer brothers, like auto settings.

Cameras like the Panasonic DVC200, JVC DV500 and Sony DSR250 belong in that group.

As an example of the problems with automatic control, let's consider two automatic settings, which are likely the oldest types: focus and exposure.

Focus works like a sort of "sonar", sensing what's in front of the camera and adjusting to it. What happens when there are several planes of focus? The sensor will adjust focus to the closer one, as you move the camera, on a pan or travelling, the control will re-focus all the time. Focus should be exactly where you want it to be, neither fore nor aft, and never move.

Exposure from the camera has one initial flaw which is common to all still cameras too: it measures reflected light. It's been a long time, probably around 40 years or so, since incident light measuring replaced reflected light measuring as meter lighting reference. This is both for film and video.

Even so, if you follow the same incident light rules and set your exposure by always measuring the same thing (a gray card or the back of your hand) with a reflected light meter, you can still get good results.

Video has another way to control things, through a waveform monitor, which is the way you control things on studios or really professional jobs. But you can rely on a good monitor (never a TV) to let you handle your contrasts, which is the main problem video has, and set your exposure.

In professional video and film you set your exposure level with an incident light meter first and then measure lighter and darker points with a spotmeter, which is a special reflected light meter type. Then you cut the light or brightness on the high points and improve detail on the darker ones. A good monitor will help you see exactly what you get.

All this requires a person taking decisions behind the camera, and they are never automatic.

We can talk even in more detail about these or all the other automatic settings so you can see my point of view. That doesn't mean you have to follow them.

Apparently there are few professional video people in this forum to share their experience on how things are set out there.

My comments are not to stop anyone from doing what they want, only help knowing what's expecting them. At the same time I firmly believe that rules can be broken and should, but do not expect the results will satisfy you. You only have to be humble enough about this and set your own limits.


Carlos

<<<-- Originally posted by Fred Garhart : The professional Panasonic PV-DV953 camcorder is a professional camcorder with automatic and manual controls. I read it in my manual Carlos. -->>>

The manual defines the DV953 as a Digital Video Camcorder. There's no definition of professional for it in the whole manual, or I missed it. Having manual and automatic controls are certainly an assett, but they do not convert the camera into a pro unit.

<<<-- You don not have to use manual controls and you do not have to go to film school to film great professional video with a professional PV-DV953 camcorder.-->>>

If you believe so please do it. But when you were a kid you went to school to learn to read, write and a lot of stuff on what this world is. The first you got was a pencil or a pen: the camera is only that. Of course you can self-teach yourself, but it will take longer. Even a book won't teach how to do it. The camera manual is far from being an even basic book on what film making involves.

<<<--Just read and study the manual and you will soon see how to use the PV-DV953 in automatic and in manual and shoot great film. It is not difficult. You can do it Carlos! Go for it! -->>>

We are getting nowhere with these mails. You do not seem to listen to what I am saying or I am not being clear enough to pass on to you the fallacy you are falling into. I am legitimately trying to help you see things in a constructive way. Believe me I do know how far you can go with the automatic possibilities. I tried them and saw the results. They suck when compared to manual control.

The question is that to control them you have to learn your basics. When I say film school that doesn't mean you have to UCLA or NYU. There are a lot of decent places around that will teach you the basics and how to build from them.


Carlos

OK time for me to chime in....

First in DV filming we DO NOT USE LIGHT METERS. That is for film. Please get this one straight as when you are on a set you may use the meter to get the right temperatures yet you do not use it for setting the scene. That’s why you use the zebras in the viewfinder.
If there is no such thing as pros using manual I hate to burst the biggest bubble of them all. When the embedded reporters who went into Iraq the cameramen used PD150s how you might say a few nope there where 1,000s used, as this was the camera of choice. This camera is a workhorse used in many a shoots as the handling is great and it is lightweight however there is a little trick that the guys use in the field and that is PD150s shot in manual good very good I might add.

However when your at a remote broadcast for any news station and I do mean any news station they use DVCPRO from Panasonic.

The following DVCPRO cameras have some form of another to shoot on the fly either in presets, auto iris,
AJ-HDC20A, AJ-HDC27A, AJ-SDX900, AJ-SDC915, AJ-D610WBPS1, AJ-D410A

So if there is no manual settings and there is no manual iris then why does Panasonic have a “Preset” (PRST) for the AWB for the cameraman, could it be that maybe just maybe there might be a shot they have to get when there is no time to do a White Balance.

From the manual:

When there is no Time to Adjust the White Balance
Set the WHITE BAL switch to PRST.
The white balance for the filter is automatically adjusted according to the setting position of the
FILTER knob (outside).
White balance memories

From the manual:

WHITE BAL (white balance memory selector) switch
PRST: Set to this position when there is no time to adjust the white balance. The white balance
value for 3200K is stored in the memory.

From the manual:

Select the filter in accordance with the lighting conditions, and when the white balance
has already been stored in the memory, set the WHITE BAL switch to “A” or “B”.
When the white balance and black balance have not been stored in the memory and there is no time to adjust the white balance:
Set the WHITE BAL switch to PRST and the FILTER knob to “1”.
A 3200K white balance is now achieved.

<<<-- Originally posted by Tom Neumann : OK time for me to chime in.... -->>>

Welcome!

<<<-- First in DV filming we DO NOT USE LIGHT METERS. That is for film. Please get this one straight as when you are on a set you may use the meter to get the right temperatures yet you do not use it for setting the scene. That’s why you use the zebras in the viewfinder. -->>>

Who says you don't use light meters? Things can go much faster and much more controlled if you do. Have a look here on what ASA setting you should use when shooting with a DVX100:

http://www.dvxuser.com/cgi-bin/DVX/YaBB.cgi?board=news;action=display;num=1068605987

Color temperature meters are not that essential in video work, as you can use your white balance control to correct most of your problems. The good thing is that you can handle lamp filters and see what you get on your monitor (if well adjusted) right away.

Zebras are a bit limited in application if you don't have a way to control overbright areas on camera, be it internally or externally.

<<<-- If there is no such thing as pros using manual I hate to burst the biggest bubble of them all. When the embedded reporters who went into Iraq the cameramen used PD150s how you might say a few nope there where 1,000s used, as this was the camera of choice. This camera is a workhorse used in many a shoots as the handling is great and it is lightweight however there is a little trick that the guys use in the field and that is PD150s shot in manual good very good I might add.-->>>

I did not quite understand the text above, but apparently it says that pros had to read the manual and that the PD150 shot in manual got very good results.

If that's so I do agree with you. If you want to know your tool you should at least read the manual. And the PD150 works quite well when used in manual.

<<<--However when your at a remote broadcast for any news station and I do mean any news station they use DVCPRO from Panasonic.-->>>

They probably applied what they learnt there with the DVX100, DVC80 and new DVC30. Sony maybe losing the train with the just released PD170 against the DVC80, not to speak the DVX100A.

<<<--The following DVCPRO cameras have some form of another to shoot on the fly either in presets, auto iris,
AJ-HDC20A, AJ-HDC27A, AJ-SDX900, AJ-SDC915, AJ-D610WBPS1, AJ-D410A-->>>

Having presets is very good. In fact when you set things to manual you pick a preset value and stay with it. The problem is to let "auto" go all around the place. Auto iris can be very good as a starting point, then you set to manual and pick the stop. In certain circumstances, if you are careful not to pick the sky or very light objects, you can let the autoiris make a small adjust. If you control your contrast well, this would be like stopping by hand on the fly.

<<<--So if there is no manual settings and there is no manual iris then why does Panasonic have a “Preset” (PRST) for the AWB for the cameraman, could it be that maybe just maybe there might be a shot they have to get when there is no time to do a White Balance.-->>>

Color correction (WB) is probably the sole thing that, within certain parameters, can be corrected a little during editing. For that you should still use gross WB presets, like sun or interior presets at least. But when in video you have little detail in high areas (for overexposure) or dark areas (for underexposure), most probably you lost them forever. Same thing when the focus is wrong or the shutter at the wrong setting.



Carlos

Lions and tigers and bears Oh my!

Meaning.....

I shot with guy from MTV who foes lighting for the pros, on sets where we are doing indie movies he has yet to use a meter. Film looks great shot looks great "Meter, meter we don't need a stinking meter" (Hey I thought that was pretty cool don't you)

Da embeds used da PD150 as it was good all around camera and here is the punch line they used it sometimes in the auto setting.

So do you agree or not agree that there are cameras with auto setting and presets that the Pros use…and yes I can handle the truth.

<<<-- Originally posted by Tom Neumann : So do you agree or not agree that there are cameras with auto setting and presets that the Pros use…and yes I can handle the truth. -->>>

Presets are one thing. Auto settings a different one.

Presetting gain, shutter and WB is the usual thing. You set them and forget about them for some time.

Auto settings for iris, focus or audio (AGC) are a different matter. In order to use them you have to know quite well how they work and where they can serve you and be invisible.

Auto iris: frame an scene and let the iris pick a stop. Then you look at it on the viewfinder and/or monitor and see what needs some correction. Then you go to "manual", make the necessary adjustment and leave it there. The iris shouldn't move during your take. In fact you should use the same F stop during all that sequence, if it happens in the same place. Then you will have background continuity.

Auto focus: go to maximum zoom length and select where you want the focus to be in. Press auto-focus. Then pass to manual or lock it. Auto focus should be locked out during each take. After the take is over you can auto-focus for next take and so on.

Audio AGC: this you should never use for quality audio. You may use if you are picking ambience, but in such case it's much better to pick a level manually, with peaks 2/3 towards the right, and do not change it during the whole sequence. If you let AGC free you may have a "pumping" effect when loud noises come and go.

As you see what I advocate is not let any automatic free during your takes. You can still use the camera virtues, not letting them ruin your shot.

Does this combination suit your terms?


Carlos

<<<-- Originally posted by Tom Neumann :
I shot with guy from MTV who foes lighting for the pros, on sets where we are doing indie movies he has yet to use a meter. Film looks great shot looks great "Meter, meter we don't need a stinking meter" (Hey I thought that was pretty cool don\'t you
-->>>

Real pros get so used to lighting that only pick ther meter just before rolling. Most gaffers are also so experienced that already tune in to what the cinematographer is looking for that practically put the spot on the right place for the right light amount. In fact some gaffers do the metering themselves for the gross lighting, leaving the final tuning to the DP.

That most video DPs do not use a meter does not mean it\'s useless, mostly that they never learnt how to use it. If you use a good monitor and waveform to set your stop, a meter may only cut your tuning time.

<<<-- Da embeds used da PD150 as it was good all around camera and here is the punch line they used it sometimes in the auto setting.-->>>

For news gathering you may switch between auto and manual settings, but you should know what you are doing quite well. As a rule following the ideas on my other mail.


Carlos

Presets are almost the same as auto in that you set the camera up once and then flick from setting to setting as I have on my camera. I am able to set the scene and go back to it without having to recalibrate the whole mess.

What you are failing to miss here is that you are a cameraman you’re in a fire zone or a Hot LZ you don’t have time to AWB or set the ins and outs of a camera. So prior to getting there you set your presets on the way there it’s dark and you have to make a switch yet your camera was not set for this setting let’s just say for the fun of it you want this shot what do you do. Open your iris full throwing the whole thing in full auto mode.

They don’t send cameramen out in a hot LZ with a HD camera or even DVCPRO until it’s calm down so they use PD150 etc as these are throw away cameras. Meaning if it’s your life or the camera what do you do. Also the budgets of field offices are less now so they use the best for less. And yes so we can go enjoy our nice Thanksgiving Tofu Bird, they do use auto sometimes and yes even I will admit, well kinds of admit there was that one time or maybe twice OK so I used it more than once are you happy do you see what you made me do I confess the auto button was there I saw it and well the shoot looked good so I wet for it. I mean wouldn’t you?



Tongue and cheek please…..

The funny thing is the embeds did have to go to combat training camps. It helped save their lives and it showed the ones who could not stand up to the mustard when they started dropping like flies.

<<<-- Originally posted by Tom Neumann : The funny thing is the embeds did have to go to combat training camps. It helped save their lives and it showed the ones who could not stand up to the mustard when they started dropping like flies. -->>>

What\'s an embed?

Why did they drop like flies? Scared?

To close the matter, if I were in a combat situation, I would use the camera in the full-automatic position.

Carlos

Embed was the newsmen with the troops. This also included the cameramen as well. They did use the VidPhone to connect to the world however they still needed a cameraman.

Here is a cool trick try this sometime….

Go full auto then do an AWB on a Grey card or even a Coral or Peach then take some footage and call me in the morning tell me what ya got….

Carlos wrote:Light meters are almost never used with shooting DV. My "professional" videographer friends would laugh from here to kingdom come if they heard that one. Trust me. And professionals do use artificial lighting unless there is "enough" light and they are stuck in a position were lighting is impossible to set up. That\'s why I\'d rather have a MX5000 today, than spend a year\'s salary on something that\'ll be obsolete tomorrow. See Pokey of Hollywood North star in ad: http://www.dvfreak.com/mx5000ad.jpg

As to light meters I have to bring in a hired gun his name is John Jackman if you know him well you can call him Rev. well on page 21-23 of his book “Lighting of Digital Video & Television” I am quoting from his book now:

“A light meter and the knowledge of how to use it can be quite useful, but a meter is not a necessity for video work because the camera itself is a sophisticated light meter; the video signal is a precise conversion of the level of light”

Now I believe he has a couple of books under his belt well not literally all the same he wrote them and well I have to side with the Rev on this one and Frank does have a point on this one. Seriously I have not used a meter at all with a DVC200 or DSR500 matter of fact when we did have a lighting guy on a shoot he used his meter for all the takes when we went to the NLE we saw it was to hot. The meter did not have it.