DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/)
-   -   EX1 on a big screen (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/138185-ex1-big-screen.html)

Alex Raskin December 10th, 2008 08:53 PM

I would not be surprised to learn that a number of indie features were shot with EX1 already.

For sure, EX1 was used at least as B camera on many productions.

Craig Seeman December 10th, 2008 08:57 PM

Here's some stuff. Not primarily features but it's in there. "S.N.U.B" Angry Badger Pictures. Behind the scenes stuff for James Bond "Quantum of Solace" so that'll be on DVD I suspect.
http://www.sony.co.uk/res/attachment...7064695918.pdf

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erik Phairas (Post 976039)
Hey serious question... When are we going to see our first feature length movie shot with an EX cam? Just so I can brag that I own the same camera would be awesome.

"Yea, that horror movie we just watched, shot on the same camera I own."


Alex Raskin December 10th, 2008 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck Spaulding (Post 969904)
I purchased the WD HD TV from Best Buys yesterday for $129. ... it would not fast forward or rewind.

You mean you got a WD Media Player, correct?

I don't have that model, but I did purchase Popcorn Hour A-110, and it is just gorgeous :)))

Awesome picture and sound, and yes you can seek forward or back on any video file. I used files off of the external USB drives of different types (although not flash media yet), and streamed over network as well.

Erik Phairas December 10th, 2008 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig Seeman (Post 976065)
Here's some stuff. Not primarily features but it's in there. "S.N.U.B" Angry Badger Pictures. Behind the scenes stuff for James Bond "Quantum of Solace" so that'll be on DVD I suspect.
http://www.sony.co.uk/res/attachment...7064695918.pdf


Ha that is great! I hope it's just a matter of time before some high profile movie takes a chance and uses it as a primary camera. I wonder is Panasonic/Canon and the others are kicking themselves for all the attention the EX cams are getting?

Craig Seeman December 10th, 2008 10:07 PM

Docs yes, TV shows maybe but certainly a B camera. "High Profile" Features you're not likely to see less than a Sony F23. RED would be lower budget.

David Lynch's Inland Empire was shot on a Sony PD-150 so it's possible a maverick like him might find the EX convenient and good.

Features are likely going to want the Depth of Field of large chip and lightly or uncompressed codec for compositing and possible very heavy color correction.

Certainly a good "dogma 95" film can be done on an EX and some films of that genre have been big hits. "The Celebration" won at the Cannes Film Festival.

Here's another low budget feature shot on EX1 mentioned on DVInfo sponsor Abelcine
Abel Cine Tech - Shooting an Independent Feature with the Sony EX1

Erik Phairas December 10th, 2008 10:32 PM

Of course you're right but it's nice to dream. I imagine if they did use it, it would be output from the SDI only and run to some recorder or their choosing.

Ivan Gomez Villafane October 6th, 2010 12:09 PM

Hey guys, I think there was another thread somewhere but I can't find it... maybe this one is too old.

Anyway I post here because yesterday I saw on my local cinema "El Hombre de al Lado" (The Man Next Door), it's an argentine movie. I was intrigued to find out what it was shot with and after some research I found this:

17: Sundancing Part 1, Reflections | Leitner’s Cinematography Corner

It was shot with an EX1 and it actually won the Sundance Cinematography award. But in my personal opinion, it looked kind of bad... but you have to consider it was very very probably shot without much lightning, in a very indie way. The truth is it looked like that, you know, a lot of burnt sections, underexposed subjects and the general "amateur look", not that it's something necessarily bad (it won the Sundance Cinematography award right?). I personally don't like it. I even saw some very soft exterior shots, as if they were using a high F-Stop instead of using the ND filters. The general look wasn't very appealing to me, it looked videoish and dead. I guess the conclusion is, if you want to make video look like film, don't just point and shoot and edit-as-is. Please remember I'm drawing conclusions without knowing all the facts, I'm just talking out of what I saw in front of the cameras.

At one given point I thought it was shot with HDSLR because I saw some aliasing on a wide shot and even vertical fixed banding but not in noise, in well exposed areas. I have never ever seen banding on my EX1 so I wonder if it was a product of the conversion or something like that. Maybe even the film projector, don't know, anyway, very weird...

Go see it if you have the chance! I'll probably go again with "shot with EX1" in mind. Let me know if there's anything you think it would be nice to look for.

Ivan Gomez Villafane October 6th, 2010 12:34 PM

I found a YouTube HD trailer!

YouTube - THE MAN NEXT DOOR OFFICIAL TRAILER

Wow... I'm seeing so much more aliasing, more than I saw at the cinema. Maybe it's YouTube's fault? Sometimes it looks like 720p HDSLR. 0:30, it's just YouTube, right? The next shot as well, inside the van. What's going on?

0:42 pretty much ilustrates what I mean by "amateurish look". Underexposure and blown out highlights...

In general I think the longer focal length shots look better than the wide angles, I think we it's general knowledge that this cameras work that way. Closeups as seen in 1:00 didn't caught my flaw-looking attention in the cinema. The wides were the ones that looked kind of dirty to me.

What do you think?

Alex Raskin October 6th, 2010 12:34 PM

>> I even saw some very soft exterior shots, as if they were using a high F-Stop instead of using the ND filters.

Closing aperture instead of using ND filters would actually INCREASE sharpness..

>> At one given point I thought it was shot with HDSLR because I saw some aliasing on a wide shot
>> and even vertical fixed banding but not in noise, in well exposed areas.

Probably bad intermediate codec they used for editing. Should've used Cineform ;)

Plus of course it could be that they tried to apply effects or render as 8bit instead of 16 or 32 bit, which would be a banding disaster recipe due to quickly accumulating errors at low bit depth...

Ivan Gomez Villafane October 6th, 2010 12:44 PM

"Closing aperture instead of using ND filters would actually INCREASE sharpness.."

?? I think the consensus is around F4 lies sweet spot, if you go higher than that the footage will start to look softer and softer and instead one should use ND filters. I have tested and confirmed this... I think maybe you are referring to using ND instead of going higher from F1.9?

Oh man, Cineform comes in again, I hate it because I don't know what it does! Some guys on the other forum on the T2i/7D section concluded that with CS5 there was no problem editing T2i footage natively, it looked almost the same than using Neoscene. This is not the case with EX1?

Alex Raskin October 6th, 2010 12:45 PM

Watched the trailer at 720p. Looks just fine for the most part - stop nitpicking, eh :)

Ivan Gomez Villafane October 6th, 2010 12:49 PM

Nitpicking is the curse of owning a T2i!

:D

Alex Raskin October 6th, 2010 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivan Gomez Villafane (Post 1576183)
Oh man, Cineform comes in again, I hate it because I don't know what it does! Some guys on the other forum on the T2i/7D section concluded that with CS5 there was no problem editing T2i footage natively, it looked almost the same than using Neoscene. This is not the case with EX1?

Don't just hate Cineform because it is beautiful. ;)

What it does: provides universal intermediate codec. You transcode your videos to CF to store/edit them with stable results.

Cineform also comes with utility called FirstLight which is non-destructive Color Correction software that's worth its weight in gold! ...Wait, what is the software's weight? ...Anyway.

CS5 is fine with virtually anything you throw at it without Cineform, true. But the results will not be guaranteed as with Cineform; and most importantly, any editing will result in artifacts. CF will have much less artifacts if you choose FS1 or higher; and edit in 16bit or higher. Also CF (I use Neo4K) is 444 color, so again it's great for post work even on the footage that originated as 420 or such (no new color info is gained by simple transcoding of course, but the error in post production math calculations resulting from effects will be less when using CF vs original 420 footage.)

Stephen Armour October 9th, 2010 02:32 PM

Alex, just a question. Do you have a link to any place comparing CF High (on the EX1R) to Film Scan 1 or 2 with NEO4K?

Just curious, as we haven't had time to compare the two in heads up testing, but are gearing up for a new production. The additional storage space is not an issue, but anything helping hold quality through post and chroma work is certainly welcome!

I'm leaning heavily toward using the FS setting from here on out with the EX1R, just to make sure. Better safe than sorry later...

Any comments?

Alex Raskin October 9th, 2010 03:25 PM

Well, this discussion seems to cover this very topic - although not naming EX1, but the results will be the same regardless of the source, I think.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:01 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network