Best cam for shooting a low budget action drama w/ filmlook??
 

I asked this somewhere else but I think maybe this is better place for it. I'm looking for a cam to shoot a low budget action drama. I want to shoot on a 3ccd cam then do a film look. I got my eye on the Pana 24p but I'm not 100% sold on it considering with software and other tricks you can get the filmlook (or what many indy directors consider the "filmlook") for less than $4000. Here's the problemo.

The GL-1 (and 2) and VX2000 have been noted to have problems in their frame modes. My choices are...

1. Buy one of these cams (problably the GL-2) shoot normal mode using sports mode (high speed shutter) during the action scenes and play around with it in post. (Maybe get Magic Bullet).

2. Shoot in frame mode and ignore the problem, as I've heard it's not that big of a deal - I noticed a little herky jerky motion in the movie "The Glass House" in some scenes making me wonder was some of it shot on video and made to look like film or were they just poor match cuts.

3. Wait on the 24p which may still have the same problem in 24p mode. (By the time I can afford the 24p there should be a few meaningful reviews of this cam). What do you guys think?

4. I could buy a Pal VX2000 and DVFilm Atlantis. Andromeda has a nice price for a Pal VX2000 but I need to do some research on them and find out if they're a real camera provider or BS artist like Royal and B&H.

I should mention I just want the film look I'm not going to print to film, but I don't want the motion to look to weird.

-Vinson

I don't know if you were looking at the XL1s at all, but I can tell you for sure that camera movement of anything but a slow speed looks jerky as hell in frame mode.

Okay, I see what you're asking. Here's the link:

http://www.dvfilm.com/atlantis/

My advice would be for you to decide exactly what you want to do, first. Then you'll have some direction to determine which way to go (with the rest of the way).

<<<-- Originally posted by Josh Bass : I don't know if you were looking at the XL1s at all, but I can tell you for sure that camera movement of anything but a slow speed looks jerky as hell in frame mode. -->>>

That's what film look is about. When you watch something like Saving Private Ryan, the high shutterspeed and shooting at 24fps makes the motion a lot more jerky then at 50i or 60i, but that's part of the filmlook.

Bar3nd

Yeah, but if you're trying to do a nice delicate tilt/pan for an establishing shot or something, that's not supposed to look like that.

That is still no effect of the XL-1s' frame mode, but the effect of the framerate. To get a smoother look you need to use a lower shutterspeed, whether you're shooting video or film. Or would you say another digital video camera shooting 25p or 30p has a smoother motion at exactly the same shutterspeed?

Bar3nd

The XL1 in frame mode has a look of it's own. It's not entirely video, it's not film, it's XL Frame Mode. Especially when combined with good lighting and filtering it is a really nice look that does justice to any story.

Shooting at high shutter speeds in frame mode does produce a jerky effect, esspecially when there is camera movmement. At low shutter speeds, 1/50 1/60 depending on format ther blur is just enough to look smooth but retain subject focus.

A camera operator who knows what they're doing can get a smooth pan or tilt out of the XL1 in Frame mode. Whip it around and sure, it'll look funky. Excersize some care with the movement and it's just fine. Exact same principle applies to motion picture film cameras.

It is not an issue of the camera at all. It's strictly an issue of frame rate.

Chris's point shouldn't be taken lightly. I've been a big proponent of the frame mode over the years, and I've heard the debate over its supposed jerkiness. I use this mode exclusively, and I almost never see a problem..the footage nearly always looks smooth and filmic and beautiful. There are two situations where the frame mode can be a problem (and they are the same situations that would cause similar problems for film, or other progressive scan systems like the panasonic ag-dvx100)

1. Fast rotational movements caused by poor hand held photography. The xl1s doesn't have as much of this problem as say the smaller gl1/gl2. Its greater mass and shoulder mount keep it more stable, and less likely to tip and wiggle. With the gl2, I always shoot handheld using a shoulder mount to eliminate this problem.

2. Panning or tilting the camera across high contrast linear elements that are perpendicular to the camera movement. In this situation, virtually any pan, slow to medium in speed will see some amount of strobing. Often, if you pan very quickly, these lines will blur, and strobing will not occur. Recently, I have seen this situation occur in several theatrical films...and they strobed just as bad, (Actually worse) than the frame mode.

The real problem here is not the frame mode...it's the camera operator. You rarely see this problem on film, because the camera operators are disciplined, experienced professionals, and they know the limits of their medium. A good chunk of us using the xl1s and gl1/2 are significantly less experienced, yet we wonder why the camera alone won't give us the magical "filmlook" we desire.

Barry

Yes, but how does one strike a balance?

If you lower your shutter speed (to smooth out);

You then choke down the aperture (to get the exposure right);

the result is a bigger DOF, right? (which gets away from the film look)

I know we can add neutral density filters to try to keep the iris open...

What about big changes in lighting? Day shots, night shots...

Is there a logical way to approach a balance in all this?

Do what Hollywood does in these situations: just add light.

Even the darkest of the dark shadowy film noir thrillers were actually saturated with light during shooting.

And their camera movements are elegant, deliberate, and look like there's some mass behind them.

So, plenty of light while using heavy filters?

If not, how can you keep the iris open for shallow DOF?

Thanks for your help!

On the XL1 (don't have an XL1s or GL2 here to check on) but when you kick it into frame mode, it doesn't allow digital effects such as slow shutter speed.

BTW, I've been able to get some monster whip pans with the XL1 and get it to blur/smear nicely. I use this technique to do hidden cuts, panning to a dark area, then starting my next shot from a dark area. I've had results that are seamless 180 degree turns stitching two locations into a single shot.

Then there are times when using the stock 16x IS lens, that the stabilization was left on and I didn't know it, nor thought to check with it. When I looked at the footage, I had a fit cause THE take was ruined due to the I.S. trying to compensate for the whip pan on the tripod, bobbing back and forth as the pan slowed to a stop. I fancied thoughts of locking the lens with no IS and then ripping off the toggle switch. When I did the pickup shot, I made sure I went with a freshly purchased manual 14x.

Adrian

Ah yes, the Golden Rule of O.I.S. -- always turn it off when you're on a tripod!

I sorry, but I disagree about the comments regarding jerkiness in frame mode. At a shutter speed of 1/60, (at 1/30 frame mode doesn't look like frame mode at all, to me, it looks like 60i --as far as smoothness of movement. I accidentally shot this way and it just looks like regular video) you can be outside, doing a moderately paced pan across any surface you want, on a tripod, (this is just an example, it could be anywhere) and the movement just looks funky. I don't mean it looks like the camera itself is jerking around, but the pan movement looks like poo. I've watched a monitor. Maybe this is the problem. When I say monitor, I mean magnavox TV. I'm sorry if I've pissed everyone off because my monitor has mislead me.

Moderately paced -- that's probably why it was jerky.

Different people can see the same thing different ways, and there are many shooters on this board who can spot Frame Movie mode video in a heartbeat -- and from a locked down camera, too.

Nobody's going to be angry at you for your comments, Josh, however you should be aware that your findings directly conflict with the experience of most pro shooters here. And I wanted to point that out, that's all. Just because it doesn't look good to you doesn't mean it's this way for everybody else. The tools perform differently depending on the hands that are using them. Hope this helps,

i have found that persons that started off shooting film and looking at projected film have no problem with "frame mode"..
however i do find persons that started with shooting Video do have problems with frame mode as they are use to the very smooth motion of 60i .... i started in FILM and i only shoot frame mode and i say WHAT jerkyness ???? yes i can see that 60i is very smooth panning - i use BOTH - sometimes pan with frame mode /other times 60i ..sometimes on the GL 1 i'll switch between them in middle of a shot ....

i do find 24fps FILM that has been transferred to TAPE a bit distracting on pans/motion .... IMO weird jerks/movement !!!!

so this could be one of those you see jerky pan and i see normal pan ( what jerky ) ....

I'll do some tests. Maybe I'm wrong. We shall see.

I shot lots of stuff in progressive scan mode. You only see some jitters with faster moving stuff. And as a rule, I don't pan, tilt and zoom when I shoot in progressive, and the cam sits on my tripod! (But this is how I mostly shoot, in progressive).

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : I shot lots of stuff in progressive scan mode. You only see some jitters with faster moving stuff. -->>>

That's a big problem when you're shooting action. I saw one really bad Tomb Raider parody on Cable Access (I found out it was a 45 minute B movie called Mummy Raider with a grade B talent named Misty Mundane). They cheated the camera by not panning or tilting. It was all cuts. The action looked pretty good (ametuerish but it wasn't problematic or jittery really). I don't know what it was shot in but it looked like Canon's frame movie mode. They even had decent slow motion (Yep they tried to get that John Woo effect).

-Vinson

What if you shoot in frame mode . Can it be transferred to film?

never mind I just found a thread on that last post

I got to see one of the films by they guys who did "Mummy Raider" but it's bullcrap. It's softcore lez porn. They didn't even use a frame mode or anything like they did with MR. I was expecting them to atleast atempt some kind of DV "filmish" type feature, but it wasn't any of that, it was straight video, pathetic locations, truely bad acting and basically it was everything I didn't want to see. Hell, I don't even know if they shot this in DV.

-Vinson

Back to the jerky frame-mode thing. I went to see "Punch Drunk Love" last night. (great film....certainly the most beautifully strange, thoroughly conceived flic I've seen this year). The first half of the film has a lot of panning and steady cam work, and I was fully aware that the conditions I described in my earlier post were constantly present--there was very noticeable strobing on every shot with high contrast verticals.

Even out-of-focus items would skip across the screen. For the worst offense, watch for the closeup of the soup cans. Frankly, frame mode is certainly more smooth than 24fps film given the same camera movement (I just think we don't see much of this kind of movement in most hollywood films).

Barry

Well let me ask you guys this. If I can't get the DVX100 then I'm going to go with the GL2. What do you guys know about the Frame Mode on the GL-2. I saw a show shot in XL-1 framemode yesterday evening on Cable Access. The low light was grainy but that was probably just poor lightling, (although I like the look of shooting in natural lighting with just downtown street lights. That look is hot to death) but I had to admit the filmic quality couldn't be denied. And with good lighting I need look no further and it was pretty smooth. So let me also ask has anyone used DVFilmmaker? If so is it truely better as far as resolution goes than the Frame mode?

-Vinson

Vinson

I think the frame mode on the Gl2 is certainly worth looking at. A big question is where do you see your work ending up. If it is going to be broadcast, or viewed on an NTSC monitor, the dvx100 isn't really doing much for you. The extra resolution needs to be filtered out to minimize the twitter that happens when you playback progressive on a standard tv. If you plan to go to film, then the dvx100 is for you, as it's tailor-made for this purpose.

Panasonic makes the chips that are in the gl2, and from what I've seen, the color response seems very similar between the two cameras. Both the gl2, and dvx100 have lower contrast than the xl1s, which will give them a less hot look in most situations including when in low light. I think they are both decidedly less "video" than the xl1s for this reason.

When shooting in low light with the gl2, it's recommended that you have enough light that you can get a good exposure without increasing gain. I've found that the gl2 and xl1s are nearly identical in terms of sensitivity in low light, until you start upping the gain, where the gl2 shows its noise a little earlier, but produces a much sharper result. My guess is that the dvx100 is not significantly different than the canon cameras in this respect.

Barry

<<<-- Originally posted by Barry Goyette : Vinson
When shooting in low light with the gl2, it's recommended that you have enough light that you can get a good exposure without increasing gain. I've found that the gl2 and xl1s are nearly identical in terms of sensitivity in low light, until you start upping the gain, where the gl2 shows its noise a little earlier, but produces a much sharper result. My guess is that the dvx100 is not significantly different than the canon cameras in this respect.

Barry -->>>

Thanks. The GL-2 is starting to look like the camera I'm going to get more and more everyday. I've practically decided to get one already and by the time I do (March or April) some people may even have them below 2 grand. My script is ready all I need is a cam and my Mac and I'm ready.

-Vinson

I posted some stuff way back earlier in this thread, and I'd just like to go back to it for a moment. Yes, my foot tastes mighty good as I say this. Seems that strobing effect IS only a problem with parts of the image containing lines that run vertically on camera. Unfortunately, in life, there are so many of those! People standing upright, trees, cups, the list goes on. I guess this is what confused me. My bad. Everyone may stone me now.

Josh

Indeed, especially if you are in a man-made or urban environment, verticals are a way of life. You can have some success by making sure these edges aren't too high contrast. A few months back in a thread similar to this, I experimented with dropping the sharpness and upping the setup, this seemed to eliminate strobing in all but the worst cases...give it a try, and let us know if it helps at all.

Barry

Thanks. I've also noticed it to be a problem with horizontal surfaces too. When tilting straight up or down, lines horizontal to the tilt strobe.

yeah. any strong contrast edge, perpendicular to the line of camera travel will cause the problem...again, it is worse on 24 FPS film and 24p video, but the key is to know your tools, and avoid the cause of the problem if it's a bother to you. Kinda like not pointing your camera into the sun when you're shooting your girlfriend dancing on the beach, or not shooting tight grid patterns on video --they'll moire-- where as film wouldn't.

Barry

Regarding the strobe effect from frame/progressive mode, a lot of otherwise good footage can be rescued by the use of gaussian blur. For example, Premiere, AvidDV etc has horizontal and vertical clamped versions of guassian blur for exacly this purpose, also there is motion blur which also can be applied orthogonally depending upon whether your panning/trucking or tilting the camera. Another useful tool is the curves function which can do amazing things to help with contrasty scenes which are part reason for the strobing.

However earlier comments on good camera operation are the key to avoiding this ratchet motion as I call it, trouble is getting those ultra smooth and slow and weighted camera movements costs a lot of lula.

I found setting custom preset shapness to default and adding gaussian blur value 1.0 (premiere) is about the same as setting custom preset sharpness to the softest setting - but has the advantage of some noise reduction.

just my 2 zorkmids worth...