Is there a plug in, or some kind of software that will give you DOF?

DOF?
What are you asking?
You do realize that depth of field is the range of distance within the subject that is acceptably sharp?

Yes, there is a software that creates a fake depth of field. I can not think of the name right now, but I will look for it and post a link when I find it.

I knew I had seen it.



NewBlue Video Essentials II | Video effects plugins for Avid Liquid, Avid Media Composer, Adobe Premiere, Adobe After Effects, Apple Final Cut Pro, Apple Motion, Corel VideoStudio, Pinnacle Studio, Sony Vegas, Canopus Edius and other video editors. (http://www.newbluefx.com/video-essentials-ii.html)

Thanks Ron but that seems like standard effects. I didn't see a specific plug in for DOF. Perhaps I just didn't see it, while looking though all of the effects.

It is there look at all the effects in the Essentials II package. I will be getting it also for that very effect.

So then are you trying to emulate a "shallow" depth of field then?
Is that what you are asking?

It is there look at all the effects in the Essentials II package. I will be getting it also for that very effect.

Oh Ok! Thanks Ron.

So then are you trying to emulate a "shallow" depth of field then?
Is that what you are asking?

Yes, I want to get a DOF adopter for my XH-A1 in the near future, but the thought occurred to me perhaps I can use something like this plug-in, in the mean time. I've also considered getting a DOF adopter for my HV30 but I think I hold out and get one for the A1.

For the cost of a DOF adapter you can get a Cannon 7d to use for the shots where you want shallow DOF.

I agree with Ron.

It's possible to approximate shalow depth of field in post-production. The key word here is approximate.

If the shot is relatively static, you can use graduated blur effects. You can use AE, or use the tilt and shift tool in Magic Bullet Looks. This can be very effective in short scenes.

If you want to simulate shallow dof in a rack-focus effect or a moving camera, I suggest looking at this Andrew Kramer tutorial - VIDEO COPILOT | After Effects Tutorials & Post Production Tools (http://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials/2d_depth_of_field/)

Of course the real thing is better, but as filmmakers we are dealing with illusions, and careful and judicious use of tricks is part of the art.

there's a vignette effect in final cut -you can turn down the darkness leaving you with the blur to play with.
I would mask a simple shape around the object in After Effects, and on a duplicated layer below add plenty of blur. Then just feather the mask edge.

For the cost of a DOF adapter you can get a Cannon 7d to use for the shots where you want shallow DOF.

Untrue... You can get DOF adapters for 200.00 dollars nowadays! Although the 200.00 ones do not have vibrating lenses so you can see the glass grain. Jump up to around 400 bucks and you get a vibrating disc.
Jag35 Adapters (http://jag35.com/new/)

The jags unfortunately do not flip the image on the sensor so you end up either switching in post, or shooting upside down.

However...

The Letus35 Mini is around 800 dollars (still half the cost of the 7D) The letus has superior quality edge to edge, and does not suffer from the vignetting that the other cheaper ones get.
Letus35 Mini (http://www.letusdirect.com/cart/letus35-mini.html)

There are others much more expensive... but you are talking about budgets here.

I personally just purchased the Mini based on the images I have seen on Vimeo of people using it. Gorgeous video. I have seen people try to imitate DOF and it NEVER works. Grab one of these bad boys, shoot in 24p... and you will find your true love!

B

I personally just purchased the Mini based on the images I have seen on Vimeo of people using it. Gorgeous video. I have seen people try to imitate DOF and it NEVER works. Grab one of these bad boys, shoot in 24p... and you will find your true love!

B

Sorry Brad, the Letus 35mini will not work with the XH-A1 that Michael owns.
Which puts him back into 7D territory as far as cost goes.
For what it's worth, I have used many of the DOF adapters out there, and own a couple, but I have not used them in some time since there are so many other viable options out there now.

All the Best!

Sorry Brad, the Letus 35mini will not work with the XH-A1 that Michael owns.
Which puts him back into 7D territory as far as cost goes.
For what it's worth, I have used many of the DOF adapters out there, and own a couple, but I have not used them in some time since there are so many other viable options out there now.

All the Best!


You are indeed correct about the letus35 mini. didn't realize it didn't go up to 72mm. that puts you in the letus35 extreme range which is around $1100. still cheaper than a 7D, but I see your point. if your almost there go for the extra bang and get a 7D. however the Jag35 Pro comes with a 72mm acromat and is only $400. again, be prepared to flip in post, or shoot upside down.

one other benefit is that if you have a DOF adapter you can use it on any camera, and any lens, so if you have multiple cameras it is interchangable. with the 7D you are always using the same sensor regardless of changing lenses etc.

anyway, I just wantedto throw out there that there are cheap alternatives that would do what he wants.

b

For more information on that NewBlueFX plugin, they have an article on how it works.


NewBlueFX Video Essentials II - Create a faux depth of field using Rack Focus (http://www.newbluefx.com/blog/create-a-faux-depth-of-field-using-rack-focus.html#more-818l)

And here is their quick video showcase on how to use it:
Creating Depth of Field using Rack Focus in Adobe Premiere Pro (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH72DeC08aE&feature=channel)

I have it for Sony Vegas Pro. It isn't the same as filming something with proper DOF, but its not bad either.

Sean, have you used the noise reducer filter from New Blue?
I think that would be of great use for low light footage.

I've used the noise filter in a few situations. It works fine for minor noise but don't expect miracles. I find the settings useless above Light as too much detail is lost. But if the footage is noisy as low light often is, applying a light filtering does clean it up a little.

Neatvideo is a miracle worker for noise. Try it. Slow render but worth the wait.

Thank you. I was going to ask about Neatvideo. Is it a plugin or a stand alone application.

NeatVideo is a plug-in. It does work well IF you have a large uniform spot in your footage that it can do its analysis on (non-texture wall, blue sky, etc). The larger the better. Unfortunately, not all scenes have such a large spot and the results aren't as good on smaller ones (I'm not saying it still doesn't help). In the future I may hold up a white posterboard or something at the beginning of a shot so that it has such a place if I think I may need to filter it latter.

However, for some reason, when the rendering timeline hits a scene where I've added NeatVideo filtering, my CPU utilization drops dramatically from 98-100% down to 60% and sometimes down to 38% on all 4 cores until that scene is over. This means my renders take longer. I'm not sure whats going on as if it needs to think it should be using more of the CPU's time, not less.

Like I said, the thing is a pig as far as rendering but the results are great. I have had no issues like your mentioning, Sean. I saved the filter with different settings and apply it as needed. For example, I have labeled, low noise, mod noise and high noise. I just drag the filter to the clip and that works fine. I had a client who wanted me to use footage from their camera to act as the 3rd camera (don't ask why I agreed to that). Anyway, they must have had auto gain on and it was extremely noisy. Before I trashed the footage and told them I couldn't do it, I tried Neatvideo. It was the difference between having usable footage or not. Do all your work, add all your transitions and then add the Neatvideo and go to bed when you wake up it should be good to go. It could save your butt some time.

So you are saying that you don't create a new noise profile for each scene? Instead you use a noise profile from before but with different settings saved as presets that you apply to all you scenes?


This implies that the noise in most of your footage is similar enough that you don't need to adapt the filter to new noise. Is this correct? I have been operating under the assumption that if I using the filter on a scene shot in different lighting conditions or different time or location that I need to readapt the profile to get good results.

Sean, I really don't use it very much with my own footage. However, I occasionally use it on other people's footage including VHS. To answer your question, yes, I've used it with success just from a created filter I used on another scene from some other footage. I don't even go into the program anymore. If I remember correctly, it has presets, you can make your own presets and it also has an auto feature. Doing it the way I've done it works for me so far.