As for turning on the stage lighting after the rehearsals, you want to do that. This will tell you quickly whether on not you are going to have any low-light issues with your cams. Actually, this may be good news. If they were going to do much with the lighting, they would be having tech rehearsals with the lighting crew.

I did attend last year's recital and I have scanned through the last several year's DVDs and to me it doesn't appear that the lighting changes will be that dramatic. Some years used a spot light, but I have been told they won't be using one this year. The biggest lighting issue I saw from past is a row of bright lights right across the front of the stage floor, but I was also told that those will be fewer and smaller this year.

Brad: two more simple point about using two cameras together rather than having one strictly for backup..

First, even if you shoot wide with both cameras, having two angles can provide some visual relief. Viewers are conditioned to expect to see multiple angles, and it is something most parents cannot readily do for themselves.

Second, when you have small groups of dancers, or duos and soloists, it is nice to be able frame the dancer. If you guess wrong about a move and the dancer(s) move out of frame or suddenly jump high, you've got the second cam's wide frame to cover until you have caught up with the dancer(s).

It may seem intimidatingly complicated, but you will actually find this pretty easy once you've started.

Just be careful with your zooms. Nothing looks more amateurish than overuse of zooms. Usually you should just do a straight cut between wide and close, which is why you'd want more than one cam.

I always teach my kid shooters (my shooters are all kids): You are not a fireman putting out a fire -- no waving the cam around wildly trying to find something interesting. Always have a destination in mind when you pan or zoom. When you find your shot, stay there. There are two ways to zoom: quickly, to get to the next shot, or slowly and smoothly for effect. The former is never seen in the final show; the latter can be. Same for pans. No shots less than 30 seconds. Ever. Unless someone's head explodes onstage.

You are shooting this for parents, and parents of parents. They have never heard of MTV.

I know we're getting into stylistic issues here, but always remember your audience.

Jay's point about visual relief is an extremely sophisticated one that people in the live performance world frequently just don't understand. When we view something live, our brains act as editors and switchers and we zoom and pan in our brains. You can experiment with this next time you see a live show -- your peripheral vision becomes less evident to you, but it's still there and you can see it if you concentrate on it. But merely taking a wide shot and viewing it on TV, this no longer happens -- it's like you are viewing a bank security cam. Using multiple cams is necessary to emulate the live experience, which is the opposite of what live theatre people think -- they think that a fixed shot by a camera is the same as you sitting in one seat for the whole show, which you obviously do.

You've chosen a remarkably difficult project for your first one. We've covered the focus, exposure and sound elements, but as just explained - you have to cope with needing closeups, and wide angle shots. With dance, and especially with dance you've never seen before, with just a single camera, you'll need to also be aware of what is happening outside the frame in the viewfinder. You'll perhaps be concentrating on a soloist, and not notice the stage is filling up with new dancers , who you don't spot until they move downstage and blot out the image, meaning a hasty zoom out, which always looks cack. So for single camera dance, you need to consider the viewfinder and use the other eye to watch out for action out of the frame. It's a very difficult skill to develop. You'll also need to practice diagonal movements - pans and tilts from corner to corner, sometimes with a zoom at the same time. You have to consider if you wish to keep the dancers framed in a consistent manner, so you zoom in as they go up stage, and out as they travel downstage - but do it slowly and sympathetically. If I were you, I'd try to find a dance class somewhere near you where they might let you practice during a class?

All true and all the more reason to have a second cam set full stage from a different angle.

You may think of it as a back-up or safety net (which it certainly can be), but the audience for the DVD sees it all as part of the show you are making for them. They will think all of your cuts are intentional and will appreciate the changing views.They will not know or care whether you made the cut intentionally or if instead you are covering up a mistake or a zoom or a wobbly pan or whatever. (The term of art for this is a "cut-away" shot.)

Even with a basic video editor like Adobe Premiere Elements or Vegas Studio, this"two track" editing is so easy to do that I think there is no reason not to do it.

If the dance school/studio wants its own private version with no closer and no change in views, just burn them their own dvd from the second camera's footage.

And, for what you've planned, you won't need to do a lot of close shots. Mostly, just enough to frame the dancers. (Everything changes with small kids but that is true generally as well as here.) Think about it this way: with the camera framed wide enough to hold a a large group of dancers or wide enough to encompass the whole range of a dancer's movement, a soloist or duo or trio are going to look awfully small and alone in all that space. Bringing the frame in a bit closer is much more interesting to watch. Plus, when a dancer flubs a move, you can always to cut to the wide view where it usually looks a lot less serious. Having that second camera track available is great stress reducer, especially for as long a performance session as you are facing.

A couple points about the smaller Sony cameras from a 5xx series shooter - they have a surprising amount of lattitude, which helps a lot with exposure - you mainly run into focus trouble when there's just "nothing" to focus on, be it black or nearly black screen, that's when the camera will go on the hunt for "anything", and likely not be where you want it when lights come back up... it will also likely re-lock fairly quickly if in auto. Better though to set the focus distance and leave it for the wide camera.

I'm generally with Adam in relying on the auto intelligence of the camera, they aren't perfect, but they are pretty darn good, and will be better than someone just learning and trying to use the small fiddly controls on a handycam. As Adam noted, you still have to watch out for situations where the camera will pick out an object in the foreground (OR background), and decide THAT is what you wanted to focus on, rather than your actual subject. Nothings "perfect"!


Framing:
Having a wide/safety shot gives you the full experience shot - the tighter shots are for smaller groups or soloists who will appear dwarfed if left in a "wide" frame. BUT, as duly noted, you don't want pans and zooms all over your footage, so one cam is wide and steady, you point and frame the other while trying to track the action... if the tripod head is not the greatest, if you whip pan or crash zoom, it goes in the bit bucket while the "safety" covers. You're the only one who has to cringe! The fixed cam can be lashed to a post or rail if needed, just has to stay locked down, sometimes you may need to adjust framing a tad with zoom, avoid it if you can...

It does sound as though the lighting won't be nearly as difficult as some of us have experienced, and you've gotten lots of good advice! Just remember to remain calm, have a water bottle handy, and on a five hour shoot, a snack... wear comfy shoes, and don't "double punch" the record buttons!

For framing with the intention of a one camera shoot I use the follow general guidelines. If there are 5 or less dancers on stage and they are not spread out very far, I leave about 1 to 1 1/2 person nose room on either side. I follow the group using as smooth a pan as possible. If someone goes out of frame don't worry and don't do a whip pan to try to catch up with them. Just keep panning to catch up with them or if you have a good controller slowly zoom out a bit pull them back into frame.

Larger group of kids usually have dances that are not as complex and involve as many formation changes. They tend to be more of a line-em up and have them all do the same techniques. So I shoot most of those dances framing the entire group and once or twice during the number I zoom in to about three of them in the frame and do a pan over the group so that each dancer get's some face time. This seems to satisfy those parents that want to see a close up of little johnny but also doesn't show any favoritism to one dancer or another.

As far as thinking in terms of a two camera edit. A basic rule is you don't want to have a jump cut. In other words cutting between two cameras that have roughly the same framing and angle. It creates a very jarring affect on your audience.

-Garrett


Side note to Adam, the EX3 and EX1/R are really great cameras. The 1/2" sensor helps in low light situations and the resolving power of even the stock lens and sensor is really incredible. The focusing is an issue for a couple of reasons. I does a decent job of auto focusing but becuase the image is very sharp from the cameras and that makes something that is out of focus much more noticeable. HD is already a killer for critical focus but coupled with rapidly changing lighting environments, dark uniform backdrops that have no edges for the focusing to rely on make thing difficult for any camera. I've found that having a follow focus is a great investment and I use it more on live stage shoots than I thought I would.

I just purchased a used Sony HDR-XR500V. Let's hope it arrives in good working condition early next week to give myself some time to familiarize myself with it. I feel much less nervous now knowing I will have something a little better than the CX160 to work with. You guys played a big role in my decision to make this purchase! Thanks!

Thanks. Don't forget to check back in and let us know how things go.

Regarding my previous comment on -not using auto- for recitals due to dramatic lighting: That was based on my experience when we first started shooting them with a 2GL1s, an XL1s, and a VX2000. At the time, we thought it would be safer to use the auto settings due to all the dramatic lighting, but what ended up happening more often than not was massive overexposure. When we started controlling the iris manually it really really improved the picture quality dramatically.

Today's cameras may very well have much better auto settings the 5-10 years ago. I have not really used any auto stuff on my NX5 yet. Tomorrow night is the dress rehearsal for the one I'm filming Sat and Sun. When I go set up tomorrow night, I may very well turn it on auto and see what happens!

One thing for sure, with a 3+ hour recital, I'll have plenty of chances to try stuff out tomorrow night.

This will be my first time using the NX5U on such a long form event... total of about 10 hours film time.

Kyle --

My experience with the NX5 in theatrical settings is the reverse of my experience with with the CX cams. Manual modes are definitely preferrable. In particular, I've found the NX5's auto focus in problematic in theater settings -- slow to react and not always in sharp focus. I also use an FX1000 and have found that, unlike the NX5, it does pretty well in mostly auto mode in a stage shoot. This parallels Adam's experience with his Z5 cams (pro division version of the FX1000). Since the NX5 is derived from the Z5/FX1000 platform, I am mystified that the NX5's auto modes seem comparatively sloppy in theatrical settings, but they are. Ron Evans has also observed the same thing and has posted about it in the NX5 forum. Even weirder, it seems to be only theater lighting and stages (and extreme low light at wedding receptions) where I run into these problems. In other shooting situations, auto modes have been good. I'll be interested in what you find from using your NX5 at the dress rehearsal.

Hmm, that is fascinating and surprising. I too would have thought the Z5 and NX5 would behave much like twins. In other reading I was surprised to also see that the NX5 lacks a few features -- like Shot Transition, which I always regarded as a toy but which I now use quite frequently during concerts for the slow creeping zoom you can't get any other way.

I bought my Z5s about a week before they announced the NX5. I knew the NX was coming, but I needed the cams for a show. At first I was irritated that I hadn't waited and bought the newer, "better" cam. But now I'm glad I bought what and when I did; I love these babies beyond words.

Equipment list update! This has come a long way since my initial post.

Main cam to be mainly fixed wide with occasional zooms and pans is a Sony HDR-XR500V mounted on a Sony VCT-80AV Tripod with Remote in Grip (Sony VCT-80AV Tripod with Remote in Grip VCT-80AV B&H Photo).

Secondary cam to be fixed wide is the Sony HDR-CX160 that I was originally intending to use as my only cam. This one will be on a Sony VCTR640 Light Weight Tripod (Sony VCTR640 Tripod VCTR640 B&H Photo Video). I'm still not sure this tripod will be sturdy enough even for a fixed cam so I may look to borrow something better.

Because of the length of the show (5-6 hours), I will be using the AC power adaptors on both cams. The XR500V has a 120gb hard drive so I am good on media storage there. The CX160 has 32gb internal flash memory and I also have a 32gb SDHC Class 10 memory card so I should be good there too. Since the highest image quality on the XR500V is FH, should I use that same image quality on the CX160 or should I go up to FX on that one? If I use FX on the CX160, I could run close to using up my media storage capacity (approx 3 hr per 32gb).

I did purchase an external stereo microphone (Azden SMX-10 Stereo Microphone SMX-10 B&H Photo Video) but I'm not sure if I should use it or just relay on the built in mic on the XR500V. I will be asking for a copy of the actual music being used for the performance, but only intend to use it if really necessary.

I know I have been advised to set these cams up at different angles, but I'm not so sure what the best angles would be so I am looking for suggestions on that. I imagine I want the fixed cam to be as close as possible to the stage using minimal zoom. I am hoping to be a on a platform with my main cam (probably just behind the floor seating left or right).

Overall I like your plan. You're right about the second tripod being flimsy but if you don't pan much or even touch the cam you should be fine. Note that it does not have a remote on the handle so if you even touch the cam for any reason you will get tremendous shake. So don't touch the cam.

I would set the 500 up to cover the full width of the stage, and the 160 to cover the center third or so. I'd set them up right next to each other so you can supervise both without moving. If you cut between them -- as you'd do if some kids just happen to be in the center third of the stage, like with little kids -- then the POV will be sufficiently different that it'll look like you planned it that way. You will never need to zoom or pan. But you could put the cheap cam on the good tripod so you could do so if you needed to.

I'd return the mic if possible. It's of no benefit. Your on-board mics will be fine for atmosphere and you will need the booth audio anyway for the actual music -- the add-on mic wouldn't benefit you there anyhow.

AC Power adaptors = Good.

Always record in the highest quality mode possible unless you have no choice. You can always degrade it later, but you can't make it better.

Offhand, there's no reason not to match the 17Mbps rates, although you might get better results using the higer rate for the wide cam, more data=more detail, at least in theory...

You'll have to scope the venue - usually setting up near the "sound booth" is the way to go - there's usually space - problem with this is you don't want to zoom in too much as the aperature will by nature close up a bit... which may or may not be a problem.

You don't want to be too far away from a camera if you're operating solo - in case you need to tweak adjustments or someone bumps your pod out of alignment... your angles don't need to be terribly different, your zoomed in framing on the "tracking cam" will be sufficient to give an altered perception. If you have a 5 man crew and all that, sure, put cameras forward stage left and right, a rear wide and tracking cam, and toss in a handheld roaming... but you're talking a 1 man band, know your limitations!

You're pretty well set now, be sure your computer will handle the edit/render, and be prepared to make a boatload of dics copies - I did one "friendly job" that was supposed to be "20-30", turned into 120!

You're pretty well set now, be sure your computer will handle the edit/render, and be prepared to make a boatload of dics copies - I did one "friendly job" that was supposed to be "20-30", turned into 120!

I'm already prepared for a possible need to upgrade my computer. I'm using an AMD Athlon X2 5000+ processor right now, but understand I may need to upgrade to a QUAD core processor. I built the machine I have now myself, so it shouldn't be too bad to upgrade the motherboard and CPU if need be.

As far as disc duplication, I understand what you are saying. I'm planning this performance to be a 2-disc set and am estimating 50-60 copies so that's a lot of DVDs. I am considering outsourcing the duplication of the discs to a source such as CD Duplication Services, DVD Duplication Services, CD / DVD Replication, CD / DVD Duplication (http://www.proactionmedia.com/bulk-dvd-duplication.html). This method I won't have to buy the media, worry about printing labels, or extensive use of my not-so-great DVD burner.

What sort of price would you guys put on a DVD package like this? I'm planning to produce a double disc set in a standard 2-disc case with the discs labeled and a nice cover in the case. Last year, I bought the video of this same recital at $40. I have heard that some year's had charged as much as $60, but they didn't sell many at that price. I'm thinking about $25 for my production this year becasue being a parent of a performer, I think $40 is too much, and also becasue of the fact this that is my first time doing this and I have no idea how it will turn out.

It'll turn out GREAT, you've got the best crew in the biz here for advice! Short of double punching the record button and not getting anything, you'll be ahead of most!

I'd suggest $30-35, - you have to figure that a "store bought DVD" with lesser "stars" than your video will feature is $20... your "content", presuming it's reasonably well captured and edited is of higher "value" <wink>!

Don't let any lack of confidence cause you to underprice, if you go to the rehearsals, nail the framing and exposure and framing, and run it though in your head so it's second nature, you'll have a quality result given all the advice here. I'd have no problem asking $40 shooting with your gear, and know I'd deliver a good result that was well worth it.

The other factor is the economy, money is tight, so you may want to consider some sort of "pre-pay discount" (maybe make that your $35 "package"), with an option for them to purchase when it's done for $45? You could work with the studio for the "after-market" if it comes out great, if not, you could soft-pedal it. I always found if I gave a "courtesy copy" to whoever was in charge and they show it to the "class", my phone rings...

As usual, Dave has nailed it. It will depend on your area but the price ranges make sense. The idea of $35 day of show/$45 later is a good one. The difference needs to be enough to really encourage paying right then and there so you have some working capital up front, even if you are outsourcing the actual duplication.

And don't laugh at the idea of double-punching the record button... we've all done it. Keep your eye on the little red light.

You'll do great.

Don't forget that if you go in close, you have a very large angle of view to cover, so you will be panning and tilting through a big angle, and working very hard - the cameraman at the rear of the room has a much easier job. So don't go very close in - it's very tough - AND you make focus more tricky too.

Another pricing aspect to consider is offering a discount on multiple orders. In other words, if they order 3 or more they get a discount. Remember, you are capturing memories so for a lot of people this will be something they keep looking at. It also makes great family gifts for Grandparents and Uncles and Aunts. I always get calls after for order forms or asking how to order videos. Don't forget to make a master for yourself too, saving the artwork for your labels and DVD cover inserts. I've been doing one studio's shows for about 5 years now, they do two shows a year (one winter one spring), and I with each show it never fails that I get a few requests for past shows. this last one a lady's daughter was graduating and this was her last show. She ended up wanting to get a copy of every show her daughter was in.

Like Dave and Adam said, I'm sure you're video will turn out better than you think. And there are a list of things that seem silly that can go wrong. Another one I learned was for mics that are self powered. Remember to turn it on. I usually use phantom powered mics but on a backup cam I was using a Rode Videmic. Got everything set up tested for picture, went through my check list. Didn't have "turn on mic" on the list. All I can say is that recording showed that the mic had zero self noise.

While I'm thinking of it. Plug in power on the cams is good but also have a fresh battery in the camera too in case something happens and you lose power to your adapter.

-Garrett

...
What sort of price would you guys put on a DVD package like this? I'm planning to produce a double disc set in a standard 2-disc case with the discs labeled and a nice cover in the case. Last year, I bought the video of this same recital at $40. I have heard that some year's had charged as much as $60, but they didn't sell many at that price. I'm thinking about $25 for my production this year because being a parent of a performer, I think $40 is too much, and also because of the fact this that is my first time doing this and I have no idea how it will turn out.

Here's the problem ... even if you're a parent, if you start out low this year it's going to be extremely hard to raise your price to where it should be in the future. $25 is going to be a killer when everything is factored in.

For a 2 disk set with multiple cameras, I don't think $40 is excessive (if produced well), but $35 is probably a better figure. You're going to have a LOT of editing to do, so that's going to eat up a lot of your time has got to be worth something.

I agree with the price discount for multiple orders. Yes ... you'll have a few people get together and place a single order for multiple disks ... but the main thing is that you did in fact sell multiples.

Our recital was a little different. We had 3 separate performances at approx. 1.5 hours each. I started at $25 dollars in the VHS days and then went $30. I had a multiple performances discount, since some were in all three at $50 for 2 and $70 for 3. I actually sold a lot of the 3's. My guess is that $30 to $35 would be good depending on whether you mail them out or not. I mailed mine. The biggest hurdle you might find is the turn around time. Because I was doing this on my off time and we were traveling with the dance team all summer I had an 8 to 10 week delivery. Duplication was usually a week and then I mailed them out as well. The studio decided not to go with me this year after 12 years because they said they got too many complaints about the delivery time. My situation has changed this year, but they didn't bother to ask me they just went with another company. The good thing is that for the first time in 12 years I can actually watch and enjoy my daughter and son dance. Good luck with it all.

I actually just finished creating my order form. As it stands at this moment, I am asking $28 for one or $25 for two or more ordered and paid for the day of the recital. Orders after the day of the recital are $33. I am also giving the option of having it mailed at $2.00 shipping and handling.

I know you guys are suggesting a little higher prices, but I don't want people getting scared off knowing I'm not a professional. Without knowing how well this project is going to turn out, I'm worried about charging too much. I feel that if I do deliver a quality product, prices on future projects can be adjusted accordingly without too many complaints. I'm not looking to make much of a profit either - I'm mainly looking to cover my equipment expenses since I'm starting with nothing.

I know the editing is going to be a lot of work, especially since I have limited experience in that area too. I think I'm really challenging myself to see what I can really do and hope I'm not getting in over my head. I'm starting to get really nervous now that the recital is less than one week away.

I just finished filming a choir show from Hell...First major screwup was they never allowed for camera placement, so my normal setup was unavailable, they then stated it was a sold out show so I was forced onto the balcony with only four seats I could call my own, remember I am using 3 cams, so to say it was tight would be an understatement, I could barely fit a tripod in the isle, my 7 " Marshall monotor became a god send...sound was to be provided from the house board and whoever ran it left the first 2 numbers out, I mean the board was not even turned on , I can still use the sound from my Rode mics thankfully ...
Exiting my seat was not an option since my cams and the audience were on either side of my seat.(Thankfully there were no children in my isle, I could just see one tipping my cams over the balcony ledge..Ouch! ) I was basically stuck in my seat till the intermission and then I had to climb over the back of my chair to exit...It was then that I observed that nearly half the auditorium seats were empty down below, and the original area I wanted to set up had no one in or around it at all, so I was a little upset to say the least....Anyway the footage turned out OK even with the placement limitations but its going to require a bit more editing than I would have liked, but I guess it comes with the job...I have another show at the end of the month at the same venue, a meeting and changes will be made for this one for sure.....

Brad:

A small suggestion for placing the second camera. I believe you said your wife is also attending? If so (or if you have anybody else available to babysit the second camera) my experience is that life will be easier with the second "wide" camera with a really different angle than your main cam. If I were using two cameras and are shooting from, say, the middle of a front balcony, I would place the second cam down on the main floor against the right or left wall. I would put it high enough to have a mainly unobstructed view of the stage and close enough that I do not have to zoom much (or at all) to cover the entire stage. (This gives you easiest depth of field control and avoids most exposure problems.) As long as you have somebody to watch over the camera --- standing next to it when people come in and out between acts --- they should not need to do much of anything with the CX. Maybe check for how much time is left on the SD card and maybe re-aim if the tripod gets bumped.

Maybe you will be confined to the ends of a balcony. So, stand on the right with your XR and have your locked-down CX on the left. Am I being clear about having very different angles of view?

As I see it, the primary benefits for separating the cameras this way is that it makes editing much easier for you and, with this being your first big project, also increases how professional your finished product will look, and does so with pretty minimal effort. Also, I find every so often that, when shooting dancers from one angle of view, something will be happening in the back or to one side but dancers are in my way from where I stand. A different view avoids that problem of your angle being blocked. (A basic rule of thumb for wedding videos is that, no matter how carefully you position yourself with your main camera, somebody, at some point in the wedding is going to stand up and block your view.)

Another important reason for separate views in your first few gigs is that that when you have the cameras close together, and you cut from one to the other, you often wind up with what editors call a "jump cut." You get these when you cut from one similar view to another, and it has an adverse psychological effect on viewers. It certainly is possible to cover some or most of these kinds of jump cuts with a transition, even a simple dissolve. But why put yourself to that work if you do not have to?

I will say that I certainly do (sometimes) run two cameras together, although I make a point of having two or three other angles with locked down cams for cut-away shots for when I inevitably get busy, distracted, confused etc and get two bad shots. All of us, both experienced and inexperienced shooters alike, will yield to the temptation to fiddle with the cameras within arm's reach.

So, for your first big gig, I recommend having the two cameras apart from each other. If the situation does not permit, so be it. If it does, take advantage of this simple little trick of the trade.

As for the opinions on pricing, I think you have gotten good advice and I also think you have properly thought through your pricing for this gig.

Jay-

My thoughts all along have been what you stated about really different angles, but it's not likely that I will have any assistance to monitor even a fixed cam. My wife will indeed be at the recital, but she will be responsible for getting my 5 year old daughter prepped for 4 different performances.

The photo in the following link gives an idea of the venue setup.

Facility (http://packardmusichall.com/facility.htm)

The risers that are behind the floor seats may or may not be there (some years they've used them and others they haven't). Last year's videographer was set up on a platform just behind the left side floor seats and I was thinking that I could probably get the same setup if I wanted. He used two cams right off the same platform at the same angle. I'll have to watch some of his video tonight to see if I can notice what you are talking about with having the cams at the same angle.

Do you think if I could get each cam set up at the extreme outside corner behind the floor seats on each side that it would provide the contrasting angles that you are suggesting? I'm not sure of my chances of being able to set either up right against the right or left walls; those isles are pretty narrow and I'd be concerned about something getting jarred.

I will have a chance to scope out the venue a little better at Thursday night's dress rehearsal. I'm planning to take and set up both cams for the rehearsal and doing some practice shots. I really wish they'd be using the stage lighting for the rehearsal becasue I'd like to play with some various cam settings and see what works best with the lights. I think I'm going to have to go into the main event of Sunday with a best guess at what settings to use based on recommendations here.

Amazing theater space.

You do not need to monitor the second cam. That is one of the advantages to the CX line. I only suggested having a babysitter if your locked-down camera will be in a traveled area of the theater. Or, if you have concerns about somebody maybe walking off with your unattended camera. (This has not been concern in my rural area, but it could be in other places.)

Outside corners of the main floor seating area could work. Alternatively, how much of the balcony wings will be in use for these recitals? You could have your main cam on the platform behind the left side of the floor seating. In the photo, I see a kind of notch at the center aise side of the back left row of seats there -- great place for a platform if you can get it. If you can, and the platform just gets your camera over the audience heads, you might put your second cam in the front of the right balcony wing, back above the right-side doorway seen in the photo. With a CX 160, you would have to zoom in a little bit to fully frame the stage but probably not enough to adversely affect low light situations.

In the photo, it is hard to tell of the balcony wings go all the way up close to the stage (what I would call "opera house style") or if the balcony wings only wrap about halfway to the stage (what I would call "movie house style"). For a movie house style room, I would put the CX 160 on the right front corner of the balcony wing. I've being doing that for years in several of our local venues and used that "elevated locked-down cam" to make the "single cam no zooms" view for the dance' schools private copy of the performance.

Boy, I don't know...

Where are the electrical outlets? Where can you, in a practical sense, actually set up without obstructing the view of others?

Everyone wants to sit "front row center." That is the ideal perspective of your video. Remember, the seats off to the sides in any theatre are always the cheapest seats because they provide the poorest views.

Remember, different "angles" really mean different "perspectives." Your two cams can be standing in the same actual position but if one is tight and the other is wide, they have two very different angles. Conversely they could be on opposite sides of a seating area -- say at the right and left of the center section of the second seating area in the picture of the theatre you've attached -- but if they both have the same field of view, like the width of the proscenium, they are essentially the same angle and won't offer the visual variety you need.

To be honest with you, if you're a one-man band, I'd really recommend what I suggested earlier. Set them both up in the same place, one wide and one tight, with the better cam set wide, using the tight one to pan and zoom if you want, on the better tripod, only panning and zooming when necessary. Near an outlet. In the center. Maybe in that center aisle in the balcony. Someone will knock/tip over/steal your unattended cam. Or it will stop recording because someone sneezes. Or something else will happen if you're not there. Like it will explode.

Believe it or not, there's a regular poster here who does these with one camera only because he shoots HD and delivers in SD. He does all his cropping and zooming in post. I'm not suggesting that I would ever do this or that you should do this, only that a minimalist approach is possible and he reports that his clients are happy.

Below is how we place our cams in our theatre. Note that if we have the same framing on cams 1 and 4, it would be virtually the same shot, so 1 is always very wide and 4 is always medium or close. But 2 and 3 can be zoomed/framed similarly since their placements are so different. 1 is our IdiotCam(tm) and it is the one I operate for safety. It is always locked full wide, full stage. If everything else is screwed up -- and it sometimes is -- we always have this. Unless I have screwed up. And I have.

As Adam says, with a single operator, you don't want the cameras TOO far out of reach, stuff happens. Haven't had one explode YET <VBG>, but sometimes cams will turn off for no apparent reason... better to be close, just resist the urge to adjust too much!

I'd also second a closer to "center" position, preferably with A/C and audio feed (where's the mixer/audio desk?). You typically get the "best" view and audio from the "center" in most venues, don't let someone stick you offsides because "that's what's left". YOU are responsible for capturing the video for the ENTIRE audience, pick your "seat"!!!

You also need a platform high enough to get you over any heads, people stand and walk around, you don't want to have them blocking (why I use 6'+ tall tripods).

IMO if the zoom/framing is different enough, you shouldn't have the issue of "jump cuts", but you'll have to watch it in post to make sure your framing is different enough to add a different "perspective".

Believe it or not, I actually own and have used this device:

Manfrotto 131DDB Tripod Accessory Arm for Four Heads 131DDB B&H


to mount two cams on one tripod so I could have one locked down wide while I used the other up close when I was down one shooter for a show.

Is it a sickness? Oh yeah. Somebody please help me.

I do not necessarily disagree with Adam and Dave, but my thinking on two widely spaced cameras with different angles of view is that: (a) this will be Brad's first try at this, so it is important to try to keep this simple enough to work reasonably well; (b) placing cameras on opposite sides of the room (if he can do that) with, better yet, one camera high to one side in the balcony and the other low and sort of centered, is the easiest way for him to get differing views; and (c) Brad will probably be framing more tightly with the cam he has than the wide view of the other camera, so there will be differences in view almost as a matter of course.

In Adam's drawing, with the positioning of cameras ## 1 and 4, I think that there is enough space between them that you would not get the sense of a jump zoom when cutting between them provided you have one camera always framed tighter than the other. The difficulty I see for Brad is that he may not always be able to do that.

Adam and Dave are quite correct that a significant framing difference can work for having the cameras next to each other. As long as the framing difference is large enough, you avoid the "jump" effect when cutting between the two views. Personally, however, I had to learn a sense of the difference from experience and still do not always get it right. Since I also work with at least four cameras, I have at least two other very different views to fall back on when (as happens) I do not get the framing difference large enough. Brad does not yet have this experience and is working with only two cameras. My thinking is that "doubling up" from the same location could make the experience more stressful than it needs to be.

Plus, for those times when there are a lot of kids on the stage -- or when you have a cheerleader parent standing up in your camera's line of sight to cheer a child (something I've noticed is happening more often) --- having a different angle may allow capture of things for which there might not otherwise have been clear line of sight from the location where you are standing.

Dave mentions the odd incident where a CX cam may shut down. It is pretty rare, but I have had a couple of them. (Most recently, during a school Christmas concert, a parent in the front row of the bleachers had set her Sony handycam on low tripod in front of her and was running the cam with the camera remote which happened to be aimed right in line with a CX cam that I had hidden under the grand piano at the front of the performance area.) Still, if you can have somebody sitting near the camera, you can can get allerted quickly if something goes wrong. They just need to look over once in a while to see if the red tally light is on. You may even be able to spot the front or rear one on the CX from where you stand with the XR.

By the way, some venues and dance groups may insist that you shut off the little red tally lamp --- the tiny red leds that signal recording is running. On the CX and XR cams it is called the "rec lamp" and is under the camera's tools menu on the touchscreen. Some people think tally lamps are annoying but, if the recital is anything like the ones here, there will be plenty of parents holding up cell phones and other camera devices with illuminated viewscreens and nobody will notice or care about the sub-millimeter sized dot on the front of your cams. (Usually, places that have rules about tally lights came up with those rules when tally lights were significantly larger and much more annoying.)

Another thing to point out -- regardless of whether Brad has both cams in the same or different locations --- is that Brad will be shooting in HD but delivering on DVD. Adam noted that there is a shooter here who works with a single camera and does this. It works equally well (if not better) with two cams. This gives some room in editing to pull framing tighter when you needs to. The after-the-fact artificial zoom in editing on an HD timeline won't be noticeable when the finished video is down-rezzed to SD in the DVD encode. (Okay, it will be noticeable when you zoom-in too much. Judgment is required.)

Again, as Adam and Dave point out, there may be considerations which make it desirable or necessary to have the cameras within arm's reach, equipment security being one of them.

One of the benefits of going to the rehearsal is that Brad will be able to experiment with different positionings to see how things work.

Adam makes a good point about knowing where the power outlets are. Unless Brad has invested in NPFV100 batteries (which will run a CX cam for about 6 hours), he may need to run an extension cord to get power to the cameras. It is always a good idea to tape cords down so people don't catch a cord while walking through to and from their seats. Venues hereabouts have been unenthusiastic about the use of gaffer's tape and duct tape, but I've had good luck with 2" wide blue masking tape. It is visible enough for walkers to see but not so garish as to be distracting and it comes up without residue on floors and carpets.

One option to consider is that there is a menu setting to shut off the remote sensor function as well (preventing a "stray" IR signal shutting the camera off unexpectedly).

Best answer for a clear line of site is to be on a platform, or have a tall tripod, or both - the tripods Brad has dictate finding a platform if at all possible, perhaps in the audio mixing area? Usually the "sound booth" is raised so they have a clear line of sight to help them catch visual cues for the audio mix.

Adam -
Yeah, the gear addiction thing is an illness, worse yet, I've got a fairly decent fabrication capability, so I go build whatever I can't find or modify... I've got a bar I tooled up that originally was set up to have three cameras... I realized it wasn't stable enough for my tastes, and was going to chuck it, then discovered that I could remove the tripod head and there was plenty of room to put the bar between the legs and head.... so now I have two outboard mounting positions with ball heads (usually set the cams on those to cover stage left and right on a wide stage, crossing them so I get an illusion of different angles), fluid head to track in the center, and a Ultrapod II strapped to the upright shaft with another camera on wide, just below the main assembly. Looks scary, but allows for a "one mand band" to catch everything!

"One option to consider is that there is a menu setting to shut off the remote sensor function as well (preventing a "stray" IR signal shutting the camera off unexpectedly)."

Of course. I did not think of that until after the Christmas show I mentioned. Another thing to add to Brad's checklist.

Regarding the sound booth: could be an excellent place to put a locked-down full wide camera. Also, if there is an equipment security concern, no problems with folks bumping into a camera or any worry about somebody walking off with it.

I don't believe the CX160 has a remote option; another reason to consider it as the fixed cam.

I personnally like Jay's idea of one cam fixed wide from potentially the right side balcony and the other on the floor just behind the first set of seats. However, I will need to do some experimenting to see if this is possible. I will also need to determine which cam to put in which location based their individual performances (although true performance may be different once the stage lights are one).

When I first agreed to take on this project, I hadn't even considered two cams. My original intention was to shoot the entire performance with the CX160 that I just bought new. Many of you were skeptical as to the capabilities of the CX160 for this type of project and convinced me to get a second cam that you knew would do better. I purchased a used XR500 with the same intentions of shooting the entire performance with one cam, but now having the CX160 as a backup. I hadn't even considered using footage from both cams until you guys started talking about it here.

I really like the idea of possibly using cuts between cams to provide different views, but I'm still skeptical of the abilities of the CX160 in this environment. With that being said, I'd hate to set the CX160 fixed wide and then use the XR500 for closer framing and zooms and pans (or vice versa) and then have the footage from the CX160 not come out so great.

I would like put to the CX160 at a fixed wide location at a significantly different angle than the XR500. However, I want use the XR500 in a manner that would allow me to use all the footage from this one cam if need be. If I do get really good footage from the CX160, that would be great and I would definately use cuts between both cams. I don't want to use the XR500 strictly for closeups only to find out later that the CX160 didn't perform as well as I thought it might and have no good wide shots.

The reason I am bringing all this up is because in the begginning of this thread, most of the advice leaned toward the CX160 not being a suitable cam for this type of production. These latest posts seem to have forgot about those original concerns with the CX160 and have me thinking I really need to catpure and use footage from both cams. Maybe I am misunderstanding or maybe I am just getting more paranoid as the event gets closer.

BTW... I still haven't received the XR500 I bought on ebay yet - let's hope it arrives today! It's yet another reason for my paranoia! :-)

Please keep the advise coming - specifically on how I should be using each of these cams. Thanks!

Let me try to provide some reassurances.

Some of the concerns about the CX160 came about because lighting conditions were unknown. They seem to be less of a concern than some of us were afraid they could be. Some of the concerns were the result of past bad experience with older model consumer cams and unfamiliarity with the capabilities of the CX line of cameras. Some of the concerns were for doing a more professional kind of job that is possible with a camera as limited and as tiny --- dare I say "teeny" --- as the CX160.

Using the CX with another camera avoids much of the concern and gives you a video that the school and most of the parents could not do for themselves.

Based on what you have figured out and conveyed to us about the shoot, it seems likely that the CX160 can at least give you acceptable video when used as a locked down "b" camera. Running the CX160 at full wide (in my opinion) avoids some of the biggest limitations of that camera. For example, with it on full wide (even using face detection as Dave suggested and spotlight mode), viewers are less likely to notice when some kids are overexposed by variations in the stage lighting. (Now that we have called this to your attention, YOU probably will start noticing things like this.) The CX160 also has such limitations in size and controls that it would be a difficult tool for use as your sole camera when the objective is to capture the recitals on DVDs for sale to the parents. The XR500 cam has enough additional functions to overcome some of the more serious lacks of the CX160, particularly when zoomed in and panning (slowly) from one group of kinds to another (and perhaps differently lit) part of the stage.

When you say "I want to use the XR500 in a manner that would allow me to use all the footage from this one cam if need be" you are saying exactly the right thing for your first multi-cam shoot. That means you try to avoid "snap zooms" and "whip pans." You do not have to limit yourself to 15 or 30 second slow zooms, but you do want to avoid the instant zoom that is all to easy to do with the tiny top button on these cams. (One of the reasons my primary cams are things like the NX5 is that the larger cameras have nice big rings and buttons that my fat fingers can find in the dark and that allow me fine control.)

That Sony tripod & controls will make this far easier for you and thereby make it much more likely you will get a more professional looking video. Even so, you will have a significantly better looking DVD if you can cut away during most zooms and pans.

You will be able to test these things out at the rehearsal. If stuff works at the rehearsal, it will probably work even better for the shows this weekend. If, as seems likely, the rehearsals are done with house lights and minimal stage lights , the stage will probably be dimmer than for the performance. Rehearsal footage could wind up with a greenish cast to it. At this point, I suspect that the biggest concern with stage lighting during performances, in this instance, will be the risk of parts of the stage being overbright. Using the CX cam's spot light setting, and using the XR with a spotlight setting and the AE shift will mitigate much of that. (Of course, with the education you are getting here, you may start noticing all kinds of things that you would not have noticed previously. Careful, that is the road to gear fetishes!)

As for the CX160 not having a hand-held wireless remote (something that my CX550v cams came with), that probably is not a limitation on using it with a tripod controller. The tripod controller uses a wired connection (which is referred to as a "Lan-C" port.) I believe that all of the CX and XR cams have the same D-ring i/o port. As far as I know, that port can can be used for either analog output to a tv (using the analog output cable) or for the the tripod's camera controller when a d-ring Lanc-C cable is plugged into it. I do not know if your Sony tripod comes with the LanC d-ring connector cable or this is something you will need to get separately. I'm not familiar with the tripod and do not know if it would need an adapter cable. Maybe Dave can address this.

I see the point of Adam's suggestion for running the CX160 as your primary cam, but I also think you might have greater peace of mind using the XR cam as the primary one. Peace of mind counts for a lot. Do some experimenting during rehearsal. Try both cameras and see what works best for you.

Jay - I think your last post put me at ease a little. It seems that you are agreeing with my thoughts on how and where to use each cam.

If I receive the XR500 before tomorrow's rehearsal, I'll be able to test out my plan which includes the CX160 fixed on the right side balcony (just far enough back to get a good wide angle on the stage without too much zoom) and the XR500 just behind the floor seats toward the center.

I will have my family sit in the balcony area near the fixed CX160 to make sure it stays recording and that no one dirsturbs it. My wife will be taking care of my daughter throughout the show, but my step-son (14) and sister-in-law (16) will also be there to help keep an eye on it. The ONLY concern I have with the CX160 being up there and me being down on the floor is a media change at some point. Once the 32gb internal memory fills up, I will need to switch over to the 32gb SD card unless the CX160 cam will do the switch automatically (I can't find anything in the documentation that tells me it will do so).

My statement about the CX160 not having a remote was to point out that it shouldn't accidentally get shut down due to a "stray" IR signal. The CX160 does work well with the Sony tripod controller (I tested it out last night). I'm so glad I got the tripod with the controller; it's so much easier to control the zoom from the controller than with the small button on the top of the cam. The controller also has a switch for "slow zoom," but in my opinion the "slow zoom" is TOO slow. My plan is to mount the XR500 on the tripod with controller since the CX160 will be fixed anyway.

I do think the plan I've laid out will give me the best peace of mind (if there is such a thing). Thanks for the reassurances!

I think there's a bit of confusion about "remote" - there's the WIRELESS remote, triggered with the little "flinker", the IR sensor for that is in the front of the camera, and typically there's a option to turn that IR sensor off, buried deep within the menus... the reason being you don't want a stray IR signal turning the cam off record...

The second "remote" is a WIRED remote, typically a LANC accessed through the "D" shaped A/V port - I believe all the remote tripods CURRENTLY shipping have the A/V plug, older LANC interfaced through a 2.5mm miniplug.

I'd not worry THAT much about the CX160 - think of it as a "monitor", covering your cutaways. I've been experimenting with the Sony P&S (point and shoot!) cameras for this function, similar chip size and "features" (or lack thereof!), and they do just fine, looking quite good in HD, and by the time you go to DVD, shouldn't be a problem.

You want the camera with more controls to be the "manned" camera. Not saying it isn't preferable to be close enough to your second cam to have a look at the screen from time to time (thus operating from a SINGLE location), but if you decide to have the two cams in separate locations... you'll have to set framing, and let 'er roll. Unless you can "visit" the cameras during the event, you just have to set and forget... myself I prefer to be able to at least "check" on a cam if at all possible now and then (if for no other reason than to make sure it's still rolling and "on the mark").

Edit: Just caught your post that you WILL have a second camera "person" (YEA!). Just be sure to instruct that the ONLY concern is to maintain the camera rolling, and framed properly (meaning where you set and lock it!). NO zooming, unless required to tighten up the framing (set to full stage width, but sometimes this isn't always "fixed"!). I think with a second "camera op" you're set! The memory WILL NOT automatically switch media, so instruct your op how to do the changeover. Start with an SD card, go to internal, switch to a second SD card when it's convenient would be my suggestion.

We've all had our experiences with "consumer cam" quality, but the cameras out there now are significantly improved over even a couple years ago - we have HD cell phones now, after all... with a little skill, and some production value, even these little "pocket rockets" can get results that 5 years ago would have knocked most anyone's socks off, and will hold up fine to most viewers today.

The tripod remote should work with both cams directly just fine.

I think it's time for Brad to stop listening to us and just try this stuff all for himself and see how it comes out. Try the settings we've suggested on both cams (if the XR arrives in time) and play back directly to a good HDTV via HDMI and see how it looks. Only way to know. The only thing he won't be able to tell from the rehearsal, if they don't use the actual stage lights, is how well the SPOTLIGHT and AE SHIFT modes handle the brightness and contrast levels. That's going to be a Hail Mary on the day of show.

Once the 32gb internal memory fills up, I will need to switch over to the 32gb SD card unless the CX160 cam will do the switch automatically (I can't find anything in the documentation that tells me it will do so).


It will not switch over automatically.

To switch, touch Menu --> show others ---> scroll down to "Manage Media" ---> touch media settings ----> Movie Media Set ---> Memory Card. Exit menu.

I got my first good trial with the CX160 last night at my step-son's play. They did Alice in Wonderland Jr. in a high school auditorium setting with stage lights, full dress, etc. I found that overall the CX160 did pretty well. I need to go back and watch the whole thing again because I tried changing a few settings throughout the performance. In the beginning I let the cam run on auto mode with only steady shot turned off. After a while I set scene selection to spot light as they were using a spot light on occasion and I wanted to see if there was any noticeable difference.

I hooked up the cam to my HD TV when I got home and the first thing I noticed is that the faces of anyone wearing light (mainly white) colors were overexposed when zoomed out. Faces of those wearing darker colors were great. If I zoomed in closer on those wearing white, the overexposure was gone and I really got a nice shot. Changing scene selection to spotlight did not seem to show any noticeable improvements.

I'm guessing I am going to run into the same scenario with the recital this weekend. Any thoughts?

Does "overexposed" mean kind of "washed out" (brighter than you would like but the kid was still more or less recognizable) or does it mean "blown out" (unrecognizable white blur)?

If this was a case of "just brighter than you would like," and you are only using the CX as your second cam, I might just live with it. Maybe adjust the scene a bit in editing with whatever controls your NLE has. With your soon-to-arrive XR cam, you avoid much of this by using the AE shift (-3 for plain stage lights, -4 if there will be a spotlight). Unfortunately, one of the limitations of the CX160 is the lack of AE shift.

If it is a case of "blown out," you could try enabling the "spot meter" function on the CX. While watching the viewscreen, you touch the area that seems blown out. (The 3" hd videwscreen on the CX will give you a pretty good sense of this.) The camera adjusts the exposure for that area. When the "bright" kids move in the frame, follow with a touch. The disadvantage of this method is that each adjustment momentarily bumps the camera. Still, it gives you something like manual exposure control while maintaining a wide depth of field with the manual focus (per the instructions several pages ago.) This is intuitive enough that, if you are using the CX as your fixed cam, you could draft one of the family members to do this while you run the XR.

Another alternative for control, particularly if the CX is being run as the second cam, would be this. Turn on "spot focus" and point/touch to mid stage. (If it is a fixed cam, the mid-stage focus is most likely to have everything in focus with a proper depth of field.) Re-set the manual knob from "focus" to "exposure." Leave the camera set to auto exposure until there is a dance with a lot of white/very light apparel. Press the button to activate control and then ride the exposure knob for that dance, dialing down as needed. Of course, everytime you make an adjustment will bump the camera. If the XR does not arrive in time and you need to use the CX as your primary camera, you could try the combined spot mtr/focus touch screen control for dances with a kids in white costumes.

Am I correct that the controllers on the Sony tripods do not have anything that would control exposure or focus on a CX cams; that they only have controls for start-stop, zoom and still photo?

I haven't used the CX menu setting for face detection setting much, but it has seemed to help on some occasions. Maybe Dave can contribute more on this.

Definitely want to enable face detection, as it will allow the camera to look for proper exposure when it "sees" a face. As Jay noted, "overexposed" may still be tweakable in post with these cameras - they tend to have pretty good lattitude, meaning the chances are the data is there to be tweaked in post, not just "blown out" and gone, like old school film might be. Drop some of the footage into your edit program, and play with it a bit.

The problem comes when the camera is trying to adjust to the entire frame, rather than the faces (thus face detection!). Light costumes/clothing on a dark background will tend to overepose because of the dark background being dominant - that's where riding the exposure or using spot exp/focus "might" be an option. AE shift is the more reliable "fix", but since the 160 lacks that...

I actually looked at a 160 at the big box store yesterday, I think you'll find it more than acceptable in quality, what I could see from a brief hands on was pretty good.

OK... It's been a long day!

Rehearsal was tonight and I got the XR500 about an hour before it started. It was sent to a wrong zip code and I had to drive out of my way to go pick it up once I found out which post office had it. Then I found out the seller didn't include the AC adapter and both batteries were completely dead. I did manage to get some rehearsal footage from both the CX160 and the XR500 using the AC adapter from the CX160.

First to Dave - I did have face detection turned on at the play last night, but the cam only started recognizing faces when zoomed in quite a bit.

Next, I'm sorry if I am using the term "overexposure" incorrectly. At the the play last night, "washed out" would be the correct description. However, at the rehearsal tonight, "blown out" would be the better description for the footage with the CX160 (many of the performers were completely white from head to toe). The XR500 did pretty good but still had some "washed out" footage. The lights on the stage tonight were bright white overhead lights. No colors or anything for the rehearsal. The footage from the CX160 even showed the pitch-black background as being a bright gray color. So for rehearsal, I had bright white stage lights with a solid black background.

I found that if I turned down the exposure setting manually (on the CX160 it's just a slider bar on the screen with no numbers), I could get some really good images. Are the dB numbers on the screen during playback the exposure settings? If so, I was getting the best shots when it was either at 0 dB or 3 dB. On auto exposure, it was about 13 dB for the same scene. In this lighting situation, turning the exposure down made the background look black and made the performers really stand out nicely against it. If I could only keep this fixed lighting scenario for the recital on Sunday, I'd know exactly how to set these cams for the perfect picture.

Since the CX160 did really poor with the bright lights, I'm considering manually adjusting down the exposure as I think that would still provide the best overall footage even if the lights were a tad dimmer on some performances. I'm going to guess that most will be bright. I will be manning the XR500 myself and I am considering using auto focus (it did well tonight) and using the manual nob to control exposure if need be.

Sounds good to me. Advice is only that. You have to develop judgment for the conditions and you are doing that. Pretty soon, you'll be able to give advice to others.

Sounds about right - I'm not sure where the threshold is on face recognition, sometimes it seems able to pick faces out of a small portion of the frame, other times, not so much... it's definitely better with tighter framing on the talent!

I usually set AE shift -2 to -4, then use the knob for exposure if needed, as you plan - you also might take a look at spot focus/exposure, although it means potentially bumping the camera around with the touchscreen.

You probably are thinking along the right lines with the 160 - set the exposure manually and cross your fingers that the lighting range isn't too radical... As already mentioned, these cameras will ealuate the entire scene, and gain up as much as they "think" they need to get it all exposed "about right" - but in theater lighting with dark backgrounds and brightly lit performers, it's typically WAY too bright. The camera will, as you found, attempt to make the black "grey" to average the scene!

I leave AE shift "on" pretty much ALL the time, but you'll have to manually ride the exposure (manual AE shift if you will!) on that little CX160. Or set to what you hope will be a "happy medium" - another one of those reasons to be close to your cam for adjustments...

I was using AE shift of -3 on the XR500 and still got the "washed out" effect in many circumstances. I'm not so sure I am comfortable using the MANUAL dial to actually control the exposure as I don't have much experience at all with that. Should I consider dialing down the AE shift a little further to like maybe -4 or -5? Or better yet, I think I can use the MANUAL dial to actually change the AE shift manually. I would feel more comfortable adjusting the shift than the full exposure for a specific scene.

-4 is usually sufficient for the AE shift.

With family members watching the CX for you, maybe one of them could check the viewscreen at the start of each dance and dial exposure down for those dances where it seems to be needed? They can dial it back up to your baseline setting at the end of the dance. Also, if you can, get the theater to give you a 5 minute light check maybe ½ hour before they start the show. You might find the stage lighting to be better balanced than the house and work lights. I've found most tech people are willing to do this for me.


Oh, and the answer to your previous question about the dB numbers on the viewscreen, those are the numerical measure used to represent the exposure setting. To put a fine point on it, dB is technically a measure of gain, but the CX The "exposure" control on the CX is actually a combination of iris, shutter speed and gain, The camera's processors are programmed to adjust these parameters in varying combinations to give what the engineers thought would be most likely in most cases to produce the best picture.

My previous answer was based on my experience with older Sony cams such as the VX2000 and TRV900. I just checked this on my CX550v and I am not seeing any dB numbers, so my previous answer may be incorrect.

OK ... we've watched this thread all the way through, so we've gotta know ... how did it go?

I would like to thank everyone for all of the advice, support, and encouragement provided here in this forum! Although I haven't yet watched any of the recital footage, I feel pretty confident that this has been a successful endeavor. If it weren't for you guys here, this could have been a disaster!

You were correct from the beginning that the CX160 camera was not suited for this job and I am so glad I took your advice and got the XR500. I did use the CX160 in a fixed wide position form the right side balcony, but I don't think much of its footage is going to be useable because it didn't handle the bright lights very well. The lights (which we were all concerned about) ended up being fixed for the entire show. They had overhead bright white lights with some colored lights pointing to the top of a backdrop.

I will post back again once I start to review what I've captured to give more details on how things came out. I'll probably post a couple samples (of my better shots) so you can have a look. I can't believe how long it takes to download so much data from the camera to the computer. As of this morning, the 40gb file from the XR500 had been transferring for about 8 hours with an estimated 2 hours left. Is this typical for transer time?

Thanks again for all your help. Stay tuned for a new thread by Brad Ridgeway titled "Amateur Recital Video Editing."