http://www.motivitypictures.com/hvx200/Jadon_HD.html

I think this is an indications of how great footage looks when the lighting is right.

My partner Cassidy edited the footage. Nice work Cassidy!!! You're FIRED!

David

sobbing uncontrollably...

Very impressive---can you tell us more about the shoot---camera settings, white balance etc-----

Nice looking stuff! How many cameras?

Can you tell us about the color grade? I noticed a couple of high-noise shots- did you- push gain in camera or do something in post? Also noticed that some of the slo-mo shots looked like they were artifically done in post while others looked really clean.

Great job guys!

Nice looking stuff! How many cameras?

Can you tell us about the color grade? I noticed a couple of high-noise shots- did you- push gain in camera or do something in post? Also noticed that some of the slo-mo shots looked like they were artifically done in post while others looked really clean.

Great job guys!

Matt, all of it was post, and yes there was some artificial slow motion shots I did, the ones that were clean were pure 60p. For certain aesthetic reasons I like to take the mids up to an intense level, I know it's noisy but there's something about it that feels right at that moment.

It was a 1 camera shoot as well. The footage that is not 60p was recorded at 1080i and downconverted to a 720p timeline in FCP.

Well honestly my shoot would be pretty unimpressive to anyone who was at the concert.

I only have one 4GB card. So my record time was about 5 minutes. Who would ever know from the footage? I had to select my shots very quickly and very wisely.

I set up my Hollywood Micro Dolly in front of the stage. I immediately got a couple of track shots...then broke down the track in about 2 minutes. I then relocated for the other shots. It was my friend who was singing and I basically told him I had about 5 minutes worth of footage I could capture and he was actually only playing for abour 30 minutes. So it was all pretty bang bang.

So all that to say. 1 camera. 5 minutes of total footage captured.

My settings were all pretty basica. Cine V curve. Open iris. 1/120 F-stop. White balance on auto. Like I said it's all about great lighting. But combined with a wonderful camera.

Yes! More inspiration! That looks awesome! Gorgeous! I am finding no end to the thrill of this camera.

I have some footage coming up to add to the inspiration pool - hot models. :D But I gotta clear the footage with the photographer.

Start salivating now. :P

Great work David. Keep it comin.

-steev

OMG! That is some damn nice footage there.

For certain aesthetic reasons I like to take the mids up to an intense level, I know it's noisy but there's something about it that feels right at that moment.

I liked it. It plays very well with the subject matter and most importantly, it wasn't excessive.

Again, great looking footage.

The light was so dramatic at the concert and the camera captured it VERY well.

I think that the noisy shots at the beginning of the piece (the c.u.'s of the hand plucking the guitar) look great. They suit the mood of the piece quite well. The grain has a very organic feel to it. Watching it over again makes me wonder if that has to do with the edit. Perhaps if I saw that shot for a longer time I would think differently. Who knows. Again, it does look nice and works well within the cut so I suppose it doesn't matter.

In my opinion, something well lit looks good on any camera, be it super8 or DV. In this case it's good usage of the camera and a tight cut that make it. I'm assuming that the lighting was pretty much taken care of.

I can see why people who are used to the long times provided by tape have complained about the times with p2 cards. However, even for event shooting, p2 simply requires more dicipline and planning. One only needs to look at documentaries and events that are shot on film. The first Woodstock documentary is a great example of this. A more recent example is March of the Penguins. That was shot on an Aaton XTR prod with 800ft mags (about 20 min a load.) So it can be done. It is being done.

I figure with four 4gb cards shot at 720 24p (4gb card x 2 or about 20 min per load so no slow-mo) with a p2 store, covering a concert event is very possible. The time to transfer the cards is about the same as unloading and reloading a mag. The benefit of the card is that it can be done without a camera assistant/loader.

If the client needed end to end coverage of an event that was a couple of hours then perhaps I would go for a tape based medium. However, with an assistant, I think the HVX could be implemented into this workflow.

The one thing I'm wondering is how this footage looks on a bigger screen, specifically the noise on those first shots. Can you comment on this David?

Regards,

Kris.

I can see why people who are used to the long times provided by tape have complained about the times with p2 cards. However, even for event shooting, p2 simply requires more dicipline and planning. One only needs to look at when documentaries and events are shot on film. The first Woodstock documentary is a great example of this. A more recent example is March of the Penguins. That was shot on an Aaton XTR prod with 800ft mags (about 20 min a load.) So is it can be done. It is being done.

I figure with four 4gb cards shot at 720 24p (4gb card x 2 or about 20 min per load so no slow-mo) with a p2 store, covering a concert event is very possible. The time to transfer the cards is about the same as unloading and reloading a mag. The benefit of the card is that it can be done without a camera assistant/loader.
You bring up an interesing point, Kris. Call me crazy, but one of the things that attracted me to this camera is the SHORTER running times. As you said above, it forces you to be more disciplined with your shot selections. One thing that drives me nuts on DV shoots are directors who know that tape is cheap and exploit that fact to get excessive coverage or versions of a take. "Ok keep rolling, now try this... one more time, one more time, one more time, one more time... OK push in, keep rolling, one more time..." Sound familiar to anyone? I think the shorter run-times will force undisciplined directors and DPs to figure out what they need and/or want before they shoot, which is a good thing.
Of course, that's just, like, my opinion, man.

it forces you to be more disciplined with your shot selections.

I couldn't agree more, in the time we have shot with this camera, each shot is never arbitrary. We plan it out, especially with track and dolly shots. We light it really well and when we think we have it we shoot. Then we watch it again... (I love this feature) if it isn't perfect we delete it, make refinements and try again.

The one thing I'm wondering is how this footage looks on a bigger screen, specifically the noise on those first shots. Can you comment on this David?

Regards,

Kris.


Hey Chris...I really don't have an answer for how this will look on a big screen. All I know is they have shot movies on minidv that made it to the theatre so the HD footage is only better. But believe me the amount of noise in that first part is do to blowing out the image. 200% larger maybe? Just an edit decision. All I know is we have burned some of this HD footage to a DVD and it looks fantastic on tvs. The mpeg2 codec responds so much better to all the resolution.

The mpeg2 codec responds so much better to all the resolution.

Yes, I was getting quite angry when exporting xl2 footage to the mpeg2 codec using compressor. I know compressor is the last thing you want to use for exporting high quality mpeg2 material, but that is all we have, we have tried bit-vice and some others as well. But i have noticed a considerable difference in quality when I export 720p or 1080i footage to mpeg2, burn it and watch it on the T.V. There are a lot less digital artifacts than with the xl2 exports.

Another thing we did was go direct from the HVX into the television using S-video and watched some footage. Now that looks good. So good i think i drooled a little bit. And I just have a crappy Sanyo TV in my office.

I know compressor is the last thing you want to use for exporting high quality mpeg2 material
How come? I've never heard that before. Is there some other tool for the mac that I'm oblivious to? Just curious.

That was really. Awesome. Can't wait to get my Hvx200.
You get good clarity even the noise level is high. Is H stands for Heaven?

How come? I've never heard that before. Is there some other tool for the mac that I'm oblivious to? Just curious.


There isn't for the mac. These would be 3rd party encoders. They are machines that are specifically built to encode. Usually offering much more in depth bit rate variation. You have a slow scene. Reduce the bit rate. You have an intense action scene. Raise the bit rate. Basically it's all customizable. When you use Compressor you pick a bit rate and that's it. The whole thing is encoded at the same bit rate.

These 3 party systems are extremely expensive. I've heard upwards of $200,000. But this is what Hollywood uses. This is all what I've been told.

How come? I've never heard that before. Is there some other tool for the mac that I'm oblivious to? Just curious.

Well there are lots of tools... I was just stating that compressor pails in comparision to a program like Digital Ventures
DVDComposer. An MPEG-2 video encoding system that's $50,000.

When i went straight into the T.V with my Xl2, the footage looked so good, but everytime I converted to Mpeg 2, there were tons of digital artifacts, especially on cross fades and fade to black transitions. I could even see pixelation on any type of movement. I even dragged every slider there was to top quality and used the highest bit rate possible, it still didn't seem to matter.

It may not be that big of a deal, but it drove me nuts that i couldn't get what i saw on tape to look like that on DVD. I am a perfectionist.

I know Sony has proprietary mpeg2 encoding software that they use to make all the hollywood DVD's on, and that's why they look so good. (I know it's film) but the arrested development DVD disk series wasn't done on film and it looks so good on DVD. I always wondered if they used the xl2 on that show.

All in all, i like what i am seeing using compressor with HVX footage.

My assumption is since the footage was shot in 2/3" ccd chips or film the quality should be good even after compression.

What if, you create a 3d composite using Maya and Shake and compress it using existing codec h.264 you still have the quality maintained like a film.

When i create any object and during rendering i specify what quality i needed it to be either HD,super 16 or 35mm and when i compress it using h.264 the actual file size will be much more less and still the film/HD quality will be maintained.

I think its more towards the pixel size of the chip used in the camera which directly correlates to how much color info you can gather.

Just my 2 cents here.

My assumption is since the footage was shot in 2/3" ccd chips or film the quality should be good even after compression.


Yes, but the HVX200 has 3 1/3" CCD chips...