Hi folks,

I'm having some real trouble with footage I'm currently producing.
I shot a little outdoor footage (construction) yesterday in one of those overcast but bright days. Aside from not being particularly sharp (I'm testing the back focus again tomorrow) the footage looks, according to my girlfriend, like an old VHS copy of eastern european documentary (and not kieslowski at that). The sky is so bleached it almost hurts your eyes and the reflections on white concrete the same. There is no warmth there at all, pretty much a blue hue dominates.
I had to use a the 2 on board ND filters whilst keeping the iris at 4 - 8 mark depending.
Scene was CAM scene 1 - I'm going to play with Tim and Paulo's (et al) recipe scenes tomorrow, though I had used panamatch before and although the colour was far superior I still had this bleaching...which leads me to believe I am doing something fundamentally wrong.
Will this scene files suit PAL and SD setups (rather than NTSC HDV)?

If someone can give me a little direction I'd be most grateful. I have to get some more footage over the next few days and I really want this to work...and I'm starting to panic!
It doesn't seem right that I'm getting sharper, more colourful footage from my old panasonic NV GS120 camcorder!

Many thanks.

Hi david...

Fundamental question...did u white balance? what was the color temp?

I figured I wouldn't need to on this. It was pretty much one building under construction from various angles/rooftops/ground etc.
It was set at preset 3200k. I read from someone that white balances were not as necessary as made out to be and perhaps a warm card (or kodak grey?) may be better. Of all the things I was doing to get to grips with this camera (and the FCP suite for that matter) white balance has sadly been neglected. If you have a recommended linkie to white balancing then that would certainly help.
It's early days for me at the moment (I haven't as yet produced a show reel etc) and I sometimes think I'm going to collapse under the weight of it all...but I'll keep on plowing on become confident.

I'll try and post a jpeg frame just as an example...be warned - it's not nice viewing!

well, that's certainly your problem with blue coloration. once you capture, there's only so much you can do in post to correct the color balance.

David,

For an overcast sky you're about 4000k out. It's not the end of the world. You need to reset reset the WB by using your 3-way colour correcter. Using the small eye dropper is the fastest way to do this.

Hope that helps.

Liam.

First thing -- if you're outside start at 5200 or 5600 depending on what the camera has-3200 is basically an indoor setting under incandesant bulbs, not always but as a general rule of thumb.
In you're NLE you should be able to color correct MOST of the blue out but it probably still won't look quite right but at least it won't look like you used a blue filter to shoot.The basics of WB are quite simple-find something white under the lighting you're going to shoot under and set the camera to that-outdoors 5200 indoors 3200 zoom in on the white object and set the switch - once the camera reads that you're good to go. You might subsitute a gray or warm card in place of white depending on the look you want to achieve.
Not owning the particular camera in question this is just a general rule of thumb-some cams have a setting up to 6400-I'm not familar enough to be able to say exactly on you cam.
HTHs
Don

That might explain pretty much all this pain then folks.
Yes the camera has a 3200k (set to...which will explain why the indoors shots looked good, though I feel the back focus has slipped a little since then) whereas the outdoors is pretty rum. I'm fairly certain the highest setting on this camera is 5600k.
There is a preset temp and and A and B for storing (I presume you can set increments of these temps on the HD100?)
I'll white balance first thing tomorrow...I have to film again over the next few days and can't really afford to make any more errors like this.
I just really need the shots to be sharp and colourful - lifelike really in this particular job.
Reset in FCP Liam? I'll give it a whirl - it might not be perfect but at least I'll have backup (this will be used in sharply edited 'funky' video so might get away with it...?).
Aside from the 'blueness', would this explain the over bleached look also then?
Many, many thanks.

2800K - Incandescent "household" bulbs

3200K - Tungsten balance (most professional lighting)

5600K (aka 5500K) - Daylight balance (sunny day or HMI source)

8000+K - Cloudy/shade

David...

You need to read the owner's manual. There are 2 WB presets, 3200 and 5600K, plus 2 user definable white balance settings. read the manual to find out how to set a custom white balance. In my own experience, the 5600K preset will give you a pretty warm outdoor color.

As for exposure, I have several ND(neutral density) filters that I use outdoors, ontop of the in-camera ND filters. I use the external ND's whenever I can't hold f/4-f/5.6, which is pretty normal in bright sunlight. One of the best exposure tools you have are the zebra stripes, which will show up whenever the highlights exceed a certain IRE value. The HD100 will let you select when to illuminate the zebra stripes. If you see them, you know you're blowing the highlights. Again, read the manual to find out how to set these up.

Hope this helps,
Bill

Aside from the 'blueness', would this explain the over bleached look also then?
Simple overexposure.

On bright days you will barely have enough control with ND position #2 and 1/48th or 1/50th shutter speed. You can always stop down (as you mentioned you were in the F4/F5.6/F8 range. However, try not to stop down past F8 because you will risk diffraction, which will make everythink a little out of focus. The sweet spot to aim for is F4.

You could increase shutter speed to reduce exposure, but then you will be invoking the "strobe" effect used in films like "Saving Private Ryan."

I recommend investing in some ND filters to attach to the front of the lens. ND filter factors are hard to understand for beginners (unless you understand logarithmic functions) but the basic idea is that every "N.3" is one stop of exposure reduction.
Therefore a N.3 filter will cut the exposure in half (1 stop), a N.6 will cut the exposure to ¼ (2 stops) N.9 = 3 stops (1/8th), N1.2 = 4 stops (1/16th), etc. You can add ND filters as well, so a N.3 + N.6 = N.9 (3 stops.) I usually keep a N.3 and N.6 in my box.

If you want to maintain the rich "blue" of the sky, invest in a polarizer (NOT a circular polarizer) and a matte box with a rotatable filter stage. Polarizers can cut your exposure as much as 2½ stops and the effect is controllable. The versatility of a polarizer for controlling reflections in glass/water as well as the "blueness" of the sky means I never leave home without it.

Will this scene files suit PAL and SD setups (rather than NTSC HDV)?


David,

HDV isn't PAL or NTSC it's HDV. The colour space and resolution are the same whatever the frame rate.

If I were you I'd use Tim's wide latitude setting and stick the zebra's on 100%. Then at least you'll always know when things are going pear-shaped.

Cheers,

Liam.

David,
The A/B on the WB is for setting a "preset" WB-in other words, once you have set the switch for the appropriate type of lighting in this case 5600 then focus in on something white or again use a gray or warm card your choice for the desired look you want -hit th eWB switch in either A or B setting. This will now be stored in the camera until you change it. If you WB using a white card on the A side you can WB using a warm card on the B side as an example. You can of course only use 1 setting at a time but it can be a big time saver IF you need to shoot say the same thing but have 2 different colorations.
Again, by reading the manual and practicing with the camera you will find all sorts of amazing things you can do with color, exposure and DO learn how to proper use the zebra settings. They can save your bacon.

Don

Thanks folks - all the above is an absolute wealth of information for me.
I had a good route through the manual at the time (several months back) but unfortunately neglected the white balance ???? I'll destroy that article which suggests WB is not really that important (though thinking back it still maintained setting the correct temp for indoors/outdoors).

I have had my eye on some screw in ND filters for some time...now's certainly the time to invest. Matt box and french flag...unless I can find a good price for one that may have to wait.

Tim - I will look into the polariser, but I guess that's tied in with the investment of a matt box. I do in fact have one (circular) for an old SLR camera, so makes sense to employ one for this camera....ebay might be called up over the next few days!
8000k - cloudy and shade - tis no wonder that my WB set at 3200k pretty much killed my footage. Bright overcast sky and having the camera sat on top of a building - 360 degrees of this horrible light. After 2 x ND filters and the iris being pushed far enough I realised something was missing...not much chanc of fixing it in the mix (though I'll try Liam's suggestion of colour correction). I really didn't want to play with the shutter (set at 1/50th). The footage has to be pretty 'straight'...in fact sometimes interlaced camcorder shots are preferred to progressive. If I get this right over the next few days then the former won't be asked for again!

Bill - I did start to use the zebra when I first started using the camera, but I've mostly done indoors stuff recently and it seemed ok (I know now that the WB would've been correct). But yes - time to deploy the zebra again. Thanks.

Liam - Yes...we had this conversation yesterday on these boards - quite a relevation (or not if I thought about it). I suppose then I should've asked whether using HDV scene settings would translate ok in PAL or NTSC. But I guess this should be fine. I'll dig round for Tim's wide settings tomorrow (will try other scenes out also).

Well - what a crash course this has been. Really, really appreciated folks.
I'll let you know how I get on...thanks again.

...meanwhile the client wants some day/night sped up/time lapse footage...that will be for another thread :)

Hi David,

A quick guide to WB.

1. There are three buttons that determine white balance; 'B', 'A' and 'PRST'.

PRST (preset) can be set to either 3300k (tungsten) or 5500k or auto white balance via the menu. I'd avoid auto white balance, and even then I'd avoid it.

2. 'B' and 'A' are where you store your manual white balance readings. These are what you should use for setting the white balance.

3. To set white balance. Choose 'A' or 'B'. Fill the centre part of the frame with something gray or white. Hit the auto exposure button (it's not necessary to focus but it's very important to set your exposure correctly.

4. Press and hold the 'AWB' button. A message will appear telling you the recorded value.

5. That recorded value will remain stored at either 'A' or 'B' until you record a new value.

That's all there is to it.

There are a lot of tricks that you can do to fool the white balance to create different looks, but I think you need to get a handle on the fundamentals first.

Hope that helps.

Liam.

Sorry Don I didn't mean to shoot you down. Should have refreshed my browser.

The more the merrier Liam!
I'll be doing these tests first thing in the morning (before taking them out live)...unless it's raining of course...rain cover - something else to invest in :(

The exposure is a bit of a worry though - I'll struggle to research and either afford/purchase extra filters or even matt boxes & french flags although I'm sure these pretty much essential. As I mentioned before, the on-board ND filters barely touched the light and any extra iris tweeking would harm the footage in another manner.
I took some digital photo's on a fairly basic Sony cyber shot over the weekend - similar sky to as the day I shot this footage on the HD100. The shot's are perfectly balanced/exposed/focused etc. Increasinly getting the impression that there's a wealth of difference between digital camera's, digital camcorders and (may I suggest professional?) camera's such as the HD100. It's been said here a few times that the camera really makes you work for that fantastic footage...which isn't really a bad thing in the end.

Curious about the eye dropper and colour correction in FCP. Worth a try certainly if not to rescue a few vital shots. Pretty new to FCP also, so another learning curve awaits me.
Cheers.

Increasinly getting the impression that there's a wealth of difference between digital camera's, digital camcorders and (may I suggest professional?) camera's such as the HD100. It's been said here a few times that the camera really makes you work for that fantastic footage...which isn't really a bad thing in the end.
Not really. I use my Nikon D70 all the time on location scouts to judge available light levels. When in "auto" mode, Digital still cameras will simply stop down and use a high shutter speed when outside (probably around 1/500th) which is 10 times higher than the 1/50th shutter speed you would ideally use with 25P. You could also increase your shutter speed to control exposure, but every frame will have that very sharp look.

PRST (preset) can be set to either 3300k (tungsten) or 5500k or auto white balance via the menu. I'd avoid auto white balance, and even then I'd avoid it.
Tungsten (indoors, outdoors night, artificial lighting, theatre, concert, etc.) = 3200K
Daylight (outdoors day, HMI lighting, interior day if large windows allow daylight in, etc.) = 5600K or sometimes 6500K

The lower the temperature (measured in degrees Kelvin - K) the more sensitive to the changes the number is. I.e. you can see the difference between 3200K and 3300K with your naked eyes. However, the higher the number, the less difference would be visible. I.e. you are unlikely to see the difference between 5600K and 6500K. They are almost interchangeable. That's why I mentioned in another post that during the day and typical shoot, one might be just fine to set the WB to a preset (in this case 5600K) and just live with it. As Tim mentioned, if the day is very cloudy with those white bright clouds, the colour temperature is going to climb to 7000-10,000K. Again, even if you shot under those circumstances with the WB in preset 5600K, you'd be fine, the colours might be a tad cool but that's how they look to our eyes anyway (if you really pay attention). You can imagine the difference to follow a logarithmic curve where the steep part are the lower temperatures from 0 to say some 4000K. Further on the curve flattens and the differences become very small.

If you want to maintain the rich "blue" of the sky, invest in a polarizer (NOT a circular polarizer) and a matte box with a rotatable filter stage. Polarizers can cut your exposure as much as 2½ stops and the effect is controllable. The versatility of a polarizer for controlling reflections in glass/water as well as the "blueness" of the sky means I never leave home without it.

Tim,

I'm curious about your admonition against circular polarizers. It was always my understanding that circular polarizers were prefered for digital video cameras in order to preserve the ability to meter through the polarizer. My experience has been that both linear and circular polarizers give you the same effect on the light, but I thought that the slightly more expensive circular polarizers were needed to ensure that light made it through the prisims in the optical path. Perhaps I've been laboring under a delusion.

Tim,

I'm curious about your admonition against circular polarizers. It was always my understanding that circular polarizers were prefered for digital video cameras in order to preserve the ability to meter through the polarizer. My experience has been that both linear and circular polarizers give you the same effect on the light, but I thought that the slightly more expensive circular polarizers were needed to ensure that light made it through the prisims in the optical path. Perhaps I've been laboring under a delusion.
Circular polarizers are designed for SLR still cameras that use TTL metering systems and AF rangefinding systems with "half-mirrors." Using a linear polarizer screws up those auto exposure and auto-focus systems, and that's why most photo stores will recommend circular over linear.

Professional cameras don't even have autofocus, and they don't need separate TTL metering systems because the CCDs are always on.
You can use a circular polarizer on any camera system if you want, but you won't be able to control the intensity of the effect by rotating the filter in a matte box.

Control is the key with digital cinematography, and the ability to control the "darkness" of the sky or opacity of reflections by simply rotating the filter is essential. Therefore, the standard (and cheaper) "linear" polarizers are my preference.

So the prism blocks that split the incoming light to the 3 ccds is not effected by full linear polarization? Makes sense. Thanks for the info.

You can, btw, see the effect through a circular polarizer. I have a 4x4 Tiffen circular polarizer that I adjust in the mattebox just as you describe.

So the prism blocks that split the incoming light to the 3 ccds is not effected by full linear polarization? Makes sense. Thanks for the info.
I've never heard of it being a problem. I use a linear 4x4 polarizer on a regular basis without issue.

You can, btw, see the effect through a circular polarizer. I have a 4x4 Tiffen circular polarizer that I adjust in the mattebox just as you describe.
You're right, it is slightly controllable in a matte box, but linear polarizers are much more effective.
I should have also mentioned that I'm trying to sway people from purchasing "screw on" type filters that you typically see on SLR cameras, unless it has a "double-ring" that allows for independent rotation.

I should have also mentioned that I'm trying to sway people from purchasing "screw on" type filters that you typically see on SLR cameras, unless it has a "double-ring" that allows for independent rotation.
As long as the screw-on polarizer has the double ring allowing for rotation, is there any disadvantage to the screw-on type?

Also, it has always been my understanding that the circular polarizer is only needed for certain automatic focusing systems. Since the JVC camera does not have autofocus, the circular polarizer is not necessary. This link explains this:
http://www.geocities.com/cokinfiltersystem/polarizer.htm

Re chepaer Polarisers - wouldn't you have to factor costs of the mattebox (with french flag?)?
I can see that a mattebox and linear polarizer is certainly something I'll require have to add to my kit...but cost at the moment is putting me off.
The odd bit of low budget corporate work (at the moment) make these seem a little surplus at the moment, but it's probably the right time to be thinking about adding these in the very near future. Are there any budget ranges - and ones that don't fall apart within a few weeks?

I get some nice sky shots from my old 35mm SLR with a circular polariser - it would be great to start capturing these skys with the JVC.


Meanwhile, the screw on ND filters are of top priority...morning telephone call - reading the previous posts 1 x N3 and 1 x N6 should help.

Cheers.

And thanks for that linkie Jack - interesting read.

Tungsten (indoors, outdoors night, artificial lighting, theatre, concert, etc.) = 3200K
Daylight (outdoors day, HMI lighting, interior day if large windows allow daylight in, etc.) = 5600K or sometimes 6500K

Correct me if I'm wrong and I apologize if I am, but this is completely wrong and a touch misleading.

If what you say were true explain to me a sunset shot, where you have 2300k coming from the sun and 10,000k or more coming from the sky or how a kino flow can be either daylight or tungsten when it's actually a fluorescent or how some artificial lighting has no measurable colour temperature at all.

The point is simple; everything you point your camera at will be made up from a mix of colour temperature and that colour temperature varies massively, be it natural or artificial. It's up to the DP to determine what colour temperature is important to capture -usually the key.

What I was trying to do was give David some basic advice so he can get some usable material on tape.

Please, shoot me down if I'm wrong, unlike Lord Kelvin I didn't attend university at age ten.

It's up to the DP to determine what colour temperature is important to capture -usually the key.
Absolutely right... and it is important for the DP to first understand the different colour temperatures of different sources. That's all Jiri and others (including myself) were trying to educate David on.

David's "mistake" of using 3200K in daylight is exactly the technique I use to intentionally shoot "day-for-night." (along with a 1 or 2 stop underexposure.)

The point is simple; everything you point your camera at will be made up from a mix of colour temperature and that colour temperature varies massively, be it natural or artificial.
Well, everything is a mixture of colours, that's true. You used the example of a sunset. Well, sunset typically looks very warm, deep orange and red hues, right? Well, if you white balanced to that (and it may well be colour temperature of around 2300K), you would loose those beautiful hues that make the sunset what it is. Your sun would be more yellow/white and the clouds too and all that. Go ahead, try it.

Now if you add a person to the mix and stick to a daylight preset (5600K), their face, of course, would also look very warm. But that is EXACTLY what the skin tone looks like in that light. And here comes the DP and his/hers expertise and artistic vision for the shot, as well as the need within the context of the scene. If the scene is supposed to take place in the evening and we, the audience, know that (from, say, an extablishing wide shot) we expect the actors' faces to be warm. On the other hand, if this shot is a pick up at the end of the day and it really belongs to a scene that happens during the day (and which was shot earlier), clever white balancing might be necessary to try to match the rest of the scene. The DP would also make sure that they would not shoot in the direction of the sun and avoid direct sunlight on the actor's face. Check some major Hollywood pictures and see how actors sitting around a campfire at night have completely warm (red and orange) faces. If you white balanced to the fire light, that would be lost.

White balancing in video (and the same colour temperature principles in film) is a tool that allows the DP to create a feeling, atmosphere, a tone for the scene and in extension for the whole film.

... or more coming from the sky or how a kino flow can be either daylight or tungsten when it's actually a fluorescent or how some artificial lighting has no measurable colour temperature at all.

Kino flows use specially designed precision colour balanced tubes giving you the daylight and tungsten options. Regular household/office fluorescent tubes are around 4000-4300K with a nasty green hue. To balance that out, there are some special white balance cards available (Warm Cards), which include a lightly green card that allows the DP to remove most of the green hue and bring back some natural skin tones.

In short, white balancing tells the camera that whatever it's pointed at IS WHITE (even if it's not). The camera circuts attempt to remove all other colours to create 'white'. Hence, back to your previous example with the sunset, if you white balance to the light coming from the sun at sunset, the camera will attempt to remove all the orange and red to artificially create 'white'.

The same principle is used in the opposite direction when the DP wants to 'warm up' the picture. Then a card of light blue shade is used. The camera removes portion of the blue spectrum from the image, making the picture warmer. I have seen (and used myself in a crunch) white balancing on stone-washed blue jeans with very good results. Well, now I use a set of Warm Cards...:-)
http://www.vortexmedia.com/

The creative uses of WB are quite limitless. One needs to understand the principles and then it could be a lot of fun. A great example is what Tim mentioned - doing Day for Night with 3200K.

For a rather extreme example of what white balancing can do, I did some still photography a while back in a musical venue that only had red and blue stage lights, creating a purple look on stage. I white balanced on the purple and snapped away. Anything off stage had a bit of a greenish tinge, but the band looked fine.

Now if you add a person to the mix and stick to a daylight preset (5600K), their face, of course, would also look very warm. But that is EXACTLY what the skin tone looks like in that light.
Again, forgive me if I'm wrong, but shooting an actor/model at sunset with your technique would render orange/red highlights, violet/purple mids and dark blue shadows. Not very flattering I'd have thought. Has anyone got a special technique for shooting people at sunset? We don't get many sunsets in the UK, what with all the fog, but it would be nice to know.

And the Rain, don't forget the rain


ooh and the Drizzle


And the sleet..........


:-)

^^ Tell me about it...I was supposed to be shooting a 'vibrant outdoor cafe scene' later today...that ain't going to happen!
Fortunately it's given me the opportunity to read these enlightening posts and get up to speed ASAP...I have a until mid week next to pull this back.

Sorry to labour this point but I need to get hold of some filters today.
I have seen a set of 82mm screw on's (0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.2) for around £94. I only really required (or so I thought) a 0.3 and 0.6 (doubling for 0.9 if required).
I have also seen a Formatte Mattebox for the HD100 at around £145. I may have missed it back in this thread but is it possible to get hold of ND filters used in the mattebox (aside from the liner polariser).
If not, then at this stage I'll get hold of the ND screw on filters...time and certainly money is very important.
As for warm cards, I'll see if I can pick a few up cheaply otherwise the arts and crafts tub downstairs will soon pillaged!
Cheers.

The price of the Mattebox and 4x4 ND filters is more than 3 times the cost of the screw in filters (though I won't be 'polarised filter' ready...and I could do with those :( )

The graduated fliters are slightly more expensive than the ordinary ND filters kit - from experience might it be worth spending an extra £30 on graduated ND's?

Again, forgive me if I'm wrong, but shooting an actor/model at sunset with your technique would render orange/red highlights, violet/purple mids and dark blue shadows. Not very flattering I'd have thought. Has anyone got a special technique for shooting people at sunset? We don't get many sunsets in the UK, what with all the fog, but it would be nice to know.
Liam, you are not reading my posts properly. I am talking about creating a mood and conveying a feeling of the scene. Yes, the actors' faces would look VERY warm (sunset or nighttime bonfire) but if the audience is to undestand WHEN and WHERE the scene is taking place, the cinematography needs to convey that. What is real when it comes to skin tone anyway? People in an office lit by fluorescent lighting? Summer day? Cloudy winter day? Evening in a cozy kitchen lit by a single 60W light? If you, as the DP, don't create distinctive 'looks', you would not be doing your job right.

I'm kind of glad I made this 'error' now - it's been worth if for the amount if information I've 'indulged' over the past 24 hours...certainly raised a few points. I feel far more confident now and look foward to carrying out a series of tests before I go 'live' again.
I totted up the costs for a mattebox (formatte) with 4x4 filters and linear polarisers and it came to around £500...beyond my budget at this time, though hopefully the bit of work I'm getting in at the moment will enable to invest in such kit.
As it stands I have the option of the 82mm Neutral Density kits; either standard ND filters at £60 (for the 4) or £95 for the graduated filters. Just reading through some old threads on here and other sites, for some reason (never explained!!) screw in graduated ND filters have admonitions against them?
The reason that I may have trouble with them is that for this current job I'm shooting onto a the white concrete of the building against the sky (which could remain overcast/bright when I shoot again). If the bottom half of the filter is clear then whilst the sky will be exposed correctly the bottom half, the white concrete, has the possibility of being over exposed as before (though not as bad due to correct WB this time).

Does that kind of make sense? Should I therefore go for the ordinary ND filters at this stage and build my kit at a later date...?
[EDIT - £70 for just one Formatte screw on ND filter...looks like the 0.6 will have to see me through for the time being :( ]
Cheers.

David,

screw-on filters are okay. The reasons why some people advise against them are as follows:

1. the fact that they use fine thread makes them (and your lens) more likely to get damaged from the constant use

2. you can't combine more filters, as they would create a deeper barrel that could become visible in the picture (vignetting)

3. matte boxes and sun shades are more beneficial in the long term as they do more than just hold your filters - they shade the lens from light flares, you can attach a French flag to them, etc.

4. I am pretty sure that there are more various filters available for matte boxes than screw-ons for your particular diameter size. It's a standard size of tray and you have numerous manufacturers making filters

Jiri - totally agree.
At this stage though cost is a major factor. However, I'm really warming to a mattebox and it's versatility - a few more jobs in the pipeline should help pay for one (and the complicated add ons like rails etc!).
For now I may have to order the one .6 filter (non grad) to see me through
As I (hopefully) become more professional then this is the type of equipment I should own. The fact I've digested so much over the past 24 hours tells me that if you set your mind to it then 'it' will stick in!
Many thanks.

Liam, you are not reading my posts properly. I am talking about creating a mood and conveying a feeling of the scene. Yes, the actors' faces would look VERY warm (sunset or nighttime bonfire) but if the audience is to undestand WHEN and WHERE the scene is taking place, the cinematography needs to convey that. What is real when it comes to skin tone anyway? People in an office lit by fluorescent lighting? Summer day? Cloudy winter day? Evening in a cozy kitchen lit by a single 60W light? If you, as the DP, don't create distinctive 'looks', you would not be doing your job right.
Right. Absolutely.
You've outlined the basics of cinematography and I completely concur.
But if I may Jiri, I'll cross swords with you one more time, then I'll bow out gracefully and go back to work. Oh, and I have read your posts carefully.

I picked you up initially because of your assertion that "artificial lighting = 3200k". Clearly that's inaccurate and I know I was harsh to pick you up, well pendantic really and I apologies for that, but I felt that the original poster needed clarity. That's why I mentioned kino's because it's one lamp with two colour temperatures. By the way, in the UK most offices have daylight fluorescents usually giving a cool blue colour temperature.

Again, I raised the sunset issue, not because I don't understand it, but because it's an excellent and easy to understand example of extreme mixed colour temperature and it's one lighting situation that is certainly not as straight forward as it first seems. There are a number of ways to shoot cracking sunsets, I was just interested to hear how different people approached it.

All the best,

Liam.

I certainly did need clarity Liam and these debates have helped the flow of information.
The sunset issue is a good one to point out. Before yesterday, this would never have occured to me and it's entirely possible I'll be shooting objects/people within such a mileu.
Any more suggestions for this setting will be warmly welcomed from me at least!
Cheers all.

WB test update:

I carried out a WB test last evening (just before the heavens opened!) along with control of the zebra:
It was an overcast sky late afternoon/early evening (4:30pm uk), in my back garden shielded to some extent by trees (certainly less open than on the roof of a building). Indeed the reasding was 8000k as it wasn't really that bright at this stage (clouds were beginning to get heavy with light rain).
But considering I was shooting at 3200k the other day there's no wonder I got the results I did.
Also noticed that the zebra isn't as easy to manipulate as I thought. Pointed to the sky the glare was pretty noticeable but not zebra indication (on the sky) - took the iris down a little (both ND's were on btw) and the zebra lines began to appear over the sky. However to completely eliminate these the image was pretty dark (viewing the footage later confirmed this) - clearly not a real indication of the scene. I presume altering the zebra setting within the scene files will help this?
It will then, take some time to get this zebra function working for me...does anybody else find you have to find a compromise between the extreme zebra lines and a light enough shot?

Oh, and the default scene 1 in the camera (after this white balance) pulled almost all the colour from the shots. I'll be adding tim's wide latitude this morning before trying his (and Paulo's) others.
All in all, despite some harsh footage which sank my heart a few days ago I've learned so much over the past few days that it's really a blessing in disguise - and please tell me at least some of you made a few error's when you first started out :)

Huge thanks to all.

David, don't be too hard on yourself. Setting the proper exposure is not easy. The zebra pattern is only a guide. The way it works is as follows in principle:

Set the level - now, the JVC has somewhat 'approximate' settings; 60-70, 80-85, etc. and then 'Over 95' and 'Over 100'. To determine which setting you use and for what is very personal and individual. So, I will share what I do.

I use the 60-70 setting when shooting people-centered material. This setting provides guidance for proper exposure for Caucasian skin. If used (and the person is properly lit) approximately 30% of their face, namely the cheek, tip of nose, possibly parts of forehead would show the zebra pattern. It could get annoying to shoot with it on, so if the lighting is consistent (as with an interview, for example), once you set your exposure, you can turn the zebra off. Also note, that these rules don't apply for darker skins - the darker the person, the less zebra you would see.

If I am shooting landscapes I set the zebra to 'Over 100'. 100 indicates overexposure - in other words, areas cover with zebra over 100 will have little or no detail. For landscape shots I don't want to see any zebra on the ground but might get little in the white clouds or sun reflections on water, glass, chrome, etc. The overall amount of zebra in the frame should be minimal, perhaps some 10-15% maximum. I say this because in some conditions, i.e. partly cloudy, the areas covered by clouds might be too dark unless you compromise a little in the clouds. It's very much a judgment call.

Now, the most difficult is the situation where you are shooting with no control of lighting, location or anything else. You might (and likely will) find yourself making sacrifices and blowing out background in order to see the person's face - or keeping the face slightly underexposed in order to maintain some background. This will all depend on the situation, importance of the subject and the call you, as the DP will make.

Shooting a dramatic material is another whole chapter and the application of the zebra pattern , evethough in principle the same, in practice might be quite different. Just a quick example could be a dramatic scene in a dark basement: the actors may not have any zebra on their faces because you are conveying the fact that they are in the dark place. So, you are underexposing their faces by a stop or two on purpose.

Another example might be someone walking in a hallway with sun-lit windows. As they are passing by the windows, their faces are well lit and you'd see 70% zebra but in between the windows they get darker and no zebra would be visible. This is also another example of creatively determining WB: it could be that you don't want the image too warm and WB to the sunlight. The oposite is WB in the shade and let the sunlight put warmth on the people's face when they pass by the windows.

A lot of this is subjective and good results will come with experience. Good luck.

Exposure is one of the items that makes this "art". In today's technically oriented world, it seems there is a need to quantify, quantify, quantify. In the end, the image is a reflection of the sentiment one wants to convey. I'm not even gonna touch the "good art" vs "bad art" topic. Beauty is in the eye of the blah, blah. What makes digital video somewhat unique is that the LCD in the viewfinder is not a perfect reproduction of the scene that you record. Then art takes on a little good old Kentucky windage.

Thanks for that Jiri.

The overall amount of zebra in the frame should be minimal, perhaps some 10-15% maximum. I say this because in some conditions, i.e. partly cloudy, the areas covered by clouds might be too dark unless you compromise a little in the clouds. It's very much a judgment call.

That makes much more sense to me now. The earlier test in the garden I had all but eliminated the Zebra (50% landscape and 50% sky), but the scene was underexposed this time. If I had left a small amount as you suggest here then I would've been pretty close, at least as close as I can get with the equipment I have. Slowly this is all clicking into place and once I have these fundamentals tied up I can worry less about the 'higher spec' worries!

Another example might be someone walking in a hallway with sun-lit windows. As they are passing by the windows, their faces are well lit and you'd see 70% zebra but in between the windows they get darker and no zebra would be visible. This is also another example of creatively determining WB: it could be that you don't want the image too warm and WB to the sunlight. The oposite is WB in the shade and let the sunlight put warmth on the people's face when they pass by the windows.

I had read a bit of this situation on another thread (the guy, I forget who, recording in the church under an environment described by you above).

I go back a bit to the Neon lighting WB a bit back on this thread: Ironic as a project I want to get going (personal rather than commercial paid...though it all helps) has a scene set in a store in Chinatown here. I really like the work of Christopher Doyle in Asia and Chan-woon Park in South Korea: they seem to have a distinctive, green hue to them often set under these very same atmospheric neon's. With a couple of scene file plays and WB I'm hoping I can nail that one...!

Like this! http://www.scoutgallery.com/doyle_images/doyle_images_5_2046.jpg

Exposure is one of the items that makes this "art". In today's technically oriented world, it seems there is a need to quantify, quantify, quantify. In the end, the image is a reflection of the sentiment one wants to convey. I'm not even gonna touch the "good art" vs "bad art" topic. Beauty is in the eye of the blah, blah. What makes digital video somewhat unique is that the LCD in the viewfinder is not a perfect reproduction of the scene that you record. Then art takes on a little good old Kentucky windage.

Yes - be great if I had access to a top range field monitor or even dedicated HD monitor at home, so yes I have to rely on that little fella!
Aye - good art/bad art...one man's meat is another man's poison...some might not be too keen on south Asian cinematography!

Kentucky Windage? :)

Kentucky Windage...

A term coined, I beleive, by us yanks, referring to the accuracy of the American Long Rifle during the Revolutionary War and later in the War of 1812. The kentucky Long Rifle was extremely accurate at long distances when placed in a skilled frontiersman's hands. The frontiersman knew, from experience, how to accurately compensate for the effect of wind on his musketball trajectory when fired over a long distance. The long rifle was most famous in Kentucky...hence the term kentucky windage refers to hitting a target at long distance by pure skill and judgment.

I like it Bill!!
I'm off out this evening with friends (rare 'pass out' from the missus!)
I'm gonna somehow squeeze that into the conversation and see who picks up on it! :)

Just a quick thanks for all your help and input over the past couple of weeks.
Fortunately the deadline for getting the footage in was extended. This enabled me to really hammer the points made on here into my synapses!
It's all now second nature for me to back focus check; white balance for each scene; check the zebra/exposure...etc.
I do all pretty much without thinking now and the resulting footage is far, far superior to the old 'winging it' days.
Bit of an art to manage the exposuse I find (using the zebra) - guidelines help but it's only when you consistantly check your work at the end of the day when you realise you may have slightly unexposed (getting buildings to be lit without blowing the sky takes a little practice).
Maybe a cliche to suggest that you're best learning from your mistakes, but these past couple of weeks have demonstrated how true that is.
Sorting out these fundamentals allows me to concentrate on the myriad other techniques/applications that you find in this game.

Thanks again folks.
Dave.

How do actually change the white balance to a level higher than 5600 on the HD200?