16:9 mode on GL2

[Graham Bernard]

Or should I bother? . . . I'm presuming that by the time I get it done the resolution will be uninspiring?

Anybody got a thought on the matter? Apart from stepping up to a native 16:9, anybody got a recipe for success?

Grazie

[Darko Flajpan]

Try to work in 4:3 mode with 16:9 display markers on. That will give you chance to compose the shot for 16:9 while having 4:3. Works for me. If i somehow decide later that i want 16:9 i just add black bars in posts. Works for me.

[Graham Bernard]

Hiyah! - So you don't bother with the 16:9 conversion squash?

[Robin Davies-Rollinson]

Graham,

I always used to swing hot and cold with the in-built conversion option. Sometimes I liked it, others, I hated it. It really depends on your subject. The resolution loss is just too much for any wide shots, but if there are lots of talking heads and general close work, it isn't too bad. I've had interview stuff broadcast with it, so it's certainly no worse than the PD150/170 material that tends to get used straight from the camera,ie. no ARCing done by a Snell & Wlcox box.
Other times, I've been more than happy with shooting 4:3 and post-cropping.
You can of course use the built-in title mix tool to insert black bars top and bottom, which will save any cropping in post. The only drawback with this is if you apply certain effects in editing, you'll be changing the whole image, including the colour of the top and bottom bars!

Robin

[Graham Bernard]

HAPPY ST Davids Day! CYMRU!

Robin thanks, I'll get back to yer on these matters too. BUT today I've got a showing of my latest 4:3 work at the British Library! Ahah!

Grazie

[Dmitry Yun]

There is a program called Photozoom I believe. You can uprez your 4:3 footage into nice 16:9 footage.

[Marty Allen]

I shot my entire trip to Peru in 16:9 and my trip to Catalina Island in 16:9. I love the way that it fills my widescreen TV and it is sharp. The entire Catalina trip was shot with my WD-58H wide adapter in place.

[Alex Beaupre]

From what i have gathered, on a GL2 a result would be better shotting from the in camera squashed mode of 16:9, instead of cropping, as opposed to where the vx series are better to crop then shoot in the squashed mode. But up to you, in 4:3 with guides you are left with more options, but if you know you want 16:9 go with the incamera mode.

Alex B

[Cosmin Rotaru]

I've read that if you use the in camera squashed 16:9 the DV compression stuff is better. There are less dots to share the DV stream...

[Michael Donne]

..and if you had no creative preference between 16/9 or 4/3 but considered there was the CHANCE of your production being taken up by a non-terrestrial tv channel for the uk market...which would you shoot?

[Cosmin Rotaru]

I don't know what the "non-terrestrial tv channel for the uk market" would prefere, but I would go for 4:3. I would display the 16:9 framing lines and frame for that. (Every now and then I forget to keep an eye on the framing lines so I have to reframe it in post...)

[Philip Melia]

My brother and I have just bought an XL2 for our new video production business and we would like an additional camera for supplementary footage (ie: cutaways). I know the XM2 is unlikely to produce 16:9 footage on a level with the XL2 but is its "squeeze" mode
of an acceptable quality for DVD? Good 16:9 will be the deciding factor in choosing the 2nd camera.
Thanks in advance.

[Zack Birlew]

Nope, the 16:9 mode isn't very good, but it's a lot better than lower model cameras. I don't trust the idea of using the GL1/GL2 for a B camera for the XL2, unless you're shooting strictly for 60i, but that's just my opinion.

You can't use the GL2 for 24p shooting. But 30p might, just "might", look good mixed together. Shooting in 16:9 for DVD has worked really well for me, but you don't really get that fullness that the XL2 16:9 gets, it's stretched of course, so it requires some work to look really good. I hope that helps, if at all.

P.S. I know you're talking about the European models, just replace GL1/GL2 with XM1/XM2 and 24p with 25p in my answer.

[Boyd Ostroff]

You might have a look at the PDX-10 if 16:9 is you primary interest. It has hi-res CCD's which can shoot native 16:9, and at the current price of $1,600 it's a real bargain. Visit our forum for more info.

[Brian Neuls]

I am an amatuer filmmaker who just bought a GL2 after much research and reading on lenses, etc...my question is, I hope to take some of the things I may shoot with this to festivals and maybe to film...I've read that the 16:9 isn't that great and so I'm going to shoot in 4:3 and letterbox it with magic bullet. Does anyone know if this is stupid and should keep it at 4:3 or just go with the 16:9...has anyone shot like this? Until I have the money to get the XL2, I have to decide what to do...I really don't want to shoot in 4:3...I like the 16:9 framing, etc...if anyone has any ideas on this, it would be much appreciated. If I letterbox it, what will it look like on film? It will be 4:3 with artificial letterbox, I know, but anyway...I hope someone has some ideas...thank you very much.