GL2 / XM2 Frame mode

Federico Dib · August 11th, 2003, 02:03 AM

Hi,
I´ve read and hear comments like yours before...

I have to tell you that maybe the term "slow motion" might mean different things to different people.

The first time I showed some footage of my XM-2.. my wife asked me "why is it in slow motion?"... well it is not... and shutter speed was at 1/50... (the normal here for PAL)... It was a Harley Davidson meeting lot of sun... (just beautifull metal beasts!).. and beautifull footage..

I´ve also heard comments of some other people not liking the shots with frame mode.. and using different terms like "strobing", "jerkiness", and "CHOPPY"... most of these comments came from Videographers...

Ideally you should put some sample so others can take a look at it and see if it´s looking "slow motion" or if it is that you do not like (or are not used to) the look of Frame mode...

One advice... when using frame mode... avoid fast camera movements... it makes some "strobing" effect that more times than not.. bothers everyone...

John Heskett · August 11th, 2003, 06:08 AM

Turn off all automatic settings. Turn off the ND. With ND the speed will go down th 1/15 or so if on automatic. You need to learn to only use manual settings anyway. It should be the rare situation where you need automatic settings not the norm.

Richard R Rivera · August 12th, 2003, 10:11 AM

Well it turned out that when i turned of the Nd and went manuel on the focas it made a little bit more difference. Maybe its just me and i dont like the look that frame mode gives off. I have filmed movies before but i am a newbie when it comes to the GL2. I work with $25,000.00 cameras at school that are hitache and sony. we even have the jvc gy dv550 nice camera for news.

So as far as mooving the camera with frame mode i do it slowly not to get the jerkyness or chop it presents. I think That the GL2 has a long way before its one of the top cameras when it comes to frame mode.

I was told that the XL1s frame mode is much better than the GL2/MX-2, is this true?

Ok i lowered the gain to 1/30 or 1/15 for the sunny day out and it kina gave it a better chop that wasn't too bad, but all in all I didnt like the way it looked so im planning to take some footage and post it for you all to see and get an opion what might be wrong or might need setting right.

Im also thinking about buying the Ma-300 xlr, I was told it does a great job with the sound. I know from being in college that the Mic we use are high grade with xlr connectors.

I still love this camera and feel that it was a great buy. I plan on using it to film movies and do some stringer work.

Jonathan Richards · August 13th, 2003, 05:32 AM

Film cameras work at 24fps and lots of fast panning and tilting shots cause a heavy strobing effect that can be difficult to look at. The large format of film allows the camera to remain relatively still and allow the action to move within the frame.

On a NTSC GL2 the frame mode works at 30fps not the 60fps of interlaced (the smooth looking) video. If your shutter speed is below 1/30th of a second then you get the slo-mo look to the shot.

Richard R Rivera · August 13th, 2003, 01:45 PM

Thank every one for the info and it worked out great for me. I love the Gl2/MX2 its a great camcorder for the price i paid.

I still dont like that i have to set color gain but can live with it for now. Alround id have to give the canon GL2 97% out of 100% vote.

I have been testing the canon GL2 out side light source like on the Beach and found that in frame mode when set right it records really well. For those out there that dont like the chop try keeping the camera very still and when it comes to pan scenes use a try pod that my recomondation. with a try pod it stays very clean but dont pan to fast or you will get the chop or streaks as other people say.

Also when using pd150 frame mode is very jerky and can be very blury.

In low ligh coditions i had to up the gain to get the frame mode not to be chopy but still it was chopy until i added more light indoors then it seam to do very well. I feel that if your going to do a indoor scene you shouyld invest in time with the lighting. this will then set your self for a good shoot.

I did a test were the ight was very little like in a home were the only light source was comming from the window. i found that in low light after white balacing in frame mode that the camera was still choppy. then after i up the gain and lighten the camera back light i found that it did well but wasnt impressed with the end results, but can live with it. over all this camera does very well in normal mode and i give it a a+ for normal and a B- for frame mode.

I did one more test in frame mode and that was done with those ultravilet lights and found that camera had some real nasty effects so i messed with the gain and white balance and still sdidnt like what i saw, so i decided to use light with blue and red gels over the light source and foud that it was much better and i got a light light like club effect from it and the frame mode worked very well in this condition than the rather ultravilette look.

Over all i think the GL2 is a great camera and up the road will lead to better things to come. And again people thanks for your imput it really did help me out. So as i always say Shot on and dont miss the chance to shoot more.

Richard R Rivera · August 13th, 2003, 09:21 PM

Hello every one, I was using my GL2/MX2 in frame mode while i was in the back of my truck to get a live traffic shot and it looked good until we came across a bridge under path. the film went hay wire and looked real nasty at that point.

I learnd that when the change of light source changes rapit that GL2 trys to keep a sharp picture for some reason and the frame mode went off the charts in chop. So we decide to add a light source to this area and tried it again only to find out that it didnt help much. This kna bugs me then i tried changing white balance and up the gain and it worked perfectly.

A few other things happen too, later on play back i fount that the blured back ground added a cool effect that i didnt anticapated at all and made the move segment look great.

Ill keep posting more finds on move mode as i film my movie im doing in miami.

Jonathan Richards · August 14th, 2003, 02:36 AM

Man - you really are struggling with the Frame Mode thing.

Richard R Rivera · August 14th, 2003, 03:08 AM

I like to experiment with different things; it’s more like I’m trying things others wouldn’t do. As I go I learn what makes my GL2 tick. I want to know my Camcorder inside and out. I guess this is the teckie side of me that wants to know my GL2 like my Computer. So I’m getting good footage and my movie is coming along good so far.

Well shooting has been put on hold due to the tropical wave that’s heading our way and that why south Florida at this time of the year can hinder you film time. With that I’m back to post productions and learning more about my camcorder.

You can learn a lot when you struggle with any thing. What you learn is not to do the same thing over again. And some time you learn a few new tricks that save post editing. I thank everyone for there impute on this subject. If you think you have any advise that would help me learn more about the GL2/MX2 in frame mode or normal I would appreciate any advise that would help.

Tony Singh · September 3rd, 2003, 10:47 AM

Hi Everyone...my first post :)

I read somewhere that if I was to shoot in Frame Movie Mode, then try to edit a slow motion sequence, in Premiere, I would run into major problems. Is there any truth to this, or was this guy blowing hot air?

I need to know soon because I plan on using Frame Movie Mode in my next shoot, and there will definitely be slow motion sequences.

Thanks

Tony
http://proavforums.mediatechcommunications.com

Hans Henrik Bang · September 3rd, 2003, 11:43 AM

Hmm. By no means an expert here, but here goes my thoughts.

In frame mode you get 30 frames per second.
In normal mode you get 60 interlaced fields per second.

Frame mode as such is already more susceptible to stuttery movement. The stutter obviously gets more glaring the more you slow down the clip.

I have no idea how Premiere handles slow motion of interlaced footage. There might be some smart interpolation to minimize the effects of stutter, but I don't know this.

My best piece of advice would be to try it out and see for yourself. Set the camera up next to a busy road and shoot 2 sequences. On in frame and one in normal. Then slow them both down by varying amounts and see for yourself.

Maybe you could even find some object that moves the same way over time such as a windmill etc. That way you will have identical shots except for the chosen mode.

My 2 cents.

Hans Henrik

Ps. And oh welcome to the forum. You will be hard pressed to find a better place on the planet for answers to your questions. There are some real gurus on these forums - not counting myself among them :)

Luke Gates · September 4th, 2003, 12:45 AM

your best bet is to shoot in normal mode for slow motion!

I would stick with normal mode for your slow motion shots regardless because with frame mode ANY camera shake without a tripod is noticed and the video looks choppy. Also any quick or even moderately fast pans will give you some pretty dissapointing results with your video. On the other hand if you want to do some frame grabs from your video frame mode is perfect as you get a true frame each time.
So I would say stick with normal mode but you should do what Hans said...make a comparison and see what YOU like better.

Tony Singh · September 4th, 2003, 08:17 PM

Thanks guys.

My reason for asking is because I don't have a camera yet.
I will be renting one for a shoot I am doing, and my partner will be receiving his new one sometime late this month.

We may not have much time to play with settings, etc before our first shoot with the camera, so I was hoping someone had some experience editing with Frame Mode.

Thanks!

Luke Gates · September 4th, 2003, 09:40 PM

Oh well in that case I would definately say stick with Normal mode as you would probably end up shooting your footage in frame mode and be very dissapointed with the results when you saw it in post.

Hans Henrik Bang · September 5th, 2003, 02:21 PM

I would definately vote for normal mode too. If you are interested, I could perhaps do a test of normal vs frame shots and post the results on FTP.

Would you be interested in that?

Hans Henrik

Barry Goyette · September 5th, 2003, 02:47 PM

I don't know about Premiere, but in FCP, slomo-ing frame mode footage can be problematic, especially if you are using anything other than 50%. FCP has some algorithm for doing the conversion that seems to assume that your footage is interlaced ...when you give it progressive type imagery it starts to duplicate frames in a very uneven way, giving you a sporadically jumpy image.

Normal mode will definitely be smoother, although your result will be noticeably less sharp, as the program will be converting each field to a frame, thus you'll lose about 50% vertical resolution as compared to the original interlaced footage or about 25% less than if you had shot with Frame mode.

Barry

August 11th, 2003, 02:03 AM	#136
Federico Dib Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Barcelona Posts: 312	Hi, I´ve read and hear comments like yours before... I have to tell you that maybe the term "slow motion" might mean different things to different people. The first time I showed some footage of my XM-2.. my wife asked me "why is it in slow motion?"... well it is not... and shutter speed was at 1/50... (the normal here for PAL)... It was a Harley Davidson meeting lot of sun... (just beautifull metal beasts!).. and beautifull footage.. I´ve also heard comments of some other people not liking the shots with frame mode.. and using different terms like "strobing", "jerkiness", and "CHOPPY"... most of these comments came from Videographers... Ideally you should put some sample so others can take a look at it and see if it´s looking "slow motion" or if it is that you do not like (or are not used to) the look of Frame mode... One advice... when using frame mode... avoid fast camera movements... it makes some "strobing" effect that more times than not.. bothers everyone... __________________ Messenger Boy : The Thessalonian you're fighting, he's the biggest man I've ever seen. I wouldn't want to fight him. Achilles : That is why no one will remember your name.

August 11th, 2003, 06:08 AM	#137
John Heskett Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Terre Haute Indiana Posts: 181	Turn off all automatic settings. Turn off the ND. With ND the speed will go down th 1/15 or so if on automatic. You need to learn to only use manual settings anyway. It should be the rare situation where you need automatic settings not the norm. __________________ Illuminate the Vision

August 12th, 2003, 10:11 AM	#138
Richard R Rivera New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Miami, Florida Posts: 22	thanks guys that worked Well it turned out that when i turned of the Nd and went manuel on the focas it made a little bit more difference. Maybe its just me and i dont like the look that frame mode gives off. I have filmed movies before but i am a newbie when it comes to the GL2. I work with $25,000.00 cameras at school that are hitache and sony. we even have the jvc gy dv550 nice camera for news. So as far as mooving the camera with frame mode i do it slowly not to get the jerkyness or chop it presents. I think That the GL2 has a long way before its one of the top cameras when it comes to frame mode. I was told that the XL1s frame mode is much better than the GL2/MX-2, is this true? Ok i lowered the gain to 1/30 or 1/15 for the sunny day out and it kina gave it a better chop that wasn't too bad, but all in all I didnt like the way it looked so im planning to take some footage and post it for you all to see and get an opion what might be wrong or might need setting right. Im also thinking about buying the Ma-300 xlr, I was told it does a great job with the sound. I know from being in college that the Mic we use are high grade with xlr connectors. I still love this camera and feel that it was a great buy. I plan on using it to film movies and do some stringer work. __________________ If you dont use it , you'll just loose it!

August 13th, 2003, 05:32 AM	#139
Jonathan Richards Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Hull, UK Posts: 107	Film cameras work at 24fps and lots of fast panning and tilting shots cause a heavy strobing effect that can be difficult to look at. The large format of film allows the camera to remain relatively still and allow the action to move within the frame. On a NTSC GL2 the frame mode works at 30fps not the 60fps of interlaced (the smooth looking) video. If your shutter speed is below 1/30th of a second then you get the slo-mo look to the shot. __________________ Jonathan Richards -- Cameraman, Editor, Motion Graphic Artist Mobile +44(0)7939 512215 mail@jonathanrichards.tv

August 13th, 2003, 01:45 PM	#140
Richard R Rivera New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Miami, Florida Posts: 22	that did it Thank every one for the info and it worked out great for me. I love the Gl2/MX2 its a great camcorder for the price i paid. I still dont like that i have to set color gain but can live with it for now. Alround id have to give the canon GL2 97% out of 100% vote. I have been testing the canon GL2 out side light source like on the Beach and found that in frame mode when set right it records really well. For those out there that dont like the chop try keeping the camera very still and when it comes to pan scenes use a try pod that my recomondation. with a try pod it stays very clean but dont pan to fast or you will get the chop or streaks as other people say. Also when using pd150 frame mode is very jerky and can be very blury. In low ligh coditions i had to up the gain to get the frame mode not to be chopy but still it was chopy until i added more light indoors then it seam to do very well. I feel that if your going to do a indoor scene you shouyld invest in time with the lighting. this will then set your self for a good shoot. I did a test were the ight was very little like in a home were the only light source was comming from the window. i found that in low light after white balacing in frame mode that the camera was still choppy. then after i up the gain and lighten the camera back light i found that it did well but wasnt impressed with the end results, but can live with it. over all this camera does very well in normal mode and i give it a a+ for normal and a B- for frame mode. I did one more test in frame mode and that was done with those ultravilet lights and found that camera had some real nasty effects so i messed with the gain and white balance and still sdidnt like what i saw, so i decided to use light with blue and red gels over the light source and foud that it was much better and i got a light light like club effect from it and the frame mode worked very well in this condition than the rather ultravilette look. Over all i think the GL2 is a great camera and up the road will lead to better things to come. And again people thanks for your imput it really did help me out. So as i always say Shot on and dont miss the chance to shoot more. __________________ If you dont use it , you'll just loose it!

August 13th, 2003, 09:21 PM	#141
Richard R Rivera New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Miami, Florida Posts: 22	Today i use frame mode in theback of my truck Hello every one, I was using my GL2/MX2 in frame mode while i was in the back of my truck to get a live traffic shot and it looked good until we came across a bridge under path. the film went hay wire and looked real nasty at that point. I learnd that when the change of light source changes rapit that GL2 trys to keep a sharp picture for some reason and the frame mode went off the charts in chop. So we decide to add a light source to this area and tried it again only to find out that it didnt help much. This kna bugs me then i tried changing white balance and up the gain and it worked perfectly. A few other things happen too, later on play back i fount that the blured back ground added a cool effect that i didnt anticapated at all and made the move segment look great. Ill keep posting more finds on move mode as i film my movie im doing in miami. __________________ If you dont use it , you'll just loose it!

August 14th, 2003, 02:36 AM	#142
Jonathan Richards Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Hull, UK Posts: 107	Man - you really are struggling with the Frame Mode thing. __________________ Jonathan Richards -- Cameraman, Editor, Motion Graphic Artist Mobile +44(0)7939 512215 mail@jonathanrichards.tv

August 14th, 2003, 03:08 AM	#143
Richard R Rivera New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Miami, Florida Posts: 22	I don't think im strugling I like to experiment with different things; it’s more like I’m trying things others wouldn’t do. As I go I learn what makes my GL2 tick. I want to know my Camcorder inside and out. I guess this is the teckie side of me that wants to know my GL2 like my Computer. So I’m getting good footage and my movie is coming along good so far. Well shooting has been put on hold due to the tropical wave that’s heading our way and that why south Florida at this time of the year can hinder you film time. With that I’m back to post productions and learning more about my camcorder. You can learn a lot when you struggle with any thing. What you learn is not to do the same thing over again. And some time you learn a few new tricks that save post editing. I thank everyone for there impute on this subject. If you think you have any advise that would help me learn more about the GL2/MX2 in frame mode or normal I would appreciate any advise that would help. __________________ If you dont use it , you'll just loose it!

September 3rd, 2003, 10:47 AM	#144
Tony Singh New Boot Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 14	Canon GL2 Frame Movie Mode and Slow Motion Hi Everyone...my first post :) I read somewhere that if I was to shoot in Frame Movie Mode, then try to edit a slow motion sequence, in Premiere, I would run into major problems. Is there any truth to this, or was this guy blowing hot air? I need to know soon because I plan on using Frame Movie Mode in my next shoot, and there will definitely be slow motion sequences. Thanks Tony http://proavforums.mediatechcommunications.com

September 3rd, 2003, 11:43 AM	#145
Hans Henrik Bang Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Frederiksberg, Denmark Posts: 133	Hmm. By no means an expert here, but here goes my thoughts. In frame mode you get 30 frames per second. In normal mode you get 60 interlaced fields per second. Frame mode as such is already more susceptible to stuttery movement. The stutter obviously gets more glaring the more you slow down the clip. I have no idea how Premiere handles slow motion of interlaced footage. There might be some smart interpolation to minimize the effects of stutter, but I don't know this. My best piece of advice would be to try it out and see for yourself. Set the camera up next to a busy road and shoot 2 sequences. On in frame and one in normal. Then slow them both down by varying amounts and see for yourself. Maybe you could even find some object that moves the same way over time such as a windmill etc. That way you will have identical shots except for the chosen mode. My 2 cents. Hans Henrik Ps. And oh welcome to the forum. You will be hard pressed to find a better place on the planet for answers to your questions. There are some real gurus on these forums - not counting myself among them :)

September 4th, 2003, 12:45 AM	#146
Luke Gates Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: new jersey Posts: 151	your best bet is to shoot in normal mode for slow motion! I would stick with normal mode for your slow motion shots regardless because with frame mode ANY camera shake without a tripod is noticed and the video looks choppy. Also any quick or even moderately fast pans will give you some pretty dissapointing results with your video. On the other hand if you want to do some frame grabs from your video frame mode is perfect as you get a true frame each time. So I would say stick with normal mode but you should do what Hans said...make a comparison and see what YOU like better.

September 4th, 2003, 08:17 PM	#147
Tony Singh New Boot Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 14	Thanks guys. My reason for asking is because I don't have a camera yet. I will be renting one for a shoot I am doing, and my partner will be receiving his new one sometime late this month. We may not have much time to play with settings, etc before our first shoot with the camera, so I was hoping someone had some experience editing with Frame Mode. Thanks!

September 4th, 2003, 09:40 PM	#148
Luke Gates Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: new jersey Posts: 151	Oh well in that case I would definately say stick with Normal mode as you would probably end up shooting your footage in frame mode and be very dissapointed with the results when you saw it in post.

September 5th, 2003, 02:21 PM	#149
Hans Henrik Bang Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Frederiksberg, Denmark Posts: 133	I would definately vote for normal mode too. If you are interested, I could perhaps do a test of normal vs frame shots and post the results on FTP. Would you be interested in that? Hans Henrik

September 5th, 2003, 02:47 PM	#150
Barry Goyette Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: San Luis Obispo CA Posts: 1,195	I don't know about Premiere, but in FCP, slomo-ing frame mode footage can be problematic, especially if you are using anything other than 50%. FCP has some algorithm for doing the conversion that seems to assume that your footage is interlaced ...when you give it progressive type imagery it starts to duplicate frames in a very uneven way, giving you a sporadically jumpy image. Normal mode will definitely be smoother, although your result will be noticeably less sharp, as the program will be converting each field to a frame, thus you'll lose about 50% vertical resolution as compared to the original interlaced footage or about 25% less than if you had shot with Frame mode. Barry