GL2 on Parade at DVinfo.net

Bill Hardy · October 12th, 2002, 03:17 PM

We had a Jr football parade before the game today. Used a wide angle lens adapter.

http://homepage.mac.com/bhardy3/PhotoAlbum16.html

Naturally I was dying to try out my new GL2, but much of the movie came out darker than expected. Never try to use manual adjustments like exposure in a MOVING PARADE was my lesson for today.

Will post a short movie soon.

Bill Hardy · October 12th, 2002, 06:30 PM

Here is the movie. Frame mode really works well as you can see. Notice the battons in the last scene.

http://homepage.mac.com/bhardy3/iMovieTheater17.html

Hans Kuipers · October 13th, 2002, 01:53 AM

I have never seen so bad footage in my life. The movements are not fluent at all. It looks like a bad cartoon with 5 frames per second. If this is really the best the GL2 can produce I will go for the VX2000 but I just hope yopu did something wrong during shooting!!!!!

Bill Hardy · October 13th, 2002, 06:04 AM

Ossedream, something could be wack with your video player. The actual uncompressed DV is smooth as silk, plus the fact even the compressed video that you see here should be relatively stable, though much darker and fuzzier than real DV. You must take into account there is major compression going on for the web. Do you have the same problem with the duck video on that web page? If so something is definitely wrong with your system. And like I say, the video was under exposed; my fault; left it on manual exposure while I was running around through the parade. I also had to brighten the video through software and editing. This may also be what you are seeing. Don't blame it on the cam. Nevertheless buy a VX, they are both good cams. Next time I will be more choicy in posting video.

Hans Kuipers · October 13th, 2002, 07:34 AM

The duck movie you posted was of much better quality (smoother) than the parade movie. When I saw the parade movie I was very dissapointed and asked myself if the frame mode can be used only for still pictures (maybe that was the reason that the VX2000/PD150 have full ps (25 fps) for still pictures and only 12.5 fps for video). So you think that the GL2 gives as fluent video in frame mode as in normal mode??????? Or is movie frame only useful when the movements in the footage is slow??????

Barry Goyette · October 13th, 2002, 09:13 AM

Odessa

My guess is that you are seeing something that is relative to your computer's speed, not buddy's video. I downloaded it yesterday, and it plays fine...looks just like every frame mode video I've shot over the last 3 1/2 years. There is a lot of discussion on these boards about the pros and cons of frame mode. One major issue is that it isn't as smooth as NTSC.. (something sited by both promoters and detractors to prove their point)...but jitteryness only really shows itself in very specific situations....panning with High contrast vertical lines in the image...and poor, shaky, handheld work. Neither of these is present in buddy's clip, as he is using his camera like a pro...keeping his subject relatively stable in the frame, and avoiding the amateur's typical instinct to zing the camera around to look at this and that.

Buddy's clip is a full sized, highly compressed monster...it takes a tremendous amount of power to process this info...and I know that even my DP 500 G4 will make it stutter if it's having a bad day.

Your concerns about frame mode are reasonable...as you probably haven't seen how beautiful the footage typically is. I encourage you to use the search tool to read the debate that has been going on here since forever. I have used frame mode on every project since I bought my first gl1, and have never had a regret. Several friends, amateurs and pros, have bought canon cameras after seeing my footage---specifically because they felt the image didn't look like video. The Gl2 has what I feel is the best implementation of the frame mode so far....sharper than the xl1s and less strobey than the gl1.

One more thing....I believe you would be looking at the xm2...because of the pal frame rate.. your frame mode would be slightly less smooth than the gl2. This really just means that you have to be a little more careful with your camera work. (after all at 25 fps, your footage will be slightly smoother than a typical theatrical film).

Barry

Hans Kuipers · October 13th, 2002, 09:27 AM

What do you mean with that last remark concerning frame mode in the GL2 vs. XM2. Do you mean that the XM2 has 25 fps and the GL2 24 fps ???

Bye the way I have a Pentium III 667 Mhz PC with a Matrox G400 32 MB Dualhead MAX AGP videocard. Is that not fast enough ????

Barry Goyette · October 13th, 2002, 01:25 PM

Odessa

No..the xm2 is 25fps..the gl2 is 30fps. Thus the xm2 has a slightly less smooth appearance....very similar to the framerate of film. I really don't know much about PCs, but I do know that sometimes my dual processer 500 G4 (which, I would guess, would be considerably faster than a 667 p3), occasionally has difficulty running full screen sorensen 3 video at 30fps.

Recently I posted a full size clip and several people responded that it looked choppy while others had no problem. The reason for sending a full size clip is to evaluate sharpness, or to import into an NLE to playback on a monitor. But quite often this type of file is too much for a multimedia player to play at full res and frame rate. Regardless of this, the purpose of my post was to let you know that the choppiness you were seeing had nothing to do with the frame mode, which it doesn't.

Barry

Hans Kuipers · October 13th, 2002, 04:54 PM

That is good news Barry that it is caused by my slow PC. Probably I need an update of my pc as well if I want to do NLE etc. Ok first I will buy the camera whenn it is available and shoot some nice footage :-)))

October 12th, 2002, 03:17 PM	#1
Bill Hardy Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 205	GL2 on Parade We had a Jr football parade before the game today. Used a wide angle lens adapter. http://homepage.mac.com/bhardy3/PhotoAlbum16.html Naturally I was dying to try out my new GL2, but much of the movie came out darker than expected. Never try to use manual adjustments like exposure in a MOVING PARADE was my lesson for today. Will post a short movie soon.

October 13th, 2002, 01:53 AM	#3
Hans Kuipers Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 61	to buddy1065 I have never seen so bad footage in my life. The movements are not fluent at all. It looks like a bad cartoon with 5 frames per second. If this is really the best the GL2 can produce I will go for the VX2000 but I just hope yopu did something wrong during shooting!!!!!

October 13th, 2002, 07:34 AM	#5
Hans Kuipers Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 61	to buddy1065 The duck movie you posted was of much better quality (smoother) than the parade movie. When I saw the parade movie I was very dissapointed and asked myself if the frame mode can be used only for still pictures (maybe that was the reason that the VX2000/PD150 have full ps (25 fps) for still pictures and only 12.5 fps for video). So you think that the GL2 gives as fluent video in frame mode as in normal mode??????? Or is movie frame only useful when the movements in the footage is slow??????

October 13th, 2002, 09:27 AM	#7
Hans Kuipers Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 61	to Barry What do you mean with that last remark concerning frame mode in the GL2 vs. XM2. Do you mean that the XM2 has 25 fps and the GL2 24 fps ??? Bye the way I have a Pentium III 667 Mhz PC with a Matrox G400 32 MB Dualhead MAX AGP videocard. Is that not fast enough ????

October 13th, 2002, 04:54 PM	#9
Hans Kuipers Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 61	to Barry That is good news Barry that it is caused by my slow PC. Probably I need an update of my pc as well if I want to do NLE etc. Ok first I will buy the camera whenn it is available and shoot some nice footage :-)))

October 12th, 2002, 06:30 PM	#2
Bill Hardy Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 205	Here is the movie. Frame mode really works well as you can see. Notice the battons in the last scene. http://homepage.mac.com/bhardy3/iMovieTheater17.html

October 13th, 2002, 06:04 AM	#4
Bill Hardy Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 205	Ossedream, something could be wack with your video player. The actual uncompressed DV is smooth as silk, plus the fact even the compressed video that you see here should be relatively stable, though much darker and fuzzier than real DV. You must take into account there is major compression going on for the web. Do you have the same problem with the duck video on that web page? If so something is definitely wrong with your system. And like I say, the video was under exposed; my fault; left it on manual exposure while I was running around through the parade. I also had to brighten the video through software and editing. This may also be what you are seeing. Don't blame it on the cam. Nevertheless buy a VX, they are both good cams. Next time I will be more choicy in posting video.

October 13th, 2002, 09:13 AM	#6
Barry Goyette Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: San Luis Obispo CA Posts: 1,195	Odessa My guess is that you are seeing something that is relative to your computer's speed, not buddy's video. I downloaded it yesterday, and it plays fine...looks just like every frame mode video I've shot over the last 3 1/2 years. There is a lot of discussion on these boards about the pros and cons of frame mode. One major issue is that it isn't as smooth as NTSC.. (something sited by both promoters and detractors to prove their point)...but jitteryness only really shows itself in very specific situations....panning with High contrast vertical lines in the image...and poor, shaky, handheld work. Neither of these is present in buddy's clip, as he is using his camera like a pro...keeping his subject relatively stable in the frame, and avoiding the amateur's typical instinct to zing the camera around to look at this and that. Buddy's clip is a full sized, highly compressed monster...it takes a tremendous amount of power to process this info...and I know that even my DP 500 G4 will make it stutter if it's having a bad day. Your concerns about frame mode are reasonable...as you probably haven't seen how beautiful the footage typically is. I encourage you to use the search tool to read the debate that has been going on here since forever. I have used frame mode on every project since I bought my first gl1, and have never had a regret. Several friends, amateurs and pros, have bought canon cameras after seeing my footage---specifically because they felt the image didn't look like video. The Gl2 has what I feel is the best implementation of the frame mode so far....sharper than the xl1s and less strobey than the gl1. One more thing....I believe you would be looking at the xm2...because of the pal frame rate.. your frame mode would be slightly less smooth than the gl2. This really just means that you have to be a little more careful with your camera work. (after all at 25 fps, your footage will be slightly smoother than a typical theatrical film). Barry

October 13th, 2002, 01:25 PM	#8
Barry Goyette Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: San Luis Obispo CA Posts: 1,195	Odessa No..the xm2 is 25fps..the gl2 is 30fps. Thus the xm2 has a slightly less smooth appearance....very similar to the framerate of film. I really don't know much about PCs, but I do know that sometimes my dual processer 500 G4 (which, I would guess, would be considerably faster than a 667 p3), occasionally has difficulty running full screen sorensen 3 video at 30fps. Recently I posted a full size clip and several people responded that it looked choppy while others had no problem. The reason for sending a full size clip is to evaluate sharpness, or to import into an NLE to playback on a monitor. But quite often this type of file is too much for a multimedia player to play at full res and frame rate. Regardless of this, the purpose of my post was to let you know that the choppiness you were seeing had nothing to do with the frame mode, which it doesn't. Barry