HV20 Gain?

[Don Palomaki]

Just keep in mind that gain is not always bad. It has to be considered, along with the alternatives, in light of the artistic intent of the shooter, expectations of the client, and field conditions.

The noise and image grain that are often associated with the use of gain may be just want you need for a "reality" look, and in many situations a noisy image is better than none.

[John Hotze]

Originally Posted by Don Palomaki

Just keep in mind that gain is not always bad. It has to be considered, along with the alternatives, in light of the artistic intent of the shooter, expectations of the client, and field conditions.

The noise and image grain that are often associated with the use of gain may be just want you need for a "reality" look, and in many situations a noisy image is better than none.

I totally agree. A good slant on a much misunderstood part of video production. Grain is not necessarily something we aim for but it is not always totally bad. Now that I'm shooting video myself, and in many cases, done in low light conditions, I have become aware of many instances of grain in professionally shot productions of movies and videos. I believe a lot of video production of night scenes are really shot during the day and adjusted to look like night in order to avoid grain. If you are truly protraying reality, grain is part of that. This has led me to believe that grain can occur even with $100,000 cameras if the lighting conditions are not there to support a no gain situation. If sometime in the future, our consumer camcorders have the ability to shoot in the woods at night with no lights and no grain, do you think that grain will be gone forever from video production? Does an artist always attempt to paint a portrait that is exactly the same as a good photograph. As technology creeps ahead and Hollywood is able to do away with actors and create a movie completely void of real people, will we be satisfied as an audience. I think not.

[Dale Backus]

I agree with you all in saying that grain is not ALWAYS bad... however, grain in video is like echo in audio (well maybe not completely) it's easy to add in post, but really hard to take way. It's always better to start with the cleanest source possible and then add what you need later.

NOW - this TOTALLY depends on what you're doing. Shooting a live event vs shooting for a feature film for instance are COMPLETELY Different things. Of course for the live event your audience is going to prefer seeing an image rather than not seeing any grain.

So, the technique i'm describing in my previous posts is just to guarantee you don't have gain/grain for those who don't want any. Use at your own discretion.

Also note- that even when i'm shooting with no gain, if you really look at the image, it's not a PERFECTLY clean image. Nothing is, just like i said it's nicer to start off clean (just like audio) and add what you need.

[Don Palomaki]

Another factor to keep in mind is that gain in the camcorder is typically applied to the analog signal read off the sensor before a/d conversion and compression. Adding gain in post can introduce different image artifacts and possible visible banding in the image. It goes back to which image look best meets your needs.

[Michael Jouravlev]

To me grain is ALWAYS bad. I see nothing artistic in grain, adding noise is not art. Grain is just defects in the film. The only reason for grain and speckles is for movie-within-a-movie situation, when it is necessary to show an "old" movie. I do not accept a whole movie made with grain and speckles to emulate an old movie, this is just a cheap effect.

Another thing is that random grain doesn't compress well, which is why a complex scene with grain may look blocky because there is not enough bandwidth both for real image and for grain.

[Ian G. Thompson]

A good noise filter does wonders to your footage...trust me....

http://www.neatvideo.com/

[Ian G. Thompson]

Michael I've seen plenty of big budget movies with suprisingly a lot,,and I mean LOTS of noise. People like to say film noise is different from video noise...that's hogwash...at least to my eyes. One recent movie that comes to mind is "Transformers"...lots of noise in the dark scenes. it did not take away from the movie however.

I understand your questions above...I agree with you...I ask myself in most cases why bother fighting it.....I have been recently shooting in dark situations and accept the grain that comes in...sometimes shots look good with the added grain... Also...when I fight it with the cellphone trick......in most cases (not all) it comes out too dark....then what....i dial the gain up in post and ....there is the noise that was hidden in the dark scene. But that is what noise filters are for.... The one I posted above....it\s amazing... I am used to using noise filters and they all suck....but this one "Neat Video".. is great. Your end product looks like it was shot with a cam that has high end ISO. Unlike other filters..it does not take away ANY of the "fine" detail in your shots. You have to see it to believe it.

The thing for me is...I let the cam focus the best it can in dark lit situations...allow some 9not a great deal0 of gain (which undoubtedly will add grain)...apply the filter in post...and no one would be the wiser. I am almost convinced a lot of high end cams do this internally to their footage...because that is what the end results look like after I apply it to my videos.

[Don Palomaki]

To me grain is ALWAYS bad.

A lot of folks who shot and printed Tri-X might disagree with you, as might Geroges Seurat. In any case, art is in large part a matter of individual taste.

[Ian G. Thompson]

Oh....and the other movie was "Bridge to Tarabitha"....noise all over the place (it shocked me....but only because I was looking for it).....but....great movie (ok....I have a six year old)....

[Euisung Lee]

I guess gain is a necessary evil in some situation and I don't mind as much if I can get some range back with it, and because you have ways to suppress it in the post to some degree. I guess the bigger problem is the shot to shot consistency. Adjusting gain and exposure in a predictable way is essential but difficult with HV20, and locking to a light source to have a consistent starting point is very helpful. Didn't know about 4.8 as 0 guarantees no gain whatsoever. Thanks for the good info Dale.

[Seun Osewa]

Neat Video really works wonders. Best $45 I ever spent.

[Ron Wilber]

holy smokes that neat video seems like a very empowering tool. If those sample pics on its website are for real, then it's definitely something that will allow us to up our exposure.

[Ian G. Thompson]

You don't know the half of it.....Suen is right...it would be the best $45 you'd spend.

[Stian Rishaug]

I have the Hv10. When I use the spotlight in the scene menu, there’s now gain kicking in!

[Dale Backus]

I'm a firm believer in post as well, and it's something i forgot to mention in my earlier posts.

If youre at max aperture and the image is still too dark, and adding lights isn't an option or even just impractical, relying on some post techniques is always an option.

I was actually going to bring up the transformers example myself. I noticed that too, especially in the scene where they're in the NSA (or whatever) headquarters... crazy.

But i'm sure that for some reason was a choice (michael bay has done weirder things).

There is actually a plugin you can get for photoshop as well called "noise ninja" that does an extremely good job at de-noising shots. If it makes sense to do it frame by frame (batch) for your project.

Any who - you at least know how to control the gain for those who want to...