24p questions

[Hart Boyd]

Look at the width of the video to see the different camera shots.

" It will alternate between 16x9 and 4x3 pillarboxed in 16x9 for the DVX footage."

[Barry Goyette]

Marty

Just a few comments on what I'm seeing in your footage. As was said, its difficult to get a read on some of these because the response seems to change with each setup (I think this is mostly due to changes in lighting..looks like you shot all the XL2 footage in one swoosh, and then camera around with the DVX...so the changes in daylight are affecting many of the scenes)....in some of the shots the xl2 seems significantly more saturated than the DVX, but what is most notable is the smoothness of the image. In several instances where the DVX has an edge on saturation, the image seems to fall apart more than one would expect. I've always avoided the cinegamma settings on my DVX because I felt they caused noticeable noise and posterization to the image (about the same as fixing in post)...is your DVX the original or the A version? The A version shouldn't do this.

Overall, I think its clear to me why you chose to stay with the xl2...and thank you for your comparisons, as I haven't spent much time doing this kind of A-B thing...your footage will be helpful when we get around to a two camera shoot someday.

Barry

[Marty Hudzik]

Barry,
All of the Indoor shots are under the "exact same" lighting conditions. there is no outside light in those shots....all artificial light. Only the outside of the building where you see the CEI sign and I pan toward the warehouse is it natural light. And yes. that part was shot the next day.

I had already sent my XL2 back and decided to recreate the same shots (approximately) with my borrowed DVX to convince myself that it would look just as good. As I said in the original post I was essentially hoping the DVX would look as good. I wanted to stick with the DVX. I even took extra time to make sure that I white balanced properly on the DVX as footage I shot here 2 months ago looked very greenish and grey. However when I A-B'ed them in the timeline I found I really preferred the XL2. Which actually p**ssed me off cause I wanted that extra cash back! But at the end of the day I am very happy with XL2.

Also....my employer has purchased all of the accessories for this thing so I am no longer worried about the financial difference in the 2 cams....since the biggest issue was affording the accessories.

Edit: The DVX was the original or "classic",

[Alfredo Castil]

I guess this is the kind of footage we were waiting for. Thank you for posting and risking server death.

[Kevin Chao]

i still can't seem to open the files... it states that it is no longer on the server or something like that... i can't open the mirrored links either...

marty... why'd you have to send you xl2 in in the first place?

[Marty Hudzik]

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Chao : i still can't seem to open the files... it states that it is no longer on the server or something like that... i can't open the mirrored links either...

marty... why'd you have to send you xl2 in in the first place? -->>>

I just tried again and the links work for me. Are you behind a firewall or something?

Without going into great detail I was concerned that there was a problem. Canon tested it and said that there was an issue with the neutral density filter being in the on position even though it was slid to the off position. Then they sent it back to the vendor to give back to me.....with no paper work or description if they fixed it or what might have been wrong. So this vendor, a DVINFO.NET sponsor, said they didn't feel comfortable sending it back to me so they gave me a brand new one.

[Kevin Chao]

no firewalls... i'm no a mac... that shouldn't prevent me from hitting up the links tho... barry's footage and others come up just fine... maybe the dv gods don't want me to see your footy...

did your lcd flicker on both cameras in 16:9 mode... i know the discussion is shot to death, but since you had two xl2's, just ought to know...

[Marty Hudzik]

Kevin,
I have seen no flicker on either camera. Sorry.

But I would like to comment on something that others have pointed out. Everyone says that 24p defaults to 1/24 shutter speed. I have not had that experience. However I have turned my camera to 24p postion and never changed it. So maybe once you change it from 24-30-60i and back it goes there....I don;t know.

It seems odd as the way the XL2 functions is it will turn on a little red light insid ethe viewfinder to remond you that you are in a "non-default" shutter speed....for example in 30P it is off when you are at 1/60th. Any other shutter speed and the light turnd on to warn you.

So even if the camera defaults to1/24 you are warned and can correct before shooting. However I really don;t think this is an issue unless you are changing frame rates all the time.

[Raymond Schlogel]

So I just brought in my fist capture from my first little test shoot. Sony Vegas appears to be considering it to be IVTC Film 23.976 and not 24p. So is that right ? If I change it two 24p it looks pretty bad. What am I missing here ? Sorry if I'm ignorant but new to 24p and a wee bit confused.

- Ray

[David Lach]

23.976 is the way to go, whether it be Vegas, FCP or Premiere Pro. 24p is for film transferred to your NLE for editing. The reason it's not true 24p is because NTSC video isn't true 30p or 60i, it's 29.97p or 59.94i. So your XL2 footage should be edited in 23.976p, not 24p.

That being said, if your goal was to later transfer it to film, you could edit it in true 24p. All you would need to do is convert the audio from 48 000Hz to 48 048Hz. It is not supposed to look bad when you edit in 24p. It just throws the audio out of sync. It might be a compatibility issue with Vegas.

[William LiPera]

On the xl2 I've tried 24p with 2:3 pulldown(standard) 16:9 and played the dv tape into a 16:9 tv and there is a flicker present with movement, especially pans. Why dont I notice this flicker on films transfered to vhs rented from block buster. Any ideas? Thanks.

[David Lach]

here's two possibilities you could look into:

1) your shutter speed was set too high. The highest the shutter speed, the jerkiest the movements will look. Normal setting should be 1/48th of a second. Slower will smooth motion, but also add motion blur. Experiment with those settings. 90% of the time you'll want to shoot 1/48th, however, for specific uses, you might want to use 1/24th, 1/60th, or any other rate.

2) You move too fast! This might seem like a dumb answer, but beleive me, it's not. Videographers tend to be used to make fast pans with crisps results because the image is normally sampled 60 times (fields) per second. Now on film or in 24p with the XL2, the image is sampled at a 24fps rate. Much slower. Film cameramen understand this reality linked to their medium and they know just how fast they can move/pan before the motion seems too flickery. Sometimes, special action scenes in films with lots of fast camera moves will be shot at a faster frame rate, like 48p or 60p, to get more samples per second. There is no easy solution here, 24p means you need to be more careful about your movements. If you do fast paced stuff, you might want to consider the 30p option on the XL2.

[Yi Fong Yu]

for fast panning pieces (like the movie speed or a michael bay movie), does it make sense to shoot 60i and convert to 24p since we can't shoot @higher progressive fps? will that match 24p (for little movement drama scenes)?

[Stefan Scherperel]

It's funny that this should come up now, but it was only inevitable that it would. Being a DVX100a owner I remember going through this conversation over a year ago. Here is the most straight forward answer you can get.

When shooting 24p, you can't handle the camera like a video camera, you need to treat it like a film camera. The reason that you don't notice "strobbing"(as it is often refered to) in movies is that 90% of the time, it is hidden. HOwever, it is still prevelent, filmaker have just learned how to keep the viewers eye from seeing it. Even if you shot at 60i and converted to 24p, the strobing would still be there, it is just inherent to the slower frame rate of 24fps. The way that you hide it is #1 learn the panning speeds for focal lengths. The longer the focal length, the slower the pan needs to be. #2 if you must pan faster than the focal lenght will allow, get something in the frame that the eye can follow, like a moving car or a moving person, something to take the eye away from the background. If you watch any motion picture (shot on film) on DVD, and watch for fast moving backgrounds, you will see lots of stuttering. It has nothing to do with the camera at all. In fact, it is funny now that the Xl2 is displaying the same characteristics as the DVX, because so many people were 100% convinced that it was the DVX itself causing the strobing. Well, all I can say to those people is, "you missed out on a great camera and now your going to find that it is the same with every other camera that shoots progressive video" HA HA HA!

Sorry for the childishness, but you have no idea how many heated arguments I got in over this. People are just convinced that it doesn't happen with film.

I suggest looking up some "filming" techniques and incorporating those techniques into your current shooting styles. It is not hard to follow these rules, and if you do, your footage will look 100x better than any 60i video could ever look (as far as film look goes that is).

[Yi Fong Yu]

hey stefan,

you're absolutely correct. now that i think about most films have panning shots that follow a character or a group of people or something. that's awesome =). thx for the suggestion.