Saw great footage of the HD10

Frederic Lumiere · November 2nd, 2003, 05:39 PM

Heath,

That's right...you sent your camera to your friend in NYC for some 35 mm blowup test?...or was it just HD comparison test?

Oh...she really got to me when she said "This camera is only good for web video formats." That's when I finally walked away.

It's funny when you listen to 'so called' experts and you slowly realize that they're idiots.

Heath McKnight · November 2nd, 2003, 05:42 PM

Just HD tests, 35 mm is a bit TOO pricey!

heath

Frederic Lumiere · November 2nd, 2003, 05:44 PM

Some houses will do 1 minute for free. Had it done years ago.

Heath McKnight · November 2nd, 2003, 05:54 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Frederic Haubrich : Some houses will do 1 minute for free. Had it done years ago. -->>>

Hmmm...If I can get my hands on a Varicam tape, along with what I'll already be getting (the HD10 tapes and, if he does it, the DVX100 tapes), I just may do that.

heath

Frederic Lumiere · November 2nd, 2003, 06:03 PM

Of course there is the inherit problems with converting 720p to Film 24fps but here's my view on this (not that you asked):

1/ The number of theatres and film fests planning on projecting HD in digital is growing every week.

2/ I beleive that the 'old' conversion technique of shooting a high quality LCD (HD Rez in this case) might be appropriate in this case vs. the digital frame scanning approach.

Heath McKnight · November 2nd, 2003, 06:08 PM

I thought the HD10 footage could be viewed with no problems in 1080i HD...

heath

Frederic Lumiere · November 2nd, 2003, 06:11 PM

Heath,

Yes it can. It will play at 1080i right into a DVHS for recording.

I was just talking about blowing it up to 35mm for theatrical release.

Heath McKnight · November 2nd, 2003, 06:12 PM

Oh, gotcha.

hwm

ps-Maybe this camera isn't for 24 FPS film transfer.

Steven Galvano · November 2nd, 2003, 06:13 PM

Good question Alex--

I've logged a bunch of stuff to date on our 65" Sony ES series HD TV. Largely, the stuff is pretty locked. Thank God for the JVC engineer who thought up the aliasing thing--

I had some soft stuff outdoors where the LCD itself was harder to see. But, thankfully, the AF worked better in bright light to grab focus. I did have SOME focus issues, but so far so good. Maybe my eyes are just good:)

-Steven Galvano

Heath McKnight · November 2nd, 2003, 06:18 PM

I hear there is an 80 inch HDTV. I wonder how the HD10 will look.

Dang, now I REALLY wish I had it right here. (Testing is good, testing is good...)

heath

Alex Raskin · November 2nd, 2003, 06:30 PM

Thanks Steven. I guess 65" is a VERY large HD monitor, so any imperfections would show...

<<<--- I did have SOME focus issues, but so far so good --->>>

I just watched Network, the 1976 movie (a good one!). Even on DVD, one of the most important scenes - Max talks to Diana, towards the end of the film - looked REALLY out of focus.

So obviously stuff happens even with large productions.

The fact that you got the focus fine fo the most part of the shoot with only flip-out LCD as a monitor, is very encouraging. Like you, I also like this thing when the image "pops" on the LCD when in focus. Even more so on HD1 - but I ran as far as I could from its edge enhancement artifacts...

<<<--- Manual focus is easy with the LCD -- even racked (often) very sucessfully. --->>>

Now, this one is contrary to my own experience... I found the focus ring to have some sort of response lag, and it seems to be impossible to reproduce the results as it ends up in different position for the same focus in different takes.

Is my camera defective or do you have a technique that works around that?

Yang Wen · November 2nd, 2003, 06:36 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin : Thanks Steven. I guess 65" is a VERY large HD monitor, so any imperfections would show...
-->>>

So how would a film blowup hold up?

Steven Galvano · November 2nd, 2003, 06:42 PM

Good point - I should clarify. I never really tried to reproduce a focus pull as I never really had a "take 2".

On our film productions, our 1st camera assist cuts little paper markers and sticks them to the lens marking exact focus. I don't think the ring on the HD10 is that accurate:)

I basically just kept in mind that clockwise motion brought focus in, anf counter clockwise brought it out. My point was that I liked the response. I was able to do it accurately on the fly because I would rotate until focus poped.

I love racking -- and this is the easiest (small camera) I've done it on.

Steven Galvano

Frederic Lumiere · November 2nd, 2003, 06:43 PM

Alex,

Yes I experienced something similar.

I did change the settings 'sorry forgot the exact name' in the menu for focusing closer to the lense and I found that I had a lot of room to play with when the exposure was optimized for short depth of field.

In some instances, I could change the focus on three seperate distances clearly.

I was impressed. I was only able to do that with the Ps Technique on the XL1. $8K adapter.

I think I misspelled 'PS Technique'.

Frederic Lumiere · November 2nd, 2003, 06:53 PM

Yan,

Assuming (and these are assumptions I am making because I haven't tested it) the 720p frame rate issue is taken care of by transfering to film via shooting a hires LCD, footage has been color corrected (I never let a show go until it has been completely color corrected), the footage from this camera will look a lot better than DV.

For one simple reason, resolution.

The number one enemy of video to film is the lack of resolution. If it isn't there it just isn't there.

Now many have done well blowing DV to film (Blair Witch Project, Last Broadcast, Celebration, that latest docu drama shot in the middle east) but somehow, the quality of image was always part of the story in some way.

I am very excited about this camera because despite its imperfections, it has something no DV camera has, resolution.

But the true answer to your question is, let's wait and see the first print.

November 2nd, 2003, 05:42 PM	#17
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Just HD tests, 35 mm is a bit TOO pricey! heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 2nd, 2003, 05:54 PM	#19
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	<<<-- Originally posted by Frederic Haubrich : Some houses will do 1 minute for free. Had it done years ago. -->>> Hmmm...If I can get my hands on a Varicam tape, along with what I'll already be getting (the HD10 tapes and, if he does it, the DVX100 tapes), I just may do that. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 2nd, 2003, 06:08 PM	#21
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I thought the HD10 footage could be viewed with no problems in 1080i HD... heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 2nd, 2003, 06:12 PM	#23
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Oh, gotcha. hwm ps-Maybe this camera isn't for 24 FPS film transfer. __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 2nd, 2003, 06:18 PM	#25
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I hear there is an 80 inch HDTV. I wonder how the HD10 will look. Dang, now I REALLY wish I had it right here. (Testing is good, testing is good...) heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 2nd, 2003, 05:39 PM	#16
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Heath, That's right...you sent your camera to your friend in NYC for some 35 mm blowup test?...or was it just HD comparison test? Oh...she really got to me when she said "This camera is only good for web video formats." That's when I finally walked away. It's funny when you listen to 'so called' experts and you slowly realize that they're idiots.

November 2nd, 2003, 05:44 PM	#18
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Some houses will do 1 minute for free. Had it done years ago.

November 2nd, 2003, 06:03 PM	#20
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Of course there is the inherit problems with converting 720p to Film 24fps but here's my view on this (not that you asked): 1/ The number of theatres and film fests planning on projecting HD in digital is growing every week. 2/ I beleive that the 'old' conversion technique of shooting a high quality LCD (HD Rez in this case) might be appropriate in this case vs. the digital frame scanning approach.

November 2nd, 2003, 06:11 PM	#22
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Heath, Yes it can. It will play at 1080i right into a DVHS for recording. I was just talking about blowing it up to 35mm for theatrical release.

November 2nd, 2003, 06:13 PM	#24
Steven Galvano Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Rochester, New York Posts: 109	Good question Alex-- I've logged a bunch of stuff to date on our 65" Sony ES series HD TV. Largely, the stuff is pretty locked. Thank God for the JVC engineer who thought up the aliasing thing-- I had some soft stuff outdoors where the LCD itself was harder to see. But, thankfully, the AF worked better in bright light to grab focus. I did have SOME focus issues, but so far so good. Maybe my eyes are just good:) -Steven Galvano

November 2nd, 2003, 06:30 PM	#26
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	Thanks Steven. I guess 65" is a VERY large HD monitor, so any imperfections would show... <<<--- I did have SOME focus issues, but so far so good --->>> I just watched Network, the 1976 movie (a good one!). Even on DVD, one of the most important scenes - Max talks to Diana, towards the end of the film - looked REALLY out of focus. So obviously stuff happens even with large productions. The fact that you got the focus fine fo the most part of the shoot with only flip-out LCD as a monitor, is very encouraging. Like you, I also like this thing when the image "pops" on the LCD when in focus. Even more so on HD1 - but I ran as far as I could from its edge enhancement artifacts... <<<--- Manual focus is easy with the LCD -- even racked (often) very sucessfully. --->>> Now, this one is contrary to my own experience... I found the focus ring to have some sort of response lag, and it seems to be impossible to reproduce the results as it ends up in different position for the same focus in different takes. Is my camera defective or do you have a technique that works around that?

November 2nd, 2003, 06:36 PM	#27
Yang Wen Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 991	<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin : Thanks Steven. I guess 65" is a VERY large HD monitor, so any imperfections would show... -->>> So how would a film blowup hold up?

November 2nd, 2003, 06:42 PM	#28
Steven Galvano Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Rochester, New York Posts: 109	Good point - I should clarify. I never really tried to reproduce a focus pull as I never really had a "take 2". On our film productions, our 1st camera assist cuts little paper markers and sticks them to the lens marking exact focus. I don't think the ring on the HD10 is that accurate:) I basically just kept in mind that clockwise motion brought focus in, anf counter clockwise brought it out. My point was that I liked the response. I was able to do it accurately on the fly because I would rotate until focus poped. I love racking -- and this is the easiest (small camera) I've done it on. Steven Galvano

November 2nd, 2003, 06:43 PM	#29
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Alex, Yes I experienced something similar. I did change the settings 'sorry forgot the exact name' in the menu for focusing closer to the lense and I found that I had a lot of room to play with when the exposure was optimized for short depth of field. In some instances, I could change the focus on three seperate distances clearly. I was impressed. I was only able to do that with the Ps Technique on the XL1. $8K adapter. I think I misspelled 'PS Technique'.

November 2nd, 2003, 06:53 PM	#30
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Yan, Assuming (and these are assumptions I am making because I haven't tested it) the 720p frame rate issue is taken care of by transfering to film via shooting a hires LCD, footage has been color corrected (I never let a show go until it has been completely color corrected), the footage from this camera will look a lot better than DV. For one simple reason, resolution. The number one enemy of video to film is the lack of resolution. If it isn't there it just isn't there. Now many have done well blowing DV to film (Blair Witch Project, Last Broadcast, Celebration, that latest docu drama shot in the middle east) but somehow, the quality of image was always part of the story in some way. I am very excited about this camera because despite its imperfections, it has something no DV camera has, resolution. But the true answer to your question is, let's wait and see the first print.