What would you like to see in a HD100/200 to 35mm transfer test?

[David Scattergood]

Thanks for sharing Jose - the reel looks stunning.

Forgive my ignorance but I'm not sure why you wouldn't use the SGrpo for an anamorphic/2.35:1 look but would for 1.85:1? If it's a softer image and the image is merely cropped what difference would there be?
I'm sure your answer will put me straight!

I'll second Dan's request for how you monitor on field. It's a constant bane of my life...I 'had' to shoot a building from a certain angle recently and at an early hour of the morning in order to get the footage to a client before midday. Unfortunately I was almost directly facing the sun and using the ND filters and closing the iris down resulted in soft images (despite checking back focus and focus assist). Not sure they grasped the basic concept of shooting against the sun...but the time was the most important aspect for them :(

[Jose L. Martinez]

Thanks guys for the kind words. I've spent years (2003) reading this forums in silence, just learning, so I'm really proud to finally be able to share something here!.

Originally Posted by Jaadgy Akanni

Thanks for all the updates on your project. I've always been convinced that this camera gives you the most filmic look of all the cameras in its price range. Those grabs are just beautiful-very nice "film-stocky" grains.

Hey José, given that you lose some color when using the adaptor, having you ever raised the color gain on either Tim's or Paolo's scene recipes?

I think it's still the most filmic camera under that 10000€ price tag, and I've tried them all:-). Of course is the knowledge of it what makes the difference. I've seen beatiful pieces of filmmaking in pretty much every camera since the first sony dv (did you remember 'The Dead' by starway pictures?).

About your question, this film wasn't shot with the adaptor, but with the stock lens alone, and very little filtration (NDs and POLA). In the film out test I found a small loss, but since I did the test to know how will these scene files react to the arrilaser process, I let them as-is to not invalidate the test themselves. It pretty much worked as an emulsion tests, I just follow the findings in the real shooting, since I cannot afford, or wait for, another batch or tests to correct what I found in the first ones.

Jose

[Jose L. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Dan Parkes

Cheers Jose.

I missed your earlier post with your impressions etc of the JVC201/SGPro setup and since we are using the same equipment I found it most interesting.

Your conclusion regarding the stock lens sweetspot being 4-5.6 confirms what I have been told -we were struggling for light and ended up opening the stock lens right up on a recent shoot, and had some issues with soft focus.

Absolutely. The HD and this lens form a strange combination you must be very careful with.

You also mentioning checking the backfocus on each setup. I am curious to know what you used for onset monitoring? Did you have a HD field monitor?

Dan

Backfocus is a must. I admit I got very paranoid with it, but with a film out, your image will soften enough. I've been assistant camera in a small number of F900 projects so I was on guard. I asked for a collimator, but wisely production showed me the middle finger, so my assistant and I had to go with a focus chart and a lot of patience.

Monitoring was another pain in the a.. I quoted an astro for me and a sony LCD for director. I had to reduce costs, so I keep the astro, with the slim hope that a standard CRT would be enough for the director. The shooting began without any of them, I shot blind the first day, and finally got a HDA sony LCD 9 inches. I hate them. I hate LCD with all my guts, but at least I had something to look at. Since them I bought a Marshall for myself, at least enough to check focus. The Dell 24 with a HDlink would be a nice option, less portable.

I found two things: The camera has way more latitude you can show on any of these sub-20,000 monitors, and that the analog out, camera LCD and viefinder all show different crop of the image, so I have to check compositing and 2,40 safe zones on the monitor itself.

[QUOTE]

Forgive my ignorance but I'm not sure why you wouldn't use the SGrpo for an anamorphic/2.35:1 look but would for 1.85:1? If it's a softer image and the image is merely cropped what difference would there be?
I'm sure your answer will put me straight!

[\QUOTE]

We all are learning, so don't excuse yourself.

I wouldn't use the SGpro or any other adapter on a 2.40 project because the softness of the adapter will add to the softness of the cropping. At least with the arrilaser, to extract a 2,40 image from a 16x9 master, you have to crop and resize it, so you end up with an even softer image. For me, this was unaceptable, at least for this project, since it was really visible in the tests.

[QUOTE]
I'll second Dan's request for how you monitor on field. It's a constant bane of my life...I 'had' to shoot a building from a certain angle recently and at an early hour of the morning in order to get the footage to a client before midday. Unfortunately I was almost directly facing the sun and using the ND filters and closing the iris down resulted in soft images (despite checking back focus and focus assist). Not sure they grasped the basic concept of shooting against the sun...but the time was the most important aspect for them :(
[\QUOTE]

I experimented something similar, shooting the backlight facing the sea reflecting the 'magic hour' sun. Adding ND's and closing down, I also ended with a soft image. I think it has something to do with difraction of the light with such a small aperture and the angle of the light, but perhaps somebody more knowledgeable than me could elaborate this.

A monitor is a must, and CRT should be the way, but as you know it's a lost battle. Perhaps the smallest Marshall, video-assist monitor could be an option, but shooting on sunny locations is imposible. I spent all the sea-shooting days completely wrapped in black velvet with the monitor to barely try to see something. They though I was nuts. And in these situations, I would relay more on the spot meter than the monitor.

Jose

[David Scattergood]

We all are learning, so don't excuse yourself.

I wouldn't use the SGpro or any other adapter on a 2.40 project because the softness of the adapter will add to the softness of the cropping. At least with the arrilaser, to extract a 2,40 image from a 16x9 master, you have to crop and resize it, so you end up with an even softer image. For me, this was unaceptable, at least for this project, since it was really visible in the tests.

Thanks Jose - I was looking at it from the 2:35.1 matte crop in the NLE rather than such high end equipment as the Arrilaser (I've just read up on this). With the NLE crop I can't see how you're physically losing data and hence ensuing softness when the width (horizontal) remains the same.
I've tried the crop but think it might be 'honest' if wide angle, or 35mm adaptor options were used (and I've been asked to shoot an upcoming project in 2:35.1 but using the standard fujinon lens for the HD100 - I'll try and persuade otherwise but if that's what is wanted I'll have to go along!).

I experimented something similar, shooting the backlight facing the sea reflecting the 'magic hour' sun. Adding ND's and closing down, I also ended with a soft image. I think it has something to do with difraction of the light with such a small aperture and the angle of the light, but perhaps somebody more knowledgeable than me could elaborate this.

A monitor is a must, and CRT should be the way, but as you know it's a lost battle. Perhaps the smallest Marshall, video-assist monitor could be an option, but shooting on sunny locations is imposible. I spent all the sea-shooting days completely wrapped in black velvet with the monitor to barely try to see something. They though I was nuts. And in these situations, I would relay more on the spot meter than the monitor.

The thing is, it wasn't even the magic hour...they needed the footage by a certain deadline - I was to shoot a huge LED advertising screen but this and the surrounding buildings were just really badly lit - later in the day when the sun was facing them would've been perfect. They then slipped in that they wanted me to photograph (50 odd photographs...I'm not a 'photographer' and told them so) the site also...all for absolute peanuts. Essentially a pi** take I had no option of walking away from. Business lessons learned on this job!

Every time I take the camera out and especially on an upcoming film project I desperately wish for a small monitor - the siemens chart (on zoom out for back focus) is a royal struggle - I can't imagine how this is reliable on such a small LCD. Focus assist and viewfinder are often my only friends out there.
I'm going to give your reel another viewing, purely to provide inspiration for upcoming projects...if I can achieve anything remotely like what you've produced I'd be happy Jose.

Cheers.