Low-light test shoot
 

This is a quicktime (sorenson codec so you PC guys can play it) of a test shoot I did Sunday for a film I am prepping now.
The available light level was never any more than 5 footcandles, the average ambient light was probably around 2 footcandles.
For ƒ1.4, 1/48th shutter that would mean a sensitivity of 500 to 800ASA.

I want to stress that this was shot at 1/48th shutter at 0dB, except for the overcranked 576p50, which was shot at 1/50th shutter (I should have switch to 1/59.94 to avoid flicker.) Gain or slow shutter were never used.

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/...y-sorenson.mov

The Camera Process settings were as follows:
MASTER BLACK... Normal
DETAIL... -1
BLACK... STRETCH3
WHITE CLIP... 108%
KNEE... MANUAL 85%
CINELIKE... OFF
GAMMA... STANDARD
LEVEL... MAX

May You explain me, why there is flickering in the 50p shots? And what has it to do with a 1/59.94 shutter?

If I had shot with the same setup in Germany, there would be no flicker at 1/50th shutter. However, in North America electricity is 60Hz, and therefore flourescent and other vapour lights flicker at a rate of 60Hz (not 50Hz like in most of Europe.) This was the main reason for the frame rate differences between NTSC and PAL when TV standards were first introduced.

1/48th shutter generally doesn't present a problem with 60Hz sources, but 1/50th is off just enough to cause flicker. If I had shot 480p60, there would have been no flicker, or I could have used synchro-scan to dial in 1/60th (1/59.94) and still shot 576p50.

Was there any extra lighting uses or just what was provided by the light sources around the scene?

For the CU handheld running shot, and the stuff when she was on the ground, I had a 60W bulb in a china ball about 6 feet away.

Other than that, it was all available ambient light, shot between 9PM and Midnight, while it was raining.

Nice little film
 

Hey Tim,

good job man, the film looks great! Are you actually finishing it with sound, music and CC and submitting to a festival or something?

My other - more technical tests
 

Here's the sequence of informal tests I did last week to compare the DVX sensitivity.

Also, low-res sorenson quicktime:

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/...e-Sorenson.mov

This was just a test shoot/screen test. I am shooting the film in the winter, and we will be reshooting this scene then, when it is cold.
The director and I decided to do a practical test so he can use it for a teaser trailer to raise more money. He will be cutting it together and adding SFX, music, titles, etc. I'll post it when he is finished.

Here's some publicity stuff for the film:
http://www.mojoprofilms.com/exlover.html

Tim, Are you familiar with DivX?

Stephen, Here they are in Divx codec if that works better for you. The file sizes are a little bigger.

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/...embly-Divx.mov

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/...uence-Divx.mov

Is that shoot with the stock lens?

Nice footage Tim. Looks really good. Specially the slomo shots. Judging by the camera settings, I would say you have squeezed as much low light performance as possible from the camera without adding gain.
The great thing of all is I see no sign or split screen whatsoever in these low light shots.
Great job! Can't wait till I get mine.

Thx for the footage Tim and good luck with your project. I noticed the in-famous split screen in sec 4-5 of the footage, sadly it appears in one of the best shots in your teaser, great location btw. I can live with a semi-decent lens as it can be changed, I can live with a dead pixel as it can be masked but I wont shoot a feature with split screen...JVC better fix this error ASAP!

Mine will arrive on monday and this split screen problem really bugs me. This was the first time that I saw split screen in action and I hope I wont see it with my unit, this is just not acceptable from a camera like this!

Michael check the footage again. I didnt notice it the first time I watched it either...but then I just jumped out of my chair when I watched it for the second time. Sad!

Tim, The reason I asked about DivX is because there is a high def preset for 720p that gives full resolution with insane quality. I don't think that's just on the Windows side is it? I saw the split screen on a couple of frames. One when she is running (closup on face) and once after she looks at her foot. The first time though I was looking for it and didn't see it at all. The policy is that the camera be replaced if the split is there so it is what it is. I'm relatively sure they'll have to fix it on the production line with closer tolerance on the circuits. From what I've seen of the camera, it is worth changing out over and over to get one without a split. Really great for 1/3".

A 60w light in a china ball in the rain?!? That was hardly worth pulling out!

Yes. The 13x3.5 isn't available here yet.

I'm sorry, but I watched both clips again, with my nose glued on the monitor, and couldn't see it. Where exactly are you seeing it?

Click for image

These are single frame's with split in the motion picture, not overall split in the motion picture. They are hard to pick up unless you're looking for them.

Now that the split screen was pointed out I can see it in a handful of shots. You really have to look hard but I guess if the film was blown up to 35mm or even shown in HD on a big size TV, it may be more visible.

Ok, I see it now. But even in the still frame you have to look for it. Did you bright the shots to make them more visable?

No, no enhancement. That was a screenshot from the QT player.

Tim D. What's the serial number on your unit?

Tim, is it possible for you to upload the first shot of your teaser or the close up of the girl in raw .m2t?

I've uploaded a few takes to my public folder. The original m2t files.

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/...etup06-tk1.m2t

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/.../setup16-2.m2t

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/.../setup17-1.m2t

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/.../setup18-1.m2t

I only saw it because someone pointed it out, it wasn't bad at all. If I already didn't know about the sse, I wouldn't have noticed at all. I thought it would be more pronounced. Easily taken care of in post IMHO. Still, it's a bummer to even have to deal with it at all. This cam is definitely not for newbies.

I'm scared to order one now. Sorry if that sounds wimpy, but I gave up being a guinea pig for new tech a long time ago. Let you young whipper snappers take the risks for now. hehehe

I think I'll just rent a DVX100a and shoot with that. Assuming the HD100 is still around, I can wait till the Canon and the Panasonic are released to make a final decision. Too much at stake to rush into things. And now, hearing about that new Sony cam coming out in spring , yet another thing to think about.

Finally, a true nugget of wisdom on this board!

Tim, bad news. I dropped the files on the timeline and sent them out to monitor. There is no mistaking the split when sent out to CRT monitor. It is not fleeting or flashing by. Take a look when the director says to the girl "fall down" on setup-06.m2t. Right when her face leaves the scene you absolutely can not miss the split for the rest of the duration of the shot. Damn it! This thing could kill one of the most phenomenal camera packages to come along in a long time.

It is what it is and there is no mistaking it. I posted an ISO on another thread for SD DVD. If you download it and burn it you'll see (if you haven't already). I asked you on another thead what the serial number of the camera in question was. Is it low??

The serial numbers are 8 digits, so it is hard to tell what they mean. There is probably some type of coding system that tells you when the unit was manufactured.

I'll email them to you so you can try to decipher them.

I saw it, but that wasn't why I posted the footage. The point of this test was very low ambient light, but I was fortunate enough to get a bit of split screen.
That's exactly why I'm doing so many tests. I wouldn't want to find this stuff out while in production.
What I find really interesting is how it "flickers" in and out. The intermittency is probably a pretty good clue as to what is actually happening and why. I need to test this in a controlled environment some more before I send this unit back to JVC.

It would be very difficult to try to identify an affected batch vs. an unaffected batch by analyzing serial numbers on any of today's camcorders. These numbers are not just a direct progressive sequence like they were just a few short years ago. Those numbers will tell you what the technician on that assembly line ate for breakfast the morning your camera was built, but without knowing how those serial numbers are coded they would be impossible to decipher properly.

Tim, thx alot for posting the clips!

Great looking stuff. I'm really impressed with the low light performance for "film"-like work.

Is it just me, or does the noise look less like typical RGB video noise, and just a bit like film grain? Maybe I'm just kidding myself?

How does your 800 ASA square with the ASA 100 to 320 Berry found?

Looking at his results it's clear the lens T-stop does not match the F-stop markings as one goes below F4. Looks like by F2 the lens is really only passing a T-stop of about F2.8.

Damn straight
 

Hey you all, and really cheers for this good forum. As a newbie in this stuff good to got info from more experienced ppl. And thanks Tim, for the settings, have been going circles with my new love (hd100) about the "grainy" quality in low light, and with settings u provided really starts exeeding the expectations.

Would be nice to get also more settigns in different environments. I know you pros have more better stuff to do, but when we newbies are going to take ower the world we are going to give a big cheers for you guys.. and all these things are something that u have no idea if u have no idea.

Thanks to u all

Low light test
 

Very impressive! Thanks for that Tim! Looks great! Can't wait to get my hands on this baby! (a few more days!)

==========

"If you can talk brilliantly about a problem, it can create the consoling illusion that it has been mastered."
- Stanley Kubrick