For low budget movie at DVinfo.net

Larry Secrest · June 24th, 2007, 05:12 PM

Hello,

I'm going to produce a low budget film. I'm hesitating between three cams.
Sony V1 DVX100B and Canon HV20.

Also, since I'm not assured at all of film transfer, why should I go HDV
I'm also aware that many project have originated in DV, with the DVX100 and they were viewable. So why should I go through the headache of HDV editing?
THanks a lot to all the experts on this forum.
Larry

Cole McDonald · June 24th, 2007, 05:21 PM

If you can afford to, go HDV. The acquisition footage will start out better, which will give you prettier pictures when you downsample to SD for your release...then if you transition to needing film release ever, the footage will hold up better.

Keep in mind the post workflow and hardware needs for HDV will be higher than SD...so that may add to your cost at the outset.

Buying technology rule of thumb: Buy the best you can right now, and don't look back...I'm still shooting with my XL1s and am very happy with the picture...even projected off of DVD in a theater (which is really cool, BTW).

Jon McGuffin · June 24th, 2007, 06:04 PM

I second Cole's remarks. Seems the cameras you mentioned fit into different price ranges with the Panny 100b costing over twice as much as the Canon HV20. For $3,000 you can get the HDR-FX1 which I own which is not that much more than the 100b. As Cole pointed out, your hardware editing requirements are going to be a lot higher needing a good cpu and NLE to edit. If that's just not possible, why not get a 3K HDV cam anyway and just downconvert to SD on capture. You'll still be better off than if you shot in SD Raw and this way, down the road, you can do HD.

Larry Secrest · June 24th, 2007, 06:45 PM

Thanks Jon and Cole.

I need a new computer and I'll build one of the configuration recommended by the Videoguys. I think I'll be fine to edit as far as power. I've never edited HDV and I've heard it can be a headache.

Now are you saying that if I shoot with a HDV cam and downconvert to SD I'll keep the 16 x 9? That'd be sweet.

The reason why I wanted to go either with the HV20 or the DVX100 B is for the 24p. To me aesthetically, for a narrative, 24P is a must.

I have access to a free DXC-D50 with a DSR1 back, do you think this cam could do a good job? Of course it's interlace. What would you recommend to deinterlace its footage? What software? I bet deinterlacing in post is not as good as acquiring in progressive, correct?
Thanks
Larry

Jim Exton · June 24th, 2007, 06:54 PM

Or you can rent.

Zack Birlew · June 24th, 2007, 07:12 PM

One question, have you considered a Canon A1? It's a little more than a DVX100B and a little less than a V1 and a lot of people seem very happy with it.

I personally have an HV20 and it is really nice and everything but I would think you would want something more professional. I don't mind going through the manual exposure steps on the HV20 myself but I would want an A1 at the least if I could help it.

I also agree that going DVX right now would be taking a step backwards. The only reasonable argument would be if you intended to get an Andromeda modification for it. Otherwise, the DVX is a no go.

Don Donatello · June 24th, 2007, 07:30 PM

there is no headache editing HDV - maybe 5 years ago ? today it is easy provided you have the right tools ...pretty much any good NLE will edit HDV.

everybody wants their projects to look GOOD .. and today 1920x1080 looks better then 720x480 anyway you look at it ...
35mm looks better then HD ... the higher the quality the better it looks when you down res .. 35mm has always looked better on VHS then any standard def camera ... IMO any of the top 6 HDV camera ( hand size ) looks better then any hand size DV camera ....

from the 3 camera's you mention and the want/need of 24p ... then it looks like the sony V1 would be 1st choice of the HDV camera's ... ... i have a HV 20 and i look at it more as a toy .. the DVX 100 is a excellent Standard def camera ... for me it would be a toss up between shooing DVX & HV20 ??? would depend on script and budget for lighting ..

thats my 3 cents

Larry Secrest · June 24th, 2007, 07:33 PM

Jack and Don
Thank you.
Yes, I'm actually also looking at the Canon A1. Of course I realize that the HV20 is no pro instrument. I'm trying to figure out, or find in a thread, if the 24F from the A1 are "real" progressive? Will the 24f footage be treated as 24P in a time line? In other words, if I was going to transfer to film, can I get real progressive footage using the 24F of the Canon A1?
I've just discovered digging out info on this forum that there are issues with the progressive footage of the HV20. It's not really possible yet to truly take advantage of the progressive capability of this cam. In other words for film transfer footage from the HV 20 is not the right choice yet. It is NOT possible to really extract the progressive frame yet, correct? Now I'd assume I can still have progressive look from the HV20 as long as I view the footage on an interlace display?
So Don you'd consider shooting a film with the Hv20?

By the way, what about deinterlacing footage from a sony DXC-D50 with a DSR1 back, as I mentioned I have access to one for free

Cole McDonald · June 24th, 2007, 08:27 PM

I shoot with my XL1s exclusively in frame mode. I have no problems in the FCP with it.

Zack Birlew · June 24th, 2007, 11:07 PM

Well, Larry, it's not that you can't get the HV20 progressive footage out of it. The problem is that you can't do it natively yet, which is basically what we can do now with other 24P/24F HDV cameras. Fortunately, Compressor 3 in Final Cut Studio 2 supposedly makes the 24p extraction process easier, I've yet to try though on my HV20 (haven't had time to film anything yet with summer school and all).

As far as the A1's 24F to film-out goes, I honestly haven't read anything on that, I've been sticking around either the RED or HV20 forums lately and I've read the A1 forums every now and then because a lot of cool A1 projects are being made out there! =)

Mark Kenfield · June 24th, 2007, 11:47 PM

Larry,

Both the HV20 and the XHA1 record 24 progressive frames per second in their 24F mode. I believe they lose some vertical resolution in the process, but they still produce lovely images if used well, and yes a current NLE will treat the footage as 24 discreet frames per second in the timeline.

Hope this helps.

Don Donatello · June 25th, 2007, 12:14 AM

for PC you can use cineform software to get the 24p out of the HV20 1080i ( 24p mode) ...

choosing between hand size Dv camera and HV20 - 1st & 2nd thought - YES i would consider HV20 .. i know i would need more lighting ( then if used DVX100) but 1080 just might be worth it ... i do have to say the images from the HV 20 are very good when you have enough light ...
i would do a few test of scenes where you know the camera will be shaking/vibrating ... more & more i tend to turn off the optical stabilization ..
also depends some on the script ... if alot of night street shooting and i don't have some large HMI's then i lean more towards a camera more sensitive to light ...

i prefer to light for a min of a ASA 100 film stock ... i don't know what the HV20 would be with a 35mm adaptor on it ???

at cinegear Red rock had a interesting shoulder mount for the HV20 ( camera was mounted upside down) with the M2 adaptor on it ...

Chris Barcellos · June 25th, 2007, 12:53 AM

I shot this movie with the HV20, in 24p and Cinemode, using Letus35a adapter for a 48 Film contest in SF. I used a self built unit to shoot it upside down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s3hDShqe18

This is picture of the first days of this flip unit, but I have remade it since then, adding a lot of things....

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...6&d=1176516289

Check out latest version here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...4&d=1182318059

Larry Secrest · June 25th, 2007, 08:30 AM

Chris,

Wow, the quality of the footage is really good.
Larry

Doug Cooper · June 25th, 2007, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

I shot this movie with the HV20, in 24p and Cinemode, using Letus35a adapter for a 48 Film contest in SF. I used a self built unit to shoot it upside down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s3hDShqe18

This is picture of the first days of this flip unit, but I have remade it since then, adding a lot of things....

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...6&d=1176516289

Check out latest version here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...4&d=1182318059

Nice. Is that a dvd player/laptop on top? How did you build that?

June 24th, 2007, 05:12 PM	#1
Larry Secrest Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Bethesda, MD Posts: 404	For low budget movie Hello, I'm going to produce a low budget film. I'm hesitating between three cams. Sony V1 DVX100B and Canon HV20. Also, since I'm not assured at all of film transfer, why should I go HDV I'm also aware that many project have originated in DV, with the DVX100 and they were viewable. So why should I go through the headache of HDV editing? THanks a lot to all the experts on this forum. Larry

June 24th, 2007, 05:21 PM	#2
Cole McDonald Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Sauk Rapids, MN, USA Posts: 1,675	If you can afford to, go HDV. The acquisition footage will start out better, which will give you prettier pictures when you downsample to SD for your release...then if you transition to needing film release ever, the footage will hold up better. Keep in mind the post workflow and hardware needs for HDV will be higher than SD...so that may add to your cost at the outset. Buying technology rule of thumb: Buy the best you can right now, and don't look back...I'm still shooting with my XL1s and am very happy with the picture...even projected off of DVD in a theater (which is really cool, BTW). __________________ Web Youtube Facebook

June 24th, 2007, 06:54 PM	#5
Jim Exton Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Memphis Posts: 103	Or you can rent. __________________ "Four Years", a 35mm short film at http://vimeo.com/3071939 "Anniversary", a short film shot on Red at www.jim-exton.blogspot.com

June 24th, 2007, 07:12 PM	#6
Zack Birlew Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 613	One question, have you considered a Canon A1? It's a little more than a DVX100B and a little less than a V1 and a lot of people seem very happy with it. I personally have an HV20 and it is really nice and everything but I would think you would want something more professional. I don't mind going through the manual exposure steps on the HV20 myself but I would want an A1 at the least if I could help it. I also agree that going DVX right now would be taking a step backwards. The only reasonable argument would be if you intended to get an Andromeda modification for it. Otherwise, the DVX is a no go. __________________ "Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew www.BabsDoProductions.com

June 24th, 2007, 07:33 PM	#8
Larry Secrest Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Bethesda, MD Posts: 404	Jack and Don Thank you. Yes, I'm actually also looking at the Canon A1. Of course I realize that the HV20 is no pro instrument. I'm trying to figure out, or find in a thread, if the 24F from the A1 are "real" progressive? Will the 24f footage be treated as 24P in a time line? In other words, if I was going to transfer to film, can I get real progressive footage using the 24F of the Canon A1? I've just discovered digging out info on this forum that there are issues with the progressive footage of the HV20. It's not really possible yet to truly take advantage of the progressive capability of this cam. In other words for film transfer footage from the HV 20 is not the right choice yet. It is NOT possible to really extract the progressive frame yet, correct? Now I'd assume I can still have progressive look from the HV20 as long as I view the footage on an interlace display? So Don you'd consider shooting a film with the Hv20? By the way, what about deinterlacing footage from a sony DXC-D50 with a DSR1 back, as I mentioned I have access to one for free Last edited by Larry Secrest; June 24th, 2007 at 07:50 PM. Reason: forgot one thing

June 24th, 2007, 06:04 PM	#3
Jon McGuffin Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Carlsbad, CA Posts: 634	I second Cole's remarks. Seems the cameras you mentioned fit into different price ranges with the Panny 100b costing over twice as much as the Canon HV20. For $3,000 you can get the HDR-FX1 which I own which is not that much more than the 100b. As Cole pointed out, your hardware editing requirements are going to be a lot higher needing a good cpu and NLE to edit. If that's just not possible, why not get a 3K HDV cam anyway and just downconvert to SD on capture. You'll still be better off than if you shot in SD Raw and this way, down the road, you can do HD.

June 24th, 2007, 06:45 PM	#4
Larry Secrest Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Bethesda, MD Posts: 404	Thanks Jon and Cole. I need a new computer and I'll build one of the configuration recommended by the Videoguys. I think I'll be fine to edit as far as power. I've never edited HDV and I've heard it can be a headache. Now are you saying that if I shoot with a HDV cam and downconvert to SD I'll keep the 16 x 9? That'd be sweet. The reason why I wanted to go either with the HV20 or the DVX100 B is for the 24p. To me aesthetically, for a narrative, 24P is a must. I have access to a free DXC-D50 with a DSR1 back, do you think this cam could do a good job? Of course it's interlace. What would you recommend to deinterlace its footage? What software? I bet deinterlacing in post is not as good as acquiring in progressive, correct? Thanks Larry

June 24th, 2007, 07:30 PM	#7
Don Donatello Hawaiian Shirt Mogul Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: northern cailfornia Posts: 1,261	there is no headache editing HDV - maybe 5 years ago ? today it is easy provided you have the right tools ...pretty much any good NLE will edit HDV. everybody wants their projects to look GOOD .. and today 1920x1080 looks better then 720x480 anyway you look at it ... 35mm looks better then HD ... the higher the quality the better it looks when you down res .. 35mm has always looked better on VHS then any standard def camera ... IMO any of the top 6 HDV camera ( hand size ) looks better then any hand size DV camera .... from the 3 camera's you mention and the want/need of 24p ... then it looks like the sony V1 would be 1st choice of the HDV camera's ... ... i have a HV 20 and i look at it more as a toy .. the DVX 100 is a excellent Standard def camera ... for me it would be a toss up between shooing DVX & HV20 ??? would depend on script and budget for lighting .. thats my 3 cents

June 24th, 2007, 08:27 PM	#9
Cole McDonald Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Sauk Rapids, MN, USA Posts: 1,675	I shoot with my XL1s exclusively in frame mode. I have no problems in the FCP with it. __________________ Web Youtube Facebook

June 24th, 2007, 11:07 PM	#10
Zack Birlew Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 613	Well, Larry, it's not that you can't get the HV20 progressive footage out of it. The problem is that you can't do it natively yet, which is basically what we can do now with other 24P/24F HDV cameras. Fortunately, Compressor 3 in Final Cut Studio 2 supposedly makes the 24p extraction process easier, I've yet to try though on my HV20 (haven't had time to film anything yet with summer school and all). As far as the A1's 24F to film-out goes, I honestly haven't read anything on that, I've been sticking around either the RED or HV20 forums lately and I've read the A1 forums every now and then because a lot of cool A1 projects are being made out there! =) __________________ "Babs Do or Babs Do not, there is no try." - Zack Birlew www.BabsDoProductions.com

June 24th, 2007, 11:47 PM	#11
Mark Kenfield Major Player Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 470	Larry, Both the HV20 and the XHA1 record 24 progressive frames per second in their 24F mode. I believe they lose some vertical resolution in the process, but they still produce lovely images if used well, and yes a current NLE will treat the footage as 24 discreet frames per second in the timeline. Hope this helps.

June 25th, 2007, 12:14 AM	#12
Don Donatello Hawaiian Shirt Mogul Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: northern cailfornia Posts: 1,261	for PC you can use cineform software to get the 24p out of the HV20 1080i ( 24p mode) ... choosing between hand size Dv camera and HV20 - 1st & 2nd thought - YES i would consider HV20 .. i know i would need more lighting ( then if used DVX100) but 1080 just might be worth it ... i do have to say the images from the HV 20 are very good when you have enough light ... i would do a few test of scenes where you know the camera will be shaking/vibrating ... more & more i tend to turn off the optical stabilization .. also depends some on the script ... if alot of night street shooting and i don't have some large HMI's then i lean more towards a camera more sensitive to light ... i prefer to light for a min of a ASA 100 film stock ... i don't know what the HV20 would be with a 35mm adaptor on it ??? at cinegear Red rock had a interesting shoulder mount for the HV20 ( camera was mounted upside down) with the M2 adaptor on it ...

June 25th, 2007, 12:53 AM	#13
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	I shot this movie with the HV20, in 24p and Cinemode, using Letus35a adapter for a 48 Film contest in SF. I used a self built unit to shoot it upside down. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s3hDShqe18 This is picture of the first days of this flip unit, but I have remade it since then, adding a lot of things.... http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...6&d=1176516289 Check out latest version here: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...4&d=1182318059 __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

June 25th, 2007, 08:30 AM	#14
Larry Secrest Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Bethesda, MD Posts: 404	Chris, Wow, the quality of the footage is really good. Larry