shooting my new film in HD at DVinfo.net

Yonathan Gal · February 12th, 2005, 08:04 AM

Hi there,

I am starting work on a film soon which is to be set in 1939. I have a SONY DCR-TRV950E but for this sort of film I just couldn't bear the idea of shooting in MiniDV again, it just wouldn't work... HD however sounds promising, it sounds like it's going to look a lot better than MiniDV.... And with th Z1E, I should get much more of a "film" look, right?

Basically, I just neeeded some hep with the basics... If I film i HD, I'll have to distribute it in SD?? And will this mean that all the extra effort is pointless because it'll jsut look like mini-dv again, or will it still look a lot better than dv footage? is there anyway I could distiribute it in a way that preserved more of the quality, even if it was a more expensive way... just a few tips would be really great if anyone can help!

Thanks very much for any help,

Yonathan Gal

Darrell Essex · February 12th, 2005, 11:03 AM

Yonathan, go with the fx1 or z1. here is what i have found out. i have taken some of the footage that's been posted, color corrected, added effects ect.
rendered 720x480. when i played the video back at 1920x1080 it held together great and still looked amazing.
i even tried something i don't think has been done yet. i took some footag that had been posted 1280x720 quicktime mpeg 4, rerendered it as a standered quicktime 1920x1080 movie and it even cleared up some of the blurring that was in the orginal footage. just go'es to show you that if you have high rez footage to work with, your sd out put will look better in the end.

Yonathan Gal · February 12th, 2005, 11:07 AM

ok thanks, that's what I was thinking... I knew it would look slightly better, I jsut want to know if it's going to look "film-like", especially with these 25 settings etc that it advertises, how good are they? and also, when HD-DVD is out and I can actually present it in its original format, will it look really great, and like a higher budget film... I just want to get as close to a proper film look as I can on a small budget....

thanks :)

Rob Lohman · February 14th, 2005, 05:20 AM

I would advice you to do a search on these boards on film look.
I've written large sections about this and I would carefully look
where you are going to put your money.

I'll give you two small "lines":

- a great camera can enhance a good story, but can't fix a bad story

- a great camera might help in the film look, but it will never make it look professional if you don't light, block, act and edit like a "pro"

Heath McKnight · February 14th, 2005, 09:01 AM

Rob is absolutely right! I won't go into my craze between 1999 and 2001, where I came close to buying 10s of thousands of dollars worth of gear, because I bought into my own delusions of great gear=great movies.

Also, for film look, here is but one of MANY possibilities:

www.dvfilm.com/maker

heath

Mark Kubat · February 15th, 2005, 10:47 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Darrell Essex : Yonathan, go with the fx1 or z1. here is what i have found out. i have taken some of the footage that's been posted, color corrected, added effects ect.
rendered 720x480. when i played the video back at 1920x1080 it held together great and still looked amazing.
i even tried something i don't think has been done yet. i took some footag that had been posted 1280x720 quicktime mpeg 4, rerendered it as a standered quicktime 1920x1080 movie and it even cleared up some of the blurring that was in the orginal footage. just go'es to show you that if you have high rez footage to work with, your sd out put will look better in the end. -->>>

This is SO true.

It's so evident if you go out and shoot with HDV - you'll never go back to "blocky, unsharp" mini-dv...

I really don't understand how certain DVX enthusiasts for instance can honestly suggest the DVX100A produces an end-result SD DVD that even comes close to what you get with FX1/Z1 downconvert... Maybe to make the comparison fair, mpeg-2 encoding was done at like, what, 0.002 MB/s????

Deinterlacing 1080/60i in Premiere Pro 1.5 trounces 24p...

Boggles the mind...

James Darren · February 16th, 2005, 08:29 AM

hi guys..

its interesting you say that the FX1/Z1 looks better than a DVX100, even on a SD DVD. I thought the same too but then I read an internet artical on dvxuser.com (I assume the article could be slightly biased from the web name!) which states the DVX100 looks much better than a FX1 on SD DVD.... given that you have much better resolution from the FX1, you could deinterlace, colour correct, etc etc with lots of resolution to play with... well in theory anyways...

cant wait until we get the Z1 here in Australia so I can hire one for myself & actually try it out...

Heath McKnight · February 16th, 2005, 08:47 AM

I don't want this to become a DVX100A vs. FX1 debate, but I've seen footage from both and I feel both are solid cameras. My favorites:

1. Great control and 24p on the DVX100A.

2. HD and a great picture on the FX1. 16x9!

heath

February 12th, 2005, 08:04 AM	#1
Yonathan Gal Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Bournemouth, England Posts: 26	shooting my new film in HD Hi there, I am starting work on a film soon which is to be set in 1939. I have a SONY DCR-TRV950E but for this sort of film I just couldn't bear the idea of shooting in MiniDV again, it just wouldn't work... HD however sounds promising, it sounds like it's going to look a lot better than MiniDV.... And with th Z1E, I should get much more of a "film" look, right? Basically, I just neeeded some hep with the basics... If I film i HD, I'll have to distribute it in SD?? And will this mean that all the extra effort is pointless because it'll jsut look like mini-dv again, or will it still look a lot better than dv footage? is there anyway I could distiribute it in a way that preserved more of the quality, even if it was a more expensive way... just a few tips would be really great if anyone can help! Thanks very much for any help, Yonathan Gal

February 12th, 2005, 11:03 AM	#2
Darrell Essex Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: kelseyville, ca Posts: 123	Yonathan, go with the fx1 or z1. here is what i have found out. i have taken some of the footage that's been posted, color corrected, added effects ect. rendered 720x480. when i played the video back at 1920x1080 it held together great and still looked amazing. i even tried something i don't think has been done yet. i took some footag that had been posted 1280x720 quicktime mpeg 4, rerendered it as a standered quicktime 1920x1080 movie and it even cleared up some of the blurring that was in the orginal footage. just go'es to show you that if you have high rez footage to work with, your sd out put will look better in the end. __________________ darrell

February 14th, 2005, 05:20 AM	#4
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	I would advice you to do a search on these boards on film look. I've written large sections about this and I would carefully look where you are going to put your money. I'll give you two small "lines": - a great camera can enhance a good story, but can't fix a bad story - a great camera might help in the film look, but it will never make it look professional if you don't light, block, act and edit like a "pro" __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

February 14th, 2005, 09:01 AM	#5
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Rob is absolutely right! I won't go into my craze between 1999 and 2001, where I came close to buying 10s of thousands of dollars worth of gear, because I bought into my own delusions of great gear=great movies. Also, for film look, here is but one of MANY possibilities: www.dvfilm.com/maker heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

February 16th, 2005, 08:47 AM	#8
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I don't want this to become a DVX100A vs. FX1 debate, but I've seen footage from both and I feel both are solid cameras. My favorites: 1. Great control and 24p on the DVX100A. 2. HD and a great picture on the FX1. 16x9! heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

February 12th, 2005, 11:07 AM	#3
Yonathan Gal Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Bournemouth, England Posts: 26	ok thanks, that's what I was thinking... I knew it would look slightly better, I jsut want to know if it's going to look "film-like", especially with these 25 settings etc that it advertises, how good are they? and also, when HD-DVD is out and I can actually present it in its original format, will it look really great, and like a higher budget film... I just want to get as close to a proper film look as I can on a small budget.... thanks :)

February 15th, 2005, 10:47 PM	#6
Mark Kubat Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 375	<<<-- Originally posted by Darrell Essex : Yonathan, go with the fx1 or z1. here is what i have found out. i have taken some of the footage that's been posted, color corrected, added effects ect. rendered 720x480. when i played the video back at 1920x1080 it held together great and still looked amazing. i even tried something i don't think has been done yet. i took some footag that had been posted 1280x720 quicktime mpeg 4, rerendered it as a standered quicktime 1920x1080 movie and it even cleared up some of the blurring that was in the orginal footage. just go'es to show you that if you have high rez footage to work with, your sd out put will look better in the end. -->>> This is SO true. It's so evident if you go out and shoot with HDV - you'll never go back to "blocky, unsharp" mini-dv... I really don't understand how certain DVX enthusiasts for instance can honestly suggest the DVX100A produces an end-result SD DVD that even comes close to what you get with FX1/Z1 downconvert... Maybe to make the comparison fair, mpeg-2 encoding was done at like, what, 0.002 MB/s???? Deinterlacing 1080/60i in Premiere Pro 1.5 trounces 24p... Boggles the mind...

February 16th, 2005, 08:29 AM	#7
James Darren Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York, NY Posts: 235	hi guys.. its interesting you say that the FX1/Z1 looks better than a DVX100, even on a SD DVD. I thought the same too but then I read an internet artical on dvxuser.com (I assume the article could be slightly biased from the web name!) which states the DVX100 looks much better than a FX1 on SD DVD.... given that you have much better resolution from the FX1, you could deinterlace, colour correct, etc etc with lots of resolution to play with... well in theory anyways... cant wait until we get the Z1 here in Australia so I can hire one for myself & actually try it out...