Rolling Shutter for wedding videographers at DVinfo.net

Jason LeFrense · July 1st, 2008, 09:37 AM

Hey Folks, I posted another video of a wedding I have just recently shot. You will see at the end of the video during the dance the rolling shutter problem is easy to see. I have asked a client if she noticed anything about the video and she said she loved it. So I didn't bother to tell her because if the client is happy so am I. But with that being said I really think the camera could be a 10/10 if that problem was fixed. I have no issues with the focus problem, no more then I did with the 170. I actually like the manual focus a lot more then the 170.

http://www.vimeo.com/1263515

Dave Blackhurst · July 1st, 2008, 12:51 PM

A few observations on "RS"...

1 - you're seeing it more often on broadcast TV because of the proliferation of CMOS technology

2 - Partially exposed frames are a bit jarring for a moment, particularly if you're editing frame by frame...

3 - as a practical matter, because most people know exactly zippo about technology, once they see #1 a few times, they will accept the "effect" as "normal"... as offensive as that can be to our "expert" video sensibilities.

The ONLY thing you can do is work around it as much as possible, or go back to CCD, with it's own set of technical challenges. I'll take the better overall images and deal with RS, haven't had anyone complain about it, even when it sticks out to my eye...

Bruce G. Cleveland · July 1st, 2008, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

A few observations on "RS"...

1 - you're seeing it more often on broadcast TV because of the proliferation of CMOS technology

2 - Partially exposed frames are a bit jarring for a moment, particularly if you're editing frame by frame...

3 - as a practical matter, because most people know exactly zippo about technology, once they see #1 a few times, they will accept the "effect" as "normal"... as offensive as that can be to our "expert" video sensibilities.

The ONLY thing you can do is work around it as much as possible, or go back to CCD, with it's own set of technical challenges. I'll take the better overall images and deal with RS, haven't had anyone complain about it, even when it sticks out to my eye...

Yep I see it on regular network tv all the time.

Bruce

Jason LeFrense · July 1st, 2008, 06:34 PM

Ya I agree totally guys, my clients don't seem to mind and the more I see it the more I accept it. The camera itself has worked great so far for me, it's taking a bit of getting use to the CF but its a great camera. I thought I would post the video for the guys who are thinking about buying the camera . For about 2 months I was weighing the options between the Z7 and EX-1 and the Z7 was just a better fit for the type of work I do. The only other thing is, I wish Sony would allow you to record HD to CF and SD to tape.

Marshall Levy · July 3rd, 2008, 11:32 AM

It's typical based on this technology. I've never had a client say anything about it, let alone know what they're talking about, and it's quite common on tv broadcast, as the other posts have stated.

Bruce Ostrout · July 3rd, 2008, 11:56 AM

The rolling shutter is terrible on the Z7 especially if you use schlomo, but wedding customers and average viewers wont really be bothered by it. But if you do any compositing or tracking in post rolling shutter sucks for that as well.

Craig Hollenback · July 7th, 2008, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason LeFrense

Hey Folks, I posted another video of a wedding I have just recently shot. You will see at the end of the video during the dance the rolling shutter problem is easy to see. I have asked a client if she noticed anything about the video and she said she loved it. So I didn't bother to tell her because if the client is happy so am I. But with that being said I really think the camera could be a 10/10 if that problem was fixed. I have no issues with the focus problem, no more then I did with the 170. I actually like the manual focus a lot more then the 170.

http://www.vimeo.com/1263515

I use and EX1. No one has ever said anything, I've never mentioned it, and frankly, if the photog and 30 others are all shooting flashes during the cake cutting, it is something that will end up in the video.

Zach Love · July 8th, 2008, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason LeFrense

I really think the camera could be a 10/10 if that problem was fixed.

how do you feel about pixel smear? if Sony swapped the CMOS w/ CCD, you might be having bright vert. lines in your shots that last for more than a frame or two.

I think for the money, the Z7 is w/o a doubt the best camera on the market for the price range. I'd think that if anyone's clients have a problem w/ RS they should look at the price it would cost to shoot something on 35mm or 16mm, and see if they still ming the RS.

but all in all, I really think RS isn't the best, but I think it bugs us video-heads more than it bugs the viewer which means that I really think it is nowhere near the issue that many people make it out to be.

I think it is like getting a handmade pizza w/ 1cm of the crust burnt. the person who paid $12 for it probably doesn't care about that 1cm IF they even notice it. thus the chef shouldn't worry about the stove that put the 1cm of burnt crust, the chef should just go onto make the next pizza.

Dave Williams · July 12th, 2008, 04:09 PM

It did bug me at first. I figured there were three choices:
1) Let it go
2) Cut it out
3) Use an effect to mask it

Even though it's VERY apparent in the beginning of this clip, I decided to do #1. Later in the clip I cut 3 frames out. Even though the photog's lazer beam right before the flash is still there, the flash is not and there's a jump cut that no one has noticed so far.

http://DVideography.com/client/stier

However, I'm sure the response to this post will be the timecode of that jump. ;-) You're all nerds!

Stephen Gradin · July 16th, 2008, 09:08 AM

What is starting to really bother me is the fact that the numerous still camera flashes that occur during the first dance, cake cutting and bouquet/garter scenes, are causing unusual pixelation to occur in my video. The HDV format doesn't seem to be able to handle all the multiple flashes at once. Let me know if others out there are seeing this and if it bothers you as much as it bothers me? Is there anything I can do about it when editing HDV?

Marshall Levy · July 16th, 2008, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen Gradin

What is starting to really bother me is the fact that the numerous still camera flashes that occur during the first dance, cake cutting and bouquet/garter scenes, are causing unusual pixelation to occur in my video. The HDV format doesn't seem to be able to handle all the multiple flashes at once. Let me know if others out there are seeing this and if it bothers you as much as it bothers me? Is there anything I can do about it when editing HDV?

Oh, you don't "love" the shutter-happy photographers? Oh, it drives me insane...I did a wedding on July 5th that had 7 photographers....it was almost like a club with all the strobes....as far as the video goes, I can't say it's the greatest looking thing but it is what it is...never had a complaint, never been too worried about it, either. I'm there to do the best I can, but based on the realistic confines of the environment, and I'm there to document what goes on, not play g-d and fix what can't be fixed. The end.

Tom Hardwick · July 16th, 2008, 09:31 AM

I think you guys are right - we must accept the CMOS pros when we remember the CCD cons.

CCD cameras such as the Z1 simply record electronic flashes as an overall brightening of the entire frame and if you happen to be shooting the shooter (which I often do to show the paparazzi attention the couple are getting as they sign the register, cut the cake, dance together) then the individual frames look just as you'd expect them to look, with the camera's flashgun forming the centre of a bright splodge.

Not so the EX1. Electronic flash causes some very odd exposures, where unpredictably the top half or bottom third or top third of the frame is over-exposed. The same effect is visible if you're shooting a scene lit by flashes - ie you're not shooting into the lights but shooting the subjects themselves.

Now you might think that being subliminal (one frame out of 25 per second) would go unnoticed, but I assure you it's very noticeable indeed, and not at all attractive. I think a lot of that's due to the fact that it looks so unnatural, and the fact that at weddings it happens a great deal. I have been known to add a flash to a single frame pulled into Photoshop when the photographer has taken an age to fire the shot. I can assure you that I add the bright splodge exactly as the Z1 records it, and would never dream of simply over-exposing the top 40% of the frame.

I haven't used a Z7 so cannot pass comment. I've got to say it lowers the EX1 a notch for those in my profession - but only a little notch.

tom.

July 12th, 2008, 04:09 PM	#9
Dave Williams New Boot Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 16	Rs It did bug me at first. I figured there were three choices: 1) Let it go 2) Cut it out 3) Use an effect to mask it Even though it's VERY apparent in the beginning of this clip, I decided to do #1. Later in the clip I cut 3 frames out. Even though the photog's lazer beam right before the flash is still there, the flash is not and there's a jump cut that no one has noticed so far. http://DVideography.com/client/stier However, I'm sure the response to this post will be the timecode of that jump. ;-) You're all nerds! __________________ Dave Williams DVideography

July 1st, 2008, 09:37 AM	#1
Jason LeFrense Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Sydney Canada Posts: 126	Rolling Shutter for wedding videographers Hey Folks, I posted another video of a wedding I have just recently shot. You will see at the end of the video during the dance the rolling shutter problem is easy to see. I have asked a client if she noticed anything about the video and she said she loved it. So I didn't bother to tell her because if the client is happy so am I. But with that being said I really think the camera could be a 10/10 if that problem was fixed. I have no issues with the focus problem, no more then I did with the 170. I actually like the manual focus a lot more then the 170. http://www.vimeo.com/1263515

July 1st, 2008, 12:51 PM	#2
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	A few observations on "RS"... 1 - you're seeing it more often on broadcast TV because of the proliferation of CMOS technology 2 - Partially exposed frames are a bit jarring for a moment, particularly if you're editing frame by frame... 3 - as a practical matter, because most people know exactly zippo about technology, once they see #1 a few times, they will accept the "effect" as "normal"... as offensive as that can be to our "expert" video sensibilities. The ONLY thing you can do is work around it as much as possible, or go back to CCD, with it's own set of technical challenges. I'll take the better overall images and deal with RS, haven't had anyone complain about it, even when it sticks out to my eye...

July 1st, 2008, 06:34 PM	#4
Jason LeFrense Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Sydney Canada Posts: 126	Ya I agree totally guys, my clients don't seem to mind and the more I see it the more I accept it. The camera itself has worked great so far for me, it's taking a bit of getting use to the CF but its a great camera. I thought I would post the video for the guys who are thinking about buying the camera . For about 2 months I was weighing the options between the Z7 and EX-1 and the Z7 was just a better fit for the type of work I do. The only other thing is, I wish Sony would allow you to record HD to CF and SD to tape.

July 3rd, 2008, 11:32 AM	#5
Marshall Levy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Maryland Posts: 304	It's typical based on this technology. I've never had a client say anything about it, let alone know what they're talking about, and it's quite common on tv broadcast, as the other posts have stated.

July 3rd, 2008, 11:56 AM	#6
Bruce Ostrout Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Jacksonville Fl Posts: 107	The rolling shutter is terrible on the Z7 especially if you use schlomo, but wedding customers and average viewers wont really be bothered by it. But if you do any compositing or tracking in post rolling shutter sucks for that as well.

July 16th, 2008, 09:08 AM	#10
Stephen Gradin Contributor Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Nottingham, MD Posts: 66	What is starting to really bother me is the fact that the numerous still camera flashes that occur during the first dance, cake cutting and bouquet/garter scenes, are causing unusual pixelation to occur in my video. The HDV format doesn't seem to be able to handle all the multiple flashes at once. Let me know if others out there are seeing this and if it bothers you as much as it bothers me? Is there anything I can do about it when editing HDV?

July 16th, 2008, 09:31 AM	#12
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	I think you guys are right - we must accept the CMOS pros when we remember the CCD cons. CCD cameras such as the Z1 simply record electronic flashes as an overall brightening of the entire frame and if you happen to be shooting the shooter (which I often do to show the paparazzi attention the couple are getting as they sign the register, cut the cake, dance together) then the individual frames look just as you'd expect them to look, with the camera's flashgun forming the centre of a bright splodge. Not so the EX1. Electronic flash causes some very odd exposures, where unpredictably the top half or bottom third or top third of the frame is over-exposed. The same effect is visible if you're shooting a scene lit by flashes - ie you're not shooting into the lights but shooting the subjects themselves. Now you might think that being subliminal (one frame out of 25 per second) would go unnoticed, but I assure you it's very noticeable indeed, and not at all attractive. I think a lot of that's due to the fact that it looks so unnatural, and the fact that at weddings it happens a great deal. I have been known to add a flash to a single frame pulled into Photoshop when the photographer has taken an age to fire the shot. I can assure you that I add the bright splodge exactly as the Z1 records it, and would never dream of simply over-exposing the top 40% of the frame. I haven't used a Z7 so cannot pass comment. I've got to say it lowers the EX1 a notch for those in my profession - but only a little notch. tom.