Flim Look vs Video Look

Barry J. Weckesser · February 15th, 2009, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Miner

I like the look of 1080 30p. What is the final target of this progressive rate. I currently burn to blu-ray and shoot 1080 60i. I did not like 24p (which IS a legal blu-ray spec).

1080 30p looks good but what is your final destination for it?

Mark Miner

Doug Jensen from Vortex Media keeps making the point that shooting 1080 30p and converting it to 1080 60i in post for blu-ray delivery is preferable to shooting 1080 60i. He has made the point in another thread that 1080 30p converted to 1080 60i looks better than video shot at 1080 60i. See the following link: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/sony-xdca...080-24p-2.html and read post # 17.

Mitchell Lewis · February 15th, 2009, 10:40 AM

Okay, in my opinion there's more to the 60i vs 30P debate than meets the eye.

1. When you're editing a project (with video, graphics, etc...) in 60i the motion will look smoother than 30P. For example, try doing a lower third text crawl in 30p. It looks terrible. Do the same thing in 60i and it looks perfectly smooth.

2. While I agree with Doug Jensen 99% of the time (I just ordered another one of his videos) I'm not sure I agree with his statement that it's a simple process to convert 30p to 60i. Maybe it's because I use a lot of graphics with sharp edges, but converting from p to i normally gives me jagged edges. You could probably get away with this if you're just converting your footage (no graphics).

This is a good discussion. :)

Barry J. Weckesser · February 15th, 2009, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mitchell Lewis

Okay, in my opinion there's more to the 60i vs 30P debate than meets the eye.

1. When you're editing a project (with video, graphics, etc...) in 60i the motion will look smoother than 30P. For example, try doing a lower third text crawl in 30p. It looks terrible. Do the same thing in 60i and it looks perfectly smooth.

2. While I agree with Doug Jensen 99% of the time (I just ordered another one of his videos) I'm not sure I agree with his statement that it's a simple process to convert 30p to 60i. Maybe it's because I use a lot of graphics with sharp edges, but converting from p to i normally gives me jagged edges. You could probably get away with this if you're just converting your footage (no graphics).

This is a good discussion. :)

Since I am a hobbyist I don't do a lot of graphics except for titles for which I use Ulead Cool 3D Studio (yeah, I know it is rather "basic") and output 32 bit avi's as graphic overlays for my title shots. Since I am rendering from the timeline to a blu-ray legal format would that necessarily give me the jagged edges that you associate with 30p (in the final product) since the entire timeline (including the avi overlays) are being rendered to 60i at the same time?

Are you saying that on a 30p timeline you are seeing jagged edges with graphics both before and after rendering to a blu-ray format?

Mitchell Lewis · February 15th, 2009, 11:14 AM

Viewing graphics (and video) in a 30P timeline looks great. It's when you try and convert it to a interlaced format (720i, etc...)that you have problems with jagged edges (aliasing)

It's easy to test. See for yourself. Maybe you'll figure something out that I haven't yet. :)

Paul Inglis · February 15th, 2009, 04:46 PM

My preference is to shoot 25p whether it be 720 or 1080. I like the way it looks and can convert to most formats without scratching my head too much! Maybe I've watched too many films :)

Gints Klimanis · February 16th, 2009, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Daviss

Shooting interlace is just a cheap way of getting twice the frame rate, but with the caveat that you get soft video with at least 25% less resolution as a best case scenario. Shoot 1080iXX and what you're getting is 720p

Although on the EX1, 1080i is about twice as sensitive to light as 1080p30 or 720pXX. So, you don't have to shoot wide open for soft video or bump the gain for grainier video.

Matt Davis · February 16th, 2009, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gints Klimanis

Although on the EX1, 1080i is about twice as sensitive to light as 1080p30 or 720pXX. So, you don't have to shoot wide open for soft video or bump the gain for grainier video.

720p25 gains a stop over 1080p, I'd be guessing that the two (1080i and 720p25) are pretty close in terms of sensitivity.

Craig Seeman · February 16th, 2009, 06:17 PM

Quoting Adam Wilt

Sensitivity

To measure sensitivity, I set the exposure of an 18% gray card at 50% on the waveform monitor with the camera in its default Standard Gamma 3. I metered the card with a Gossen Starlite and incident light with a Spectra Pro IV, and varied the ISO settings until the shutter speeds and apertures matched the camera (both meters agreed within 1/10 stop). I determined the sensitivity of the camera to be:
• ISO 400 in 1080p modes
• ISO 800 in 1080i modes (just as you’d expect: with dual-row summation, you get twice the sensitivity), and
• ISO 500 in 720p modes.
Apparently Sony is picking up some gain during downsampling to 720p, analogous to what happens in dual-row summation.

Matt Davis · February 16th, 2009, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig Seeman

• ISO 500 in 720p modes.
Apparently Sony is picking up some gain during downsampling to 720p, analogous to what happens in dual-row summation.

Not that I'm doubting his figures, but I'd figure at a stop between 720p and 1080p. It doesn't 'feel' such a minor difference.

Serena Steuart · February 16th, 2009, 08:23 PM

Frame rates and interlaced/progressive are important issues, but I would put more emphasis on other aspects which directly affect the image. An important variable is the gamma curve and how you employ it, as has been discussed elsewhere on this forum. This link is to a very nice description of what is what, but in the general application rather then to the EX1/3 specifically; the information applies. ProVideo Coalition.com: Stunning Good Looks by Art Adams | Cinematography

Mitchell Lewis · February 16th, 2009, 10:00 PM

I agree. The look of interlaced versus progressive footage isn't a big deal, especially when you compare 1080 60i to 720 60p.

But down the line, it can become a big problem if you are shooting interlaced and converting to progressive (for the web for example). The edges on text and graphics will look terrible with this type of conversion.

Joachim Hoge · February 24th, 2009, 04:17 AM

We just did a action sport film in the Nissan Outdoor Games in Chamonix. We decided to shoot 720 50P and it looked great in my opinion. Not video look, but not film look either, just really slick looking footage.
This way we easily dropped in overcranked 60fps footage that matched perfectly.

Before we have shot 1080 i and 25p when doing actionsports, btu the slo-mo have always stood out, and often you don´t manage to get smooth looking action in 25p.
I´d love to be able to shoot 1080 50P though.

February 15th, 2009, 10:40 AM	#17
Mitchell Lewis Trustee Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Kennewick, WA Posts: 1,124	Okay, in my opinion there's more to the 60i vs 30P debate than meets the eye. 1. When you're editing a project (with video, graphics, etc...) in 60i the motion will look smoother than 30P. For example, try doing a lower third text crawl in 30p. It looks terrible. Do the same thing in 60i and it looks perfectly smooth. 2. While I agree with Doug Jensen 99% of the time (I just ordered another one of his videos) I'm not sure I agree with his statement that it's a simple process to convert 30p to 60i. Maybe it's because I use a lot of graphics with sharp edges, but converting from p to i normally gives me jagged edges. You could probably get away with this if you're just converting your footage (no graphics). This is a good discussion. :) __________________ Sony EX3, Canon 5D MkII, Chrosziel Matte Box, Sachtler tripod, Steadicam Flyer, Mac Pro, Apple/Adobe software - 20 years as a local videographer/editor

February 15th, 2009, 11:14 AM	#19
Mitchell Lewis Trustee Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Kennewick, WA Posts: 1,124	Viewing graphics (and video) in a 30P timeline looks great. It's when you try and convert it to a interlaced format (720i, etc...)that you have problems with jagged edges (aliasing) It's easy to test. See for yourself. Maybe you'll figure something out that I haven't yet. :) __________________ Sony EX3, Canon 5D MkII, Chrosziel Matte Box, Sachtler tripod, Steadicam Flyer, Mac Pro, Apple/Adobe software - 20 years as a local videographer/editor

February 16th, 2009, 10:00 PM	#26
Mitchell Lewis Trustee Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Kennewick, WA Posts: 1,124	I agree. The look of interlaced versus progressive footage isn't a big deal, especially when you compare 1080 60i to 720 60p. But down the line, it can become a big problem if you are shooting interlaced and converting to progressive (for the web for example). The edges on text and graphics will look terrible with this type of conversion. __________________ Sony EX3, Canon 5D MkII, Chrosziel Matte Box, Sachtler tripod, Steadicam Flyer, Mac Pro, Apple/Adobe software - 20 years as a local videographer/editor

February 15th, 2009, 04:46 PM	#20
Paul Inglis Major Player Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: British Isles Posts: 415	My preference is to shoot 25p whether it be 720 or 1080. I like the way it looks and can convert to most formats without scratching my head too much! Maybe I've watched too many films :)

February 16th, 2009, 06:17 PM	#23
Craig Seeman Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA Posts: 3,841	Quoting Adam Wilt Sensitivity To measure sensitivity, I set the exposure of an 18% gray card at 50% on the waveform monitor with the camera in its default Standard Gamma 3. I metered the card with a Gossen Starlite and incident light with a Spectra Pro IV, and varied the ISO settings until the shutter speeds and apertures matched the camera (both meters agreed within 1/10 stop). I determined the sensitivity of the camera to be: • ISO 400 in 1080p modes • ISO 800 in 1080i modes (just as you’d expect: with dual-row summation, you get twice the sensitivity), and • ISO 500 in 720p modes. Apparently Sony is picking up some gain during downsampling to 720p, analogous to what happens in dual-row summation.

February 16th, 2009, 08:23 PM	#25
Serena Steuart Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Studio Alnitak, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Posts: 640 Images: 3	Frame rates and interlaced/progressive are important issues, but I would put more emphasis on other aspects which directly affect the image. An important variable is the gamma curve and how you employ it, as has been discussed elsewhere on this forum. This link is to a very nice description of what is what, but in the general application rather then to the EX1/3 specifically; the information applies. ProVideo Coalition.com: Stunning Good Looks by Art Adams \| Cinematography

February 24th, 2009, 04:17 AM	#27
Joachim Hoge Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Oslo, Norway Posts: 402	We just did a action sport film in the Nissan Outdoor Games in Chamonix. We decided to shoot 720 50P and it looked great in my opinion. Not video look, but not film look either, just really slick looking footage. This way we easily dropped in overcranked 60fps footage that matched perfectly. Before we have shot 1080 i and 25p when doing actionsports, btu the slo-mo have always stood out, and often you don´t manage to get smooth looking action in 25p. I´d love to be able to shoot 1080 50P though.