Panasonic DVX100a or XL1S better in achieving film look?

Boyd Ostroff · November 30th, 2004, 05:46 PM

Arthur, maybe I'm confused also. 29.97 is the NTSC drop frame standard for DV. I don't use an XL-1s, but I sort of doubt that it's something you can choose on the camera itself, it's a capture/sequence setting in your NLE.

If you saw some kind of motion you disliked then my bet would be that the XL-1s was recording in frame mode since that has a distinctive look to it.

Aaron Shaw · November 30th, 2004, 06:00 PM

I'm not entirely sure how you could like the XL1s better than the DVX...

hmm

First of all what I think you are talking about is 60i footage versus 30p, yes?

Graham Jones · November 30th, 2004, 07:09 PM

'Frame rate is one of the least important factors for filmlook when it comes to use it for video/broadcast tv/dvd. However, if you're transfering to film, then yes shoot 24p.'

I think the combo of shooting 24/25 fps and shooting full progressive (rather than interlaced) brings you toward the film look - obviously the other things on your list are crucial too.

Arthur To · November 30th, 2004, 07:42 PM

perhaps there is a difference in what we define as filmic.

filters/post colorization/lighting/- etc----- gives it film look and those are the key factors for it

24p, stability, 16:9 ---- gives it a filmic FEEEL.

filmic FEEL and film LOOK must work together to produce the ultimate effect.

so no one is wrong and no one is right- its just that no one has clarified whether its the exact LOOK (one frame) or what the video makes you feel like you're watching (filmic feel)

-arthur

Graham Jones · December 1st, 2004, 02:33 AM

Oh, you're correct aboout that.. it's a very subjective thing.

For years I laughed at the notion that video would ever look like film. As people went on and on about the evolving quality of video - saying that it would soon hit film - I kept thinking: it's not only resolution, film and video are two different processes that look different and always will. Even IF video becomes better quality, in terms of resolution, it still won't be as nice.

I realise now that what I hated about video wasn't simply that it was a different process, but the interlace and higher shutter speeds - as opposed to progressive and a shutter speed only twice the frame rate.

I have recently shot a feature length piece on SD at 25fps progressive at a shutter speed of 1/50, 16:9 and for me it has the magic of film. It's just a completely different visual experience than video I have seen in the past.

Trying to break it down with words like LOOK and FEEL is all very well - but no two people will break it down the same.

It's not rational or logical this film look / feel business. I read threads about it in which people laud examples of a great film look / feel on video that I wouldn't only disagree with but would never imagine would dupe anyone. This post, with me talking about progressive/25fps/lowshutter may constitute that for someone else ;)

Hayden Rivers · December 1st, 2004, 06:32 AM

Do you have a trailer or any samples of this feature you shot?

Graham Jones · December 1st, 2004, 08:19 AM

I won't have it cut for a while yet

Sameer Puri · December 21st, 2004, 06:07 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Jose di Cani : check this shot made with the dvx. :)

http://www.macgregorcorp.com/dvinfo/x5.mov -->>>

Hi Jose,

Very nice shoot.. Do you know anything about how much work went into post production and what was used? Vegas, Magic Bullet, FCP? The contrast and saturation give it an excellent film look.

cheers
Sameer

November 30th, 2004, 07:42 PM	#19
Arthur To Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Cerritos, CA Posts: 78	i think... perhaps there is a difference in what we define as filmic. filters/post colorization/lighting/- etc----- gives it film look and those are the key factors for it 24p, stability, 16:9 ---- gives it a filmic FEEEL. filmic FEEL and film LOOK must work together to produce the ultimate effect. so no one is wrong and no one is right- its just that no one has clarified whether its the exact LOOK (one frame) or what the video makes you feel like you're watching (filmic feel) -arthur __________________ xL1s

November 30th, 2004, 05:46 PM	#16
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Arthur, maybe I'm confused also. 29.97 is the NTSC drop frame standard for DV. I don't use an XL-1s, but I sort of doubt that it's something you can choose on the camera itself, it's a capture/sequence setting in your NLE. If you saw some kind of motion you disliked then my bet would be that the XL-1s was recording in frame mode since that has a distinctive look to it.

November 30th, 2004, 06:00 PM	#17
Aaron Shaw Major Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 587	I'm not entirely sure how you could like the XL1s better than the DVX... hmm First of all what I think you are talking about is 60i footage versus 30p, yes?

November 30th, 2004, 07:09 PM	#18
Graham Jones Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 489	'Frame rate is one of the least important factors for filmlook when it comes to use it for video/broadcast tv/dvd. However, if you're transfering to film, then yes shoot 24p.' I think the combo of shooting 24/25 fps and shooting full progressive (rather than interlaced) brings you toward the film look - obviously the other things on your list are crucial too.

December 1st, 2004, 02:33 AM	#20
Graham Jones Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 489	Oh, you're correct aboout that.. it's a very subjective thing. For years I laughed at the notion that video would ever look like film. As people went on and on about the evolving quality of video - saying that it would soon hit film - I kept thinking: it's not only resolution, film and video are two different processes that look different and always will. Even IF video becomes better quality, in terms of resolution, it still won't be as nice. I realise now that what I hated about video wasn't simply that it was a different process, but the interlace and higher shutter speeds - as opposed to progressive and a shutter speed only twice the frame rate. I have recently shot a feature length piece on SD at 25fps progressive at a shutter speed of 1/50, 16:9 and for me it has the magic of film. It's just a completely different visual experience than video I have seen in the past. Trying to break it down with words like LOOK and FEEL is all very well - but no two people will break it down the same. It's not rational or logical this film look / feel business. I read threads about it in which people laud examples of a great film look / feel on video that I wouldn't only disagree with but would never imagine would dupe anyone. This post, with me talking about progressive/25fps/lowshutter may constitute that for someone else ;)

December 1st, 2004, 06:32 AM	#21
Hayden Rivers Regular Crew Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 53	Do you have a trailer or any samples of this feature you shot?

December 1st, 2004, 08:19 AM	#22
Graham Jones Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 489	I won't have it cut for a while yet

December 21st, 2004, 06:07 PM	#23
Sameer Puri Tourist Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: London Posts: 4	<<<-- Originally posted by Jose di Cani : check this shot made with the dvx. :) http://www.macgregorcorp.com/dvinfo/x5.mov -->>> Hi Jose, Very nice shoot.. Do you know anything about how much work went into post production and what was used? Vegas, Magic Bullet, FCP? The contrast and saturation give it an excellent film look. cheers Sameer