Video before film: which camera at DVinfo.net

Steve Williamson · September 22nd, 2005, 04:40 PM

There are numerous discussions on this board about what cameras, settings, and techniques produce the most film-like result. Here's a different take on that question:

I'm in pre-production of a feature film that will be shot on digital video. It is my intention for this movie to eventually be transfered to film for general theater release. What camera(s) should I use and what settings? 60i? 24i? I assume I'll be shooting in 16:9.

Just FYI, I'm a big fan of Canon products (a GL2 is my primary cam).

Ash Greyson · September 22nd, 2005, 10:38 PM

For film out the recommended camera is the XL2 shot in 16:9 in 24PA mode. The DVX-100A will work as well but most would recommend an anamorphic adapter as it does not shoot true 16:9.

ash =o)

Eric Brown · September 26th, 2005, 10:12 PM

That would depend on your budget, too. I agree with Ash if you're wanting to stay in the 10k and under club. The XL2 will get the job done in this price range.
Moving up the food chain a bit there is also the SDX-900, which looks really nice. They use it as their main camera on Laguna Beach on MTV. (yes, I admit, I watched it..but just to see the SDX images..I swear..)
I think American Cinematographer did a review on the XL2 and said it looks great in a film out.
And yes, the DVX will work too, I just prefer true 16:9.

Kevin Red · September 28th, 2005, 08:12 AM

Is DV resolution suitable for the big screen?

DJ Kinney · September 28th, 2005, 09:44 PM

Take a look at my two favorite examples.

1) 24 Hour Party People. This is, at most points, indistinguishable from film. I find it frankly amazing. And it was shot interlaced and converted ex post facto. Double plus.

2) 28 Days Later. Duh. A given. People complain that it's a little too video-y, but I think that's intentional on the part of the director to give it immediacy and a little rawness.

So the answer is yes. And it these aren't even DV. Of course there are bad examples too. Dancer in the Dark was weirdly processed, to be kind, and looks like a digital movie. And then there's Figgis' Timecode which wasn't processed at all. So it looks pretty much like a digital home video. Well...four digital home videos.

September 22nd, 2005, 04:40 PM	#1
Steve Williamson Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Sandy, OR USA Posts: 31	Video before film: which camera There are numerous discussions on this board about what cameras, settings, and techniques produce the most film-like result. Here's a different take on that question: I'm in pre-production of a feature film that will be shot on digital video. It is my intention for this movie to eventually be transfered to film for general theater release. What camera(s) should I use and what settings? 60i? 24i? I assume I'll be shooting in 16:9. Just FYI, I'm a big fan of Canon products (a GL2 is my primary cam). __________________ Steve Williamson www.RuckerWorks.com ( RuckerWorks Media ) Web, Video, Photography, Audio

September 28th, 2005, 08:12 AM	#4
Kevin Red Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 103	Is DV resolution suitable for the big screen? __________________ AMD Athalon 2800 (2.08ghz) running Windows XP sp2 1GB of RAM Vegas 6.0 NLE 300+ GB hard drive space running SATA RAID 0 With an NVIDEA Geforce FX 5600XT http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/search.php?searchid=149990

September 22nd, 2005, 10:38 PM	#2
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	For film out the recommended camera is the XL2 shot in 16:9 in 24PA mode. The DVX-100A will work as well but most would recommend an anamorphic adapter as it does not shoot true 16:9. ash =o)

September 26th, 2005, 10:12 PM	#3
Eric Brown Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Seattle Posts: 427	That would depend on your budget, too. I agree with Ash if you're wanting to stay in the 10k and under club. The XL2 will get the job done in this price range. Moving up the food chain a bit there is also the SDX-900, which looks really nice. They use it as their main camera on Laguna Beach on MTV. (yes, I admit, I watched it..but just to see the SDX images..I swear..) I think American Cinematographer did a review on the XL2 and said it looks great in a film out. And yes, the DVX will work too, I just prefer true 16:9.

September 28th, 2005, 09:44 PM	#5
DJ Kinney Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 277	Take a look at my two favorite examples. 1) 24 Hour Party People. This is, at most points, indistinguishable from film. I find it frankly amazing. And it was shot interlaced and converted ex post facto. Double plus. 2) 28 Days Later. Duh. A given. People complain that it's a little too video-y, but I think that's intentional on the part of the director to give it immediacy and a little rawness. So the answer is yes. And it these aren't even DV. Of course there are bad examples too. Dancer in the Dark was weirdly processed, to be kind, and looks like a digital movie. And then there's Figgis' Timecode which wasn't processed at all. So it looks pretty much like a digital home video. Well...four digital home videos.