Going all in on 4K.

[Noa Put]

I found the thread back with the pan and scan experiment, here I thought it was well excecuted:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/panasoni...xperiment.html

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

It can come in handy, but it will bite you hard if you start to use it as a crutch.

Are you referring to zooming into a 4K image in a 1080p project with the main purpose to reframe your shots? If that is the case I start using it all the time during the ceremony with excellent results.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

I found the thread back with the pan and scan experiment, here I thought it was well excecuted:

Yes, if you don't mind mastering in 480p and are know how to ramp your movement. That was a decent job movement-wise. However, I will point out that the encoding of it made the quality of the video really poor. That could just be YouTube, or it could be something else. Would be interested to see a DVD-quality render of it.

Originally Posted by Noa Put

Are you referring to zooming into a 4K image in a 1080p project with the main purpose to reframe your shots? If that is the case I start using it all the time during the ceremony with excellent results.

I guess that depends on how much zooming in you are doing (all the way in to 200%?) and what you interpret as "excellent" results. NeatVideo might help, but the sensor pattern you get zoomed all the way in like that is not pleasing to my eye, and I would assume a lot of this is ISOs higher than 400 for ceremonies, so I can't imagine the noise wouldn't be significant.

[Jeff Harper]

The discussion of Pan and Scan and comparing it to utilizing 4K is curious and makes no sense at all to me, so maybe I'm missing something, I'm with Noa.

4K has 4X the resolution of HD, so pretty much any zooming unless taken too far, will look awesome and will be in full HD, so you're not losing any resolution.

Many of us shooting 4K are putting out great looking videos and we are zooming in and adding camera movement with great results.

My understanding of Pan and Scan is that it is a method of taking something shot in 16:9 and trying to make it fit in a 4:3 production. Totally different animal than 4K to HD, not a valid comparison.

4K and HD both fit on the screen the same, 16:9 aspect ratio essentially.

I zoomed in post on a bride during vows and it was nothing short of amazing, I did a long, slow zoom and it mimics a camera zoom perfectly, and of course, there was no loss of resolution.

As I said, maybe I'm missing something and not understanding you Gary.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

My understanding of Pan and Scan is that it is a method of taking something shot in 16:9 and trying to make it fit in a 4:3 production. Totally different animal than 4K to HD, not a valid comparison.

Except that, for films which were shot far wider than 4:3, they were panned in post-production to move between speakers on occasion where it was a two shot and they were on opposite sides of the frame. That's a post production move utilizing a source resolution that's larger than the target.[/QUOTE]

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

Yes, if you don't mind mastering in 480p and are know how to ramp your movement.

It looks like premiere has the advantage of slowly speeding up at the start and slowing down at the end panning or tilting motion which makes it appear like a real tripod move, something you can perfectly do in a 1080p project.

That experiment he did does show it is possible to pull off real looking tripod moves so it doesn't have to look bad. I use Edius and have not experimented with that but I think it's not possible to do gradual movement like you can do in premiere.

About zooming in on the image, in a 1080p project I never zoom in further then the native resolution of 4K, if I pixel peep I might find artifacts but from a normal viewing distance zoomed in 4K shots blend in with my 1080p material just fine, I can't see any difference to be honest. I often use it to create some variation in framing my shots while I switch between a 1080p and a 4K camera. I also used it a lot to correct framing mistakes as I mainly use the 4K camera locked of and as a safety, for instance I place the altar and lectern in one frame but in post I can switch between altar, lectern or both and with a second manned camera I do close ups so I have plenty of shots to choose from.

I know this advantage will only last until I have to deliver in 4K but I plan to use it as long as I can, 4K has made my ceremony recording so much easier to handle as a one man band.

[Jeff Harper]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

Except that, for films which were shot far wider than 4:3, they were panned in post-production to move between speakers on occasion where it was a two shot and they were on opposite sides of the frame. That's a post production move utilizing a source resolution that's larger than the target.

[/QUOTE]

Got it. For what most of what we all do here I think 4k at this point has virtually no downsides, other than potential issues with ability to edit. You can certainly take it to far, for sure.

I want to add that I would also opt for the pro camcorder when possible, the AX100 is amazing but the 30p is a real limitation. Would love to shoot at 60p. I would think shooting with several AX100s and having one pro version as primary cam would be very nice.

[Mark Watson]

Another advantage to shooting 4K, at least with the FDR-AX100, is for better low-light performance. The AX-100 lens is not the best part of that camera, it ramps up from f/2.8 rather quickly as you zoom in. So, if you leave the lens wide, to get the f/2.8 aperture, then you get more light in, and can just crop to HD sized framing in post. Also, compared to the XF305 shooting a low-light scene in HD, the AX-100 performance is a little better, but not "amazing". NeatVideo yields excellent results with the AX-100 4K footage, although the XF305 isn't too far behind it.

Mark

[Dave Blackhurst]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

Well, you used the word "pan" and that is a camera move. And it will look bad.



It can come in handy, but it will bite you hard if you start to use it as a crutch. Remember, you're zooming into the sensor, and all the nasty stuff that is generally hidden because you don't have your nose right up to the sensor (sort of what you can get with the Panasonic GH-line in ETC mdoe) can be ugly.

It's not a panacea.

I think all you've illustrated is that that any technique or "effect" CAN be poorly executed... and also misunderstood.

When taking an HD crop from a 4K frame, you're not "zooming into the sensor" (whatever that means), you're simply re-framing to pixels that are ALREADY there. There is plenty of resolution and potential to move within the larger "picture".

Thus my original suggestion that a single camera can potentially "cover" much the same needs for wide and close up framings that might have necessitated 2-3 "HD" cameras to avoid the very issues you're describing. Frame wide, crop in post. If you're talking DVD/SD delivery, you can take this up another huge notch as well...

Of course if you are trying to get 4K output (not sure there's much demand YET), this would not be true, although I'm finding that HD can look pretty good on my 4K "monitor", more than adequate for all but dedicated "pixel peepers".


And If memory serves, "pan" in pan and scan did not typically involve "live" moves (maybe it did, didn't watch much in 4:3 once widescreen became available, too much stuff "missing"!), but rather moving the mask back and forth as needed to get a 4:3 framing in the larger "window"