help make things better at DVinfo.net

Robert Johnston · July 22nd, 2006, 09:12 AM

Hi all, I have read a lot and learned a lot. But reading does not make up for experiance. I done my nieces wedding and would like a through pointers. I used a sony pd 170p and although there is some places where it is off white balance, due to in and out of doors quickly. I would like your thoughts. The editing was done on ulead media pro studio. This was throwen together in two hours and I know I can make a better one but how is my question. I dont think ulead has colour correction, or at least i dont know how to work it.

I have loads of questions but will get this one over with first, as it may help answer others.

I missed the wedding but had loads of fun filming it - hard work also and a new pair of shoes needed half way through wedding.

this is the link http://www.v-i-cstudio.com/demos.html

Ian Briscoe · July 22nd, 2006, 11:27 AM

Hi Robert

I'm no expert having only done 3 weddings (UK also). But I think you should be quite proud of that - the B&G will be delighted with it. I also had problems white balancing - but try to get it right - saves loads of hassle in editing. Having said that - yours didn't look too bad.

The only bit I really didn't like was the bit with the car arriving - jumping forward - it doesn't fit with the gimmick/effect free nature of the rest of the video. If you did need to compres time at that point - maybe just dissolve it forward.

Nice one - so it is!!!!

Ian

Mike F Smith · July 22nd, 2006, 12:42 PM

Sorry Robert, Can't make your file play.

Mike

Robert Johnston · July 22nd, 2006, 03:43 PM

Thanks Ian for your comments. I did not need to compress time for the car, it was just me trying to do something which you rightly said dosent fit the gimmick/effect free image of the video. This video is only a demo for the web and hopefully the first of a lot of weddings as i did enjoy it. The reason why i asked is for comments like Ians which will give me more hints in where i am going wrong and how to fix it. I have loads of footage which is correctly white balanced and for most part shake free. Would like to build a demo with your thoughts. Give me ideas and if I have the footage will add it to the demo for you all to see.

ps just bought a steadycam merlin and am practicing how to keep it straight when moving. It dosent half way a ton with a pd 170p and accesseries on, 12 pounds all in all. Can take some nice shoots already but need lots more practice as it is a finely juned peice of equipment.

Ian Briscoe · July 22nd, 2006, 03:56 PM

Robert

I'd be interested to hear about your Merlin experiences. I'm considering getting one for a Z1E - but with an attached microphone it takes the weight to 5.5lbs - slightly over the Merlin limit of 5lbs. I spoke to Tiffen and they said they regularky use such a set up with no problems. It's be great to be able to hire one before investing - but can't find anywhere that offers that service.

Ian

Robert Johnston · July 23rd, 2006, 06:09 AM

The actul weight is 5.25lbs for sony pd170p so 5.50lbs is still within range. They actually use a sony pd 170 and a Z1E in there demo video. They only garentee for cameras up to 5 lbs so it is risky to use. I find if you are carefull enough it does support the weight well but I can also see that the weight in the wrong hands could easily break it. In other words dont let anyboody else use it and be careful in a crowded area. Will try and take a few shots this week and put up the vid when I get time hopefully before next weekend.

ps I also found that with a wide lens on that it was front heavy and had to put a big battery on the other end to evan up the weight differance. It makes it heavy but does mean I can take longer video too.

Robert Johnston · July 27th, 2006, 07:08 AM

Hi ian, after a few days working with the steadicam merlin I have come to a conclusion that it is not suited to heavy cameras. Here are my reasons:

1. the gimbel is too free and would need to be tighter for more stability.

2. It is hard to control because of the wieght and loose gimbel.

3. The dovetail lock is way to flimsy and already it comes out when you try to tighten the camera to the stage due it not having a locknut to surcure it to the dovetail plate.

4. The same dovetail lock also has lost it's grip evan when it is in the lock position so that the camera is free to move up and down the stage freely, not good.

As stated above the conclusion is that the merlin is not suited to heavy cameras. I can however see what it is trying to give customers, but the cameras suited to this product is consumer cameras and not pro consumer cameras. Hence only for those people who no nothing about cameras and has a lot off money to burn. This product is not made well when it comes down to it and I see that a lot off adjustments could be made to make it a good product but not the way it is made now.

Vincent Croce · July 27th, 2006, 07:29 AM

Yeah, Robert, I had a similar experience after purchasing a Steadicam JR to use with my PD170...the cam was too heavy for it. I switched to a Glidecam 4000, with an arm brace and vest, and I'm extremely happy with it. I now use it on one of my cams for the entire wedding and it's made more of a difference in my footage than any other single piece of gear I have.
It could support a much heavier cam if needed, also...

Ian Briscoe · July 27th, 2006, 03:15 PM

Robert

Oh bugger! Thanx for the mini review there. It's really useful - and by useful I mean it's saved me a few hundred quid! I think that only leaves the Glidecam 4000 in the "affordable" range - but a lot of comments around that criticise the amount of weight that goes on the wrist - although as Vincent says - should be better with the right brace. So you gonna sell the Merlin?

Ian

William Gaffney · July 27th, 2006, 05:52 PM

Robert,

I have watched your demo and here are a few comments which generally are just my opinions and not intended to be critical and which you may be aware of anyway.

For a first wedding the demo looks reasonable and you have a good basis to build on.

The PD170 is capable of great images but your coding for the clip was not great (particularly the black and white sequence) so it was difficult to tell the quality of your master tape..

I dont know if you use the camera in auto mode but there was some exposure problems in places. At the very least the iris should be controlled manually. Particularly on bright sunny days problems will arise if the iris is left on auto.

The staged shot with the Groom, Bestman etc. should be avoided. They looked embarassed and uncomfortable. Avoid directing people unless you can make it appear natural.

You should have been positioned on the Grooms side in the church (not always possible) so you have the Bride facing you. She is the star and its her reaction etc. you need to record if at all possible.

As you film more weddings you will realise that not all locations are perfect and you sometimes will have to comprimise. Producing a good video under difficult circumstances is what you will need to be able to do if you wish to progress in the business.

Finally with regard to your website, I would remove the reference to "just starting out" it will not inspire confidence with Brides. When you are demonstrating your work to them you can then explain you are new to the business, with fresh ideas etc. etc.

Good luck

Hope this is of some use.

Robert Johnston · July 28th, 2006, 03:04 AM

Firstly to Ian, no I am going to keep it and try it on another consumer camera and take it on holidays. Its compact travel mode makes it a good choice for this. As for William I will try and answer some of your points:

The cd copy of the black and white is perfect on the master and the couple loved it evan though it was a accident that it was done at all. This brings me onto your next point about white balance. Again you are correct that the camera was set wrong. I white balanced every time I move position except where I moved indoors and outdoors quickly and forgot to change the settings. I always use manual white balance as auto can give some strange effects at times. As for not being on the grooms side again nothing I could do there either. The band was on that side. The only reason I got on the other side was because they dident need it until they where signing the register. As for the web sight I was wondering if I could rearange the wording to make it feel better. Need to find time and look at this and redo demo with all the perfectly taken footage and reduce the size so that it plays and looks better.

Thanks William for giving your time to answer and give good advice and to you Ian, If you get a glidecam 4000 please let me knew how you get on as I might be temped and probley will to buy one. William have you any footage that you could show me and Ian of you using your glidecam and tell us if you have had any difficulties with it when on shoots.

July 22nd, 2006, 09:12 AM	#1
Robert Johnston Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: northern ireland Posts: 57	help make things better Hi all, I have read a lot and learned a lot. But reading does not make up for experiance. I done my nieces wedding and would like a through pointers. I used a sony pd 170p and although there is some places where it is off white balance, due to in and out of doors quickly. I would like your thoughts. The editing was done on ulead media pro studio. This was throwen together in two hours and I know I can make a better one but how is my question. I dont think ulead has colour correction, or at least i dont know how to work it. I have loads of questions but will get this one over with first, as it may help answer others. I missed the wedding but had loads of fun filming it - hard work also and a new pair of shoes needed half way through wedding. this is the link http://www.v-i-cstudio.com/demos.html

July 22nd, 2006, 11:27 AM	#2
Ian Briscoe Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Southport - UK Posts: 208	Hi Robert I'm no expert having only done 3 weddings (UK also). But I think you should be quite proud of that - the B&G will be delighted with it. I also had problems white balancing - but try to get it right - saves loads of hassle in editing. Having said that - yours didn't look too bad. The only bit I really didn't like was the bit with the car arriving - jumping forward - it doesn't fit with the gimmick/effect free nature of the rest of the video. If you did need to compres time at that point - maybe just dissolve it forward. Nice one - so it is!!!! Ian

July 22nd, 2006, 12:42 PM	#3
Mike F Smith Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 156	Sorry Robert, Can't make your file play. Mike

July 22nd, 2006, 03:43 PM	#4
Robert Johnston Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: northern ireland Posts: 57	Thanks Ian for your comments. I did not need to compress time for the car, it was just me trying to do something which you rightly said dosent fit the gimmick/effect free image of the video. This video is only a demo for the web and hopefully the first of a lot of weddings as i did enjoy it. The reason why i asked is for comments like Ians which will give me more hints in where i am going wrong and how to fix it. I have loads of footage which is correctly white balanced and for most part shake free. Would like to build a demo with your thoughts. Give me ideas and if I have the footage will add it to the demo for you all to see. ps just bought a steadycam merlin and am practicing how to keep it straight when moving. It dosent half way a ton with a pd 170p and accesseries on, 12 pounds all in all. Can take some nice shoots already but need lots more practice as it is a finely juned peice of equipment.

July 22nd, 2006, 03:56 PM	#5
Ian Briscoe Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Southport - UK Posts: 208	Robert I'd be interested to hear about your Merlin experiences. I'm considering getting one for a Z1E - but with an attached microphone it takes the weight to 5.5lbs - slightly over the Merlin limit of 5lbs. I spoke to Tiffen and they said they regularky use such a set up with no problems. It's be great to be able to hire one before investing - but can't find anywhere that offers that service. Ian

July 23rd, 2006, 06:09 AM	#6
Robert Johnston Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: northern ireland Posts: 57	The actul weight is 5.25lbs for sony pd170p so 5.50lbs is still within range. They actually use a sony pd 170 and a Z1E in there demo video. They only garentee for cameras up to 5 lbs so it is risky to use. I find if you are carefull enough it does support the weight well but I can also see that the weight in the wrong hands could easily break it. In other words dont let anyboody else use it and be careful in a crowded area. Will try and take a few shots this week and put up the vid when I get time hopefully before next weekend. ps I also found that with a wide lens on that it was front heavy and had to put a big battery on the other end to evan up the weight differance. It makes it heavy but does mean I can take longer video too.

July 27th, 2006, 07:08 AM	#7
Robert Johnston Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: northern ireland Posts: 57	Hi ian, after a few days working with the steadicam merlin I have come to a conclusion that it is not suited to heavy cameras. Here are my reasons: 1. the gimbel is too free and would need to be tighter for more stability. 2. It is hard to control because of the wieght and loose gimbel. 3. The dovetail lock is way to flimsy and already it comes out when you try to tighten the camera to the stage due it not having a locknut to surcure it to the dovetail plate. 4. The same dovetail lock also has lost it's grip evan when it is in the lock position so that the camera is free to move up and down the stage freely, not good. As stated above the conclusion is that the merlin is not suited to heavy cameras. I can however see what it is trying to give customers, but the cameras suited to this product is consumer cameras and not pro consumer cameras. Hence only for those people who no nothing about cameras and has a lot off money to burn. This product is not made well when it comes down to it and I see that a lot off adjustments could be made to make it a good product but not the way it is made now.

July 27th, 2006, 07:29 AM	#8
Vincent Croce Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Fort Myers, FL Posts: 263	Yeah, Robert, I had a similar experience after purchasing a Steadicam JR to use with my PD170...the cam was too heavy for it. I switched to a Glidecam 4000, with an arm brace and vest, and I'm extremely happy with it. I now use it on one of my cams for the entire wedding and it's made more of a difference in my footage than any other single piece of gear I have. It could support a much heavier cam if needed, also...

July 27th, 2006, 03:15 PM	#9
Ian Briscoe Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Southport - UK Posts: 208	Robert Oh bugger! Thanx for the mini review there. It's really useful - and by useful I mean it's saved me a few hundred quid! I think that only leaves the Glidecam 4000 in the "affordable" range - but a lot of comments around that criticise the amount of weight that goes on the wrist - although as Vincent says - should be better with the right brace. So you gonna sell the Merlin? Ian

July 27th, 2006, 05:52 PM	#10
William Gaffney New Boot Join Date: May 2006 Location: UK Posts: 16	Robert, I have watched your demo and here are a few comments which generally are just my opinions and not intended to be critical and which you may be aware of anyway. For a first wedding the demo looks reasonable and you have a good basis to build on. The PD170 is capable of great images but your coding for the clip was not great (particularly the black and white sequence) so it was difficult to tell the quality of your master tape.. I dont know if you use the camera in auto mode but there was some exposure problems in places. At the very least the iris should be controlled manually. Particularly on bright sunny days problems will arise if the iris is left on auto. The staged shot with the Groom, Bestman etc. should be avoided. They looked embarassed and uncomfortable. Avoid directing people unless you can make it appear natural. You should have been positioned on the Grooms side in the church (not always possible) so you have the Bride facing you. She is the star and its her reaction etc. you need to record if at all possible. As you film more weddings you will realise that not all locations are perfect and you sometimes will have to comprimise. Producing a good video under difficult circumstances is what you will need to be able to do if you wish to progress in the business. Finally with regard to your website, I would remove the reference to "just starting out" it will not inspire confidence with Brides. When you are demonstrating your work to them you can then explain you are new to the business, with fresh ideas etc. etc. Good luck Hope this is of some use.

July 28th, 2006, 03:04 AM	#11
Robert Johnston Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: northern ireland Posts: 57	Firstly to Ian, no I am going to keep it and try it on another consumer camera and take it on holidays. Its compact travel mode makes it a good choice for this. As for William I will try and answer some of your points: The cd copy of the black and white is perfect on the master and the couple loved it evan though it was a accident that it was done at all. This brings me onto your next point about white balance. Again you are correct that the camera was set wrong. I white balanced every time I move position except where I moved indoors and outdoors quickly and forgot to change the settings. I always use manual white balance as auto can give some strange effects at times. As for not being on the grooms side again nothing I could do there either. The band was on that side. The only reason I got on the other side was because they dident need it until they where signing the register. As for the web sight I was wondering if I could rearange the wording to make it feel better. Need to find time and look at this and redo demo with all the perfectly taken footage and reduce the size so that it plays and looks better. Thanks William for giving your time to answer and give good advice and to you Ian, If you get a glidecam 4000 please let me knew how you get on as I might be temped and probley will to buy one. William have you any footage that you could show me and Ian of you using your glidecam and tell us if you have had any difficulties with it when on shoots.