Al Bergstein
Forum Replies Created
-
first off Ty, a quick apology if I seemed abrupt, as your answer seemed condencending, rather than helpful.
Please just point me to shoot outs rather movies.
I know these guys have “experience” over me, but they also have “budget” and can afford to buy the best specs. my question was, and is, “is it three times better?”
Alf
-
Ty, you know, I wasn’t trying to be sarcastic, nor looking for an oh so smart answer. I know the azden is crap, though frankly I’ve done a few videos with it on a 7d that turned out fine. the question I was asking was, is a $1000 shotgun three times better than a $300 at897? You answer is a bit out of line, IMHO. Quite demeaning.
Please point me to proof rather Than tell me to go watch movies that I have no idea what they used or what the gear cost.
Cow users deserve better than that.
And it’s quite irritating to see your self serving huge video ad after every post you make.
Alf
-
While I agree with David’s opinion, it’s all about degrees. Is my AT897 really 3x less good than a $1000 shotgun? For interviews or run and gun? In noisy situations, like on a fishing boat with a 100 horse Honda at full throttle and trying to record dialogue? I would bet good money the answer is “no”. Is the $1000 mic twice as good? Maybe. This is about satisfying the need rather than optimizing to get a perfect solution to the need. I have yet to see a shotgun that is worth paying twice what I paid for mine. Please prove me wrong. I’m talking field video production here and not optimal audio studio requirements. I’m willing and ok with being proved wrong on this. If I am, I’ll sell my AT897 tomorrow. I had a laugh out of a recent review that showed three mics, my AT897 as “budget” and others as working horse, and upper range. As if it was an Azden or something (which I also own, by the way). A throw away mic for a cheap price, but worth it if you can’t afford an At897 or better.
Alf
-
Tim, since you have cross posted this, I’m answering in the canon forum.I have the same two cameras. I would agree on transcoding to proxy, maybe rent or borrow multiple machines & just bulk it in compressor,
Is your work headed for cable, theatrical or just the web? I ask because I have started the process of working in competing nle’s to end transcoding for those projects that are’t going to need significant color grading, or green screen. I’ve got some nice results without the t.c. You might reconsider your nle now, while you have a chance.
That’s why I’m posting in the canon forum. I don’t want to seem like dissing the apple faithful. I have spent thousands on FCP workflow, but the transcode issue is problematic for documentary shooters and there finally are alternatives.
Best of luck, if you lived nearby, I’d be glad to rent you time on my machine.
Alf
-
Yes, I have a 305, and the multiple takes you mention are file spanning.your canon utilities will help you bring it back together. The clips ought to end up as you shot them. I use the canon utility, not l&t to first create a virtual disk, edit out the bad shots, and then L&t in using that add on.saves the time in transcoding every bit.
Alf
-
Into what? Not much longer than with my hmc150. It depends on a lot of variables.
Alf
-
Best idea I’ve found is to get there early, manually white balance and then use a monitor to tune the colors, hopefully with a color card. Give yourself 30 minutes once the gear is setup.
Alf
-
These cameras are still considered (and engineered)as a still camera with video capability. That’s why Magic Lantern has been so successful with many of the Canons.
It’s also why so many video people have been falling in love with the AF-100, as it’s a ‘real’ larger sensor camera with interchangeable lens and all the pro add on’s like zebra, and waveform. I am sure that Canon will be bringing out a competitor to this soon (next year?) as Sony already has.
This is not to trash canon, as I know this is a canon board, and I own a newer xf305, along with a 7D. so while I love Canon, I also felt the need for zebra’s, WF, and XLR in’s on the camera I do most of my work on. Let alone the beauty of 4:2:2 at 50 Mbps. Not quite a larger frame sensor, but I use my 7D when I need that feel.
Alf
-
Yes, you edit in HD. Remember, if you are in SD now, you may need a more powerful computer to edit. I use either Windows 7 with 8 GBs RAM and a lot of storage, or a MacPro with lots of RAM & Lots of storage (G).
The 300/305 XDCAM files import natively into FCP. No need to transcode to ProRes, it doesn’t ‘help’. There is a L&T add on from Canon to do that import, works fine. Only place where you might find an issue if you are using multicam editing in FCP, where all the formats need to match. I’ve had problems using Multicam where even with everything Prores the JVC 700 that I was having help me could not be used in the multicam editing, where I was bringing in HMC150 AVCHD & transcoding it, along with 7D footage. For some reason the JVC footage, while MOV, still needed to be transcoded to match the other footage. I gave up on doing all that work, and just hand edited the short footage.
Alf
-
It’s easy Neal. I shoot HD all the time, and have needed to make DVDs for showings I’ve done. DVDs are SD by nature. When you go to create the DVD you simply choose either SD or Blu Ray, depending on your device & machine. Apple of course is not supporting Blu Ray natively in FCP, but you can get tools to work around it. You can output BR but they don’t support burning it inside FCP. Toast can do it for you. Or move to Windows, where support is a no brainer (G).
You then create the DVD and it plays on any DVD player (hopefully). No different than you do now. Certainly there can be minor issues, but it’s not any more a problem than shooting what you are now. The upside is that your quality looks better (IMHO) as you are capturing to begin with at a higher quality. If you make it look good, it will look great. Moving to Blu Ray then allows you to actually output HD quality.
Alf