[Bruce Greene]

[George Evatt] “Is the above right? If so is the DVCPROHD codec so good that it gets by doing more with less bandwidth.”

George,

I think it’s more the compromise that we make with the Varicam to be able to shoot variable frame rates up to 60fps progressive and still capture and edit the HD original data on a firewire drive.

It would be cool, and a big improvement, if the camera would use all 100mb/s when shooting at 24 or 30 fps (as I think the Sony HDcam does), but it doesn’t and fills the extra space with duplicate frames as slugs.

Fortunately, the compression is often not visible to the average viewer.

But now you’ve led me to a crazy idea: Could we shoot at 48fps and have a Final Cut Pro plug in that uses all the frames and blends them into 24fps? Or at least, uses the extra frames to create a 30fps for dvd or tv broadcast without the interlaced frame added during the conversion from 24p to 60i?

[Bruce Greene]

Thanks John for a terrific response!

Re: Florian’s original question…

From my personal experience, I like the look of 30p more than 24p because:

1. I don’t really like the look of 3:2 pulldown (ie. converting 24fps into 30 fps for US video). I can see the uneven motion during pans and the interlaced frames that are created in the process. By shooting 30fps motion is evenly paced, shutter motion blur is close to the natural look of 24fps, and there are no interlaced frames created for US tv viewing when distributed at 60i

2. 30fps offers more picture information per second and the effect is kind of like shooting with more pixels in the camera. I too remember Showscan which was 35mm film shot and projected at 60fps and it almost had the look of IMAX, though with stobing motion due to the short exposure required by a movie camera running at such a high speed.

The downside of shooting at 30fps is that frames must be dropped to get to 24fps for US theatrical viewing or to 25fps for European TV or movies. Dropping the frames looks much worse than adding frames from 24fps to get to 30fps when needed.

So, when I shoot knowing that the project will only be seen in the US on TV or video or the web, I usually shoot at 30fps. If anything else is a possibilty, I shoot at 24 fps for the most flexibilty.

I wish I could shoot my Varicam at 60fps and distribute at 60fps as well. Because I can turn off the shutter on the digital camera, it won’t strobe like showscan did and look very nice in playback. Of course, I’ll have to play back my movie at home on my Panasonic monitor that displays 60p and I’ll be the only one to enjoy it…….

-bruce

[Bruce Greene]

Thanks Shane.

I hope you mean a 23.98 timeline and not a 24fps timeline.

Yes, 23.98

Just encode the DVD via Compressor. The DVD will play back 23.98 fps just fine. No duplicate frames will be added.

I thought that’s what was done. Step framing the DVD shows the duplicate frames, and it looks jerky at full speed when panning or watching the rolling credits. Shouldn’t we be adding the 3:2 pulldown with the interlaced frame in the middle?

[Bruce Greene]

It originated as 24PA and was edited on a 24fps timeline.

[Bruce Greene]

I have done this before for my sample reel, though I can’t remember which ripper software I used.

I do remember that I had to rip a large portion of the dvd to find the clips I wanted.

I then rendered them into the dv codec, cut them into my reel, and made my dvds. The digital artifacts from the dvd material becomes pretty severe by uncompressing, compressing to dv, and recompressing to mpeg2 for the dvd. A better way might be to capture the dvd to dv via analog, but you may need a macro vision defeating box (also not legal), though a professional dv deck might not be affected by the macrovision at all.

Oh for the days of the laser disc which had no copy protection!

Trying to get copies on tape through a studio legal department can be very difficult. I once had to pay thousands of dollars to copy a master tape of a feature I shot by having a copy made in an online suite at their laboratory and they insisted on printing “for screening purposes only” inside the 1:85 frame even though it was a full frame transfer. I had to battle to get the type down to 50% white from 100% white.

Perhaps you can get ok quality by placing your dvd clips (and the rest of your reel) in an uncompressed timeline and rendering your dvd sample reel from there, avoiding the compression to dv. I now try to become friendly with the editorial department when I will need clips and try to get them while the project is pre mpeg2, but this is not always possible.

Good Luck!

-bruce
DP/Steadicam
Los Angeles

[Bruce Greene]

Sure . The knee point has a range of 70%-107%. The knee slope goes from 0-99. Anything else you would like to know ?

With a lowest knee point of 70%, that would give the Varicam a significant advantage in exposure latitude when desired.

Thanks!

[Bruce Greene]

Mr/Ms. Leaking Oil,

Please help me out here. Why are you thinking that I’m mistaken?

Your brief responses don’t give me much to go on.

And I’m curious, I think you mentioned that you own both a Varicam and HDX900. If so, to satisfy my curiosity, could you check the knee menu on the HDX900 and let me know the range of adjustment allowed in the knee point and the knee slope on that camera? Thanks.

-bruce

[Bruce Greene]

Name: leaknoil
Date: Oct 9, 2006 at 1:21:57 am
Subject: Re: film rec vs vid rec? mystery solved

“And re: the HDX900, if one can set the knee point to 10% in that camera you essentially have Film Rec provided that you can set the knee slope to 500% for maximum lattitude.

Huh? wrong.

This was the entire point of the original post in this thread. Hard to believe, but true. Film Rec mode on the varicam is the same as setting the knee point to 10%, and that’s all it does. Period. If you can set the knee point on the HDX900 to 10%, then you have put it in “Film Rec” if you will.

[Bruce Greene]

I actually did do more testing than I mentioned in the original post as I was creating a set up for a shoot tomorrow.

My goal was to create a “look” that will be used for wysiwyg, for tv, not for filmout. My aim was to create a set up that would have slightly more latitude than standard video (without an obvious knee point) but still have the punch (contrast and color saturation) for a finished product. Another consideration was that I wanted to reduce the noise of the camera by giving the CCDs more exposure.

Here’s what I came up with for tomorrow:

Film Rec – dynamic level = 300%
Gain = +3db
Gamma = .62
Black Stretch = -1
ped = 0
black strech level = 9%
color matrix and correction per my taste via DSC chart and real life

The result is an image that has a normal gamma for most of the image with a little extra room at the top for additional highlights and an Exposure Index of 400 which makes the image less noisey than Vid Rec at -3Db (which has an exposure index of 640).

And re: the HDX900, if one can set the knee point to 10% in that camera you essentially have Film Rec provided that you can set the knee slope to 500% for maximum lattitude.

In a way the whole “Film Rec” idea is rather confusing as Panasonic, it seems, could just have enabled the knee point to go as low as 10% and accomplished the exact same capability in the camera. As it is Vid Rec with the knee point set at 30% is almost film rec, but with a more obvious “kink” in the density curve at the knee point.

[Bruce Greene]

FILM REC is for transferring to FILM. Monitor u use in field is pretty much useless without Gamma corrector, color and exposure will not be accurate without it.
What u see is NOT what u’ll get.

FILM LIKE is similar to VIDEO REC in Varicam.
Image is as same as after Telecine process, what u see in normal HD monitor IS WHAT U GET.

This is the way panasonic often explains it, and Film Rec can be used this way with a gamma corrected monitor.

Vid Rec is more like a standard video camera with a knee circuit.

That said, I believe the best quality images can be made with the camera in Film Rec mode with the gamma, ped, and dynamic level adjusted for a WYSIWYG result on the monitor without monitor gamma correction. The noise level of the camera is substantially less in Film Rec shot this way than images shot in Vid Rec. It should be noted that Vid Rec has an EI of about 640 while Film Rec shot for WYSIWYG can have an EI of as low as 200. In Film Rec though much more gain can be added without noticeable noise as well.