Chris Oben
Forum Replies Created
-
Sounds good Shane . . . now here’s a tougher question . . . these DVD’s we need are ‘dailies’ of all the footage shot on the HVX200 over a period of three days. I would like to have the t.c. on the dvd refer to the P2 (.mxf) t.c. of the original file. the t.c. plug-in in fcp seems only to refer to the timeline start point.
To make it even more difficult – we deleted ‘bad’ takes on the set so the P2 t.c. is not continuous.
Is there another t.c. generator plug in that uses the source file’s t.c. to genereate the burn?
Thanks for your input . . .
Chris
Chris M. Oben
-
Shane,
It makes sense to me to preserve the 23.976 source code from the archived .mxf data instead of outputting a 29.97 t.c. burn? Does that make sense to you?
Chris
Chris M. Oben
-
I can’t seem to find any Time Code settings in Deck Control. I am using Ver 4.8 – the pre-apple codec which has better noise reduciton than Ver 5. Are there VITC options in Ver 5?
Chris M. Oben
-
Federico – 32.5mm to 423mm is the Panasonic posted 35mm ‘Still’ film equivalent – I am interested in the 35mm ‘Motion Picture’ equivalent . . . any ideas?
I have found a few sources that say to multiply by a factor of 4.4 for a 1/3″ CCD. However every manufacturer has a different actual CCD size. Has anyone compared the HVX side by side with an Arri 435 (or similar film camera) with a 1.78 ground glass and found the lens conversion factor?
Chris M. Oben
-
Federico – 32.5mm to 423mm is the Panasonic posted 35mm ‘Still’ film equivalent – I am interested in the 35mm ‘Motion Picture’ equivalent . . . any ideas?
I have found a few sources that say to multiply by a factor of 4.4 for a 1/3″ CCD. However every manufacturer has a different actual CCD size. Has anyone compared the HVX side by side with an Arri 435 (or similar film camera) with a 1.78 ground glass and found the lens conversion factor?
Chris M. Oben
-
35mm ‘Motion Picture’ equivalent that is . . .
-
JS and Gary,
I am interested that no one at CineGear was able to confirm what we have battled since the onset of our use of HD acquisition for dramatic television. Magnetic ballast HMI fluctuation and fluorescent ballast flicker have definitely been a real world problem. When shooting 23.98(23.976) we were regularly forced to use a 1/60th shutter or ECS to compensate for highly visible flicker and fluctuation. The problem was most evident in static shots or long takes with brightly lit walls or surfaces – I also experienced some color cycling where an image would shift from well balanced to greenish and back over a period of about 7 or 8 seconds.
When the first f900’s were put to use in series TV everyone (engineers, D.P.s, sound recordists and post) agreed that 23.98(23.976) was the optimal choice of frame rate. i.e. simplest production / post-workflow. The thinking was ‘let’s shoot 23.98 and record sound at 29.97 thereby preserving the original frame rate as closely as possible without the need for ‘slowing down’ in post.
What we now know is that there are many situations where available fluorescents and magnetic ballast HMI’s cause problems with flicker and/or color cycling which aren’t immediately apparent.
Our solution on “Muppets Wizard of Oz” and “The 4400” is to shoot 24PsF and ask sound to record at 30FPS. At least 4 other local, Panavision supplied TV series are shooting 24PsF including “Stargate SG-1 and Atlantis”.
BTW – when we use the HVX200 for sound sync scenes we ask sound to run at 29.97FPS . . . so far so good.
Gary, Yes there are some very good posts on CML – here’s an excerpt from a thread that I think is valuable:
*** If you set up an F900 in front of a face lit with HMI light and shoot at 23.98 (1/48th) you will see a (cyclical) phase shift in the flesh tones. This is easy to see on a vector scope. The same effect is in evidence with fluorescent sources.
This is *not* a source related issue.
What is more difficult to specify is the degree to which this bothers people.
>
-
[gary adcock] “As john pointed out the post workflow is a NIGHTMARE at 24.0 for most productions. “
Gary,
I guess I just don’t see the ‘nightmare’. If one gains the ability to shoot without HMI and fluorescent flicker issues by simply changing the frame rate, then why not shoot 24PsF? Am I missing something?
Chris M. Oben
-
. . . the 24Psf video is slowed by .1% to 23.976 . . .
Chris M. Oben
-
JS
We are going a little of topic for this forum here but I will take a momet to reiterate what I stated earlier . . . in fact, the audio post is identical to any television show shot at 24fps film. During transfer to an HDCam submaster the 24Psf video is slowed by 1% to 23.976 as is the audio DAT (to 29.97 from 30). There is no nightmare. The reason we switched from 23.98 to 24PsF was because of the HMI magnetic ballast issue described above.
I only posted the comment to clarify that the F900 does indeed record 24PsF directly to tape on-board not exclusively to D-5 or SRW as suggested by Gary . . . I am quite sure you can confirm this yourself by checking the F900/3 Maintenace Menu page 7.
Chris M. Oben