David Burch
Forum Replies Created
-
Another thing about 60p is that it can be used to create a true 29.97 interlacing. For this reason I use it when I know my final product must be standard definition, 29.97 interlaced. Being a progressive format, it downscales much better than, say, 1080i, and doesn’t result in a juttery look like 30p does. Personally, I can’t stand 30p…if I want to shoot progressive I’ll shoot 24p. That way, I can emulate a true film look, and non-progressive monitors get the benefit of a 3:2 pulldown, just like any movie. Also, DVD compression works much better with true 24p footage, which can be important when encoding content that is 2+ hours on a single-layer DVD.
-
As far as I know, shooting “overcrank” flags the footage as whatever speed your camera is set at. For instance, say you’re shooting 720p24, and overcranking to 60fps. The file that is being created is a true 24p file; it’s simply being recorded onto the card faster than real time. I don’t know this for sure, but i believe that the advantage of shooting overcrank as opposed to simply shooting at 60p and slowing down in post is compression. Remember, the XDCAM-EX format is 35 mbps, regardless of resolution or framerate. Theoretically, overcranked footage plays back at the same bit rate as footage recorded at the normal rate. Therefore, the camera has to process data much faster than 35 mbps when overcranking, which explains why you can only overcrank to 60fps while shooting 720p (and why Sony doesn’t recommend using non SxS media when overcranking).
On the other hand, if you shoot footage at 60fps, the bit rate is still 35 mbps, but the codec has to encode many more frames per second with this same amount of data, resulting in more compression per frame. While you can actually achieve decent results by slowing down 60p footage to 24 fps, the overall quality will be better if you overcrank while shooting.
-
As far as I know, in HQ mode the 24p settings are true progressive. I haven’t shot in SP so I wasn’t aware it applied a pulldown, but I guess it makes sense when you figure that SP mode is basically HDV.
-
Couple of things on that. I agree that content is the most important thing (at least when talking about purely artistic forms of media, such as movies, TV series, etc.), but in my opinion one of the biggest things that distinguishes a novice artist from a master is how well the artist knows how to use the tools available. A master painter is one with expert brush technique. Ansel Adams made his photographs stick out with superb darkroom skills. It is no different in video or film. Regardless of what kind of camera one uses, a master will know how to get the most out of his or her equipment. In the case of the EX1/3, this means knowing exactly what frame rate to use, what f-stop, what kind of resolution, picture profile settings, and so on. The technical aspects of the camera are crucial to the artform, as much as using the correct brush stroke is to painting, or knowing music theory is to composing.
The second point I have is that, unfortunately, in this business not everything we do is purely artistic. Of course, I try to put as much of a creative touch as possible on my work regardless of the medium, but there is only so much one can do when shooting a business meeting 🙂 Sometimes, all the client cares about is making sure the technical is flawless.
-
Almost everything I shoot has to be downconverted, as the vast majority of our product goes to DVD. I have found I get the best results shooting either 720p24 or 720p60, depending on if I want to end up with an interlaced or progressive final product. I find that for DVD, 24p works the best, as you get the most out of the MPEG-2 compression. 720 is better than 1080 if your only output is SD because there is less potential for aliasing, and because the camera codec will be less compressed to begin with. I would stay away from 30p, unless you like that kind of look. Personally, I can’t stand it.
-
I just returned from NAB, thrilled after having spoken with the project manager of the EX line that Sony was now allowing users to do their own firmware upgrades. However, after having read horror stories from people who have bricked their cameras, I have decided that it is not worth the risk. The $130 service fee is much lower than the $2000+ price tag I have heard some people have had to pay to get their cameras fixed. I trust myself enough to handle a firmware upgrade, but the problem is that Sony is refusing to take responsibility for user upgrades, even if the software itself is to blame.
That said, my hunch is that those that have bricked their cameras didn’t pay attention to the fact that the latest upgrade requires that all previous upgrades be installed first. In other words, if you don’t have the LATEST firmware, it’s a two stage process.
-
For me it depends on what I’m doing with it. 720p24 has a couple advantages, namely better light gain, less compression per frame and the ability to overcrank to 60fps. I typically use 720p24 if I am planning on downscaling anyway, which is a good portion of what I do. However, if I am planning a Blu Ray or other HD form of release, I’ll use 1080p24 or 1080i60, depending on the shoot. I may also choose 720p60 for Blu Ray if motion clarity is critical.
Since the bit rate is relatively constant regardless of frame rate or image size, what is changing is how compressed each frame is. Shooting in 1080i, the codec has to encode about 62,208,000 pixels per second. In 1080p24, that number is 49,766,400. In 720p60, the number of pixels per second is actually higher than 1080p, at 55,296,000. 720p24 is only 22,118,400. In other words, 1080i is the most costly, at nearly 3 times as much data as 720p24 that has to be encoded with the same bit rate. Next is 720p60, then 1080p24, and finally 720p24, at less than half the amount of data as 1080p. All things being equal, this means that if you are downscaling anyway you should end up with better results by shooting 720p24 (less compression artifacts, resulting in a cleaner downscale).
-
To me the biggest problem seems to be the white balance is off and the exposure is too high. Also, the lenses on the EX-1 are not the best, and subject to chromatic aberration when zoomed in on a high-contrast subject, which may account for some of the color bleed. Are you using auto exposure? If so I would highly recommend using manual. Set your zebras to 80% video and use those as a guide for skin tones, making sure they only show up on highlights and not all over the skin. Finally, red is a horrible video color, especially for codecs like DVCAM. It causes bleed and blockiness, which is especially apparent in standard definition.
-
One more thing, since I saw you mentioned light gain. I’m not really sure why you had better light gain in 60i than in 30p, since theoretically your gain should be better with twice the exposure time (unless you had a shutter on). 24p, however, I can vouch for as having far better light gain than 60i, especially with the shutter off. I typically keep my shutter at 1/48, to mimic a film camera, and seem to have slightly more gain than I do in 60i. In very low light situations (a wedding reception, for instance) I will turn the shutter off and see an instant jump in light sensitivity.
-
I have shot extensively in 60i, 60p, and 24p, and I would say that there are pros and cons to each. Interlacing, like it or not, is still the standard for broadcast, and is a requirement for anybody who still uses an old CRT (more people than the industry likes to admit, I think). That being said, progressive has the advantage of a sharper image, albeit more juttery. 24p also has some serious advantages if your final output is DVD. For instance, 24p can be stored natively on a DVD in a PsF format. This allows progressive scan DVD players to work as intended, and the lower frame rate means the same bitrate in your MPEG-2 compression will yield better results. However, the tradeoff is that you must use good shooting technique, or your footage will look juttery. That is, be sure you are following you subjects as closely as possible, and always use your framing to lead the eye to the important part of the shot (which should be moving within the frame as little as possible).
If you don’t like the jutter of 24p, then IMO your best bet is either 720p60 or 1080i. 720 actually has a higher apparent clarity, since it boasts the same motion smoothness as interlaced without losing have the resolution. If your intended output is for Blu-Ray, this may be a good choice. If your project is headed for broadcast, however, you probably will want 1080i, since this is the broadcast standard for HD.
I personally do not care for 30p at all; the jutter does not look natural and there is no good way to get rid of it. 30p offers none of the compression advantages for DVD that 24p does, and unlike 24p it does not get a pulldown applied when being sent to an interlaced screen. The standard 2:3 pulldown applied by DVD players results in 2 progressive frames followed by 2 interlaced frames, and looks much smoother than anything 30p can produce. The only real reason I could see that anybody might want to shoot 30p would be if the only intended output was web distribution. LCD computer monitors are inherently progressive, and typically web video is compressed with a lower frame rate anyway. However, if web is your intended output, I see no reason to choose 30p over 24p.
The bottom line is, I would look carefully at the pros and cons of each format, and decide what to shoot in based on your intended output and what kind of look you are going for. For a film look shoot 24p. For a more realistic look I would go with either 720p60 or 1080i. Hope that helps!