Graeme Nattress
Forum Replies Created
-
https://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewVideo?s=143441&id=81531506
Shot on a DVX100, and used Nattress FIlm Effects. That shows you what you can do with my software, and it’s a fraction of the price of the competition. Here’s the story behind that music video.
“”Just wanted to drop you a line and thank you for your wonderful Film Effects package. Last spring I was hired to direct a music video for Universal Music artists The Features. It was a very tight turnaround and I couldn’t get the film I wanted Fed Ex’d to me in time for the shoot, so I went with my trusty DVX 100a in anamorphic. Being very careful to maintain a good DoF we shot the video and went to post. After we had a lock on the video I went in and started tweaking the look with Film Effects. I ended up settling on a nice 70’s look and sent it off to Universal for approval. They loved it. When it came time to deliver I sent them a master of the video and the three DV tapes I shot. They called me saying that they needed the original negatives and the telecine transfer tape before they’d release my check. I told them that I don’t have the negatives… “well you need to get them from the transfer house” they said. I told them they didn’t understand, I shot the video on video and before they ask for the HD tape, the mini dv tapes in your possession are the originals. They could not believe that the video was shot on tape. Your plug ins were that last little something that put the video over the edge and pulled the wool over the eyes of a major record label! Thanks!”- Chad Denning Peace Frog Productions
Graeme Nattress
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
Just edit in DV as normal. Right at the end of the project, change the sequence settings to “uncompressed” and re-render everything. Now play out of your uncompressed card, Decklink, Kona whatever, over SDI to DigiBeta.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
Well, obviously Jan is holding back proprietary info, but on the whole we’re talking about common enough and understodd principles, and I do see a lot of language problems. I think Jan has been super good to respond in the way that she’s done when it’s obviously a frustrating discussion and I think we’re all looking forwards to seeing the blog entry on this.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
I see a lot of language difficulties here. I hope Jan can get her Panasonic people do put together some really cool diagrams to explain this to people – if not, Jan, give me a shout and I’ll draw up some pictures based on your information to help clarify this for people.
As I’ve said on other forums, it really sounds like Panasonic are taking an sensible engineering approach, and I think Toke agrees, but is having bother figuring out exactly what Jan is getting at.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
At http://www.nattress.com and there’s a free demo too.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
That’s part of what this forum is about!
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
Well, I got a person when my HDlink power supply stopped working. And they got onto a local Canadian distrubuter who called me, put a new HDLink and power supply in the post asap for me (they were not certain whether it was the PSU or the HDLink that was down, so why not send both), and once that arrived the next day, I put the old HDLink + PSU back in the post to them. I had minimum possible downtime and spoke to real people throughout. There’s no way the service could have been better.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
Mike, if as you say all ccds are inherently progressive because light does not fall on them in an interlaced manner, and that some ccds can only read out in interlaced manner, clocked at an interlaced rate, and some can only read out progressive, being clocked at a progressive rate, then:
Progressive ccd means you can areas out the whole frame at once, where each pixel represents one instant of time, and all pixels are read at once
Interlaced ccd means the above does NOT happen.
I don’t see any condusion between real progressive and interlaced and fake progressive. I think everyone knows that the Z1 is an interlaced camera with interlaced chips and rather poor faked progressive modes.
I think the HVX200, when recording 24p takes 24 progressive images a second from the CCD, ie, it’s clocked at 24fp. Similarly for 30p. For 60i, I think it gets clocked at 60p and the 2 frames are filtered and melded together to create one interlaced frame. Jan, can interlace filtering be turned on or off? If it could be turned off, it would give us more info slowmo or interpolating back to 60p.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
PD-150, 170 do it wrong, the Sony PDX-10 does real widescreen. High End Sony cameras do it right. I thinkt eh real issue with the 150 was not that it didn’t have real widescreen, but that it’s implementation was so bad as to severely degrade the image beyond just what teh resolution loss should do.
As for anamorphic lenses – they’re tricky to use. I’d certainly want to play with one first and find out it’s limits.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
-
I have a little plugin that does that now with 24pA on teh DVX, so it shouldn’t be hard to do it on the HVX 200, as soon as I work out the pattern for each and every frame rate. It will be a manual process of guessing the right cadence, but if people need it, I’ll put it in as a feature on the Standards Converter.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP