[John Sharaf]

Robyn,

If you are using aggressive dynamic range setting (like 500%) then set your Panasonic monitor for “Film Gamma”, then you can more accurately see what the change in gamma really looks like (assuming you import to post with Film Gamma Correction set to “on” on your 1400 deck) otherwise the monitor is creating false brightness that will also complicate setting a proper iris (unless you use the waveform function for that) because it is an LCD.

JS

[John Sharaf]

The nominal gamma setting of .45 is designed to accurately reproduce the grey scale on CRT monitors. Some other contemporary monitors also are calibrated for similar gamma.

Setting the gamma at .75 is effectively “crushing” the gamma, that is lowering the middle grey. This effect is often referred to as “crushing” the gamma. With Panasonic cameras and their Film Rec Menu when Dynamic range control is invoked the blacks and gamma do seem to raise and the picture begins to look low contrast, washed out and desaturated. By crushing the gamma you restore the contrast and increase the color saturation.

These are controls you might do in color correction (if that is included in your post workflow) or can be done to the origional (as you have described) to create a more pleasing WUSIWUG look.

You do have to be careful however not to crush the gamma too much for display on conventional monitors. If you’re looking at an uncorrected LCD display which has false brightness, what looks good at .75 gamma will come out dark on other displays. I suggest going no further than .55 or .60 gamma for this reason, unless of course you’re going for a specific effect.

JS

[John Sharaf]

You only need to “strip”, meaning record black and time code if you’ll be insert editing onto the tape. Camera masters have traditional been “striped” meaning laying down 30 seconds of bars (thus the word strips) and tone in the analog realm because this helps nominalize the audio and video levels that are subject to adjustment.

In digital there is no such adjustment, but it’s still a good idea to bar and tone in case the master is copied to an analog format and also to bypass the first thirty seconds of the tape to minimize the effect of dirt. In file based digital recording, unless you’re going to transmit the footage over fiber or uplink, where again there might be analog control of audio and video levels, you need not “stripe” (bar and tone).

Hope this helps,

JS

[John Sharaf]

Dean,

I wouldn’t be as dogmatic as you regarding framerate selection for TV broadcast; 24 or 30, both are good for conversion to 60i. I think the decision should be more creative based, do you want a full-on “film look” (choose 24 with 180 degree shutter) or more of a film-like smooth motion look (30p with 180 degree shutter), or “live video look” (60p or 60i). Where I would be dogmatic is if you are shooting for internet where 30p is a no-brainer, allowing for two repeated frames which will make compression easier and more efficient.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Caitlin,

There are a million crews in NYC, some of the best and most experienced in the country (except of course for those in L.A. where I live).

Here’s email address for a buddy of mine there named Rodney McMahon, who I used to work with a lot when he lived in L.A.

rodneycam at hotmail dot com

Tell him I referred you.

John Sharaf

[John Sharaf]

Tungsten lights don’t care about 50 or 60 hz, you will not see flicker there. If you do photograph under practical fluorescents or see a neon sign in your shot, they will flicker unless you adjust your shutter speed to 1/100th of a second. You’re unlikely to get skunked by this as you’ll see the problem (with the fluoros and neons) in your monitor.

JS

[John Sharaf]

With an 8 bit master (even if imported to 10 bit Pro Res) any color correction deteriorates the image. This is why eventually all high end production that has not already migrated to 10 bit mastering (HDCAM -SR, AVC-I, etc.) will do so. In 8 bit formats like DVCPRO100, HD XDCAM, HDCAM, etc. the best you can do is get it right when you shoot it (both exposure and paint).

JS

[John Sharaf]

Bob,

I’ve got to agree with Michael, Kinos are used hundreds of times a day on motion picture and tv sets around the world with no audio problems. After getting spurious noise on tracks which we isolated to be AT&T cell phones (all iPhones + others) we ask people to turn them off when we can. In public places, obviously we can not have control and suffer with occasional noise.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Tom,

The biggest selling point to the PDW-F330/335/350/355 line is the XDCAM disc media itself; it costs $20 for 45 minutes of HD master, can be submerged in water, dried out and played as if nothing happened, is said to be able to last for 50 years and can be erased and reused a thousand times.

The XDCAM recordings (both SD and HD) are file based so they transfers into NLE’s at faster than real time from either the camera or an inexpensive drive (PDW-U1 at under $3K) and the camera itself has a shoulder mount form factor that is the same as is used by many local and national news operations, and kind of modeled after the original Betacam.

The 335 and 355 versions differ only in that they can record on double sided discs (doubling the recording time), which incidentally cost more than twice is much so makes little sense. There are still new b-stock (slightly used but with new warranty from Sony) 330 and 350’s available at considerable savings (within your budget), so I think these are just what you’re looking for. These cameras will definitely stand up to the rigors of use in education, more so than any of the others mentioned. Again, feel free to contact me off list to talk business.

Regards,

JS

[John Sharaf]

Interesting discussion, but somewhat circular in logic as main factor is price. The fact is that all the manufacturers dole out the feature set in portions which when you add all the stuff you want adds up to their top of the line product.

The main problem (as a long time film and video pro) I have with this class of prosumer products is that they are plastic fantastic, not built to last, nor should they be, because they are in fact built with planned obsolescence.

The cheapest camera that I consider worthy (although I do own, use and rent HVX200 successfully, meaning I’ve made money with it) is the Sony PDW F3330/335/350/355 for the reasons that the camera itself is robust, made to use and last in a professional arena (namely everyday broadcast use like at a local news station) and especially because of the XDCAM disc media, which I feel is worthy because of its fair/low price, robustness (we’ve all hear of the dishwasher stories) and archival (supposed to last 50 years). In addition the PDW-U1 reader at under $3000 replaces expensive VTR’s and the proxy video concept is really cool too.

Of course there are drawbacks, as there are to any compromised (by price) scenario; namely the dumbed down 1920 to 1440 horizontal rez, the long GOP recording, the 1/2″ imager vs a 2/3″ imager (but still the biggest in the class) and the temptation to use cheap SD glass instead of HD glass.

Just by way of disclosure, I do now sell cameras from a shop in SF in addition to my work as a cameraman and lighting director in LA, where we sell both Sony and JVC, but I try to be honest and realistic with my customers, most of whom are network level news shooters who use this class of camera as an adjunct to their bigger Varicams, HVX900s, Cine Altas and now PDW700’s, but more and more I’m being exposed to folks who want to spend 10-12K for a camera and obviously I’d like to accommodate them. I can tell you it’s a lot more work/effort/discussion selling to prosumers than to pros who more or less know what they want, but price is what drives the decisions on all levels; at least the pros subscribe to the logic that the more it costs the more it makes.

If you realistically have a plan to recoup your investment then you should buy the best camera you can (afford). I think we’ve arrived at a place where even though a particular camera or format may become obsolete, one can continue to make money for many years if you have a dedicated and loyal clientele and your productions are driven by quality and creativity. In the end, other than the rather nebulous concept of “broadcast quality” which still rules in some circles, most end users of your media will not care what camera you use, beyond the product being interesting, informative and entertaining.

However if you want to buy any Sony or JVC products feel free to contact me off list for some smokin’ prices (of course other than EX1/3 which Sony controls the discount and all dealers are forced to sell at the same price).

John at Sharaf dot Net

JS