Joseph Moore
Forum Replies Created
-
So I did a bit more testing today with another powered mic, and it really does seem that the problem is that their just isn’t enough juice coming from the mic through the Beachtek to yield much signal.
I left the GH3’s levels at their lowest (1) as recommended and did some recordings. Virtually nothing showed on the GH3’s on-screen meters, but once I got the audio into Audition there was a clean recording…it’s just that the audio levels were very, very low. I was able to normalize them and get a usable recording (better than I got by cranking the gain on the camera) but this is definitely not how you would want to record…if for no other reason than it is virtually impossible to monitor anything while recording.
How does my experience compare with others using other non-amplified adapters?
-
My initial experience using powered mics with my GH3 and a Beachtek DXA-2T (an unpowered adapter) has been quite poor. I thought I could save a few bucks since all my mics are powered, but maybe not.
The the GH3’s levels turned all the way to 0 and the DXA-2T trim controls wide open I got almost no sound level from a Rode NTG2 or a Shure SM58.
I had to turn the levels on the GH3 all the way up to end up with any signal. Obviously, the noise floor was horrible. Amazingly I was able to rescue it enough in post to be usable, but not a good experience at all.
I don’t know what I’m doing wrong, or if some piece in the chain is defective. I’ve got to do some more testing, but my initial thought is that I need an adapter with power, like the Riggy222.
-
“Live TV Production” ? What’s that! 😉
Seriously, cutting live is probably the way to go in that time frame, but if you’re not experienced in such, you’d better dern well practice before hand because it’s a skill/art unto it’s own.
If you do go that route, you really need some sort of headset-intercom system in order to direct the camera crew or you could find yourself at the board with nothing to cut to.
-
What was the issue?
-
If the IT high priests demand WMP9, then you encode appropriately. I don’t do those kinds of gigs, but I feel you, Ed. 😉 Even so, you’re down to two encodes, H264 and whatever WMP9 compatible codec you choose. That’s a darn sight better than the “old” days when you routinely had to encode for at least 3 different players and two or three bitrates bitrates each! Tools like Sorenson Squeeze were a must.
The net take-away on Flash is that the old proprietary FLV codecs have been deprecated in favor of a standard, and that is great news for both the production and the consumption side of the chain.
-
You’re kind of missing my original point. I’m not promoting Flash so much as I’m promoting H264 as the most universal codec. The most players can handle it. Current versions of Flash, QT, WMP and Real can all display it. Encoding once is a beautiful thing.
Of course if your paying client is stuck with older browser technology, you do what you have to for them to see it, of course. But in general practice, H264 is currently, and for the foreseeable future, the HQ standard for online delivery. I count this as a “good thing.”
PS. There is a reason YouTube, Vimeo et. all use the Flash Player. Like it or not, more surfers have Flash than any other plug-in, and no one is even remotely close. (That’s not coming from Adobe, that’s coming from server logs.)
-
Shooting 60p and conforming to 24p in post should yield the same results as shooting 24p and having the EX1 record it overcranked. It’s just a matter of where the conforming takes place. If you set it in camera, you don’t have to do anything in post. Either way, the exact same number of frames are being recorded.
-
Actually, it has far more penetration than QT … even the newest sub-version. Flash is the defacto universal plug-in.
https://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/version_penetration.html
-
No need for QT or anything else. Just point a Flash video player at a correctly encoded H264 file and Flash 9 can handle it exactly the same as it does FLV’s. This goes for AAC audio, as well.
-
FYI, Current versions of the Flash Player support H264. You don’t need to encode to the old FLV format. You can encode once to that and support many different players. (This is how the new “high quality” YouTube videos are handled.)