[Leo Ticheli]

Hi Uli,
Forgive me, but I believe you are missing the point.

No, loading via HD SDI will not improve the quality of VariCam material, but it will keep the post process, effects, color correction, layers, in an uncompressed format which will result in a much higher quality final product than loading via Firewire which has the effect of decompression/recompression with each and every layer, grade, and effect.

Viper? Sure, love to. However, it’s awkwardly tethered to a large array and much more expensive than a VariCam. If you really want the very best image, shoot 65 MM film! Naturally, the best route is to select the cleanest post path for whatever format you choose.

Best regards,
Leo

Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA

[Leo Ticheli]

Hi Uli,
It’s a major mistake not to load via HD SDI if you are doing any effects or layers! You will compromise the quality of the material if you try to go beyond simple cuts-only with a Firewire load. This includes any color grading.

Yes, HD SDI requires more disc space, but it’s certainly worth it if you want to work uncompressed throughout the process. Use Firewire for any purpose other than an off-line edit will do violence to the image quality.

Best regards,
Leo

Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA

[Leo Ticheli]

I’m glad to hear Walter is seeing an improvement in quality with FCP 5. The fact remains, however, that the best results are obtained by loading via HD SDI, then you will be working uncompressed thoughout the process.

Best regards,

Leo

Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA

[Leo Ticheli]

My friend Walter and I differ on the best way to bring in VariCam material.

Firewire is suitable for cuts-only projects because each effect, color correction, or layer results in a decompression/compression cycle which noticeably degrades the image quality. The DVCPro HD codec looks great when you bring it in via Firewire, but it will not hold up to effects and layers.

For the best results, bring your material in via HD SDI. This does require more disc space, but fail to do this at peril of reducing image quality.

Best regards,
Leo

Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA

[Leo Ticheli]

Of course the HD signal is compressed in both HDCAM and DVCPro HD.

I’m talking about the way you’re editing and doing effects. If you capture via Firewire with the DVCPro HD codec rather than HD SDI, you will make the compression much worse every time you add an effect, layer, or color correction. The quality difference can be profound.

It’s your choice; continue to use Firewire to save some storage space or use HD SDI and keep the video uncompressed in the system.

Best regards,
Leo

Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA

[Leo Ticheli]

You might get some help in the Cinematography forum.

There are probably some old pros who can do a decent job of shooting aerials hand-held; I can’t and won’t try. If you must, use the widest angle you can and fly low and slow. I know you’ll be thoroughly belted in.

Aerials aren’t cheap, but the look you get with a mount and experienced pilot is worth it.

Good shooting!

Leo
Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA

[Leo Ticheli]

Hi Walter,
While it’s true that the native DVCPro HD codec looks good, it’s a very bad idea to use it if you are doing any effects or layers!

Every time you color correct or add a layer of any kind you are, in effect, decompressing and recompressing each time; the result is noise and reduced picture quality. This may explain the problems you reported seeing.

In sum, if you want the best quality, load in HD SDI not Firewire. You’ll stay uncompressed for all your color grading and effects. The Firewire method is acceptable only for cuts-only shows. I believe this has been discussed in detail here previously.

Give it a try, Walter; I think you’ll be pleased.

Best regards,
Leo

Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA

[Leo Ticheli]

Yes, you’ve got it exactly right, Shane, you need to lay off your variable frame-rate material to a separate master if you wish to off-line.

I’m sure that off-line is important for many, such as a director’s cut on a laptop, for example. I just believe that making a variable frame-rate master is a small price to pay for having an HD camera that’s a direct replacement for a film camera.

Best regards,
Leo

Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA

[Leo Ticheli]

Have you tried HD SDI capture, Walter? We do not use Firewire capture, only HD SDI, and the flags are recognized by our FCP systems.

I’ve not seen any VariCam footage that I would consider less clean than HDCAM footage. Both VariCam and CineAlta offer a very extreme range of “sharpness” settings, such as horizontal and vertical detail, so it’s difficult to say one is sharper than the other. The preferences of the cinematographers may be the key difference.

Best regards,
Leo

Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA

[Leo Ticheli]

Golly, Shane,
I couldn’t disagree with you more.

Specifically:

1. Variable Frame Rate: It’s prudent to lay off your variable frame rate material. By the way, this is absolutely no different than what’s done in a film to tape transfer where we frequently lay off the footage at various playback rates. Any quality loss is imperceptible. If you don’t use the proper work flow, the fault is yours, not the system’s.

2.The 1200 deck is not an editing deck. If you want to master to DVCPro HD, buy a 1700 or a 150 or lay off to D5. I really don’t understand your reasoning; your facility obviously has the resources to buy the correct equipment. I’d like to have a Porsche Cayman at Mazda Miata prices, but I don’t think anyone is offering that deal and, if they did, they wouldn’t be long in business.

3. You prefer the look of material shot with HDCAM. Fine. That’s why they have so many flavors at the ice cream store. I believe you’re mistaken, but you’re certainly entitled to your beliefs. Both VariCam and CineAlta are capable of making pretty pictures but only the VariCam is a direct replacement for film because of the variable frame rate capability. Perhaps that’s not important to you, but I under and over crank frequently. Many, myself included, think the VariCam does a better job with color. By the way, I hear VariCam is outselling CineAlta ten to one. With the camera body being only one part of the considerable cost of an HD system, I think there’s a lot more going on than price alone.

4. Since you are still using Quantel, I can only assume that you have some sort of masochistic death-wish. Bless your heart, as they say around these parts. For commercials and most jobs shorter than features, I believe off-line is dying if not already dead, just as it should be. Storage is cheap, cheap, cheap and today’s editing and effects systems are fast. Why confound things with off-line at all? I haven’t done a conform in years. Good riddance.

I’m sure the HDCAM SR is a good system; does it not require an off-board deck to record? Perhaps dandy in the green screen studio, but not very practical in the field.

I’ve been using VariCam since it was first released and my clients have been delighted with it. If you do “shudder whenever a client calls and says they have something shot on Varicam,” send them to me, I’ll be happy to help them!

Good to hear from you, Shane, and welcome to the VariCam forum. Perhaps you will have more positive experiences with VariCam in the future.

Best regards,
Leo

Director/Cinematographer
Southeast USA