Leo Ticheli
Forum Replies Created
-
Please don’t do this!
In the first place, wire work is inherently dangerous, even for experts.
In the second place, it’s not necessary for what you want to do; just tilt the camera down and the subject will “rise” through the screen.
Again, do NOT endanger a child attempting something you aren’t qualified to do.
Best of luck,
Leo
-
There are many ways to do this, all, in my opinion, yielding various degrees of bad.
What you are doing is dropping out most of the frames without the benefit of the adequate level of motion blur.
Your results will largely depend on how much action you were capturing; I fear you will have some difficulty in matching the footage with the other cameras.
Best of luck,
Leo
-
This is an urban myth that just won’t die! It’s been covered like a rug here at the Cow and other forums more than should be tolerated.
There is NO BLOODY DIFFERENCE in the tape, formulation, coating, plastic case, mechanical construction, etc.
Anyone selling you the “HD” version is picking your pocket.
Rich, I hope you are not paying the tech who told you there was a difference in the tapes; he/she should be fired on the spot.
Good shooting and best regards,
Leo
-
I believe that Tony stated that he had tried “clear scan” without success; same thing as Synchro-scan.
Tony, are you shooting interlaced or progressive? I got very good results shooting mobile phone screens for a little CNN spot at 24 fps progressive. I don’t remember having to resort to changing the scan, but it was a few years ago. You’ll just have to put the phone in front of the camera and see what works.
It is possible to get good results without compositing and tracking, but you’ve got to be in control of all the elements, light levels, etc. The screen on the phone certainly won’t be bright enough to compete with daylight in most cases, so be prepared with light control kit.
I don’t see any value in maladjusting the back focus. This should have nothing whatsoever to do with the presence of scan lines. Further, if you’re desiring a soft focus, just turning the focus ring with do the job without throwing the various focal lengths out of whack.
Good shooting and best regards,
Leo
-
24 fps/180
-
OK, let’s review the usual list:
1. You’re using a camera with a tiny sensor so your depth of field is terribly deep. To overcome this liability, use as long a lens focal length as possible consistent with the aesthetics of the shot. In other words, move as far back from the subject as you can and zoom in as far as you can keeping the action in the frame.
2. Move the subject as far from the background as possible and try to choose backgrounds that are as homogeneous as possible so they will not detract from the attention you want to give the subject.
3. Shoot wide open aperture, also to reduce depth of field.
4. Control your background lighting so you don’t call attention to it. If appropriate, drop the light level on the background a bit.
5. If your camera allows it, always shoot progressive instead of interlaced. If possible shoot at 24 fps with a 180
-
There is nothing really different about doing a head to toe key, it’s just more difficult to achieve good results.
All the usual guides apply:
1. Light the screen evenly! If you don’t have the lights to do it, you can’t be expected to produce good results. You can overcome this in post by doing separate parts, but don’t expect love from the compositor!
Lighting evenly is much more difficult with the cove and floor reflecting the light much differently. Succeeding with just two lights is doubtful.
2. Never put colored gel on the back lights; this will produce a colored edge that looks unnatural. Some still recommend a yellow gel to counteract the green, but I’ve found it just introduces more problems.
3. The larger your softlight sources on the key lights, the less shadow they will cast on the green screen. I use a 4’x6′ Chimera in front of a 5k and as large as possible, say 12’x12′ for head to toe.
4. I’m sure you’ll be trying to have as much distance as possible for the subject from the back wall, but the floor is right there bouncing green spill all over the subject. I know of no solution for this, it’s all down to the compositor’s skill.
Hope this helps.
Good shooting and best regards,
Leo
-
The “filmic” quality of any footage is far more dependent in the basic arts of cinematography than format.
If your lighting, composition, and movement are excellent, your footage will look filmic, especially if you can shoot at 24p/180
-
Table Top shooters have been doing this for years; shooting the same static scene at different exposures and then using the appropriate parts combined in Telecine.
I have serious doubts that you could solve the parallax problems with a three camera setup unless you make some sort of optical splitter so all cameras record through the same lens.
Furthermore, and most importantly, starting with DV is pretty much the bottom of the barrel in dynamic range to begin with; seems the RED camera, which records Raw files would be ideal as you can really reach into the blacks. You could expose for the highlights so you don’t clip, and then make additional passes to pull up the shadow areas.
With this technique, you could film moving scenes unlike the double takes of the old method.
Just thoughts, I won’t have my RED camera until late December, but it is interesting to speculate.
Good shooting and best regards,
Leo
-
This is a subject that has been beaten to death so many times it’s like the Night of the Living Dead.
The consensus is that 24 fps is more “filmic” or “cinematic” and more interesting to watch and 30 fps is more “live” or “video” looking. Taste is individual, but 24 fps is the overwhelming choice of most cinematographers.
You wrote, “While I love the look of 24p, it doesn’t do well with lots of movement/action, especially fast movement. It’s also a real pain to edit.”
I strongly disagree on both points.
Obviously, 24 fps is just fine for all the action motion pictures in the hands of cinematographers who know how to use it. If you have the skills to use it properly, perhaps you simply don’t really like the look. Of course it’s your choice to make.
As far as editing goes, there is no increase in difficulty in editing a 24 frame time-line rather than a 30 frame time-line. At least not for the editors in my facility. Perhaps you should request aid in the appropriate editing forum.
Best of luck on your projects and good shooting!
Leo