Mitch Gross
Forum Replies Created
-
This has been around for a little while now. I believe the website creator eveolved the item into an actual product. If it’s not him then it is a design of a very similar nature. It’s called the Micro35 and sells for an astoundingly low $500. Properly machined and built to tight tollerances using a real groundglass, not fiberboard and a plastic CD blank, so it has far better performance than the DIY version. I’m probably going to pick one up soon having seen it in person and impressed.
Mitch
-
The monitor won’t care about the frame rate, and I believe the connectors will be compatible as most of these type monitors are designed to accept both computer and video type signals via RGB, USB and others. But you should be prepared for a monitor that is likely not completely accurate for lighting (as compared to a proper field monitor) and one that will likely NOT have the exact same resolution as your camera signal. This means pixel mapping and interpolation, which could defeat your critical focus plans. Sure it’s better than using an SD monitor, but it may not be 100% accurate. Also realize that these screens are very heavy and designed to sit in a room, not bounce around in the field. Have a very, very well-padded and sturdy case for it but be prepared for it to fail after a few years.
Mitch
-
Depending on the system your soundman uses the audio may have a reference timecode associated with it. It can be useful if not just plain easier and less confusing to match timebases. You cannot jam-sync with this camera, meaning that there is no way to get the exact timecode fed into or out of it to another device, but you can at least be sure to use the same type of timecode. In that regard, you should understand that while you are shooting at 24p (really 23.97) you are in fact laying down the video as 29.97 with pulldown. So if you use 29.97 on the audio’s timecode then you will have a matching numerical system. For this type of work I would recomend running both the camera and the audio in non-drop timecode mode so that the numbers are sequential with no skips.
There can be a case made for 24.97 timecode reference in the audio. This is if you plan on shootin your video in 24p (23.97), dumping it into your edit system and then imediately extracting your flagged frames to edit using true 24p frames only instead of a 29.97 timeline. In this case you would sync the material with the video in 24p. Again the timecode in 23.97 should still be non-drop. If this doesn’t make sense to you then don’t bother and just record audio at 29.97.
In the end anything will work but you might have to scratch your head a couple of times in the edit until it becomes clear. Just remember that there is no way to jam-sync the timecodes between the audio and the video. In the past I’ve done this with a simple clapper slate and noted the difference between sound and picture numbers as the same repeated offset for the run of the tape.
Hope this all didn’t just confuse you more.
Mitch