Pete Burger
Forum Replies Created
-
Looks to me like the compression gets visible. I got these kind of artifacts as well in dark regions but for sure not as visible as in the example.
Since you’re using cinestyle it might just be as you wrote… The shadows are lifted and so things that “shouldn’t be seen” are visible now… If you darken the shadows in post, these artifacts will be not as obvious, maybe they’ll disappear completely. I applied a simple s-curve to the picture and it became quite clear.——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo -
I’d say the camera crops the picture above and below.
——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo -
In 1080p and 720p your DSLR uses the full sensor but reduces the framesize through line-skipping. Only when you’re shooting in SD, the center part of the sensor is used. This won’t reduce DOF either because it’s like extracting just a portion of the full-frame which still has the “full” shallow DOF.
——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo -
[Tiago Ribeiro] “So you can get 1620×1080 with 3:2 pixel ration out of HDMI.
Fair enough as a cheap way to get uncompressed 10 bit :)”Thanks, Tiago! I wasn’t aware of that! Much appreciated!
——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo -
If your talkeing about the lines that run through your picture, it’s as you guessed: the lights. The frequency of the electrica current and so of the lights don’t match your shutterspeed.
If it’s the “jello-ish” wobbling while moving the camera it’s the so called rolling shutter…
——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo -
Is it just one clip or more than one? If it’s more than one I’d guess it’s the camera. Data corruption during transfer (which of course can happen) will more likely destroy the whole clip so it can’t be played properly. If the same streaks are visible in more than one clip… I’m almost perfectly sure it’s the camera.
——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo -
I can confirm Tiagos advice concerning Magic Lantern. Higher bitrate will give you more room in post. You’d also could try one of the various flat styles like the Technicolor Cinestyle.
There is a lot of information about that in the COWs “DSLR Video” subforum.[Tiago Ribeiro] “This is an external capture device that feeds on the HDMI port in the camera to save ProRes uncompressed 10bit video straight out.
I haven’t tried it, so I can’t tell you how great it works. It was recommended on a workshop I was in about Cinema with DSLR, and I’ve read all about in online.”Not sure either if it’ll work, because AFAIK the only Canon DSLR that provides FullHD HDMI-out is the 7D, but even on the 7D it is not a clean-feed. All(?) other Canon DSLRs only output 480p (SD) video via the HDMI-port…
——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo -
[Vic Noseworthy] “Since I’m shooting in AVCHD, would I be better off using Premiere (which can natively edit that codec), or using Final Cut Pro (and ProRes)?” (…) “I’ve heard that, while Premiere Pro can, indeed, edit AVCHD, but that it can also introduce considerable stuttering unless one has a really powerful computer (I’m using a MacBook Pro 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo).
Any thoughts?”Don’t think, I’m the right guy to answer that since im “Windows only” 🙂 Had to edit on an iMac and FCP last week and it was a disaster. ;))
Sorry, can’t really compare Premiere with FCP.
On Windows, CS4 wasn’t too great for AVCHD if I remember correctly, haven’t tried it more than once though.
I’m quite sure that native editing of DSLR footage wasn’t really possible before CS5.I absolutely don’t know if this is even remotely comparable, but I had Windows 7 64Bit on an Intel Core2Quad running for about one year and was able to edit natively with Premiere CS5 with no big issues. But the moment I threw some effects on the clips, it took ages to render previews.
I did a hardware update recently (Intel Core-i5), so AVCHD is of no issue now.
But concerning Mac hardware, some expert should chime in here.
——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo -
John, Brent and Al gave excellent advice on “broadcast quality”. I’d like to add just one tiny little thing: I really don’t believe that – for video – there’s such a huge differnce between the full frame cameras and the APC cameras concerning the picture quality. Of course there *is* a difference (DOF, low-light, quality…) but honestly, if you use your camera mainly for video, better invenst in gear, rather than a MkII or MkIII body… But that’s just my personal opinion. As written, I edited a lot of DSLR videos from all sorts of DSLRs (exception: MkIII), the difference I noticed was mainly low-light.. But enough of that! Why don’t you rent a MkII or MkIII and compare to your footage…
[Vic Noseworthy] ” I believe it’s the compositing that is “dirtying up” my image.
This might most definitly be the case. As written, the H.264 codec is a heavy compressing codec, so not much picture information left. Everything that cannot or just barely be seen in the original picture is thrown away by the codec (example: details in the shadows, …) If you’re doing intense post-production, colour-grading etc. those “weak spots” of the picture will get visible (excuse my english, I hope you get, what I mean).
Like a heavily compressed JPEG image: Do colour correction and artifacts will get visible.The perfect solution for intense compositing of course would be to use not a DSLR but a camera with a better codec (especially codecs with 4:2:2 or even 4:4:4 colour subsapling and or 10bit) – or even a cam with a raw codec like the RED or Alexa. You’d have a lot more information left in the picture to play with. The problem is, these are mostly pro-cameras and they are … well … not very affordable.
[Vic Noseworthy] With reference to your comment that “transcoding won’t add anything”: From what I understand, AIC has less “color space” than, say, ProRes. Wouldn’t having less color space yield a more “deteriorated” composited image? (Again, think of the VHS analogy: a 5th generation copy made with high-end VCRs would likely look better than a 5th generation copy made with consumer VCRs)
I hope my question is clear enough. :^)”Sorry, I don’t know too much about AIC, and I don’t know if transcoding to AIC will degrade the footage, so all I can say here is: ProRes (even ProRes LT) or DNxHD or Cineform are (more or less) lossless codecs. That means you don’t lose any picture information, but you won’t add any information either. So you can’t really compare to VHS copies.
Transcoding IMHO only makes sense now, if you can’t work natively on your NLE.——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo -
[Vic Noseworthy] “Do the stories I’ve heard about using DSLRs for serious (broadcast) work refer to higher end DSLRs than the T3i? For example, does the 5D have a far better codec that yields a higher quality final output? Or, are there other issues I’m unaware of?”
No, all (Canon) DSLRs use the exact same codec. The more high-end cams do a bit better in low-light (bigger sensor, faster processor). Can’t speak for the 5DIII though, since I don’t have first-hand experience, but AFAIK it uses the same H.264 compression. Also can’t speak for the Vixia cams in comparison with DSLRs.
We shot a lot of projects with the T2i, the 7D and 5DII (even alongside to each other) and IMHO picture quality is absolutely comparable if not identical (exception: low-light). The crucial point is glass. If you have good lenses IMHO it doesn’t really matter which DSLR you use (Bokeh and DOF of the full-frame 5DII aside here, as well).
The problem with compositing is – as you wrote: You need a good codec.
H.264 in general is a bad codec for both: editing and compositing. H.264 with the Canons uses interframe compression with 4:2:0 colour-sampling, which means a lot of information is lost during compression. So you don’t have much picture information left to work with.If you transcode your footage before editing into a more editing-friendly intraframe lossless codec like ProRes, DNxHD, Cineform, etc. you’d most definitly notice an increase in editing speed and maybe stability of your NLE. But you won’t notice any differences in quality, since transcoding won’t add anything. It simply interpolates the missing frames which helps with both – editing and compositing.
So I don’t think you’d get (much) better quality through updating your NLE. When I made the step from 32Bit Windows XP and Premiere CS3 to 64Bit Windows7 and Premiere CS5 it gave me much higher editing speed and the ability to work with the native footage, but no quality improvement (other than being able to render more filters like “Denoiser” etc. in less time…)Just my two cents.
Edit: One more thing comparing composition: When working in After Effects, be sure to use 16Bit mode rather than 8Bit. This can (depending on your footage and project) increase quality quite dramatically.
Could you describe, what exactly it is, your disappointed with? What are the “quality critera” you’re missing from your DSLR footage. Maybe it’s just a matter of settings and (I can’t stress this enough) lenses…
——————————————
“Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot.” – Buster KeatonMe on Twitter (english/german)
https://twitter.com/FastFoodVideo