Steve Crow
Forum Replies Created
-
I’m no expert in this but there are LUTS (look up tables) that do something similar to what you are after. Some cameras allow the use of LUTs directly within the camera but mostly it is done as a post process.
I don’t think RAW actually supports the idea of “baking in” a look as the whole point is to not bake in a look but have a great deal of flexibility in adjusting the image to what you want
Steve Crow
-
What you are thinking of is a Sescom cable. The one I have is a
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/750963-REG/Sescom_LN2MIC_ZMH4_MON_3_5mm_Line_to_Mic.html
which allows both connecting the Zoom to the DSLR and for monitoring the signal using a headset
Steve Crow
-
Sounds like to me that your computer is having trouble with the AVCHD codec used by the GH4. If you can, try transcoding the files to ProRes and while the file sizes will increase it should playback much smoother for you.
ProRes is a very common format on Apple Macintosh computers but I believe you have to install some additional software to be able to use ProRes on a Windows PC, but I haven’t used a PC in several years so my info could be outdated.
Oh here may be a better idea for you: try converting the video clips to H.264 compression – I know Premiere Pro can edit that format natively.
Steve Crow
-
Hey JP,
I agree with your overall points and lens recommendations but I think it’s fair to also point out that if that prime lens with a fixed focal length is attached to a camera with a sensor smaller than full frame (say something like the Canon Rebel Series (T2i – T5i, the 7D, other APS-C cameras etc etc) or a micro four thirds sensor camera like the GH4 then the effective “reach” of the lens is increased from 1.6x to around 2x in the case of the micro four third cameras. I am often surprised how far I have to back away from the talent when using my Canon 50mm 1.4 because it’s acting like an 80mm (50×1.6=80)
Also, let’s not forget that you can still move the camera to get a wider or closer shot IF (and I think this was your point) you have the freedom to move your camera location and are not stuck where you are at.
But again, I basically agree with your points.
Steve
Steve Crow
-
24p or 24 frames per second comes from the kind of cameras used to film for Hollywood movies, in fact the standard goes way, way back. Essentially 80-90 percent of all the movies you see in the movie theater are filmed at 24 frames per second with some notable exceptions. It’s what our eyes have become used to.
This frame rate creates a bit of “motion blur” between individual frames and that’s actually a good thing up to a point…higher frame rates means less motion blur and the movie begins to look both more “real” “more like video” and “less cinematic.”
30p is what video cameras used for years and years and is typically associated with the more “video look”
The P stands for progressive which means that each time the camera captures a “frame” it is recording the entire image hitting the camera’s sensor in one snapshot – a very nice thing. “i” stands for interlaced and it means the frame is broken down into two “fields” – basically half the image is captured in each frame (really it’s all the odd lines in one frame and all the even lines in the other) which is then merged to give you a complete picture.
It’s easy to confuse frame rates like 24, 30 and 60 with shutter speeds which are actually different.
Steve Crow
-
Uhhh actually I have to agree with Jason (I somehow missed the link to your video entirely, sorry about that) He’s right on regarding the manual focus and keeping your shot steady…
What you are trying to do is first of all not easy but here’s how I would have approached it ideally
* Forget about trying to film both the presenter and the slides at the same time, very difficult to do both well with one camera – instead just set your camera up with a more or less straight on shot of the same speaker – the human is the most important part of the video – the slides are a distant second or even third, fourth
* THEN, arrange to get the slides from the speaker afterwards and use your editing software to show the slides as your “B-roll” – in other words put them on track two so that you still have the voice of the speaker underneath. Just a few seconds on each slide should be enough unless the slides are very dense with information, then cut back to the speaker.
* Speaking of that….Powerpoint type presentation slides are often very awful to work with in video. People try to cram as much text and small diagrams as they can on a slide. I often opt to recreate the slides in Photoshop or my video software rather than use directly the same slides used by the speaker.
The image looked a little washed out to my eye….so I would increase the contrast somewhat.
Steve Crow
-
Yes, I have my H4N recording levels set to around 50 and I don’t run into issues with lavalier mics. Headphone levels could be of course whatever you want.
Steve Crow
-
The only problems I would anticipate are inexperienced shooters allowing the cameras to record “long clips” until the camera itself stops the recording due to the built-in limits. I’ve heard of several instances reported on this site where the resulting clips couldn’t be opened because the files didn’t close cleanly.
I would encourage both camera operators to record no longer than 10 minute individual clips just to be on the safe side.
I see no issues with sound sync or color matching as long as both cameras are set up using the same picture profiles, white balance and so on and even that could be worked around – I guess ISO could vary based upon what part of “the scene” each camera operator is focusing on.
Verite or not, you will still end up doing multiple takes and getting separate establishing, medium, closeup and over-the-shoulder shots, yes? Watch out for “crossing the line” problems if cameras are trying to film the same action from both “sides” of the line.
Steve Crow
-
Oh I forgot to answer your initial question, no – if you follow the basic workflow I mentioned the quality will be nearly indistinguishable from the original camera footage
Steve Crow
-
Yes editing H.264 on the timeline can bog a computer down a lot, so converting to ProRes was a good first step but I would have used standard ProRes and kept the quality level at 100 percent. Once you’ve fully edited and color graded, you want to create a MASTER output file off the timeline that is as high quality as you can make it – then you can downconvert that master file a bit if you have to to create the version you will actually be delivering which is often a H.264 if you plan on streaming it on the Web. Your computer should be able to edit the normal quality prores file without much problem so I wouldn’t go with ProRes LT unless absolutely necessary.
I have never done this myself but some editing systems let you use a lower quality “proxy” version of your clips that are easier on your system to edit and then at the end of the workflow you swap out the proxy clips for their full resolution version and render that out to create your Master file…but you are only doing the rendering once so it can be a real time saver.
Steve Crow