[Todd Terry]

That comes from interlacing. You are seeing those lines because the original footage was shot interlaced, but now you are using it in a progressive project and/or viewing it on a progressive computer monitor. For example, taking original footage shot at 60i but using it in a 24p (or 30p) project… where you will definitely see the interlacing lines.

If you shoot interlaced footage, you will almost always see interlacing lines except when you shoot interlaced, edit on an interlaced timeline, export as an interlaced project, and view the footage on a “real” television monitor (not a computer monitor). Then it will look fine and line-free.

[Anastasia Antonova] “How do I resolve this?”

Well it depends on what look you are going for and what kind of projects that you are doing. If you are working in a 60i environment and your projects are destined for broadcast TV (or otherwise will be presented on real TV monitors), then you don’t have to do anything. The end result will actually look fine… it just looks bad for now on your progressive computer monitor.

But if you are doing anything in the progressive world (such a working on a 24p timeline, trying to maintain a cinematic look, producing anything that is destined for web viewing or any other kind of computer viewing), then by far the best route is to shoot progressive (either 24p or 30p, depending on both your project parameters and the look that you are going for). I honestly can’t even remember the last time I shot any interlaced footage. I’m sure it’s been quite a few years.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Rich’s math seems about right to me.

I didn’t do any actual calculating, but when I first read the original post my initial “hunch estimate” (and my hunches tend to be at least in the ballpark) was something in the $40-50K range.

I’ve never run across any locally-owned restaurants that were willing (or able) to throw that kind of cash just into social media marketing… like Rich said they the average biz would probably choke at even $10K, which would be a major loss for you. If they did have that kind of an advertising budget to throw around, I would certainly try to steer them into something else which would be more impactful.

Hopefully you can pitch something different that retains the client, does useful advertising for them, and still makes you money.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Ned makes a lot of good points.

I completely forgot that I had a would-be client ask about something very very similar to this a year or so ago.

Within a block of our studio is a small restaurant. It’s a decent place, and we’ve used it as a shooting location a time or two.

Well, the lady who owns the place walked over one day, asking about a production job. They wanted to put a big-screen monitor in their adjacent extra dining room, with all kinds of videos about the restaurant, featuring different specials, all kinds of food videos, highlights of special events that have happened there… and she thought a new batch of videos every Friday would be a good idea.

I listened, but the whole time I kept thinking “She has no clue how much production work this would be.”

THEN… she let me know the real reason she wanted these, and I had to suppress a bit of internal chuckling: They already had the monitor for some reason, and it was sitting in storage doing nothing. She said “This was an expensive TV, over $500, and I hate for it to go to waste!”

I didn’t quite have the heart to tell her she was talking about production probably 50 or 100 times what her TV cost, and maybe much more than that.

Fortunately she caught me just as we were walking out heading to a shoot, and said she would come back another time (and we haven’t seen her again).

I think the point of that too-long story is, pursue this job if your potential client really understands how much they are asking for (which is a great great deal), knows how much it might cost (which would be a lot), has very deep pockets and isn’t afraid to spend.

But knowing how most restaurants operate, that’s probably not the case. You might be best served pitching them one of the more realistic ideas that have been popping up in this thread.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

I won’t even begin to price that, as it would take a little bit have time to work up a reasonably accurate budget for that (and am out directing on location at the moment). But I will say this, after having done a fair bit of restaurant shooting, to do it right that is nowhere near only four hours. I would say a multiple-day shoot at a minimum.

Also remember, that food is one of the hardest things to photograph really well. You’ll definitely want to budget for a food stylist, and a fair bit more time than you’re probably used to shooting other inanimate objects… I always found food shooting (or any scene that even just contains food, such as a dinner scene) to be such sloooow going.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

I’m not familiar with the T5i specifically, but I am familiar with Canon cameras in general… and it was easy enough to look it up.

It’s not the answer that you want to hear, but you can stop driving yourself crazy trying to find that specific option and setting… because it doesn’t exist.

From the manual for that camera…
“When using the finder for shooting, the image ratio is [3:2] and cannot be changed.”

In other words, when you are using the camera in the “stills” mode (when you can use the optical viewfinder), the aspect ratio is and will always be 3:2, there are no other settings. And 1920×1280 is 3:2.

Is there a specific reason that this would matter? It would be unusual for someone to have a problem with the fact that their photo has more pixels than they were shooting for. Fewer, yes… but more is generally not a problem. It would be super easy to crop 1920×1280 down to 1920×1080, you could even batch crop hundreds of them at once.

For specifics on aspect ratios and what your camera will (and won’t) do, you can see this link…
https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/index?page=content&id=ART140244

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

[ryan early] “It always amazes me when people who spend a lot of money branding their businesses… then have a video online representing their business that looks completely unprofessional. “

And among the worst offenders of that? Vendors of production equipment.

You’ll see it time and time again, companies that sell grip, lighting, or camera support equipment… who have promo or demo videos that are just positively awful. Of course there are some like Zacuto, DJI, Edelkrone, etc., that do have very good and polished videos, but many many of them do not.

You’d think that people in our industry would have killer videos. They should. The fact that they often don’t I used to sort of attribute to the “cobbler with shabby shoes” theory, that they just didn’t have time or energy to promote themselves right… but more and more I think that’s not the case, that they simply don’t know any better. One case… a rep for a very cool and innovative (and very expensive) piece of lighting gear stopped by our studio a few years ago, to demo their new product. I enjoyed the demo, and knowing that their own website was populated with videos that looked like a drunk and nearsighted toddler wagging around a 1992 handycam (except not quite that good), I suggested that we buy one of their pieces of gear at a bargain price, and we’d give them a short super-polished demo. The rep (who was also a partner in the company) looked at me fairly glassy-eyed and finally said “Huh? We have videos. A bunch of them. Ummm… something wrong with them?”

And I’ve had that exact scenario happen two following times. And probably will again.

Sad.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

We still have two UmaticSP decks in the racks (haven’t been even turned on in years… for that matter neither have the Betacam decks)… I don’t think they’re even cabled in, but not a big deal (probably also need a head cleaning).

I would think you could still find some post houses that can handle the 3/4″ dinosaur tape… but if not, hit me off-forum and maybe we can handle it.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Beta (Betacam) or Betamax?… (title says Betamax but post says Beta)…. two very different things.

I don’t know of any post house that has had a Betamax deck in 20 years. Maybe 30.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Firstly…. welcome.

Secondly… ouch. I don’t want to be blunt and say your DP made a boneheaded move…. but….

Actually what you DP did is sometimes the only option. If you are doing a shot where you must have a slow-mo version of the shot, and it must be “smooth” slow motion, and it’s an absolute one-time or one-shot deal where you can only photograph the action once… then yes, you should overcrank. But in virtually all other instances, you should overcrank only the shots you intend to slow-mo, and overcrank the exact amount that you want. You are not alone, I’ve frequently heard people say they are going to overcrank everything because they might want to slow-mo some of the shots later… maybe. This is a huge mistake… but I think you’ve learned that already so I won’t lecture about it.

In theory… playing back the 60fps shots at 250% on a 24p timeline should give you the correct speed motion. There is nothing wrong with your math… you got the math exactly right.

You say it looks “sped up.” I’m betting that it isn’t actually sped up, but is normal speed… but just looks sped up to you. Here’s why… what you are seeing there is footage that is similar to footage shot at normal speed but with the “narrow shutter” look that comes from a higher-than-normal shutter speed. When shooting 24fps, a “normal” shutter speed would be 1/48th of a second. You were shooting at 60fps, so I’m guessing that your shutter speed was at least 1/120th of a second (or maybe even higher, depending on what your DP did). So when you speed it up, you get footage that has the speed appearance of 24fps, but the shutter appearance of 1/120. When shot with a normal shutter (1/48th) each frame will have a fair bit of motion blur in it, which your brain needs to interpret motion as smooth. But when you’re viewing 24fps footage with a 1/120th of a second shutter, because of the fast shutter speed there will be very very little motion blur in each frame… each frame will be pretty darn sharp. The result is that jittery staccato “narrow shutter” look that action movies use to look more “actiony”… and I’m betting that’s what you are seeing… and it’s making you think they footage looks too-sped-up when in reality the actual speed is correct.

Unfortunately of all the things we can change in post production (which these days is darn near everything), you are fairly stuck with the shutter speed you’ve shot at… that is one of the very difficult things to manipulate in post. Well, in reality, you actually can’t manipulate it at all… but you can simulate it’s manipulation a little bit in some instances.

If you have, for example, a very fast pan that looks stuttery, you can add a little bit of a horizontal directional motion blur filter just while the shot is panning. Or a vertical filter if you are fast panning. Isolating moving objects within a non-moving scene and adding motion blur to them is much much more complicated. Depending on the shot it can require a lot of layers and masks and some painstaking frame-by-frame rotoscopting to add just the motion blur needed just where you need it in the right areas, amounts, and directions. For an extremely short shot (a second or two), it might not be too big of a deal. For longer shots it gets a lot more complex… and at the very minimum I’d suggest a compositor who is an After Effects wiz, or ideally some much more advanced compositing than that, such as the voodoo that Autodesk can do (Flame, Smoke, Flint, or Inferno compositing).

Good luck…. and I’d tell you to remind your DP to shoot at the desired frame rate next time…. but I bet you’ve already whacked them over the head by now.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Ummm…. can you explain to me what you would get out of this?

From what I take away from the original post it’s a distribution deal that pays you nothing, actually costs you money, and considerable time and effort and hoops to jump through, and negates the possibility of festival participation.

What am I missing? Why would anyone consider doing this??

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com