Film vs digital cameras with music videos

[precious nchanji]

I have noticed from a personal point of view that digital cameras including Red find it hard to achieve the glossy video results that film cameras can produce.

An example will be this music video which was shot with the S16 Arri camera.

 

http://evanwinter.com/vivianna%20ft%20dmx%...that%20shit.php

 

So i wanted to know if this kind of glossy look is atributed only to film or can it be achieved with a digital camera. if possible with a digital please can i get some tips on how it can be achieved.

[Dane Brehm]

When you say "Glossy Video" do you mean sharpness,contrast,color,diffusion etc? To answer you question yes. A music video is made in the telecine suite at $400-650/hr. This video looks very sharp and my guess is they used 200T or slower stock.

 

What I care more about is what glass they used because a film camera body has no direct influence on the "look" unless were talking shutter angle or phasing. please be more specific. what is your experience level?

[Evan Winter]

Hiya and I'm flattered that you referenced a video of mine,

 

Here was the setup I used for the shoot:

Arri SR3

Vision 2 7218 500T film

Canon 8-64 Zoom

45 degree shutter

Soft F/X filters (between 1/2 - 2)

 

I transferred in Toronto and my colorist is probably the best in the city (he was doing me a massive favor because his typical rate hourly rate would've blown my entire transfer budget in about 15 minutes) :)

 

As digital technology becomes better and better we're seeing results that challenge film acquisition but no matter how you acquire the images a brilliant colorist (artists themselves) and a good transfer (with enough time to do the job right) should never be overlooked or underestimated. It costs a heck of a lot of money but every penny is well spent!

 

Good luck on all your projects!

 

Evan W.

[Dane Brehm]

Here was the setup I used for the shoot:

Arri SR3

Vision 2 7218 500T film

Canon 8-64 Zoom

45 degree shutter

Soft F/X filters (between 1/2 - 2)

 

 

45 degree shutter ....thats why its so Sharp! The rest answer all my questions.....500T is the best S16mm stock ever made with the exception of 7219 Vision 3. :lol:

[Adrian Sierkowski]

The glossy look is really a function a lot of how you tweak the colors in post as well as a good notion of lighting and filtration. The main difference between film and video is just that film, on average, gives you more information to work with (unless you move up to the big expensive cameras!), so it's, in a way, simpler to tweak in post. If you ever did a color correct on DV/HDV footage you'll know what i mean.

[Lars Zemskih]

In a way I think it does make some sense to shoot music videos on digital, as the video is going to end up on TV anyway and not in a projector.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

TO a certain point. But with HDTV now a days, it's important to start with some high quality stuff, be that high end HD or film. But that's just my thinking on it.

[Michael Lehnert]

In a way I think it does make some sense to shoot music videos on digital, as the video is going to end up on TV anyway and not in a projector.

 

Ading to Adrian's crucial post above as we move into HD broadcasting, Emile, do also note that even though your final destination might be TV tubes or panels only, the proprietary texture and quality of both video and cine-film, despite or thanks to the best colorist's work, willl ultimately shine through. It's a matter of how far you can push what you have at hand originally. Certainly in documentaries or features, yet even in highly fx-enhanced video clips. Try watching two simultaneously shot samples originating from HD telecine'd cine-film and from HD video put onto the same (even low-res'd compressed) playback medium viewed on the same tv or monitor. You WILL (at least you should) note a difference.

 

After all, even today in a rather vivid and saturating visual world, people still notice a difference when they watch a film take of Bryce Canyon or a video clip of Bryce Canyon. They might not allocate the two samples to the correct format (as many consumers now buy into the marketing messages due to lack of or interest in verified knowledge, and hence believe carte-blanche that everything labeled "digital" will herald "superiority"). But in my experience, they will feel more favourable watching one over the other - so far, the favoured ones had cine-film as acquisition format.

 

For you personally, it really depends where the quality requirements and conditions for work that is associated with your own name, should start and end.

[John Sprung]

In a way I think it does make some sense to shoot music videos on digital, as the video is going to end up on TV anyway and not in a projector.

Indeed if budget is a consideration, digital all the way will be more cost effective.

 

 

-- J.S.