HD against 35 and S16

chris · November 5, 2004

I have a project coming up that has a large shooting ratio and limited budget, so HD is the obvious choice. I have an access to Sony 1080i #730 HD camera, which I can have for almost nothing. The other choices are F900 and Varicam. We need a decent quality so it looks acceptable on a big theater screen. Film is naturally the best choice but it is absolutely out of the questoin.

If we can get quality similar to Once Upon A Time In Mexico, it would be ideal.

Could someone describe for me please how does Varicam project look like if it is projected to a large theater screen? Once Upon, because of the lack of grain, would beat 35 mm sharpnesswise, naturally not resolutionwise. That's what I thought.

How good would Varicam look like? Would the lower resolution make it look more like S16? I know that the colors are better than on F900. This is not my main concern. It is how good will it look on a very big screen.

As to the HDCAM 730, which is interlaced, how would it look like after deinterlacing and conversion to 24p? Does anyone know?

All answers will be appreciated.

David Mullen ASC · November 5, 2004

I think if you want a film look to the image and a good transfer to 35mm, it is absolutely imperative that you shoot progressive-scan rather than interlaced-scan. Don't even consider 1080i.

As for the difference between the Varicam and the F900, it's pretty basic math: 720P versus 1080P, about twice as many pixels with the F900 image. That doesn't mean that you won't like 720P-to-35mm; you should see some tests.

I can only think of one Varicam-shot feature that was released in 35mm, which was "Camp." I didn't see it.

Dudu Stoz · November 5, 2004

As to the HDCAM 730, which is interlaced, how would it look like after deinterlacing and conversion to 24p? Does anyone know?

maybe you can use the hdw-750 which is cheaper then the 900 and still

have progressive scan option(only 25p not 24p) unlike the 730 ..

John Sprung · November 5, 2004

As to the HDCAM 730, which is interlaced, how would it look like after deinterlacing and conversion to 24p?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It'll look like absolute total crap. Any vertical edge that moves horizontally will either have to be softened to a very unnatural degree, or you'll see "mouse teeth" -- the edge is in different places on every other line of video, which makes it look like a rodent had been nibbling on it. 720p/24 will go to film far better than any interlaced source. Of course, 1080p/24 is better than 720p/24, but both are far better for going to film than 1080i.

-- J.S.

chris · November 6, 2004

Thank you. So I guess the #730 is out of the picture.

Mike Brennan · November 6, 2004

Thank you. So I guess the #730 is out of the picture.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A deinterlaced 50i frame from the 730 will be close match in resolution of the DVCPROHD cam.

Editing at 50i is less of an issue than dshoting and editing at 60i and trying to get that to look good at 24fps.

But it is a lot of trouble and some (post) expense when there are other alternatives.

730 has one filter wheel by the way.

Sony is in box shifting mode and offering incredible finance deals on the 730 (£26 per day!) but don't forget the HD lens, tape, post production effort as well as cost of transfer to film will all be compromised by the weakest technical link, the interlaced capture.

Mike Brennan

chris · November 6, 2004

Thank you. How does DVCPROHD look like when projected to a big theater screen? Is it close to 16 mm, S16, 35 mm? I mean, if I acquired in one of these formats, which would the HD format be clesest to?

Yusuf Aslanyurek · November 7, 2004

I saw same picture (for test) on screen

35mm vs hd (sony 900)

it was huge diffirence on picture. I cannot explain most important difference

lets say no plastical drawing, depth is bad and latitude is low

I've tested dvcpro HD 2 weeks ago, everywhere written that 8 stops latutude have.

results of my test was 6 stops. (with this addictional %10 error level)

anyway digits are not important than picture

in my option better to shoot on 16mm

may be new generation HDs (D-20 and new panavision HD) will be similar to negative.

Michael Nash · November 9, 2004

Thank you. How does DVCPROHD look like when projected to a big theater screen? Is it close to 16 mm, S16, 35 mm? I mean, if I acquired in one of these formats, which would the HD format be clesest to?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I love the Varicam but it always looks like Super16 to me, never 35mm. And when you consider that the Sony F-900 still looks a little softer than 35mm footage when blown up to 35mm and projected, you'll realize that the Panasonic can't look any sharper. But like David said, you really need to test it for yourself to see how you like it. Just because it has less pixels than the Sony and is softer than 35mm, doesn't mean it can't work for your purposes.

Dopamine was another Varicam feature that had a theatrical run, although I only saw it on DVD. Lots of heavy color correction in that movie, so there are color artifacts in the final version.