Jump to content

Combining Motion and Stills shoots: Is It Practical?


Francis Kuhn

Recommended Posts

I just was the gaffer/lighting director on a shoot for fashion week in NYC. The still photographer had a 5DMKII and we shot with an HVX200/Letus35 and another 5DMKII for video as well.

 

This was in a large white cyc studio and we were using 4ks and down to get the light level up. The HVX200 had to use ND it was so bright. At 100 ISO I was usually at a f5.6.

 

Considering that renting a studio and getting talent / wardrobe / and the rest of the support crew for two days would be more expensive than just beefing up the lighting package I think this was definitely an economical way of getting both stills and video. Plus most of these designers are only in one place for a couple of hours during fashion week.

 

FB Set Photos

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2088672&id=3702694

 

Just another example/story.

 

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A crude way of changing the shutter speed in post would be to just shoot a screen that is running at 120 frames per second with whatever framerate and shutter speed that you desire.

 

And I just don't understand how shooting a movie at 30 frames per second would look terrible. Traditionally when using the 65mm Todd AO format movies were shot at 30 frames per second because 65mm film is so sharp that the motion artifacts are multiplied if you try to shoot 65mm film at 24 frames per second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I just don't understand how shooting a movie at 30 frames per second would look terrible.

 

It's not that 30 fps looks terrible. It just doesn't look filmic. You've got to remember that film has been shot at 24 fps since its inception over a hundred years ago. People have just been accustomed to the way it looks, so much so that people like us can spot 30 fps from across the street with one eye closed. That's part of the reason I don't think the Canon 5DMKII will hold up as far as a legitimate contender for HD video capture, at least, in the film industry. Just like frame rate, people have also become accustomed to a rotating shutter. While this might be changing, it's just, different. Not necessarily bad, just different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to say that it is 35mm film that has been shot at 24 frames per second since its inception. It is a different story with genuine 65mm Todd AO which has been traditionally shot at 30 frames and always will be shot at 30 frames per second if the cinematographer wants the real deal. 65mm Todd AO cinematography is a totally different beast and deserves its own special frame rate in order for it to work. The reason why the Canon 5D cannot hold its own in the film industry is because its resolution does not even come close to matching the resolution of 65mm film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been a stills 'tog for 15 years - im learning and loving motion now

 

my move to motion was brought by

 

- cheap technology (5d) and my existant prime set

 

- my desire to keep providing what my customers will want - and IMO that is stills for print motion for web

 

I see it as essential to learn motion to stay in business as a stills 'tog

 

Some thoughts..

 

'Jack of all trades good at none'

 

Well operating the cameras is just practice - vision content and concepts are the key elements - and those skills are one and the same

 

'Grabbing Frames'

 

I dont see the technology being there now (frame rate shutter issues)

 

I shoot a motion take and then some stills of the same concept

 

'Lighting'

 

Stills cameras like the D3 are now usable at 800+ ISO, meaning they can create on a set lit for motion - I shoot less and less flash and more with my daylight flouro light

 

 

Most important if I where a client hiring models lights location etc for a stills shoot I would hire the 'tog that could provide a short motion sequence as well as the stills

 

In a way that is different from cinema - it is maximising a still shoot

 

So the still industry will change to account for motion, proper cinema will continue as normal

 

My guess

 

SMM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is, to a limited extent, being done in ads already.

 

Plus, there is always a stills photographer on set.

 

 

This may be a tired cliche, but it rings true here: Jack of all trades master of none.

 

 

very true! it has happened quite a few times that a stills photographer shoots my set-ups in my set, my lights and ran away with the best photography award in the bi-annual advertising congress!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very true! it has happened quite a few times that a stills photographer shoots my set-ups in my set, my lights and ran away with the best photography award in the bi-annual advertising congress!

 

This is cheeky indeed

 

It emphasies the point that the skill is the creative direction etc

 

operating the cameras is more a technician role

 

Im trying to provide that creative input on motion and stills shoots, the fact I have a stills background is IMO irrellevant

 

S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
I would like to say that it is 35mm film that has been shot at 24 frames per second since its inception.

 

 

Once again Thomas you are wrong. 24 FPS was only adapted with the invention of sound in the mid 20's. 35mm had been around for a lot longer and was usually (but not always) something in the order of 16-18 FPS.

 

Please stop making stuff up to suit your own delusional dreams of a high frame rate future.

 

The British broadcasting Service BBC is championing high frame rate television that shoots at 300 frames per second and downconverts to 100 frames per second.

 

Not true.

 

When super sampling at higher frame rates the shutter speed can be adjusted and optimized in post

 

Not true.

 

You can't actually do this in post. And when I asked you how to do this you came up with this....

 

A crude way of changing the shutter speed in post would be to just shoot a screen that is running at 120 frames per second with whatever framerate and shutter speed that you desire.

 

Right. So to keep all that high resolution imagery you're obsessed with your seriously suggesting we shoot monitors to somehow convert frame rates to retain motion blur ? I'm pretty sure you aren't making sense....

 

The higher resolution still photographs will also be able to increase the dynamic range of the video stream

 

Not true. Since when has resolution got anything to do with dynamic range ?

 

Ultimately this means you can easily shoot Imax quality footage at a 1000 frames per second by the proper mix of photographs of various resolutions although some of the photographs will be extremely low resolution.

 

Wow. 1000 FPS imax quality, motion blur shutter speed independent, HDR stills/motion pictures from the one camera ?

 

Thomas, your blue sky dreams are getting pretty boring to listen to and derail genuine and sincere conversations about practical cinematography in today and the near future working environments.

 

I would like to request, on no authority other than my own frustration at your fanciful inventions, that you please limit yourself to discussing stuff in this practical forum, that actually exists or is about to exist rather than ideas that you think might be good for you one day.

 

 

jb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really I think that you are trying to make me wrong.

 

1. The statement about 24 frames per second was only a generalized statement and was never intended to be absolute.

2. I am not making stuff up about the 65mm Todd AO format because it was indeed shot at 30 frames per second and was only changed to 24 fps when Michael Todd lost control of his own company. Therefore it is not irrational to insist that genuine, beautiful and film like 65mm Todd AO can only be shot at 30 frames per second just as genuine IMAX is only 15 perf 65mm film even if IMAX dumps that format in favor of 2K digital.

3. The BBC wants a frame rate that is easily convertable to 50 fps and 60 fps to allow for worldwide broadcasting.

4. Indeed the shutter speed can be adjusted in post if the footage is temporally super sampled. Whether or not software is available today is irelavant because the fact remains that such software can be easily developed if there is a demand. When I proposed shooting monitors I never suggested that this should literally be done but only attempted to demonstrate that changing the shutter speed in post would be theoretically feasible. Also I never suggested that I possesed the technical expertise to write software but only expressed a need that should be meet by people that have software writing abilities.

5. I meant to say that high resolution photographs that also have a high dynamic range could be inserted in the video stream to improve the resolution and the dynamic range of the entire stream. I never meant to say that all high resolution photographs have high dynamic range.

6. My very last statement was only concerned with how far this compression technology of inserting high resolution still photographs into a video stream can be pushed.

7. As for being off topic, the original title of the thread is not just concerned with the practicality of digital still motion capture but also questions whether or not this technology is the wave of the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...