Bud E. Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 Has anyone attempted to edit DVX footage next to footage shot on film and have success matching the two? The final output isn't film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Achterberg Posted February 5, 2005 Share Posted February 5, 2005 Has anyone attempted to edit DVX footage next to footage shot on film and have success matching the two? The final output isn't film. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> nope, sure haven't. you should also be more specific with the format of the film, you will notice a BIG difference comparing the minidv 24p stuff to 35mm with a minidv master...the motion and the 24P thing would match up with 35mm shot at 24 pretty well, but the minidv image will have a life of its own, or no life...? same with 16mm, film has charactoristics that video has yet to match, even on some of the newer rigs like HDcams or even the Dalsa (although I give the Dalsa credit, that is getting close) but you're talking about a consumer camcorder, I think an audience will see a difference right away but wont be able to put their finger on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 5, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted February 5, 2005 Hi, > film has charactoristics that video has yet to match And to be fair, video has characteristics film has yet to match. The DVX-100 footage will probably be stabler than the film with enormously lower noise and much better shadow detail. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Achterberg Posted February 6, 2005 Share Posted February 6, 2005 Hi, > film has charactoristics that video has yet to match And to be fair, video has characteristics film has yet to match. The DVX-100 footage will probably be stabler than the film with enormously lower noise and much better shadow detail. Phil <{POST_SNAPBACK}> true, personally I never wanted film i've shot to resemble video though, better shadow detail? isnt video High contrast? I am sure a low contrast filmstock would beat video in shadow detail...but hey, I could be COMPLETELY wrong. and one thing I like about film is how each film has different grain structure...sometimes I really like the grain, others I dont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted February 6, 2005 Share Posted February 6, 2005 I have a friend who loves his DVX dearly. We've done tests where we replicate the same shot in 35mm and with his camera, and while I do like the 24p look that the camera has, it's no where close to film. We shot with both 200T and 500T, and with the 200 the contrast difference is especially noticable. He also shot a short film a while back on 16mm (500T), and he decided he wanted a couple more shots for cutaways and shot them in 24p. He was able to light the video shots well enough that that 90% of the people watching probably won't be able to tell the difference in media, especially since they're quick cutaways to close-up shots, but if it was a dialogue scene or something, I think it would be much more noticeable. It took me a while to warm up to it, especially since it's frustrating with how wide the depth of field is... even when you back it up... but I really do like that camera. It's a different look than I'm used to working with, and it's kind of exciting experimenting with a new way to create images. Jeremy http://www.throughaglass.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now