Shooting a fight sequence in progressive scan

[Simon Wyndham]

I've just shot a fight sequence in a subway tunnel using progressive scan on a Sony PDW510p. Now my work colleague is complaining that frame mode on a Canon XM1 looks better and that the movement from the 510 looks 'soft' and less defined by comparison!

 

I've tried explaining to him the characteristics of progressive and how the fighting movements need to be bigger and more defined themselves, as well as perhaps the performers slowing down their movements a touch.

 

In Hong Kong they will often undercrank the film camera, not to speed things up so much, but so that the performers can slow down their movements to be more defined and powerful, and then played back at full speed. Problem is that with video speedups of one or two fps are not so easy to perform, and lose picture quality as they have to be done in post.

 

Has anyone here had any experience of shooting 35mm fight sequences such as with Jackie Chan or Jet Li on their US movies? Those films don't appear to have been undercranked so I'd be interested to hearing any advice anyone could give me with regards to obtaining clear fight movements using progressive scan. I never came across this problem with the XM1 in frame mode (and to be honest I can't really see what my colleague is on about, but there must be something wrong for him to be complaining in the first place).

 

I've already taken precautions such as not panning too fast, and being weary of heavy handheld style shots. But on the other hand I have seen films such as Spiderman 2 (the part where he is trying to avoid being fired from the pizza delivery) where there is very heavy shakey handheld camerawork. So on the one hand I am advised not to do heavy handheld work in progressive, but on the other hand I see 35mm films with quite manic camerawork (24 is another example).

 

What am I missing here? Especially with regard to following a fighters movements during a fight what is the best advice anyone can give me when shooting in progressive mode?

 

Also aside from the slightly artificial way the old Canon XM1 creates it's frame mode, is there really much difference between it's motion characteristic and true 25p (I'm working in PAL)? My colleague compared the true progressive mode of the 510 to the look of cheap American television when it has been converted to PAL!

 

Help!

Edited March 7, 2005 by Simon Wyndham

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

> I've just shot a fight sequence in a subway tunnel using progressive scan on a

> Sony PDW510p. Now my work colleague is complaining that frame mode on a#

> Canon XM1 looks better and that the movement from the 510 looks 'soft' and

> less defined by comparison!

 

Assuming you had both cameras on identical shutter settings, the motion rendering should be identical - the PDW510 will of course be sharper, have better highlight handling, etc. Possibly your colleague would prefer the motion rendering of a shorter shutter period - the motion becomes more staccato, and this might address his "soft" criticism.

 

But "soft" is usually a sharpness characteristic, not a motion rendering one.

 

> Jackie Chan or Jet Li on their US movies?

 

Most of the stuff I've seen is clearly undercranked.

 

> So on the one hand I am advised not to do heavy handheld work in

> progressive, but on the other hand I see 35mm films with quite manic

> camerawork (24 is another example).

 

Yeah, well, there you go - don't listen to people! Progressive scan will make chaotioc camerawork appear more chaotic but without necessarily making it more confusing.

 

> Also aside from the slightly artificial way the old Canon XM1 creates it's frame

> mode, is there really much difference between it's motion characteristic and#

> true 25p

 

No. The pixel-shift-based frame mode on an XM1 is softer than normal 50i, but the motion rendering should be the same.

 

> My colleague compared the true progressive mode of the 510 to the look of

> cheap American television when it has been converted to PAL!

 

Yes, that follows - things like Friends are shot very flat-lit on 35mm and when transcoded to PAL lose a lot of sharpness, so you have flat-looking 24p-originated pictures. Coincidentally this is also what the vast majority of EFP-style video looks like because it was lit quickly and with minimal resources. Making it stop looking like cheap American TV and start looking like expensive American TV is a matter of not lighting it in the way video has traditionally been lit. Abandon your carefully BBC-trained studio camera experience here; it's a different game.

 

Phil

[Simon Wyndham]

Hi Phil,

 

>Assuming you had both cameras on identical shutter settings, the motion rendering >should be identical - the PDW510 will of course be sharper, have better highlight >handling, etc. Possibly your colleague would prefer the motion rendering of a shorter

 

Yes. I have suggested to him that one of the only solutions I can think of is to change the way the performers are moving, or to have a slightly shorter shutter speed. I do like the high shutter speed look, but I just wish I could address his problems directly without him going away thinking true progressive is rubbish. He loves the frame mode on the XM1, and as you rightly say the motion characteristics should be exactly the same.

 

>But "soft" is usually a sharpness characteristic, not a motion rendering one.

 

Yes. I can't seem to clarify what he is saying when he uses the word 'soft'. I was shooting a f1.7 for a short DOF, so I am wondering whether he thinks that because the background might be ever so slightly out of focus even on the wide shots whether he is thinking this makes it a soft picture. Although to my eyes I can't honestly see what he is talking about.

 

Another theory could be this. The location was heavily lit with flourescents (it's a walkway tunnel). I had set the camera up with a smoother knee roll-off. The XM1 has a naturally very contrasty image. Perhaps the smooth highlight roll-off combined with the larger contrast latitude of the 510, the reduced edge enhancement I set, and the flourescent lighting has made him think it is subjectively softer?

 

>Most of the stuff I've seen is clearly undercranked.

 

Most of the Hong Kong stuff they did yes. Although to my eye the US stuff such as Rush Hour hasn't. The movements are a lot 'heavier' and slower than their HK productions. If they were it must have been very subtle. There seems to be a definite change in technique too. In the Hong Kong films they would undercrank so that they could perform the movements slower (it's very easy to move too fast for the camera to see). But in the US productions I've noticed a lot more holding at the end of movements seemingly to add more definition to moves as a result of lack of undercranking. I could be wrong of course, but most of the people I know who work on martial arts film are based in HK so I don't know anyone who could tell me the practise in the US.

 

>Yeah, well, there you go - don't listen to people! Progressive scan will make chaotioc >camerawork appear more chaotic but without necessarily making it more confusing.

 

LOL! Yes, true. But I do wonder where the advice or 'myth' came from.

 

>American TV and start looking like expensive American TV is a matter of not lighting it in >the way video has traditionally been lit. Abandon your carefully BBC-trained studio >camera experience here; it's a different game.

 

Don't worry, I'm all for film style lighting. Any BBC training I have is as a freelancer so I wasn't assimilated into the studio lighting mindset ;)

[Duncan Buckley]

Im interested in shutter speeds and there effect on fight scenes. When shooting regular 24fps to create this 'staccato' effect you use a small shutter? How small are we talking? When filming faster speeds say 64fps what sort of shutter should you use to produce smooth looking motion?

 

I will test this out soon for myself but i'd like to know some information beforehand.

[Bob Hayes]

64 FPS will create the same ?crispness? to your image as shooting at 24fps with a 60 degree shutter. Your image will be 1 ½ times slower. Sometimes, if I?m planning on a tape finish , I?ll get lazy and shoot my action sequences at 48, 62, or 86 FPS and then decide in post if I want slow motion or not. If I skip frame the transfer down to 24 FPS it looks like I shot with a 45 degree shutter like Private Ryan. LAAAAZY :-)

[Simon Wyndham]

I've just heard more from my colleague. He seems to be saying that the progressive mode on the 510 has more motion blur during movement than the XM1 in frame mode. Not sure how this is possible if they are both shooting at 1/50 shutter.

[Simon Wyndham]

Well I've just found out the reason why. The bloody camera wasn't in 1/50 shutter! The XDCAM defaults to 1/25 shutter when progressive scan is selected. Grrrr. Silly me for not assuming that they might default it to 1/50.

 

Oh well, at least I know how to set it up now!