Videos

October 14, 2005

What cameras are being used in the production of today's music videos? I am leaning towards using the Panasonic Varicam, or Sony's F/900 3, both of course HD. I have the editing system that can do the post so I am safe there. Also, is it safe to use the consumer level Sony HD cameras, or even the Panasonic DVX 100?

Just to note, the music videos are of the rap genre, and the artists are going to try to get the videos aired on one of the several video channels (i.e. BET).

Ram Shani · October 14, 2005

hi

i would go for the higher video like the f-900 or the varicam.

but if you have good post like FLAME INFERNO OR AFFTER

you can go with SD or minidv

but art directing light makeup clothing is also very importent

and if you got budget problem i would put more infront of the cam and in post

ram

Max Jacoby · October 14, 2005

Please refrain from posting the same question in different forums. Most people check all the forums, so they will find your question.

Kevin Zanit · October 14, 2005

I shoot a lot of music videos, and the formats we have shot on vary a lot based on budget. I have used the following formats/ cameras on music videos that have aired on MTV/ or MTV2, FUSE, etc.

35mm/ s35

S16mm

16mm

Super8

Sony/ Panavision (depended on the show) F900

Panasonic Varicam

Panasonic SDX900 with or without the Pro35 adapter (depended on the show)

Panasonic DVX100

I have ranked the above in the order of what I consider the best quality (some may not put the F900 over the Varicam, but I do). As I said, these are the formats I have shot on music videos. Not your only options. Shoot on the Genesis if you can afford it ;).

I have also worked with older systems like Betacam, and F700s, etc, but not recently.

Kevin Zanit

October 14, 2005

When you have shot music videos with 16mm how did you handle the sync to the pre-recorded CD or audio track? I have film speed options of 24 and 32 fps.

I shoot a lot of music videos, and the formats we have shot on vary a lot based on budget. I have used the following formats/ cameras on music videos that have aired on MTV/ or MTV2, FUSE, etc.

35mm/ s35

S16mm

16mm

Super8

Sony/ Panavision (depended on the show) F900

Panasonic Varicam

Panasonic SDX900 with or without the Pro35 adapter (depended on the show)

Panasonic DVX100

I have ranked the above in the order of what I consider the best quality (some may not put the F900 over the Varicam, but I do). As I said, these are the formats I have shot on music videos. Not your only options. Shoot on the Genesis if you can afford it ;).

I have also worked with older systems like Betacam, and F700s, etc, but not recently.

Kevin Zanit

Michael Collier · October 17, 2005

I've never tried this, but it might work.

If you already know what takes you will need go into something like premiere and cut the song up into different setups. if you wnat the whole song you wont have to cut it up, but if you intend to shoot setups that only will cover half the song (ie 1:33-3:00rollout) make sure to make a clip for it.

when you make these clips ad an audio blip to the header, about a second from where the music cues up. Record to sound as you shoot, though you dont need quality sound. the shotgun on the cam should be sufficient (assuming your in the video realm, with film this might be more trouble than its worth)

In post you will know that a certain part of the song will start exactly 30 frames past the blip and this can help you sync everything up.

I know this probably isnt the 'correct' way to do things (the correct way usually involves several peices of pricey gear) I have used it a few times and it works well. Just make sure you know exactly where in the song a peice is supposed to go. Cut your playback files DIRECTLY from the wave file you plan on using in post. Cut each different take exactly on the second, to simplify in post. name each file after the where the take comes in on the track. ie: songname_093sec_dur.wav or something like that. you can even add a audio slate to even greater simplify things.

Phil Rhodes · October 17, 2005

I'm not sure I can take seriously anyone who claims that super8 resolves a better image than an F900!

Phil

October 17, 2005

Just a quick question, why do people use HD cameras for video going on to TV? I really can't see any advantage of using a HD camera over an XL2 for TV footage. If you're are doing blue/green screen work then fair enough I can understand, maybe HD cameras are better noise wise, giving you more flexibility in post.

I suppose there is the 4:2:2 colour rendition, although in that case use an SDX-900.

(And as for 8mm footage looking better than footage from a F900, I'd hardly say 8mm even comes close to MiniDV let alone HD)

Edited October 17, 2005 by Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

David Mullen ASC · October 17, 2005

A number of programs want to "future proof" by shooting or mastering to HD because they plan on eventually broadcasting in HD. And some are already broadcasting HD versions.

But the SD versus HD question has to be broken also down into the pro versus consumer camera question.

Plus if you shoot in SD, then you have the whole PAL versus NTSC question if you plan on selling to both markets.

But I agree, if the project is just for NTSC transmission, there isn't much difference between using an SDX900 versus an F900 -- both do 24P, both have 2/3" CCD's, both can use the same lenses, etc. It's just that until recently, if you wanted to shoot 24P or 25P with a pro camera, you had to use the Varicam or F900.

The trouble with the XL2 is that it's not a 2/3" CCD pro camera and it only has 4:1:1 color, etc. It's more work to get professional results from a camera designed for consumers, although possible.

Kevin Zanit · October 17, 2005

?I'm not sure I can take seriously anyone who claims that super8 resolves a better image than an F900!?

Woops, oversight on my part . . .

I will formally state that no, I do not consider 8mm as a quality anywhere near that of the formats below it. Maybe I should sleep first, then post.

Of the film formats, I rank it lowest. In fact, I would rank it lower than everything on this list because of the grain and steadiness issues.

My mistake.

As for sink in 16, we used a crystal sync camera, thus it was handled the same way as with 35 or video.

They took the song on a DAT with time code on one channel, and the music on the other. Then a smart slate was jammed to the DAT.

Kevin Zanit

Phil Rhodes · October 18, 2005

Hi,

Daniel, it's also worth remembering that not all SD cameras are created equal. An XL2 won't resolve an image as sharp as an SDX-900 in 25-megabit mode; most of the good consumer cameras have about 500 lines of resolution, whereas any broadcast camera should have between 750 and 850.

Phil

Brian Wells · October 18, 2005

Doesn't the tape format limit the recordable lines of resolution? (I'm asking) Obviously an SDX is sharper than a DVX, but I'm unclear on how having 750-850 lines helps in this area. I just don't understand, that's all.