Alvin Pingol

Bob deinterlacing is one of many types of methods used to convert interlaced footage to progressive. Unlike deinterlacing methods such as duplicate fields, interpolate fields, discard fields, and blend fields, all of which output a stream with the same framerate as the original file, bob deinterlace splits each frame into two, one consisting of just the odd fields, the other the even fields, and interpolates the missing lines. The output is a file with twice the framerate of the original, for each frame no longer consists of two fields (i.e. two moments in time) - they have been separated and given their own frames: Input file, Interlaced, First four frames: 1) 1A+1B 2) 2A+2B 3) 3A+3B 4) 4A+4B Output, progressive, First eight frames: 1) 1A 2) 1B 3) 2A 4) 2B 5) 3A 6) 3B 7) 4A 8) 4B Starting to make sense? :) And yes, since the XL1, as any other video camera, can shoot in interlaced mode, bob deinterlacing can be applied.

If you're using tungsten-balanced stock then yes, daylight balanced flos (daylight balanced anything) will render a blue bias. Keep in mind, however, that the average fluorescent tube will also render a green shift on film, something you may want to compensate for by using CT MinusGreen/Magenta gels or appropriate magenta filtration. Hope this helps!

>>the DCC is more powerful and sometimes too effective, making overexposed >>patches look "dulled down" and compressed, like you're getting dirty whites. >>I've always used DCC on with Sony beta and digibeta cameras, but am very >>careful about using it with a JVC I leave DCC disabled on my pro-sumer JVC (model GY-DV300) for the very reason Mr. Mullen mentions; it seems a bit too strong and, this being a pro-sumer model, is unadjustable, unfortunately. What would be clipped highlights, i.e. 100IRE white, appear as white with a mild tint - not quite sure how the auto-knee decides what kind of chroma information it will "save," though I've had problems dealing with what seemed like random choices: purple/magenta tint seems to be a popular choice for the circuitry. Additionally, for those like myself who rely heavily on zebra stripes to determine optimum exposure settings (especially in uncontrolled and/or outdoor lighting situations), stripes show after auto-knee has done its work. Thus, if one sets zebras to 90IRE (for example), planning on not letting highlights go hotter than that, one runs the risk of overexposing because it'll appear that the highlights are still in check, when in reality it is just the auto-knee trying to save some chroma information. Of course, to base exposures off of zebra settings requires that you know your camera's response curve rather well in the first place.

One more, your signature: "Landon Parks - Writter / Director" :P Good luck on your script, by the way.

Shoot in interlaced mode to capture the maximum amount of motion per second, and use a 180-degree shutter (1/100th or 1/120th-sec, depending on where you are). In post, bob-deinterlace (50i/60i to 50P/60P) the footage and set its playback rate to 24fps (or whatever you wish, however much you want to slow down the footage). Motion rendering will be essentially equivalent to that of having shot film, or progressive video, at 50fps or 60fps, though you are likely to encounter "shimmering"; an artifact caused by the interpolation of alternating odd and even fields.

Absolutely. Was scanning through the thread and noticed your images - especially the first one, where substantial edge enhancement is visible. And look how quickly the skin tone clips and blows out...

When decreasing shutter speed to 1/30th, if I'm not mistaken, the camera must still discard and interpolate one of the fields. When using Frame Mode, the green pixel offset aids interpolation - not sure if it's the same with a slow shutter.

Hi, sorry, just noticed the replies in your other thread. (I always check new posts and work backwards up to the most recent) :D

Though I haven't checked your link, the solution for a "gritty" feel almost always involves excessive image grain. Take a high speed stock (7279, for example), underexpose, then push process. Although you will lose saturation, you'll get grain. Also try crushing the blacks during telecine to further emphasize "grittiness." Silver retention process is another option worth considering.

Plus, no one wants to deal with all of that bad luck... ;)

When I operated the XL2, it killed my shoulder. Indeed, as you said, terribly awkward; it is simply too tiny. The weight of the camera body concentrates itself onto the small shoulder pad, giving you aches and pains on the day of, and day after, production. If I owned the camera I would definitely purchase some sort of shoulder mount; one with padding, for sure. Of course, the owner happily operates sans shoulder adapter. Either it takes some time to get used to it, or you and I have odd shoulders.

Will silica gel packets suffice?

Works for me! And yes, a little overboard with the glow filter... ;)

FilmmakerJack, The MiniDV and DVCAM tape formats employ the same compression scheme and ratio (5:1, or 25Mbit/sec). Images should be identical from either format, though risk of dropouts is a bit less with DVCAM, as it is a more robust format.

Hmm. Nothing else comes to mind. Perhaps you'd be better off posting this in a forum dedicated to DVD authoring, not cinematography.

Is your TV set properly calibrated? Try this: Color Bars and How To Use Them Then try playing the DVD. Hopefully it will look correct, assuming you calibrated correctly.

Not until everyone owns an HD television set will MiniDV become obsolete. Though, as was mentioned, MiniDV-related technologies will drop in price as newer formats evolve, such as said tapeless solutions, as well as HDV which is already becoming quite popular. In the meantime, MiniDV is here to stay. The technology to produce compact, acceptable-quality $500 MiniDV cameras already exists, and the market for these types of video cameras is massive. Of course, the technology to produce compact acceptable-quality HDV cameras probably exists too, but it'll be awhile before the price for one of these falls below $500.

Wow - Nice work all! And yes Stas - those grabs are amazingly sharp. B) Great thread.

In addition to lens characteristics affecting contrast with different apertures, shooting at wider stops can give the appearance of lower contrast, for the background becomes more out of focus as depth of field is reduced. Light areas and dark areas in the BG will blur into each other, effectively reducing contrasts - Accordingly, stopping down will bring things into focus, thereby making contrast differences more apparent.

Haha! :lol: Nice one

Not quite; the closest I've come to it was lighting for interviews for a friend's independent feature to be distributed to family and friends (and anyone else who wanted one), on DVD. Apart from that, I've only lit interviews for projects connected to local organizations, as well as personal projects. Keeps me busy. ;) Great work everybody! Mr. Townson, what method(s) did you use to achieve the altered color balance on "Straw Man Unyielding"? I think it works quite well.

Shot naked; diffusion added digitally. ;)

Thanks, The setups are quite similar. Here's a quick, ugly sketch of the lighting plan for the first two photographs. As you can see, I was in tight quarters. (EDIT: I was forced into the corner because the walls that aren't drawn were essentially right behind the camera, and the other closey behind the key light) The wall behind subject is being illuminated by some overhead built-in recessed lighting, which were not tungsten bulbs but rather their energy-saving compact fluorescent counterparts. I'm glad they didn't green up the shot any. More images from the setup: In the second photograph here, subject was positioned a little too far from the corner where the other three subjects were. Not wanting the woman to have to stand up and re-situate herself after I moved the chair back (she would've needed assistance, as she was seated from being brought in on wheelchair), I took the picture and tried to frame out the window. As I feared, it spilled in... Here's the sketch of the lighting plan for the darker interview setup. As you can see, pretty much the same.

Lighting setup for some interviews shot on DV. These frames are from 35mm stills taken with the setup, but, knowing film's better response to highlights, the edge light was about one stop hotter from when the interviews were being conducted and recorded on video: I can find equivalent DV captures if anyone wants to compare. ;) Here's another interview setup. Direct grab from the video stream: Image Yes, it's a little dark, but when displayed on your average overly-bright consumer television, it works quite well. B) By the way, the BG in that last interview wouldn't appear so distracting had I been able to throw it out of focus a little more, but I was already wide open!

Thanks for that. I checked out the forum and Roy said he wanted a change in the look from what Walt Lloyd had done, as well as shortening the work day and using a more efficient lighting package. He wanted the look to be a bit more similar to what Tom Siegel had originally done for the pilot. The pictures of the set taken from above are pretty intense. http://www.studentfilmmakers.com/bb/viewto...php?p=2876#2876