Jonathan Bryant

Please don't piss off the people in the malls, you are likely to encounter some real attitude when they find out you are secretly filming them. What you are doing could likely burn future opurtunities for other film makers trying to get legit footage in malls. The mall will probably kick you out anyways, most don't allow cameras inside without approval. Even though I don't agree with that policy its not going to help matters secretly filming interviews.

How many clients demand 16 over 720p? Are the latitude advantage, and other quality advantages over 720p enough to justify the higher cost in your opinion?

Most news organizations still shoot on Betacam SP, CBS has switched over to XDCAM, and some use DVCPRO or P2. The Olympics on NBC is usually always supported by mostly Pannasonic equipment. "The Torino Olympic Broadcasting Organization has selected Panasonic as its supplier of standard and high-definition recording equipment for the 2006 Olympic Winter Games. According to the agreement between the Organizing Committee of the 2006 Olympic Winter Games in Torino, Italy, Panasonic?s DVCPRO P2 solid-state memory, DVCPRO HD and DVCPRO50 recording equipment will be used for the games. The video equipment will be used during the 2006 Games at the International Broadcasting Center and throughout the various athletic venues. " I would be surprised if they use Panasonic cameras for the live feeds, since NBC is 1080i and because I don't know of a Studio or EFP style HD Panasonic camera. No doubt the P2 will be used alot for NBCs news, and D5 & DVCPRO HD will be used for the live broadcasts. I do imagine there will be people shooting film,just not for news.

So you have a HD100? Whats your opinion as of yet on that camera?

If doing low budget photography for something that would only get distributed to TV or DVD would you choose 16mm or 720p? And why?

You might find this review helpful. http://videosystems.com/mag/video_sony_hvrau/ I too am interested in this camera, upon looking at its little consumer brother at best buy I was impressed by its image quality at such a low price. The exposure can be controlled, just like the PD150. The focus seemed more accurate and repeatable than the PD150. I would think that the CMOS sensor has a more filmic lattitude, and by my perception and the reviewers comments I think you can believe that. But its not as good in low light as the Z1s ccds, and the Z1 isn't as good in low light as the PD150. Since you are shooting docs you need all the sensativity you can get. SO in that case I couldn't recommend this camera for you. I would ATLEAST get the Z1 which is rated better in low light. Or you could just go to your cloesest best buy and look at a1s consumer brother, its the same camera just missing xlr audio and such. BUT please don't buy from the best buy, their customer service is lacking.

This is not my listing but I thought I would let all my cinematography.com friends know what I found on ebay. 12k HMI for $600 http://cgi.ebay.com/Desisti-12k-HMI-fresne...1QQcmdZViewItem 6k HMI for $600 http://cgi.ebay.com/Desisti-6k-HMI-fresnel...1QQcmdZViewItem

Yeah the infinity seems like it could be an awesome camera for the money (2/3inch chips ,1080,720p, all using the JPEG200 codec,or MPEG 2) But it is really crippled without 24p. Its can record upto 75mbps using the jpeg2000 codec which is supposed ot be an awesome codec (it doesn't tend to have mosaic patterns as much as mpeg2) They talk like later they can upgrade the software in the camera as drives get bigger and faster to include higher bit rates. SO I would assume they could add 24p unless they are trying to protect their high end Viper(Kewl name by the way). I think the key to the Infinity camera is its use of consumer media flash drives and Iomega Rev drives. The Codecs are where the quality comes into play and since businesses and ordinary comsumers will be buying flash drives and Rev drives it will drive the cost down of the media IMHO for professionals using the Infinity. Something that will not happen for XDCAM or P2 I am affraid. If people could convince them to add 24p I think they would have a high demand for the camera. Just imagine not have to buy expensive P2 cards or HDCAM decks.

I prefer either orange or purple screen better.

All these shows one day will be legacy programming and IMHO if I were in their shoes I would transfer now in HD rather than have to pay to redo the whole thing. I don't think people disbelieve what you are saying, it jsut seems dumb on the networks side. Just like these developers who tear down perfectly sound 2-3 yearold brick buildings and build something new that is close to what was there before. There must be more to it , like tax write offs,etc.. Let me ask another question, So on a Spirit you can't add an additional VTR to the transfer (transfer to Digibeta and HDCAM at the same time) So they finish in SD using the digibeta ,and would just transfer to HDCAM to save the cost of going back to and telecine the film at the cost of $800 an hour, which is inevitable in a few years if they want to sell their programing.Right?

Why use the that HDCAM back anyways? It seems it is primarly made for docking to sony.com"When connected to its companion HDCF950 camera, the SRW-1/SRPC-1 creates a high quality portable HD image-capturing system." Why would you pay $750 a day to hook up this great deck to a inferior camera. How could your XLH1 even compare to a F900 just because it is recording SR? Why don't you just bit the bullet and rent a F900 or for close to what you are already spending just rent a Varicam. IMHO I would say that would look way better especially with the superior lens available with those cameras. If you are using the stock lens on the XLH1 how can that compare to a 2/3inch piece of glass. I don't think there is a 2/3inch piece of glass that costs less than your camera. The stock canon lens is a servo driven lens(motor driven) so focus and iris aren't near as smooth or as acurate as a real lens. Also you will have much shallower depth with the 2/3inch cameras. Also to end all of the confusion on 24f and 24p for you. How bout we take what your buddy Barry Green said: Barry_Green 09-16-2005, 07:49 PM All indications are that the "24f" is not something bogus like de-interlaced 1080i. It is, however, causing a lot of confusion -- so I do hope that as soon as someone gets one of these things in their hands, they have the opportunity to simply shoot a resolution chart in both 1080i mode and "24f" mode. Then we can answer one question instantly: if the 24F frame is lower in resolution than the 1080i frame, then it is unquestionably "bogus" (i.e., not the equivalent of actual 24p). If the 24f frame is higher resolution than the 1080i frame, well, we may very well have us a horse race. Then we take your shootout specs Adam Wilt prepared: HDW-F900/3 CineAlta 2/3" 1920x1080p 1000+ 1000+ Canon XLH1 1/3" 1440x1080i 800- 700+ 24f mode(540) Sony HVR-Z1U 1/3" 960x1080i 550 700+ 24f mode(540) Panasonic AG-HVX200 1/3" ???x1080p 550? 540? Adam Wilt "Of the 1/3" cameras, the 1440-pixel, 1080i Canon XL H1 was the clear winner in horizontal resolution, and it was second only to the 1920-pixel CineAlta. I see almost 800 TVL/ph from it, with minimal aliasing above that: an astonishingly good performance. In 60i, vertical resolution was a solid 700+ lines; in 24f mode, we thought it looked like half-resolution material on the monitors, consistent with what you'd get with field-doubling. Looking at the captured clips, especially the Combi-2.3's bullseyes, I'd have to say that it certainly looks like field-doubled vertical sampling, with about 540 TV lines usable, although certain aspects of the image "feel" sharper. I'm not sure how to describe it, but perhaps Canon's secret sauce for creating 24f results in a perceptually sharper picture than plain field-doubling, even if the clues I can glean from the interference patterns on the bullseyes would indicate otherwise. "

What would you say is the basic set of prime m42 lens for the K3?

Whew you are sure rawled up. :huh: You choose to post I didn't force you to post or read my post. I was simply asking a question, I thought that was what forums were about. "So what how much are you talking about adding to the budget just to transfer in HD $100-200 more an hour at the telecine?" We understand it costs more money. All I was asking is why don't they go ahead and transfer to HD. Can't most telecines transfer to multiple VTRs at once?

Is this some hidden camera marketing survey video? I have been offered to do one of those before, where you go to a competitors store and asks peoples opinions on the clients store. All while filming them secretly with a hidden camera. Kinda distasteful IMHO.

Kewl spot! Whos did the music? I like the rhythm of the ad. I was also impressed by the low grain for such a high speed stock. What camera and lens did u use?

A show like Scrubs that is shot on super16, it is hard for me to understand why they wouldn't do a HD telecine because aren't they probably using a Spirit ? So what how much are you talking about adding to the budget just to transfer in HD $100-200 more an hour at the telecine? The Spirit and everything else in the show costs so much more in comparison I would think.

http://www.theragefilm.com/teaser.htm Can you guys tell if they used the 16x standard lens or did the use the more expensive 13x wide angle? Also take a look at this beautiiful shot from a HD100 http://home.comcast.net/~stephenlnoe/robertburks.wmv

This would explain why some of FOXs shows in the past years looked really soft to me.

Thanks for all your advice I will pass it on to the decision makers. I have been to busy to post the last few days. The horse logo came from another brand name we were trying to use for our commercial productions side. We called it Barndoor Productions which we came from the barndoors on a fresnel light. Now we have dropped that name and the barndoor part of the logo and just have a man riding a horse horse. I will let you know what happens.

Wow thats a huge difference in power, how would you vary the 10k into soft light fill?

HDV1 is JVCs codec of 720p at 19.4mbps HDV2 is Sonys and Canons 1080i codec at 25mbps.

If you had to go to go to an island with access to electricity and you could only take one light what would it be and why. Would it be a KinoFlo(I am guessing that will be David Mullens answer), A soft box,the sun,etc... Be creative, and I think this could be a interesting thread. I would proably have to say a 1k frenel, because I can use it directly,bounce it off walls,and etc.. Very small and versatile.

www.athensvideo.com its a man on a horse. Ideas so far , a creatively lit shot of someones eye with moving gears composited over it, a POV shot of someone pointing to an editor making an edit on a NLE, and/or a Blacksmith molding a horse shoe by hitting it while it is hot with sparks coming off, etc.... Were are trying to come up with a concept shot that means something, it doesn't have to be techy or relate to the horse logo. Just like Nike doesn't do a whole commercial with just a shoe, they come up with creative concepts. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

I would also like to say I feel like this forum has the more knowledgable people compared to other forums, and yet our members are some of the most humble. It seems like most of the other forums have beginners misunderstanding camera technology,then dishing out mis information, and alot of them have a cocky pre madonna attitude to boot. I am thankful to have such a great information resource without having to deal with cocky attitudes.

"""""""2/3" CCD HD naturally gets a little deep-focus looking if you're stuck in small interiors using wide-angle lenses, or the wide end of the zoom." But since it was a Pannavised one wouldn't that have the depth of field of 35mm just like using a 35mm lens adaptor?""""""" """""""Most HD movies are downconverted to SD submasters for making DVD's. It's confusing on the DVD of "Jackpot" because we shot in HD but the Sony Pictures Classics logo was a telecine to HD from film, and it has dust & dirt on it, so the first thing you see on the DVD is this dirty logo, which makes you think the whole movie was telecined, when it wasn't.""""""" Thats what I thought, but wondered if some telecined the print for the look. """"""""What DP's want most of all is CONTROL over exposure, and generally film negative allows greater flexibility than HD in terms of exposure control, especially in the highlights. It's always easier to throw away detail and information than to try and recover it when it's gone. There were only few times when I ever thought that HD's tendency to burn out and clip in the highlights was an advantage over film."""""""" Agreed, Latitude is IMHO the biggest asset to shooting film over HD.