Daniel Sheehy

Tape as a capture medium has some serious flaws, but as a data storage solution, it has decades left in it. Given the need for long term storage solutions for any footage not shot on film, I don't think the end is any where in sight for tape in the entertainment industry.

In view of the thousands you'll spend on the camera itself, an extra $300 on warranty isn't all that much. Think of it as peace of mind ;)

Pretty much any mid to high end DSLR is suitable to experiment with. A couple of points to remember: auto white balance will fluctuate. You won't be able to see the difference between shots individually, but once in sequence it will most likely show up. The other issue is the lifespan of the shutter on a DSLR isn't as high as a traditional SLR. This can become an issue on longer projects, where you may need to have several camera bodies on hand. This page has some links to discussions of this issue: http://www.stopmotionworks.com/cams4stpmo.htm#shutterlife Tim Burtons' Corpse Bride used the Canon EOS-1D Mark II.

80 & 100 IRE.

http://www.bebob.de/international/zoe-dvxl_eng.html You really did nothing wrong. The jumpy zoom could be due to a couple of things. Worst case, the gears or electronics in the camera are a little off & need looking at. Was the servo switch on the camera cleanly engaged? I've found that it sometimes doesn't engage properly initially, needs a little help. Could also be a dicky remote - battery still good? Was the signal path to the camera clear? If you were trying to be discrete about the zoom, the remote may have not been pointing cleanly at the camera. I'd just set the camera up again & see if you can sort out the issue. If its a dicky remote, that should be easy to prove. If its the gears/motor in the camera, the zoom should be jumpy when you use the zoom buttons on the grip or handle.

You're probably the only Boddington they know, but not the only Richard. How many other (un-related) Boddingtons do you know? There are several Daniels' on this forum... but only one Sheehy. In fact, I'm one of only 9 Sheehys in the whole of Fiji, and the others are all family. :) So I can completely understand the way people latch onto last names as identifiers.

Doesn't the HVX record camera settings in the meta-data with the footage? You might be able to check the gain settings that way... because that does sound like the most likely scenario.

No need to get all huffy. I didn't give you a technical answer, because you didn't ask a technical question. ('How bad..' is NOT a technical question.) As for 16:9, well, you weren't specific... so I wasn't going to assume anything. To the technical... 4:3 SD (i.e. the DVX100) is 720x525 (NTSC) or 720x625 (PAL) lines. To achieve 16:9, it crops or squeezes the image into 720x480 lines Therefore when shooting 16:9 on the DVX100a, you might lose anywhere between 45 - 145 horizontal resolution lines, depending whether you're shooting NTSC or PAl. So, like I said before, now that you know the technical explanation, you will still have to make a subjective call about whether you & those working on the project with you are happy with the resolution loss. You are not going to know 'how bad' it is until YOU look at it and decide whether you are ok with how it looks. Another option is to shoot 4:3 (full resolution) and the up-rez the footage to 16:9. There are a couple of fairly good programs that do this. (Photozoom, Instant HD...) If you have further questions, or things still need clarifying, feel free to do the polite thing, and post an expanded or more specific question.

What exactly are you trying to find out? Shooting in squeeze mode, for final play-out in 4:3 is not a good idea. Shooting squeeze mode for 16:9 play-out is the reason they included the mode. If you are asking if the loss of resolution is going to be acceptable, well the best thing would be to shoot some footage & see what you and the directors think. Some people are happy to go that path, others prefer to go with a native 16:9 camera.

I think a serious pro would want to see how the camera performs before spouting off at all. Nothing has changed since Tim (Admin) suggested that everyone wait till there was a camera in hand to test before the spouting began. We don't yet have the camera in hand, so maybe we should just hold off on the spouting. ...though it is amusing to hear about fanboys & hecklers.. I don't even remember who coined those terms!

LOL, yeah, the site they're after is reduser.net. I actually find it fascinating how there is so much talk of how the camera 'does' this or 'does' that. Last time I checked, it was still in the 'will do' or 'is supposed to do this' stage. Its come a long way since I first stumbled across the red.com page, with its announcements about how it was going to revolutionise digital film making... and no product to show, not even a prototype. :) I think the one, indisputable, good thing that has happened is that the Red Co. have announced a date when other film makers will be able to test it. (That is if JJ allows the hecklers to touch his creation ;) ) "never sell this guy no matter what"

Unfortunately not, like Walter said, that's pretty much the end of the road. ...though if you are really desperate, you could try & reconstruct the frames in photoshop or a similar programme... very time consuming, and the touch up will stand out like a sore thumb.

Hi, As discussed here apparently 18% grey isn't the best way to go with the video cameras. Better to take a reading from an average scene (no excessive hightlights, no large black holes) and then match the ISO that way.

Hi, 'Minimum Lux' is a phrase most often seen in advertising material, it often has very little to do with good exposure.

How about we move the discussion over here: http://www.davidrubio3d.com/ But wait! I just looked there, and this type of language isn't allowed over there either!

A simple search of the archive will reveal that this has been discussed before. http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...&hl=dvx100a

I shoot with the DVX quite a bit. It is a nice camera, nice picture & clean audio. However, as Chris noted, it is native 4:3. Your choice will probably boil down to that difference; native 16:9 vs. 4:3 The start/stop button popped off mine when I was shooting with an Ewa-Marine housing. :huh: Annoying, but its a great camera none the less.

It sounds like it might be a really bad idea to use the PD150. (Don't shoot with it myself, so can't really comment.) If you're worried about cables, how about running all your mics to the mixer & feeding the mixer out to a wireless transmitter, receiver is strapped to the camera or worn by the camera operator. (A-la ENG/EFP sound..) Has the advantage of avoiding excess cables, is cheap & keeps the PD150 out of the equation. Down side: runs everything through a wireless transmitter which is going to compress it slightly.

It would seem that the problem hasn't been entirely fixed. He claimed to have found a lag of about 1/60th sec. ( http://www.adamwilt.com/24p/#AVsync )

EDIT: specific link : http://www.adamwilt.com/24p/#AVsync Well, a 24P extractor should help, but you can always just nudge the audio a couple of frames.

Adam Wilt on his site ( http://www.adamwilt.com/24p ) observes an audio lag of about 1/60 sec with footage shot in 24PA mode. So it might be reasonable to expect to see a similar difference when you run the sound from the PD150 with the video from the DVX100a. However it is easily corrected.

Allow plenty of time to get your shots. It is also not a bad idea to get them in early, so they can get used to the lights & noises on set. Be patient. :)

If it's too good to be true... :) I would think that part of Helen Mirren's attraction is that she is content to be the way she is, instead of 'yearning for her lost youth' or something.

I think completely removing the reflections from the eyes makes them look dead. I personally won't do anything to the eyes unless there are multiple competing highlights, then I'd remove all but the key reflection.

You might get an interesting film if you take care of the Allied side of things.. ie. embed with/follow US/British forces. But hire a local (Middle Eastern) cameraman to document the other side of the story. I'm sure that put together it would allow you better access than you would be able to get alone and it would make a very interesting documentary.