Daniel Andreas

We shot a project on DVC Pro 50, on the SDX 900 in 24p. We captured on a DVC Pro 50 deck into Final Cut Pro using FireWire. We have mixed the film, and now it's time for hidef upres and color correction at a local post house. Is there any benefit of going back to the camera originals, and reassembling the master via SDI? Is there any quality improvement? Reassembling could be time intensive and costly due to many split screens, so we are looking to avoid it, and stay with the FireWire transfer we originally did, as long as there's not a major quality compromise.

Well.... kind of but not really -- especially looking at the format & price... Also, the Pro35 has a B4 mount and is designed for 2/3" chipsets where as the Mini is for small DV Cameras either projecting THROUGH existing lens (DVX100s, Sony's HDVs) or mounting onto camera (Canon, JVC). More info on Mini35: http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-mini35-converter.php More info on Pro35: http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-pro35.php Well.... kind of but not really -- especially looking at the format & price... Also, the Pro35 has a B4 mount and is designed for 2/3" chipsets where as the Mini is for small DV Cameras either projecting THROUGH existing lens (DVX100s, Sony's HDVs) or mounting onto camera (Canon, JVC). More info on Mini35: http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-mini35-converter.php More info on Pro35: http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-pro35.php Well.... kind of but not really -- especially looking at the format & price... Also, the Pro35 has a B4 mount and is designed for 2/3" chipsets where as the Mini is for small DV Cameras either projecting THROUGH existing lens (DVX100s, Sony's HDVs) or mounting onto camera (Canon, JVC). More info on Mini35: http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-mini35-converter.php More info on Pro35: http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-pro35.php

I need to rent a 35mm SuperSpeed package for a producting that uses the P&S Technik Mini35 adapter on a HDV Camera (Sony's HRV-Z1). Looking to rent a lens package for ca. 2 weeks in February for an affordable rate. Looking for 18/25/35/50/85mm Super Speed package if possible w. Follow-Focus and Matte-Box / Rods. You can email me directly at Daniel@24pcine.com Thanks!

I have used the Pro35 adapter on my SDX900 for a short film and was very PLEASED with the beautiful shallow dof and the 35mm look I got out of the camera (on 24p). Now we are planning a music video in Europe with the idea to use the Mini35 adapter shooting either with the Sony's Z1. 1) Does anybody have any experience / recommendations with shooting on the Mini35 adapter using Zeiss Primes on the Z1? 2) any links to footage shot with the Mini35 with primes on the Z1? 3) any reviews on that combo? 4) what rental house do you recommend in Los Angeles? Thanks!

I am looking to purchse a CINEMETER II Light Meter. It was made in the 80's by a company called GDB Enterprises in Burbank, CA If you have one or know where to get one please email me at PALCREWS@gmail.com Best, Daniel

I have used the Pro35 adapter on my SDX900 for a short film and was very pleased with the shallow dof and the 35mm look I got out of the camera (on 24p). Now I am playing with the idea to use the Mini35 adapter for a music video in Europe shooting either with the DVX100B or possibly Sony's HDV (Z1) if the production decides they want to go there. 1) Does anybody have any experience with shooting on the Mini35 adapter using Zeiss Primes and either the DVX100A/B or Z1? 2) any links to footage shot with the Mini35 and DVX100A/B or Z1? 3) any reviews on either of those combinations? Thanks!

Canon's XL H1 is presumably the first camera that employs HDV2 -- the second gerneration algorithm which promises lower motion artifacts. Flashback: When the Z1 was introduced at NAB last year the Sony booth was buzzing and full of enthusiastic early adapters. I walked into the Sony booth with a client who wanted to see what HDV was all about. The HDV Kiosk featured several large HD Plasma Displays arranged around the booth in a circle. The loop showed nicely composed high-rez images dissolving to classical music. My client was impressed until I poped the question: "you notice anything" and then he did. "Nothing moves". True, in every shot of the demo loop the camera was completely locked down, not pans, no tilts no zooms. I am certain the DP who shot the demo for Sony was instructed to NOT MOVE the camera and have no movement within the frame. You have to wonder how it makes any sense to have a motion picture camera that can't handle motion and why Sony decided to rush to maket with a mediocre camera. I had heard rumors about the motion artifacts that haunted that 60:1 compression method. But over at the Sony booth the world was still at peace: there was no motion and there were no artifacts until.... I found the server and hit the space bar right in the middle of a dissolve.... The compression is at it's weakest when a lot of information changes from one frame to the next -- the result was large digital "blocks" pixelating the entire screen. I went frame-by-frame to show that the ugly artifact was happening throughout the entire dissolve with blocks the size of a postage stamp. Soon an angry Sony sales rep who felt he was caught with his pants down rushed over, pushing me away to hit the space bar and get the loop going again. Back to today: Canon's new HDV camera the XL-H1 is using the improved HDV2 algorithm which has a dynamic compression allocation and supposedly handles motion considerably better. Has anybody seen that being true and can confirm that Sony's Z1 pales in comparison because it is still using the inferior HDV1 method, where as the Canon HD is using HDV2? Has anybody done any comparative tests between those two cameras on motion and digital blocking?

More info on SDX900 shooting Laguna Beach: http://www.infocomm.org/index.cfm?objectID...B755062C9B78038

When the FX1 was introduced at NAB last year the new Sony booth was buzzing and full of enthusiastic early adapters. I walked into the Sony booth with a client who wanted to see what HDV was all about. The HDV Kiosk featured several large HD Plasma Displays arranged around the booth in a circle. The loop showed nicely composed high-rez images dissolving to classical music. My client was impressed until I poped the question: "you notice anything" and then he did. "Nothing moves". True, in every shot of the demo loop the camera was completely locked down, not pans, no tilts no zooms. I am certain the DP was instructed to NOT MOVE the camera and have no movement within the frame. You have to wonder how it makes no sense to have a motion picture camera that can't handle motion and why Sony rushed to maket with a mediocre camera. I had heard rumors about the motion artifacts that haunted that 60:1 compression method. But over at the Sony booth the world was still at peace: there was no motion and there were no artifacts until.... I found the server and hit the space bar right in the middle of a dissolve.... The compression is at it's weakest when a lot of information changes from one frame to the next -- the result was large digital "blocks" pixelating the entire screen. I went frame-by-frame to show that the ugly artifact was happening throughout the entire dissolve with blocks the size of a postage stamp. Soon an angry Sony sales rep who felt he was caught with his pants down rushed over, pushing me away to hit the space bar and get the loop going again. So here is my question -- I heard that the new Canon XH-H1 is using the improved HDV2 algorithm which has a dynamic compression allocation and supposedly handles motion considerably better. Has anybody seen that being true and can confirm that Sony's FX1 is in fact only using the HDV1 method where as the Canon HD is using HDV2? Anybody done any comparative tests between those two cameras?

How do those "Indie Divisions" work? Do they have different rules to join?

I have owned a Cinemeter II for years but now need to replace it. If you own and don't use it anymore please let me know and I will offer you some $$ or trade filters etc.

The Cinemeter II is definitely a superior meter - I have had mine for seven years. It's the only light meter that is designed for the cinematographer - from the ground up. All other light meters are still meters where they added some cine speeds.... Sadly the Burbank based company went belly up as it could not compete w/ the Asian made meters. If you are lucky you might still find them at some stores. Good luck and let me know if you found one and where -- I might buy a back-up just in case.

Viel Glück hier eine PAL SDX900 zu finden -- wird eher schwierig sein -- von uns kannst Du allerdings eine SDX900 in NTSC mieten sowie eine DigiBeta PAL Lass uns wissen falls das von Interesse für Dich ist, sonst würde ich die Kamera aus Deutschland mitbringen. Daniel@24pcine.com www.24pCine.com

Sony has "figured it out" how to compress the hell out of an HD signal -- They were forced to come out with something new after sales of their PD150/170 plummeted (because people went to buy the popular DVX100/A) So in a desperate attempt to get some of the lost market share back Sony adopted JVC's HDV -- Problem is, when JVC came out with it 2 years prior it was designed for poeple who have HD displays at home to be able to shoot their weddings in HD. If you want to edit it oh boy, does it look like CRAP! Once you ingest it, do some image manipulation (color correction) and then output again, the artifacts won't be pretty. And don't forget to instruct your DP NOT to move the camera or have any fast subjects move through the frame as the high 60:1 MPEG-2 compression can simply can't handle such increased data. Bottom line: you can not fit HD onto MiniDV tape w.o major concessions. So Panasonic, being the visionary company they are came out with P2, moving towards a fully solid-state future. As for the apparent frustration some express with P2: be a little patient -- prices will go down and meanwhile there will also be 3rd party hard drive solutions available.

Here is the QT link: ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/Panasonic/Dri...s/hvx200_ad.mov

Even in A/B comparisons the cinematic image of the SDX900 is virtually indistinguishable from both VariCam and CineAlta! Having shot with both an F900 and a SDX900 in a comparative scenario where we finished on D5, we found that the SDX900 held up REALLY well. If you finish in HD the Varicam is definitely a good choice, if your final project is in SD there is NO reason to shoot on the Varicam, and if you are undecided you can shoot on the SDX900 and easily uprez to full HD. Most of the settings of the SDX are indentical with the Varicam, including the two cine gamas, color matrix, and all the extensive contrast control. Nat Geo who traditionally shoots on film (Super 16 or 35mm) now shoots on the SDX for several of its high-profile documentaries: http://www.creativemac.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=25973 Other shows that shoot on the SDX include PROJECT GREENLIGHT (Bravo) and THE COMEBACK with Lisa Kudrow on HBO http://www.hbo.com/comeback/about/ I have been using the SDX900 on many projects with high-profile clients such as IBM, HP, Neutrogena and Maverick Records and the clients could not be happier.

Even in A/B comparisons the cinematic image of the SDX900 is virtually indistinguishable from both VariCam and CineAlta! Having shot with both an F900 and a SDX900 in a comparative scenario where we finished on D5, we found that the SDX900 held up REALLY well. If you finish in HD the Varicam is definitely a good choice, if your final project is in SD there is NO reason to shoot on the Varicam, and if you are undecided you can shoot on the SDX900 and easily uprez to full HD. Most of the settings of the SDX are indentical with the Varicam, including the two cine gamas, color matrix, and all the extensive contrast control. Nat Geo who traditionally shoots on film (Super 16 or 35mm) now shoots on the SDX for several of its high-profile documentaries: http://www.creativemac.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=25973 Other shows that shoot on the SDX include PROJECT GREENLIGHT (Bravo) and THE COMEBACK with Lisa Kudrow on HBO http://www.hbo.com/comeback/about/

Anyone knows of any software for drawing lighting diagrams? (2-D overhead no 3-D)

picture of Pro35 System

We are using a Pro35 adapter with Zeiss SuperSpeeds. Any recommendations to get the best look out of this system? The project is not intended for a film-- it has to look great on DVD, but then again you never know. In the camera test I noticed that the system has a strong softening effect -- similar to a white promist #1 Is it a good idea to crush the blacks to get a little more snap out of it? What Gamma settings work best? Admittedly many of these things are subjective. However, I am hoping for somoene to give me some recommendations based on their experience for settings including V and H resolution, coring, master pedestal, etc Also, what # setting on the PRO35 worked best for you, I have noticed that around #7 you can make it almost disappear, as the fame rate seems to cancel out the oscillating movement. Nots sure if that's where it's best to be or just outside that area? BTW: WHITE SHADING is crucial and made a bid difference! Thanks for your help! D

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/s...Model=AJ-HDX400

We are going to be shooting a short on two SDX900s with the Pro35 adapter and Zeiss SuperSpeeds. Has anybody used the Pro35 system on the SDX900? What advise do you have in terms of changing the camera setup? What else should be considered?

Hi Matthew und hallo Achim: Unfortunately Achim's SDX900 will always look better than Matthew's camera -- that's not the camera's or the DP's fault but dueto the inferior NTSC television standard with less lines, bad color space and bad color reproduction etc. So whenever possible shoot on 24p or 30p. Below might interest both of you: The first German film to be admitted to Cannes since 1993 (you know how those "Frenchies" love you Germans!) and shot with the SDX900 PAL: https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/pro-av/sal...fo/ibc/070.html

This link be helpful to visualize the concept of Interlaced v.s. Progressive imaging. http://www.avdeals.ca/classroom/Proscanexplained.htm

The best thing is to try to stay with the SDX900 for the entire production. If you HAVE to use an inferior format go with the DVX100A for your 2nd Unit camera -- they CAN match somewhat and I have done this recently with my SDX900 and two DVX100A rentals. There is a setting on the CD Rom (also available online) called DVX MATCH. Use it to get the SDX intercut with the DVX somewhat. Having said that you will never get the same look out of a 25MB/s signal from a prosumer camera compared to a broadcast camcorder in DVCPro50 with a SD or HD lens. Color space, chip set, compression, resolution, optics are all vastly different. But if you HAVE to intercut the two formats I would recommend to shoot the majority with the SDX, including the wider shots. The DVX can look good on closer shots that have less detail. Stay away from the XL2 -- it won't match the SDX and the only solution you may have is to "fix it in post" by adding some silly posterize or color effect (B&W, sepia etc) to purpously set them apart so it doesn't look like one camera was not as good as the other camera.... :unsure: