The Panasonic 24P

[Korhan20]

Hi, I finally made a decision to use a Panasonic 24P instead of using film for a movie i am shooting in the near future. (I did this because of cost reasons) But i have a couple of questions for people out there.

1. I read that the 24P has XLR inputs. I own a Tascam dap1 portable DAT recorder and i was wondering if that would give me better sound quality than the Panasonic would. Originally i was just going to use the DAT recorder and synch later during editing, should i still do this using this new camera?

 

2. Lighting issues. I know there are a lot of books out there that give a lot of tips and tricks while lighting with film. But where should i turn to in order to obtain lighting information with regard to video being shot with the Panasonic 24p? I want it to look as good as possible and i want the average viewer to think they are watching film.

 

Thank you very much.

 

 

 

 

 

-Korhan

[painfulcrash]

1- if you asked that question to my cine-4 teacher (who owns a Pan 24p) , he would tell you to record sound with the camera. But personally , I would use portable DAT recorder; key word portable. (DAT has been the standart audio-recording format ) So I would dont worry about the quality, because its going to be clean anyway.. worry about how fast and accurate you can get the sound. There will be situations where the XLR will be too short if you go to the camera . But if you use DAT-coder you can just place yourself anywhere you want , not worrying if you are gonna pull on the camera with your tangled XLR...

2- We did an in-class test shoot with 35mm and 24p. I have to say 24p amazed me. (Even tough i'm not satified with the depth) The image quality is very nice. (very close to35mm) But one thing to watch out is : the white zones. Like any other digital format it has hard time holding the whites. If you use the zebra mode, and light according to it, you will have a beatiful image.

 

good luck ,

-crash (aydin ozer)

[Tenolian Bell]

I always vote for totally seperate sound. I don't like camera being linked to sound because often, sound and camera need to be in two seperate places in covering the scene and you have to deal with a tangle of cords.

 

I also notice in camera sound tends to make the sound recordist a little more lazy and I to pick up some of the slack on sound since the meters, level controls, and headphones are all near or in the camera. I try to stress that I don't want to have anything to do with the operations of sound.

 

One quick and rough way I check lighting when shooting miniDV. I use my light meter, more in the spirit of looking at exposure values than an acutal T stops. If relevant highlights are three stops over it's clipped, if relevant shadows are around five to six stops under they are crushed.

[David Mullen ASC]

Good lighting is the lighting you see in great paintings, in well-photographed movies, in nature, etc. -- if you can master THAT then adjusting for the contrast of DV is a tiny part of the learning curve.

 

So I'd study great lighting PERIOD, learn to light that way, and then make adjustments on the set for the limited overexposure capability of DV. In other words, if you want the lighting to look like "The Godfather" or "Seven" then study those films, study the films, paintings, and photos that influenced those films, etc.

[Mitch Gross]

Lighting is lighting, and the only difference in doing it well in MiniDV is in using a decent monitor to stay within the exposure range of that camera. So any good lighting book is a great place to start to understand the concepts and techniques to good lighting.

 

As for sound, your Tascam DAT recorder has better limiter circuitry and A/D converters than can be squeezed into the tiny audio circuits of the little Panasonic camera. So I would vote for using the DAT deck every time.

[Michael Nash]

Maybe I'm overlooking the obvious, but I'm assuming you're all talking about the DVX-100 Mini DV camcorder. "Panasonic 24P" is a little confusing since there's the DVX, the SDX-900 (2/3" chip DVCPRO50/DVCPRO), and the Varicam (DVCPROHD). All three have different image and sound quality (although the SDX and the Varicam probably have the same audio sampling). And since this is the "video only" conference we'll eliminate the HD Varicam.

 

There are potential risks and frustrations to shooting single-system sound on video, but it doesn't have to be a problem. I shoot a TON of Betacam stuff where the audio goes straight into camera and almost never have a recording-related problem. Any problems that do occur are either with the mics and cables, or operator error.

 

There are a couple of tips to simplify things:

 

1 - Use a mixer, and send the mixed signal to the camera. Set the record levels on the camera with tone from the mixer, then put tape over the pots on the camera and leave them alone. All level adjustments are done by the sound mixer, who then never has to touch the camera.

 

2 - Monitor the sound FROM THE CAMERA, not from the mixer. You need to hear what's going to tape, not just through the mixer. I've seen a half day's work ruined beacuse the sound mixer never bothered to plug his headphones into the camera instead of the mixer, only to realize the camera was set to the wrong inputs.

 

3 - BUILD A F#$@*NG AUDIO SNAKE, for cryin' out loud. (Ahem, sorry, pet peeve of mine). It's a simple matter to bundle two audio cables and a headphone cable together so there's one clean cable going to the camera. You're going to want to monitor the image anyway, so there's almost always a cable going to camera. Some sound people even build a BNC cable into the snake for this purpose. Most sound guys (and gals) build a quick-release "pigtail" that stays attached to camera, and the mixer/boom op can just click-in before you roll. Standard Operating Procedure on these reality TV shows. That way all the connections to the camera stay put, and the camera operator and sound person can quickly become untethered.

 

As a cameraman I hate being responsible for audio also. I can't pay due attention to operating and sound quality at the same time. But often on Betacam gigs I end up doing just that. It's hard to operate with full sized headphones, so I bought a $10 pair of earbuds from Best Buy (I just looked for the best frequency response I could find). I swear by these things as they take up no space, sound great, and I can easily monitor audio while shooting in handheld video/wireless audio situations.

 

Now all that said, most larger film-style productions that shoot on video do record sound separately onto DAT. It's a tried and true method and has its advantages. Nothing wrong with it. But if you decide the audio quality of your camera is up to task, don't be afraid to take advantage of it when you need to.

[Josh Hill]

I would go with the DAT personally. I've recorded sound into my XL1s on both of my big shoots and quite frankly, I never want to do it again while using a boom or anything like that. Its just too much stuff to deal with at once on the camera (mixing the audio, keeping cords out of the way, etc etc).

 

I'm looking into getting a DA-P1 for myself so I can separate my video and my audio producing capabilities. Mobility is the number one issue. If I can get one crew member to handle a boom and a DAT, they tend to pay more attention to what they're doing and there is better sound recorded.

 

Also, you have to remember when working with in-camera sound, what if the director wants to take a few shots at the scene himself? Do you tag along with the earphones and try to keep everything adjusted and eventually annoy the hell out of him, or do you just let him go at it and see if he even cares about the audio (I always prefer the latter because when it comes out bad and its the director's fault, they tend to stop picking up my equipment and dicking around with it).

 

Anyway, thats my advice. Go with the DAT and sync up in post. I think you'll get a better product that way.

[Mitch Gross]

3 - BUILD A F#$@*NG AUDIO SNAKE, for cryin' out loud. (Ahem, sorry, pet peeve of mine). It's a simple matter to bundle two audio cables and a headphone cable together so there's one clean cable going to the camera. You're going to want to monitor the image anyway, so there's almost always a cable going to camera. Some sound people even build a BNC cable into the snake for this purpose. Most sound guys (and gals) build a quick-release "pigtail" that stays attached to camera, and the mixer/boom op can just click-in before you roll. Standard Operating Procedure on these reality TV shows. That way all the connections to the camera stay put, and the camera operator and sound person can quickly become untethered.

Yes, this drives me absolutely nuts. I won't work with a soundman unless they have one of these. They're called Breakaway cables, btw. They often have an extra headphone jack on the camera end in case the operator wants to hear the sound as well (for creative reasons, not technical). Any real field sound mixer will have a special connector that plugs this cable to the mixer with just one connection and the cable is generally 25' long, so it's good for most situations. For my kit I also went and made a 25' extension cable for this which is simply two XLR cables and an 1/8" stereo cable for the headphones all cable-tied together. It's pretty rare to need the extra distance so I didn't bother with building in a breakaway pigtail but at least it's a single trunk hanging off the camera.

[Bill Totolo]

Just to chime in, if you want people to mistake your video production for a film production you should treat it as a film production.

 

Mount your camera on a dolly or a steadicam, compose your shots, shoot wide screen, don't over use zoom or handheld, limit your dof, reduce detail (in the menu), use filtration, ND your windows, be judicious when mixing color temps, story board your shots, pre-light your sets, shoot single camera style relighting your coverage, rehearse all your camera moves and like David recommended, study the classics.

 

Most of your work and time should be spent on pre-production.

 

Anything you can do to replicate the workings on a real film set will go a long way to the over all look and feel of your production.

[Korhan20]

Bill, i am already planning to do almost everything you just said. Except there are some things that you listed that i am unaware of (or just don't know the abreviations. "limit your dof" - "ND your windows" - "be judicious when mixing color temps". Also, when you say shoot widescreen, should i use the widescreen feature on the camera? Or shoot it fullscreen and change it later on my computer or something?

 

Thank you

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

Not to preempt Bill, but my feelings:

 

> "limit your dof"

 

Shoot using as short a depth of field as you can, generally, with video, unless you have compelling reasons not to. Use focus (soft or sharp equally) as a tool to concentrate the viewer on the portion of the frame you want them to look at.

 

> "ND your windows"

 

Use netural density (grey; reduces light with no colour shift) gel to control windows and avoid them overexposing. This is a common problem when you're shooting an interior which includes a window, since indoors is generally much dimmer than outdoors and video doesn't handle the hilights well.

 

> "be judicious when mixing color temps"

 

Assuming you know about colour temperature - don't follow the rules slavishly, but know why you're breaking them. It might be appropriate to allow an exterior to go slightly blue (with its high CT natural light) if you're trying to create the impression of a nice warm interior shot directly following it, or if you were to dolly through a doorway from a wintry night to a welcoming interior.

 

> Also, when you say shoot widescreen, should i use the widescreen feature on

> the camera?

 

People argue for both. If you shoot fullscreen you may find that your computer uses a better resizing algorithm than the camera does - compare a Photoshop resample with "nearest neighbour" checked to one with a more advanced mode. It's obvious which is better. I don't think the difference is quite that pronounced with most cameras, but a free video tool such as VirtualDub will generally make a better job of it.

 

On the other hand, if you crop in camera, it means that the compressor is using all of the data space it has inside the already-harshly-compressed DV codec to compress useful picture, rather than stuff you're going to chop off.

 

I'm ambivalent about this. Shoot tests. Look closely at the results and make a call.

 

Phil

[Bill Totolo]

What Phil said and as usual much more detailed and technical than I could

express : )

[Korhan20]

Thank you very much for that information. Also, does anyone know what the differences are between the AG-DVX100AP and the AG-DVX100P?

[Alvin Pingol]

Thank you very much for that information.  Also, does anyone know what the differences are between the AG-DVX100AP and the AG-DVX100P?

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:ijA_arm...0a+dvx100&hl=en

 

Note: The P at the end simply reperesents that it is an NTSC model and is usually omitted.

 

EDIT: Seems the post on that site deals with the PAL version of the camera, so anywhere that says 25P, 1/50, or 1/25, simply take it as 24P, 1/60, and 1/24.

[Michael Nash]

They often have an extra headphone jack on the camera end in case the operator wants to hear the sound as well (for creative reasons, not technical).

There are times when I wish I had this. Shooting reality shows we'll have two cameras covering eight people, the wireless receivers split between the two sound mixers. Sometimes someone in the group might say something that I couldn't hear beacuse of distance or ambient noise, and a producer would run over to me and ask, "did you get that?" I'm like, "get what? I can't hear anything." And the producers are the ones who get the Comteks, not the camera operators.

[Tenolian Bell]

adjusting for the contrast of DV is a tiny part of the learning curve.

In my journey of learning lighting when I finally figured how to use and manipulate contrast made all the difference. I'm sure its different for everyone, I already had a good eye for interior natraulistic lighting. Outdoors and dealing with the sun when I finally figured out how levels of contrast worked it opened an entirely new world for me.

 

I've been shooting in California a lot over the past few months and I've had to add more to the lesson because of how much more harsh the sun is there as compared to the East coast where I've mostly worked.

 

 

I must be working with some poor sound guys. I really came more from shooting film, video has come with emergence of DV and HD. So sound into the camera is fairly new to me and I've only had to deal with it over the past couple of years. In my expiereince when sound goes into the camera it adds more responsibility for me, and is a pain in the arse.

[Mitch Gross]

I must be working with some poor sound guys. I really came more from shooting film, video has come with emergence of DV and HD. So sound into the camera is fairly new to me and I've only had to deal with it over the past couple of years. In my expiereince when sound goes into the camera it adds more responsibility for me, and is a pain in the arse.

You should work with better sound guys. I'm a great friend to the soundperson, and always try to work with them for lighting and positioning. I let them know what I'm up to and we work together. But I like to have the headphone passback so I can wear earbuds when necessary, and I've let the soundguys know that just because sound is fed into the camera doesn't mean that the camera dept. should have anything to do with it. Aside from making sure they feed me proper tone when laying bars or being there to plug in for a quick jam sync if we're recording to a separate deck anywhere, I just don't wanna know about it. Give me the breakaway on the camera, tape my pots into position and do your job. Mine is to get the image.

[Korhan20]

One more question to you guys. Should i hold off on buying this camera and wait and see if there will be other cameras that can accomplish the same things in the fall. I can purchase a dvx100ap right now for around 3 grand. This fall will there be any other 24p cameras coming out in that price range that i should wait for? Or should i just buy this camera now?

[Tenolian Bell]

One thing that remains constant is that there will always be something new. The DVX is the hot little camera right now. You can wait for the next thing to come out, but inevitably there will be the next after that.

[Mitch Gross]

When do you need it? If you don't need it until the fall then you might as well wait. The price won't be going up.

 

Canon has secretly discontinued the XL-1s and the replacement is supposedly arriving in the next few months. It may have both 24p and HDV capability, but who knows?

[Korhan20]

I won't really need it until 2005, but i would like to get my hands on one so i could pratice lighting and what not while i have time. Also, would some one clear up the problems in post while editing something that was shot in 24p? When i capture the footage will it be in 24 or 30 and can i edit it just like i do normally with 30? I don't really understand what all the fuss is about.

[David Mullen ASC]

NTSC is 60i (60 fields per second, interlaced scan). The NTSC DVX100 when set to 24P, captures 24 progressive scan frames per second but adds a 3:2 pulldown to convert it to 60i for recording. When set to 30P, it simply splits each frame into two fields for recording as 60i. In 60i mode, it captures motion 60 times a second as fields.

 

So the material shot in 24P can be edited as any other 60i material in NTSC. However, as soon as you edit it, the 3:2 pulldown sequence is broken up. This is not a problem if you stay in NTSC from then on out, but should you wish to convert it to true 24P for storage on DVD for a progressive scan player and display, or for transfer to film, it would be better to extract the pulldown before editing and edit true 24P. The 24P Advanced mode makes it easier to remove the 3:2 pulldown when importing the footage into some editing software.

[Korhan20]

If i edit in true 24p, can i still output that and play it on NTSC players? I want to make VHS and DVD copies of it but at the same time i don't want to do a re-edit if i have to transfer it to film.

[Alvin Pingol]

You have to run a telecine over it first, that is, put back the 3:2 pulldown.

 

I recommend just keeping a 24P master. You will maintain a higher quality versus if you kept a telecined version and removed pulldown afterwards.

[Korhan20]

Is there special software that i can use in accordance with Premiere 6.5 to do that? Running a telecine i mean.