JVC or Panny for Indie Film in Asia???

[Seung Han]

Hello,

I am an independent filmmaker about to embark on my first feature film and I am considering HD or HDV to be my format. I have shot on 16mm, DV and Digibeta in the past, so I am excited about the new possibilities of HD.

But, it has been a while since I have researched new technology in video and video optics, and I am a little overwhelmed to say the least at the amount of ground to cover in HD and HDV. I would greatly appreciate any advice or feedback in my process or thinking.

My film will be shot in Seoul, South Korea in real locations using a small crew with minimal funds. The story is a character driven piece and deals with young Korean-American men moving back to South Korea from the States and discovering the many exciting and strange ways to meet beautiful young Korean women, some of it legal, some of it illegal, but most of it in a moral grey area.

The subject matter is very controversial and even though it is absolutely a fictional narrative piece, I would like the images to have an immediate quality about it, a lot of handheld with minimal lighting. I guess Lost in Translation would be a good example of what I am aiming for - an intimacy without being obtrusive.

I am currently talking to some distributors in the U.S. and Asia about possible interest in the concept of my film, and they seem enthusiastic about it since it deals with dating and sex in a very foreign context (dating in Korea is very different then other parts of Asia), except they are not familiar with HDV. They, especially the Asian distributors, however, have released many HD projects in theaters and are seeking more and more HD content since many theaters out here are projecting digitally. I am hoping if I can produce quality content with HDV these distributors will see the light.

So, I have researched HDV and HD cameras for budgetary and practical reasons and have narrowed it down to the JVC HD100 and the Panasonic HVX200. I know indie filmmakers have embraced both for different reasons, but I find myself on the fence. I have checked both out at the retailers in Seoul but cannot make up my mind. I do know I will have to rig either camera with a 35mm adapter (m2 or brevis) but I cannot decide on the camera or format (DVCPRO HD or HDV). I hope to have my film projected both digitally and on 35mm film at some point in the future.

Knowing a little about my project, what do you guys recommend? I know this forum tilts toward HVX but the threads I’ve been reading seemed informed and at times opinionated but with reasoning.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to read all this…

[SPZ]

Han, I'm in Macau, near HK. The HVX is great in Neon lights and gives a very filmic "Wong Kar Wai" look right of the camera if you shoot on the Cine D or V settings on the go.

However, since you seem to be talking with investors (and your story seems very interesting and sellabe), I would suggest you look at the PANASONIC HPX-500. A bit more expensive, for sure, but not too much more if you have a small group of investors or aids.

Since its fiction, I believe you won't have a problem with the size of the camera.

As for the JVC, I would personally suggest you check out the HD200 and not the 100. More up to date and with more features

And do not exclude the Canon XL-H1. I saw a Blockbuster movie being mastered in a top production House in Hong-Kong shot with this camera. It was being prepared for film out and commercial distribution. It looked almost indistinguishable from 35mm. I was very, very impressed.

I love my HVX with Brevis. I'm still to properly do post in my film (image wise I'm very, very happy with it), and think it WILL look good on the Big screen (I aim to show it in the Big Screen) but would seriously consider the HPX500 and the XL-h1.

[Seung Han]

Hey SPZ,

I'm thinking about shooting this one with my own funds. Been dealing with companies for another script in development for about a year and just got the itch to shoot something indie style in Asia like I used to in NYC.

As far as the cameras, I keep leaning towards the Panny but I have been seeing better footage on the net with the HVX. For some reason, even the good footage of the Panny looks noisier...

I am very curious about HDV blow up to 35mm. I have been watching a lot of films in Korea shot on HD (real HD not HDV) projected digitally on big screens and they look okay. A step below super 16mm blown up to 35mm. They are noisier especially in med and wide shots in low light settings but the people I go to see the movie with who are not technical do not know the difference. They think they have seen a regular movie.

I would like to see some HDV footage projected digitally on a large screen or even some HDV footage blown up to 35mm. I know it will be softer but it would be great to know what kind of latitude I can work with so the image will not be so soft or noisy as to be obtrusive to the narrative.

Please let me know any other technical details you have seen in terms of HDV being projected digitally or as 35mm. Thanks for you response and comments! :thumbup:

I've been to Macau twice this year and had a crazy time. Its a pretty wild city.

[Justyn]

The 100 is not the choice. I think that they make newer models now.. the 250 maybe. I really hated shooting with that camera. The ergonomics, cheap lens, and the kind of blah mediocre footage. In order to match what we shot to my HVX, the editor had to cut my color info down 50 percent..

I think that HDV has come a long way.. You should also see that experiement Barry did in Vegas... very telling.

There's been quite a few HVX blow-ups and so far I think people are happy.. but again if the content is good who cares what it was shot on. I loved that Basketball diaries movie and that was shot on Beta... ewwwwww..

[Seung Han]

Hey Justyn,

I agree, quality of the story is paramount but I believe this to be more true as the image becomes worse. I say this because I see many films that have terrible stories and bad writing but they get distributed because they have quality cinematography, production design, great sound...

Reality is - I believe I have a compelling story in my script but I need great actors, good locations, proffessional sound and good cinematography to pull it off. I cannot go into a project thinking I have written a masterpiece script. I know I have written a good piece but I'm hoping the camera is good enough that distributors will overlook possible elements in the film that are weak. But if the picture quality is soft or noisy throughout the whole film because it needs to projected on a big screen then it is an uphill battle to get it sold from day one... I believe that's the reality of the situation.

Thanks for your reply, I appreciate it.

[SPZ]

Seung han,

Can I suggest you see both Collateral and Miami Vice? Or, for film, I would suggest you watch Babel- have you any chance of seeing anything in BLU-RAY? Try to find out a way to see BABEL or 300 on BLU Ray. You'll see the amount of noise those films have.

When I was mainly a Panasonic DVXa shooter , the camera performance really bottered me. I had the original dvx non-a, and it was spectacular, though. The Canon XL2, that came almost at the dvx100a time, really did pull out a considerably more solid picture to the DVX. COlor wise and gamma wise, the DVX was superior, but, for broadcast, the DVX100a (PAL )footage was very vulnerable to broadcast compression. The original DVX didn't had this problem.

I was very concerned about this aspect when I went HVX, and before my purchase I really did my research and posted many questions on this forum. Many people where concerned about this aspect.


I decided to take the risk and go HVX.

I went for the HVX when it came out, because, sincerely, I knew the QC for the first model cameras should be very good. It is the camera that will penetrate the market and help define it, so it should be tuned to be the best (like the original DVX). I was disappointed with the DVXa upgrade, so I figured if I was to buy it, I would have to buy the HVX non a model. Very happy with it. A trully fantastic camera.

And yes, there's noise. But there's also something else entirely. The color and solidness of the picture is really Broadcast level this time.

The TV commercials I did with the HVX are incredible looking, and no one outside of the production houses can tell the difference between something shot with the HVX or a f900, if shot properly. This is a pretty bold statement, I agree, but if you know where the camera can go (which means lots and lots of practice) you can have spectacular footage. I just recently shot a short film with it. A short film that happens 90% at night. And it looks simply spectacular. What the HVX footage allows you is, if you have the budget to properly do Post-Production, to get back the detail of the underexposed areas. Something you see that isn't there can easily be brought back. Its fantastic.

The HVX is not an immediate results camera, by the way. Do take your time with it, and you'll soon start to get fantastic footage with it. It conveys a handheld and motion heavy shooting style ( which I use). And the color information trully is unique in the price range.

But if I had the finances to go HPX500, I wouldn't blink at the opportunity. People are saying you need to buy a 35mm adapter, etc. for shallow DOF.

Well, I shot my short with only 3 35mm shots, the others with the HVX in Telephoto. You'll struggle to see the difference. Just plan your shots well, know you'll lose one stop with the HVX fully zoomed in, and you'll get fantastic DOF. Of course this is a lot harder for handheld, but its a matter of, once again, knowing where you can or can't go. The HPX with the FUji lens or the Canon should be better than the HVX for shallow DOF, due to the 2/3 CCD's and the lens type.

Either way, for narrative work, the HVX is a very good option. If you go docummentary, I would still suggest a Tape based camera like the Canon XL-H1. Or the HPX, which comes with the 4x16gb cards. More than enough for Doc style shooting.

[brianluce]

Get the HD1oo if you plan on doing a lot of hand held. the hvx is not ergomically engineer for hand held. also keep in mind that all the independent shoot outs show the hvx with a softer image than the hd100. the hvx is good on a tripod and good for slo mo and trick shutter work.

[Justyn]

I'd say bunk to that. The JVC is much more wonky on handheld and a 70 dollar spiderbrace covers the handheld situation..

The JVC just looks blah and has that split sensor business... and just doesn't deliver the goods as evident with the fact that no one is really using it for commercial work

[Patryk_Rebisz]

Get a DP. Even if you are DP yourself who want to graduate to directing you will have other things to worry about then then lighting and framing. Good DP who u can trust will put you at easy in those 2 aspects and you will have chance to concentrate on the performances. Moreover good DP is an extra pair of eyes that can point out better angles and better shots. All that comes from my experience directing/DPing my own projects. Even though i concider myself good at DPing i think it takes away from my directing skills when i have to worry about "trivial" visual shit.

BTW, from my experience JVC is a very impressive camera.