Camera's used in the top 10 [Archive] - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking

lawriejaffa

03-18-2009, 06:41 AM

Oooh indeed, and both Nikon D90 films were also very wellshot and produced (I mention that in particular since its quite interesting seeing these DSLR's getting used). I'm surprised there were no entries produced on the EX? Less than last fest on the Red too :P

chriscurl

03-18-2009, 08:01 AM

dvx is still alive and well, I like that!

vic777

03-18-2009, 08:31 AM

dvx is still alive and well, I like that!And it will be alive as long as story telling is alive!

lawriejaffa

03-18-2009, 08:46 AM

Oh absolutely!

In fact its hilarious because this festival (and to be honest the last as well) made the issue of what camera - codecs, encoders, resolution etc far less relevant!

Storytelling is King. So many of us in the hardware threads hehe probably turn our eyes up at that, and goodness knows ive squabbled enough times (pointlessly so) about cams (indulging in the most immature of consumer behaviours) and yet it honestly makes my day when i see again and again that creativity trumps any superficial hurdle presented.

Chamber005

03-18-2009, 09:02 AM

Yeah, gotta give it up to the Nikons. Model/Photo was, IMO, the best "looking" film. Which is saying a lot seeing as it was pit against a couple Reds.

Chamber005

03-18-2009, 09:03 AM

dvx is still alive and well, I like that!

And I still can't find your friggin movie anywhere! More than any of the other films I'm enticed by your premise. Hook a brother up with a link!!

Lawsuit_Boy

03-18-2009, 09:52 AM

I say that those of us who shot on a dvx-100a or b deserve a fair share of credit as well for going up against good looking films of the HD world. Two made it into the finals. :)

Nick_Lee

03-18-2009, 10:13 AM

yeehaw dvx's. haha.

Norm Sanders

03-18-2009, 10:52 AM

Total proof that it's not the tool, but the user. I remember when HVX came out & was allowed in competition, everyone thought HVX's would sweep the winnings. Then when RED came out, everyone was afraid that camera would sweep, etc.

Again, comes down to story/writing, and then overall execution (acting, directing, technical) as being king, with finally the image itself bringing up the rear.

If I had someone who knew how to squeeze every drop out of a DVX, I'd have no problem having it still be the main camera. A skilled carver can still turn out beautiful ice sculpture with just a butter knife, if need be. :)

Blaine

03-18-2009, 02:00 PM

Well, if you're shooting in low light, with limited budget for lighting, you're better off shooting with the DVX than either the HVX OR RED.

Tim Joy

03-18-2009, 02:04 PM

Well, if you're shooting in low light, with limited budget for lighting, you're better off shooting with the DVX than either the HVX OR RED.

I would say that the D90 could be even better in low light.

Blaine

03-18-2009, 02:17 PM

I would say that the D90 could be even better in low light.
I'm sure it would. I was just pointing out that even the "lowly" DVX still has its strong points. :thumbsup:

Tim Joy

03-18-2009, 02:18 PM

In regards to this camera thing-

I used the DVX (with light-swallowing adapter, mind you) for Twilightfest. This time I did the Ultimate and used the still jpegs from the D90. I would say that even though it can't shoot 24p (In Still Mode), the image quality surpasses any digital video camera, including RED -- IMO.

This was an enlightening experience for me, and looking at DVX footage now, I see the LIGHT. I now notice the lack of detail in the color sampling and resolution. It's shockingly obvious, whereas before, I was oblivious to it.

You can see the difference easily between the footage in the movie, and the BTS video (shot with the dvx) in the same lighting setup.

I would certainly recommend this as a great exercise to "train you eyes" to anyone who wants to see what spectacular footage looks like, in order to emulate it as best you can with the video camera. It's also amazing stuff to work with when color correcting. After the fest, I'll upload the HD version so you can see what I mean.

Hopefully, my next short will be on film, and I'll jump up even another level. Anyone care to donate to the Film Fund? :)

Kholi

03-18-2009, 02:23 PM

D90 cant' shoot 24p? Huh?

And surpasses RED in video or still mode? Still mode isn't even a valid debate, RED is not a still oriented camera (although you can pull very awesome stills from it.)

Can't say that the D90 image quality even gets close to RED. This coming from a D90 owner and ritual RED shooter.

chriscurl

03-18-2009, 02:26 PM

I'll be sticking with with my DVX until my abilities are greater than my equipment, so i have a little while ;-)

Sprocketboy

03-18-2009, 02:35 PM

Someone here has a passion for the D90. It certainly cannot be compared to the RED. It is a camera only good for certain things. Zak and Tim utilized it fully in two different ways. In video mode, not great, and in still mode below an acceptable fps for shooting a narrative, not great. Its great for making art films and that can be limiting for other filmmakers.

Zak Forsman

03-18-2009, 02:42 PM

I totally agree. “The enemy of art is the absence of limitations.”

Norm Sanders

03-18-2009, 02:43 PM

I'll be sticking with with my DVX until my abilities are greater than my equipment, so i have a little while ;-)

You're a wise, WISE man. :)

Sprocketboy

03-18-2009, 02:50 PM

I totally agree. “The enemy of art is the absence of limitations.”

Your on top of the threads, man. I probably should have worded it a bit more carefully. That camera is great for making films, films that are more stylized than what others may want. That's the only way you are going to get mileage out of it. I wanted to see your film made on something that gives a little more sharpness. Others may contest that the D90 gave it a dreamy quality, so be it. Just a personal opinion. It had a beautiful thing going on, but was kind of muddy looking.

Zak Forsman

03-18-2009, 03:06 PM

its muddy and mushy and yucky because of the compression for lossfest. the full res version looks really cool.

Tim Joy

03-18-2009, 03:18 PM

Ha hA! Didn't mean to start a fire under your RED Kholi. :) True, it's comparing apples and oranges.

My point was only that working with "footage" such as the series of still frames from the D90 was a real eye-opener to me, and could be a cheap and easy way to "train your eyes" to see images differently in terms of color depth and resolution.

Sprocketboy

03-18-2009, 03:21 PM

To set the record, I have no experience with the D90, so I'm obviously going by what I'm seeing in this festival. A brilliant friend of mine told me that if you compress your footage minus the letterbox on the top and bottom, raised your bit rate... you could have had a much sharper image and still get it in under 50MB. Please, let me somehow see the footage in all its glory, so I can stop talking through my...

Zak Forsman

03-18-2009, 03:39 PM

i certainly will. and if viewers are taking perceived image quality into consideration for a fest with a 50mb limit on file sizes, what are you gonna do? :) personally, i am completely satisfied with "Mo/Pho"s reception in this fest. it's already exceeded my expectations. and honestly I would like to see the prizes go to filmmakers that truly need that gear. I don't. I think the guys that did Acceptance deserve the recognition that first place would bring, and the boost some new gear would provide. if I were to win something, the honor would be amazing, but i'd likely donate the actual gear to someone up and coming that I believe in. i've done that before -- donating funds and gear to aspiring filmmakers that could use a little nurturing.

besides, if you've read the latest news in my thread, you'll know that i've already received a very valuable "award" that will just push me and my work further.

Sprocketboy

03-18-2009, 03:45 PM

besides, if you've read the latest news in my thread, you'll know that i've already received a very valuable "award" that will just push me and my work further.

I just read it. Wow! Very nice indeed. Congratulations on your other success!

Norm Sanders

03-18-2009, 04:09 PM

A brilliant friend of mine told me that if you compress your footage minus the letterbox on the top and bottom, raised your bit rate... you could have had a much sharper image and still get it in under 50MB.

Yeah, I unfortunately figured out how to do that just a day too late. My HD version, and even the standard version are now minus the letterboxes, and look much better with smaller file sizes.

Sprocketboy

03-18-2009, 04:16 PM

Yeah, I unfortunately figured out how to do that just a day too late. My HD version, and even the standard version are now minus the letterboxes, and look much better with smaller file sizes.

Its amazing how much data those two black bars take away to degrade the overall image.

Lawsuit_Boy

03-18-2009, 05:09 PM

I would say that the D90 could be even better in low light.

Agreed. But that means that one must buy, rent, or be loaned the D90. If I had my choice, I would have loved to give it a whirl.

But, the dvx is all I have besides a vx-2000, and I'd rather not shoot short films on that.

Zak Forsman

03-18-2009, 05:11 PM

Agreed. But that means that one must buy, rent, or be loaned the D90. If I had my choice, I would have loved to give it a whirl.

But, the dvx is all I have besides a vx-2000, and I'd rather not shoot short films on that.

you would not have been able to shoot your film the way you did with the D90. too much horizontal movement.

Lawsuit_Boy

03-18-2009, 05:27 PM

you would not have been able to shoot your film the way you did with the D90. too much horizontal movement.

Still a big problem, eh? What sort of motion artifacts does it yield?

Zak Forsman

03-18-2009, 05:31 PM

Still a big problem, eh? What sort of motion artifacts does it yield?

skew. the only way you can pan horizontally and avoid skew is to anchor the move to a subject, like an actor. if you look at the kiss in my short, it's the only time the camera moves horizontally, and the background is probably skewing but your attention is on the actor(s), who are not, because they are anchored to the center of the frame.

Lawsuit_Boy

03-18-2009, 05:39 PM

skew. the only way you can pan horizontally and avoid skew is to anchor the move to a subject, like an actor. if you look at the kiss in my short, it's the only time the camera moves horizontally, and the background is probably skewing but your attention is on the actor(s), who are not, because they are anchored to the center of the frame.

Ah, I see. Just watched that shot again (happened to have the video open anyway) and I see what you mean. I noticed the first time I saw it that that shot was one of the only ones to move horizontally in a pan-type motion.

Very interesting.

Sprocketboy

03-18-2009, 05:39 PM

That skewing is the same effect you get with CMOS and 3MOS cameras from Sony and one of the newer Panasonic cameras, not yet released.

Actually, I just checked... the D90 uses a CMOS chip.

preston

03-18-2009, 05:40 PM

i certainly will. and if viewers are taking perceived image quality into consideration for a fest with a 50mb limit on file sizes, what are you gonna do? :) personally, i am completely satisfied with "Mo/Pho"s reception in this fest. it's already exceeded my expectations. and honestly I would like to see the prizes go to filmmakers that truly need that gear. I don't. I think the guys that did Acceptance deserve the recognition that first place would bring, and the boost some new gear would provide. if I were to win something, the honor would be amazing, but i'd likely donate the actual gear to someone up and coming that I believe in. i've done that before -- donating funds and gear to aspiring filmmakers that could use a little nurturing.

pay it forward...

Yeah, I unfortunately figured out how to do that just a day too late. My HD version, and even the standard version are now minus the letterboxes, and look much better with smaller file sizes.

Norm, wanna share what you learned? :)

Lawsuit_Boy

03-18-2009, 05:46 PM

Yeah, I'm very skeptical of CMOS sensors. The technology keeps improving, but it seems that a number of specific cameras keep running into certain motion-related issues because of rolling shutter and other issues. This actually makes me weary of certain cameras that I would LOVE to invest in. They all have their weak points, as does the dvx, and they must be learned and worked around (or assimilated into the workflow in an accepting manner).

Let's just say that if I had the opportunity, there are a lot of cameras I would love to give good, thorough trial runs. I have a lot of ideas for what I'd do with each.