Expecting...

[admactanium]

Shot a new video today. I'm still learning on the camera. Any critique and criticism is welcome. Really. I'm in a creative field now so I'm used to hearing advice on how to make things better. I'm still finding that I tend to underexpose things. When I'm in creative movie mode I seem to miss the exposure settings a lot. Any advice?

http://gallery.me.com/jeffnee#100091/Expecting

[PappasArts]

Shot a new video today. I'm still learning on the camera. Any critique and criticism is welcome. Really. I'm in a creative field now so I'm used to hearing advice on how to make things better. I'm still finding that I tend to underexpose things. When I'm in creative movie mode I seem to miss the exposure settings a lot. Any advice?

http://gallery.me.com/jeffnee#100088/Expecting

What was this shot in 1080/24 or 720/60p?

.

[admactanium]

720p60.

[Peter J. DeCrescenzo]

Hi Admactanium: I really like this video, and thanks for posting a high quality QT of it.

This video doesn't look underexposed on my computer. Or did you mean you had to bring up the luminance in post? I think it looks great. Don't be afraid of the darkness! :cheesy:

The only thing I can suggest which might have made it "better" was perhaps you might have included a few scenes with just a bit more motion in them, such as an infant's mobile toy hanging from the ceiling, slowing turning in the breeze. Something like that. Subtle motion, but just a little more.

However, I'm a big fan of calm, "meditative" motion video where not much _seems_ to move in the frame -- until you start paying attention and notice there's actually all sorts of things going on.

(And look, hardly any CMOS banding/streaking that I noticed, too.) Well done!

[Voytech]

Cool! When's the due date? Mine is on thanksgiving :)

[Nighthawk]

Thanks for that Admactanium and congrats on the upcoming 'delivery'. I'd have to mirror what Peter suggested. Other than that the piece had a certain gentleness and pace that reflected the subject matter well. Plus a dash of Moby to boot.

[Nathan Troutman]

(And look, hardly any CMOS banding/streaking that I noticed, too.) Well done!

The CU of the black teddy bear (00:38 in video) has a lot of banding on my end - maybe it's my machine or monitor, but it's pretty bad.

admactanium, any idea what ISO you shot the video at and/or in particular what ISO you shot that CU of the black teddy bear at 00:38?

[admactanium]

The CU of the black teddy bear (00:38 in video) has a lot of banding on my end - maybe it's my machine or monitor, but it's pretty bad.

admactanium, any idea what ISO you shot the video at and/or in particular what ISO you shot that CU of the black teddy bear at 00:38?

It definitely does have a lot of banding. It's a very dark bear anyway but I had to bring it up in post a lot. Of course, I made the stupid error of leaving my ND .3 filter on for that shot. :embarasse I did try to adjust the levels of a number of the shots in FCP.

Thanks for the suggestion of more motion. I'll probably continue working on this since we just got back from the doctor and it seems like I have at least two more weeks to fine tune it. Haha. Due date is August 2nd. We were sort of on red alert that it might happen earlier but the doctor confirmed today that we're on good schedule to be at the due date.

[Peter J. DeCrescenzo]

Quote: Originally Posted by Peter J. DeCrescenzo http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=1691788#post1691788)

(And look, hardly any CMOS banding/streaking that I noticed, too.) Well done!


The CU of the black teddy bear (00:38 in video) has a lot of banding on my end - maybe it's my machine or monitor, but it's pretty bad. ...

Hi Nathan: Well, I did say "hardly any ... that I noticed". Now that you point it out, sure, there's lots of noise in the teddy bear scene (and elsewhere, too).

The first 2 times I watched this video I "watched" it with my heart, not my head. My heart really liked it. But sure, now my head sees the noise, too.

For me the noise doesn't distract hardly at all from the emotional impact of the video, especially since I assume this was a no-budget, no-crew production -- aside from the relatively small investment in the camera system. I am impressed, however, with the big investment in "props" made for this production! :cheesy:

[Nathan Troutman]

Hey Peter I wasn't trying to single you out there, I was just more curious as to what settings were used that produced that kind of video. Just trying to get an idea of what settings don't look too good and which do without the much easier option of just having the camera myself.

I've seen good GH1 footage in both 1080P and 720P modes and I've seen some really bad stuff from both. More details about settings combined with more footage is the only way to try and begin to understand what is the actual working truth about the GH1 and the footage it produces. Again, this is all I can do without having the camera myself to test.

[admactanium]

Totally fair comment Nathan. In fact, I'm shooting stuff with it now so I can figure out the limits of it on my own and for my own uses. It gets pretty nasty banding in some cases. But I have a lot left to learn on it for sure. I'm more comfortable with still photography, so this stuff has a bit of a learning curve to it as well.