PDA

View Full Version : Wow! Finally compared my new Canon T2i (550D) to my Canon HV20 Camcorders! Holy Crap!



skital
08-05-2010, 12:42 PM
What a HUGE HUGE difference!!! The difference compared head on was so vastly different. I was just using the kit lens and my own custom picture style I called "Film Style 1". The T2i had image fidelity that simply was not there on the HV20. The HV20 looked to lack dynamic range (it was in cinemode too!) against the T2i, looked way more videoy, the colors weren't nearly as rich and it just looked so much more noisy.

Even with the kit lens low light or semi low light just were on another level with the T2i. It blew me away...the color quality, the dynamic range, the smoothness, nowhere near the noise level. Wow. Wasn't expecting to see so much difference comparing head on. I might put a video on youtube once my Class 10 SDHC card arrives.

PerroneFord
08-05-2010, 01:09 PM
Welcome to the club.

aituv
08-05-2010, 01:14 PM
lol. these DSLR's are being compared to RED cameras, SONY ex series, etc...and you have an hv20 going...quite funny.

skital
08-05-2010, 01:33 PM
lol. these DSLR's are being compared to RED cameras, SONY ex series, etc...and you have an hv20 going...quite funny.

Haha! Yeah, I know. lol. It's just that I had been quite impressed with the HV20 and didn't expect quite this much of a difference head on. My HV20 was an upgrade to the original and supposedly first progressive scan SLR style Canon Optura. The difference between the two was amazing; the hv20 annihlated it and I thought gave me close to that DVX100 quality I had been wanting for years, so between the T2i and HV20 I was expecting a difference in low light quality and maybe sharpness, but it just exceeded expectations in all areas. The T2i simply stomps it....at least indoors it does. Still can't wait to shoot some outdoors stuff.

I just thought the HV20 would hold up better against it (even though I still thought the T2i would still look noticeably better, just not to the degree that it did. lol), but I'm very happy to be wrong in this case! lol.

The HV20 does much better outdoors than indoors though. I'm gonna shoot some comparison videos for youtube and vimeo and then put the HV20 on Ebay most likely. :D

J Davis
08-05-2010, 01:34 PM
If you shoot a chromakey you will find it is the reverse.

The hv20 will blow the DSLR's out the water

edit:
but use an EX1 if you really are. Just illustrating a point that shallow dof and long gop macro blocking
is not always the winner

skital
08-05-2010, 01:37 PM
If you shoot a chromakey you will find it is the reverse.

The hv20 will blow the DSLR's out the water

Oh really? Well, that sucks. I was planning to do some chroma keying and was hoping to be able ot put my HV20 on Ebay to help get a lighting kit and other lenses. I have seen some good T2i/7D keys though on youtube and vimeo. Maybe it's more difficult to pull off though....why is that? Because of the line skipping of the T2i, right?

So, you would say I should keep the HV20 for green screen shots?

PerroneFord
08-05-2010, 01:49 PM
If you shoot a chromakey you will find it is the reverse.

The hv20 will blow the DSLR's out the water

Hmmm really? That's surprising. I wouldn't think there would be that much of a difference.

jonE5
08-05-2010, 01:57 PM
Ive did a chroma test with the 7D a while back and it keyed out just fine

:shruggs:

Paul Hudson
08-05-2010, 02:20 PM
You can key the Canon DSLR footage it just takes a lot more work.

jls4
08-05-2010, 02:25 PM
Hmm, I just just Keylight in After Effects and pop the green goes away. LOL

PSA1
08-05-2010, 02:30 PM
Yeah but the HV20 will be much sharper outdoor on wide shot than any DLSR.

ICD Films
08-05-2010, 03:02 PM
I miss my HV30 when doing slo-mo. 720p is very "meh" compared to 1.333 1080i.

skital
08-05-2010, 09:50 PM
Yeah but the HV20 will be much sharper outdoor on wide shot than any DLSR.

Not that big of a deal to me really. Cinemode on the HV20 softens the picture quite a bit on it (including what is in focus), so whatever is in supposed to be in focus on the DSLR will still be sharper than the HV20. I guess I NEED a shot like that I'll just use the HV20 or raise the aperture and use really wide glass.

I'll do some comparison videos soon. Should be fun! I'm thinking of buying some clamp lights from Wal-Mart tonight for tests and later upgrade to a real lighting kit. I'm just trying to remember what temperture my current lights are so I know what bulbs to get.

John Caballero
08-05-2010, 09:57 PM
Sorry, but the HV20 is just a toy.

Jason Ramsey
08-05-2010, 10:05 PM
would you be offended if someone called the t2i "just a toy" b/c to some, for video purposes, it is...since it wasn't designed for that in the first place...

I've seen some pretty stellar footage from both cams... Sure...hv20 is pretty long in the tooth these days though, but it was the first budget 24p cam that I can think of and was pretty revolutionary to the no-budget filmmakers as the large sensor video enabled dslr's are today....

under a grand for 24p was a pretty big deal to a healthy demographic of no-budget/micro budget filmmakers, just as S35 for under a grand is today...

not trying to start anything :) just think toy is a bit of an overstatement from a historical perspective (well, if a few years is "historical" :) ) so in context, it's no more a toy than the t2i... Though, I don't think either are toys, per se....

John Caballero
08-05-2010, 10:42 PM
not trying to start anything just think toy is a bit of an overstatement from a historical perspective (well, if a few years is "historical" ) so in context, it's no more a toy than the t2i... Though, I don't think either are toys, per se....

Well, we are all little boys at heart and our cameras are actually our toys! They are to me. Toys that pay my rent! I never liked the way the HV20 felt. I guess some people did work with it but the camera itself never interested me. At the time I went with the HVX200 and I loved that chubby thing. It was a heavy duty toy!

Jason Ramsey
08-05-2010, 10:46 PM
I guess some people did work with it but the camera itself never interested me

me neither... but, i give it its due respect for bringing 24p to such a great price point... of course, it was also the camera that exposed us to the new set of issues to be aware of when it came to shooting motion with rolling shutter cmos sensors... and, as newer cmos cams came along, also made us aware that not all rolling shutters are created equally :)

John Caballero
08-05-2010, 10:54 PM
i give it its due respect for bringing 24p to such a great price point.

Very true.

David G. Smith
08-05-2010, 11:39 PM
Welcome to the club.

No doubt. I never used an HV20, but I have a T2i, and I have to say I have never seen a camera with such great image quality, out of the box, at the price of a T2i. It is a great little camera. Perfect? No, but give me a break. I am prepping to shot a guerilla feature on a couple of these little f**kers in October, and if someone would have asked me two years ago if I thought I would be shooting fictional narrative films with an $800.00 camera I would have told them they are crazy. Well, times have changed, haven't they?

aituv
08-06-2010, 12:24 AM
If you shoot a chromakey you will find it is the reverse.

The hv20 will blow the DSLR's out the water

edit:
but use an EX1 if you really are. Just illustrating a point that shallow dof and long gop macro blocking
is not always the winner

idk where this came from. if you light it up good you have no problems, at least i didn't. with good light nothing is forcing you to shoot at 1.2/f or 11/f depending on lens.

ankawa
08-06-2010, 12:47 AM
my t2i looks better than my pana DVC30 ad canon xh-a1 :)

flinty
08-06-2010, 02:05 AM
Haha! Yeah, I know. lol. It's just that I had been quite impressed with the HV20 and didn't expect quite this much of a difference head on. My HV20 was an upgrade to the original and supposedly first progressive scan SLR style Canon Optura. The difference between the two was amazing; the hv20 annihlated it and I thought gave me close to that DVX100 quality I had been wanting for years, so between the T2i and HV20 I was expecting a difference in low light quality and maybe sharpness, but it just exceeded expectations in all areas. The T2i simply stomps it....at least indoors it does. Still can't wait to shoot some outdoors stuff.

I just thought the HV20 would hold up better against it (even though I still thought the T2i would still look noticeably better, just not to the degree that it did. lol), but I'm very happy to be wrong in this case! lol.

The HV20 does much better outdoors than indoors though. I'm gonna shoot some comparison videos for youtube and vimeo and then put the HV20 on Ebay most likely. :D

owning both like you i agree the T2i/550D that i have does give a better overall pq outdoors and huge increase indoors, i would never compare my HV in cinemode as this is a very soft picture look, i also plan to do some comparison checks but will not use cinemode on the HV it would not be fair.How resolution compares i dont know but in 1920P the 550 looks sharper to me,but i have always and still love my HV,making films and filming with it is so easy.

skital
08-06-2010, 02:55 AM
owning both like you i agree the T2i/550D that i have does give a better overall pq outdoors and huge increase indoors, i would never compare my HV in cinemode as this is a very soft picture look, i also plan to do some comparison checks but will not use cinemode on the HV it would not be fair.How resolution compares i dont know but in 1920P the 550 looks sharper to me,but i have always and still love my HV,making films and filming with it is so easy.

IMO, it's less fair in other modes. Cinemode is softer, but it has higher dynamic range; better dark detail and highlight detail. It makes skin tones look far more natural and doesn't accentuate skin flaws nearly as bad as the other modes that lack dynamic range. For me, the difference in the T2i with a custom picture style vs HV20 in any mode other than cinemode only makes that difference in quality MORE startling. Sure, the sharpness will be more comparable when not in cinemode, but the dynamic range difference will become even more apparent....which is IMO, is a much bigger deal than a softer image....which actually makes for more flattering skin.

I really dislike the other modes compared to cinemode. Can't shoot in them. I noticed time and time again how bad the lack or dynamic range can make peoples' skin look far worse than in reality, while cinemode creates a far more natural looking image that doesn't accentuate blemishes and such nearly as much. I happily live with the softer image for the increase in highlight/dark detail and the more natural pleasing skin.

J Davis
08-06-2010, 04:14 AM
idk where this came from. if you light it up good you have no problems, at least i didn't. with good light nothing is forcing you to shoot at 1.2/f or 11/f depending on lens.

no matter how good the lighting or how stopped down the lens and sharp the image
h264 macro blocking and chromakey is a combination thats gonna bite you in the ass

aituv
08-06-2010, 09:51 AM
no matter how good the lighting or how stopped down the lens and sharp the image
h264 macro blocking and chromakey is a combination thats gonna bite you in the ass

i tend to disagree with whatever you're saying, because i myself shot (subject in front of a green screen) and keyed out in post no problem...in fact better from my previous experience with z1u. im not trying to start a batch, simply saying all of your technical words don't make up for the lack of experience you gained with DSLR + chroma key... go set up, shoot, edit, and then tell us your experience :) and if you say you already have, then obviously you struggled in some area(s).

P.S. here's something i pulled off google within a one minute browse, nothing but good things about DSLR + keying, you just need to know what to do, see it for yourself:

http://www.thec47.com/gearbox/feeling-green-pt5.html

J Davis
08-06-2010, 09:55 AM
we all have different standards bro
I've already started thread on my experiences. old news by now
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=210534
and
http://96.30.50.47/showthread.php?t=4510

aituv
08-06-2010, 10:04 AM
we all have different standards bro
I've already started thread on my experiences. old news by now
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=210534
and
http://96.30.50.47/showthread.php?t=4510

now i see your side...yes 100% agree

PerroneFord
08-06-2010, 10:06 AM
As J-Davis says, a talking head in front of a greenscreen should look pretty good on all but the worst of cameras. It's when things start to get more tricky that the limitations begin to show. Add a blond subject with hair blowing. A model with a sheer gown. A closeup with a 105mm or 135mm lens. Life gets MUCH more tricky in those instances.

Shoot some tests like these:

http://www.hollywoodcamerawork.us/greenscreenplates.html

And get back to us on the ability of the Canon DSLRs. They are great for the money, don't get me wrong. But they aren't film by a long shot.

J Davis
08-06-2010, 10:06 AM
more here

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=184445

Pietro Impagliazzo
08-06-2010, 10:33 AM
would you be offended if someone called the t2i "just a toy" b/c to some, for video purposes, it is...since it wasn't designed for that in the first place...

I've seen some pretty stellar footage from both cams... Sure...hv20 is pretty long in the tooth these days though, but it was the first budget 24p cam that I can think of and was pretty revolutionary to the no-budget filmmakers as the large sensor video enabled dslr's are today....

under a grand for 24p was a pretty big deal to a healthy demographic of no-budget/micro budget filmmakers, just as S35 for under a grand is today...

not trying to start anything :) just think toy is a bit of an overstatement from a historical perspective (well, if a few years is "historical" :) ) so in context, it's no more a toy than the t2i... Though, I don't think either are toys, per se....

You're so right man... Things are moving so quickly.

Kids we'll be filming pranks on school in 8K with their cellphones by 2020, if not less.

flinty
08-06-2010, 10:49 AM
IMO, it's less fair in other modes. Cinemode is softer, but it has higher dynamic range; better dark detail and highlight detail. It makes skin tones look far more natural and doesn't accentuate skin flaws nearly as bad as the other modes that lack dynamic range. For me, the difference in the T2i with a custom picture style vs HV20 in any mode other than cinemode only makes that difference in quality MORE startling. Sure, the sharpness will be more comparable when not in cinemode, but the dynamic range difference will become even more apparent....which is IMO, is a much bigger deal than a softer image....which actually makes for more flattering skin.

I really dislike the other modes compared to cinemode. Can't shoot in them. I noticed time and time again how bad the lack or dynamic range can make peoples' skin look far worse than in reality, while cinemode creates a far more natural looking image that doesn't accentuate blemishes and such nearly as much. I happily live with the softer image for the increase in highlight/dark detail and the more natural pleasing skin.

Well maybe we like the different look,when i accasionaly use cinemode it is on a sunny day when most in the film is natural green,by upping the sharpness contrast and brightness to max it can then look better than the P or TV mode,with my 550D i like the neutral setting with the colour down a bit,so for me in most curcumstances HV cinimode is a no,not sure what making peoples skin look far
worse than in reality meens if they have spots and pimples they have them nothing wrong with that.Anyway it seems we both like our cams even if in a bit different ways.:thumbsup:

skital
08-06-2010, 12:52 PM
Well maybe we like the different look,when i accasionaly use cinemode it is on a sunny day when most in the film is natural green,by upping the sharpness contrast and brightness to max it can then look better than the P or TV mode,with my 550D i like the neutral setting with the colour down a bit,so for me in most curcumstances HV cinimode is a no,not sure what making peoples skin look far
worse than in reality meens if they have spots and pimples they have them nothing wrong with that.Anyway it seems we both like our cams even if in a bit different ways.:thumbsup:

What I mean is that if someone does have a red spot or some sort of facial blemish (especially a red one) the camera when not in cinemode causes it to looking about 10x worse on any somewhat close shot on the face than it does in person and this is clearly due to how the human eyes see vs the camcorder. Huge difference in dynamic range. Compared to the human eye there is a huge compression on dynamic range, which causes certain blemishes to look far more pronounced and obvious (not to mentions skin looks more artificial to me...highlights blowing out too quickly and such)....drawing too much attention to blemishes; I despise it. I found that cinemode extended the dynamic range enough that these types of blemishes were not nearly as harsh and unflattering; the skin takes on a more natural gradation in less than ideal lighting....highlights not blowing out as quick....harsh shadows not as bad....etc.

But yeah, to each their own. I really just don't like the harshness of the other modes....not enough dynamic range for me. I don't like neutral mode or any of the modes on the T2i either really. I use a custom style I created called "Film Style 1". If not that I use Superflat or Marvel Cine.

skital
08-06-2010, 01:21 PM
I put some of the footage on my computer to view finally instead of the LCD monitor and while the footage is very nice I am now seeing the Macroblocking in certain areas that can be pretty ugly. I never recall seeing this issues on Vimeo videos when full screened. It's not everywhere, but when I was filming I notice macroblock city on this purple towel.

For the most part I'm not seeing it much anywhere else, but the T2i fell apart on the area of the purple towel.....it was just like macroblocking on the towel like crazy! Any way to improve this?

Everywhere else looked fine though...just not the towel. Hope I don't run into this too often.

Ian-T
08-06-2010, 01:24 PM
I went from the HV20 to 7D to GH-1(3) and I will say I do miss the cinemode on the HV20. It looked so filmic but just softened the image a tad much....which sometimes was a good thing especially for skin tones. I used it a lot to get the shadows raised up and highlights down. When I got the 7D I was hoping it had that feature (or something like it). But the custom curves helped a great deal.

boulder
08-06-2010, 02:37 PM
In a related note, I compared my 7D to a picture I drew of a tree and the 7D was waaaayyyyyyy better.

Pietro Impagliazzo
08-06-2010, 02:43 PM
In a related note, I compared my 7D to a picture I drew of a tree and the 7D was waaaayyyyyyy better.

Go learn to draw properly...

aituv
08-06-2010, 02:53 PM
Go learn to draw properly...

you obviously misunderstood his analogy... and btw what the heck is wrong with this thread? hv20 and 7D? Oh the RED one i shoot with produces a little better quality than my iPhone 4 UGH and I was gonna make my feature film with the iPhone 4 now I can't make up my mind... because I want the debate to be in the camera who cares if I suck as a film maker and have no creativity in me whatsoever, if I have an expensive camera I'll be awesome!

boulder
08-06-2010, 03:00 PM
Just a good natured ribbing. But really the newer camera's images are almost always going to be better than the older cameras...I mean I could list off thirty cameras off the top of my head that it is better than. The real challenge is comparing it to cameras more expensive and that are standards in shooting.

flinty
08-06-2010, 03:05 PM
What I mean is that if someone does have a red spot or some sort of facial blemish (especially a red one) the camera when not in cinemode causes it to looking about 10x worse on any somewhat close shot on the face than it does in person and this is clearly due to how the human eyes see vs the camcorder. Huge difference in dynamic range. Compared to the human eye there is a huge compression on dynamic range, which causes certain blemishes to look far more pronounced and obvious (not to mentions skin looks more artificial to me...highlights blowing out too quickly and such)....drawing too much attention to blemishes; I despise it. I found that cinemode extended the dynamic range enough that these types of blemishes were not nearly as harsh and unflattering; the skin takes on a more natural gradation in less than ideal lighting....highlights not blowing out as quick....harsh shadows not as bad....etc.

But yeah, to each their own. I really just don't like the harshness of the other modes....not enough dynamic range for me. I don't like neutral mode or any of the modes on the T2i either really. I use a custom style I created called "Film Style 1". If not that I use Superflat or Marvel Cine.

:huh: You dont like the neutral mode on T2s :grin: custom mode on mine is gross vastly oversaturated totaly unlike the washed out cini mode on HVs, all i can say is cams and dslrs must vary a lot .Pal and ntsc ?

Pietro Impagliazzo
08-06-2010, 04:26 PM
you obviously misunderstood his analogy... and btw what the heck is wrong with this thread? hv20 and 7D? Oh the RED one i shoot with produces a little better quality than my iPhone 4 UGH and I was gonna make my feature film with the iPhone 4 now I can't make up my mind... because I want the debate to be in the camera who cares if I suck as a film maker and have no creativity in me whatsoever, if I have an expensive camera I'll be awesome!

I understood his analogy and I thought it was a little bit extreme so I used a little sarcasm for comedy's sake.

As a matter of fact the thread is very informative for me given how much badmouthing of the DSLRs codec we see out there.

And by his words I judge colorimetry is on another level in the DSLRs.

bunny
08-06-2010, 06:52 PM
J Davis, I have been lurking here for the best part of a year, and this is the first time I have ever seen you be rude. Not just rude, but very very rude.

You have a technical point, but you did not say it was a technical point until later. I repeat, it is a technical point. I personally just got a 550D and rig for 100% chromakeying. I chose it above the competition after a years worth of comparisons and tests. It is the best tool for the job at the price point at this time or MY chromakey needs.

You see, I know you plan your production around your limitations. I see every tool as having limitations in chromakey at this time. Even professionally scanned 35mm film footage. So I designed an entire production to limit the frailties in keying at this time. This means that the 550D gives a better result for my production than Kodachrome stock.

I started in TV production back when meer mortals could only work on first generation Amigas. In the late 80's I was producing 2D cell and 3D animation off an Amiga, and dealing with limitations like 32 colours from a palette of 4096 (thankfully on a per frame basis as the Amiga was the only machine to ever be able to palette flip). Maybe if I started off on Quantel boxes, Cray renderers and Kodachrome stock then I may have not learned to live with limitations, but since this is not redoneuser.com, I assume it is best if everyone is helped to overcome and live within the boundaries of the current consumer equipment.

boulder
08-06-2010, 08:27 PM
I went back and read J Davis' posts in this thread and have no idea how you came up with him being rude...he's just offering his oppinion. I take people's advice here under consideration but in the end it's my own experiences and work-arounds that matter. I've chroma-keyed fine with the 7D but I'm sure other cameras probably are better at this. The bottom line is anything I've tried to key out worked and maybe I had to put more effort into it but it was doable.

Edit: I would imagine the GH1 with the new hack might be better for keying than the 550D/7D

J Davis
08-06-2010, 09:07 PM
J Davis, I have been lurking here for the best part of a year, and this is the first time I have ever seen you be rude. Not just rude, but very very rude.



where?

sorry if anyone interpreted any of my posts as rude ... not intended
sometimes I type fast and to the point because time is optimum and not enuff of it
but I like this forum


I went back and read J Davis' posts in this thread and have no idea how you came up with him being rude...he's just offering his oppinion.

+1
Thanks!

Of note:
anyone shooting chroma keys with dslr, shallow dof is your enemy, you want to stop that lens down with lots and lots of light to get the edge of your subject very sharp
use soft lights on the green screen to get even color.
If possible use dof so the green screen itself is out of focus but your subject remains with a sharp edge this will help even out any wrinkles in green material.

all dslr's so far are shooting with h264 codec, even AVCHD and gh13, but bitrate helps.
Soft edges including motion blur from moving subjects will contribute to screwing up your key thanks to h264 macro blocking.
I'm currently keying 165 clips from music vid all from 7d. Wish we had shot with ex1. (or hv40 ! :))

bunny
08-06-2010, 09:15 PM
He was curt and nonforthcoming with information at least, but the way he rounded on aituv after aituv gave his very honest and true observation about there being a BIG difference between theoretical and practice I have to classify as incredibly rude.

It would have been far more polite to expand on his statements after stating that "under some situations, h264 can cause problems with chromakeying". Instead he made his statement absolute and gave the impression that under EVERY situation, the h264 of the t2i is inferior to the DV of the HV20. This is not the case, and for my own situation, I find the colour accuracy of H264 from the t2i to be more stable and accurate than the DV from any other system. In fact it has an edge in colour accuracy over film stock in the tests I have done (results may vary for others with different lighting/software/conditions).

J Davis comes across as someone who has decided what works for him and refuses to accept that there are situations that other people have in similar circumstances where a different workflow and different equipment work better. It is great that he has equipment and workflow that works or him, but I know I would not work with the same equipment with my workflow, or for the result I require for the production I am working on.

J Davis
08-06-2010, 09:16 PM
yes bunny you are right

apologies to aituv

Jason Ramsey
08-06-2010, 09:18 PM
slow to give AND to take offense... people need to relax a bit... not take every little comment on the internet so seriously....

If someone has an issue with a particular post, please feel free to use the report post button and state why, so that a mod can look into it... (as opposed to derailing threads with such stuff)

For now, lets get back on point... last couple of days have been a bit off around here... everyone relax a little and give each other some slack...

J Davis
08-06-2010, 09:19 PM
I find the colour accuracy of H264 from the t2i to be more stable and accurate than the DV from any other system. In fact it has an edge in colour accuracy over film stock in the tests I have done (results may vary for others with different lighting/software/conditions).


good luck with that



J Davis comes across as someone who has decided what works for him and refuses to accept that there are situations that other people have in similar circumstances where a different workflow and different equipment work better.

lol
that's what my mamma always was saying

J Davis
08-06-2010, 09:33 PM
some dslr eye-candy to lighten the mood, no not a chromakey but from the same music video job
7d + ais

:)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4100/4867300777_0e358a892a_b.jpg

philip bloom
08-06-2010, 09:45 PM
it's very easy to mistake people being forceful in their opinions as being rude....is the hv20 better at keying that a Canon DSLR...not in my experience, but we all have different results in these things.

I have recently come off shooting a big budget Lucasfilm project with the Canons and ILMs work with the green and blue screen has been stellar

J Davis
08-06-2010, 09:49 PM
... with the Canons and ILMs work with the green and blue screen has been stellar

Hi Phillip, I could have used some of your skills on that chromakey shoot!
sorry I missed your shindig in nyc the othr day.

philip bloom
08-06-2010, 09:53 PM
Hi Phillip, I could have used some of your skills on that chromakey shoot!
sorry I missed your shindig in nyc the othr day.

very poor of you...but best thing is the BIGGEST AND GREAT one is next Saturday in London. Your perfect chance to come visit! ;)


http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Great-London-Meet-Up/134590609916729?v=wall#!/pages/The-Great-London-Meet-Up/134590609916729?v=wall

skital
08-07-2010, 12:51 PM
it's very easy to mistake people being forceful in their opinions as being rude....is the hv20 better at keying that a Canon DSLR...not in my experience, but we all have different results in these things.

I have recently come off shooting a big budget Lucasfilm project with the Canons and ILMs work with the green and blue screen has been stellar

Nice to see the man himself reply to my thread! I'm honored! hehe. Your videos are a big part of what sold me on the DSLRs.

I can't wait to try shooting some green screen work with the T2i. I'll try with the HV20 as well.

BTW, I can't put my T2i footage in Vegas Pro 9 64-bit (which I love for the great control over image compared to Premiere Pro CS5). It says I need the Quicktime plugin and unfortunately anytime I download Quicktime I get an error 46 trying to open the player....none of the fixes have worked, so I just cannot used Quicktime 7+ on my Windows 7 Quadcore computer, apparently. :(

What should I use to convert the file and what should I convert to for Vegas Pro 9?

Thanks!

skital
08-07-2010, 12:57 PM
Here's a couple of my early shots with the T2i (Downrezzed) of my HD DLP projector's image. Besides the projector light the 40 or 60-watt lamp shooting against the wall is the only light source in the room. This is with the kit lens. It was white balanced for the image on the screen, of course...which is different than the light on the side.

http://a.imageshack.us/img840/3797/img0283h.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img265/2963/img0272y.jpg

boulder
08-07-2010, 10:44 PM
I'm confused

skital
08-08-2010, 02:56 AM
I'm confused

Not vague enough! :D What are you confused about? I'm confused about your confusedness. :)