1080 or 720 for film out

[smelni]

I know this will be a pure speculation post until tests are run - but speculation is fun.

Lets say you are shooting a feature that will be transferred to film (and shooting on film is not an option for a number of reasons). Should you shoot in 1080 24p or 720 24p?

The quick answer is 1080 for more information for the film out. But now throw in variable frame rates - if you want those you need to do 720.

OR

Can you shoot most your footage in 1080p and then the speed effects in 720P and uprez the speed effects? any chance they will match.

So which is the better tradeoff - 1080 with uprezed speed effects or 720 for the whole film.

let the speculation begin.

[oneinfiniteloop]

I say 720 all the way, but 1080 is enticing...

[Anders Holck]

Besides much better chroma resolution the pixels are smaller, so compression mosquito noise is less noticeable. From the stuff I've seen, i'd say 1080p for the main shots, 720p for speed effects.

As you have seen from the tests I have done, 1080p does not seem to capture much more luma resolution from the lens+CCD, but as soon as there are saturated details it's much better.

[Emanuel]

Thanks again Anders for your useful support! And for your Kaku's PC file, too! Is there already other ones equal transcode it?

[Barry_Green]

My tests show about a 25%, maybe 30% boost in res for 1080/24p capture. So I'd say shoot it all in 1080, and uprez the bits that you need for slow-mo -- a 25% uprez shouldn't look too markedly different from the rest of the project...

[SquidLips]

Pardon my inexperience, but how would one uprez the footage? If you shot on 1080, transfered via P2 into an HD timeline on FCP, at what stage with the variable frame footage would you up rez and how is it done?

[Emanuel]

Thanks Barry for your help!

[smelni]

Barry - so i guess if the footage turned out to look too different to cut together, all the 1080 could be downrezzed anyhow to make it match - right?

[Barry_Green]

Since there's not a tremendous difference in res, I'm sure cross-conversion would likely result in acceptable results. If it was truly a 100% difference in resolution then I'd be concerned, but since the difference is only about 30% then I think you'll probably be able to make them match reasonably well.

[Jack_Felis]

I'm with SquidLips, just how would you uprezz the 720p to 1080p? Is that done before editing? During capture? During export?

[smelni]

that would be done in post

[kenn michael]

that would be done in post

yep... Ideally with software that has a good uprezzing algorithm. FCP versions before 5 had pretty bad scaling quality, but 5 improved it a lot. AfterEffects scales well.

[mgalvan]

Would anyone think that Photozoom Pro method would work best for this (upscaling software wise)?

[Hawkeye]

Your thread title got me thinking about if it would be better to film out to 35mm or super 16mm from a camera like the hvx200?
Thinking the grain in super 16 may hide any slight artifacting or noise that's visible in the blow up.... I'm not an expert just wondering away to myself if a slight grain in film would help disguise any unwanted slight noise/artifacting?
Then I suppose a grainy 35mm film would be better anyway?
Then again if the hvx image is not capable of resolution and detail better than super 16mm film, then why film out to more than that if not needed from the projection point of view, it would be cheaper right?

[mgalvan]

I suppose that would be true, but I would think 99% of those wanting to film out would be to 35mm for distribution purposes, hence why everyone usually looks at 35mm as a benchmark per se ...

[Emanuel]

Then I suppose a grainy 35mm film would be better anyway? (...) it would be cheaper right?Right!

But there is who prefers a Super16mm intermediate (OK it's not from HVX but...):
(...) That has been worked with an intermediate DigiBeta from Super16mm shooting to other Super16mm intermediate before the 35mm blown-up final copy. (...)QUOTE LINK (http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showpost.php?p=391296&postcount=15)

[Fernando Kurezyn Jr.]

im kind of lost here... and sorry about my inexperience...

Why you can not shoot in slow motion at 1080??... is 1080 60p this specification, rigth?... or is because HVX only shoots at 720 60p.???? can you explainme this diference?... i know that P2 cards take alot more of capacity using 720p... why is that?? if is less resolution than 1080??? do you guys have some kind of chart with these differences?... quality vs. whatever... PLEASE!!!... now, im kind of lost here.

[AshG]

For film outs more rez is THE most important thing. That is why you see the F900 used way more than the Varicam for this purpose. I prefer the Varicam in EVERY other situation. I just like the colors and how it handles motion better. For a 24P film out project you should do everything in 1080i and maybe even consider using an XLH1 which, so far at least, looks to have the best rez of the bunch. Nobody wants to do a feature in HDV so using the cam would be dependent on your ability to use the HD-SDI out...


ash =o)