Sqeueeze >output to a huge widescreen HDTV.opin

[WaveRiderXIX]

Hi all,

Going to film a friend's wedding who has a huge $8000 HDTV. Was originally going to shoot letterbox. But then I thought about Squeeze mode. I saw the image comparisons on Barry's DVD.

Has anyone shot a full on wedding on squeeze? How did the overall quality turn out? Was the client happy with it? I am just wondering if that 30% will be much noticable on a TV to the average eye.

What are your thoughts?

[Barry_Green]

If you're shooting interlaced, it's going to hurt. But if you shoot progressive (even 30p) you can put it in thin line detail, and you'll get resolution just as high as the "native 16:9" interlaced cameras like the FX1 (in DV mode) or the PDX-10.

Shoot 24p or 30p in THIN with squeeze, and you'll be fine. Shoot interlaced with squeeze and... um, it'll be kinda ugly.

[WaveRiderXIX]

Hi Barry,

Thanks for the response. I will definitely be shooting 24p and I am going to use your recommendations onto THIN.

I see the people posting here that camera lights are a no-no recommendation. But the inside dance/dinner area will not have too much lighting to work with. So I was going to shoot with an open shutter at 1/24 with the highest gain.

Are there any other options for lighting as I walk around filming people dancing etc? I have a cousin who is willing to walk around following us holding a light on a separate pole. We were planning on only keeping the light on for 10 sec or so at a time to get some shots in.

But we were concerned this may be a little intrusive.

[Barry_Green]

If you have to choose between "intrusive" and "horrible video", I'd say let the client make the choice. I've done events where we blasted 'em with a 100w on-camera light, and yes, the people whined about it -- but the video looked infinitely better than it would have if we'd just skulked around using 18db of gain! So ask your client what they'd prefer. If you can get someone to follow you around with a light-on-a-stick, positioning it about 30 degrees off-axis and a little above eyeline, you'll get great looking footage as compared to a) the light right on the camera, or b) no light at all.

If you absolutely can't get any additional light in there, consider shooting 60i, wide-angle wide-open, with a 1/30 shutter speed, and maybe 6db of gain, or maybe 9 at the most, but be careful going above 9, it starts to get really noisy around 12 to 18.

Quality video requires enough light for exposure. If at all possible, get enough light (the guy with the light on the stick is a great way to go). If that's absolutely verboten, then make sure they understand that they will *not* be getting the best video quality. It's their choice: dark room & subpar video, or adequate lighting and great video.

[PFP_VIDEO]

When I shot weddings in my younger days I ran into many an angry client and guests due to the lighting. Back then we used Tota lights on stands and bounced off the ceiling and used a light on the camera to. It was like turning day into night and I hated it. As cameras became more light sensitive I ended up using mini Frezzi bulbed for 50 watts, and I think a 20 watter. I would then use pn light on a pole to light mainly for the main entrance and other important moments and the camera light the rest of the night. By diffusing down the Frezzi or even creating a little white bounce card for it , the guests complained alot less. I used to shoot handheld at all times, and floated around the room or dancefloor and it was alot less obtrusive. Hope this helps.

[WaveRiderXIX]

I've done events where we blasted 'em with a 100w on-camera light, and yes, the people whined about it --


LoL! Well at least I can learn from this.

You guys gave me some good insight. After reading your posts, I definitely have to re-think my plan lol.

Right now I have a 300Watt OSRAM light which we were going to try to stick on a pole. But now that I look at it, the light is still pretty harsh & looks like I may drop down to 100w. Was thinking of a way to diffuse the light more in a portable-size. Like a 12x12in softbox or something on a pole.

I will bring up the lighting subject next time I talk to the client. I'm just wondering how I can "word it" to them without losing them as a client. I'd be afraid only to have them go to someone else who has a PD170 or DSR 300 setup and can claim that their low-light filming is much better than a DVX setup etc...

In case I will have to use a lighting setup or they decide to allow lighting... any particular (not so expensive) brand of light/battery combos you guys might be able to recommend? Also the amount of wattage?

Again, thanks for the feedback.

[ericyoung]

Why don't you try it beforehand with some friends and family and see what's the best compromise in terms of lighting, gain and loss of "wedding atmosphere"? Think Barry's suggestion of light on stick is best idea as the light's only where you need it, rather than turning dim romantic lighting into daylight.

How about using a small spherical chinese paper lantern as diffuser to cut down on glare? But don't exceed the lamp wattage for the shade or you might have a fire on a stick! ;D

[Barry_Green]

If you're basically going for close or fairly close shots, you won't need much wattage at all. I've got a Frezzi 75w with a softbox, and I usually have to turn the dimmer down to half when shooting live events/conventions, stuff like that. So you surely won't need 300 watts! The DVX is a great low-light performer, but there's no substitute for adding a little light. However, it can indeed be a little light. A 50-watt Pro-Light on a stick, run from a battery belt, with some diffusion clipped over the front, would probably be adequate to get you enough illumination to restore the color to the scene and minimize the gain grain. Surely no more than 100w.