HVX200 footage for criticism

iposiniditos

iposiniditos

Well-known member
Hello guys,

I have just made a video with my hvx and i would love your comments.

5'30"
H264
640x272
29mb

Here are three grabs of the video:

HVX200_1_.jpg


HVX200_2_.jpg


HVX200_3_.jpg


the clip

Thanks a lot for viewing and comments in advance,
Theodoros
 
Beautiful footage!:thumbup:

Have you used any lens adapters or is it just the naked HVX200 lens?

(I'm asking because of the shallow depth of field and the vignetting presented in some of the shots.)

Also, have you done any CC in post or got to this final look in camera?
 
Thanks a lot Yuval Shrem for your comments.

I have used just the stock lens. Shallow dof is due to zoom and vignetting done in post.
I've used FCP for editing and CC. Most of the shots are cc'ed, but there are some uncc'ed. The coffee shots for example.

Thank you again.
 
Thanks for the info!

By the way, how far away from that guy did you have to get to be zoomed enough to get that shallow DOF ? (asking from a very practical standpoint...)
Just trying to figure out: From that distance is it still practical to get smooth camera moves? to keep it hand-held ? Steadycam? Did you have to be zoomed all the way? (It looks great, and it is obviously better to avoid those adapters if you want to keep your image sharp...)

Thanks!
Yuval.
 
looks good dude.. I have a sudden urge for an espresso...

Yuval, an adapter with the right lens gives you an amazing image.. There is no substitute..
 
Constructive criticism only here.
edit -
Looks like you need to watch for highlight clipping on a few shots.
The hard grading is stripping the image of detail and looks very DV.
However the editing is slick and was well put together if a bit art house ?
 
Last edited:
Yuval Shrem said:
Thanks for the info!

By the way, how far away from that guy did you have to get to be zoomed enough to get that shallow DOF ? (asking from a very practical standpoint...)
Just trying to figure out: From that distance is it still practical to get smooth camera moves? to keep it hand-held ? Steadycam? Did you have to be zoomed all the way? (It looks great, and it is obviously better to avoid those adapters if you want to keep your image sharp...)

Thanks!
Yuval.
Click to expand...

I haven't measured the distance ever. When i want shallow dof, i fully zoom and i'm trying to find the best position to frame the subject as i want :)
In my opinion, it's very difficult to get smooth camera moves fully zoomed handheld. I don't know about steadicam and full zoom, because i've never used one.
As for the adapters, i have to totally agree with Justin Marx. Their advantages are much more from the disadvantages. Especially with a good adapter and a right lense as Justin Marx said. In a week or so, i'll have an SGpro r.2 and i will post some footage.
 
Great looking footage! How did you export 2.35:1 without top and bottom banding? What were your project and export settings in FCP?
 
Thanks a lot jbednarski. I export with Compressor that gives you the ability to cut the blacks from top and bottom. As for my project settings, FCP in a 720p25 timeline and for export, i use H264, High quality, multi-pass encoding and AAC for sound.

Theodoros.
 
Some absolutely stunning photography, and some very interesting editing to fit together the audio & video. But it did seem to drag a bit; I think that has partly to do with the length of the song used.

The only problem I saw with the image was what appeared to be severe pixelization(?)/macroblocking(?) in some of the coffee and pear shots. I wonder if maybe that's due to the compression in the web file?

I look forward to seeing more of your work!
 
Waaaaaaaaaay too much CC on the portraits for my taste...
Or maybe too monchromatic/twotone, I always did stuff like this when I had to mix foundfootage into a trailer, like mixing VHS with Beta and DV...
The heavy CCing eased out the different origins of the materials - similar to your case here, the CC makes it less distinct and more arbitrary, like "I don´t know what I want so I dye it..."
I suppose you wanted to make it look more stylized or filmic - really worked in the opposit direction IMHO...
Reminds me of the heavyly overused sepia tinting in still photography...
The espresso shots and the pear on the other hand looked really good!
Very clean and stylized.
I´d maybe add more slomo liquids pouring into or out of sth, still not showing the plain process, but using it in a graphical way, like you did with the espresso...
And shoot more fruits!
Hmm, fruit...
 
Stunning !

simply stunning !

You know how a camera works.

Now the only thing i'd watch is the highlights.

Just for fun, try the "high" gamma setting, and tell me if you like it. Better highlight handling.

Congrats.
 
clip / link broke? 1:AM Pacific Standard Time....

seen it, Nice.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top