Why is it the dvx100 looks like home-video footage?

phazelee

phazelee

Well-known member
Before I buy any dvx100, i've been seeing a lot of dvx100p footages and 90 percent of them look like home-video footages. Something that came out of a crappy $200 hand-held camcorder. Maybe this is due because of poor lighting, or thte person who is using the dvx100p clearly does not know how to get the best ouf of the dvx100p.

The dvx100a and dvx100b looks so much better than the dvx100p, from what i've seen.

Anyone agree?
 
yuujinlee said:
Maybe this is due because of poor lighting, or thte person who is using the dvx100p clearly does not know how to get the best ouf of the dvx100p.
Click to expand...

We have a winner!
 
I guarantee you that if you saw 3 shots of the same scene, each one shot with a 100, 100A, and a 100B, with the same settings, no one on this earth would be able to tell you which one is which with 100% accuracy. Like everyone else said, it depends on who's shooting it.
 
Something that came out of a crappy $200 hand-held camcorder.
Click to expand...
Betcha I can shoot better pictures with the crappy $200 camcorder than my dad can with a DVX 100? ;) Oh, what am talking about? DVX 100, give him a 70K dvcprohd varicam with a 10K wide angle lens and I'll still beat him.
By the way he probably wouldn't even know how to turn that thing on, lol.

See what I mean? Nothing against my dad here, but he just can't shoot :) His pictures will always look like "grandmas birthday recorded by dad" no matter what camcorder he uses... and that's true for many, many people...
 
The DVX A and B models have richer colour, and improved gamma controls, from what I've seen, and also read here and from the Panasonic press releases. The original looks very "videoy" to me too, but some say the original is sharper The A model has more noise than the original and the B model is the cleanest of all. Hope that helps.
 
There was/is a new news station in western massachusetts that uses the DVX100A's and they give them to their reporters to use to shoot their own stuff with. A lot of people at the station I worked at, which was a rival station and dominated the other ones in the ratings, would talk **** about how crappy the cameras were and saying it looks like ****. I showed them things I shot with it and they didnt believe it was the same camera.

It's so important to know how to use the camera and how to light things properly.
 
most compression methods used in these web movies dont do justice to the footage you get to see when you watch in proper resolution on a monitor. Some movies do a good job because their overall production design looks good- but compare a $200 camcorder image side by side with dvx100 shot under same conditions on a production monitor and you will see the difference. Dont judge by what you see on the web alone- that is the first mistake to make.

But please explain "DVX100P" for us. just what were you trying to say exactly?
 
I have seen footage shot using the DVX 100a where the person behind the camera shot in 60i, did not properly white balance, and shifted settings as he continued to shoot. A couple of days later the same person was playing back the footage for a group of individuals, stating how bad the cam was... The fact of the matter is, in the wrong hands any of the DVX models can be completely misunderstood and produce poor-looking, uneven, washed out footage. This example speaks to the wide-ranging power of the camera as much as it does the ineptitude of the camera operator.

Myself and a group of film students tested the DVX 100a (shooting in 24p), in a controlled studio setting, alongside an Arri SR3. We had full crew and from a lighting perspective everything was top rate. When all was said and done, although the footage from the DVX -- comprising identical shots to the SR3 -- was distinctly different, it was not necessarily 'worse'. The footage was simply different. In post, there were so many variables we could affect and it was clear we could give the said footage more of a 'film-look' if we so desired. Furthermore, those that were on the shoot were consistently and enthusiastically shocked by the quality of the DVX footage in post.

I'll use this opportunity to say, if one uses the auto settings on the DVX they may expect to get a "standard" look (whatever that may be) that is more advanced than a consumer model camcorder. My experience leads me to believe this same person would be far better off using a run of the mill consumer camcorder (they will inevitably be happier with their results) as each of the DVX models is extremely powerful -- this cannot be stressed enough.

Film guys will be snobs (because they can be), but when faced with a lower budget they will be the first to use a DVX (any of the models) to great effect. Like a fine Les Paul, when used in the right hands it can produce gold, when in the wrong hands well...
 
Last edited:
dvpixl said:
But please explain "DVX100P" for us. just what were you trying to say exactly?
Click to expand...

DVX100P is the technical model number of the DVX100 sold in the US, though it only appears on the box and the manual (as "DVX100p") and not on the camera itself.
 
yeah this camera takes some know how and desire to get what you want. im still learning, but i am liking it. just as an example, i was shooting inside, and went outside and the camera went nuts, i had to spend some time adjusting settings to even get a decent view then the right look for the shot.

to someone that is used to doing point and shoot, that can be something to get used to, or interpret completely wrong.
 
Amazing that there's still such baseline technical illiteracy out there, that anyone immediately assumes that it's a hardware issue, as opposed to a not-knowing-how-to-exploit-the-hardware issue.
 
.........as the Director / DOP / Producer looks around his one man indie film set for someone to blame, the reality suddenly sinks in............................it must be the camera's fault.
{ it turned itself on and shot all this cr@p without consulting the Director / DOP / Producer }
 
It happens all the time; having a word processor does not mean you know how to write, having an NLE does not mean you know how to edit, having a Ferrari does not mean you know how to drive, having a chef's kitchen does not make you a chef... etc. Talent, discipline, and knowledge of the tool set will bring the most out of any artist in any art form.

While we are on the subject. filmmaking is a collaborative art with many disciplines and crafts at work. Knowing how to light does not necessarily mean you know how to shoot, shooting a camera does not necessarily mean you know how to record the best sound, and directing does not necessarily mean you now how to edit, and knowing how to edit picture and dialogue does not necessarily mean you know how to mix sound, etc.

Of course there are exceptions to every rule and some people will be quite good at several of these, but no one I know is great at all of them. Know, and be honest about your strengths and your weaknesses, eliminate the weakness with the best talent you can find and you will get the best film you can make.

I say this at all the panels I am invited to speak at - just because the tool has the capability does not mean that "you" have to use it.


Michael
 
fantasticfilm said:
.........as the Director / DOP / Producer looks around his one man indie film set for someone to blame, the reality suddenly sinks in............................it must be the camera's fault.
{ it turned itself on and shot all this cr@p without consulting the Director / DOP / Producer }
Click to expand...
It's not just cameras, either...late at night sometimes I hear this rustling and scratching and clicking coming from my studio, where my drafting tools are sneakily cranking out poorly-executed, inaccurately dimensioned drawings, and my workstation is quietly modeling and texturing and rendering lousy 3D work, which of course I will eventually get blamed for...

MichaelP said:
having a Ferrari does not mean you know how to drive
Click to expand...

I see the evidence of this for myself, about once a week, every week...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top