DVX100a vs. Canon XL2 for GREENSCREEN?

ryan brown

ryan brown

lOwEr CaSe Member
Got a shoot coming up where I will be doing some greenscreen work.

I know both camera's use 4:1:1 color sampling, but I will be shooting in either squeeze mode on the DVX, or native 16:9 on the XL2.

Think I'd be able to pull a better key out of the XL2 because of the native 16:9?

Is it really going to make that much of a difference? (although every bit counts)

-brown

p.s Don't worry, the scene (green) will be lit properly to get the best results for either camera.
 
I would shoot with the XL2 and if you can flip the camera on its side(9:16) to get extra resolution. Even if you shoot 16:9 youll get more res out of the xl2 which will make for a better key. This is coming from a dvxuser. And if you were after a dvx look you could match the two cameras pretty well as you have a dvx. If you can try to get your hands on a HVX trust me get one. I just did a big chromakey job was working on it for months and months we were originally gonna shooot on a dvx because its for the web and i am so glad we shot on the HVX such a difference. you can key in the dvx just did a shoot then head and shoulders, however when you start moving into full body and lots of movement you have to crunch the key so hard or rotoscope that you can run into some ugly problems. Comes down to how much detail you have per pixel and how much you have to chroma smooth or repair based on the format. Anyway raving like a lunatic now.
Have fun
Sam
 
Yo... thanks Sam.

Yeah, I'd love to get my hands on an HVX, but it's just not plausible for this project.

There's really not going to be a lot of movement in the greencreen scene, so I should be able to matte everything out, and just focus on the very small details.

One question, I remember (vaguely) reading somewhere else that you get more resolution shooting 9:16... but don't remember why. Can you explain it?

-brown
 
It depends on the shape of your object. If it's something that can fit within the 9:16 frame, then you'll get higher res because you're using more active pixels in the frame.

Think about a person standing up -- that's a primarily thin, vertical image. Recording that on a wide horizontal frame just means a whole lot of wasted space. Turn the image sideways and now you're recording a thin, vertical image on a thin, vertical frame. You can zoom in much closer and take advantage of many more pixels (and more pixels to record the same image = higher resolution).

This type of technique will work fine with 24P or 30P, but would probably play horrible havoc with 60i!
 
Misses the point -- you don't watch this footage that you've shot; this footage is strictly for compositing. So you take the 9:16 footage (obviously rotated 90 degrees) and composite it into your 4:3 or 16:9 footage. Because you shot it "closer", it'll be higher resolution, so if you scale it down to fit into your project it should benefit from an apparent increase in color resolution.
 
Haha okay okay, you got me. I didn't think of using 9:16 footage as a compositing technique because I once saw someone shooting a wedding video with a tilted XL2. It wasn't greenscreen, and he mixed tilted with standard shots, so it seemed outrageous at the time. Even when scaled down to fit, people seem to generally like their videos take up the whole TV ;). Thanks for the correction though. I now understand that the person I saw was probably using the footage for a montage, where the video wouldn't occupy the entire frame.
 
Is it true that the XL2 has a greater dynamic range than the DVX, perhaps giving more room to work with when keying and CC'ing?
 
Is it true that the XL2 has a greater dynamic range than the DVX, perhaps giving more room to work with when keying and CC'ing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top