JVC ProHD GY-HD250U footage and Conversion to 35 film for distribution...

S

sudigaalee

New member
Hi Folks,

We are two independant filmmakers, planning our first commercial production. We are planning on using JVC GY-HD250U with HZ-CA13U Optical Adapter to shoot the movie. Since we are planning the distribution through 35mm film, we are planning on conversion but we do not have a clue on the digital to film conversion costs.

Have you guys ever attempted this route for conversion from digital to 35mm film? If so could you spare your 2 cents on this.

Any suggestions on the equipment choice are welcome too...

Thanks
Sri
 
If you know your filming out, why not shoot film in the first place? cost is not that much different. Personally I'm not a fan of HDV, too much compression. I'm sure there is plenty about the HDV format here if you search. If you have too shoot digital and definitly going out to film I'd look for a RED.
 
If you are going for a film out I would recommend the Canon XL-H1 because it has higher resolution than the HD250u. So worst case scenario you can finish in 720p with enough extra frame to virtually pan and dolly your shots. Because you are shooting with hdv you will need to get close to the look you want in camera because you can't push hdv really far in post. Example if you want a really saturated look bump up the saturation in the camera. Don't go overboard just put the setting closer to what you want the final film print to look like.

Also you should shoot test shoots and print them to film before you start. The test shots shouldn't all be setup exactly right so you can get a real world look at how bad footage will look.

With all that said it is pretty easy with Canon 24f and final cut pro. Edit native 24f and render to ProRes 4:2:2 (this is better than Sony HDcam tape) when done contact a post house like http://www.plastercitypost.com
 
Hi Gopher,

Thanks for the response... here's what we think about the question you had regarding the production...

Production and Post Production in HDV is more economical, it offers us enough room for mistakes, as we can plan and shoot couple of shots extra for every scene... just to make sure... and then decide what shots to use for each scene in post production... once the post production is done, our thinking is it is economical to transfer to film than shoot on film and end up wasting the film stock and processing costs...

Any suggestions on how to approach the production with 35mm film camera...

Sri
 
Nik Manning said:
If you are going for a film out I would recommend the Canon XL-H1 because it has higher resolution than the HD250u. So worst case scenario you can finish in 720p with enough extra frame to virtually pan and dolly your shots. Because you are shooting with hdv you will need to get close to the look you want in camera because you can't push hdv really far in post. Example if you want a really saturated look bump up the saturation in the camera. Don't go overboard just put the setting closer to what you want the final film print to look like.

Also you should shoot test shoots and print them to film before you start. The test shots shouldn't all be setup exactly right so you can get a real world look at how bad footage will look.

With all that said it is pretty easy with Canon 24f and final cut pro. Edit native 24f and render to ProRes 4:2:2 (this is better than Sony HDcam tape) when done contact a post house like http://www.plastercitypost.com
Click to expand...
Hi Nik,

Our initial choice was Canon XL-H1 but after having gone through JVC HD-250U and its HZ-CA13U and both being JVC products, our thinking was that they would work well for the film look as well as eliminate lot of moving parts incase we use lens adapters like PS Mini or Red Rock M2 etc.

Can we use HZ-CA13U on Canon XL-H1? Because HZ-CA13U seems to be a better option to achieve good film look as well as get a better resolution from Canon XL-H1.

Thanks
Sri
 
Ask your question of some of the more prominent film transfer houses, such as DVFilm.com, Swiss Effects, 4MC, EFXOne, DFG. Those are the companies that can answer. You're probably looking at somewhere around $30,000 to $50,000 to print a 90 to 120-minute movie from HDV to 35mm film.
 
There are so many variables that come into play that it really takes quite a break down to see which is the most economical. For instance I know a film that had planned to shoot with a varicam a movie about beach volleyball. When the DP came in he immediatly showed them the savings of shooting 35 mm film, heres why. "The varicam doesn't have the same lattitude as film, because we are on a beach the contrast is rather high. To properly expose faces I'll have to bring in large instrument 12 to 18k to fill. But the expense only starts with the fixtures, your setups will go much slower because the fixtures have to roll on stands, and you can't roll anything in soft sand." So once they compared the added cost of film, which was about 100.000 vs the cost of a longer production, about 250,000 film made economic senses, even though they were going out to DVD.

So the first question I'd ask is what is the final venue for this production, the large screen, DVD, broadcast? Then see if you can stay in a fully digital realm, that will be the ceapest. If you are definitly filming out without a doubt, then I'd have major concerns about HDV holding up especially if you have a lot of motion. Secondly what's your enviornment that you're shooting, just like the story before, is digital the most economical format. Finally the comparison in cost, 30 to 50K for a transfer is cheaper than what I thought, but if anyone knows it is Barry. With good planning, story boards, blocking etc. 35 mm shoot will cost you about 50 to 100K more. But you will also have tons more lattitude as well.
 
Gopher, although you are making some valid points your understanding of HDV is very limited -- it's teh format that makes absolutely no sense on paper but when seen with naked eyes delives spectacular images.

sudigaalee, it's pretty obvious from your post that you can't afford the film transfer and actually don't want to... EVERY film festival nowdays takes HDCam so if you have festival worthy film all you will have to do it transfer it to HDCam. And if you are one of the lucky ones to have your film picked up for distribution -- then the distributor will pay for the film transfer.
 
I will admit I have not processed HDV footage personally, I'm a shooter not an editor so I rely on the feedback I get from editors. I shoot quite a bit on the Sony hdv camera for one company I work for, the feedback I get is from a flame suite editor, the footage is always problematic, mostly in movement. So when I shoot with that camera I'm very conscience of my pan and tilt rates as well as movement in the frame. This coupled with the limited color space would be enough for me to always choose the HVX over any of the HDV formats, especially if filming out. I really wouldn't want to film out from any of the small format (1/3in chip) cameras, I'd want more latitude to work with, however I can understand their plight, budget dictates allot of what we do.
 
Sri, based on what I saw at NAB, the HZ-CA13U Optical Adapter would definitely be the way to go. It did give, in my opinion, a better DOF look and didn't take away from the camera's inherent sharpness as much as a Redrockmicro setup would. At NAB, they had a Redrockmicro setup and an HZ-CA13U setup side-by-side and really, after I checked both setups myself, the difference was almost night and day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top