16:9 with the DVX100A
- Thread starter jezbond
- Start date
JoeFowler
Well-known member
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
I will add my question to the post if I may. I have read on the site that if you use the squeeze mode, you will be shooting "widescreen" but the image on the LCD and EVF is "squished." My question is this: How do I make it look widescreen, I will be using FCP to edit, and I want to be able to show the project on widescreen and normal TVs. How is this achieved?
Sorry to interrupt your post, jezbond, but I'm sure this has to do with what you're asking as well!
I will add my question to the post if I may. I have read on the site that if you use the squeeze mode, you will be shooting "widescreen" but the image on the LCD and EVF is "squished." My question is this: How do I make it look widescreen, I will be using FCP to edit, and I want to be able to show the project on widescreen and normal TVs. How is this achieved?
Sorry to interrupt your post, jezbond, but I'm sure this has to do with what you're asking as well!
Michael Summers
Well-known member
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
dont worry about it, he allready cross posted and got an answer here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30222
dont worry about it, he allready cross posted and got an answer here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30222
CaptainMench
Carbonite Member
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
Joe - Welcome to the board.
There are quite a few posts here on this subject. You get used to looking at squished mode.
FCP will edit in anamorphic mode which will resize the squished into a widescreen format. BUT only for your computer monitor. Going out to an external monitor will still be in squeeze mode. However, on my monitor I've got a widescreen button that forces the squeeze mode back into widescreen (inside the TV.) Makes it better for editing.
Once done in FCP, exporting to mpeg2 for DVD is easy. You'll export it as 16:9 and then in DVDSP you'll tell it to Force Letterbox. DVD will work fine in both 4:3 tvs (adding letterboxing) and 16:9 widescreen tvs.
Good luck,
CaptM
Joe - Welcome to the board.
There are quite a few posts here on this subject. You get used to looking at squished mode.
FCP will edit in anamorphic mode which will resize the squished into a widescreen format. BUT only for your computer monitor. Going out to an external monitor will still be in squeeze mode. However, on my monitor I've got a widescreen button that forces the squeeze mode back into widescreen (inside the TV.) Makes it better for editing.
Once done in FCP, exporting to mpeg2 for DVD is easy. You'll export it as 16:9 and then in DVDSP you'll tell it to Force Letterbox. DVD will work fine in both 4:3 tvs (adding letterboxing) and 16:9 widescreen tvs.
Good luck,
CaptM
CaptainMench
Carbonite Member
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
[quote author=Matthew link=board=Events;num=1091921636;start=0#4 date=08/08/04 at 03:43:38]I did it cause I had to and with some care, attention and patience it all worked just fine. Keeping the lens is delicate but the whole deal is not rocket science.[/quote]
Damn Dude... asleep at the wheel again??
CaptM
[quote author=Matthew link=board=Events;num=1091921636;start=0#4 date=08/08/04 at 03:43:38]I did it cause I had to and with some care, attention and patience it all worked just fine. Keeping the lens is delicate but the whole deal is not rocket science.[/quote]
Damn Dude... asleep at the wheel again??
CaptM
imbernauta
New member
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
Sorry but I don´t understand it at all. At the end wich is the best mode to work with if the end format will be 35mm.
Thanks.
Sorry but I don´t understand it at all. At the end wich is the best mode to work with if the end format will be 35mm.
Thanks.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
[quote author=imbernauta link=board=Events;num=1091921636;start=0#6 date=08/09/04 at 03:42:40]Sorry but I don´t understand it at all. At the end wich is the best mode to work with if the end format will be 35mm.
[/quote]
None of them. If you know you're ending up on 35mm, you absolutely should shoot 35mm in the first place. Not being facetious, but stating the fact as it is: I've shot DVX/anamorphic and transferred it to 35mm, and the result, while "acceptable", cannot compare to real 35mm origination. And after you spend the $30,000 - $40,000 to blow your DVX footage up to film, you could have spent that on film in the first place and ended up with a much better-looking and more sale-able product.
If you absolutely insist on shooting on video for a film transfer, the anamorphic adapter can make a very big difference. Squeeze mode is inappropriate for film transfer, so the far and away best choice is to shoot on film, second best is DVX with anamorphic adapter, and last place is DVX in Letterbox mode.
[quote author=imbernauta link=board=Events;num=1091921636;start=0#6 date=08/09/04 at 03:42:40]Sorry but I don´t understand it at all. At the end wich is the best mode to work with if the end format will be 35mm.
[/quote]
None of them. If you know you're ending up on 35mm, you absolutely should shoot 35mm in the first place. Not being facetious, but stating the fact as it is: I've shot DVX/anamorphic and transferred it to 35mm, and the result, while "acceptable", cannot compare to real 35mm origination. And after you spend the $30,000 - $40,000 to blow your DVX footage up to film, you could have spent that on film in the first place and ended up with a much better-looking and more sale-able product.
If you absolutely insist on shooting on video for a film transfer, the anamorphic adapter can make a very big difference. Squeeze mode is inappropriate for film transfer, so the far and away best choice is to shoot on film, second best is DVX with anamorphic adapter, and last place is DVX in Letterbox mode.
imbernauta
New member
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
Thanks a lot.
I have to take the last one solution. Rigth now I dont have money for the anamorphic.
Thanks a lot.
I have to take the last one solution. Rigth now I dont have money for the anamorphic.
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
Barry, when you say "acceptable" with the DVX and Anamorphic adapter blow up to 35mm. Would you say it looks close to shooting 16mm? Also, if one were to shoot a feature length film on 35mm, the camera and lens rental, buying film stock, then getting the thing processed wouldn't that be much more expensive than shooting DVX-Adapter then Blowup?
Barry, when you say "acceptable" with the DVX and Anamorphic adapter blow up to 35mm. Would you say it looks close to shooting 16mm? Also, if one were to shoot a feature length film on 35mm, the camera and lens rental, buying film stock, then getting the thing processed wouldn't that be much more expensive than shooting DVX-Adapter then Blowup?
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
When I say "acceptable", I'd say it's roughly comparable to a 16mm blowup. Not as good as a Super16 blowup.
The thing about shooting video vs. film is, people think they're saving a lot of money by shooting on video, because they don't spend a big chunk of change up front. But they do spend it on the back end, because that blowup is going to cost at least $30,000.
You could shoot an awful lot of 35mm film for $30,000. And the look between the two is not going to be comparable: the 35mm will blow the DVX away. You can't shoot as much raw footage as you could with the DVX, but for a filmmaker that's probably a good thing -- it teaches discipline and thinking shots through rather than just firehosing with the camera.
Shooting video for a film transfer is a false economy. You'll spend just as much, and end up with a worse-looking product. A DVX with the anamorphic adapter preserves the *possible option* of going to film, because you can get a watchable film print from it (certainly much better than is possible from other standard-def cameras), but if the goal is to make a film print, shooting film will yield dramatically better results.
When I say "acceptable", I'd say it's roughly comparable to a 16mm blowup. Not as good as a Super16 blowup.
The thing about shooting video vs. film is, people think they're saving a lot of money by shooting on video, because they don't spend a big chunk of change up front. But they do spend it on the back end, because that blowup is going to cost at least $30,000.
You could shoot an awful lot of 35mm film for $30,000. And the look between the two is not going to be comparable: the 35mm will blow the DVX away. You can't shoot as much raw footage as you could with the DVX, but for a filmmaker that's probably a good thing -- it teaches discipline and thinking shots through rather than just firehosing with the camera.
Shooting video for a film transfer is a false economy. You'll spend just as much, and end up with a worse-looking product. A DVX with the anamorphic adapter preserves the *possible option* of going to film, because you can get a watchable film print from it (certainly much better than is possible from other standard-def cameras), but if the goal is to make a film print, shooting film will yield dramatically better results.
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
Thanks for the quick reply Barry, As always I appreciate and look forward to dipping into your knowledge base.
It's good to know that the inexpensive DVX/Adapter can achieve a 16mm look when blown up. I see your points if you have the "JACK" upfront to shoot and complete the movie in 35mm that's the way to go. I personally don't want to spend that money up front or find investor's..ie firends and family. So let me ask you another question. If you were going to make a feature (approx 90 min) and you were willing to invest $10 thousand in it. Would you shoot video (DVX/Adapter) or 16mm or Super 16?
(I know this is WAY OFF the thread) I have a really really great script to shoot from, and above average talent, good crew ( I hope ). My plan is to get it done in 12 long rigorous days of shooting. Get it edited and on tape, then try to get it in a major festival. If it gets accepted, to a biggie, then I would get the money for the 35mm blowup, if needed. (Digital projection maybe) perhaps from a distributor buying a first look of the film.
I guess I look at it this way. Everyone thinks the film they are going to make or have made is good one. But will others. Will they go see it (if marketed correctly of course) Who knows? I don't want to mortgage the house, or beg, borrow and steal from friends and family to shoot it on 35mm. Maybe $10 grand could get it done on Super16?
Thanks for the quick reply Barry, As always I appreciate and look forward to dipping into your knowledge base.
It's good to know that the inexpensive DVX/Adapter can achieve a 16mm look when blown up. I see your points if you have the "JACK" upfront to shoot and complete the movie in 35mm that's the way to go. I personally don't want to spend that money up front or find investor's..ie firends and family. So let me ask you another question. If you were going to make a feature (approx 90 min) and you were willing to invest $10 thousand in it. Would you shoot video (DVX/Adapter) or 16mm or Super 16?
(I know this is WAY OFF the thread) I have a really really great script to shoot from, and above average talent, good crew ( I hope ). My plan is to get it done in 12 long rigorous days of shooting. Get it edited and on tape, then try to get it in a major festival. If it gets accepted, to a biggie, then I would get the money for the 35mm blowup, if needed. (Digital projection maybe) perhaps from a distributor buying a first look of the film.
I guess I look at it this way. Everyone thinks the film they are going to make or have made is good one. But will others. Will they go see it (if marketed correctly of course) Who knows? I don't want to mortgage the house, or beg, borrow and steal from friends and family to shoot it on 35mm. Maybe $10 grand could get it done on Super16?
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
I've got the dream of doing a production on the cheap with a DVX, *then* getting discovered, *then* a studio pays for the up-rez, and *then* getting paid millions to shoot a 35mm film, a la Robert Rodriguez.
I also dream I can fly.
But seriously, if you shoot a movie for a few thousand dollars on miniDV and it's popular enough to warrant an up-rez, wouldn't that money come out of someone elses pocket? Whereas if you shoot in 35mm, you're stuck with the higher cost no matter what.
EDIT: Ooops. I just read Kidster's post a little more carefully. I guess that's what he was trying to say.
I've got the dream of doing a production on the cheap with a DVX, *then* getting discovered, *then* a studio pays for the up-rez, and *then* getting paid millions to shoot a 35mm film, a la Robert Rodriguez.
I also dream I can fly.
But seriously, if you shoot a movie for a few thousand dollars on miniDV and it's popular enough to warrant an up-rez, wouldn't that money come out of someone elses pocket? Whereas if you shoot in 35mm, you're stuck with the higher cost no matter what.
EDIT: Ooops. I just read Kidster's post a little more carefully. I guess that's what he was trying to say.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
[quote author=Kidster link=board=Events;num=1091921636;start=0#12 date=08/10/04 at 18:23:11]I see your points if you have the "JACK" upfront to shoot and complete the movie in 35mm that's the way to go.[/quote]
Clearly 35mm would be superior if the funds were available, but that's not specifically what I was addressing. I was saying that if someone EXPECTS that their film WILL end up on 35mm, then it's a false economy to shoot on DV in the first place, because you'll spend just as much but end up with an inferior product.
If someone knows there's not much chance of ever ending up on a 35mm print, but wants to preserve the option just in case the miracle happens, then yes, the DVX is a great choice.
First, as I always advise everyone: if you even have to ASK the question of "should I shoot on film or video", the answer is "shoot video". When you're ready for film, you'll know it, and there won't even be a question in your mind when you're starting preproduction.
[quote author=Kidster link=board=Events;num=1091921636;start=0#12 date=08/10/04 at 18:23:11]I see your points if you have the "JACK" upfront to shoot and complete the movie in 35mm that's the way to go.[/quote]
Clearly 35mm would be superior if the funds were available, but that's not specifically what I was addressing. I was saying that if someone EXPECTS that their film WILL end up on 35mm, then it's a false economy to shoot on DV in the first place, because you'll spend just as much but end up with an inferior product.
If someone knows there's not much chance of ever ending up on a 35mm print, but wants to preserve the option just in case the miracle happens, then yes, the DVX is a great choice.
Unquestionably the DVX.
First, as I always advise everyone: if you even have to ASK the question of "should I shoot on film or video", the answer is "shoot video". When you're ready for film, you'll know it, and there won't even be a question in your mind when you're starting preproduction.
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
I have viewed Footage on a 50" Plasma shot with the DVX and the anamorphic in 24pa then burned to a DVD. In my opinion it looks much better than sqeeze or letterboxed. So I would add that if you plan to produce a DVD you will benefit from using the DVX, 24p and the anamorphic. I have no technical data to back this up it's just my personnel opinion even on a 42" plasma screen the results are great.
I have viewed Footage on a 50" Plasma shot with the DVX and the anamorphic in 24pa then burned to a DVD. In my opinion it looks much better than sqeeze or letterboxed. So I would add that if you plan to produce a DVD you will benefit from using the DVX, 24p and the anamorphic. I have no technical data to back this up it's just my personnel opinion even on a 42" plasma screen the results are great.
Mike_Donis
Veteran
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
Well, yeah. That anamorphic gives you full resolution of the CCDs in 16:9, whereas both letterbox and squeeze lose some in the blow up.
Well, yeah. That anamorphic gives you full resolution of the CCDs in 16:9, whereas both letterbox and squeeze lose some in the blow up.
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
There is an on going discussion about what are the advantages of using the anamorphic adapter from Panasonic. Most will agree the ana is not the best choice for film ( "if you know you're ending up on 35mm, you absolutely should shoot 35mm in the first place") BUT, if you know your final product is going to DVD the anamorphic adapter IS THE WAY TO GO it gives you added resolution (just as Mike mentioned) and makes a better DVD than sqeeze mode or letterboxed.
There is an on going discussion about what are the advantages of using the anamorphic adapter from Panasonic. Most will agree the ana is not the best choice for film ( "if you know you're ending up on 35mm, you absolutely should shoot 35mm in the first place") BUT, if you know your final product is going to DVD the anamorphic adapter IS THE WAY TO GO it gives you added resolution (just as Mike mentioned) and makes a better DVD than sqeeze mode or letterboxed.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
For clarification, while it is definitely better to shoot film if you're going to film, if you choose to shoot with the DVX anyway the anamorphic adapter will make a substantial improvement in quality on the film print, over not using it.
If you're making a film print, the best way by far is to shoot film in the first place. Second best would be HD. Third would be an SDX900 in 24P mode. Fourth would be the DVX with anamorphic adapter (or perhaps XL2). Fifth would be the DVX without the anamorphic.
For clarification, while it is definitely better to shoot film if you're going to film, if you choose to shoot with the DVX anyway the anamorphic adapter will make a substantial improvement in quality on the film print, over not using it.
If you're making a film print, the best way by far is to shoot film in the first place. Second best would be HD. Third would be an SDX900 in 24P mode. Fourth would be the DVX with anamorphic adapter (or perhaps XL2). Fifth would be the DVX without the anamorphic.
Re: 16:9 with the DVX100A
Barry,
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that if you have a DVX100A, no access to an anamorphic adapter, there is a possibility of a film-out (if the film is good enough), then the best possible choice of mode to shoot in (of squeeze or letterbox) IS letterbox.
Correct?
Why doesn't squeeze mode work for a film out?
Barry,
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that if you have a DVX100A, no access to an anamorphic adapter, there is a possibility of a film-out (if the film is good enough), then the best possible choice of mode to shoot in (of squeeze or letterbox) IS letterbox.
Correct?
Why doesn't squeeze mode work for a film out?