24pn strobing look disturbing

So do you have an answer or not?
I am asking a question because I can't find it in the video, I already purchased.
That's why I am asking for help on this discussion board...
Why do you have to be unprofessional, just answer the question or don't answer the question.
I don't need an lecture...
 
Robert Lane said:
First, find a way to afford the $89; the book has tons of "how to" info and will help you avoid the "gotchas".

Second, in a thread I posted on another forum I did a series of tests comparing motion in video cameras vs. film, specifically with the HVX200 and HPX500. Turns out, the output from the HVX/HPX @ 24p has more motion blur than an actual film using *similar* focal lengths.

If you're not in a tele-cine or film-transfer workflow, shoot in 30p rather than 24p in the HVX; the motion blur (caused either by moving objects or camera movement) will actually look more like a film camera does.

Remember that video cameras do not have a physical shutter inside, so they have to use software and chipset trickery to simulate shutter effects. That simulation varies from model to model and isn't perfect, however the Varicam @ 24p replicates motion blur much more accurately than the HVX - and it should considering the price-tag.

Get Barry's book, it's an investment worth ten-times the cost.
Click to expand...

Yeah , get the book.
If you just spend the money you'll find that you get what you paid for that hvx & learn how to REALLY use it.
$89 isn't that much if you want learn what all the camera really has to offer you.
Its a great buy:thumbsup:
 
ajmax said:
Thanks Guys,,,
it's the shot after the plane...
Click to expand...

Same thing.

and I can not pan any slower or faster.
Click to expand...

Why not? You can pan at any speed between no movement at all and a whip-pan.

A slower pan will solve the problem.


You mentioned frame rate. that sounds familiar form Barry's video...
What Frame rate do you recommend
Click to expand...

The frame rate is entirely a matter of artistic choice. If you want smoother motion, choose 30p or 60p (or 60i in 1080 or 480), but you'll lose the filmic look.


and do i loose audio if I use the recommended frame rate?
Click to expand...

You only lose audio shooting with variable frame rates in the pN modes.
 
i have Barry's DVD's... i've lerned in 5 minuts what i didnt in two hole month's
now... my money dosnt grow on trees...but im sure the books worth it, but the question is, the book is complementary to the dvds or has the same info?
 
Thank You Guys for your professional advice.
Since i was in a jam, you helped me solve my problem.,

Now that i am passed this situation, and when I get back from on-location, I'll be able to go over Barry's video again...

Thanks
 
Indywannabe said:
1080/60i or 720/60p are the only faster frame rates for normal speed
Click to expand...
I think the material in question was 24P, so 30P would be another option, and it has 25% more temporal resolution. Last but not least, a slower shutter speed / large shutter angle could have reduced judder at the expense of increased motion blur.
 
the problem that i found is that i saw lots of 24p footage i didn't see nothing strobing 1/5 tham my footage is strobing.
24p film skates , cars , people running , i do very slow pans and titls and it still strobing , even in shots with no camera movements, people walking through the screen strobes too much , it is anoying me...i'm very disapointed..
 
Any info shared on this board is purely a product of individuals being nice enough to do so. You are not owed any kind of answer at all.
And don't speak of "professionalism" when you are definitely not a professional yourself. You can't even put together a coherent sentence.
 
jimpatro said:
Any info shared on this board is purely a product of individuals being nice enough to do so. You are not owed any kind of answer at all.
And don't speak of "professionalism" when you are definitely not a professional yourself. You can't even put together a coherent sentence.
Click to expand...

Didn't he just say thank you? Doesn't seem to me like putting someone down for saying thank you creates much of a community feeling.
 
Are you kidding me? Who would put somebody down for saying "thank you"?
Did you read all his posts? Very demanding, and never said "please".
Got snarky when someone suggested he invest in a valuable tool (Barry's book).

If you dish it out you better be able to take it.
 
Strobing usually looks worse on a computer monitor than the same footage output to a TV from a DVD. I was pretty freaked too until I saw it that way.

And strobing is most definitely in evidence on conventional movie footage. I notice it all the time these days. It's all about panning speed and if the camera is following something in motion, as others have pointed out.

Most of us grew up on 60i camcorders where it wasn't a factor. 24f, on video or film, is a whole 'nother thing.
 
No one here, including Barry, has refuted Robert Lane's assertion that the HVX's 24p is more "stroby" than a film camera, or even the HPX500. Barry's book claims otherwise.

I took Robert to task at another site for reporting the same thing, citing Barry, to which he didn't reply, then months later he repeated it again here.

Is there anything to his claim? Is the HVX's 24f actually any more stroby than a film camera or an HPX500?
 
here is a thought...

unless youre planning to transfer to film. might shootinig 60i then using any of the various and reasonably effective de-interlacing/film effect filters (nattress, magic bullet, etc...) to achieve [nearly] the same end result without as much the aforementioned strobiness be a good idea?
 
wgzn said:
here is a thought...

unless youre planning to transfer to film. might shootinig 60i then using any of the various and reasonably effective de-interlacing/film effect filters (nattress, magic bullet, etc...) to achieve [nearly] the same end result without as much the aforementioned strobiness be a good idea?
Click to expand...

1) You'll toss away a ton of resolution by doing that.

2) It'll end up with every bit as much strobe, maybe even more because you'll be tempted to move the camera too quickly when shooting 60i.
 
Ted Spencer said:
No one here, including Barry, has refuted Robert Lane's assertion that the HVX's 24p is more "stroby" than a film camera, or even the HPX500. Barry's book claims otherwise.

I took Robert to task at another site for reporting the same thing, citing Barry, to which he didn't reply, then months later he repeated it again here.

Is there anything to his claim? Is the HVX's 24f actually any more stroby than a film camera or an HPX500?
Click to expand...

(It's 24p, not 24f. 24f is a Canon thing.)

I have not seen a difference in 24p strobe between the 200, the 500, or the DVX100, and I've worked with thousands of hours of footage.
 
I just finished my feature (using 720 24pN) and aside from a few fast motions in the film I've rarely noticed any strobing (very minimal at best) and I used dolly's and cranes. Of course we avoided quick pans and we would follow a subject but trust me, I am one of those people who worried and when I watched previews on a 20 foot screen I was pleased.

Todd
 
Ted Spencer said:
Is there anything to his claim? Is the HVX's 24f actually any more stroby than a film camera or an HPX500?
Click to expand...
On the original DVX DVD I took a DVX100 and a CP16/R film camera, side by side, and shot all sorts of strobing/panning tests at equivalent field of view. I defy anyone to discern any difference whatsoever between the motion of the film camera, and the motion of the 24P video camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top