With all the technology in the world today, I still can't believe that some company hasn't come up with a way to create or "mimic" a shallow DOF film-look without spending $10 grand on a mini-35. Because of focusing issues inside the camera, is this too difficult to do? SLR's have portrait mode which does exactly that, so why can't they create an effect in-camera on a video camera that would save us all thousands of dollars? BTW, I understand how DOF works (full zoom + far off background) BUT I'm not the least bit technical, so if you know the answer my question, please try and limit the 4 and 5 syllable words to a minimum. Thanks!!!
A Shallow DOF In-Camera "Effect"
- Thread starter NebulaOne
- Start date
thisiswells
Retired
It's a part of optics which is branch of physics which is set in stone.
It's a part of optics which is branch of physics which is set in stone.
Video Uses Wider Zoom Lenses, That's Why
In non-technical terms: the longer the zoom of lens, the more "visual effect" of "shallow depth of field" The non-technical explanation for it: video cameras use wider zooms with than a still picture camera.
The way a still camera offers the "portrait" option is by closing down the shutter instead of the iris as a priority. A video camera can do this as well, but the effect isn't as obvious because the lenses don't "zoom" as much.
If that doesn't make any sense, please refer to the following:
Would you be willing to take my word for it? The only other way to explain it is really technical and always stirs much debate (in other words, hundreds of people will post here making your thread complicated and many folks will leave with a foul mouth. This topic comes up about once a month)
About Re-Imaging a Film Lens For Video
The mini35 adapter works like a small projector, kind of. It projects the image from the lens onto a screen inside the device, then the video camera actually records what it sees on that little screen inside the mini35. This would be called, in non-technical terms, "re-imaging"
Ever see one of those little "convert your home 8mm movies into videotape" things in the back of a video magazine? They work by projecting the film onto a little screen inside the device and then the video camera "re-images" by recording what it sees on that little screen. The main difference between one of those (aka-film chain device) and the mini35, is that the mini35 bypasses going to film first; it just goes straight to the little projection screen. The concept is very simple to grasp, I think.
Some Alternatives Coming Down The Pipe
There are a couple of "knock-off" 35mm adapter products in development by a couple of fresh companies. www.guerilla35.com or www.micro35.com
The only real problem I see with either of those "knock-off" adapters is that the video recorded is upside side down/left-to-right swapped. The non-technical way of explaining why they do this is that they're affordable and they would not be affordable if they had a non-upside-down-left-and-right-mixed-up image.
The Guerilla35mm adapter is $1200.
The Micro35mm adapter is $500.
Neither are available for purchase yet. We expect they'll be ready in a couple of months, possibly much sooner. The developers of both products regularly visit these boards and certainly will chime in this thread discussing the merits of their particular design over the other guys design.
Does this explanation help?
It's a part of optics which is branch of physics which is set in stone.
Video Uses Wider Zoom Lenses, That's Why
In non-technical terms: the longer the zoom of lens, the more "visual effect" of "shallow depth of field" The non-technical explanation for it: video cameras use wider zooms with than a still picture camera.
The way a still camera offers the "portrait" option is by closing down the shutter instead of the iris as a priority. A video camera can do this as well, but the effect isn't as obvious because the lenses don't "zoom" as much.
If that doesn't make any sense, please refer to the following:
Would you be willing to take my word for it? The only other way to explain it is really technical and always stirs much debate (in other words, hundreds of people will post here making your thread complicated and many folks will leave with a foul mouth. This topic comes up about once a month)
About Re-Imaging a Film Lens For Video
The mini35 adapter works like a small projector, kind of. It projects the image from the lens onto a screen inside the device, then the video camera actually records what it sees on that little screen inside the mini35. This would be called, in non-technical terms, "re-imaging"
Ever see one of those little "convert your home 8mm movies into videotape" things in the back of a video magazine? They work by projecting the film onto a little screen inside the device and then the video camera "re-images" by recording what it sees on that little screen. The main difference between one of those (aka-film chain device) and the mini35, is that the mini35 bypasses going to film first; it just goes straight to the little projection screen. The concept is very simple to grasp, I think.
Some Alternatives Coming Down The Pipe
There are a couple of "knock-off" 35mm adapter products in development by a couple of fresh companies. www.guerilla35.com or www.micro35.com
The only real problem I see with either of those "knock-off" adapters is that the video recorded is upside side down/left-to-right swapped. The non-technical way of explaining why they do this is that they're affordable and they would not be affordable if they had a non-upside-down-left-and-right-mixed-up image.
The Guerilla35mm adapter is $1200.
The Micro35mm adapter is $500.
Neither are available for purchase yet. We expect they'll be ready in a couple of months, possibly much sooner. The developers of both products regularly visit these boards and certainly will chime in this thread discussing the merits of their particular design over the other guys design.
Does this explanation help?
http://home.comcast.net/~rwauhkonen/adapter.mov
IT'S ALIVE!
35mm adapter for under 5 dollars. SWEET.
IT'S ALIVE!
35mm adapter for under 5 dollars. SWEET.
thisiswells
Retired
Off Topic
Off Topic
Policar--
Looks cool. Lots of gunk on your intermediate screen, though.
Check the gate, bro!
Funny how film speak applies in more ways than one to new school digital cinematography . . .
For Example:
"check the gate" means "clean the intermediate screen"
"change mags" means "insert different p2 card"
Off Topic
Policar--
Looks cool. Lots of gunk on your intermediate screen, though.
Check the gate, bro!
Funny how film speak applies in more ways than one to new school digital cinematography . . .
For Example:
"check the gate" means "clean the intermediate screen"
"change mags" means "insert different p2 card"
Would zebra lines be my light meter then?
I'm aware of the junk on the screen but since this is a prototype I was too lazy to clean it out. My UV filter has dust on it and my intermediate screen has bits of cardboard covering it since the adapter is made from a cardboard box with holes in it and lots of little bits of cardboard were still in it. I don't have a macro yet so there's major vignetting and focus issues, too, but I've just ordered a cheap one from ebay so hopefully the adapter will be working pretty well soon.
It's amazing how simple the concept is, though. 10 grand for a box two holes and a translucent piece of glass! Then again, the professional level adapters produce useable footage, whereas my adapter has a focusing screen I made in a toaster oven.
I'm aware of the junk on the screen but since this is a prototype I was too lazy to clean it out. My UV filter has dust on it and my intermediate screen has bits of cardboard covering it since the adapter is made from a cardboard box with holes in it and lots of little bits of cardboard were still in it. I don't have a macro yet so there's major vignetting and focus issues, too, but I've just ordered a cheap one from ebay so hopefully the adapter will be working pretty well soon.
It's amazing how simple the concept is, though. 10 grand for a box two holes and a translucent piece of glass! Then again, the professional level adapters produce useable footage, whereas my adapter has a focusing screen I made in a toaster oven.
Norm Sanders
Script Wrangler
Wow, that was a dirty image, but the DOF was extremely impressive. Reading what you said here, though, I have no idea what you used or did to get what you got.
Further explainations available, or can you show a clip looking into a mirror to see the gear in action & on the camera? Still shots of it?
Further explainations available, or can you show a clip looking into a mirror to see the gear in action & on the camera? Still shots of it?
Wells - I get it. Thanks for the well-versed explanation. The DVX DVD came with footage of the mini-35 adapter and the DOF looked good, but it looked like the quality suffered a bit. I would assume there would be minor quality-loss when the whole re-imaging process takes place, right?
Policar - That thing is sweet, although dirty, but sweet. It goes to show that a little sweat and brainpower can save you a boatload of money, but we're all filmmakers here, we know that.
Policar - That thing is sweet, although dirty, but sweet. It goes to show that a little sweat and brainpower can save you a boatload of money, but we're all filmmakers here, we know that.
I finished my prototype for my digital 8 camera (7 years old and still sort of works) and it works fantastically well. The only issue is that there's a massive lack of contast because light spills in (since there are holes that I haven't patched up. The funny thing is that this flare effect increases dynamic range, but it produces ugly footage.
bvalente
DVXuser Sponsor
Check out the micro35.com - 35mm lens adapter for a fraction of the mini35.
www.micro35.com
If you want to see really great shallow DOF look at the "horsing around" sample footage.
wells: I think the more accurate phrase is "the longer the focal length", though you're right, it will get ugly & technical very quickly, so perhaps I should refrain now!
www.micro35.com
If you want to see really great shallow DOF look at the "horsing around" sample footage.
wells: I think the more accurate phrase is "the longer the focal length", though you're right, it will get ugly & technical very quickly, so perhaps I should refrain now!
bvalente
DVXuser Sponsor
Also - on the "upside down footage" - it's a conscious choice we made to keep the cost down. You could add a big LCD on-camera monitor that provides the production flip, and just flip the resulting footage in post, and still for 1/10th the price of the mini35, you'd have all that and more.
We will be releasing a micro35Pro version later that includes the optics for flipping the image right-side up. among other improvements.
Hope that helps clarify things
We will be releasing a micro35Pro version later that includes the optics for flipping the image right-side up. among other improvements.
Hope that helps clarify things
Hekselman
New member
You want a shallow effect? open the iris wide , zoom in to the object, choose a far background, and then change to 35mm ... kidding.
this would be enough. i shot many stuff using wide open iris and tele on video and achieved shallow focus. you can also use the wide lens and bring the obejct very close to the lense. if you can choose your video camera, try using the one with the biggest CCD. the shallow focuse of the 35mm is due the size of the gate which is much smaller on video cameras, hence the "too-much-focus" effect. check out the shallow focus of 70mm... its a blast!!!
this would be enough. i shot many stuff using wide open iris and tele on video and achieved shallow focus. you can also use the wide lens and bring the obejct very close to the lense. if you can choose your video camera, try using the one with the biggest CCD. the shallow focuse of the 35mm is due the size of the gate which is much smaller on video cameras, hence the "too-much-focus" effect. check out the shallow focus of 70mm... its a blast!!!
bLueButterfLy
Member
NebulaOne said:
I may have understood NebulaOne differently with regards to mimicking DOF. I myself is also curious about techniques in "simulating" this seemingly undying interest of DOF (Meaning: with all the technicalities of Lens factor and F-Stops on the side).
I have been following the progress of Z-Cam over the years and hoping that one day they'll come up with a technique of blurring objects that are not within the focal range. currently Z-Cams are used as an alternative to chroma keying by eliminating objects or backgrounds that are not within the range. although you can actually composite the background/foreground in post to be blurred, it'll be nice to see this feature integrated with the cam. Maybe the next generation cameras will have this feature...hopefully the HVX5000
more info on this...
http://www.3dvsystems.com/products/zcam.html
if anyone have used this gadget, i'd be happy to hear from their experience.
shallow depth of field "blurry curtain"????
shallow depth of field "blurry curtain"????
I've trying to re-find this product. It's a diffused, "blurry" shower curtain you hang behind your subject and makes everything slightly blurry hence giving the illusion of shallow depth of field. It works well on close ups apparently but is a give away on long shots. Does anyone know where this product is ? Trying to get one! Thanks in advance....
shallow depth of field "blurry curtain"????
I've trying to re-find this product. It's a diffused, "blurry" shower curtain you hang behind your subject and makes everything slightly blurry hence giving the illusion of shallow depth of field. It works well on close ups apparently but is a give away on long shots. Does anyone know where this product is ? Trying to get one! Thanks in advance....
