AF100 with Green Screen

D10S

D10S

Well-known member
With my HVX200 I normally use a Letus35 with Zeiss lens for 90% of my shooting to get the shallow depth of field.

However when I shoot green screen with my HVX200 I take off my Letus35 and shoot with the fixed lens. I always felt that the depth of field made getting a good key more difficult.

With all the excitement about shooting with 35mm lens on the AF100, what happens when you actually want to shoot without the depth of field for green screen? Is there a "video" lens you can use?
 
Maybe use an external recorder like an HPG 20, Ki pro mini or Ki pro which enables recording to a higher quality codec.

AND add more light, iris down to increase depth of field.
 
I have to say it does bug me a bit that the HVX has 4:2:2 color and the AF100 doesn't. But, yeah, 4:2:0 is not the best for keying.
 
Atomos Ninja (4:2:2 ProRes for $999) for green screen stuff. AF100 + Ninja is about the same price as the HVX200 was at launch.
 
jrv3034 said:
Atomos Ninja (4:2:2 ProRes for $999) for green screen stuff. AF100 + Ninja is about the same price as the HVX200 was at launch.
Click to expand...

I just took a look at that...input specs are less than stunning:

"HD 1080i59.94, 1080i50, 1080p25, 1080p24, 1080p23.98, 720p59.94, 720p50, SD 480i, 576i"

1080i on anything over 25p...
 
Steve Kahn said:
I have to say it does bug me a bit that the HVX has 4:2:2 color and the AF100 doesn't. But, yeah, 4:2:0 is not the best for keying.
Click to expand...

Well certainly the 5D should be considerably worse than the AF100, and I just did some keying with it and it worked well.

Bad keys come from bad light. Its a bit like the audio analogy, get a $3000 mic and hold it 3 metres from the talking head vs a $150 mic 12 inches away. $150 mic wins.

Crappy codec for greenscreen thats well lit vs great codec with shoddy lighting. Rubbish in = rubbish out.
 
Light is very important, true but for fine greenscreen work - film quality - 4:2:2 is a minimum.

Panasonic really made a mistake by not making the AF100 4:2:2 color - somehow (like expanding the nature of AVCHD to AVCHD422 or just making it a P2 camera which also cost 6k new). After all the camera is intended for narrative work and in this kind of work there tends to be a lot of keying needed.
 
Ultra has been doing well with the DVX for years... it was made to work with DV footage and that's not 4:2:2... I've done many spots that have been broadcast with that combo... lighting is key (excuse the pun).
 
jrv3034 said:
Atomos Ninja (4:2:2 ProRes for $999) for green screen stuff. AF100 + Ninja is about the same price as the HVX200 was at launch.
Click to expand...

As I understand the Ninja only has hdmi input ..... so you will need another converter box inbetween ...... from hdsdi to hdmi :furious3:
 
If Ninja will work (not sure technically about the flavors it records), at $995.00 it's at the price point of a couple of smaller P2 cards. I like the form factor too... nice and small, plus the easy to find laptop drives could work for archiving.
 
Steve Kahn said:
Light is very important, true but for fine greenscreen work - film quality - 4:2:2 is a minimum.

Panasonic really made a mistake by not making the AF100 4:2:2 color - somehow (like expanding the nature of AVCHD to AVCHD422 or just making it a P2 camera which also cost 6k new). After all the camera is intended for narrative work and in this kind of work there tends to be a lot of keying needed.
Click to expand...

The other thing about the HVX is it employed an older broadcast codec. I think Jan mentioned, but Id expect in 2010/2011 any well engineered broadcast aimed HD codec should surpass it.

And there is a way to get 4:2:2. It DOES have that option. If you want the best 4:2:2 broadcast codec around its AVCIntra its not DVCProHD, in fact its not even close. Is that what youre asking for? Because if its not then whats the issue? To get Intra on board would have cost 3-4k more, then (and this would apply to many that dont currently own p2 cards), theres a few grand in cards. I have p2 (well until early next week when my HPX500 ships off to its new home), but I also have CF cards, I can grab a few more, throw on a Ki pro mini and BAM there you are 4:2:2 cheaper than getting it any other way that would have been built in to the camera. I can even go out via HDMI (yes, a consumer connection) to a Nano and get 4:2:2. But with all HD SDI gear Im very unlikely to wade those waters.

So as of right now this camera is way more affordable to more users.
Im getting off track - my main point: If pana built in Intra, no one would have a choice but to spend 3-4k more on the body and an extra 1-2k on p2. $4k total more on the low end, $6k total more on the higher end. I asked for it, of course I did - I have p2 and know the power of Intra. But I'll settle for for Prores 4:2:2 (which by the way works like butter in after effects) and Im more than happy to settle for it at a minimum $2k cheaper.
 
steve i bet you no matter what you say how panasonic made a mistake, they will still sell a lot more of this cam than youd think.
 
Right now I get GREAT keys with my HVX200. I use Kino-Flo Diva's to light the screen, and Lowel Riffa's to light the talent. I use the green screen fabric by Composite Components (digitalgreenscreen.com) and we rarely have to even tweak the software setting to get a fantastic key. I just hope the AF100 is as good.
 
I've been shooting chroma key with the hmc 150 for the last 2 years with diferent producers, directors, and editors and quality has never been an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top