Anyone crazy enough to video presentations?

G

grantw

Well-known member
Everyonce in a while I'll do a conference/presentation type video for a client. I always gotta crank the iso and limited zoom on the lens' always made the video subpar. But they were mostly just for inner-office use and people didnt wanna pay alot so thats what they got.

I got a bit higher profile presentation coming up and they want to do a real nice video for it, not a huge bump on budget though. I'm trying to figure it out if I should go all dslr and between me and another guy run like 4 cameras. Or find someone with a regular video camera to take the main part and I just take alternate angles.

It is going to be professionally lit from the place too so lighting should be decent.
And audio guy knows what he's doing so that should be no problem.
 
I've shot tons of long form medical and university lectures ( including 4 day symposiums ) using everything from Panasonic HS700 consumer camera, my HMC-150 work-horse, and recently with my hacked GH2 camera.

Shooting Features

HS700 : internal hard-drive which can store 40+ hours of good quality footage, but needs good lighting to shoot. Audio via a BeachTek passive adapter is excellent, but needs a good signal. Powered 12x zoom lens.

HMC-150 : Can shoot 3 hours of great quality footage per 32 GB SDHC card, good in low light. Audio is excellent provided the feed from the room is good. Powered 13x zoom lens.

GH2 : Can shoot 4 hours of great quality footage per 64 GB SDHC card ( 24L Mode ), good in low light. Audio via BeachTek passive adapter is excellent, but needs a good signal. Much slower limited range manual zoom lens.
 
Hooray! The first common sense post on this subject for ages. DSLRs are amazing things for a limited range of projects, but presentations, awards ceremonies and stage activities really need the kinds of features conventional cameras provide as standard, not bolted on using a range of strange almost home built gadgets.

I'd rather have a camera with a decent zoom that can manage to keep in focus with little problem, mounted on something sturdy that can keep the image rock solid. I'd like to have the whole thing in focus and I'd really like it to have little need for extra gain with normal stage type lighting. I'm sure DSLRs could get some neat POV shots and be able to get in the way and get action stuff, but somebody at the lectern/podium giving the presentation needs conventional cameras, with big chunky cabling that can take a trip or two without snapping something off. Look at the music industry - stages with cameras, screens and crazy lighting. A guy with a DSLR could hide behind the drum kits, or crouch in the shadows, but they don't use them.

For all the so called cinematic stuff I can see they have a home, but this forum does seem to hardly ever feature a post that doesn't have them as the only kind of camera that exists - apart of course to the multiple even larger format gizmos everyone seems to be pioneering. Apart from the special effects testing, wasn't the Olympics/Paralympics all 2/3"?
 
I've used the GH2 as a static master angle successfully, due to its good sensitivity, fine resolution (easier to do digital punch-ins later when possible), and long shot duration. With the right lens (something parfocal, fast-ish, and smooth-focusing) it can serve as a single camera, but not really excel in the role.

The old HVX still gets called up for these jobs.
 
paulears said:
Hooray! The first common sense post on this subject for ages. DSLRs are amazing things for a limited range of projects, but presentations, awards ceremonies and stage activities really need the kinds of features conventional cameras provide as standard, not bolted on using a range of strange almost home built gadgets.

I'd rather have a camera with a decent zoom that can manage to keep in focus with little problem, mounted on something sturdy that can keep the image rock solid. I'd like to have the whole thing in focus and I'd really like it to have little need for extra gain with normal stage type lighting. I'm sure DSLRs could get some neat POV shots and be able to get in the way and get action stuff, but somebody at the lectern/podium giving the presentation needs conventional cameras, with big chunky cabling that can take a trip or two without snapping something off. Look at the music industry - stages with cameras, screens and crazy lighting. A guy with a DSLR could hide behind the drum kits, or crouch in the shadows, but they don't use them.

For all the so called cinematic stuff I can see they have a home, but this forum does seem to hardly ever feature a post that doesn't have them as the only kind of camera that exists - apart of course to the multiple even larger format gizmos everyone seems to be pioneering. Apart from the special effects testing, wasn't the Olympics/Paralympics all 2/3"?
Click to expand...

You can mount B4 ENG parfocal lenses onto a GH2 quite easily.
 
well, the ONLY DSLR that doesnt have clip length limits is the gh2. so if youre using other brands, youd have to have each camera manned so it can be re-triggered every 12min or so. as well as stagger the start times by a few seconds so you always know you have at least one angle running.

add the value of servo zooming in these scenarios and it almost makes it a slam-dunk choice for traditional video cams
 
i have a 7d and my dvx100b. The dvx doesn't get used anymore. I DP commercials and music vids and shorts mostly, where the 7d is great. ....however recently I've been called to cover two forum type settings, and guess what, I dusted the old dvx and put it to work. Just cant beat internal (great) audio via xlr and good mics...long form recording, servo zoom and proper form factor. So i guess it is still making me $. I think dslr's would be a pain in the ass in that situation.
 
jambredz said:
i have a 7d and my dvx100b. The dvx doesn't get used anymore. I DP commercials and music vids and shorts mostly, where the 7d is great. ....however recently I've been called to cover two forum type settings, and guess what, I dusted the old dvx and put it to work. Just cant beat internal (great) audio via xlr and good mics...long form recording, servo zoom and proper form factor. So i guess it is still making me $. I think dslr's would be a pain in the ass in that situation.
Click to expand...

The 7D would be a pain, that's for sure. Recording limits and overheating alone were enough to dig up my DVX.
While I had worked out an intricate system of shooting with 2 T2i's on Magic Lantern's auto-restart (cut to the other camera during the 2-3 second gap between clips), I still found my trusty old DVX more reliable and a more palpable workflow.

But I don't feel that way since getting a GH2. I've recorded a series of 30 minute lectures, as well as 1+ hour long concerts on GH1 and GH2 cameras. They can even do silent video autofocusing if that how I rolled. I do wish it had a better internal audio system, but these multi-camera shoots always have separate audio anyway. There are some servo zoom options for the GH cams, including the B4 ENG style mentioned above as well as at least one native option from Panasonic. I can't remember the last time I powered on the DVX, to be honest. (hitting ebay soon probably)
 
I have shot presentations, my own, and for others. I have one camera on the presenter and the other one on the slides. It is good to have two cameras on the presenter to vary things up. I use the camera on the slides or video just for reference. I then bring in the slides, or original video clips and drop them on the timeline. You can export the slides as graphic files and bring in to the NLE for placement.
 
So the best we can do is use great equipment that needs to be restarted every few minutes, meaning that not one source actually has a continuous video file? Well that's what happens trying to use technology not designed for the purpose. Imagine motor sport where you need to turn the engine off every few circuits, or where you accept the engine overheating as standard?

I'll happily concede that DSLRs can provide better image quality than I can achieve with my big lumps of cameras, but the manufacturers decide that these restrictions are how it is?

DSLRs are popular because they produce excellent visual quality for money. Their users put up with all the drawbacks because for them, picture quality is the only critical thing. Sound, features and everything else seem not to matter. If you want to record something above the ability of your equipment - just get different equipment that CAN do it, not crazy workarounds that ordinary people won't understand.
CLIENT "What do you mean you missed the joke I made?"
DSLR OWNER "er, I'd got to the limit of the camera, so I had to stop and start again"
CLIENT "How much am I paying for this?.........."

Will the client actually understand that some video cameras cannot simply be set to record and left? In a way it's like when cine first started and you had to change film preventing long recording times with amateur equipment. If you wanted longer times, you bought something with 400ft capability - professional kit.

Perhaps it's a bit unfair of me to even consider DSLRs in general as amateur video kit, but perhaps I should have said enthusiasts kit - which seems fairer.

There have always been bits of kit that offered pro facilities with some kind of limitation, that set them as equal in quality, but for a limited range of activities - and I think this is where DSLRs live. Ideal for many projects, but NOT all of them, and using DSLRs with short running time for a long event is a no no.

Most of my work involves theatre, and when I need more people I want to know they have the ability to record in lowish light and can do at least an hour in one go. The few times shows over-run to 1:06 is a killer for me. People having to card swap or tape swap makes me really annoyed, having to do it two or three times in the hour is unacceptable - even if their quality is superb!

Meant in good fun gents, but it is something I feel strongly about!
 
paulears said:
So the best we can do is use great equipment that needs to be restarted every few minutes, meaning that not one source actually has a continuous video file?
Click to expand...

Use a GH2, easily hacked to remove EU-inflicted record limits, with a 64GB+ card and either AC power or a large adapted battery. It'll record for upwards of 4 hours. Or, use any video camera.
 
Hi
I have been shooting presentations and steadily increasing production values.

Last shoot:

7D as varied shot camera to get the speaker with different angles, distance and all that artistic stuff.

HMC150 as main camera on speaker. I say speaker but this presentation also had four musical numbers. Some variation in shots but camera stayed in one place on a good tripod.

GL1 set up several rows back from stage as reference camera to sync slides to presenters audio.

House sound brought into HMC150 one channel and on camera mic used on other channel.

Second sound handled by seperate sound guy for me. He also captured house sound.

As mentioned in earlier post, get digital files of videos and slides and Power Points and bring them into the edit rather than using the crappy shoot of the screen.

One note on Power Point. Power Point can be set up in different ways. Both the aspect ratio and resolution is adjustable at creation. I asked the professional who the presenter hired to create their Power Point to make it 1080 16:9. I received 720 4:3... But at least I tried. Worth trying to coordinate Power Point creation with what you want on your timeline for best quality and editing speed. This also applies to videos played on screen and digital slides.

After all is said and done I think the single most important element is great sound from the speaker. But that's just my own opinion. Never hurts to have a Zoom taped to the podium as a failsafe. Some speakers play with thier mics or have loud lav clothing (is there such a thing?).

One other issue is color correction. The 7D, HMC150 and GL1 do not intercut particularly well. So similar look cameras save time whether done by same brand or looks created in camera ahead of time. Editing speed versus high quality is a game where you need both, even on low budget.

I find that everywhere in the chain it's not the equipment but the operators that make the difference. I would much rather have a good pro on almost anything than a lesser operator on the best, newest whatever the fad is currently equipment. That goes for Cameras, sound, and editing.

As for locking off cameras. I would not lock off a 7D. It needs intelligent life form operating it. I would not lock off the HMC150 simply becasue it is the main camera and I need some variation. The GL1 I want locked off so the on camera mics aren't moving all over for the reference sound and I have its pic as a failsafe. I do try to coordinate battery and media swaps.
On this shoot I had a crew of five. Three camera ops, a sound guy and myself as swing man. We were all volunteers for an organization and the crew quality ranged from good semi pro to just volunteers. Of course every shoot is different and if you are a one man band that's very different. I would leave the 7D home.

I have been manually syncing sound. But I am going to get Plural eyes and try it.

Best regards to all us sometimes presentation shooters hanging out here with the film makers.
I bet there are more of us than anyone might admit. I really like DVXUser.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top