Depth of field and the hmc150

[HotConductor]

Any tips or tricks you would like to share? I always try to put a good amount of distance between my subject and the background but I'm sure there are other techniques that work well. I use CS5.. If you have any feedback on doing this in post I would love to hear it!

 

[Michael Carter]

Dof in post? That's been struggled with since the DV cameras first hit the scene and the DOF adapters were such a craze. You can pull decent keys with the HMC and stick in a blurred background I suppose. That's really about it unless you're a fan of days of rotoscoping - and you'll still be disappointed. Try to isolate objects in a scene, float 'em and then blur the background. All the stuff you isolated is still in your background plate and will blur out as well. Try it with a photoshop file and then imagine that times hundreds of frames. Really, get that idea out of your head!

Your best bet is to get something like a T2i and a 50 or 100mm 2.8 and use that for your DOF intensive scenes. Roll the 150 and capture audio via its XLRs. Test test test your scene files to match footage. Heck, there's 28-70 2.8 Sigma glass on ebay for under $200 if you hunt around, that's not a bad lens at all for video.

You can get limited DOF with something like the 150, but you need some loooooooong camera-subject-background distances. I did scenes with my DVX that were roughly camera-to-foreground: 5 feet; foreground to background: 20 feet. Get a DSLR and a Nikon series E prime or a Canon 50mm. Others' opinions may vary.

 

[HotConductor]

Thanks for the feedback. I'm considering getting a GH2 to supplement my two HMC150s.

CS5 has done amazing things with rotoscoping. There is a tool now that can follow shapes/actors and my early results with it have come out pretty decent to be honest. Adjustments are by scene, not frame, so its not too intensive.

 

[Michael Carter]

CS5 has done amazing things with rotoscoping. There is a tool now that can follow shapes/actors and my early results with it have come out pretty decent to be honest. Adjustments are by scene, not frame, so its not too intensive.

Guess you're referring to roto brush.... I'm guessing you haven't tried it. I've thrown fairly easy shots at it and found a slow as molasses, frame-by-frame tweaking sort of misery. There may be shots it really works with though, especially if you shoot with roto brush in mind.

But... whatcha gonna do when you isolate your subject and float it over your background? Blur the background plate I would guess. But with your subject still existing on the background, you'll get a "halo" of blurry subject. You could slightly enlarge the floated layer, but if there's much motion you're sunk. You could painstakingly clone background over the subject on your BG plate (which may be the kind of thing someone tweaking on speed would enjoy).

To quote myself:

Try it with a photoshop file and then imagine that times hundreds of frames.

Seriously, you're not onto something new here... it's been a subject since DV began. Maybe there are ways to do it - some shots you can try a close up lens or diopter, people say that occasionally works. The only way I know is some very long distances for significant DOF.

I'm not trying to sound harsh, maybe someone will chime in with a magic solution that's evaded everyone since the DVX100 (pre-A, pre-B) hit the shelves. Grab a copy of AE and discover it and let us know. But if you have lighting, exposure and camera settings under control, you can get decent matches with DSLRs for a few hundred bucks more (OK, maybe not with a D90).

EDIT: there are of course the DOF adapters; but it seems like a decent model could cost more than a DSLR. Then again, with a DSLR you may need rails, an FF, matte box, etc. I've been taking my DSLR to the few talky-head jobs I do and sticking it on a tripod (different angle) and triggering it with a remote whenever the red light goes off; this has been really handy when I want to cut "umms" and stutters from a subject - having a different angle to kick in hides the edit quite well (and you get really good at dialogue editing). If the subject is prattling on and on, I'll sneak over and get shots of hand gestures or tight closeups, many of which can be edited in anywhere in the piece.

 

[Joshbalti]

Magic bullet looks has a few good tools that let you alter the blur and change the exposure of specific parts of the frame, which can aid the ever so fashionable shallow DOF look. you can download a free demo from their site so give it a go, if you haven't already. there is no true replacement for doing it when your shooting though, even with 3rd inch chip cams it's not that difficult achieving shallow dof if you take the time to compose your shots properly, there are tons of threads on this site and tutorials elsewhere online that should help you out.

 

[TomBoisseau]

I'm actually just a soundman, NOT a cameraman, but I do work full time in production. I've seen some DP's (director of photography) do some interesting tricks to get the background to go "soft".

One DP, when doing an interview, would set the shot and then carefully paint around the talent onto a UV filter with a VERY thin layer of petroleum jelly or even KY jelly. using a Q-tip. If done carefully it can look terrific. Of course that means you can NOT change the focal length without redoing the jelly on the filter.

Another technique, but not usually available to most of us, was to take a 10ft x 10ft (or 8x8, or 6x6) black "net" material behind the subject and between the subject and the background. This black "netting" will create the illusion of the background going out of focus.

I just bought the HMC150. I plan to try both of these methods as soon as I have the opportunity to do so.

Tom

 

[HotConductor]

Michael, yes, I have used the roto tool. The sarcasm is unnecessary. The tools work with stuff shot on a green screen or anything that isn't constantly moving. On intense action shots, so forth, I definitely could see where it would be impossible. I agree, adjusting the layers every frame would be completely pointless. Thats not what I'm getting at. POST, is not limited to AE, and many people adjust their footage in post to get an effect. The Social Network had several scenes which were altered to get a dream-like DOF effect that was not originally shot on the camera. They did it in AE using their plugin on choice...

I do have the latest Magic Bullet Suite (10 I believe) and I agree that Looks works wonders. I will have to delve more deeply into the blur/exposure element of that plugin. Have been watching a few of their tutorials and I definitely need to practice a bit with it. Love the plugin though. Definitely one of the reasons I moved from Vegas to CS5.

Tom that is some crazy stuff with the jelly. I can't see that being a practical thing for me BUT its still good to know! I have seen people use the mesh technique and it does work. I need to keep that in my arsenal as a quick-fix since I have some grey netting that could do exactly that.

Thank you all for your feedback. I love my two HMCs and eventually would love to upgrade them to AF100. For the time being I may try to work in post when necessary and will try the net trick! Honestly I think I just need to buy a GH2 and get my fix...