Did you guys see the new brochure!

Hmm. That's a good find.

Snip:
"Lower-speed shooting at 4 to 23* fps let you attain fast-motion effect. This technique can be combined with warp-speed effect, special emphasis to flowing water, fast moving clouds."

"Higher-speed shooting at 25* to 60fps lets you attain slow-motion effect. This is especially effective for high-action scenes such as car chases or crashes, or for scenes with great dramatic impact."
Click to expand...
Am I to understand correctly this camera will shoot 25p?
Also, care to speculate on exactly what "warp speed" effect is supposed to do?
 
The AG-HVX200 inherits the VariCam's advanced functions and warm,
rich expressivity[...]and it provides a Cine-like Gamma that captures images
that are strikingly similar in tone to film.
Click to expand...
I hope I'm not going to expect too much and be disappointed. After seeing the latitude that the Reel-Stream Andromeda can extract from the DVX chips, I really hope the HVX200's film gamma curve delivers the best latitude possible from the new HD chips.

You can use the AG-HVX200
camera to record a series of frames, and then preview the speed effect on
the camera itself.
Click to expand...
That'll be very useful.
 
<insert SPRITZ of COLOGNE here>

I've never wanted to make so much love to a piece of machinery before.

OH THOSE CURVES! AND THAT BOOTY!

Come to Daddy, baby. I'll make you do things that you weren't designed for.
 
It's interesting that Panasonic wrote a white paper about P2. I guess short duration and high price takes some 'splainin.
 
BrianAWells said:
Am I to understand correctly this camera will shoot 25p?
Click to expand...
I hope so, at least in 720p mode (which I believe is what they were discussing). But notice there's an asterisk there, and I didn't see where that asterisk was explained.

I'm hoping the variable speeds of 720p include both 25 and 50.

Also, care to speculate on exactly what "warp speed" effect is supposed to do?
Click to expand...
My guess is that it's a japanese-to-english translation of trying to explain the concept of what footage shot at 4p looks like. I.E., everyone moving at "warp speed"...
 
BrianAWells said:
Also, care to speculate on exactly what "warp speed" effect is supposed to do?
Click to expand...
"Warp speed" refers to "undercranking" the camera, or in other words, shooting at a frame rate slower than "speed" (in this case, "at speed" equals 24 fps). When acquiring at a frame rate of 4-23 fps, and played back at 24 fps, the undercranked footage goes "real fast." This technique is very effective on a long Steadicam, or tracking shot that ends its frame on a particular subject of interest (or performed or played back in reverse). You've seen this effect many times in commercials and feature films. You've also seen this used in bad 1970's TV shows and feature films when they want to shoot a car chase and make it look like the cars are going "really fast." Looks lame and fake in that application, however.

EDIT: Brian: I just read some of your other posts . . . I'm sure you already knew what undercranking was. Sorry for the elementary explaination.
 
BrianAWells said:
Also, care to speculate on exactly what "warp speed" effect is supposed to do?
Click to expand...

Maybe it can fly at several times the speed of sound? I have heard that this is a feature NOT found on HDV camcorders and Panasonic may have found a market niche.

Just speculation though.
 
NBC, I liked the explanation... I knew what it was also, but you put it nicely and added relevant info. Remember that there is a lot of other people reading these threads, so extra info almost never goes wasted. Thank you!

P.S.: ProjX don't worry, I don't think that's illegal yet, just make shure you don't get the lens dirty. Lol :grin:
 
NBCshooter said:
"Warp speed" refers to "undercranking" the camera, or in other words, shooting at a frame rate slower than "speed" (in this case, "at speed" equals 24 fps). When acquiring at a frame rate of 4-23 fps, and played back at 24 fps, the undercranked footage goes "real fast." This technique is very effective on a long Steadicam, or tracking shot that ends its frame on a particular subject of interest (or performed or played back in reverse). You've seen this effect many times in commercials and feature films. You've also seen this used in bad 1970's TV shows and feature films when they want to shoot a car chase and make it look like the cars are going "really fast." Looks lame and fake in that application, however.

EDIT: Brian: I just read some of your other posts . . . I'm sure you already knew what undercranking was. Sorry for the elementary explaination.
Click to expand...

Is there an advantage in shooting at a slower frame rate versus just changing the speed in your NLE?
 
Yes, when you change the speed in a nle the program blends frames together (except when very specific speed canges are made) to maintian the same fps rate, this creates a different effect then when it is done in camera. Not that you can't do it in a nle just that it is doing something different.
 
Correct. Since 4 FPS is 6x slower than 24 FPS, I'd just rather do it in post so I have more control ... once it's shot that way in camera, that's it. Maybe for the pros, they'd rather do it in camera, but I won't put myself at that level anytime soon.
 
Shooting variable frame rates in the camera gives you an incredible amount of freedom to do things that you couldn't otherwise do effectively. Speeding up footage in post either limits you to specific increments, or looks lousy.

One example of variable frame rates - fight scenes in pictures like Ong Bak, or Jackie Chan pictures, may be shot at 22 frames per second instead of 24. That way the actors can move just a little slower, make their moves a little more perfect, but when it gets played back at 24fps it's lightning-fast. That's something you just can't do (properly) without variable frame rates in-camera.
 
Hi,

@Barry-Edition's dynamic time warp and Avid's time warp are superb at doing just what your're saying. With Edition the NLE gives you the choice on how to handle the frames and frame rates (ie cut frames, mix frames, cut fields, progressive etc.) It truly is amazing what DV camera's and NLE's bring to the table compaired to 20 years ago.
 
barry hit the nail on the head.. as usual. You need to think of the non-tecnical advantages, such as overcranking the camera or undercranking the camera and getting your talent to do things off speed. you cant do that in post.

and Stephen, 20 years ago? Im amazed what NLE's and DV cameras can do now that they couldnt 5 years ago, hell even 12 months ago.
 
seejay1031 said:
Yes, when you change the speed in a nle the program blends frames together (except when very specific speed canges are made) to maintian the same fps rate, this creates a different effect then when it is done in camera. Not that you can't do it in a nle just that it is doing something different.
Click to expand...
Good question, Sumfun. Hmmm . . . so lemme get this straight, seejay. If you undercrank in-camera, as opposed to speeding the footage up in the NLE, are you getting "better" quality with the in-camera technique? (Obviously, in the reverse case, you are definitely getting better quality when you "overcrank" in-camera as opposed to doing it in post.)
 
Not necessarily better, just different. In post, when you shoot 24 fps, you can get a clean fast motion at 12 fps or 6fps, or at 30 fps- at 15fps and 7.5 fps (I think thats right, but its 1:30 and I am beyond the legal limit) or any multiple of the frame rate shot in. With the HVX, like Barry said, you could shoot at 22 fps or similar, for sweet kung fu action. This you could never do well in post. The program would either-
1. blend frames- take two frames and turn them into one by using opacity and blending techniques. This, as suggested above, looks less than desirable.
2. use pixel shifting technology. this is where a plugin looks at all the pixels in two different frames and creates an entirely new frame based off an average of like pixels between the two. This creates a brand new pure frame, that is completely designed by a computer. This usually looks a bit swishy (especially in slow motion). Given the choice, I'd shoot it in camera every time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top