First Movie on HD-100?

hmmm those JPEGs remind me of the look of the original JVC camera that came out (the HD10?) for quality. the colors are a little lacking, very video-like.
 
I've found that underexposing on the HD100 usually helps lose the "video look". Also, I have my detail turned down a bit from what he's got there...another give away for video.

My feeling is that it's harder to get pretty pictures on the HD100 than say a DVX, but it's not so hard once you learn what NOT to do.
 
I'm finding myself interested in the JVC again but I want to see what Pana and Canon come out with.

-Nate
 
I thought this picture was interesting. Demonstrates some bad colour aberration on her arm. Apart from that it looks like reasonably decent video. I'm going to have a play with see what grading can do with it. The HD100 doesn't seem to cope with the highlights too well, but then I wouldn't have expected too much.

hh_hiresjpeg_4.jpg
 
That pic is not so bad, the first one have more noticeble green CA on the front of the car. It seems that they used the wide lens, I wasn't expecting CA from the wide one. Apart that, these pics look great to me. Ok, it looks like video... but it is video!
 
stephenlnoe said:
It looks like it was done by a group in Toronto, Canada.
Click to expand...
Vancouver, B.C.

And I don't think this film was shot with the 13x3.5 lens. He said he tested the 13x lens though.

Tim
 
This is why I want to find out if any users here were associated with the filming. I read it as, this was shot with the stock lens and that when they complained they got another lens to do test with.

Was anyone here associated with this? It looks like it was done by a group in Toronto, Canada.

It looks like video because non of the edges are knocked off and there is no grain. The saturation is OK on the pics of the girl inside the car looking out. The halo shots would have been nicer (to me) if they'd have used a reflector to light up her face and then pulled the exposure way down with a darker ND filter.

I'm not concerned about the "film look" at all. If there is a filmout, it will be on film so "the LOOK" will be on the film. As far as film look emulation, that can happen with 5-10 mouse clicks in any decent NLE.

To me the video needs to be clean. If this was the stock lens (which I think it was) then OK, I can live with it because it's already known that there are some issues with highlights. If this is the 13X lens then I'll be disappointed, not with JVC, but with Fujinon.

We'll see...
 
neither of those are very appealing to me. the bottom line is the image quality is very similar to those old cowboy pics barry posted years back when he did the upres DVX vs. HD10 test.

i'm sure this camera kicks ass, some of the stuff i've seen from it looks quite good. these screenshots though don't look that great to me.

just an honest opinion.
 
I did some of my own color corrections

I did some of my own color corrections

Here is the original JPG they posted

hh_hiresjpeg_4.jpg






Here is my rendition of the pic brought back into spec:

correctedwoman.jpg



You'll notice her hair is not blown out. It makes me wonder if they had any filters there to bring the exposure down. It would have been nice to have reflected some light up to her face! Nevertheless, the images are clean. I'd like to see full motion video.


@Nate Weaver - Got to hand it to you. I didn't have to color correct any of your m2t footage posted. It was all right on the money and within IRE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top