Five minute short shot with HVX200

thefilmaddict said:
Kholi,

I've never said that this camera is not a good value, but the camera is a much bigger investment than under seven thousand. It's a new way of working. To do work with this camera in the real world shooting HD, you're going to need 2 8GB P2 cards (or some other portable storage device), some way to back up the footage in the field (like a portable computer if 16GB of footage is not enough for you in a days shoot), an extra battery, a field monitor (optional, but many have said that focusing in HD is critical, so a HD monitor is recommended), a way to archive your footage in post (perhaps a Blu Ray Burner when it comes out) and a HD distribution method (perhaps Blu Ray will solve that problem, too). I won't go into the cost of lighting equipment, sound gear and post equipment (that's not really relevant -- if you want to do good work you need these things), but I hope you understand that this all adds up to a big investment.

Perhaps you are rich and this is chump change, but for me it's a pretty big deal. I think that many of us just want to see what this camera can do. When we see footage that raises some questions/concerns, we like to post those questions here, so that as a group we can help each other out to do better work. If this site is just about blindly praising a camera, then it will not benefit anyone.

Also, there are other HD cameras out there under $10,000, so critical comparisons help people make informed decisions. I ordered the HVX200 months ago. I visit this forum often to read about the camera so that I can use the knowledge to make better looking films.

You say that "ordinary people" won't notice things like noise, but I disagree. Perhaps they won't be able to point out what's technically wrong with our shots, but they will feel it. The average person gets to watch films that cost millions of dollars. I don't expect a six thousand dollar camera to look like a $100,000 camera, but with knowledge and experience, we can all push these little cameras to make them look closer to the big guns. What's wrong with that?

Is it wrong to ask for people to test out the camera? I don't think so. If I had the camera now, I would run some tests. Are you not interested in seeing what this camera can really do?

As you said in your post: wtf (just kidding)!
Click to expand...

I understand where people are coming from as content creators. But all in all, is the noise issue REALLY that important?

When you dive into cost issues: It's not that this camera's cost is "chump change" to me. By all means, no. And I don't take for granted the "toys" that I'm using. Didn't mean to come off like that if I did. I can see how taxing it might be to switch your worflow over to HD, and it's really no joke; a lot can't afford it.

In the same instance, how many of us are going to go RIGHT into HD production? The market isn't even ready for HD intensive media. I don't know how many people on this forum actually own an HD television, but I would guess that number would be a very small one.

As I've been told plenty of times, this camera's a future investment. You get it, take advantage of the DVCpro50, and then later on move to HD. Or, as Luis said, master your work in HD for later distribution.

Only other options I see, as stated before, do your own tests or buy a different camera.

wtf! (running joke).
 
Stevet said:
Here again, I disagree.

Face it, if everyone had this mentality, there would be NO advances in technology.
The "it's good enough" doesn't work for me.

If everyone thought this way, including the design engineers, there world NEVER be improvements in noise levels, or anything for that matter.
Click to expand...
You're speaking from a completely different level, Stevet. Though I do respect your position, because there's proof out there. Dvx100, Dvx100a, dvx100b-- Without people taking note of what could be made better, there wouldn't be more upgrades.

What I don't think, though, is that constantly covering these certain issues throughout the forums before you (personally) or anyone else even has access to the camera to toy with is totally off-base.

The majority of people that are troubled by the issues haven't even touched the camera before.

Don't you think that's a little... sideways?

Too add to that -- It's business first. I wouldn't bet my life on it, but I'm sure they're going to do the same thing they did with the DVX. Release newer versions tagged "a" and "b" with lots of corrections.

So, maybe a people should just wait to purchase the camera instead if it doesn't meet their standards right out of the gate?
 
thefilmaddict said:
Kholi,
WTF! That's a good point, but I hope that you can see my p.o.v., too.
Click to expand...

WTF! Yes! I do. I definitely see why people are upset about certain things but I don't think that the issues are really that major. That's just my opinion, though.
 
As far as making judgements about the camera before even touching it, I don't think that anyone is attacking this camera before using it. All we can go on now is the footage that people post. It's not a bad thing to bring up a potential issue that we/I see and then discuss it. I wanted to go a step further. Use the new lower noise settings and shoot a simple test. That way we could take this discussion to the next level. If you think that I am wrong to throw out a testing idea that someone else can perform, I'm sorry. It's just an idea. WTF (I love using that)!
 
thefilmaddict said:
As far as making judgements about the camera before even touching it, I don't think that anyone is attacking this camera before using it. All we can go on now is the footage that people post. It's not a bad thing to bring up a potential issue that we/I see and then discuss it. I wanted to go a step further. Use the new lower noise settings and shoot a simple test. That way we could take this discussion to the next level. If you think that I am wrong to throw out a testing idea that someone else can perform, I'm sorry. It's just an idea. WTF (I love using that)!
Click to expand...

No, I don't think you're wrong for throwing it out there. I guess constantly reading posts about the same things over and over again (though I do have the choice of what to read and what not to) is getting tiresome.

But, if someone PMs me how to do a real low-light test or whatever, I'll do it this week when I get the camera and they can host the file.

Personally, I think that the camera (for the price-tag) is enough to move on. People did it with the DVX100 obviously, and still got great results at the time.

Wtf just do it.
 
I don't care so much about testing the camera out in a low light situation. I'm more interested in seeing what a well lit scene looks like in the black areas. I would hope that a scene like that, using the low noise settings, would be very clean (even if the shot has some large dark areas). WTF am I saying? I hope you guys get what I'm tring to say.

One more thing about grain (and it's not about the HVX, it's just an opinion) if it (the grain/noise) is light and all over the image, I think that gives the video more of a film look. If the noise is concentrated in just some parts of the screen, that's not pretty (that's distracting).
 
dancing little monsters in the bedroom scenes.... NoiseVX200....it sure looked like real noise.. not organic...nor filmic...
when floodlights are thrown it produces spectacular picture... (and so would any other camera...i guess)

i hope it was DP error... (some freaky setting he forgot to change)
 
It looks like +12db from my DVX in the bedroom scenes and seems close to the +12 setting at DVExpo = it probably was +12db. I remember a shoot I did where the DP didnt really know how to use the DVX well. He kept underexposing the image and then started using the gain. I warned him that it would be a problem later but he didnt listen - DOH! Same problem as under lighting and expecting to fix it in post.
 
Kholi said:
I understand where people are coming from as content creators. But all in all, is the noise issue REALLY that important?
Click to expand...
If it's worse than the previous generation of technology it supercedes, then yes.
Kholi said:
The majority of people that are troubled by the issues haven't even touched the camera before.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's an issue of people not wanting to touch the camera. :)

The footage that the rest of the people who haven't "touched the camera" (all but about 3 or 4 of us) have seen has varied wildly and it's tough to get a handle on what the camera is truly capable of. Evin did a national spot and said it looked great, but we can't see any of the content he shot (this is completely understandable, but doesn't change the facts). A bunch of professionals got together and did a "6 camera shootout" that was supposedly very technical, but we haven't seen as much as a screen grab from that. All we have to go by are a few random clips from some non-professional tests from a user in Japan and a few 5 second "in store" shots from some people that tested the camera out in showroom lobbies. It's not exactly scientific material. This film is the first thing we've gotten to see that's over a minute in length, has some decent attempts at different lighting scenarios, and is being presented in its native size so we can at least get a feel for what kind of color, latitude, and depth of field the camera is capable of (that are all independent of "compression for the web"). Because of this, there is bound to be a lot of scrutiny taking place with these clips, and like thefilmaddict said, "I think that many of us just want to see what this camera can do. When we see footage that raises some questions/concerns, we like to post those questions here, so that as a group we can help each other out to do better work. If this site is just about blindly praising a camera, then it will not benefit anyone." I think that's the point that a lot of us are trying to get after.

Kholi said:
So, maybe a people should just wait to purchase the camera instead if it doesn't meet their standards right out of the gate?
Click to expand...
Well, unfortunately the HVX is the only HD camera in this price range that is even moderately appealing to me, so it's what I'm intent on purchasing. With the waiting lists 300+ deep, you'll be waiting a long time if you want to wait around for a camera to be sitting on the shelves you can play with. I'm not afraid, because this camera will be popular for awhile and if for some reason it doesn't "meet my standards," I'm sure I can resell it and get its full value back. That being said, I'm not going to sit around for another year and wait for Red to materialize before I start making more films. It doesn't seem like the cameras are shipping at any constant rate, so if Panny is still tweaking these things, they might as well know what concerns the end users are having and act accordingly. Even if those changes don't get implemented until an "A" version, the concerns still need to be raised.
 
Haakon said:
If it's worse than the previous generation of technology it supercedes, then yes.

I don't think it's an issue of people not wanting to touch the camera. :)

The footage that the rest of the people who haven't "touched the camera" (all but about 3 or 4 of us) have seen has varied wildly and it's tough to get a handle on what the camera is truly capable of. Evin did a national spot and said it looked great, but we can't see any of the content he shot (this is completely understandable, but doesn't change the facts). A bunch of professionals got together and did a "6 camera shootout" that was supposedly very technical, but we haven't seen as much as a screen grab from that. All we have to go by are a few random clips from some non-professional tests from a user in Japan and a few 5 second "in store" shots from some people that tested the camera out in showroom lobbies. It's not exactly scientific material. This film is the first thing we've gotten to see that's over a minute in length, has some decent attempts at different lighting scenarios, and is being presented in its native size so we can at least get a feel for what kind of color, latitude, and depth of field the camera is capable of (that are all independent of "compression for the web"). Because of this, there is bound to be a lot of scrutiny taking place with these clips, and like thefilmaddict said, "I think that many of us just want to see what this camera can do. When we see footage that raises some questions/concerns, we like to post those questions here, so that as a group we can help each other out to do better work. If this site is just about blindly praising a camera, then it will not benefit anyone." I think that's the point that a lot of us are trying to get after.


Well, unfortunately the HVX is the only HD camera in this price range that is even moderately appealing to me, so it's what I'm intent on purchasing. With the waiting lists 300+ deep, you'll be waiting a long time if you want to wait around for a camera to be sitting on the shelves you can play with. I'm not afraid, because this camera will be popular for awhile and if for some reason it doesn't "meet my standards," I'm sure I can resell it and get its full value back. That being said, I'm not going to sit around for another year and wait for Red to materialize before I start making more films. It doesn't seem like the cameras are shipping at any constant rate, so if Panny is still tweaking these things, they might as well know what concerns the end users are having and act accordingly. Even if those changes don't get implemented until an "A" version, the concerns still need to be raised.
Click to expand...

Can't argue with that.

Yet, the sooner people like you get ahold of the camera to test away, the better off the forum will be.

With that said--

The short looks great to me. The writing, well... I'm not so sure about.

Looking forward to another short shot with this camera.
 
Hmmm... Nifty little project. Looks like it was fun to make.

Noise - bedroom scene is bad, obviously poorly light, too much gain. Some noise elsewhere, but a lot of it looks amplified by the compression for the web. Overall, looks great though.. People are complaining about this when we're coming from DV??? Sheesh.

And, a note to actors. When lying in a casket or wheverever and trying to look dead, try not to breathe so much.
 
Stevet said:
Issac,
I'm not sure what your veiwing the wmv clip on, but even the well lit stuff is riddled with noise.

As I mentioned before, it's not the compression artifacts from the web file, but noise itself.

Actually the noise is VERY distracting for myself.
I could only imagine how bad it would look if I looked at it on m 24".
Click to expand...


That's kinda my feeling. I still need to test against JVC and Canon... but I have been looking at it on a 24 inch monitor.. I'd say the bedroom scenes probably had gain boosted. They just don't look right. So ignore them. But the dinner scene and funeral home look like they have great lighting. The pixel dance in the clothes, skin tones and background is what you'll get for real.

What's interesting is on my test footage the real noise isn't way down in the blacks... it's in the dark tones above that. I can see it in skin tones and shadowed facial areas and that's what's bothering me the most.

Oh - and all the blockiness is web compression, there's TONS of crap in some of these Internet versions you don't see the real footage. I think the filmmaker here said "noisier than he'd like to see" when referring to what they got in the monitor and that's what I thought when I saw original footage too.

BUT I think ALL these cameras have noise and you just have to pick which you like best.
 
Kholi said:
As I've been told plenty of times, this camera's a future investment.
Click to expand...

Personally I NEVER buy any rapidly changing piece of technology until I NEED it. In 6 months we might have 3 new cameras to pick from in this price range that are better. If you don't need this for 6 months wait till then and shop.

A lot of people do want HD right now though so their FOOTAGE has a little leverage on the future. Right now 25% of American Homes have HD ready TV's. That's a good reason to shoot HD now with this camera. When will BlueRay, HD-DVD or iPodHD arrive? Probably about the same time some of us are completing post... or are starting marketing.

But to buy it now for a future shoot is liking buying a computer now 'cause you'll need one later. Wait and get a lot more for you money. Or buy mine used when I upgrade. :-)
 
joelnet said:
Personally I NEVER buy any rapidly changing piece of technology until I NEED it. In 6 months we might have 3 new cameras to pick from in this price range that are better. If you don't need this for 6 months wait till then and shop.

A lot of people do want HD right now though so their FOOTAGE has a little leverage on the future. Right now 25% of American Homes have HD ready TV's. That's a good reason to shoot HD now with this camera. When will BlueRay, HD-DVD or iPodHD arrive? Probably about the same time some of us are completing post... or are starting marketing.

But to buy it now for a future shoot is liking buying a computer now 'cause you'll need one later. Wait and get a lot more for you money. Or buy mine used when I upgrade. :-)
Click to expand...

I don't know if we view future investments the same. I'm not worried about waiting to spend money so I get the best at that time. I need to get what I can for my money at this moment. If I have to get something else later, I'll sell it for half price and shell out the remainder to get the newer model. No big deal.

As far as HD is concerned: Even if that twenty-five percent number were completely accurate, which I'm not saying it is or isn't, there still isn't a way to get your HD content to those televisions on-the-fly. So, you're basically waiting for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD... which basically means purchasing the camera now is a future investment.

Speaking of getting what I can -- We might be switching to the XLH1 after we rent both cameras and do real-time testing this week. Either way, doesn't matter to me. I want to go one step beyond the DVX and both provide that signifcant step.
 
By the way -- This might sound like I'm biting my own tongue or something...

I just pulled up this short on the 30" CinemaHD for referencing HVX footage to someone else.....

And I really noticed what artifacts everyone's talking about. It's not just in the bedroom scene.

Viewing this one on the PC monitor versus the Apple monitor was a world of difference. I think this had to be due to compression as well as lighting, as stated before. But... wow... that is pretty bad.

Sorry about that. I feel like an ass. =D

But that's a WORLD of difference from monitor to monitor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top