Going hdv after dvx?

D

dstevens

Well-known member
I tried to find some other discussions on this topic, but wading through the search function didn't yield any relevant results.

I'm into narrative filmmaking, and I've seen a lot of the sample footage from the different hdv cameras, and it's certainly beautiful in the hands of an experienced shooter.

I'm just wondering has anyone else here gone from dv to hdv in the filmmaking realm? Did you have any other reasons, besides obviously the picture would be better? Did having 'HD(V)' next to your production get it any more attention? Did it get you past the 'Oh, that digital video stuff...' reaction?

Again, this has probably been discussed before, but I couldn't find the threads... feel free to post a link if you know a good thread.
 
Well, we started off in film about 15 years ago (16mm). I found shooting in film in general, and in 16mm specifically, to be a painful, long, and unpredictable means of storytelling.

We had shot several shorts and and feature on 16mm by 1999/2000, but I was looking for a cheaper & more artistically pleasing way to shoot.... When I saw 2 movies called, "THE LAST BROADCAST", followed closely by an early pre-festival copy of "THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" - a film heavily influenced by the Last Broadcast (long before it was well known).

Last Broadcast impressed me because of what I felt was an impressive image (I think it was shot on the first Sony mini-dv camera) - close to as good looking as the stuff we had recently shot on 16mm.

Blair Witch impressed me because it was the first really independant movie shot on video that actually impressed me (actually, scared the hell of me).

So I sold off my film cameras and bought an XL-1. Made 2 films - both sold (goto my website for more on this), but there was no doubting that there was still a huge bias against video from distributors - especially video that, even if well shot, looked like video (which the xl-1 does) - "28 days later" included.

I knew I would not shoot another movie on the xl or any mini-dv camera because the quality, at this stage of my career, was not there. Also, I knew that to actually sell a film shot on video, it needed to look like film as much as possible. When I first saw the first images on the net from the JVC100, I couldn't believe it - they were stunning. Then all the hub-bub of SSE and then the delay for the HVX kept me on the side-lines.

But, after doing six months of straight reading on forums like this one, I figured that I'd take a chance on the JVC and if it sucked I'd mail it back and pay the restocking fee. That was about a month ago. Camera's still here, and we're about to go into production on our fourth full-length film.

Bottom line: The camera looks like a movie camera (don't underestimate this on a small set). It makes images that are pretty close to looking like film - for cheap ($15 tapes). And, apparently in a few months, all the major NLEs will be able to handle it (FCP April NAB). I want to make money AND movies that I think look good. So far, this camera is the only one that meets both those criteria. Hope this helps a little,

John
 
Last edited:
Just a quick note say, if you don't get it now from John, that is to say if you don't understand why THIS board and THIS camera, you'll never get it. That was about as clean, concise and honest a review and endorsement as I've ever heard and it's a great example of why this board and this camera have such a devoted following.
 
jlames said:
Just a quick note say, if you don't get it now from John, that is to say if you don't understand why THIS board and THIS camera, you'll never get it. That was about as clean, concise and honest a review and endorsement as I've ever heard and it's a great example of why this board and this camera have such a devoted following.
Click to expand...

it was a nice essay but it didn't say too much about the camera and i'm not totally convinced a film like video image is the best possible reason to buy it because of all the post production stuff that can emulate film look as well. you can make anything look film like nowadays.
 
Yes, that's mostly true. You can make most footage from 3CCD cams look like film in post but really who wants to do all that work in post when you can get it that much closer the straight out of the cam? Nailing the look you want also preserves the integrity of the video quality. I believe Jdv's point of achieving the most film-like video image is a pretty good point. And I'm sure he was also referencing the HD100's ability to tweak the image any which way you want it right inside the camera. The posibilities are endless with this cam. I, personally, am in love with it!
 
brianluce said:
... you can make anything look film like nowadays.
Click to expand...

Maybe to an extent, but you should just see how this camera handles light. Although it is not film, it actually reacts more like film than video IMO. The look reminds me of S16 reversal stock for a high end telecine. Anyone else feel that vibe?

It also handles like a true pro camera - no servo lens or prosumer ergonomics. It's lovely.:)

I don't like the amount of CA in the lens, but all the cameras at this level have that. I also miss having OIS when shooting handheld. The final thing is the super deep DOF, but I can hardly blame JVC for the laws of physics!
 
jlames said:
Just a quick note say, if you don't get it now from John, that is to say if you don't understand why THIS board and THIS camera, you'll never get it. That was about as clean, concise and honest a review and endorsement as I've ever heard and it's a great example of why this board and this camera have such a devoted following.
Click to expand...

Hey, I get you! That post is as good as it gets.
 
Brian, IMO you've missed the point I was making but that's OK. Just remember, lenses can be changed...at least on the HD 100... and the rest comes with experience you get through the school of hard knocks. I often joke about my wife's 2 advanced degrees, compared to my one; an MBA (obvious) and a PHT (Putting Hubby Trough). She put up with the enormous learning curve I had to overcome which, with today's Internet and boards like DVXuser, would have been alot shorter for me but there's no substitute for street experience and that's what John has.

In fact, we selected the 100HD for a very specific purpose; video is television and that's what we shoot for but it doesn't have to look like video and the 100HD comes closest to giving us that flexibility both in-camera and in post.

I take paragraphs sometimes...pages even...to help others and explain complex issues. But other times I just want to take a quick second to recognize the importance of an individual and his comments. Such was the case here. If you want in-depth reasoning, I'd be happy to provide it like I did with a young lady at HD Expo who went out the next day and bought a JVC after a couple of hours of conversation and me understanding exactly what she was trying to achieve. But I'm not the be-all and end-all. Guys like John and a couple of others here have forgotten more than I'll ever know. I just wanted to give you my 2-cents about listening to their voices of experience, logic and reasoning. They bring a perspective to the purchase you just can't get in a classroom or text book,. That's all I was trying to say in this instance.

Jonathan
 
Last edited:
Hey Jon

as i understand it, you bought several of these cameras. have you had any quality control issues? sse? how do you assess the build quality?
 
Well, Jon not only helped convert me but he also convinced me to buy my camera from EVS, so how many cameras dose that make that you have sold for them? hmm better buy stock. Anyway I have been reading, viewing and listening to forums such as this for quite a while and after waiting for years to buy a new camera that I felt would not be out done in a couple of years and even if it was, it really wouldnt matter because it would always have what I would need for future use, I finally will take the plunge this tuesday, camera's already on hold for my business so as long as I get the 100ua I am good to go. I have been wait years for this camera and I am glad for those times I came close, that I waited and ended up with the GY-HD 100u. This camera I know will do some wonderful work for me many years to come! My thanks to everyone.
 
Last edited:
All that and no commission! Hmmmmmmmm! Anyway, Brian, we've experienced no problems whatsoever with the 5 we've purchased and we have another 5 on order. Not only is QA great apparently before it leaves the factory, CS is great afterward. SSE has never been an issue and as I understand it, it was only an issue in the older iterations and on the rare recent occasion. The circumstances underwhich I expect most people shoot will typically not reveal it. Now that doesn't mean you can't purposely induce it but I know that the extremes to which we expose the units has revealed nothing but we're typically controlling all manners of the cameras i.e iris, speed etc. We dislike gain and will light to set standards so perhaps someone doing a documentary or real-life shot where true ambient atmosphere is important could induce it but when you're set up right, it shouldn't be an issue.

We have a project in the works right now that involves JVC and the deal is being made AFTER we settled on the camera and after testing each and every applicable manufacturer before we purchased the JVC. In a couple of weeks, a couple of major announcements will be being made and I think everyone that has selected the JVC will appreciate their selection even more.

One caveat. We don't typically find the stock lenses as objectionable as many in the Internet community do. Of course they're not studio grade but you can really only tell that if you've got the same scene set up side by side. Nontheless, for our purposes, we found the focal throw too short and the other side too narrow. So we switched the lenses to Fujinon S20X6.4. Again, we're shooting network quality and I'm not putting this above anyone else's work but network standards are really, really high. The first show we shot with the 100HD was to complete one we started in SD so we used the stock lenses and it was more than acceptable. So while alot of people are bemoaning the stock glass, our observations are that it's really not that bad. Now, with that being said, if you want the benefit of high quality glass and the throw, the S20X6.4 gives it to you affordably at $2000 and not $20,000. Now please note that the BRM is about $2000 and the BERM (with integrated 2X capability) is about $6000. My recommendation is to simply get the BRM and then spend $1000 for the separate 2X extender from Fuji. That saves you about $3000. The BERM is convenient but $3000 buys alot of other camera stuff!!! You'll find the throw at about 260mm total, great for any shooting you might do.

Oops. I forgot. Here's a quick URL

http://www.digibroadcast.com/products/38/S20x6_4RM.htm
 
Last edited:
Caveat. Rush is no longer at EVS so I don't know how the service will be over there from now on; not the counter service but the behind the desk, go to bat for the customer service that the sales people pass on to us. . Tommy, Randy and all of them at teh counter are great people but Rush was at the helm putting the face on the company. I don't know who they'll have take Rush's place but I hope whom ever it is is 1/2 as committed to people as Rush was. Don't let that dissuade you from EVS, though. We're not. Randy and the guys have always been top notch and I've interacted with them actually more than Rush except on a "Let's go grab dinner" basis. So hang in there with EVS like we are and let's see what happens!
Jonathan
 
If I'm allowed a slight change in question, does going HDV open anymore doors for distribution?

I'm just curious if the new HD channels, HDNet or whatever, have opened up some doors? I was wondering if these channels are looking for HD content, and adopting HDV gets you in on the ground floor? I'm probably just indulging in wishful thinking.

But back to my original question, it sounds for the filmmaker, basically HDV (and JVC's camera) gets you a much better image. Sounds like John took standard mini DV as far as he felt it could, and HDV allowed him to take his art to a higher level, and get better recognition, yes? I mean, I'm sure the writing, directing, etc was stellar all along. But now people see the better picture quality and say 'Hey! this guy is a step above the next guy making low-budget digital films!'
 
Rush left? thats sad but I called EVS the other day and they were so professional and answered all my questions. I am sure they will find an excellent person to fill Rushes shoes or at least one of them.
The reason I called was to purchase the JVC100 but they were shipped back. I hope they extend the free battery special with the newer updated model.
 
I am sure they will find someone, it's not that big a deal to find another salesman... Besides they still have Tommy "Massive Knife Attack" Mack, Randy "Arriflex, I thee Wed" Wedick, and Ramzi "Ram'em in the Head" Abed, who are all great people with knowledge akin to Sumarian Demi-gods. They got the place under control. :)
 
Thanks for the link Jlames.

I have to ask, so this lens ( S20x6.4RM (BRM)) reaches another 4X over the stock
lens, how does it look at the tele end?

How does the CA compare to the stock lens?

As far as image quality and distortion, how much better is the overall image over the stock lens?

Sorry for so many questions.
 
We're very happy with them with crisp, clear images. But remember, we're not doing motion picture or film out with them. Our productions are currently network sports entertainment and reality genres. Relative to sports, because of the speed at which images move across the screen, glass can be alot more foregiving. And relative to reality, viewers are not that visually discerning. Rather like buying Playboy for the articles I like to say. For those of you who are doing docs, FOs, shorts, etc. we think the glass is good enough but that's a very subjective term. Our color commentary booth shots use the same lenses and there are some relative close ups. of the three hosts. Think MNF. But some of the shooters here on DVXuser.com are going way, way beyond that into nature and real art films where macro and multiple focal length clarity is very important so my advice would be to rent one and try it out. I don't think you can find better glass for $2k and I think they rival successfully the 13X which I've had prices quoted from $9k to $13k.

One of the tests we did was in my own backyard where I came to within 12" of a something something something flower (I can't remember what the gardener called it but it had alot of fuzzy sh%# on it) and each one of the tendrils was crystal-clear and stood out like it was the size of a telephone pole. Then we rack-focused the lenses (not that we do a whole lot of that type of stuff) going from a close-up of a holstered gun to a horse's face about 12 feet away and the results were perfect. So, for us, it was $10,000 well-spent on 5 JVCs but again, rent one and see what YOU think. I'd be very interested to hear your opinion.
 
Pardon my inability to convert stats, but how wide is the Fujinon lens, ie, 35 mm equivalent?
 
Last edited:
OK, now there's a Q for someone brighter than I. Dashwood or someone like that would be better suited for comps than I until Monday when I can ask the DP.
 
The stock Fujinon lens? The 5.5-88 16x?

Thing is, I just posted over on another thread my explorations with focal lengths, and it seems the JVC is treating equivalent focal lengths as more telephoto than the other cameras do. So, if we're to believe the other cameras' focal length conversions are accurate, that would put the JVC 5.5 at somewhere around 45mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top