Has anyone Filmedout GH1 Footage?

I have projected it on both a Christie and a high end Panasonic 10,000 lumens projector and it looked marvelous but I have not yet seen a film transfer from it.

I don't know how much longer anyone is going to NEED to do a film transfer anymore... all the theaters here in New York are digital.
 
It was a fairly big screen, the middle size ones they show the smaller movies on. it was not the 'megaplex' super screen but a middle sized one and I sat directly in the middle two screen lengths away and I could see no artifacting or pixels and it looked like film to me and everyone else in the house. I don't know the exact diagonal of the screen I will find out as I am planning on showing some stuff there again.

I have also played it on a Epson powerlite 8100 projector and I'll be damned..... it was amazing... I was not expecting such a great picture from a $1300.00 projector but I played it on a 12 foot diagonal screen and it was mind blowing and beautiful in a dark room.

I am going to start dragging my screen and projector around and doing film fests around NYC. It's a big heavy projector too it feels like you are getting a lot for $1300. It looks a hell of a lot better than the old 720p projectors hooked up to DVD players that a lot of theaters have that rent out space to indie folks.
 
I know a projectionist who works at one of the theaters on 42nd street and I am going to try and sneak in when they closed and hook up the GH1.3 footage to the largest digital projector screen and then film it with my second GH1.3....

Sometimes they have parties and some of the workers stay and play films and bring in some beers.
 
Blackout, can you describe your post-production routine so others will know how to get the image quality you are achieving on the big screen? BTW...would really like to see your footage playing.....sort of like a bootlegged movie bass-ackwards!
 
I think those topics were covered in the *other* thread on this subject.

Keep your intermediate codec as lossless as you can stand to edit then only render when complete. While I use Vegas which can do AVC natively, I find it horribly slow for editing so I choose to use Cineform. At least with Cineform you get 4:2:2 and true 24p, which allow you to color with much better results. I've not been able to spot any problems with picture quality with this process with a similar projector setup to Blackout's Epson setup. If anything it sort of "smoothed" out some of the normal problem areas.
 
Svart said:
I've not been able to spot any problems with picture quality with this process with a similar projector setup to Blackout's Epson setup. If anything it sort of "smoothed" out some of the normal problem areas.
Click to expand...


Svart,

Do you mean the GH1 footage looked really good on a big screen? If so, how big?
 
Indyreel, if you consider canon 7d footage to be similar if not inferior to GH13, then it may also be useful to you to know that Philip Bloom premiered his 7D footage at Sky Walker Ranch on their big screen which to my understanding is one of the most advanced in the world (i.e. used personally by Lucas and Rick Mccalum and co. to watch all their stuff) and supposedly it "passed with flying colors" and surprised and/or blew everyone away. So, if you consider GH13 footage to be even better and sharper then you can make your own conclusions based on that
 
Homunculus said:
Indyreel, if you consider canon 7d footage to be similar if not inferior to GH13, then it may also be useful to you to know that Philip Bloom premiered his 7D footage at Sky Walker Ranch on their big screen which to my understanding is one of the most advanced in the world (i.e. used personally by Lucas and Rick Mccalum and co. to watch all their stuff) and supposedly it "passed with flying colors" and surprised and/or blew everyone away. So, if you consider GH13 footage to be even better and sharper then you can make your own conclusions based on that
Click to expand...


But isn't GH13 footage only 720P? I've shot my entire film on 1080/24P
 
I'll be honest, I know almost nothing about GH13 as I've been in a timewarp for the past year, filming my first feature film, using the original GH1 (learned to work around the crap).

Is the GH13 a GH1 that has updated software that corrects the existing flaws of the GH1?

If so, do I dare to change the software version, three quarters of the way through production?

Also, for some reason I thought that the Gh13 software hack only effected the quality of the 720P footage.
 
....um.....you got LOTS of reading to do. That cam (GH-1) you own has the potential to shoot much much nicer and cleaner looking video. The hack affects every shooting mode in the camera. Hack your camera...you will lbe much happier.
 
That might be a problem because if he's shot 3/4 unhacked and hacks now it will be readily apparent for the remaining 1/4 to finish....UNLESS it's somehow worked into the storyline? Thats a testement to the increased resolution the hack offers.
 
But the hack doesn't suddenly increase resolution. It decreases MUD. It's still ~1080 resolution.
 
I'd do the hack. I was in a similar situation, the hack came out about 1/2 through principal photography and we made the decision to do the hack and it has absolutely paid off. If you worked hard (as I did) around the flaws of the GH1 (unhacked) then you should have pretty good looking GH1 footage - the hack will give you additional detail and less mud/artifacting on your future footage, but it will cut together fine, and there's no reason to *not* want the capabilities that the GH13 presents - there will be shots you can do now and detail you can show that wouldn't quite come out before and so it will make more things possible. That said the GH1 was already capable of very sharp high quality imagery pre-hack, the hack just gives you a more solid and capable camera.

Remember, what you are shooting is way more important than what you are shooting on, but the hack is very nice and in all honesty is a pretty nice stress reducer. Then again, all that care that went into getting the most out of the GH1 imagery was and is still good practice for getting the most from the camera.
 
I made a terminology mistake, I meant detail not resolution. I faced a similiar situation in July on a shoot, it was run and gun ALL the way so I absolutely could not be face with any lost shots in the middle of a take due to a lockup from the hack. Maybe I was too conservative...time will tell I guess. So here's MY question apocalypse: with what you've shot before the hack, how much more detail post hack! I would like to see if this is noticeable when your film is edited as well. I'm editing now and all the little mistakes etc. become so much more obvious in post than on location.
 
I still say it's not that you get more resolution/detail(since they are directly related) but a reduction in the problems that cover that detail up, like MUD and/or codec breakup.

I ran the original "C" settings with NO native 24p on two cameras over the course of a 48 hour shoot in the sun, in the middle of a garden and then in the middle of a field/forest clearing and I never once had a failure. Those were shots that MURDERED the footage before the hack.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top