Hello to All...

SUPPATIME

SUPPATIME

Active member
Hey everyone, my name is Drew and I'm new to your site.

I've been working in corporate video and low-budget film and video for nearly a decade now. That being said, I'm still young and learning will be a life-long process.

I've had the ability to play around with just about every format you can think of and am currently dealing with the world of solid-state HD for the first time.

In 3 weeks, I will be shooting a $20,000 short film entitled "Dearheart's Bakery", a period piece about a baker's daughter living in a fairytale world gone wrong. We have an amazing cast and crew lined up so far, as well as everything on my equipment list (for which I'm shocked... and happy).

I'm sure I'll make some posts in the near future regarding the HVX and P2 useage. I've been playing with it off-and-on (between film shoots) and am loving it when I've got a crap-ton of light.

I am concerned about video noise in low light levels (isn't everyone with this camera, though?) and am planning on overlighting the sets and compensating with ND filters (quick equipment checklist: P&S Teknik and 6 Panavision Ultra Speeds).

Any reccomendations for in-camera settings? I've messed with them and really enjoy pressing the blacks (which allows me more freedom to light what I want to and not see what I don't... my way of reducing the digital camera's "ISO" from the DV norm of (roughly) 320 to somewhere near 200 (if this makes any sense...) and then further allowing a wide-open aperture with NDs and some Pro Mist 1/2 or Ultra Con 1/2 filters). The bulk of this film takes place from the magic hour through night. All lighting will replicate moonlight and bounce (4K HMI inside an Arristar) and practicals from flame (and different combinations of reflective crushed fabrics bounced from 1Ks to achieve a moving glow).

Damn, I'm going to stop now, as I seem to be long-winded. If anyone wants, I'll post screen grabs from some of my SD, 16mm and 35mm work.

Thanks ahead of time for the warm welcome!

- Drew
 
Welcome and congrats on the upcoming shoot.

To answer your question: If you are planning a film-out I would suggests talking to the lab that you think might do it. For example, DuArt in New York specializes in this sort of thing and they recommend that you talk to them before you begin your shoot so you can get your settings in order. They have a list of HVX-specific settings that works best with a film-out (and sometimes its not what you would have thought).
 
SUPPATIME said:
I am concerned about video noise in low light levels (isn't everyone with this camera, though?) and am planning on overlighting the sets and compensating with ND filters (quick equipment checklist: P&S Teknik and 6 Panavision Ultra Speeds).
Click to expand...


Welcome and nice set up to be working with.
 
welcome.

though I couldn't quite get the point with overlighting and then adding ND filters? If you're concerned for noise in-cam, then there will be as much noise with less lights and without ND filters, right?

Other than that, We've just shot 6 student films on the HVX, and my favourite settings are:

cinelike_v
+1 saturation (easier to subtract in post than add)
skin tone on

Some of the more beautifully lit scenes were shot with very soft light, even a lot of practicals. Just be sure to not use much hard light, due to reduced latitude when working with the HVX vs. film. (abt. 7 F-stops vs 14). Hard light will look very ugly due to this.

Good luck!
 
Ursa said:
I couldn't quite get the point with overlighting and then adding ND filters? If you're concerned for noise in-cam, then there will be as much noise with less lights and without ND filters, right?
Click to expand...

My goal is to get rid of the noise by lighting as if it were shot outside in broad daylight... roughly 10,000 lux. Sony turned me on to that lighting terminology years ago; it essentially means lumen per square meter, and all video cameras have a minimum lux reading before they can't see sh*t. I've been brought up on learning to read foot-candles and lumens, but this was close enough to comprehend.

From testing it out with multiple Mini DV cameras over the years, I've found that overlighting a scene (with both soft and hard light) and then stopping the camera down with the in-camera iris or with external ND filters would yeild better images with less grain. CCDs are always light-hungry, and I figure if I give them what they are looking for and then controlling my aperature and thus D.O.F. with NDs I might get better images from video. Here's an example I did a year or two ago with the Canon XL-2, right when it came out. This was on a sound-stage where I had total control (and still, I'm not satisfied with it at all) but due to elaborate camera moves, we opted to shoot at a closed F-stop... either 8 or 11, I can't recall... so that everything was in focus. It was a short about a little girl who's stepfather molests her, and despite being a horrible concept for a short film, the writer/director helped me find beauty in the little girl's courage and friendship with her stuffed animals. Everything is in focus in the scene so that your eyes can wander--while the little girl's do--making you feel more and more helpless.



It's really hard to get a shallow D.O.F. when you stop down, but this will be the fourth time I will have used Panavision lenses on DV (prior to this, I worked heavily with the DVX-100A and the P&S Teknik) and I figure it's worth a try. I'm sure I'll have a shallower depth with their 50mm, 75mm and 100mm lenses, regardless of the amount of light in the scene.



Some of the more beautifully lit scenes were shot with very soft light, even a lot of practicals. Just be sure to not use much hard light, due to reduced latitude when working with the HVX vs. film. (abt. 7 F-stops vs 14). Hard light will look very ugly due to this.
Click to expand...

I'll check into all that... the only hard lights we will be using will be for rim lights and maybe some sunlight streaming into the windows in earlier shots of the film. As far as lattitude goes... the most "video-like" stock I've ever used is Kodak's 5218 (Vision2 500T) and that has an unheardof 10 stops. I've always been told video has slightly more lattitude as it is always trying to find more information in the blacks, but honestly I don't know.

This was the same sort of thing I did on 35mm, but I over-lit the scene and then stopped down on a 50mm lens with ND. We then crushed the blacks more with gamma correction and some other stuff in post.



I'll have to experiment with a wide-open aperature and some low, soft light on the HVX. It isn't the keying that I'm afraid of... but being that this is a period piece and we're looking into the darkness a lot... I'm afraid the roll-over from lit to not-lit will have a lot of noise... almost like DVD MPEG-2 encodes do to blues on HD-TVs.

Keep the ideas coming, guys... I appreciate it more than you know.
 
If you overlight and then put NDs or stop down the lens the same amount of light will be reaching the CCDs for a given shutter angle. Exposure=IT. Same intensity of light reaches the CCDs. If you add some fill to the shadow areas then compensate for that in post, that's a whole different story. But then again, I have no idea if there's any significant improvement. My experience with the DVX was that daylight shots were most prone to noise. I always use a 85b filter with the DVX as a significant amount of noise is color-temperature related. I am not sure if this is also the case with the HVX. But converting from 5500 to 3200 optically, instead of electronically makes a huge difference in the DVX. Apparently B.Press and Cinelike_v with normal color matrices are the least noisy gamma and color matrix combinations on the HVX. However I don't like B.Press's crushed blacks and prefer Cinelike_v's dynamic range.

Regards,
 
I understand what you mean... in that whatever light hits the CCDs is whatever light hits the CCDs. That's all that matters.

I'm kind of shocked to find out that you guys are saying the camera performs better in lower light levels than higher (i.e. ambient interior versus daylight exterior) as far as grain goes. I have a lot of research to do, it seems.

If that's the case, I'll be pretty lucky in that this shoot spands from the magic hour through the entire night.

Thanks for the suggestions... I'll see if I can get some screen grabs this week and post them.
 
It's not that the camera performs better in lower light levels. My conclusions regarding the DVX are related to color temperature and gamma. Suppose you have both interior and exterior scenes that are exposed properly at f/5.6 1/48, but your exterior scene requires you use 1/64 ND or 1.8 ND. Let's also suppose the camera has an EI of 320. The interior scene would require 125.4 footcandles while the exterior scene with the 1/64 ND in front of the lens would require 7913 footcandles, that's 64 times more light in the exterior shot. However, from the CCDs's standpoint it is receiving exactly the same amount of light. The only difference, if any, would be color temperature.
 
The main reason I am using the HVX is because of Panasonic's advancements in film-like gamma and color rendering. That being said, I've experienced a lot more video noise with the HVX than I have with the DVX years ago.

I understand what you mean in that regardless of lighting, it will still be the same amount of light hitting the CCDs. I had a brain-fart while I was trying to figure out a way that I could shoot with this camera in the same way I did the XL-2: over-lighting and stopping down to virtually eliminate the video noise and any chance of color bleeding, except my not-enough-thought logic made me think "and after I over-light, I'll throw an ND over the lens so I get a more shallow D.O.F. back". This is how I think at 4AM after being up 36 hours. Whoops.

Logically thinking, I could always shoot T1.3 with some of these lenses and stop down on the camera iris... that has potential. That will allow me to retain the shallow depth of the longer Panavision lenses (50,75, 100, 200) and allow as much light as possible to hit the CCDs. I'm prepared to lose roughly 2 stops due to the P&S ground glass and Panavision lenses.



Anywho, I took your collective advice and messed with the settings of F5. I was working wlth low light because the majority of this film is supposed to be lit by candle. Below are the specs, and below that is a still image.

Setting F5 (2:3:2:3)

Frame Rate 24 Frame
Syncro Scan 180.0d
Detail Level +1
V Detail Level 0
Detail Coring 0
Chroma Level +1
Chroma Phase 0
Color Temp 0
Master Ped -4
A. Iris Level 0
News Gamma OFF
Gamma CINELIKE V
Knee AUTO
Matrix CINELIKE
Skin Tone DTL ON
V Detail Freq THICK




The center read 16 footcandles and the drop-off to the left was 5 footcandles and the closet on the right was 2 footcandles.

I'm pretty impressed with the camera's lattitude even in pressing the blacks slightly. Thank you for letting me know about Cinelike V... as the noise is greatly reduced in this mode and upon a zoom-in in Photoshop, actually resembles a fine film grain.

If you are wondering if there is a glitch in the camera because of what seems to be a brown bar going across the image, don't worry... this was natural light coming through my window, and those shadows are created from my balcony.

The only concern I have is above the dresser on the left side of the image. In reality, there is a nice drop-off from the color of the wall to the shadows... but as expressed before, it seems like MPEG-2 compression in that the camera decided that there wasn't a fade between colors, but rather 3 layers before pure shadow. Maybe I'm asking too much from a $6,000 camcorder.

I really am impressed, though... and I can't wait to light a set and shoot!
 
Last edited:
Can't seem to see the full size image...

Try switching from the Cinelike color matrix to a Normal or Enriched color matrix. That will further reduce noise in the image.

The combination of Cinelike_V and -4 on your Master Ped is crushing blacks and that's why you are perceiving as a sudden drop-off into pure shadow. Try easing the MP a bit. Or try Cinemalike_D for that matter, but noise will increase. It's not compression related, and btw HDV uses MPEG2 the HVX uses DVCPROHD which uses intraframe compression.

One more important detail to be aware of, detail in Cinemalike gammas is roughly half of that of non-Cinemalike gammas.

Regards,
 
I've redone the URL... so you should be able to click and enlarge now.

I switched over the matrix to Enriched and noticed a difference in the LCD, so I assume it was a big change. Thanks!
 
Thanks! Looks good to me, if you're still not satisfied with the amount of noise. Increase coring setting. Try After Effects's noise reduction plugins, they take some time to render, but I've gotten excellent results with DVX footage.
 
Which AE Noise Reduction Plugins are you referring to?

I'm trying to find them, but... well, I'm not finding them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top