Hi Def Video on Standard TV

Darren_Wharton

Darren_Wharton

Member
Hi guys,

Can some one please tell me.........

What are the options available on how to down res the HD footage
from the Sony z1.

I've seen the down res footage that the camera produces internally. And although very crisp and sharp....for me, it still has that video look..!

What I would like to know is:

if you were editing Z1 High def footage in Final cut pro for instance, what options are available to you to add 'Film Look' filters and also, which would be the best way to save it to standard def, for normal TV....or to put on to DVD

We see programmes on Sky and terrestrial TV every day that have been shot using high def video, and they obviously look far superior to normal SD Digital Video......my question is, how have these programmes, (filmed on High Def cameras) been processed that they can be broadcast on standard Definition Televisions..?

Cheers

Darren Wharton
 
Darren...I've always had that question myself.. and have a feeling there may not be a 'make film look' button. But there's gotta be something eh? Cause even when you watch a dvd bonus features section, and they have out-takes or alternative scenes... they always look crappy or washed out and definately not the same as they do in the film itself. Almost like there's major colour corection going on to film that makes the 'final cut'.
 
When you look at movies that originated on film and distributed standard definition DVD and you compare the out takes to the movie, what you are seeing are the dailies which are telecine'd using a "one light" - no color correction. After editorial is completed the selected clips are re-transfered using a "best light" being color corrected with a da Vinci or Pandora color corrector and transfered to HD (D5). If the movie is going to be released on film the process would be similar but in a digital intermediate environment at 2K and recorded back to film.

You can certainly color correct in FCP (or any NLE) but no where near the quality and control of a da Vinci. There are software plug-ins like Magic Bullet that you can use with your NLE or Adobe AE that give you very different film looks. They are a bit slow but usually render a good look. There are also some nice color correction software solutions available but I doubt that they will work in HDV, you will need to capture/convert the HDV to some other format using at least a 10bit intermediate codec - like Cineform. Although I don't know if AspectHD would work with the current software color correctors.

As far as standards conversion (HD to SD) most post facilities have a piece of equipment that converts to the appropriate output, DVS, Panasonic or other. These boxes are pretty expensive if your accustomed to working with FCP etc..
 
Cool... thanks.... that makes a little more sense. Until now I always thought they took the un-edited film out, and trashed it on the floor, poured beer over it, used it to scrub floors and then let it sit out in the sun.... until realizing they would use it in their never seen before, 7th released Platinum Edition "We want you to buy yet another version of our film" DVD with 5 hours of extra footage. hahahaha.
 
In FCP 5, I've gotten great results using The Nattress standards conversion, which is a little unweildy to use, but it can take the FX1's 60i HDV and give you a true 24p sequence. Then you can either output a 24 fps HDV reference movie and paste it into a 24 fps NTSC sequence (in whatever codec you want, preferably uncompressed) and thenlet FCP do the scaling. Or you can take your HDV reference movie and let whatever DVD encoder you use downscale it for you. If you shoot FX1 or Z1 HDV correctly you shouldn't have to do much color correcting to give it a film look beyond giving it a 24p cadence, but nattress has some filters for film like gamma curves too. Their filters are cheap too. http://www.nattress.com
 
"my question is, how have these programmes, (filmed on High Def cameras) been processed that they can be broadcast on standard Definition Televisions..?"

They can't. Anything shot on high def is down-converted and down conversion gives you SD, not HD. You may think it looks better but it's still good old SD. Perhaps the blacks are slightly blacker looking. The illusion of 24p is still there f it was shot that way but it's just SD.

http://www.film-and-video.com/sdhd.html
 
I think DoF is key to the effect. I mean what is it we are trying to imitate with 24p? First its the blur that film and a shutter makes. Second it's the depth of the film, the physical medium and how it records an image, and the shallow depth of field it makes.
 
I agree about depth of field up to a point, but sometimes you want to see the whole set. Look at Citizen Kane, or any of Terry Gilliam's films. I think the key is good lighting.
 
Walter_Graff said:
"my question is, how have these programmes, (filmed on High Def cameras) been processed that they can be broadcast on standard Definition Televisions..?"

"They can't. Anything shot on high def is down-converted and down conversion gives you SD, not HD. You may think it looks better but it's still good old SD. Perhaps the blacks are slightly blacker looking. The illusion of 24p is still there f it was shot that way but it's just SD.


Hi Walter,

This is exactly my point. If you watch 'Star wars' or 'Once Upon A Time In Mexico' movies shot using Hi Def Video, when they are broadcast......... on Standard res TV's they still look like film. There is absolutely no comparison to the down res footage that the FX1 or Z1 cameras produce internally..!

So how do Hollywood down convert HD footage and still maintain that Hi Res filmic look.........at plain old SD.......

I found this info while researching....maybe this has something to do with it...

"Within the production environment, video and audio data are primarily transported using the video serial digital interface (SDI), which is defined by the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE). This equipment may support standard-definition (SD) digital video formats, high-definition (HD) digital video formats, or both. SD video is transmitted at SDI rates of 270, 360, or 540 Mbps; HD video is transmitted at the SDI rate of 1.485 Gbps. With its superior visual quality, HD video represents the future of digital video broadcasting. As a result, there is an increasing need for hardware that can handle the larger data throughput required when transmitting HD video"

Cheers

Darren Wharton
www.darrenwharton.demon.co.uk
Click to expand...
 
I took my HC1 and hooked it up to my brothers tv, and it automatically takes the video and downverts it to normal DV. when I played back footage, it looked amazing on their tv... they kept saying it was even better than the footage they see on the news. The only thing that kept it back from looking like a movie, is that I currently not great at filming and the video is shakey, overexposed, etc... NOw, I am limited over controls as the HC1 is a consumer cam... however as time grows and I have the proper lens filters, lens adapters, settings and the know-how, and proper post editing treatment, I'm sure my video will look sooo much better even on a standard tv.
 
Darren_Wharton said:
This is exactly my point. If you watch 'Star wars' or 'Once Upon A Time In Mexico' movies shot using Hi Def Video, when they are broadcast......... on Standard res TV's they still look like film. There is absolutely no comparison to the down res footage that the FX1 or Z1 cameras produce internally..!

So how do Hollywood down convert HD footage and still maintain that Hi Res filmic look.........at plain old SD.......
Click to expand...

First keep in mind that these where films. So after the were shot on HD they were printed to film and underwent the same process film goes through to get to our SD sets. Not to mention possibly millions of dollars of color correction. Going directly from HD to SD is would be as simple as any other tape drop down. (Like going from DV to VHS). The truth is your stuff will look like film if the HD version looked like film. It's a good chance the HD version looks like really good video so when it hits SD it will look like really good SD video.

Take the the DVX for example. To the untrained eye (about 90% or more of the world) when shooting something at 24p with cinegamma (and particularly when well lit) it looks like film. When you drop it to VHS or whatever it continues to look like film. Because it looked like film when you started. 24p HD (particularly well lit 24p HD), to the untrained eye should look like film. (MTV uses 24/30p HD all the time). But interlaced HD will still look like video. If you're using cineframe it will probably look like some kind of cross between film and video (like the Canon XL line before the XL2).

So once you have a film look (meaning before you go to post) you then edit and make an HD master then have it recorded to VHS or DV. But whatever you do don't recompress HDV, everyone seems to say it looks like crap.

Since you're talking about Sony's HDV (as opposed to true HD), my suggestion would be find a hot young chick (about 18 - 25), get some actors and shoot a horror film, (the hot chick be the star of course). Don't even bother shooting for a film look or shoot in 30CF, light it well, learn how to frame a shot, move the camera and edit well, then put it on DVD and VHS for screeners. Promote the fact it's shot on HD (HD is the catch phrase not HDV so you want to use it) and send it to some distributors.

Have a copy of the film at full res HDV on HD tape. So if someone ask for your HD master you'll have it. Someone will pick it up if they think it will sale. And if someone wants your HD master without money upfront tell them to kiss your assets. (Unless you're more concerned with just getting to market versus the money, which some people are).

-Nate
 
Nate said it.

Whether it originates on HD or SD is irrelevant regarding how filmic it will look when shown on a standard-def TV. What matters is whether it was 24p or 60i, and the overall production value used.

Watch Leno or Letterman tonight -- both originate on high-def now, and will get downrezzed to SD on your TV. Neither will look the slightest bit like film, they'll look video video video -- because they're shot in 60i. The 24p frame rate makes all the difference.
 
OK...let me get this straight....lads

If I want to get close to the filmic look...ie 'Star wars' or 'Once Upon A Time...'

I don't want Hi Def Video interlaced......so that's both the Z1 & FX1 Sony's out.........

And if I wan't true 16.9 (which I do) that's the DVX100 out............

So that leaves the JVC HD1.........or Canon XL2..........or the HVX.......

Cool

Thank's Gentlemen and Goodnight.....I'm off for a pint..!

Cheers

Darren Wharton.
 
Barry_Green said:
Nate said it.

Whether it originates on HD or SD is irrelevant regarding how filmic it will look when shown on a standard-def TV. What matters is whether it was 24p or 60i, and the overall production value used.

Watch Leno or Letterman tonight -- both originate on high-def now, and will get downrezzed to SD on your TV. Neither will look the slightest bit like film, they'll look video video video -- because they're shot in 60i. The 24p frame rate makes all the difference.
Click to expand...
Barry I find myself agreeing with your wisdom much more than I disagree. However, on this point I still argue that 60i or 30P shot on the DVX looks much more filmic than my HC1 @ 60i. I don't associate the lattitude of the picture quality with the frame rate. Yes 24 frames provides the motion we expect to see at a theater but before I ruined my DVX I was mostly shooting 30P that looked as filmic as anything I have seen on just about any video camera. :lipsrseal
 
ChuckS said:
Barry I find myself agreeing with your wisdom much more than I disagree. However, on this point I still argue that 60i or 30P shot on the DVX looks much more filmic than my HC1 @ 60i. I don't associate the lattitude of the picture quality with the frame rate. Yes 24 frames provides the motion we expect to see at a theater but before I ruined my DVX I was mostly shooting 30P that looked as filmic as anything I have seen on just about any video camera. :lipsrseal
Click to expand...
30p can look like film. If well lit no one needs to know. I shot my first feature project in 30p on the DVX100 and it was fine. The difference is 24p is normally easier to work with because it's a worldwide standard for the most part (at least when we're talking about film).

Plus 30p looks like film but doesn't move like film, it's smoother. I don't know if the normal person even notices. I've never known anyone too. 24p/30p will always look more filmic than 60i. The DVX100 is more filmic than the 60i HC1 but the HC1 has better resolution because the higher the image you begin with the better it looks on television.

As anti-Sony as I am I must admit I could easily watch a show (think any of the shows normally shoot on highend three chipers at 60i) shot on Sony 60i from a VX2000 so I can image the HC1 is probably hot. Hows the color on that thing. I do love the colors from the VX2000. Frankly I could watch a narrative shot on the VX2000. I can play around with the DVX and get some nice 60i looks. I may shoot a feature in 60i one day. I like to shoot in 60 with the Cinegamma on.

-Nate
 
I must now concede with Barry Green and Walters statements, quoting Barry "You can't fit three pegs into one" downsizing will offer no more resolution improvement, however it will allow you to obtain 4:4:4 colour information, which in means great for keying in SD and excellent colour correction ability. Plus it should look as good as the best equivalent SD camera

Now for the film look that gets debated over and over in these forums,

Question:

Original questions was why the FX1 or HC1 (or similar) when down-converted doesn't look like film like the F900 stuff?

Answer:

Besides better comp and lighting and better lens and better DSP better format, better everything, its the 2/3" lens and progressive capture that’s the key here, a 1/3" interlace is not going to look like film at all, (you can get some what close by de-interlacing, but this is fake and you lose out in resolution, better to have a progressive Camera to start off with)

Solution:

What you could do is this, use on of those 35mm adaptors , shoot like a pro (comp and lighting) and then either de-interlace in post of use CF25 (if its FX1/Z1U) then (apply sharping filter) downrez to uncompressed SD and colour correct/ edit key etc then encode to DVD, it will look like it was shot 35mm film pixel for pixel.


Anhar
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top