how movies shot on mini dvs will be released theatrically?

N

nageswara rao s

Member
i am indie. i need some information to make my movie. movie "28 days later" was shot by canon xl1s mini dv camera. what formats they used to shot that movie, either progressive scan at 24 fps in ntsc or pal 24fps. i heard that they used panavision lenses with adapters. can any body provide that information too. and also the cost of those to buy for my self or cost of other venders. what else i need other gear to complete my movie. they used mini dv camera and released in theaters too, without quality lose too. how is it possible. if any body clarify that it will be useful to me.


nageswara rao s
hydearabad, India.
 
Don`t know if that helps:

Camera
Canon XL-1S, Canon EC and EJ Prime Lenses with Optex adapter

Laboratory
Technicolor (answer print)
Technicolor (color)
DeLuxe (prints)
The Moving Picture Company, UK

Film negative format (mm/video inches)
35 mm (final scene)
Video (PAL)
8 mm (flashback scene)

Cinematographic process
D1 (master format)
DV (source format)
Spherical (source format) (final scene)
Super 8 (source format) (flashback scene)

Printed film format
35 mm (Kodak Vision 2383)

Aspect ratio
1.85 : 1 (anamorphic)

The decision to film on DV (using Canon XL1 cameras) was both an aesthetic and a logistic choice. On the aesthetic side of things, Danny Boyle felt that the harshness of the DV imagery suited the post-apocalyptic urban landscape and the grittiness of the film in general. In the production notes of the movie, Boyle points out that "the general idea was to try and shoot as though we were survivors too," and as such, a pristine 35mm widescreen image would have been antithetical to this notion. In terms of logistics, producer Andrew Macdonald claims that it would have been impossible to shoot the film on anything other than DV, especially some of the exterior scenes in London. As MacDonald points out in the production notes, "The police and the local authorities were quite happy to assist us because we could set up scenes so quickly. We could literally be ready to shoot with a six-camera set-up within minutes - something we would not realistically have been able to do if shooting under the restrictions of 35mm which takes a good deal more time to set up a single shot."
 
If I remember correctly, it was shot in SD PAL at 25fps, the standard PAL frame rate. Be warned though. The video to film transfer costs are extraordinarily expensive. To take a feature, say 100 to 120 minutes in length, from DV to 35mm film, at an acceptable quality, will cost in the $50, 000 to $60, 000 range. That is just to the first answer print, straight off the transfer negative (no interpositive/internegative). This also does not take into account an audio edit and mix for the big screen, or other lab services.
 
thank you sir, both of you david and postmaster. sir any body kindly provide those EJ prime lenses and optex adapter costs too. or may i take any other possibilites at all. what is the possibilities of shooting in ntsc 24p or pal 25 p. any other best cameras available do this in less possible costs.
 
The EJ primes and adapter are very expensive.

If you want a low-cost camera that can deliver much higher quality results than the XL1s, look into a Panasonic GH1 with the tester13 modifications. This will be much, much, much less expensive and much, much sharper than a Canon XL1s using EJ primes.
 
I shot extensively with the Canon XL-1, TWELVE YEARS AGO, and ended up not really liking that camera very much. I had a lot of issues with it, especially when it came to using it in very humid environments. I didn't care for the way it handled audio and thought that images were not up to snuff, compared to other cameras at the time. I switched to Sony SD DV cameras and liked them much better. However, like I said that was eleven to twelve years ago. That is a long time in the digital video world.

I don't have personal experience with the GH1 and the Tester13 firmware hack, but footage I have seen, on the internet, looks amazing. If that is not for you I would look at the myriad of the available HD cameras that are available today. Almost all of them will give you better images than any thing you could shot with an XL-1. The Panasonic HMC 150 is a very popular and high quality camera. If, for some reason, you have to shot SD DV, then hands down, the DVX is the camera I would recommend. It is available in both 24P NTSC and 25P PAL versions. The PAL television system does offer a higher level of horizontal resolution with 625 horizontal scan lines, to NTSC's 525. Back in the DV to film days, like when "28 Days Latter" was shot, a lot of folks chose to use PAL DV for that little extra edge in resolution, and because the PAL frame rate (25fps) was closer to the frame rate for motion pictures (in North America). Adjusting for the difference in 24fps to 25fps was easier than adjusting for the 30 fps (29.97 fps actually) of NTSC video. Of course this was for interlaced video. The DVX, and NLE advancement, killed interlace as an issue, because of the progressive scan capture.

But if all possible, shot on HD. If you are positive you can go out to 35mm film, I would find a lab that does those transfers and start a relationship with them now. I would ask them for their recommendations.
 
thank you sir both barry green and david g smith for your kind information about cameras and lenses. i saw footage of panasonic GH1 on digital photography review.com, they are shoot using 720P and videos are extraordinary quality and look amazing. aslo ag hmc 150 and gh1 are both avccams and they use avchd formats. i want to know that, is it possible to get full hd on those cams to shoot at 1920*1080 with progressive scan at 24fps, because my movie should be released theatrically. avchd formats are interframe based, if at all any frame damaged it may cause to damage more frames in the line or the whole gop (group of picture) at all. are there any movies shoot with these cameras at all. sir i want to know that whether using dvc pro hd based hvx 200 is better or hmc 150 is better or gh1 . hvx 200 is capable of shoot 720 p and its cost is $4250. and gh1 is $1500. and what is the cost of hmc 150. transfer costs to film are $50-60000 for dvx formats. what is cost of transfer to film for other formats i.e hmc 150 and hvx 200, gh1. are there one and same ? after all that which one has better look on film
sir thanks in advance to anybody for their kind reply
 
Last edited:
Yes, the HMC150 and GH1 (with PTool hack) both record 1920x1080 progressive scan 24fps.

Transferring to film from HD has been much more expensive than transferring from DV, although you would have to ask your chosen film lab for their current rates.

The HPX170/HVX200 and HMC150 are much better video cameras than the GH1, but for digital cinema purposes the GH1 may be the better choice if you really need shallow depth of field. However, shooting on a digital stills camera like the GH1 involves many compromises and you'd have to factor all that in before deciding if it is the wiser choice.
 
thank you barry green sir. your advice is worthwhile i understood from your reply that the single large sensor of gh1 is more capable of capturing the shallow depth of field than the 1/3inch 3 ccd hmc 150 even though it is a dslr at all. am i right? sir. tranfer costs to film are double the costs of dvx to film or even more. i want a rough figure for that , not exact fgure sir. if my budget is increased by adding any friends of mine what decision should i take about required cameras and gear.
thanks in advance sir.
 
Yes, the GH1 will have much shallower DOF than the HMC150.

Film transfer costs vary substantially depending on what lab you use. And prices in India can be much lower than they are in the US. You will have to contact some local labs and ask them about HD to film transfer costs.

As for what camera is best -- it all depends on the budget of the production. If the production can afford to use a Red One or film, you shouldn't be even looking at micro-budget equipment like the HMC150 or GH1. And if the production cannot afford the bigger cameras and can only afford the very inexpensive equipment, then how realistic is it to consider transferring to film? The costs to transfer from video to film are substantial (in the USA, it can easily cost $60,000).
 
thank you sir. i asked for local dealer for gh1, hmc 150, dvx 102b and hvx 200. he said only dvx 102b and hvx 200 are available at our local market. if we want we can get gh1 and 150 at big dealers in big city nearer to us by travelling 200kms. i searched a online dealer like global media pro.com located in singapore and goods dispatched to india on order, gh1 and hmc 150 are also available at reasonable prices. but when i checked that website they didn't mentioned about sterer 13 i.e ptool hack. and also checked for additional accessories there i cant find that at all. sir, is p tool hack is included in package itself or have to purchase it separately. and i also read the reviews on the camcorderinfo.com and digital camera review.com, some rated gh1 as good at shooting at progressive in 1280*720 but some reviewed 1920*1080 shooting mode is little bit blurry like that. is correct sir. or is it solved these days by panasonic company.
i wait for your best solutionable answer sir.
thank you once again. Mr barry green.
 
The tester13 PTool hack is a free download, it is not offered by Panasonic and it is not supported by Panasonic. It vastly improves the quality of the 1080p footage. Any prior review you have heard is irrelevant, the PTool firmware update makes the footage far superior to any that has been reviewed.
 
You should know that if you use the GH1 hack then if your camera malfunctions during the warranty period, you probably won't be covered.

That said, the GH13 delivers images - especially wide shots - that really are incredible for such a cheap camera.
 
thank you barry green sir and dvx hutch for your kind information. after a long gap i am consulting you again sir. in india population is more than 1100 million people, companies like panny and sony are selling consumer cameras through dealerships only. prosumer cameras only available in Grey market so we cant get any warranty for prosumer cameras at all. if i take and install p tool hack to gh1 camera if it works properly no problem at all if any thing goes wrong or camera malfunction in any way . is it repairable at normal cost or i have lose entire camera at all.
is the p tool hack installed by ourself or with any technical personal only .
thanks in advance for your patience and good advices
 
I am certain you would lose any warranty.

Prosumer/professional cameras with warranties should be available from Visual Technologies Ltd.
 
sir i am contacting visual technologies through net. in the mean time i want some clarification sir. that is without p tool hack we cant use gh 1 for digital cinema purpose , because its given bit rate is 17mbps only,but what about canon 7d , this is also supports 24 ntsc and 25 pal.
I know that gh 1 with ptool gives high bitrate files,but i read somewhere in this forum it gives raw files is it correct.

can you give me detailed information sir. sorry for my ignorance sir.
thanks in advance sir.
 
no one hasn't seen my previous post yet, that's why i can't get any answer at all. if anybody answer to that, it is helpful
with regards
nageswara rao surapaneni
 
thank you Mr Barry Green for your time discussing with me. i see firs two and they are looking so good, and also i am stunned because of depth of field of that Gh1. i can't find third link at all. even though i am satisfied totally. you are producer for both movies.
i can understand that without hack gh1 performs that much , with p tool hack how it works i can understand. i have no more questions at this time about gh 1 at all. what is the bit rate after p tool hack.
are you released them in theaters or simply sent them for festivals at all. are you kept final print at 16:9 aspect ratio or changed to 1.85:1 or more wide. good day .....
 
The bitrate of the GH1 after the hack, depends on what settings you set for it. You get to choose how much bitrate you want it to use.

The films were mastered at 16:9, and "Depth of Phil" has already played at several festivals. "Shady, Texas" is a web series pilot and hasn't been sent to festivals yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top