Hvx200 At Ibc - Latest News From The Show
- Thread starter mikkowilson
- Start date
pmark23 said:
No. The HVX is squarely aimed at semi-pros like me that are trying to shoot for theatrical releases. So it's not 4 out of 50'000, it's more like 40'000 out of 50'000. And your argument is moot anyway because the camera is not made for users that don't understand it - if you're looking for a point&shoot, look elsewhere.
SergejIvanovits
Well-known member
Everything is possible in the data-world but why do you need it in Pal land? The 24p -> 60i is there because it can be converted to 60i . You can edit, watch and destribute your video. If the film in the cinema had 23 fps as standard than today you wouldn't talk about 24fps. I guess what is important now is the progressive part of the process. Progressive HD is the key to make better filmtransfer.Edelweiss said:
25p to 24fps is in use today. It is a frame by frame transfer. The sound pitch is adjustable, it works just perfect. But guess what , all the hollywood movies you are watching on DVD is a 24fps to 25p/50i transfer. It just goes faster than in NTSC land.Edelweiss said:
Beleve me, 25p isn't a problem in filmmaking.
Edelweiss said:
They do this all the time! Telecining films for TV is done like this 100% of the time as far as I am aware... well that was what I was told by a professional broadcast telecine operator. Fair enough, it is 4% difference, but I don't think it will have any impact on your film. It is a very, very, very, very tried and tested method.
mmm said:
Nothing wrong with the format, but to go theatrical you have to convert. And after the conversion you'll definitely see the difference between 24p and 25p-converted-to-24p:
- There's slomo in it that makes it look less "real" (if you're going the route of slowing the footage down)
- There are sound problems: Either you get pitch-shifting artifacts (really nasty) or the voices are a quarter note deeper, which is very noticably subconsiously: Tiny men sound like Pavarotti and slender female models sound like Dame Edna (if you're going the route of slowing the footage down)
- If you're going the route of keeping the speed, at which point there are no sound issues, there are major sharpness issues or the image "jumps" every second.
That's what's wrong.
Cheers!
SergejIvanovits
Well-known member
Ok, but if you are making film, and only film than buy an NTSC-one and use NTSC in your edit suit. But as I mentioned before, tv-stations wants you to switch over from 24fps to 25fps on your filmcamera if you deliver something on film. 24, 25 and 32fps is just standard on a filmcamera.
Look at this : 12, 15, 24, 25, 29.97, 30, 60, 75, 100 fps, this is an Arriflex. Do you think the framerate 25 and 29,97 are there because they don't know what they are doing? It is just to make the footage more usable in the broadcasting. Easy to convert, no problem with sound etc.
Look at this : 12, 15, 24, 25, 29.97, 30, 60, 75, 100 fps, this is an Arriflex. Do you think the framerate 25 and 29,97 are there because they don't know what they are doing? It is just to make the footage more usable in the broadcasting. Easy to convert, no problem with sound etc.
Edelweiss said:
So you shoot 24fps... oh you don't get theatrical realease - What a surprise! Now I have to put my film on PAL video at 25fps - NEVER IT WILL BE UNWATCHABLE! LOL.
Chances are 100% of your audience will only ever watch your film at 25fps anyway! So you would actually be worse shooting at 24fps - had you considered that?
Even the most successful films find most of their audience OUTSIDE the cinemas. How many are going to watch yours on a film transfer?
SergejIvanovits
Well-known member
Edelweiss said:
No. You can try it yourself. Are you using Audition or some kind of editor to your sound? You can change the framerate quit much with pitch-shifting.. and you don't hear any different. The software adjust the "speed" and it sounds like before. Try it.
SergejIvanovits said:
Yeah, that's what I'm talking about: pitch-shifting adds artifacts: either it's some "stuttering" or flanging. I've never heard a really good pitch-shifter so far. Plus this still means that you have 4% slo-mo. And we've discussed+mostly agreed before that 26fps-for-24fps adds some "otherworldy-ness" to the footage. Well imagine having this through all of your movie - it will completely change the perception. With 24fps-converted-to-25fps (the "true-and-tested method"), you have the opposite effect that everything is a bit faster, which makes the viewer more attentive - can't really compare the two. Conversions from 25p to 24p are actually much less common, and they don't look right, unfortunately. That's why it's important that the pal-hvx has 24p among other framerates, like the arri.
Cheers!
SergejIvanovits
Well-known member
Edelweiss, are you from Vienna? Ok. I was just watching some "lowbudget" (not really) film from Scandinavia. 99% was made with 25p or 50i 2/3" video camera. Transfered to 35 mm film at the and. There isn't any slowmotion effect. Looks good.
mr._guiyotinne
Well-known member
Sergej where we can get those european low budget films? In Spain is really difficult, SK too and we don´t have netfixx or blockbuster like this. How you do it? where you get the info?
Anyway this is normal trade in post houses now, just take your 25p master and they will do the work for you. But people should care; i know a couple of them (low budget too :laugh: ) that just filming and leave the sound like it is, so it get´s slower this 4%. Maybe it´s not that much (was it a pair of minutes more?) but obviously it´s not the edditing the editor and director decided.
25p it´s not a problem.
Anyway this is normal trade in post houses now, just take your 25p master and they will do the work for you. But people should care; i know a couple of them (low budget too :laugh: ) that just filming and leave the sound like it is, so it get´s slower this 4%. Maybe it´s not that much (was it a pair of minutes more?) but obviously it´s not the edditing the editor and director decided.
25p it´s not a problem.
Edelweiss said:
Honestly, this is the least of your worries! Most of you audience will see the film at 25fps anyway!
If I could have the 24fps option for free, of course, I would take it, but I am not really that bothered about it. Remember at 1080p on the HVX, the 24p is carried inside a 60i stream, so it wouldn't be possible with a 50i stream.
SergejIvanovits
Well-known member
mr._guiyotinne said:
You can buy most of those films on DVD but than it is encoded from the digital master and it is 25p and the dvd is the same. If you are on festivals or so than you can watch some of those films projected as 24fps from 35mm.
Look at this: In Hungary.. http://www.akos.hu/gallery.akos?g_2=eeca5bf8ba84c5476a76f0168a25633f the final product going to be 35mm. What are they using? Sony XDCam? Does it have 24fps?
All PAL XDCAM Camcorders offer a 25P mode. Do they worrie about sound pitch? No. Are they going to make a lot of money with this film? Yes.
This is from Sony and about SD:
"Scott Saunders' The Technical Writer, which was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance Independent Film Festival 2003, was shot with a PAL version of the MPEG IMX MSW-900P Camcorder – a tape-based forerunner of the XDCAM PDW-530P – and converted to 35mm for theatrical distribution."
Cees Mutsaers
Veteran
Let's stop this discussion about 24p vs 25p it seems that in Europe only 25p will be on the HVX.
Is there some news from our reporters?
Is there some news from our reporters?
Cees Mutsaers
Veteran
any news
The only thing that stood out was the big resolution (of course), it played on a 23" cinema display, so should show all pixels then. No clue about the abberation on this footage, since it was very shaky and zoomed out at daylight. Latitude was pretty good, sky wasn't that clear though, but I'm almost positive it is because of a bit of overexposure. Besides, just before I saw this, I was checking out the 4k projector by sony showing uncompressed HD, so my eyes got too spoiled.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Neither. It is 13x.cici said:
Interesting -- I didn't see anything about 55mm, but if there is a 55mm setting there, that would be the appropriate for a 13x lens based on a 4.2mm wide-angle. Perhaps they've changed from 4.5-58.5 down to 4.2-55mm?
No, variable frame rates are only supported in 720p. However you can use the built-in downconversion feature to get variable frame rates dubbed into your DV project. So, technically, yes you can use variable frame rates in DV, you just have to record them to P2 and then downconvert from P2 to the DV tape.
I don't think it was ever verified whether that list was correct in the first place.
First post in a while....
My crystal ball has a message:
960X720 CCDs. I have no "source" but this is my best guess. I'm going to bet Panasonic's going for 1280X1080 stretched (as stated above) with pixel shift, and pixel shifting 960X720 gets you something around 1280X1080 with 4X2X2 color. Now, given that Panasonic's improved their noise-reduction on the DSP with the 100B and that 960X720 CCDs are not too dense, I think the camera will produce a pretty good image which will be just as clean as the dvx. Hopefully cleaner.
The flip mode thing upsets me. I wanted that feature. Oh well. Next month I'm doing my first real mini35 shoot, which has me excited. No, that's not related to anything, but it's exciting.
My crystal ball has a message:
960X720 CCDs. I have no "source" but this is my best guess. I'm going to bet Panasonic's going for 1280X1080 stretched (as stated above) with pixel shift, and pixel shifting 960X720 gets you something around 1280X1080 with 4X2X2 color. Now, given that Panasonic's improved their noise-reduction on the DSP with the 100B and that 960X720 CCDs are not too dense, I think the camera will produce a pretty good image which will be just as clean as the dvx. Hopefully cleaner.
The flip mode thing upsets me. I wanted that feature. Oh well. Next month I'm doing my first real mini35 shoot, which has me excited. No, that's not related to anything, but it's exciting.