Is this japanese camera useful?

[jamesmallonuk]

http://www.superheadz.com/digitalharinezumi/

Its basically a little camera that produces super 8 like images. I am planning on getting a Scarlet when its finished but I was wondering if this camera could be useful.

For my uses I am wanting to make documantaries and using this camera maybe for individuals to document some personal moments might have a nice retro emotive feel to it, or if you were doing any kind of narative work it could serve for various looks like dream sequences or flashbacks or as home movie footage.

My question is actually this....Is it worth me getting this camera for about 250 dollars for this or will I be able to get just as good a look on a cheap camera and using color grading. The thing is I can't see myself trying to make red footage look like this. What do people think?

 

[kyotonils]

save your $250 and instead of buying a Hedgehog ("Harinezumi" = hedgehog in Japanese) shoot it on the video mode of a crappy point and shoot digicam, perhaps though a piece of plastic.

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

There is no such thing as a useless piece of equipment. Analyze the type of look and quality it can give you compared to what you want. If you like it's attributes, features and output capabilities... and fully understand how it handles light, then go ahead and use it.

Once you know the limitations and strengths of any camera, that is the moment you can do wonderful things with it. Know how to light for it and you'll be well on your way.

I'm sure it's not the BEST all around camera... probably not even good. But for someones film, somewhere out there... it is the best for that look, that story.

 

[Barry_Green]

I want one... it looks like the footage is awesome, in an old Super 8 kind of way. They go for around $170.

 

[youngindiefilms]

I would feel ripped off buying that camera for $170. Really, just get a PS camera that shoots 640x480 video and add a filter in post to achieve the same look.

 

[jamesmallonuk]

Its not so much does the look have creative potential its more can the look be copied as well through other methods, colour correction and using a point and shoot. It seems its not just a matter of colour but they purposely flawed the sensor to create the effect. So wondering if I should get it or just use colour correction?

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

What do you NEED it for? I might be missing the point...

 

[youngindiefilms]

Exactly my sentiments. It's at best a (too expensive) gadget for people with too much money on hands. I'm sure you could spend that money on something more useful.

 

[jamesmallonuk]

Exactly my sentiments. It's at best a (too expensive) gadget for people with too much money on hands. I'm sure you could spend that money on something more useful.

Ha Ha like all of us aren't spending large amounts of money on filmaking already. Back to my point in the first post IF you wanted a super 8 look to some shots for whatever reason, dream sequence, flashback, whatever... the point is could this be achieved in post with a cheap camera or is the look unique and probably impossible to simulate in post.

 

[youngindiefilms]

If you seriously consider using this for a short or even feature film I'd say you're a bit optimistic
This nice little toy camera will only record in 640x480 and probably 30fps (didn't bother to check the details further). Not really optimal for any serious use in films.

With all the magic bullet software out there you can most definitely emulate that Super 8 look. If a toy camera with a weak cpu can do this in real time you can bet that your PC or MAC with some great software like Adobe AE, Apple Motion, Photoshop etc. can create this look and probably a lot better. Plus you will be able to have full control over the effect and adjust it to your liking.

BUT... if you are too lazy to do this yourself and just want it for some random videos not meant for anything serious, go ahead... I could see myself fooling around with this but I spent way too much money on useless stuff in the past, so I'm a bit healed of that buying habit

 

[Barry_Green]

640x480, 25p.

 

[greymog]

It's 25fps thank god. I'm definitely getting one.

I think there's something empowering about a crippled picture. It's the same charm to DSLR video. For some reason everyone finds a way to make these cams work for them.

I like this little one. It's 25fps I'm in PAL land, no flicker. You have minimal choices for ISO, its between 100/800, and I think its either f8 hard set, or a choice between f8 and f3. its a 30 something mm focal length ff equivalent, one meter in focus on, and macro mode in focus 10cm.

Nice little options. The empowering part in my opinion is that the footage is below standard in quality. Not like the DSLR's, where the picture can be in certain circumstances up to standard, well well below standard.

This means you don't spend a second thinking about where your project is gonna go after you're done with it. You just do it. I'm buying this thing, but i'm not spending a cent over 50 bucks on anything i shoot over the weekend with it. But still whatever I shoot in that weekend on this thing is gonna be fun cause there's none of that pressure.

It won't be the best, it'll be honest.

And it's dirt cheap. You can stick it anywhere. If you break it, you're not reaching for the heart pills. Screw it pick up two when you can afford it, tie one to a balloon or something. Take risks with it.

I think it's brilliant.

I wanna pick up 5, then one every month if i can hang this year workwise, and start a monthly competition in the neighborhood. No grading, no dialog, just play some music on top. Losers buy winner all his/her drinks on screening night. three mates for judges.

Fun.

Fun makes good pictures sometimes. I'm sold.

T

PS. It beats my D90 in that its 25fps (flicker PAL land) and that I can choose between at least two ISOs. The jelly isn't as bad as D90's you can spot some in the sample videos.

 

[jamesmallonuk]

With all the magic bullet software out there you can most definitely emulate that Super 8 look. If a toy camera with a weak cpu can do this in real time you can bet that your PC or MAC with some great software like Adobe AE, Apple Motion, Photoshop etc. can create this look and probably a lot better.

I wish people would read the original post. Anyway this is exactly my question can you get this look form colour correction. I haven't seen this look before apart form super 8. If you can find an example please give a link. Some old looking footage just has those crappy lines moving over it and doesen't fool anyone. This look could really convince someone it was shot on Super 8 in the past sometime.


To give a real world context. Like I said i am planning to get a Red Scarlet and couldn't imagine trying to make 3k footage look like this. So I will give some ideas again why i wonder if this look could be useful. Imagine you shooting even a semi-large budget movie or documatary and you want a dream sequence, or a few shots of past event form the 70's or you you just want to add a few shots in a documenatary that has a really emotive feel. Realistically maybe 1 in 10 movies have some kind of scene where a few fuzzy shots are used to portray some kind of flashback, dream sequence, or even a scary scence where not everything is in focus.. etc so its not just a toy but potentially a great tool for these kind of scenes. I couldn't imagine using it for anythig more than a handful fo shots though but those shots may have a great impact with this style. The look is great for nostalgia and emotional past scenes. Examples: what about the first scence of Mean Streets, or the last home movie footage of Falling down or the retro past shots in the Game with Michael Douglas. CSI does flashbacks every episode!

My point remains can this look be done as well without actually resorting to super 8. please link if you can show some footage???

 

[_joe]

I'm putzing around with magic bullet right now--I'll see if I can muster something with it.

I'd totally be game for a small camera to just have in the pocket. I don't know if I'd pay $250 for it, especially if something like the flip is sub 200 right now.

 

[youngindiefilms]

I wish people would read the original post. Anyway this is exactly my question can you get this look form colour correction. I haven't seen this look before apart form super 8. If you can find an example please give a link. Some old looking footage just has those crappy lines moving over it and doesen't fool anyone. This look could really convince someone it was shot on Super 8 in the past sometime.


To give a real world context. Like I said i am planning to get a Red Scarlet and couldn't imagine trying to make 3k footage look like this. So I will give some ideas again why i wonder if this look could be useful. Imagine you shooting even a semi-large budget movie or documatary and you want a dream sequence, or a few shots of past event form the 70's or you you just want to add a few shots in a documenatary that has a really emotive feel. Realistically maybe 1 in 10 movies have some kind of scene where a few fuzzy shots are used to portray some kind of flashback, dream sequence, or even a scary scence where not everything is in focus.. etc so its not just a toy but potentially a great tool for these kind of scenes. I couldn't imagine using it for anythig more than a handful fo shots though but those shots may have a great impact with this style. The look is great for nostalgia and emotional past scenes. Examples: what about the first scence of Mean Streets, or the last home movie footage of Falling down or the retro past shots in the Game with Michael Douglas. CSI does flashbacks every episode!

My point remains can this look be done as well without actually resorting to super 8. please link if you can show some footage???

I bet you any kind of money the crew behind CSI or Mean Streets didn't use a toy camera to get their results. It's simply not feasible to use a 640x480 resolution for release on TV or even the big screen. You only can upscale low resolution footage that much. Unless you plan to use it for webscreening in low res only you will be disappointed.
I bet you even more money that all recent movies which have scenes like that were either shot on actual film (be it 8 or 16mm) to get the look or they did it in post production.
Add some vignetting, add some random flickering, some random lines etc. There are countless plugins and software out there to do exactly this. The last film I was working on the director even overdid it with the lines and dirt and other effects to emulate that look of old mistreated film.

If I have time on hands this weekend I'll make you a clip.

 

[youngindiefilms]

My point remains can this look be done as well without actually resorting to super 8. please link if you can show some footage???

I got inspired now, have a short video which I was about to edit (not yet finished) and I will transform that into the 8mm look. I've started already and will probably be done this weekend. Will post a link once it's up

To achieve this I am using a out of the box Final Cut 6 installation and only one additional plug in to finish it off and that one is even free. You will be able to achieve the same results with Premiere Pro, After Effects and other editing suites.

 

[jamesmallonuk]

Ok great, look forward to seeing what you produce.

 

[Kholi]

's simply not feasible to use a 640x480 resolution for release on TV or even the big screen. You only can upscale low resolution footage that much. Unless you plan to use it for webscreening in low res only you will be disappointed.

NTSC Standard Definition is 640 x 480... Most HD broadcast is just upscaled Standard Definition...

Several distributed productions have been helmed in standard definition formats and converted quite effectively for theatrical distribution and home vide/digital video discs.

If I have time on hands this weekend I'll make you a clip.

This is exactly the reason why this camera is possibly worth the money for some. Where as you'll have to shoot, edit, do effects, render effects, re-render if something doesn't look right...

The person with this camera just shoots and edits. And if an HD copy is needed, uses InstantHD to great effect for a 720 copy. How much do you cost an hour? How much does your gear go for an hour? Factor all of this in and then compare the true dollar amount (in an equation where time=money) and let us know how it compares to time spent shooting for an end picture to begin with and not spending all the extra time doing the effect in post.

Some people call it lazy, Producers call it efficiency.

The OP's reasons for being interested in this camera are quite valid.

 

[youngindiefilms]

NTSC Standard Definition is 640 x 480... Most HD broadcast is just upscaled Standard Definition...

Not true, Standard NTSC is 720x480

Several distributed productions have been helmed in standard definition formats and converted quite effectively for theatrical distribution and home vide/digital video discs.

Several distributed productions have been shot with broadcast grade professional cameras and equipment, not toy cameras. You have to have a certain quality image at base to be able to upscale it without a significant quality loss.

This is exactly the reason why this camera is possibly worth the money for some. Where as you'll have to shoot, edit, do effects, render effects, re-render if something doesn't look right...

So the guy with the toy camera does not have to shoot and edit the movie? Magic camera ey?
The reality here is it depends what you are shooting on. If you use a camera with some awkward format (say AVCHD) you can't do the effects in realtime and you will spend a lot of time rendering. But even then, you don't have to sit and wait while it's rendering.
I played around with filters and tweaked the look I wanted in 15 minutes. Then I applied all these filters simply by copying to the other clips, take a quick look BEFORE rendering and make minor adjustments if necessary. For all following projects you can save your favourite filters and re-use them so it's very fast to use.
And if you work with say P2HD or the new format of the JVC HM700/100 cameras you can do all or almost all filters in real time, depending on which filters you use, there are many ways and combinations to get this look.

The person with this camera just shoots and edits. And if an HD copy is needed, uses InstantHD to great effect for a 720 copy. How much do you cost an hour? How much does your gear go for an hour? Factor all of this in and then compare the true dollar amount (in an equation where time=money) and let us know how it compares to time spent shooting for an end picture to begin with and not spending all the extra time doing the effect in post.
Some people call it lazy, Producers call it efficiency.
The OP's reasons for being interested in this camera are quite valid.

That's missing the point. The question simply was if it can be done in post production which would be a simple yes. Please point out one professional in the film industry that would use this camera to get the 8mm film look. Why do you think professionals use gear worth thousands of dollars for their films, TV shows and documentaries.
Of course you need to invest more time than shooting that look straight out of the box. But you will have advantages that you can define the look to your own liking and use it on higher resolution material too. And I haven't spent a single $ here. I didn't have to buy a new camera to get this look, I can get it with any camera I have. The filters have been tweaked within 20 minutes and I did something completely different when rendering! How about that for efficiency?

Btw.. you might get me wrong here, I am not against this camera, I am not telling people not to buy it. I bet it's fun to use. I simply state I wouldn't buy that camera just because of the look because I know with a tiny effort I can get this from any camera I already have.
And since the OP posted here he obviously has interest to do this in post if possible, if that wouldn't work for him he would have just bought the thing.

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

I'm going to buy this camera and shoot the next 'Godfather' status movie with it, just to shut you all up.

This camera is not your swiss army knife of production tools, i'll give you that. But if or when you are shooting something for which it gives you what you need, you'd be doing a lot more work not using it then using it. It's a simple what do you want and does it give it to you...

Not sure why this pill hasn't been swallowed yet.

Does it give you 'that' look you're looking for? Yes. Cool... are you cool with the resolution latitude and etc? If yes, continue on... if no, then find something that does. Is this an argument of look or other features?!