looking to upgrade DVX picture...

GND

GND

Well-known member
hi, I'm looking to buy something that would make my DVX films look a tad more well..I hate to use the term thats so often used: "film-like".
but without a 35mm adapter....

Rather just something to help soften the video quality or reduce noise or something so the picture looks better when blown-up and played on a big screen...

An anamorphic adaptor? A promist filter of some sort? -- but I wouldn't want things softened so much that everything looks like a dream sequence.

And I know I sound like I should research more...but thats why I'm starting here and asking this...then I'll research things you guys recommend and see whats best for me.

thanks.

edit: forgot to mention my budget is about 1000 dollars. And the reason I say no 35mm adaptor is because I'd like something I just put on and forget about for now.
 
How about something like magic bullet? Then at least all your footy is still fresh and clean? Unless you already using it...
Otherwise a mattebox (will give you street cred when the rival video gang starts encrotching on your territory!) with a nice set of filters.
good luck
 
GND said:
I'd like something I just put on and forget about for now.
Click to expand...
There is no auto "film-like" solution, you're living in a dream world.

I would suggest you spend that $1000 on a few books on how to light for cinema, a few DVD rentals from your video store (or library--free) and sit down to dedicate some time to learning the craft of cinematography, then budget $500/ea for two short films to feed your crew and rent some lights and put yourself to work.

No amount of money is going to buy you Roger Deakins in a box, no matter what their advertisement says.
 
John Kary said:
I would suggest you spend that $1000 on a few books on how to light for cinema
Click to expand...


Whoaaaaa those are some expensive books. There are always the Lighting and Cinematography forums! :)

But really, books are an invaluable source of information, also the "Hollywood Camerawork" DVD's are absolutely filled to the brim with useful tips and techniques to make professional looking shots, which will remind people of professional movies. Camera placing and movement is cr00sh.

oh P.S. - Scene files are important too, HaroonGhauree posted this in another thread, and I think it's quite accurate

My Desired CONSTANTS , Pure VARIABLES and Restricted VARIABLES (Do correct me if I'm wrong here):

DETAIL = -7
V. DETAIL = -7
DETAIL CORING = -7
CHROMA LEVEL = -7 .. 0 .. +7
CHROMA PHASE = -7 .. 0 .. +7
COLOR TEMP. = -7 .. 0 .. +7
MASTER PED. = -7
A. IRIS = -2/-3
GAMMA = CineLike
KNEE = ? (
MATRIX = CineLike/CineLike-V/CineLike-D
SKIN DTL. = OFF
V. DTL. FREQUENCY = THIN
MODE = PROGRESSIVE (24P/25P)

CAMERA SETUP = 0% (PADESTAL SETTING FOUND IN CAMERA SETUP MENU)
 
yes, some expensive books. And how do you know I haven't done that already? which I have. And the 2 years of fine arts in college helps with composition and such aswell...


Thanks for the help, but I don't mean how to light or make a shot look better, just something to get the best looking resolution or least amount of noise(even when lit correctly) or hard edges or whatever, to make DVX footage look better on the big screen.

I'll try putting all detail settings to -7 like ffaf07 wrote...I always just had detail level at -7 with the others at -2.

the mattebox is what I was origianlly thinking...
 
I always used to shoot with detail at -7 but while playing around one day, found that -2/0 look much better to me.

A mattebox with some quality glass would be very nice. The anamorphic adapter would give you true 16:9 resolution, but with it's own problems.

Do you have a good CRT monitor for your footage so you know you are getting all you can out of it in the first place? I would spend some money on that, Without it you are flying blind.

But above all else I would dump $1k into lighting any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.
 
well, seems mattebox it is. Thanks, I'l look into it.

And sadly no. I don't have a good monitor...because I've spent all the money I could on lights and sound equipment (not to mention the dvx itself).
However, I will look into that aswell...and possibly just buy a monitor and save the mattebox or whatever for later...
 
A mattebox isn't going to get you a film-look, either. While you can have added control over your in-camera image, it's not going to be the silver bullet you think it is. If you're really concerned about image-clarity, put as few pieces of glass between your subject and your camera as possible. Anything in front of your lens should be as good of quality as you can put on it--not some cheap $20 filter.

Controlling exposure, is, however one of the best ways to keep your image looking its best. If you can keep a proper exposure, your images won't necessarily look film-like--they will just not look amateur-ish.

Shoot at the long end of the focal length for shallower depth of field.
Hire a REAL location sound mixer.
Learn some great ways to do post-production workflow (DV Rebel's Guide gives great examples.)

If you seriously want to soften the image without going all -7 Detail, and do it on a budget, shoot through a thin net or screen. If you have a screen on one of your windows, shoot an outside shot through it at long focal length, then switch to the side without the screen. Notice how more diffuse and "soft" the image looks, yet still maintains resolution and sharpness of the camera. You will loose some light depending on how tightly-woven the screen is. Head to your hardware store and get something small that can mount in front of your lens... experiment.
 
hey thanks for all the responses, and special thanks to you John Kary for that last post. I will indeed try out the screen thing + possibly buying something from the hardware store as you said.

Just a question regarding exposure since you mentioned it... I've read on here that an open iris or setting of around 2.8 maximum is best for shallow DOF and such. Is that correct? ...well, what I'm asking is if I have a location, and lit it but I need to get the iris around 5.something, is that okay or should I try to diffuse light more or take light away so I can widen the iris to the 2.8 or less(open) setting?
 
GND said:
Just a question regarding exposure since you mentioned it... I've read on here that an open iris or setting of around 2.8 maximum is best for shallow DOF and such. Is that correct? ...well, what I'm asking is if I have a location, and lit it but I need to get the iris around 5.something, is that okay or should I try to diffuse light more or take light away so I can widen the iris to the 2.8 or less(open) setting?
Click to expand...
If you were at 5.6 and needed to get to 2.8, it would be faster to slap in an ND .6 to cut some light in front of the lens instead of unstriking/moving your lights. It depends on your shot what f-stop you want to work at... a shot with a lot of moving camera you will want to stop down more so your depth of field is larger, that way your focus-puller has a larger margin of error. If you're locked off on sticks, you can work more towards the wide-open and still hit your focus marks.
 
In my experience with the DVX, when you're really wide on the zoom, the iris level doesn't really matter with regards to depth of field - an open iris will give you just the same image as a smaller one, since the video depth of field is so deep anyway. It'll only matter on the longer end of the zoom, but not much then again. I can still get some nice shallow depth of field at Z99 on my DVX, regardless of the fstop.

As for matte boxes, my current view is that they won't really help your camera image much, but it'll definitely help your image. I'm under the impression that as long as your camera isn't flaring, it won't make a difference if you shoot with or without a matte box, but i may be wrong - haven't any experience with them.
 
-If you want to appear (you yourself) more 'filmMAKER-like' a mattebox might help you impress clients.

-If you want your VIDEO image to look more like what you get when filming on 16mm or 35mm FILM, a 1000$ Mattebox is not gonna help you much. Being able to control glare and using filters might be cool, but they don't really make the resulting image more 'film-like'.
Yes ND's might be handy to open the iris further for a Shallower DOF when there is to much light, but you don't need to buy a whole Mattebox if a couple of ND filters is what you want.

You could try tweaking your scene-files some more... Do a 100 different tweaks and see if you get a look more tailored to your needs. Cool graded video can help make your video FEEL a little more 'film-like'. There is a thread floating around this board where people posted some of their Scene-files try some of those aswell. Otherwise the Natress, Magic Bullet route is another option.

Myself (aside from getting a 35mm adapter) I'd get more light(s) for that 1000$. Lighting can really make your video feel more cinematic when done right, so the more versatile your lighting-kit is, the better.

Just my two cents
 
Thanks for the input guys.

As for lights, what I have already is: 8 home depot trouble lights(75-100 watt...I use mostly for pin-eye light or lighting random dark corners and things in backgrounds), two 1000 watt home depot worklights and four 250 watt worklights....then I've got two 300w and two 150w tungsten with the stands.

I'm thinking I should buy a nice light and then an ND filter.

Thanks again for all the responses.


edit: and yes, that seems like a lot of home depot lights...most I already (well, my parents) had in my garage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top