People ragging on the 7D/any CMOS cam seem to be FULL OF IT

I don’t know… watching the Avatar trailers this past weekend in 3D (on the big screen) it gave a whole different effect than watching it on a PC (Apple Trailers). It was as if these CG characters were really interacting with the “real” actors. I thought that looked cool. This story was meant for 3D viewing it seems. And from what JC was trying to say about wishing he could show it @ 48fps makes sense because it would give us a more “reality” type of experience (kind of forging the two worlds to come together as one giving a more realistic experience for the viewers IMO).
 
bwwd said:
I do and its scary.But great for video games.(wondering why games arent in 24p and with proper shutter speed)
Click to expand...

Haha maybe filmmakers could learn from games. Gamers do find scenes at 60+ fps very cinematic. Ever played Mass Effect?
 
J. Odoms said:
So listen, I own a 7D, love it/hate it. Mostly because I had my heart set on the Scarlet, but who knows when that/if that is ever going to materialize.
Click to expand...

good rant and I agree. Can't tell if other "real cams" alias as well, but I think the real issue here is that:
a) someone posts a creative result
b) some other one posts technical feedback

The one who posts a movie should consider the fact this is a forum where people go technical. So for nitpicking this is the place to be. The author could also let us know if he wants creative or technical feedback.

For me I watch the movies because they inspire me. They tell me there is no technical excuse, no limit, to create something wonderful.
 
Barry_Green said:
I would never advocate waiting for a mystery product, over getting out there and shooting NOW. The 7D is, in my opinion, the best micro-budget digi-cine rig on the market. Yes it has problems, and people who pretend they're not there are just fooling themselves. But so what? It's $1700. At its price point it's fantastic, and it becomes your responsibility to avoid problematical situations.
Click to expand...

Great post Barry...
 
Ian-T said:
Wasn’t it James Cameron who suggested that resolution is overrated and that he would prefer shooting at a higher frame rate (48fps to deliver at 24p)? Maybe he’s rigtht.
Click to expand...
Well, keep in mind that a higher frame rate is a form of higher resolution too. It's higher temporal resolution, instead of higher spatial resolution. And yeah, it can look fantastic.
 
If one was to shoot 48p on a scarlet is there any way to easily edit and display that at 48fps?
 
(Because it'll never get better, it'll only get worse. So if you're operating on the premise of "garbage in, garbage out" you have to expand that to include the broadcast chain's decimation, so it's more a case of "Beautiful in, mediocre out. Mediocre in, dog poop out." So if you're starting with a pre-aliased mess, then the final outcome would be "pre-aliased mess in, massive disaster out". )

Agreed. My own experience in Broadcast atests this: broadcasting compression amplifies significantly the footage's noise and aliasing artifacts. That's why it's important for broadcast professional equipment to have very goo signal to noise ratio. Sony cameras are traditionally very good with this. One of the main problems for the dvx a model vs the original dvx was poorer signal to noise ratio. Maybe I had a lemon back in 2004, but the dvx a footage after broadcast was significantly poorer than the original dv footage. I believe the compression format of the original footage is really important- if the sensor picture is recorded to a robust compression format, the less problems it will have after broadcast compression. So basically two big issues here- the sensor signal to noise as well as overall aliasing and other artifacs performance and the compression codec
 
Jester2138 said:
Agreed, but Cameron was saying he would still print out at 24p, which means the viewer still only sees 24 frames in that whip pan, not 48. So why would it be any different? It's not like you can do some process on the footage to incorporate two frames worth of detail into one, since the frames are slightly different.
Click to expand...

I think he meant that there'd be one print for theaters with film projectors and another version for ones with digital projectors that would be at 48fps. I'd be interested in seeing 48fps footage though- does it have filmlike motion or is it videoish? I guess 50p in the PAL versions of the 7d and GH1 would be close enough but I am in NTSC land. Has anyone else seen 48fps footage who can offer an opinion?
 
I just think Cameron prefers 3D to be viewed with the more realistic motion of higher frame rates. It makes sense. The idea behind 3D is to give the viewer the sensation of “being there.” 24p is still suspended reality and is perfect for 2D viewing…but in order to get a more “realistic” 3D experience the motion has to match (IMO).
 
Ian-T said:
Nope. He wants 48p mainly due to the increased detail it captures for better keying. He stated (and I’m only paraphrasing) that after working in this 48p environment the end result would be delivered in 24p. 48p is ideal because in goes into 24p evenly (that’s why he said 60p is out of the question). When I think about that statement it all makes sense. I watch 30p vs 24p from the same cameras and 30p has more detail in the image making me think it’s actually sharper. 48p would be even more detailed. Since 48p is twice that of 24p….it will convert to 24p much better than 30p or 60p.

EDIT: Thanks ydgmdlu....here's the part I was thinking about:

Because people have been asking the wrong question for years. They have been so focused on resolution, and counting pixels and lines, that they have forgotten about frame rate. Perceived resolution = pixels x replacement rate. A 2K image at 48 frames per second looks as sharp as a 4K image at 24 frames per second ... with one fundamental difference: the 4K/24 image will judder miserably during a panning shot, and the 2K/48 won't. Higher pixel counts only preserve motion artifacts like strobing with greater fidelity. They don't solve them at all.

Edit 2: Also this..

The 48 fps negative or digital master can be skip-printed to generate a 24 fps 35mm DI negative for making release prints, so 48 is the magic number because it remains compatible with the film-based platform which will still be with us for some time, especially internationally. 30 and 60 fps are out for that reason. Anyway the benefit of 30 is not great enough to be worth the effort, especially when 48 is so easy to achieve. SMPTE tests done about 15 years ago showed that above 48 frames the returns diminish dramatically, and 60 fps is overkill. So 48 is the magic number.Of course, the ideal format is 3-D/2K/48 fps projection. I'd love to have done "Avatar" at 48 frames. But I have to fight these battles one at a time. I'm just happy people are waking up to 3-D.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that if it is shot at 2k/48fps that if converted to 24fps the juddering will remain due to the rule of garbage in garbage out?
 
dantewaters said:
So you are saying that if it is shot at 2k/48fps that if converted to 24fps the juddering will remain due to the rule of garbage in garbage out?
Click to expand...
24fps will always judder, because it's 24fps. If you converted a million fps down to 24fps, it'll judder every bit as much as if you'd just shot 24fps in the first place.
 
dantewaters said:
Wow barry vegas is that main stream??
Click to expand...
Lots of Vegas users out there. I think the number is several hundreds of thousands of users, especially if you factor in the Vegas Movie Studio users... but I think there's six figures of Vegas Pro users out there.

Vegas, Premiere, and EDIUS all have decent-sized installed bases. FCP is dominant in home/small shops, Avid is dominant in large shops, but Vegas/EDIUS/Premiere are all big enough that they're not going anywhere...
 
I dont think that judder in films i so noticeable , not as much as in DSLR and in RED.
I never noticed judder in any fmotion picture before , i only noticed too much blur on close ups during fight scenes.
 
bwwd said:
I dont think that judder in films i so noticeable , not as much as in DSLR and in RED.
I never noticed judder in any fmotion picture before , i only noticed too much blur on close ups during fight scenes.
Click to expand...
Judder is every bit as noticeable in film as it is in the DSLRs or Red. Every bit, and sometimes it's overwhelming (like the opening credit sequence to "Sahara" for example).

Typically, in film, you have the footage being shot by someone who knows how to control the judder, so you don't notice it as much. But it's absolutely there every bit as much as in the DSLRs or Red or DVX or HVX or other 24p camera.
 
Try The Umbrellas of Cherbourg. It is said that Jacques Demy selected the colors himself. Apparently, he thought he had a great taste. With highly saturated red/green color combinations and with wallpaper having vertical stripes you can see heavy strobing with every panning. DOF is pretty long for interior shots, so whenever they had a character in focus, wallpaper would also be in focus. Horrible if you ask me. Despite such cinematography and a lame plot, the film won numerous awards.
 
With all respect Barry but i dont believe that,also i tested that in DSLR strobing is more noticeable when panning left-right than up-down(why i dont know).
I have 20p canon and 7D in 24p strobes almost as much as in 20p.I also have camcorder with 25P and tested 25p in 7D which strobes more.
Guess i would have to make video to have some proof OR maybe i made some mistake somewhere, we will see.
I also talking about judder in static shots which i never saw in movies shot on film.But saw on 7D stuff and RED stuff.
It would be good if i am wrong because it would mean that you just have to work harder to get rid of stuttery footage.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, I have not read the this entire thread, but one thing that you said that stands out to me is that the 7D's footage has judder (?) in static shots. If if does then your doing something wrong, either lighting, shutter speed, power or a combination of all.

Besides if you don't like the 7D's 24P then shoot 30P.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top