C100: Prores 422 for documentary work?

tobyhoffman

tobyhoffman

Active member
Hi, I'm wondering whether I should continue to use the Ninja 2 for a prores output when shooting run n gun type documentary. At first I thought I noticed a big difference in image quality but unless it's graded I don't see the big point really? On the renovation tv show I worked on last week the DMT said that I was recording at a higher codec than I really needed to... Any suggestions?
 
I understand, but that was for broadcast. If I'm more often than not shooting content that's to post on the web or for clients is it really necessary?
 
If you don't need it don't use it. Most of the content I shoot is going to web or internal use anyway. When I worked as an editor I saw some really crappy codecs being shot for broadcast... If you are OK with avchd the only drawback that I can see is the possibility that you will need to transcode to Prores, etc. at some point instead of having ready to go files... I assume your gig went well?
 
I shoot occasionnaly for a national Broadcaster here in Canada and I always deliver AVCHD...they never complained! :)
 
8 bit gives 16.8 million colors. It is the depth of every beautiful picture on the Internet. 10-bit and above is useful when you are pushing the image in post, specifically to avoid banding. If you're not pushing your image hard in post, and if no one is seeing banding, then I guess you don't need 10 bit.
 
You can probably go AVCHD or ProRes LT.

Check this out:

AVCHD better than Prores?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E92jDQpou4Q

Conclusion:
- ProRes HQ 422 is better than AVCHD, especially movement, grading, etc, but you pay for it with massive file sizes
- ProRes 422 is not much better than AVCHD unless you want to grade heavily
- ProRes LT could be used to hit "broadcast quality" but without the massive file overhead, especially if you are only going to do light colour correction
- AVCHD is pretty good!
 
In my experience, Prores is only better than the AVCHD on the C100 if you are shooting content that "breaks" the AVCHD codec, wide shots with tons of moving detail like foliage or shots that have a ton of fast camera pans and movement. I also know that Prores is superior for green screen work, which I do a lot of. It all boils down to what your clients want though. My broadcast clients want Prores so I shoot Prores HQ for them. For corporate gigs where we are editing the footage, AVCHD works fine. It depends on your situation.
 
I used to record ProRes using Ninja 2 with my older Sony HDV camera, and there was a noticeable improvement in detail when I compared the HDV tape recording to the ProRes clip - big difference, meaning HDV was a really weak codec (MPEG-2 Long GOP). However, I just shot an event with a Sony X70 XDCAM camera in AVCHD mode and simultaneously recorded ProRes. Comparing the two on the NLE timeline, I was surprised to not be able to see a quality difference when pixel peeping! This same camera can also record the XAVC 10-bit 4:2:2 codec at 50Mbps which would be even better of course (didn't use it for the all day event, not enough SD cards).

Thanks

Jeff
 
The AVCHD codec in the C100 is pretty impressive I think. I can rarely see a difference between it and the Prores HQ unless it is the above situations I mentioned. Light for the camera, use a decent lens and the C100 sings.
 
Are you shooting this for TV? If so, a spec sheet should have been sent to you. Often the bookers and field producers don't know what the post peeps want, which is dictated by the network who contracted them. When shooting for TV I often have to bypass the non-techies and email the editors as to what they want.

Usually for TV they demand a 4:2:2 camera. I am often successful in talking them into a C100 with an on board recorder to go 4:2:2 but sometimes the bookers don't get it or have the authority to authorize anything not on their sheet. Looking back, I should have bought a C300 so I can just avoid those conversations.

We can not see the difference with the naked eye but I have been lectured quite a few times that the reason they don't want AVCHD for TV is that they usually do intensive grading and our C100's codec falls short, that they can't maximize the beautifulness of the image. So when I get an email or call for a TV show I can predict how their conversation will go and when they start to talk about rates, I am already adding a Ninja in. It's a PITA to do doc shooting with one because there's no loupe for it, creates a CSS Situation (Can't See S**t), so I end up using my DP4 as the EVF.

I have done a few This Old House take offs including for HGTV and I would not want to do it with a camera using still lenses. It screams for a shoulder balanced ENG with a very wide angle servo zoom, especially if it's a construction site. Their whole world tends to be in focus so why have shallow DoF gear? Nothing artsy about rehab.

Good luck,

Ned
 
Last edited:
nedcam said:
Are you shooting this for TV? If so, a spec sheet should have been sent to you. Often the bookers and field producers don't know what the post peeps want, which is dictated by the network who contracted them. When shooting for TV I often have to bypass the non-techies and email the editors as to what they want.

Usually for TV they demand a 4:2:2 camera. I am often successful in talking them into a C100 with an on board recorder to go 4:2:2 but sometimes the bookers don't get it or have the authority to authorize anything not on their sheet. Looking back, I should have bought a C300 so I can just avoid those conversations.

We can not see the difference with the naked eye but I have been lectured quite a few times that the reason they don't want AVCHD for TV is that they usually do intensive grading and our C100's codec falls short, that they can't maximize the beautifulness of the image. So when I get an email or call for a TV show I can predict how their conversation will go and when they start to talk about rates, I am already adding a Ninja in. It's a PITA to do doc shooting with one because there's no loupe for it, creates a CSS Situation (Can't See S**t), so I end up using my DP4 as the EVF.

I have done a few This Old House take offs including for HGTV and I would not want to do it with a camera using still lenses. It screams for a shoulder balanced ENG with a very wide angle servo zoom, especially if it's a construction site. Their whole world tends to be in focus so why have shallow DoF gear? Nothing artsy about rehab.

Good luck,

Ned
Click to expand...

Hey Ned,

Probably the most relevant advice - thanks. As my first tv gig I thought it was best to take my Ninja 2 and record Prores HQ. After talking to the editor, he suggested that it was perhaps a bit too high for broadcast in file size although dropping down to LT or plain 422 would have sufficed. I doubt they would have liked the AVCHD to be honest so was the best option to use as a recorder/monitor. I have an AC7 I could have used but I think it would have added on that extra real estate/weight on my shoulder.

Thanks again,
Toby
 
nedcam said:
Are you shooting this for TV? If so, a spec sheet should have been sent to you. Often the bookers and field producers don't know what the post peeps want, which is dictated by the network who contracted them. When shooting for TV I often have to bypass the non-techies and email the editors as to what they want.

Usually for TV they demand a 4:2:2 camera. I am often successful in talking them into a C100 with an on board recorder to go 4:2:2 but sometimes the bookers don't get it or have the authority to authorize anything not on their sheet. Looking back, I should have bought a C300 so I can just avoid those conversations.

We can not see the difference with the naked eye but I have been lectured quite a few times that the reason they don't want AVCHD for TV is that they usually do intensive grading and our C100's codec falls short, that they can't maximize the beautifulness of the image. So when I get an email or call for a TV show I can predict how their conversation will go and when they start to talk about rates, I am already adding a Ninja in. It's a PITA to do doc shooting with one because there's no loupe for it, creates a CSS Situation (Can't See S**t), so I end up using my DP4 as the EVF.

I have done a few This Old House take offs including for HGTV and I would not want to do it with a camera using still lenses. It screams for a shoulder balanced ENG with a very wide angle servo zoom, especially if it's a construction site. Their whole world tends to be in focus so why have shallow DoF gear? Nothing artsy about rehab.

Good luck,

Ned
Click to expand...

I was a digitzer for a lot of shows on HGTV/DIY Network last year and remember thinking to myself - man I can only imagine how much of a pain in the ass it'd be to shoot this with a C series camera as opposed to the Sony PMW's they used.
 
Yes Karl, I can't stand shooting fast moving gigs without a servo lens. Sometimes these gigs, which border on a reality show's speed, has two cameras: One of the host or hero, the other wide or action. So if I am solo I have to go wide/tight/repeat constantly so the editor has all angles necessary and with a still lens, it sucks.

If you have the spec sheet from HGTV it would be of interest if you could post it. Often these shows allow only a certain amount of continuous seconds of non-HD, non 4:2:2 footage because they don't want viewers leaving their channel. They usually say no 4:2:0 but the young bookers don't know that, they were told to find a "shooter in Perth for less than $X".

I once had a Sunday morning shoot for National Geographic Britain through a London prod co and on late Saturday afternoon the rental XDCam showed up: NO LENS! So I could not find a lens on Saturday from 6-11PM and I had to find a PAL camera on Saturday night for the next day's shoot. The only thing I could get by midnight was a Sony Z7U and I thought I was a hero for doing that.

Wow! Did the complaints come in! They were so pissed I shot in HDV yet it was not my fault that I could not find a lens in 6 hours on a Saturday night. One take away is that the freelancers will get the blame before they fire a staffer who messed up. So...they told me that Nat Geo has a way to scientifically analyze the source materials' specs and they (the prod co) have a contract that they can only have so many seconds of off-spec media, they are under contract as such, and much of that off-spec is used by amateur clips. This was Locked Up Abroad (which I gave the title) so there were amateur clips being used and they were upset that the main interviews were HDV. They did look gorgeous but as stated above, non 4:2:2 breaks down during intense grading (so I've been told) and they were worried about the contract. Not my fault but the staffer(s) in charge of sending the rental gear shifted blame on me somehow, or at least I got the brunt of the blitz.

BTW, this was the first episode and they told me the working title was: Banged Up Abroad. I asked them if they had any American friends and they said yes, so I told them to ask these Americans what "Banged" meant in the U.S. As you see, they changed the title!
 
I couldn't agree more Ned, an S35 camera is generally not the right kind of tool for those kinds of shoots. Being the hired help generally also makes you the go to for blame for anything, that's just the way it is.
 
Yes, I just remembered, like PTSD:

I back pedal a lot on that type of shoot, and on a construction site, if I didn't have a soundman guiding me and making sure I didn't trip backwards, I'd be screwed. Fortunately they usually want two radio mics at least, so I have a soundman with me.

I'm am steering away from TV or perhaps I don't get the kind of calls anymore, because I am not in the C300/FS7 In crowd. Also, they want to pay me less than I was making in 1991. Presently I'm nauseous: I just placed an ad on CL a few days ago looking for a second angle C100 owner/DP and you can't believe how cheap people are offering to go out, and what's worse: They're very talented! One guy said he'd bring his Red for free. Ugh! Get me out of this biz!!!!!

But back to the thread, I am marketing to the kind of client base that is tickled pink with the C100 using its native codec. This way I don't have to drop $14-$16K on 4K gear. I am also preparing for retirement so I am spending $1K to get certified in legal deps this weekend, which I figure I can do using a walker a couple of time a month for spare change. In fact, the big guru of deps trained me for free two days last week and he's 75 years old! So since the TV crowd wants not just 4:2:2 but they now want 4K so they can punch in during post (Real Reason: The cheap SOBs don't have to hire multiple cameramen or pay for extra cameras). Was watching Johhny Weir's (I shot a couple of episodes of his reality show on EX3) 100 Days To Rio at a sports bar with no audio, and I studied how they would punch in thanks to 4K, so I think a TV content provider would now be foolish for not future proofing, plus making punch in possibles. So 5 years from now, using Toby's C100 4:2:0 footage of the rehab gig for a re-edit will be like us using some 4x3 legacy beta cam footage now?

I figure I best avoid TV gigs from now on. Also, the LA shows want what amounts to a 11 hour day (no off time for lunch) and they pay only regular time rather than time and a half, so forget it. Also, there's only so much deli sandwiches I can eat.

Dan, I suppose you're IA? In Chicago only IA shooters are allowed to do a BTS on a union set. I once got castigated for eating off a crafts table where Paul Newman, Tom Hanks and Jude Law were grazing. I had no idea there were 2 tables: Serfs and Royalty. I've done a few BTS of big features over the years because no one thought to ask if I was IA. Also, I wear my Chicago PD Press Pass on a lanyard and security people are mesmerized by lanyards. Always got the feeling I was unwelcome. But I digress...

BTW Dan, I was not able to open those Abel files for the scene file. Do you remember what the name of that profile is? If so, I may be able (no pun intended) to find it.

See ya,

Ned
 
I thought you said you were mostly a producer and got out of the freelancer/crew game? Maybe I'm thinking of someone else?

Anyway I don't know about reality specifically but S35 cams seem popular for running around/b-roll stuff, so people must be able to do these kinds of shoots with still lenses. Maybe it's all about the dual pixel AF like Eric Coughlin is always saying. I agree with you that those types of shoots are much better served with a smaller sensor/proper zoom lens (I like the EX1), but clients want what they want and what's popular at the time is what's popular at the time. Unless you're producing the project and can make those decisions, can't fight the machine.
 
Oh yes I "can" do it with still lenses, it's just a pure PITA when there's no 2nd cameraman because I then have to do Wide/Tight constantly alone, especially on a rehab type show I'd have to ask them to "back the screw out" so I can do it again with a close up of the drilling, etc. I have to remember all the close up repeats so it's important to not have to swap lenses. If I was to make a decision to keep shooting heavy for another couple of years, I would get the new Canon 18-80 servo zoom for $6K and then my work would be as easy and good looking as the Old Days. And these types of shoots aren't artsy, "let's slow it down to do it right". They are practically reality show speed with a few beauty shots, especially the "after shots".

One thing that hurts me is I never had the desire to get into drones and with construction type shoots (homes) a drone is necessary. (Or, perhaps I don't want to get one, learn it and then throw it in for peanuts? I have buddies I can call for drones.)

But you're right, they want shallow DoF models even if we aren't utilizing soft backgrounds, but if the editors knew a 4:2:0 camera was booked they would probably want to correct and change that, from what I've experienced. That's why most shows have a list of "approved" models, codecs and bitrates. I have talked them (the editors) into accepting a Ninja, but the bookers, who are one smidge above an intern, they don't know what a Ninja is.

And yes, I am producing much more. In no way could I afford my lifestyle on a shooter's revenues nowadays. I'm in a "retirement glidepath" now at 63 so I am trying to avoid buying more gear and spending more time smelling the roses. In fact, I write this to you from my deck. I am concentrating on just doing corporate work, for 4 industries, because I want to maximize my income and I found it best to offer the whole enchilada rather than going to do "just" camera. I find TV and docs now too cheap. I'm working about half the amount of shoot days I did in my prime but by producing I'm making almost as much dough. However, I would not want to use an inflation calculator because us old guys made a LOT more money when there were only 20 or 30 DPs with gear in town!

Later,

ned
 
Oh ok. My concerns with using S35 for these shoots is trying to focus quickly on things. Stlll not great at that with the large sensors. Especially since critical focusing doesn't work with non-parfocal lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top