SCENE FILE X-CHANGE test site is up...

The idea has been tossed around for about five years now, since the original DVX came out. Nobody's showed much interest in it yet, so while I don't want to be party to killing a good idea, I can't in good conscience tell you to spend a thousand bucks on it either.

I spent a lot of time trying to match a dozen of the Magic Bullet Movie Looks scene files on the DVX DVD. Has anyone ever talked about those scene files? Very few. I put two dozen scene files on The HVX CD, and months and months go by without anyone even mentioning them.

In short, we try to get 'em out there but I really don't know that the end users seem to care all that much. :/
 
I think the fact of having a web and an interfase for the user to see and share will probably change the response you´ve been having to your effort on this. Looks great I´ll be checking it constantly.
 
I wouldn't spend a grand on it. I say do it the way you were doing before. Dont' spend a grand to automate it.
 
my biggest fear with the whole situation:

i myself, (like many other of the more seasoned shooters) would prefer to shoot clean and do any stylizing in post.

so i wonder, is there a big need for this in the first place?
 
I don't know there is a huge "need" for it, but it's nice to have different scene files available.
Btw, use that grand towards a 35mm adapter.
 
already got a brevis, and a handful of lenses ; ) and chroma setup, and steadicams, and a jib, and, and, and...

just wanted to give something back to the community...
 
since it's a relatively limited number of variables, couldn't you just exchange numbers instead of files? I mean, it would be cool to be able to work with the whole scene file but for many users it might be easier to hand-enter them in the cam than go through the trouble of downloading a file and importing it. This could make it super easy to automate, since for uploading you'd just be using forms. Plus, you could eliminate some of the variables, like frame rate, that are relatively unimportant to color.

Ideally each user would create their own page with favorite settings, and you would just have to moderate the main page, with categories like 'most popular' and 'new' (until someone coded that, too).

If you need some server resources, PM me and we can host some of this on my underwhelmed server. Or I can help code, starting with the title tag. ;)
 
ok, how about this? instead of up/downloading actual files (as i think that a general lack of knowledge as to how to do that via sd card might be a problem) we just provide a database/form driven matrix list of settings and an uploaded sample graphic for each of the various scene files?
 
Anyone game to go through and take a screenshot of every available variation....then you just have an interactive site where you can change all the variables seperately (like its the camera) and see what happens to the image. Have maybe 3 example images........I know that's alot of still shots......

3x how ever many variables......

Would be of much use to new users and old users alike.

Tom
 
Excuse me if i sound lame-ish, but isn't possible [and better] to tweak most of these in post?

Except for the CineGamma, I think, most of the other image-tweaking features on the HVX can be imitated later in the CC apps\plugins.

A DP, that I worked with, advised on this - putting all to 0 and finishing everything in CC.

Isn't it better this way, please explain?
 
What if you're not going through post? What if you're shooting news, direct-to-air? What if someone else is going to be handling post, and you have no idea what their skill level is or what they'll do to the footage (i.e., you're hired as DP, but someone else is going to be finishing)? Yet your name is going on the project, even though they may be incompetent and destroy the look of the footage through incompetent post grading?

Some people like to create their look in post. Others like to create the look in-camera. If you can get the look in-camera, that has many notable benefits, including a) no need to waste a lot of time in post trying to recreate a look you could get in-camera, and b) pushing footage always involves uncompressing and recompressing; doing it in-camera is cleaner.

To each his/her own, but there are valid reasons to do it each way.
 
I see now...

I guess this is the best reason, at least for my purposes:

Barry_Green said:
b) pushing footage always involves uncompressing and recompressing; doing it in-camera is cleaner.
Click to expand...

I'll take a look at this scene-file site... :).

So, as it turns out, digital technology changes the very definition of cinematography and the whole process of creating vision.

Hmm...

Let the war between DPs and CC-rs begin.... :kali:
 
Just dipping back into the main topic of the thread, I have a humble suggestion:

Each 'profile' as published has the numeric data as represented by the Xs, and all we need are two more bits:

- One screen capture of a universally accepted HVX setup - the basic out of box position 1 look we can all experience, read its entrails and recreate at home ('the default')

- One screen capture of the same shot using the numeric data provided ('the look')

A simple JavaScript displays 'the look' by default and preloads 'the default' and displays it on mouseOver.

That way, we can all instantly appreciate what the settings are going to do to our image, based on our experience of the basic settings.

In that way, settings defined for specialist cases such as Day for Nght, low key, monochrome, etc will not be disadvantaged by an inappropriate test scene, will immediately 'sell' by the final look, and the magic truly appreciated by quick and easy comparison with the 'before'.

A link to a paypal tip-jar with the suggested tip being the cost of the provider's favourite tipple would perhaps lubricate the system somewhat. If I'd bought a JVC HD100, I'd owe Nate Weaver a microbrewery by now.


Barry_Green said:
To each his/her own, but there are valid reasons to do it each way.
Click to expand...

Without wishing to flash my kimono too wide, I can speak as an editor on this front: please don't blow the highlights, don't sink the shadows, don't bugger up the white balance, and keep settings CONSISTENT in a scene. OTOH, I sometimes shoot what I edit and therefore eat from my own dog bowl. Therefore, I can appreciate that the DoP exerts tremendous skill in shooting flat, but rendering the lighting such that, when the grader works on it, tones fall into the look agreed at the outset.

Perhaps what I'm saying is 'don't just shoot flat - but don't try to do post production grading in-camera - exposure and setup for tonality, colour for fidelity. Let the shooting and the post work together for the look, and test, test, test.'

But as an HVX newbie I am totally guilty of doing the wrong thing, I shoot everything with P6/progressive because it looks like 16mm to me.
 
I suggest always to post 2 pictures: the one of the scene setting and a factory one, to let the people quickly see the differency.




.
 
as im planning it now, the person uploading their setting would be responsible for uploading their "before and after" pics. outside of that, i may have a whole new career of downloading, installing, shooting, capturing, exporting and posting pictures.

again, only time will tell.

sorry there hasnt been a new version posted. been out of town and plan to progress it later this week.
 
Cool idea... the frame rate hack scene files could have a life here too, although they may require an animated gif or short mov clip to show its effect.
 
Scene files that make the HVX match various other camera looks, i.e. a scene file for a Canon XL-1, XL -2, Sony PD150, etc... , would be fantastic. That way people can use those files when they are involved in multi-cam shoots with other cameras.
 
If there's interest, we could program either an exe or a web app that can take data entered in fields and create a scene file from that data, so you wouldn't have to deal with the files, just the numbers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top