Shooting for the Web with DVX....

B

bfsound

Well-known member
Im filming some interview type stuff tonight with our 2 DVX100's and probably another camera. Whats best for web? just shoot straight, 4:3 60i (going to be in lower light) otherwise i can do 30P. Log it normally and im probably going to have to send the footage else where for editing so i will have to figure how to do that without making the footage look bad.

Thanks
 
30p would be a good format to shoot in for the web (so would 24p). I'd probably choose 30p in this case as you don't seem to know the post workflow yet.

Progressive footage generally scales & compresses better for the web than interlaced.

- Mikko
 
I personally like the looks of 24p, even on the web. but if its anything with action or quick movement 30 p or 60i. I would do 30p if i were you. Its not hard to work with and looks good.
 
ryvac said:
for the web, 30p will give a cleaner look then 24p.
if you want a filmik look go for 24p.
but if it's an interview I would go with 30p.
I shot this video just for youtube so I shot it 30p. has a nice clean look
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yD4NdtSkVFo
Click to expand...

ryvac-

thanks for sharing it was a nice clean look.

i thought the 16x9 combined w/30p looked great.

care to share your set-up?

approx how far away from the background was the subject?

lighting? sound?

details are helpful.

thanks in advance for any info u care to share.

be well

rob
smalltalk productions
 
I have to disagree with Mikko; I don't see any advantages for the Web with 30p -- especially if what you prefer is the look of 24p. On the Web, you're not constrained by a 60i (or 29.97) stream at all and can go straight 23.976, even giving you a smaller file or room for a higher bitrate within the same size file. There are really no issues.

I don't see 30p as "cleaner" at all as long you encode properly.

(Check out any commercial movie trailer, for example. :) )
 
If I was doing the whole process myself, I'd shoot 24p for web in a lot of situations too (depending on the look I wanted for the specific project).
Both 24p or 30p can look great on the web and are good options.

But as - in this case - the footage is possibly being sent out to an (as of yet unknown) off-site post workflow; 30p gives you a little higher compatibility and therefore less possibility for a mistake in conforming to edit.

Either 30p and 24p can also be cleanly transcoded to 15p or 12p (respectively) for web encoding at lower bitrates if desired.

- Mikko
 
Of course, there may be circumstances at play (and being wary of someone else's savvy with 24p is a good one), but just a general matter -- I don't see 30p as generally, technically"better" for the Web. (Though that does tend to be advice I see a lot of.)

First and foremost, as you point out, should be your aesthetic concerns. :)
 
Ok so i shot 4:3 30P and the footage looks great, now i have to figure what im going to send to the person who is going to cut this and some other footage together for a short promo video. He told our manager to just get him a .mov file. Should i just export him a quicktime movie and will that work for him to then edit with or will i loose quality... Also is there a way i can get him a multiclip if he is using FCP?

Thanks
 
bfsound said:
Ok so i shot 4:3 30P and the footage looks great, now i have to figure what im going to send to the person who is going to cut this and some other footage together for a short promo video. He told our manager to just get him a .mov file. Should i just export him a quicktime movie and will that work for him to then edit with or will i loose quality... Also is there a way i can get him a multiclip if he is using FCP?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Just log and capture the footage using FCP. That will give you Quicktime .mov files with no need to do anyo exporting or conversion. Drop those files to a portable hard drive and get them to th editor.
 
C2V said:
Just log and capture the footage using FCP. That will give you Quicktime .mov files with no need to do anyo exporting or conversion. Drop those files to a portable hard drive and get them to th editor.
Click to expand...

Ageed, they'll be located in your scratch folder.

Also, wish I saw this thread sooner. As I would have said - shoot in squeeze mode for 16:9, especially for web.
 
i doubt they shot 16:9 so wont that have looked weird? And i dont think they would be able to convert 4:3 to 16:9 or vis-versa?

Also what i did since i used multiple angles and there were lots of garbage takes, i just compiled everything i want to send to him in a new sequence and exported that 1 sequence as a .mov, so should that work then...
 
bfsound said:
Also what i did since i used multiple angles and there were lots of garbage takes, i just compiled everything i want to send to him in a new sequence and exported that 1 sequence as a .mov, so should that work then...
Click to expand...

So, you compiled everything into a single movie file? I hope you left plenty of heads and tails on each shot, since the editor now does not have access to the original files from the tape. That can make restoring the project later much more difficult. Not sure why you didn't just log each of the good takes and send individual clips from there.

If the other editor is using FCP, why not just send the FCP project file as well? Then, any work you do lining up multiple camera angles can be picked up right where you left off.

Also, exactly how did you export a .mov file? Watch the settings you use there, as you don't want to end up re-compressing the video. If that happens, the editor is going to get some less than appealing video quality.
 
I see your point C2V, but basically i got 1 sequence about 5 min long out of 1 hour of good takes and the stuff i took were little bits around 30 sec long so for me it would have been a pain to watch and log little tiny clips, although i should probably just do that and give them the capture scratch files, i could just do batch capture which still would have cost me less time then i spent cutting it up and logging the whole garbage footage, about how i exported i just clicked export, quicktime movie (not quicktime conversion or compressor) and used current settings, include a/v, make self contained.

1 thing though i know when you log FC makes quicktime movie clips for each clip you log, but when you export a quicktime movie without using quicktime conversion it makes a .mov but if you get info its FCP movie, still plays in quicktime, whats the difference???

I will be talking to the editor guy today ill probably just re-capture the stuff i only want to send to him, will 2 sec handles and send him those couple little takes.

Thanks guys
 
bfsound said:
I see your point C2V, but basically i got 1 sequence about 5 min long out of 1 hour of good takes and the stuff i took were little bits around 30 sec long so for me it would have been a pain to watch and log little tiny clips
Click to expand...

Here's where a shot log would be invaluable. That's just general production advice.
 
Noel Evans said:
Yes, if they shot 4:3 as well. My point was why shoot 4:3 when the sqeeze mode is totally workable on the DVX.
Click to expand...

Because sometimes 4:3 makes more sense that 16:9. It's about using the aspect ratio that works best for the individual production.

I'll admit, I rarely shoot 4:3 anymore, but that's really due to the fact that I have shifted the production that I do to more projects that require 16:9.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top