Luckily I dont shoot houses for a living...... Many famous Music Video directors using Canon Dslrs. Personally this thread can go on forever, the final truth is this.... NO it's not that serious, if it were none of the well known Directors would use Canons anymore, but they still continue to do so
So actually, how bad is aliasing really?
- Thread starter Stab
- Start date
- Status
Luckily I dont shoot houses for a living...... Many famous Music Video directors using Canon Dslrs. Personally this thread can go on forever, the final truth is this.... NO it's not that serious, if it were none of the well known Directors would use Canons anymore, but they still continue to do so
wgzn
Veteran
well! thats all the justification i need :thumbsup:
the problem im having with this discussion is that some people are trying to state their opinion as fact.
the FACT is that it can occur in some scenarios.
another FACT is that people will clearly argue their OPINIONS about its significance or severity and workarounds all day.
the sucky part about that is that everyone involved will have a different level of experience, skill and expectation. so you have to ask yourself how each persons argument may or may not apply to the kind of work that YOU do.
to be dead honest, its not something id probably have ever noticed. because when i look at video personally, i tend to look more at the overall composition and narrative than all the twiddly bits. but having a number of detail-obsessed clients, im always on the lookout for things that might give folks reason to complain.
the best advice is to read all you can, look at the examples people will post, rent or borrow a unit and see how it works for you and what you shoot.
Last edited:
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
Yes they alias, sometimes badly.
The fact that some "music video directors" use them doesn't minimize the fact that the video recording option on these cameras is still a compromise and the way they resolve a 1080p image is to throw out pixels and thereby, on certain scenes you have the potential to get boned when recording fine details.
I have had several shots for both national spots and corporate interviews all but ruined because of this.
So, if you choose to decide that you can live with it, fine. Many people do.
But don't minimize the issue, because it DOES happen and sometime in situations that you wouldn't normally think.
The fact that some "music video directors" use them doesn't minimize the fact that the video recording option on these cameras is still a compromise and the way they resolve a 1080p image is to throw out pixels and thereby, on certain scenes you have the potential to get boned when recording fine details.
I have had several shots for both national spots and corporate interviews all but ruined because of this.
So, if you choose to decide that you can live with it, fine. Many people do.
But don't minimize the issue, because it DOES happen and sometime in situations that you wouldn't normally think.
Aaron De Pry
Active member
Just because "famous" music video directors use Canon Dslr's doesn't mean that the issue isn't serious. The real truth is that for some Image Quality isn't as important, for others having artifacts in the image is a serious compromise to the whole piece. I tend to side on the no compromise side. It is important to have a clean image in all situations no matter what. On the canon cameras that I have and use frequently moire is an ever present issue in anything with fine patterns (not just brick walls). In a controlled environment this can be managed, case in point your famous music video directors. But in the real world this can be a very difficult task. As for the director's reasons for using the canon DSLR's, I suspect it has a lot to do with the budget.
For professional productions we tend to use a Red and for small low budget jobs we will take out the canon's or panasonic's. It is alway about the production value of the final product because that is what people will know you for. Aronofsky's DP, Matthew Libatique, used the 7d to great effect in Black Swan and shot the rest on 16mm if I remember correctly and that film was amazing. I will say that these cameras have opened up a new world for creative filmmakers.
I can show hundreds if not thousands of examples here, and the reason I stated it as a fact is because it's true.
Here is an excellent Dp who uses Canon Dslr cameras
http://vimeo.com/laforet
I'm about 99% sure most people here don't have a resume like this man. Now yes Moire is a problem but something that can be worked around is not. It's like it doesn't matter how you achieve that goal as long as you get there.
It's no Myth that a Canon dslr in the proper hands, proper crew and proper setup can deliver an amazing picture.
I will end my discussion here as this will go forever
:violin:
Here is an excellent Dp who uses Canon Dslr cameras
http://vimeo.com/laforet
I'm about 99% sure most people here don't have a resume like this man. Now yes Moire is a problem but something that can be worked around is not. It's like it doesn't matter how you achieve that goal as long as you get there.
It's no Myth that a Canon dslr in the proper hands, proper crew and proper setup can deliver an amazing picture.
I will end my discussion here as this will go forever
:violin:
Aaron De Pry
Active member
Exactly, that is what I was getting at. Given the proper setup it is a non-issue, but in real world shooting like documentaries it can be a bit of an annoyance. Either way Video DSLR's are still the best bang for your buck.
Chris Santucci
Veteran
So you have to work on a feature full length movie to be a dp :undecided
Come on Man, Laforet is putting out amazing visuals with these cameras. I'm sure Moire can present itself in any scene but as someone ( My Self ) that has been shooting for well over a year with these cameras I can honestly say it has never been a problem or have I had another scene in the same location I could not use.
You people have blown this well out of proportion, people are making amazing movies and shorts with these cameras , and true professionals that we can only hope to be one day are standing by these cameras......
Done Here
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
pulpfiction007
Veteran
Yeah, you're right.
WTF do I know about DSLR cinematography.
This my friends is what they call......TOUCHE
I think what some here are failing to gather from the responses is that no one is saying these cameras aren't great tools, they just have issues. It is better to know that at times those issues can be detrimental to the quality of the work so you should know when and where they'll bite you. The list can include (and not always)- fine patterns on clothing or other items, bricks, shingled roofs, vertical blinds, busy urban scenarios, etc. It's just smart to realize that YES, it can be bad, but NO...it shouldn't stop you from producing some great looking work. The more you can anticipate it the better off you'll be.
It wasn't so much that I had issues with moire & aliasing. Clients were complaining about it more & more. I stopped even trying to use my Canon T2i for video. I went back to the HVX200 for most client videos and the complaining stopped. It was an issue. It may not be for guys making movies for themselves with only their own ego's to stroke. No doubt some killer work was done with Canon's shooting video. I just got tired of compromising composition and focus to hide the moire & aliasing. I tested every combo of setting and lenses and realized it was an exercise in futility. Because in the end I usually had a client looking at the monitors and saying "What the hell is that!"......Even worse is when they would be sitting in the edit bay as I was doing selective blurring of offending areas.
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
I have a shoot coming up that may have 8 seconds of interview footage on broadcast TV (CBS, I think- I'm not sure which network the program is on honestly). I'm going to ask the talent not to wear sharp stripes or similar patterned clothing. 
The truth is, the producer for this piece knows what I'm shooting with, and is ok with it.
I'll be honest for a moment here- before I knew where Moire was, and long before DSLRs were used for filming, I noticed those patterns occasionally on HDTV programs and internet streams that I figured was a side effect of being resampled. And quite frankly, I was usually the only one who seemed to notice it in a room. I don't think people care as much as we do.
The truth is, the producer for this piece knows what I'm shooting with, and is ok with it.
I'll be honest for a moment here- before I knew where Moire was, and long before DSLRs were used for filming, I noticed those patterns occasionally on HDTV programs and internet streams that I figured was a side effect of being resampled. And quite frankly, I was usually the only one who seemed to notice it in a room. I don't think people care as much as we do.
Yeah, you're right.
WTF do I know about DSLR cinematography.
I never mentioned you, and the book cover to me looks like Bad Photoshop....
Let me stop here and just say I completely understand what everyone was saying, but I only ask that people might understand what I was trying to say. In a perfect world no moire would exist, till then I will work around these problems becuase I personally love the image from these cameras.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
Dude...that's a little bit harsh. I think the cover looks just fine anyway.
Back to the subject - We all understand what your saying but often threads like these help the uninitiated, so on that note I think a newbie coming in will get the basic idea - The images from these cameras can often be astonishingly good, but just take care with what you're shooting/how you shoot. I think we can all agree on that - Bloom, Laforet, Hurlbut, etc. would all tell people the same thing.
From my perspective a "real" professional always chooses the best tool for the job, given the budget and time constraints they have to work with.
Choosing the "best tool" means you have no specific brand loyalty, so in some situations a Canon 5D MK2 camera might be the best tool for ultra shallow DOF in very dimly lit natural environments, and in other situations the Panasonic AF-100 might be the best tool for situations where moire/aliasing could be a significant barrier to producing professional work.
I know from experience that I can achieve a specific look with almost any camera using a combination of camera-settings and post-production image manipulation, so most of the time I will choose gear that has the fewest technical limitations to shoot my work.
It`s almost impossible to remove moire and aliasing in post, so I want a camera that does not have these problems right from the get go, which means Canon is not high on my list right now, though all this could change with the next generation of Canon cameras. I have big hopes that the Canon 5D MK3 will be like a full-frame version of the Panasonic GH-2.
Aaron De Pry
Active member
That would be epic! and +1 for the thread closure I think enough has been said.
- Status