Test?

J

janusz

Well-known member
Below is a link to some footage.

http://www.terminus1525.ca/node/41916

(for some reason it takes 20secs to load)

Most ppl on this site can pick a DVX's footage out of a mix of others. So I am curious as what ppl think this footage was shot on? What format: film or video? If film: 8 or 16? If video: what format, which camera, etc?

It's lame, perhaps, but why not.

Thanks
 
It's hard for me to tell.... If it's video, it's been altered a lot to simulate film. If this is raw, then it's film.... if it's not, i'm not sure.
 
It's too small!! (and short). Looks like 16, but give me a better version, and I'll watch again.
 
rcbrown23 said:
A higher rez clip so we can see more than just the little 3 inch example.
Click to expand...


I'll see what I can do. The site I posted the clip on is anal about size.
 
janusz said:
videoish? explain...
Click to expand...

I'm no expert. But, to me two things are sticking out:

1. Clipped highlights on his hair.
2. The image is too sharp on the plants on the left side of the frame.

Jgastelb
 
Not to mention the obvious but... who's got the money to spend on real film to shoot some guy shifting his nose from side to side while walking through an outdoorsy area just for the heck of it?

Hey, I may be really off though.
 
very true about the latitude... 8mm is very cheap.

So if it is not film, which video format? which camera, if you want to be particular?
 
Looks to me like you went out of your way to give it a film look. Too much. I would say that means you are either trying to fool us into thinking it's video, when it really was film, or it was video. ( covering my bases :) )
Really, if I had to guess, I would say video. I would say that it was shot on a progressive cam. There is an odd kind of "doubling" of the image going on, but it doesn't look interlaced for sure.

Jason
 
It's either grainy film, very badly shot video or too much compression on the file to tell. It looks like maybe a DVX w/ a mini35. It COULD be 16mm... It certainly has the grain for it.

Whatever it is, it's not the best that scene could have been shot.. In either video or film.

UPDATE: After watching it again... I'm going to go out on a limb and say DV with a 35mm adapter. What kind of tipped me off was the SOUND.... Most people are not going to bother with getting on location sound for a test like this.... But this definantly had location sound.

DV!
 
film or video

film or video

is anybody ready for the answer... or should i wait for stragglers?
 
No wait!

I think Landon's sound suggestion is the biggest hint so far. Nice call on that... and I'm going DV with a 35 adapter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top