GH3 What did I do wrong? GH3 Live Event recording doesn't look so good

[wgzn]

Soundfx4. if you're going to look for help / critique online. you're going to have to thicken that skin up a bit. yeah, a couple folks are being kinda dickish. but from my experience online, thats to be expected.

and one thing ive learned in 20+ years in the production and ad biz:
presentation is EVERYTHING.
if your username indicates a talent or even simply interest in one thing. people will automatically latch on to that and perceive you in that light.

not saying it's right. just the way it is ; (

 

[Stab]

I'm really sorry, but I am actually quite insulted by what you said here. I don't know how else to take that other than you pretty much telling me I had no idea what I was doing, and that couldn't be farther from the truth. I know what aperture does, what the numbers mean (to some extent, smaller numbers mean larger means more light, means less focus depth), and I understand Depth of Field to a good extent (although I wasn't sure about the distance affecting it, but I had a hunch about it and you better believe I'm going to read up on DOF to get an even better grasp on it), I understand the relation to ISO and light sensitivity and noise, and even the ISO limits on the GH3 before it just...looks like a mess. I know the limits of my lens (and I also know that in this situation I could not of had a faster lens to use), and I'm familiar with the shutter speed and what it does (although admittedly, I don't quite understand how it works in motion picture mode, I do know how it works for pictures though). I even understood white balance played a key role and I KNEW I had to set it manually. I was not as prepared as I should have been, but I also had no way of knowing that. I've been reading about this stuff for ever it seems and the GH3 is the first camera I've been able to get my hands on that could actually be considered a real video camera. Hell, before I even choose the GH3, I spent over a month learning about camera mechanics (and that was in addition to what I already knew). And everything that you guys are telling me is not a foreign language to me, not by a stretch which in and of itself should mean something. I'm not trying to be rude, and I know you are only trying to be helpful (and you ARE! and I do appreciate it very much), but it's just...I'm seriously passionate about this and want to eventually be able to do this full time, and seeing someone suggest the possibility that I'm not willing to put time into learning this trade is very upsetting.

That all being said PLEASE dont' think I'm unappreciative. I am, I REALLY am. I love the tips and you've given me a great deal of information too. I just wanted you to know how I feel about this and know that I really do have a love for this stuff!

Dear Soundfx4,

I am genuinly sorry that I made you feel bad about this. I really am.

My choice of words was maybe not the best and I can be kinda harsh sometimes when I give my critics. And as you have illustrated, I might have to do something about that. Maybe we're even now

But despite my words, I wanted to offer help. I don't often do that anymore online, but I wanted to write down what you did wrong and how you could improve it and why.
I absolutely believe that you have spend a lot of time about the theory of all this, otherwise you wouldn't have bought a GH3 in the first place. However, your opening post and example show that simply, you did a bad job at capturing this event. I am sorry, but I cannot put it in any other way. I am also sorry about assuming that you are not taking this filming as serious as you do.

As I understand from your last post you understand what white balance is and what it does, and what DOF is and how it affects the picture. Great, you're on the right track! Most people don't even bother with this theory at all! Nonetheless, you don't fully grasp how they should be used. Otherwise you wouldn't be looking online for help.

To make the best of my previous post, go ahead and prove me wrong. Prove what a sour, lame critic I am and learn about this stuff and shoot the most gorgeous images that you can.
The sole fact that you are posting on this forum for help shows that you are on the right path to become a great cameraman.

Bonus edit: I see now that I have said 'use the auto setting' and I can see why that is an upsetting statement. I actually meant, I swear, the white balance AUTO setting. Nothing else. Heck, I even use it sometimes on a wedding where there isn't much time to change and the indoor lighting is strange. Just wanted to clarify.

 

[yslee]

Hey man, I didn't mean in that way; DVX hosts people from lots of different backgrounds and I assumed that you did sound and were somehow thrown off into the deep end without any help whatsoever.

I do agree you need to thicken up a bit though. In my professional dealings I have come across some genuinely nasty people.

 

[Soundfx4]

Dear Soundfx4,

I am genuinly sorry that I made you feel bad about this. I really am.

My choice of words was maybe not the best and I can be kinda harsh sometimes when I give my critics. And as you have illustrated, I might have to do something about that. Maybe we're even now

But despite my words, I wanted to offer help. I don't often do that anymore online, but I wanted to write down what you did wrong and how you could improve it and why.
I absolutely believe that you have spend a lot of time about the theory of all this, otherwise you wouldn't have bought a GH3 in the first place. However, your opening post and example show that simply, you did a bad job at capturing this event. I am sorry, but I cannot put it in any other way. I am also sorry about assuming that you are not taking this filming as serious as you do.

As I understand from your last post you understand what white balance is and what it does, and what DOF is and how it affects the picture. Great, you're on the right track! Most people don't even bother with this theory at all! Nonetheless, you don't fully grasp how they should be used. Otherwise you wouldn't be looking online for help.

To make the best of my previous post, go ahead and prove me wrong. Prove what a sour, lame critic I am and learn about this stuff and shoot the most gorgeous images that you can.
The sole fact that you are posting on this forum for help shows that you are on the right path to become a great cameraman.

Bonus edit: I see now that I have said 'use the auto setting' and I can see why that is an upsetting statement. I actually meant, I swear, the white balance AUTO setting. Nothing else. Heck, I even use it sometimes on a wedding where there isn't much time to change and the indoor lighting is strange. Just wanted to clarify.

It's not a problem at all, I know you were only trying to help and you succeeded! I only was upset by a couple of the things you said, (even you saying I messed up bad at the beginning wasn't that upsetting because it's very true that I messed up bad haha), but I knew you were being helpful and I am very greatly appreciative of it! For some reason I just wanted to express how I felt about that one thing you said, and I figured if I wasn't rude about it, I'd probably get a positive response, which I very much did!

Right now, I'm trying to salvage it now and at the same time, learn even more :thumbsup: but really I just can't wait for another shot at this, that is what is driving me crazy! This was my sisters dance recital that wasn't being recorded anyway, so it's not a major deal that I messed up other than me being disappointed and wanting to be able to do it again.

I'll go back out there and make good use of the advice you and everyone else has given me though I am just now realizing that I can probably look in this forum to see if there are any pros that wouldn't mind hiring me as an intern for the experience, or advertise on craigslist for really cheap or free video production/event recording services just in exchange for experience. I'll get another shot here before long somehow!

 

[Soundfx4]

Soundfx4. if you're going to look for help / critique online. you're going to have to thicken that skin up a bit. yeah, a couple folks are being kinda dickish. but from my experience online, thats to be expected.

and one thing ive learned in 20+ years in the production and ad biz:
presentation is EVERYTHING.
if your username indicates a talent or even simply interest in one thing. people will automatically latch on to that and perceive you in that light.

not saying it's right. just the way it is ; (

That's sadly been my experience as well. And the worst part, no matter how often I'm exposed to it, my skin doesn't thicken anymore lol. I just constantly wonder why people can't be nicer :| regardless, the best thing I can do is ignore it if it's bad enough, or reply in a polite way if it's upsetting but not really bad *shrugs*.

ehhh...you're absolutely right. I've been getting tired of that handle for a while now anyway. There's actually a short story around it. Years ago (about 15-20) my friend and I decided we wanted to start making movies (I've always been into this stuff) and we gave ourselves email address names that would be relative to our particular jobs, and I decided I would handle sound (which oddly enough, I really know very little about). I just kind of kept it and now that's my online ID xD. But it probably shouldn't be, especially not in a forum like this haha. I don't suppose there's a way to change it?

 

[Stab]

One last advice, and what really would put you forever in their hearts and minds: Is there anyway to get the group of dancers together again somewhere?

So you can give yourself another shot (literally) at it. Just without an audience, get them together in a large hall or maybe even outside. Then make them do the show 2-3 times and make different framings everytime. Then edit them together and they will have the best video of their performance ever!

 

[mcbob]

For whatever it's worth, I'll reiterate the advice to just stick it at 3200K for most stage performances, since most PAR cans are tungsten and use of gels is common.

HOWEVER....

There's been a creep towards colored LED lights in the past few years. These, I am certain, are an instrument of Satan. Highlights from these cameras immediately blow out whatever color the LED happens to be. I haven't found a good way to counter them, because often they're on intermittent spots or effect lights. If anybody has a solid notion on how to minimize the effects of these Hitler-wrought, baby murdering demonic lighting instruments of hatred, loathing, and despair, I'd be very thankful for the knowledge.

 

[MadHMC150]

Hi ISO (gain) usually pumps a little more red in the picture as well... Getting a good monitor is the best way to see what you are shooting on the spot, cant emphasise that enough..

There's been a creep towards colored LED lights in the past few years. These, I am certain, are an instrument of Satan. Highlights from these cameras immediately blow out whatever color the LED happens to be. I haven't found a good way to counter them, because often they're on intermittent spots or effect lights. If anybody has a solid notion on how to minimize the effects of these Hitler-wrought, baby murdering demonic lighting instruments of hatred, loathing, and despair, I'd be very thankful for the knowledge.

No to mention LED's can flicker pretty bad when dimmed! We had that problem with a few LEDs on set.. always had to have them at 100% otherwise we had to tinker with the shutter speed.

 

[iamlance]

I'm unfamiliar with film shutter systems and how they work...for that matter, I don't really have a solid grasp on how my mirrorless camera's shutter works when recording video that well...I need to do some reading up on that. But according to my camera's settings, the shutter was 1/60 and the frame rate was 60p.

The normal ratios are:

Shutter Speed/FPS: 1/24, 48 fps; 1/30, 60 fps

It seems you also had a problem there, with putting both 1/60 shutter speed and 60fps. The shutter speed should be half of the FPS (frames per second), so next time try keeping the FSP at 60, but changing the shutter speed to 1/30.

EDIT: IGNORE THIS.


​Correct info posted below.

 

[rsbush]

The normal ratios are:

Shutter Speed/FPS: 1/24, 48 fps; 1/30, 60 fps.

It seems you also had a problem there, with putting both 1/60 shutter speed and 60fps. The shutter speed should be half of the FPS (frames per second), so next time try keeping the FSP at 60, but changing the shutter speed to 1/30.

This information is incorrect. Generally, the shutter speed should be double the fps.

 

[iamlance]

Oh crap. That is what I meant to say! I knew something felt off.

24 fps goes with 1/48 shutter speed and 30 fps goes with 1/60 shutter speed.

Use 30 fps and 1/60 shutter speed next time rather than 60 fps and 1/60 shutter speed together.

 

[Soundfx4]

This information is incorrect. Generally, the shutter speed should be double the fps.

Yikes, well that certainly wouldn't have worked if I wanted to record in 60 fps as dark as it is and without a faster lens :| What would be the harm in having the shutter snap in sync with the frame rate? 1 shutter snap for every time a frame is recorded?

Oh crap. That is what I meant to say! I knew something felt off.

24 fps goes with 1/48 shutter speed and 30 fps goes with 1/60 shutter speed.

Use 30 fps and 1/60 shutter speed next time rather than 60 fps and 1/60 shutter speed together.

I was about to do 30fps but decided I'd rather have 60fps :| I probably would have used 1/60 if I choose 30fps because 1/30 would have caused too much motion blur (I think?). Thinking back, there's really no reason for 60 fps but I've just got such a bad taste in my mouth from the ghosting effect in major motion pictures that I want to be as far away from 24 fps as possible and 30 doesn't feel like it's far enough away...although it probably is. But even if it's not, there's no panning or moving of the camera, so there'd have been no harm. Is what I'm saying making any sense or have I misunderstood something?

 

[Soundfx4]

I wanted to ask about the exposure or brightness of the footage. A couple of you had mentioned that it was underexposed and I can certainly understand why, but at the same time I have to ask; what about the highlights on the girls that are DRAMATICALLY brighter in contrast to the background?



I circled the areas that I am most concerned about and ask you can tell, they are just...well it's day and night quite literally. If I had opened the lens up any more, I feel like (and I'm absolutely positive I'm wrong considering how inexperienced I am) I may have been able to capture the entire stage, but the dancers highlighted areas would have been way overexposed. Can you guys share some thoughts or ideas on that?

Also, I bumped the saturation down a bit and I am not sure if I can say if it has fixed it, but I think it looks a whole hell of a lot better lol

 

[Lpowell]

Yikes, well that certainly wouldn't have worked if I wanted to record in 60 fps as dark as it is and without a faster lens :| What would be the harm in having the shutter snap in sync with the frame rate?

Don't worry about it, that kind of advice is about magic numbers that are supposed to produce a "cinematic" look. For practical purposes, the thing to be concerned about is power line flicker, and in the USA, the way to avoid it is to shoot at 1/60 or 1/30 sec shutter speed. Most shooters think 1/30 produces too much motion blur, so 1/60 is the safe choice. For event shooting, depth of field is the next most important issue, and with dancers you need a healthy amount of in-focus range. With MFT and APS-C cameras, the sweet spot is around F2.8 for focal lengths up to 100mm, and F4 for telephoto lenses.

So rule of thumb, go with 1/60 and F2.8 as defaults, and use ISO to adjust exposure. If you have to push the GH3 above ISO 800, expect it to need noise reduction in post. You'll likewise need color correction if you stay within ISO 800 and your footage turns out underexposed. Don't be discouraged, I've successfully salvaged much worse footage than yours, it mainly needs a gamma boost and saturation cut, along with noise reduction and sharpening. The best way to learn about post-production is to take your footage to someone who knows just what to do. (Lifting underexposed areas without blowing the highlights is what gamma correction is all about.)

 

[paulears]

lthough I don't use the new K5 for video - the short running time is a killer for me - the show video I shot for experimentation was pretty poor. works fine outside, or in white light. Stage shots like the one here also are very tough on lenses. With the iris open, the sharpness is much worse than when they are looking at white lit shots. I have a sigma zoom for one of the stills cameras and the definition on the longer focal lengths is pretty horrible in certain colours. Blue by far the worst - quite soft. Red and yellow give pretty sharp images.

Please don't blame the lights - as a design tool, for the first time we designers can flood a stage with saturated colour and we love it. It's not going away, its getting brighter! They also snap on and off instantly - not just do a fast fade in or out. They can strobe too - and that wrecks video pictures big time. We are still complaining about dimmer curves and flicker at the bottom, but it's getting better. They are not going away, and the manufacturers have not paid anough attention. JVC don't seem too bad, Sony users - the EX series in particular often complain lots, but the sensors just need sorting for saturated colour. Plus the auto settings need tweaking for those that use them.

I suspect that the parents will be happy with the video - leave it orange as it was. Frankly, the lighting is a bit bland, and there's no real shadows for the cameras to use for focussing - so I don't think you did awfully, you just got what many people get.

Just don't blame the theatre people, their job is for the live audience, and unless the venue contract and technical rider mentions lighting for video (which it NEVER does in my experience) then asking them at a late stage to alter things won't work. When we do video and lighting, I always use a video monitor. Even when we have outsiders managing the video side, I give them a cable and ask for a feed so I can see if it looks a mess and perhaps help. Without a monitor, how do they tell? The eye looks at something VERY different.

 

[yslee]

A scene like this has big differences in exposure range. Try switching to the spot meter and check your exposure settings from point to point. You'd be surprised that the difference can be as high as 6-8 stops.

Without a monitor, how do they tell? The eye looks at something VERY different.

To add to this: Eventually over time you will gain the experience to tell the difference; sort of disassociating yourself from the corrections your own brain performs when viewing the scene.

 

[wgzn]

...they are just...well it's day and night quite literally. If I had opened the lens up any more, I feel like (and I'm absolutely positive I'm wrong considering how inexperienced I am)

in situations like this you just have to expect that that's probably going to happen. this isnt cinema where you have 20 people taking care of subtle details or a professional production where the goal is to get the best image for the CAMERA. you were up against a wall with limited experience and a mid-quality, arguably too slow lens. and with what you were working with this is by no means a trainwreck.

 

[wgzn]

i shoot similar stuff sometimes (easy money) and why i keep my old hpx170 around!
here is a frame from a similar situation i shot last summer. 24p50
not sure what i did here. as i recall it was 24p50. i seem to recall shooting wide open (expose for curtain) than dropped the boat highlight with (built-in) ND and let the performace land in the middle.

 

[Soundfx4]

View attachment 96878 i shoot similar stuff sometimes (easy money) and why i keep my old hpx170 around!
here is a frame from a similar situation i shot last summer. 24p50
not sure what i did here. as i recall it was 24p50. i seem to recall shooting wide open (expose for curtain) than dropped the boat highlight with (built-in) ND and let the performace land in the middle.

*nods* good to know, thank you kindly! I'll get it next time, and I may buy an ND filter as well (and probably a larger display too!). I had been wanting one for shooting in bright daylight anyway!

 

[wgzn]

and I may buy an ND filter as well (and probably a larger display too!

what you need is a faster lens. something along the lines of 1.2 or 2.8. AND a range of ND filters.