Jump to content


GY-HD250/200 Favorite Settings?


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Melissa Cobb

Melissa Cobb
  • Guests

Posted 13 May 2007 - 03:42 PM

Hi,

Just purchased some JVC HD-250 cameras and we're trying to get the best look out of them possible. I was wondering what menu settings you liked to keep the camera on in order to get a great cinematic look. Do you have any favorites?

We are shooting a documentary on a family, so we won't be doing anything too extreme, but of course we want the best look possible. We'll be shooting HD at 24fps. I'm not concerned about post issues at the moment, but only in-camera settings.

We are testing the cameras tomorrow. Any suggestions for what we should play around with? Thanks!
  • 0

#2 Jonathan Bowerbank

Jonathan Bowerbank
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2815 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 13 May 2007 - 04:19 PM

My main thing when shooting digital is keeping the Gain level down and being sure not to overexpose. It helps in post to be just a TAD underexposed so you have more information to work with. With video, once something is blown out, it's blown out and there's nothing you can do about it.

But the low gain levels should help in eliminating noise and make it seem more "cinematic". Of course, your lighting is crucial as well. And since this family knows you're shooting them for a doc, I'm sure they'd let you plant some lights here & there. :)

Will you be using a Steadicam or Glidecam of any kind? If it's all handheld it could look very homemovie-ish, so it'd be nice to have the smooth movement that a stabilizing system can provide.

Edited by Jonathan Bowerbank, 13 May 2007 - 04:20 PM.

  • 0

#3 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5070 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 13 May 2007 - 04:42 PM

Tim Dashwood has some settings:

http://www.dvinfo.ne...ead.php?t=93052
  • 0

#4 Paolo Ciccone

Paolo Ciccone
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Santa Cruz, CA

Posted 14 May 2007 - 10:20 AM

Just purchased some JVC HD-250 cameras and we're trying to get the best look out of them possible. I was wondering what menu settings you liked to keep the camera on in order to get a great cinematic look. Do you have any favorites?

The besgt approach, IMHO, is to keep the camera as neutral as possible and add some filtration if appropriate or necessary. I'm almost done testing my TrueColor settings for the HD250 which is the translation of the same configuration previously designed for the HD100. The config gives you more natural and saturated colors and wider latitude, 1 stop, than the stock settings. When di you start shooting?
  • 0

#5 Melissa Cobb

Melissa Cobb
  • Guests

Posted 15 May 2007 - 06:26 PM

Thank you all for your help. Paolo, I was looking at your sight and hoping you had those settings up for access already, but I'll have to wait. I'm looking forward to them, if you'll publish them. I believe we start shooting after this week. I won't be the one shooting the show, I was only helping to test the cameras. And Jonathon, it is handheld, but our operator specializes in this.

If anyone comes up with anything else, I can forward the info on to our DP. Thanks again!
  • 0

#6 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 15 May 2007 - 08:43 PM

The problem with shooting at 24p is that it does not handle motion very well. 60p is the preffered progressive scan format for the highest picture fidelity. A good example of a television show that uses the the high definition 60p live showscan format is Dances with Stars. 60p gives the ultimate live performance look. Detractors of the 60p look complain that it looks like interlace video. However 60p is a progressive scan format that shoots complete photographs unlike interlace video which is like watching a picture through a set a venetion blinds.
  • 0

#7 Paolo Ciccone

Paolo Ciccone
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Santa Cruz, CA

Posted 16 May 2007 - 01:28 AM

Hey Melissa.
I would give you the preliminary settings but I'm still running some tests. The first draft of TrueColor was defintely good, very rich and with excellent skin colors but then I found that the red tones were way off. I shot new testes today using a different configuration and I should have the result tomorrow, Wednesday.
I'll let you know.

Edited by Paolo Ciccone, 16 May 2007 - 01:30 AM.

  • 0

#8 Paolo Ciccone

Paolo Ciccone
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Santa Cruz, CA

Posted 16 May 2007 - 03:43 PM

Hey Melissa.
I have a tentaive configuration please take a look at http://digitalcinema...pic.php?p=46#46

Hope this helps.
  • 0

#9 Michael Nash

Michael Nash
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3330 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Pasadena, CA

Posted 16 May 2007 - 05:57 PM

The problem with shooting at 24p is that it does not handle motion very well. 60p is the preffered progressive scan format for the highest picture fidelity. A good example of a television show that uses the the high definition 60p live showscan format is Dances with Stars. 60p gives the ultimate live performance look. Detractors of the 60p look complain that it looks like interlace video. However 60p is a progressive scan format that shoots complete photographs unlike interlace video which is like watching a picture through a set a venetion blinds.


Not Showscan -- it's HD video. Showscan is a film format: http://www.showscan....company_2_2.htm

And most filmmakers don't have a "problem" with 24P motion rendering. Nor do they see much of a difference between 60P and 60i. Interlaced video doesn't induce any more of a "venetian blind" effect than progressively displayed video -- only motion may be subject to "combing" instead of strobing. A simple tradeoff, and the resolution and smoothness of static subjects is exactly the same.

Of course I'm wasting my time even writing this...
  • 0

#10 Paolo Ciccone

Paolo Ciccone
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Santa Cruz, CA

Posted 16 May 2007 - 07:02 PM

Of course I'm wasting my time even writing this...

Michael, I don't want to get into what it seems a pre-existing issue but it's never a waste of time to produce precise information. Lots of people watch this forum without ever writing a note and while you might not convince the recipient of your reply, you provide information for everybody who is reading.
Just today I got an email from a newcomer in the field who is having trouble with "judder" in his footage and he thought that it was an issue with the HD100. It turns out that this is the first time that he's trying 24fps progressive. When I pointed out that the issue with 24fps has been around for a loooong time and that there are actual tables in the ACM that precisely describe the panning speed for frame rate, shutter angle and focal length, he was taken by surprise. He thought it was some settings in the camera.
Good information is always valuable, you never know who's gonna be affected by it :)
  • 0

#11 Patrick Neary

Patrick Neary
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Portland, OR

Posted 16 May 2007 - 09:48 PM

Michael, I don't want to get into what it seems a pre-existing issue but it's never a waste of time to produce precise information. Lots of people watch this forum without ever writing a note and while you might not convince the recipient of your reply, you provide information for everybody who is reading.


If I can jump in on this side-note, that's a very good point-

It seems like lately cinematography.com could use a full-time "damage control" person. It's one thing to post an answer in a hurry and end up sounding like an idiot (God knows I've done it) but over the last year or two the forum seems to have attracted a cadre of folks who obviously have no real-world experience, but are compelled to post authoritative comments that range from flat-out wrong to extremely bizarre. The RED forum in particular has been like a car wreck.

I understand the idea of the open forum here, but I'd hate to see it slide into a kind of newsgroup oblivion.

Anyway, sorry for sidetracking.
  • 0

#12 john Spear

john Spear
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 09 November 2008 - 05:33 AM

I tried Paolo Ciccone's true color settings, and the other variations and I like the look of all of them, I appreciate their input and dedication to come up with them as well as share them with people who can and will benefit from them such as myself. The "wide latitude" variation I thought, was the most adequate filmic feel I have seen so far, although I will test it again under other conditions and settings including interiors. A bit less saturated, in my view all elements in the picture, or moving picture are film inclusive as opposed to the more scattered and diversified video look. More latitude to correct in post, although minimal correction if any would be required. Quality as opposed to.... So as a response to the first post:

NOTE : Paolo Ciccone has his settings for true color different than the one posted below. I double checked it in his site and these are either not accurate or they have been updated. Here is the link: http://paolociccone....ibration-3.html

And for reference, here are the settings:

WIDELAT2
Master Black -1
Detail MIN
Black STRETCH3
White Clip 108%
Knee MANUAL
Level 80%
Cinelike CINELIKE
Color Matrix OFF
Adjust (all NORMAL)
Gamma STANDARD
Level NORMAL
Color Gain NORMAL

TRUCLRPC (Paolo Ciccone)
Master Black -2
Detail MIN
Black STRETCH1
White Clip 108%
Knee MANUAL
Level 90%
Cinelike OFF
Color Matrix STANDARD
Adjust
- R Gain 3
- R Rotation 4
- G Gain 2
- G Rotation NORMAL
- B Gain 3
- B Rotation -3
Gamma CINELIKE
Level -1
Color Gain NORMAL

TRUCLRET ("widelat" variation)
Master Black -1
Detail MIN
Black STRETCH3
White Clip 108%
Knee MANUAL
Level 80%
Cinelike OFF
Color Matrix STANDARD
Adjust
- R Gain 3
- R Rotation 4
- G Gain 2
- G Rotation NORMAL
- B Gain 3
- B Rotation -3
Gamma CINELIKE
Level NORMAL
Color Gain NORMAL
  • 0

#13 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11945 posts
  • Other

Posted 09 November 2008 - 07:58 AM

I think this forum does amazingly well, sitting neatly on the ideal fence between newsgroup anarchy and the swaggering arrogance typical of... how can I put this... other internet collectives?

The reason for Michael's exasperation is, I should point out, that Thomas James has been intermittently posting here for a while, always slavishly uncritical of any form of 60Hz imaging, even when that's completely inappropriate, and making some very questionable technical points in support of it. His posts should be taken with a pinch of salt.

P
  • 0

#14 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 11 November 2008 - 01:05 PM

Not even Doug Trumball who is the champion of 60 frames per second cinema projection is uncritical of the format for even he says that the problem with this type of projection is that it destroys the film look because the footage ends up looking like video.
However there is a solution to the problem and that is to use variable speed ramping. For example drama portions of the movie can be shot and displayed at 30 frames per second by projecting each frame twice while the fast action portions of the movie that can benefit by the higher motion fidelity can be shot and displayed at 60 frames per second. Of course this wastes film however when we switch over to digital projection this will no longer be a concern.
  • 0

#15 Corey Steib

Corey Steib
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Orlando, FL

Posted 01 February 2009 - 03:17 AM

Hi Mr. Paolo Ciccone and everyone, about 2 weeks ago I was a DP on a music video using my HD100 and I tried Paolos TRUCLRET ("widelat" variation) shooting 720p at 24p and the video turned out great. Now you must remember that if you are going to shoot a film you must light for it, in this case we were going strait to a master tape (not doing a blow up to film). We putt the shutter at 1/48 and was at a 1.4 just about the entire shoot (shooting both inside a club and outside at night.) The most I went to outside at night was a 2.8. I should have my demo reel up on my website in about a week and I will let you know when so you can see the footage.
  • 0

#16 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 10 February 2009 - 12:48 PM

When I shoot a music video I set my JVC camera at 720p30 which is 30 frames per second and I set the shutter at 1/60th of a second if there is enough light.
  • 0

#17 Corey Steib

Corey Steib
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Orlando, FL

Posted 11 February 2009 - 03:32 AM

When I shoot a music video I set my JVC camera at 720p30 which is 30 frames per second and I set the shutter at 1/60th of a second if there is enough light.


Correct which is good but if you need to you can go down one stop from 1/60 to get a little more light.
  • 0


Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

Opal

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

CineTape

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

CineLab

Wooden Camera

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Tai Audio

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport