The best possible video look
Posted 24 March 2008 - 06:39 PM
Posted 24 March 2008 - 08:02 PM
I'm sure you're asking this for your own education, but the obvious answer is, "get a DP who knows how to shoot well." A good DP will help you weed through the variables and save you a lot of grief. Asking here is a start, but there are many, many variables particular to your own production that you'll have to work out one-on-one with your DP.
But as a matter of approach, start from both ends and work your way toward the middle. What's your finished poduct supposed to be, and what do you want it to look like? Then, how much money do you have to spend? Those two ends of the equation will narrow down your search.
If you don't want to shoot film, then your options are basically professional HD or SD, and then prosumer HD or SD. Dozens of choices right there. In the hands of a good DP at least, you tend to get the quality you pay for.
I'm going to get on my soapbax yet again though, and try to dispel this rumor that a 35mm adapter is necessary to get good quality images. These adapters are tool made for a specific purpose, which is to allow shallow depth of field on camera systems otherwise incapable of it -- namely 1/3" chip prosumer cameras. The tradeoff is that they eat light, soften the overall image, and add cumbersome mechanics/ergonomics to the physical rig. You handicap the performance of the camera for the sake of shallow depth of field. When you need it, they're great and can produce some lovely images. But if you don't really need it, they simply make your life difficult. Use the right tool for the job.
A professional 2/3" chip camera has essentially the same depth of field characterstics as super 16mm. So if super16 is adequate for your short film, you don't need an adapter on a digibeta or 2/3" HD camera to get similar optical characteristics. Get some good HD glass instead.
As for the "look," that's between you and your DP. There's no one right or wrong way to go about it, just realize that video has less room for manipulation in post than film does. So it's more important to get it right in camera. But again, your DP should know this.
Also consider the post production for your film. There are dozens of recording formats and digital compression schemes to deal with, so you'll have to work out what hardware and software issues you can deal with. These days, you might find it easier to rent a professional HD camera that records to solid state cards than it it may be to go the digibeta/deck route.
Posted 25 March 2008 - 04:32 PM
HDX900, Pro35 and cooke primes along with the autoknee function (increasing the dynamic range, giving a more filmic look)
If not, HVX200, red rock and cooke primes.
I mean.. woah:
Edited by Daniel Ashley-Smith, 25 March 2008 - 04:34 PM.
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:52 PM
The 35mm adapters are only a part of a filmic look and I wouldn't get too excited by it. I suspect part of the effect is the pro mist filter effect of the ground glass.
I've seen a Pro 35 on a digi beta DVW790 and the progressive frame SDX900 with a 2/3" zoom looks more filmic.
Posted 26 March 2008 - 12:31 PM
Posted 26 March 2008 - 02:59 PM