This is a tutorial on how to increase the dynamic range of an SLR. SLRs and camcorders are pretty close in terms of dynamic ranges, so you might find it useful in your post-production of video as well. Keep in mind that “digital” has a significantly smaller range when compared to film, so every little bit helps.
How to increase the Canon 7D dynamic range (Tutorial) from Luka.
Adam Wilt at DV Magazine, is taking a first look at Sony V1.
In a typical SAT fashion: with V1 Sony has upgraded the Z1 “prosumer” camcorder the same way it upgraded the revolutionary Sony FX1 to Sony FX7. If you’re already familiar with the FX7 or you’ve already read the comparison between FX1 and FX7, you’ll find relatively few bits of new info.
At the same time, Sony V1 is significant because it confirms Sony’s dedication to putting CMOS sensors on its prosumer line of camcorders instead of CCDs. This is an important change of direction as it affects light sensitivity, vertical resolution, and more importantly the “full 1080 HD” of FX7 and V1.
Let’s go quickly through Adam’s points:
Again, it’s a “sideways upgrade” because you lose some, you gain some. Here’s Adam’s conclusion:
Sony squeezed out some features in the quest to put HDV into a PD170-sized package: analog-in recording, 50 Hz/60 Hz switchability, low-light capability, and standard video connectors on the camera body. But the result is a compact, lightweight Handycam that shoots sharp, clean HDV while offering the best laid-out controls found on a small Sony, and true progressive capture to boot. Rolling shutter will be an issue for some, but overall, the V1 looks like a worthy addition to the choices available to HDV shooters.
I’m considering switching from my web cam to this baby. Here’s a short guide on how to select a web cam.
Kaspar had this question to ask:
I’ve come across your webpage and have been reading your reviews on HD cameras. May I ask you a question concerning this? It seems you have quite some experience — and I seem to lack it!
I am working together with a small group of creatives and we would like to make a series of short movies: some movies about dancing/arts (for fun) and some ad movies for customers (to be shown on fares, public advertisement screens, and maybe one or two clips on television).
We have experimented a little bit with MiniDV (in combination with FinalCutPro, After Effects, and Shake) and found it disappointing. We frequently had to use keyers (to get rid of a white/green background) and the results were really bad, even though we started with a pretty good white background.
I am now hoping that HD changes this a little. But I see that many HD cams use heavy compression and therefore I fear that the resulting artefacts will make editing difficult, again. Is this so?
Or more concrete: Could you tell me maybe a camera that you could recommend (without responsibility, of course) for this type of
work? A low-budget one (say up to $2000), a semi-pro one (up to $4000) and an even better one?
I thought the answer could be helpful to others as well:
I’m afraid the quality of the video won’t change much from DV to HD. The resolution definitely will change but it seems to me you’re not after resolution. From the sound of it, you have a problem with removing the background.
First off, when doing blue/green screen work, you need a studio of some sort. You could probably do it yourself but the resulting video will suffer. The key problem with greenscreen is EVEN lighting. The way it’s done in studios is that you create a “rama” with lights spread out at precise intervals. It’s rather expensive if you want to create a similar setup at a stage (if you’re dancing on a stage that is).
In terms of cameras, any camera below $6000 is going to use HDV (25Mbps) to record the signal which means a lot of compression. So you’re right about that – HD will introduce more compression artefacts, not less. At about 6,000, you can get Panasonic HVX200 which supports 100Mbps recording ( i.e. much higher quality recording).
I certainly understand your frustration. When I bought my first camera (a SONY VX2000) I was pretty disappointed as well. Then, I bought a Lowel light kit (4 lights) and I loved the results. Your goal is a bit more ambitious but I think you’ll find out that once you solve the lighting, everything else will be easy.
Keep the questions coming 
I just found this video tutorial (?) about achieving filmlike video. It talks about screen ratios, interlaced vs progressive shooting, and more.
Right-click video, then select “Save Target As…”
For a 5 minute video, it packs plenty of info. It missed one very important point (that I frequently come back to): LIGHTING.
Lighting is one of the magic ingredients when going for filmlike video. Just look at the segment in question – the blue background light creates much needed separation between subject and background. (In video, this separation is often achieved by adding a certain color – usually blue; in film, you have many more options.)
I’m not 100% sure if this is a Panasonic HVX200 in the background. I was hoping to see someone putting the new Sony FX7 to good use!
Yahoo just bought Jumpcut – for an undisclosed sum. This makes Youtube one of the few big indies in this space. So what is poor Google to do but bid for Youtube.
TechCrunch posts that there are rumors that Google’s going to acquire Youtube.
The Wall Street Journal is now reporting this as well, saying “Google Inc. is in talks to acquire popular video-sharing site YouTube Inc. for roughly $1.6 billion, according to a person familiar with the matter. The discussions are still at a sensitive stage and could well break off, this person says.”
I bet a few heads in Google Video should roll. They had a distinctive advantage with Google Video and they totally missed the boat.
Anne Walk at LoadedPun put a note on their blog about FilmDailies. Much appreciated.
I love this line:
So far, there are a good number of camera reviews for those looking to buy a high end camera. They are beautiful and so very beyond my scope.
No one called camera reviews beautiful before
The Mentos + Coke video phenomenon is like a wild fire burning through tons of bandwidth.
The story? I doubt it’s worth calling it a story: if you drop Mentos in Coke, you get a geyser. Naturally, both Coca Cola and Mentos refuse to comment.
The point is that a ton of Mentos + Coke videos have surfaced. Some guys have been doing synchronized performances – over 100 bottles of diet coke “blowing up” in a choreographed performance. I would even go so far as to call these guys independent filmmakers… I mean there was obviously no studio backing for these projects!
Finally! The specs for the Panasonic HVX200 have been sent to a couple of review sites. If you’re in a video production company or (even better) an aspiring filmmaker, you should start taking notes.
Update: You can already get REAL footage from the HVX200, even footage at 60p (frame rates supported by HVX200). The camera should be available in stores, so you might also want to get my recommendations for accessories for HVX200.
Here’s a summary of the important features introduced with the new Panasonic HVX200. I’ll prioritize them for you.
Variable frame rates
Panasonic HVX200 supports a variety of frame rates just like Panasonic’s Varicam (AJ-HDC27). In 720p, the HVX200 records not only in the most popular 24p, 30p, and 60p, but almost any rate between 4 and 60 as well. One limitation is that his flexibility is reserved for 720p.
When we jump up to 1080p, the camera still delivers TRUE 24p – which is amazing considering none of the HDV cams in the same price range support it. Click here for more on HVX200 frame rates.
Robust format
Panasonic HVX200′s HD format is called DVCPRO-HD. The difference between DVCPRO-HD and HDV is about 4 to 1 in terms of data throughput. DVCPRO-HD supports data rates of up to 100Mbps. This allows the camera to record video without applying as much compression as the HDV cameras do. Another advantage in terms of format is the support of 4:2:2 color space – again linked to the 100Mbps allowance. The DVCPRO-HD has been around for several years and has been used in the Varicam.
In addition to the HD format, Panasonic HVX200 also supports standard DV, as well as DVCPRO50 (Panasonic’s more professional DV format with a much lower compression ratio).
Tapeless recording (P2)
The argument tape vs, memory is still raging on. On the negative side, memory is very expensive compared to tape. An 8GB P2 chip that can hold about 10 minutes of HD (depending on frame rate) is going to cost you $1,700. On the positive, it’s quick, durable, and best of all – bound to become cheaper. SONY has pioneered a disc system – XDCAM – which is similar but naturally, cheaper because it uses Blu-Ray discs (27GB).
Panasonic HVX200 takes advantage of its data recording medium in several ways. First, you start recording immediately after you hit the button. In fact, it’s better than that. P2 allows you to start recording BEFORE you hit the button. The memory will buffer 3-7 seconds of video, so even if you don’t have split-second reactions, you’ll be able to capture action flawlessly.
Another advantage is the ability to transfer files directly to your computer (or you could back them up to Firewire drives). During shooting you can also mark takes which you like so that you can start editing in seconds.
Lens and controls
HVX200′s lens is a 13x Leica which compares favourably to SONY FX1. The zoom ring is full manual which is another big plus. Both JVC GY-HD100U and the upcoming Canon XL H1 have interchangeable lenses although the availability and variety of quality lenses is still in question.
Audio
Panasonic HVX200′s more robust format (DVCPRO-HD) allows four uncompressed channels of 16-bit 48Khz quality audio (or two stereo pairs). This is a BIG change from the HDV format.
Final verdict (based on specs)
Panasonic has created a worthy successor to the DVX100. HVX200 excels in all areas and it could be hard for a HDV camera to compete, especially, when you consider the price. At $5,995, it’s only marginally more expensive than SONY Z1 (50 bucks more) but offers a lot more. It’s much cheaper than the interchangeable lens cameras – Canon XL H1 and JVC GY-HD100U.
That’s until you consider the cost for the media. At $1,700 per a pop, 8GB P2′s are going to be a TOUGH sell. In a year’s time, it’ll probably be 2-4 times cheaper, so don’t start stocking on P2s just now. If $6,000 is too much for you, you could get Sony HC1 for less than $1,500 – it’s a more affordable, entry-level HDV camcorder. The bigger and better Sony FX1 is midway (at $3,000 it’s perfect for wedding videography) between the Hc1 and HVX200.
Update: Check out this USB 1.1 vs USB 2.0 speed comparison.
I get quite a few emails from people interested in becoming indie producers and filmmakers. Here’s one:
Thank you for your webpage and all the valuable information it contains. I had a question please: I want to be a totally independent guerrilla filmmaker, and was wondering if
the Pansonic HVX200 would be good enough a camera to start with? Is the true 24P the most important factor here?I had intended to shoot with an HD camera of some sort, and then use the software that gives video that
“film look”.I appreciate your time and assistance. Thank you.
My answer:
Thanks for writing. I think independent film making goes beyond the hardware. It’s true that HVX200 will get you closer to getting filmlike video than say … Sony FX1. However, film and video are two very different media and you cannot expect a $20,000 production to look like a $20,000,000. It’s bound to look “different.”
That’s why, I think you should pick a subject matter that will let you “exploit” the advantages of the digital medium and hopefully mask its weaknesses. For example, you might want to try a “reality” format for your feature. Intrusive, in-your-face camerawork with a lot of close-ups will put emphasis on video’s strengths (check out Waterborne at Google Video).
Hint: Get diffusion filters, if you plan close-ups as video is quite unforgiving to ANY skin imperfections. A good make-up artists is a plus!
I encourage you to rent HVX200 for a weekend and plan a shoot around it. There’s no better way of managing your own expectations for the final result. Once you see the results, you can either select another cam or perhaps change your script a bit to accommodate the specific “look” you get from the camera.
Remember that high-end cameras give you flexibility and protect against errors but at the end, all cameras are the same. I’ve seen some amazing photos coming out of Kodak’s single-use cameras. It’s just that a high-end Canon gives you consistency and flexibility. The same thing applies to camcorders as well.
Hope that makes sense
I’ve been extolling the virtues of HVX200 for the last few months.
This time, however, it’s Sony FX1 turn to shine (review of Sony FX1). How, you ask. Very simple – it’s the first time I see the camera go for under $2,000!
Apple Store has the FX1 for $1,995 – you should definitely hurry up. It can’t be linked directly, so here’s the instructions: go to Apple Store, search for “HDR-FX1″ and voila! You got an HD cam for less than 2,000.
Update: It seems the item is out of stock now (April 7).
There’s a report at Cinema Minima that while guys from Apple and Panasonic were setting up an Apple G5 / HVX200 combo. The point of the exercise is obviously to showcase how well HVX200 integrates with Apple’s new mac.
If you’re attending SXSW, you might want to check out some of the movie premieres as well. They boast “115 features, 50 of which are World Premieres.” Not exactly equal to Sundance’s selection but nonetheless impressive. Here’s the schedule.
BBC’s ENG teams will be using Panasonic HVX200 during the Winter Olympics in Torino. The information is based in part on an article that talks about BBC experimenting with Panasonic’s P2 tapeless technology.
The major issue with HVX200 at this point is that its PAL version hasn’t been released. BBC definitely shoots PAL. It’s not clear whether Panasonic sent pre-production units to the BBC.
Talking about sports coverage, BBC will probably using the interlaced modes and not the progressive frame rates.
Sony is not left in the dust either. It provides a complete solution to NBC for their coverage of the Olympics. The acquision is handled mostly by Sony HDW-730 HDCAM.
Update: It seems the BBC distances itself from more traditional media. Maybe it’s affecting camera choices as well!
I recently reviewed Ikegami HDL-20 as one of the pioneers in the field of ultra-compact HD cameras, a.k.a. minicams. The downside to being an early adopter though is price and in HDL-20′s case, it’s pretty steep – $20,000+.
Sony has a PAL camera (DXC-C33P) which is pretty good and flexible for a minicam but unfortunately it’s not hi-def.
The price is only one-fifth of the Ikegami unit which could save you, if you desparately need a minicam on a budget.
Here’s the company description:
The Sony DXC-C33P is a 3-chip color video camera with Firewire connectivity for limited space applications. It uses 3x 1/3-inch CCDs that output an amazing 850 lines of resolution and are sensitive for f/8 at 2000 lux. A powerful digital signal processor allows great image quality with DynaLatitude and Partial Enhance, special features usually found on high-end broadcast gear. The camera is made up of 2 pieces: the camera head that takes C-mount lenses, and the camera control unit, a control box that gives access to the various video parameters the DSP governs and the on-screen menu system. The 2 pieces are connected by a flexible cable (sold separately) that can be as long as about 90 feet (30 meters).
There are three Sony minicam lenses that come as standard accessories – none of them are anamorphic, i.e. convert from 4:3 to 16:9. You most definitely need an anamorphic adapter as otherwise you’ll be losing a lot more resolution (converting from 4:3 to 16:9 in post).
I haven’t seen a lens adapter that small but the camera comes with a standard c-mount type lens mount, so it which should accommodate other lenses as well.
The GOOD news is that the dimensions of the camera put it in the ultra-compact class (32x38x40mm). The camera head weighs just 48 grams which allows you to mount it on ANYTHING, even on a remote-controlled toy car. If I were you, I would be careful where I mount it though. It’s still a pretty expensive camera ($4,000+).
To put the DXC-C33 into perspective, Sony’s smallest HD cam, the HC1 weighs 680 grams (24 ounces) and Sony’s regular-sized FX1 is 2 kilos (4 pounds).
In terms of camera accessories, you have no choice but to buy a lens and a recording unit. There’s an optional 30 meter cable that links the camera to the control unit which could come in handy as well (if you need to put the camera on a pole). There’s a company in the UK that’s already putting these on poles – not surprisingly, the company’s called Polecam.
It’s interesting to see if some of the new USB 2.0 webcams can deliver an image that’s worth anything.
Recently, when I reviewed Sony HC1, I said it’s the smallest, most compact HDV cam. It would seem I got it wrong, as Ikegami has had a smaller hd camera for some time now.
Ikegami HDL-20 is a ultra-compact HD minicam with some amazing features. It comes with an inpressive price tag but considering you’ll probably rent it for a day or two of “trick” photography, it’s a good option to consider.
If you’re on a low budget, however, you have little choice but to tinker with a Sony HC1 camcorder. Maybe you can remove the recording mechanism or fit it with a lens adapter.
Here’s the description found at the site:
The HDL-20 is a HDTV camera with an ultra-compact camera head incorporating two 2/3-inch 2.2 million-pixel CCDs. As external sync signal input and HD-SDI output are provided, the HDL-20 is suitable for trick shooting in special fields of the broadcasting sector. Despite the fact that it utilizes only two CCDs, the camera incorporates a newly developed ASIC for digital processing to achieve a resolution as high as three-CCD cameras.
It all sounds OK, although the last sentence bothers me a bit. If 2CCDs are just as good as 3CCDs, why am I not seeing MORE 2CCD cameras? Anyway, the important features are as follows:
If there’s a downside to using this camera as your next helm cam, it’s the price tag. The MSRP is $30,000. Yep, that’s THIRTY thousand. I didn’t put another zero for effect. So if you’re super-rich and your MTB weighs 2 pounds there’s no reason why your helm cam should weigh more than several ounces.
This minicam is a good option for “trick” photography – as a pole cam or miniatures cam because of its 2/3 inch mount which accepts a variety of professional HD lenses (also very expensive).
If you’re like me, you better stick to Sony – their SD minicam is the Sony DXC-C33. You will need an anamorphic adapter though to make up for the resolution loss.
On October 12, 2005, Apple announced the fifth-generation iPod, a.k.a. video iPod, which featured the ability to play video with resolutions of up to 480 x 480 and 320 x 240 (videos purchased from the iTunes Music Store are limited to 320 x 240.)
Is the video iPod (and handhelds in general) a viable platform for indie producers to distribute shorts and features? As I’ve said in my iPod video review, you won’t be able to play Lawrence of Arabia on your iPod any time soon.
IMAX movies aside, let’s take the U2 iPod video as an example of what you can play on an iPod and make it look great.
Video iPod – Encoding Video
The video iPod plays MPEG-4 and H.264 video – this is all good news as both codecs are very efficient which results in very high-quality video.
When one considers the target resolution, even files encoded at the highest resolution (230,400 pixels) usually end up about 15MB per minute of video.
Most feature-length videos will be between 1GB and 2GB. If you encode them at 320×240, they’ll be in the 500MB range probably. In other words, even the 30G iPod will store 10+ movies.
Video iPod – Screen and Battery
It has a 65,536 color screen with a 320 x 240 (the pixel count is 76,800) QVGA transflective TFT display. The iPod is also able to display video on an external TV via the AV cable accessory (that’s the only reason to encode at the higher resolution).
16-bit color is OK but definitely not great when you need a dynamic range. Most gradient backgrounds will form strips instead of one smooth transition. Reflections or overexposure create similar patterns. As you can see in the screenshots from the U2 iPod video, there are 3 rules:
High-contrast could be put on the list but it would be a bit misleading. For example, a film noir is high-contrast but it might have too many grays for the display to handle.
Practive makes perfect. However, before you rush out with your new HD camera, you should download a few torrents for your iPod (already encoded) and see what works and what doesn’t.
I’ll return to the subject tomorrow when I’ll review how to convert videos for iPod.
Steve Jobs have captured hearts and minds with his Macworld San Fran 2006 presentation (I got it as a torrent for iPod). I’ve seen posts about it all over the place, some praising his presentation skills (Guy Kawasaki), some commenting on the Intel insides of the new MacBook Pro.
There’s a ton of new stuff coming from Apple, but the interesting bit is below. Steve Jobs included one HDV camera in the presentation: the Sony HC1 .
More robust cameras like Panasonic HVX200 and Canon XL H1 shouldn’t feel threaten though. I’d imagine Steve included it because HC1 is an ultra-affordable HDV cam at the $1,500 range, truly a remarkable achievement for Sony. Apple should really look up to Sony – I want them to take one of Sony’s LCDs and put it on the next generation of video iPods, so that they play movies.
As to Steve, what can I say… great minds think alike. I did a review of the Sony Hc1 just a day before Steve
Update: Kevin Smith touts HVX200, so Sony HC1 is not the only “winner”.
Barry Green (from DVXuser) has been teasing us for some time now about a four-camera shootout. The four cameras in the shootout are:
I expect that by the end of the week, Barry will be done. Disclosure: Barry is one of the people behind DVXuser so he faced some “suspicions” from some of the posters there. They expected his report will be skewed in favor of the HVX200. That’s why he has some “witnesses” to verify his findings.
Update: There’s been a major forum war on the finding of the four-camera shootout. As far as I’m concerned, there’s no winner-loser. If you want the raw 40 pages of posts, I have two links: DVX forum and Dvinfo forum.
Panasonic HVX200 is all over the site and for a good reason. I finally got to see some of the 60 FPS footage shot by Jarred Land at DVXuser.
He got amazing CHEERLEADERS in real slow motion!
You can download the clip directly – click here. Keep in mind the clip has been resized and compressed.
The original was shot at 720p – 60 FPS. HVX200 supports a whole range of frame rates at 720p but I’ve always found that slow motion is much, much more useful. I’m a bit hesitant to check what Jarred’s next test will be. For all I know, he could decide to switch to sexy babysitters!
I’ve been reviewing HVX200 accessories like tripods, monitors, storage, etc. Once I got to matte boxes and filters for HVX200, I knew I have to include lens adapters.
Panasonic HVX200 is dubbed as the low-budget filmmakers HD camera. Although it has an impressive lens (Leica, 13x zoom lens), the lens is by no means a be-all, end-all lens. You should pay extra attention to makeup donts when using this lens.
If you’re into extreme sports videos, you probably need a wide-angle lens. If you do skateboards, you need a fish-eye. It has become a standard shot although a bit cliche.
The Super Fisheye from Century Optics produces an “extraordinary degree of barrel distortion with a magnification factor of approximately .55x. Adding the Super Fisheye to HVX200′s 13x Zoom Lens, results in a 92° horizontal angle of view.” The fish-eye works wonders whether you’re shooting from below (someone jumping over you), or above (top of half-pipe).
Wide-angle lenses have an incredible depth of field so you might want to go wide for action shots or tracking shots. If the auto-focus is not 100% spot on, you’ll save your shot by going wide. Robert Rodriguez shot some of the action scenes in El Mariachi with a 5.7 Kinoptic wide-angle lens. He didn’t even need to focus, he just pointed the camera in the direction of the action.
Extreme close-ups: if you need those, there are “achromatic diopter” lenses that you attach to the zoom lens. You’ll probably only need them for a few shots, so you could just rent or borrow these. Apart from shooting flowers and bugs, you can find usage for these by shooting dilating pupils (e.g. Requem for a Dream).
Tele lenses are always popular with amateur filmmakers although not always for the right reasons. The “zoom” factor on a lens has become a marketing gimmick. Get this 400x digital zoom now. Using digital zoom however ruins the quality of the footage. There could be a few exceptions where you might need that extra push but you’ll be better off with a tele converter. There are plenty to choose from but not all are created equal. I think a 1.6x tele converter is about the highest you want to go. The ones that come from eBay are 2x and go for 50 bucks should go to the trash.
Talking of adapters and converters, there’s one important distinction to make. Converters will allow you to use the whole zoom range (i.e. go from wide to tele). Adapters usually only extend your range. For example, a .6 wide-angle adapter will give you a 40% wider angle of view. You can usually zoom a bit before you experience vignetting on an adapter.
Some manufacturers also offer (or plan to do so) 35mm lens adapters for HVX200. The discussion about these is still raging on but maybe I could do a review once the dust settles somewhat. Combining film depth of field with HVX200′s frame rates will make this camera a totally different beast. I mean that in the nicest sort of way.
When I reviewed accessories for HVX200, I went through tripods and heads. Today we examine matte boxes, filters, lens adapters, and storage. Next, I’ll review lens adapters for HVX200.
Matte Box: HVX200 is a filmmaker’s dream and no dream is complete without a matte box. The matte box is not simply meant to make you look like a filmmaker. It reduces flair and also serves as a way to standardize filters and gels.
For example, Vocas matte boxes accommodate 3X3″ through 4×6″ filters and work with most wide angle lenses in both 4:3 and 16:9 aspect ratios. Matte boxes usually start below $1,000 but once you add a few flags and masks and you could be in the $2,000+ range.
Filters: Your spanking new matte box needs some fancy filters. Tiffen has its series of filter sets that supposedly create a “filmlike” effect. Considering the frame rates supported by HVX200, it will be a shame not to go for the film look.
The 4×4″ Film Look set costs about $700 and you’ll probably need more than these. Keep in mind that heavy use of filters will result in a reduction of the light going to the CCDs. In other words, more filters will require bigger lights. Early footage from the HVX200 is pretty dark so you might need quite a few lights to make anything work.
If you shoot in bright sunshine, you might want to get a bunch of softening and neutral density filters of different grades. ND filters will reduce light, softening filters will soften the harsh quality of the sunlight.
Storage: The HDV cameras that are in HVX200′s class all support recording to MiniDV. In order to utilize fully DVCPRO HD, HVX200 records to P2 memory chips. This means if you plan to record anything longer than an hour, you need additional storage. At the very least it could be a laptop – get one with a big HD and fast USB/Firewire ports (USB 1.1 vs USB 2.0). You could also get an external hard drive but that will only serve as a backup recorder.
OK, I think we just spent another $6,000-8,000 easy. No money for lens adapters. You can borrow these anyway. I’ll review lens adapters for HVX200 in a separate post.
You still got to get lens adapters, capture / real-time cards, editing software, editing workstation/server, etc. Not to mention – a ton of lights. But that’s another post!