http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ Videomaker Forums » Tag: DV - Recent Posts en Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:20:47 +0000 http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/an-alternative-to-acdsee-on-h264avchdmpeg2-video-browsing-and-managing#post-52330 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:40:05 +0000 famering 52330@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Today, I was cleaning up files on an old hard disk. In it, I met again many softwares I used to be using during last decade. ACDSEE, PHOTOSHOP, ULTRA EDITOR and many others, some of them are still my favorite tools today.</p> <p>Watch the Windows Vista I am using now, what a similar looking between the explorer and the old ACDSEE classic. The so called thumbnail-view layout, which I first saw in ACDSEE classic, is nowadays a most common user interface standard.</p> <p>Thumbnail-view is not the only strong point that ACDSEE holds. <br />ACDSEE is still the best when the image browsing speed is measured. That's why I am still using ACDSEE as my picture browser, although the Windows now can do it natively(but slowly). This shows, there is always a chance to survive for an unique technology, like the image browsing speed of ACDSEE.</p> <p>On the contrary, when we turn to the speed of video browsing, ACDSEE falls into the common category of DirectShow filter based applications. ACDSEE does not decode video itself, so its video browsing speed is limited by the DirectShow.</p> <p>This gave an opportunity to the video manager I am using now, the Smart Mate for DV and DVB.</p> <p>Based on special video technology from FameRing, Smart Mate for DV and DVB is 20~30 times faster than DirectShow based softwares when browsing and taking thumbs of movies.</p> <p>I have a Hauppauge HD PVR DVB Box with a tuner installed on PC. I've recorded about several hundreds of H.264/AVCHD movies on my hard disk. They are .ts files, aka transport stream. Every now and then, I need to organize them, search them, bookmark them, share them with my friends. Just like what I did to my Jpeg photos. Further more, I want to edit the movies, like cutting commercials out of them, this leads to the most valuable part of Smart Mate for DV and DVB. It has the world's first H.264/AVCHD/MPEG2 frame accurate cutter without re-encoding.</p> <p>Smart Mate for DV and DVB not only supports frame accurate cutting on H.264/AVCHD/MPEG2, but also does it in a fastest way. It only re-encodes the gop on start point and end point, middle part of movie remains untouched. This gives the highest speed cutting while reserving highest video quality. So called, "Smart Cut".</p> <p>If anyone else needs an easy but professional management solution for H.264/AVCHD/MPEG2 movies from Satellite video receiver, DVB HD PVR, DV Camcorder, or INTERNET, the Smart Mate for DV and DVB is the software you must have. FameRing also has video manager for all popular formats, called MovieShop, I was only using the version customized for H.264/AVCHD/MPEG2.</p> <p>Come back to the ACDSEE, it will always be my image browsing tool, but not for the video browsing and managing.<br /> <br />To me, the Smart Mate for DV and DVB is an alternative to ACDSEE on video files. That is why we like competition, which gives us more and more better softwares.</p> <p>May be some time later, Windows will be able to browse H.264/AVCHD/MPEG2 .ts movies natively(cuts frame accurately? I do not think so), like the thumb-nail view it learned from ACDSEE. But it will never be the only software left, because the unique technology always survives, as it is unique. The customers will always have alternative and better choices.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/sony-dhr-1000-dv-edit-deck-795-obo#post-51804 Sun, 01 Nov 2009 18:24:15 +0000 bgunder 51804@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>This edit deck has very low hours on it being used for only a few personal projects each year and the very occasional one for a client. Note that this is one of only a few DV decks that takes both miniDV and full-size DV tapes. With a full-size tape you can have over 3 Hours of recording time at SP speed! </p> <p>It is in perfect condition, essentially as new. All the original accessories are included: owner's manual, cables, etc., except for the remote batteries and the cleaning cassette. I'll include a 186min. full-size size tape (used) instead.</p> <p>This is by far the best tape deck I've ever used and that includes many professional models. The rewind and fast forward speeds are almost not to be believed. The built-in edit functions do not compare to using a computer-based editor, but they work perfectly and easily.</p> <p>It will ship in the original Sony box and packing.<br />Please contact me with any questions. I'll answer as best I can.</p> <p>Specifications</p> <p>Format: Digital (Dv/Mini Dv) (Dvcam Playback Only) </p> <p>Number of Heads: 4 Head </p> <p>Audio: Pcm Stereo 12 Bit 32 Khz 2 Stereo Tracks, Or 16 Bit 48 Khz 1 Stereo Track,Mts Stereo Tuner </p> <p>Flying Erase Head: Yes </p> <p>Audio Dub: Yes (12 Bit Mode) </p> <p>Insert Editing: Yes (Video Or Audio Or Both) </p> <p>Random Assemble Edit: Yes 10 Segment Assemble Editor </p> <p>Synchro Edit: Yes W/ Control-L / Control-S / Dv Fire Wire </p> <p>Time Code: Drop Frame Time Code, Compatible W/ Rc Time </p> <p>Control Protocol: Yes Control-L (Lanc), Control-S </p> <p>Time Base Corrector (TBC): Yes </p> <p>DV (IEEE-1394): Yes </p> <p>Line In Recording: Yes (S Video/ Composite/ Dv-Fire Wire) </p> <p>Tape Counter: Yes </p> <p>Jog/Shuttle: Yes Jog/Shuttle </p> <p>Audio Level Meter: Yes </p> <p>Manual Audio Level Control: Yes (Also A Audio Mix Balance) </p> <p>Slow Motion: Crystal Clear Freeze Frame, Slow Motion </p> <p>Frame Advance: Frame By Frame </p> <p>Manual Tracking: Yes </p> <p>VCR Plus: Yes </p> <p>Cable Box Control: Yes </p> <p>Program Timer Recording: Yes </p> <p>Auto Repeat: No </p> <p>Auto Tape Speed: No </p> <p>Record Speeds: No </p> <p>Playback Speeds: No </p> <p>Commercial Advance/Skip: No </p> <p>Front Audio/Video Input: Yes S Video/ Rca / Dv Fire Wire/ Lanc Line (2) </p> <p>Back Audio/Video Inputs: 1 S Video 1 Rca And Control-S Line (1) </p> <p>Back Audio/Video Outputs: 2 S Video 2 Rca And Control-S 1 X Lanc </p> <p>Headphone Jack: Yes W/ Level Control Stereo (In Front) </p> <p>Microphone Input: Yes W/ Audio Control Mini (In Front) </p> <p>Index Search: Yes Or By Data Search </p> <p>181-Channel Tuner: Yes </p> <p>Dimensions (WxHxD): 17"X 5 3/4"X 14 3/4" </p> <p>Weight: 21 Lbs 5 Oz </p> <p>Power Requirements: 23 Watts, Ac 120 Volts 60 Hz </p> <p>Remote: Yes </p> <p>Jog/Shuttle On Remote: Yes Jog/Shuttle Ring </p> <p>Multi Brand Remote: Yes </p> <p>Specialties: Photo Search, Data Search, Built In Tv Tuner, Insert Editing, Audio Dub, Assemble Editing, Manual Audio Level Control, Mic Input,Head- Phone Jack W/ Level Control, Built In Edit Board</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/which-dv-would-be-recommended-and-proper-for-family-use#post-49788 Wed, 05 Aug 2009 03:04:03 +0000 jollydragon 49788@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> Thank R<a href="http://www.robgrauert.com/"><strong>obgrauert</strong></a> for the suggestions. But I'm afraid they are too professional for normal family use. </p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/which-dv-would-be-recommended-and-proper-for-family-use#post-49787 Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:55:48 +0000 jollydragon 49787@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> I'm not familiar with the parameters of DVs. What good features do you suggest for normal family use? My budget is about US$ 600.00. </p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/which-dv-would-be-recommended-and-proper-for-family-use#post-49764 Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:07:42 +0000 birdcat 49764@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>What's your budget?  Price will make a big difference as to recommendations.  Also, besides low light capabilities, what are your other feature/bell/whistle needs?</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/which-dv-would-be-recommended-and-proper-for-family-use#post-49762 Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:32:26 +0000 robgrauert 49762@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Sony PD170, VX2100, PD150, or VX2000</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/which-dv-would-be-recommended-and-proper-for-family-use#post-49761 Tue, 04 Aug 2009 09:45:13 +0000 jollydragon 49761@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> I'm planning to buy a DV for my family. The video quality should be good for normal family standard. It should be good not only for sunny screenary, but also for dark environment. Thanks a lot in advance. </p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-49502 Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:38:54 +0000 composite1 49502@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Mazda,</p> <p>Glad you're enjoying the thread. I recently shot some racing events one set using 60p the other 24p at high shutter speeds to make for more interesting slo-mo's. I dig the look of both though as you implied, the 24p has a less smooth look at normal speed. However, the stuttered motion does lend a certain 'excitement' to the look of the movements.</p> <p>Concerning whether your 'gearheads' computers can handle the footage, yeah it helps to format it so it will work for the lowest level units. However, YouTube does allow for higher-res viewing so you can put out a better looking piece and those who can view it at hi-res can choose to do so. </p> <p>Deciding to use 24p with video is purely an artistic choice. Using it just so your video will look like film isn't a good idea if you aren't sure about what you want to accomplish with it.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-49467 Sat, 25 Jul 2009 22:17:54 +0000 MazdaMan 49467@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I've never shot 24p and never really had an interest in video until people on my website wanted it. Since it is an automotive site where I might be covering local race events or something I was thinking it best NOT to have a camera that shot in 24p only? This seemed to make sense to me since the movement of a car traveling at high speeds would be less between frames and so would look smoother on video. I like to take into account though that many of my viewers probably have a below average internet connection because they are gearheads who don't do much on their computers. Not sure if it would really matter in my case since I upload to youtube anyways....</p> <p> </p> <p>Good thread.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/video-recording-formats-and-editing-software#post-49150 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:37:20 +0000 darkmilonguero 49150@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Hi.</p> <p>I find very interesting this post because I have a similar issue. I am bit confused whether I should shoot in 60i or 30p for web, DVD and eventually Blu-Ray. </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/video-recording-formats-and-editing-software#post-48803 Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:56:08 +0000 rocrob 48803@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> Thank you.  </p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/video-recording-formats-and-editing-software#post-48789 Mon, 06 Jul 2009 12:08:34 +0000 birdcat 48789@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Good lighting is essential.  Look in a TV studio of any kind and the most prevalent equipment you will see is the multitude of lights.  </p> <p>Good audio (mic placement) is also very important - use decent mics on boom poles or wireless lav's if you can.</p> <p>A tripod is also important, as is a teleprompter and talent that knows how to both run it and read from it (both sides of the camera).</p> <p>I think the camera is the least important piece of the puzzle as even a good consumer model will yield decent results.</p> <p>Just MHO.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/video-recording-formats-and-editing-software#post-48778 Mon, 06 Jul 2009 02:14:23 +0000 rocrob 48778@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> I would like to add that the videos for will primarily for the web, but occassionally, I may want to create standard definition DVDs as well.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/video-recording-formats-and-editing-software#post-48775 Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:53:32 +0000 rocrob 48775@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> Does anyone have any recommendations on the recording format (720p/60, 1080i, etc) needed to achieve the live TV look (such as the video type seen on the TV news, The  Daily Show) or if the Standard Definition camcorders like the DVX100B or XL2 are capable of recording and displaying that type of video?  Most of my videos would be shot indoors.  I would like to narrow down the camcorder I need to purchase based the recording formats.  </p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/video-recording-formats-and-editing-software#post-48683 Thu, 02 Jul 2009 04:29:11 +0000 rocrob 48683@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Thank you for your replies.  Does the 720p30 recording format produce an video image similiar to reality and news TV programs?  More often than not, that will be what I want most of my videos to look like.  I may do some film-like videos, but not very often.  </p> <p>I am strongly considering one of the SD camera such as the DVX100B or the XL1.  For HD, I'm sort of considering the JVC HD100U or the JVC HM100.  I read somewhere that the JVC-HD100U was used to make a movie that used a lot of green screen work.  I believe I also read somewhere else that the HD100U was good for 24p film-like video, but not for reality or studio type video.  But since the HD100U and the HM100 has a wider variety of recording formats than a little of the lower to mid-range camcorders, I'm not sure if that is accurate.  </p> <p>Would you recommend green screen projects with a SD camcorder (like DVX100B or XL1)?</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/video-recording-formats-and-editing-software#post-48675 Thu, 02 Jul 2009 02:07:45 +0000 robgrauert 48675@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>If you are shooting for the web, I don't see a need to shoot any other HD format other than 720p30, however, I don't think you need HD. I think if you shoot 16:9 on a Panasonic DVX100B or a Sony PD170, you would be satisfied with the results. </p> <p>Since you want to do green screen, if you insist on shooting HD I would recommend a DVCProHD camera since that codec is an I-Frame codec. Long GOP codecs, such as AVCHD, HDV, and maybe even XDCam EX, will give you problems when attempting to do green screen.</p> <p>As for editing on PC, I suggest Adobe Premiere for editing and After Effects for your graphics.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/video-recording-formats-and-editing-software#post-48667 Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:09:51 +0000 Cville 48667@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> You asked a lot of question and I will address a few of them.  You can find both books and DVD's here on yhe Videomaker website.  One book that I would recommend "The filmmaker's Handbook" a comprehensive guide for the digital age.  This  covers and explains a lot about film and video.  I have the 2008 edition which also covers high definition formats.  It is a great all around guide and you will learn a lot.  My copy came from Borders.</p> <p>You also said you want to shoot in 16:9.  Most of the standard definition cameras will record in 16:9</p> <p>Your computer platform will influence your Editing software I am sure you will get many recomendations.  I work on a PC and use Sony Vegas Pro 8.  I moved from Uleads Meadia Studio Pro. When I bought Vegas it came bundled with a set of VASST training DVD's which were a great help in gettng me up to speed on the software.</p> <p>You will probably need more than just the editing software for some of the things that you want to do and I am sure others will make some recomendation in that area especially around your annimation requirements.</p> <p>I hope this helps</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/video-recording-formats-and-editing-software#post-48655 Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:49:10 +0000 rocrob 48655@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I am in the process of trying to select a digital camcorder for some projects I plan on doing and have a question about some of the various video recording formats in order to narrow down which camcorder to buy.  My projects will primarily be for a web site I plan on publishing and for YouTube.  My preference is to shoot videos with a look similiar to what you see on reality shows, TV news, The Daily Show; in essence, most of the videos will not have the film look.  I also plan to do blue or green screen backgrounds for some of my videos and incorporate some animination and graphics in my videos.  Should the need arise, I would like the option of shooting film-like video which I understand is 24p.  Typically, what shooting format should I be looking at in the digital camcorder (ie 1080i/60, 720/60p, 720/30p) to achieve the video look I want to produce.</p> <p>High definition is probably not a necessity at this point although I have been looking primarily at HD camcorders because I like the option of recording in that mode and a lot of them can film in 16:9.  While most of my projects will be on the internet, I would like to option of filming and putting the video on a DVD and have it displayed optimally for widescreen televisions.</p> <p>The other question I have is about software and editing.  Some of my videos will be like a news segment or a comedy news show other videos or pictures will appear on the video along with the video that I filmed.  I also would like from time to time to use animation (think Daily Show or The Colbert Report) where the title of the segment is animated along the bottom of the screen or an opening segment is animated.  Then, of course, is the blue or green screen work where I can display either a still photo or another video in the background.  Any ideas on which software(s) are ideal for these types of projects or any good books or DVDs I can read.   I would use be using a PC for my editing work.</p> <p>Thank you.  Robert</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48467 Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:39:30 +0000 composite1 48467@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p><em>"Yet another reason I say that if they put the 5d Mk II into a camcorder body, I'd pay for one. Or four."</em></p> <p>Jim,</p> <p>I don't know Hoss, after seeing some of the rigs put together for the Mk II by Redrock and Zacuto, plus the firmware updates allowing for manual exposure control, zebras and audio levels 'being in a camcorder body' is shrinking fast in my eyes as an issue. If you haven't seen those rigs, check out the videos on the '5k' and 'Advanced Info' threads.</p> <p>Stephan,</p> <p>Yeah 29.97 is the old workhorse but I'm definitely a progressive scan convert. If I didn't have to edit another interlaced video project again I doubt my feelings would be hurt. Currently, I'm working on a project shot in 24p with the web and DVD in mind.</p> <p>Norman,</p> <p>No I don't think your questions are hijacking the thread as I asked it in the first place.</p> <p>BTW,</p> <p>Have any of you shot any projects in 24p? If you have, please elaborate on why you did it and how it turned out.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48465 Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:52:16 +0000 robgrauert 48465@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Norman,</p> <p>Yes. For youtube I use h.264</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48463 Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:45:18 +0000 Stephan 48463@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I never really use 24p. Even after seeing the video, still will continue to use 29.9 frames per second.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48446 Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:34:52 +0000 NormanWillis 48446@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Hi Rob.</p> <p>Thanks.</p> <p>Just to confirm, you mean you upload to YouTube and other sharing sites in H.264?</p> <p>Norman</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48433 Fri, 26 Jun 2009 06:45:44 +0000 robgrauert 48433@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Norman,</p> <p>No, those are the settings I use when I upload videos to my personal website. </p> <p>When it comes to sites like Youtube, I upload videos at the recommended image dimensions (1280X720 for HD, 640X360 for 16:9 SD, and 640X480 for 4:3 SD) and I compress as close to the file size limit as I can. I do this because sites like Youtube apply their own compression that the user has no control over. So I upload as much data as I can. </p> <p>But I do always upload h.264 Quicktimes.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48432 Fri, 26 Jun 2009 05:54:32 +0000 NormanWillis 48432@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Hey Rob.</p> <p>I don't want to hijack this thread, but do you use these settings on all web sharing sites (YouTube, Vimeo, Metacafe, etceteras), regardless of HD or SD?</p> <p>&gt;&gt;<em>Apparently the average internet connection speed in the US is 3 megabits per second, but I wouldn't rely on that statistic. I encode at a much lower data rate than that. Here are the settings I use. Hopefully you have the same options...I don't see why you wouldn't:</em></p> <p><em>Codec: H.264</em></p> <p><em>Video Settings:</em></p> <p><em>Frame Rate: 30fps</em></p> <p><em>Key Frames: Automatic (if you can't choose 'Automatic' try '300')</em></p> <p><em>Data Rate: Restricted to 700kbits/s (although, you should experiment and see how low you can go)</em></p> <p><em>Encoding: Multi-Pass</em></p> <p><em>Audio Settings:</em></p> <p><em>Format: AAC</em></p> <p><em>Channels: Mono (although Stereo is fine if you really want it)</em></p> <p><em>Sample Rate: 44.1 kHz</em></p> <p><em>Render Quality: Best</em></p> <p><em>Target Bit Rate: 64kbits/s (128kbits/s if you choose Stereo)</em></p> <p><em>Streaming Option: Fast Start (this is what 'tells' the video to load as you watch)</em></p> <p>Or do you use different stuff for SD than you do for HD?  Thanks.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48426 Fri, 26 Jun 2009 05:04:10 +0000 jimcvideo 48426@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Yet another reason I say that if they put the 5d Mk II into a camcorder body, I'd pay for one. Or four.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48398 Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:11:41 +0000 composite1 48398@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Rob,</p> <p>I totally got what Jim meant. Exposure Latitude is determined by how much film can be over or underexposed before you start to lose detail. By the very nature of the silver halides suspended in film's emulsion said silver begins to decay when exposed to the blue spectrum of light. The lattitude and range of sensitivity comes from the amount and density of spacing of the silver in the emulsion. The range of sensitivity can be selected by its ISO number. Color Film gets additional boosts in what it can record from the different chemical additives comprising its individual color emulsion layers. As for 'not having to worry about losing detail in dark shadowy areas or bright 'hotspots, yeah you do. With film you have to take extra care in selecting your film stock, speed, how you light it and how it's going to be processed. Nothing worse than seeing 'bulletproof' (overexposed) or 'ghostly' (underexposed) daily's in the screening room. </p> <p>All that said, the ISO rating is very important if you want to get that image detail in the highlights and shadows. For a very long time color film had low ISO ratings and needed lots of light to get those details. If you've ever watched Hollywood 'A' list films from the late '40's through the early '60's they had to use 5 point lighting in nearly every scene and either shot night scenes on stage or used 'day for night'. Your film lattitude comes from the base layer of film that contains the blue light only sensitive silver. A higher ISO rating will give you more ability to record highlight and shadow detail due to it's greater sensitivity.</p> <p>Video on the otherhand is similar to film as each camera's CCD(s) or CMOS chip also has an ISO rating. Most prosumer and mid-level cameras come in at 320. The way video cameras give you simulated lattitude is through boosting the gain. Obviously, a cameraman would use that only as a concious creative choice and it is not comparable to film, but that's video. Knowing your camera's ISO will help you to expose properly and light to expose those light and shadow details. </p> <p>Film has the advantage in that you can also 'push and pull' during processing to get more or less detail in your images. With video you have to make all of your adjustments in camera and get your desired look during production. The closest you can get to pushing and pulling is tweaking the exposure in an NLE. But you have so narrow a range on what can be done, you want to shoot to avoid having to do that in post. So the CMOS chip in the Mk II being sensitive as it is should be able to record more information and give you more exposure latitude than the typical 3CCD chip.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48395 Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:34:49 +0000 robgrauert 48395@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Composite,</p> <p>I could be wrong and possibly be misunderstanding you, but I think what Jim means is that when you work with film, you don't have to worry about losing detail in dark shadowy area or bright hotspots. Video looks bad when the image loses detail in the highlights and shadows. Therefore, video has a limit to the amount of contrast it can record. </p> <p>Maybe the ISO on the Canon 5D address that, but from my understanding of what ISO is, i dont think it does.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48385 Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:43:29 +0000 composite1 48385@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Rob,</p> <p>Thanks for the info. Yes I do have those options. I do believe it's more the limitations of my current website. We are currently preparing for a complete 'slash and burn' of the old one and are redesigning it from scratch. It will be primarily support flash based video with potential links to .wmv and .mov for my clients who prefer the old stuff. </p> <p>That's too bad about not having any narrative work in your background. You've got the 'eye' for lighting and good composition. Narrative work would really flesh out your skills as it takes more planning and discipline to make scenes look like you 'didn't do anything'.</p> <p>Jim,</p> <p>You are on point about the strength of film's potential lattitude. However, I do believe Canon has hit that mark you mentioned. The EOS 5D Mk II has ISO ratings from 50 to 25,000+. Yeah, I wrote 25k ISO. Now offhand I think the effective ISO for video is 6400 so you can shoot in some places you would need a Night Vision adapter and still get usable footage. It just so happens I have one for the EOS and would love to try that out. It be grainy, but I could put it to good use.</p> <p>It's funny how you and many others say 'film is lifelike'. I must have different eyes and a different brain because I always thought film looked 'fake'. I've shot film for years as a photographer and cameraman with 16mm to 70mm and developed medium to large format film (everybody goes on about 70mm ever see 9"x9"? Imagine 'The Dark Knight' shot on that!) But I've never seen a photo or motion picture image on film that ever struck me as looking like 'real life'. Now I've seen a bunch of video that did. Especially seeing a soccer stadium interior at 6k! I swear, even from the cheap seats it looked like all you had to do was step out and just sit down on the bleacher in front of you.</p> <p>But with film depending on your stock can play with exposure so much more and there's stuff you can do to it prior to shooting to get certain looks. In the movie 'Saving Private Ryan', they actually 'baked' the film to give it the same texture as that old combat camera film would have had back in WWII. In 'Blade', the cinematographer fooled around with the bleach process to get 'richer blacks' as he called it. They all looked 'blue' to me, but I got his point. </p> <p>Now if you have a mid-level to pro camera you can get into the controls and tweak your settings to create certain looks before you get to post. However, lately conventional wisdom says to shoot it 'clean' as possible then jack with it in post. I agree and disagree with that because you do want to be creative as a shooter and you don't want to give your editor nightmares either.</p> <p>As far as 'film going out of business', I don't see that happening for quite some time. I figure it will go the way of painting and sculpting as a primary medium and become a purely 'artists medium'.</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48369 Thu, 25 Jun 2009 05:49:45 +0000 jimcvideo 48369@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>There are only two things that I love film for over video. One is the shallow depth of field, which If you really care that much, a DOF converter can be purchased or built farly inexpensively.</p> <p>The one that can't be simulated so easily is the super wide latitude that film gives you when it comes to picking up light. That's what really makes film look so special and "lifelike". Sure, you can simulate it by tinkering with your color curves, but the bottom line is that video is just not catching the light in the same way that film can, at least so far.</p> <p>It won't suprise me at all though if some genius figures out a way to widen the latitude of video. I've often thought that if you had a camera that could capture enough frames per second, you could theoretically do some sort of interleaving - Even frames are underexposed, odd frames are overexposed, and the processor blends the two into one frame. Okay, so the idea's a bit crazy, but sooner or later, someone will invent a way to do it, and then film will go extinct completely. Let's hope for nostalgia's sake that Kodak is the company that invents this technology. I'd hate to see them go out  of business. :-)</p> http://videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/the-truth-about-24p-video#post-48368 Thu, 25 Jun 2009 04:02:15 +0000 robgrauert 48368@http://videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Composite,</p> <p>Many people think file size is the issue when it comes to steaming video for the web. It's not. It's the data rate. You can load a HUGE file to the web and have it play fine as long as the data rate of that video does not exceed the viewer's data rate of their internet connection. If the data rate is too high, when the video reaches a point that isn't loaded it has to stop and buffer. I'm sure we've all experienced that and it's annoying.</p> <p>Apparently the average internet connection speed in the US is 3 megabits per second, but I wouldn't rely on that statistic. I encode at a much lower data rate than that. Here are the settings I use. Hopefully you have the same options...I don't see why you wouldn't:</p> <p>Codec: H.264</p> <p>Video Settings:</p> <p>Frame Rate: 30fps</p> <p>Key Frames: Automatic (if you can't choose 'Automatic' try '300')</p> <p>Data Rate: Restricted to 700kbits/s (although, you should experiment and see how low you can go)</p> <p>Encoding: Multi-Pass</p> <p>Audio Settings:</p> <p>Format: AAC</p> <p>Channels: Mono (although Stereo is fine if you really want it)</p> <p>Sample Rate: 44.1 kHz</p> <p>Render Quality: Best</p> <p>Target Bit Rate: 64kbits/s (128kbits/s if you choose Stereo)</p> <p>Streaming Option: Fast Start (this is what 'tells' the video to load as you watch)</p> <p> </p> <p>And yes, I always compress and deinterlace using a dedicated compression program. I use Compressor right now. I might buy Sorenson Squeeze so I can encode to flash. You can achieve really low data rates with high image quality with .flv videos. I have had some people tell me they had to wait around for my videos to load. </p> <p>Oh yea, and just so that you have something to compare to, my videos are about 40 megabytes, but like I said, it's the data rate of the video that matters, not the file size.</p> <p>Let me know how things go.</p> <p>Oh, and no. I haven't done any narrative work, although lately I've really wanted to.  </p>