Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Hybrid Still/Movie/MP3 Digicams

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 27, 2007, 7:17 AM   #241
Senior Member
 
Wayne12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,071
Default

hdguy wrote:
Quote:
The look would be part of the conceit.* I've seen films done with consumer VHS cameras.* It's the story that is important.* I'm sure someone will shoot some film using the A-HD or something like it.* Indie and Hollywood films have been using consumer cameras to "steal" shots.** To "steal" a shot is to shoot in a crowded area like a street without a permit.* That way the cops only think it is a tourist shooting video of some friends.* Small cameras like the A-HD and Sanyo would be even more inconspicuous and a camera like the Kodak 1253 which looks like a still camera even more so.* Usually these scenes work under a conceit that it is something shot with someones video camera or even cell phone camera.

I look in on some of the film making groups and watch the arguments over shooting HD versus film.** There is a group of cinematographers that don't like HD and try to come up with all kinds of reason not to use it but I think the unsaid reason is "job security" and they don't want to learn a whole new medium.** With today's cameras like the Genesis and the Viper it is hard to tell the movie wasn't shot on film.* Check out "A Mighty Heart" which was shot in HD and they rave on the extras about how it allowed them to shoot in tight places creating the reality of the events that happened.
In 30 seconds I felt like walking out of Borne Ultimatum, but then it did not have much an story line either. Story is one thing we should have, but an story is much better in professional shot Panavision, then in an 9 year old Panasonic consumer Mini DV. These low bit rate cameras can look better than the very old consumer Mini-DV, until you start moving it.

The debate about film versus video goes something like this: video has much less stops of latitude (things burn out, shadows go black, and things look glary) sensitivity is too low, leading to noise, especially in darker scenes, color is inferior, lens are rubbish etc. Or, it used to go that way. Now modern technology can give descent performance on all basis (using an SLR lens adaptor) probably. You can change between film stocks to beat video, but the latest sensor technology can deliver full rate color video at night (no lighting) and 27 stops of latitude with color constancy. Sure some film method might record with less light (but most likely not with same latitude) but it doesn't really matter for most filming. This very latest sensor technology is only new, and HD cameras with it are yet to come, but we stand on the edge of an revolution in the coming years.
Wayne12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2007, 2:35 PM   #242
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 296
Default

So did you walk out on "28 Days Later" or how about "Pieces of April" the latter an excellent film written and directed by Peter Hedges ("Dan in Real Life") and starring Katie Holmes? I've see lots of excellent films shot in DV as well as really excellent films shot in HD. One of my favorites was "Crank" where the filmmakers really prefer HD. Also Tarantino's "Death Ride" where the stunt scenes were shot in HD and on the extras he makes a joke after they finished videoing one of the stunts to "check the gate" and laughs. Of course there is no gate to check on an HD camera.

My bet if I took an audience and maybe even a group of film people and showed them films and asked them which was shot in HD and which was film that most could not tell the difference (except maybe a DP who's worked in both mediums a lot). The difference is in the liberation of shooting. A 35mm film magazine can only give you 11 minutes of shooting time whereas tape an hour or even better a raid array for even more time. The directors and actors really love that much freedom and getting a much better idea by playback how the scene is going to look. And I'm sure to the union folks in Hollywood HD looks like doomsday to them (though I think Canada took that role long ago. Listen to David Lynch's rap about that in the extras on "Inland Empire").

I also don't like the "Hollywood look" with overlit sets where living rooms and kitchens look more like a Sears display model than real life. Or outdoor shots where the actor looks like someone was reflecting the sun off foil in their face (that's what it looks like to me when you use a reflector).

My local theater a few blocks aways has 8 auditoriums with Christie DLP projectors so some films I see are HD all the way through.

The bottom line is that I feel pretty secure that in the next couple of years I'm going to be listening a commentary where a directory says "we used these really inexpensive pocket HD cameras to steal this shot and they worked out great."


hdguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2007, 3:02 PM   #243
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

I did not yet see 28 days later, or the others, but I rememberwhen 28 dayswasout here it was a year old already?

Since we're offtopic anddo not mind at all, never do. LOL

Survivor with the Vivid color of the opening of every scen after the commercials. they're like to true to be regular footage?

This is what I like when watching the tube shots like that.

once our eyes , my eyes gets adjusted , i can't stand going back to regular tv LOL

just my thought. I see thefilming at times and they use these big balloons at nigh, I agree too much , is overkill, I am not a pro, Just happy I can keep the hybrid alive for all here ?
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2007, 3:28 PM   #244
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 62
Default

There is no debate here between video and film. The discussion was whether the A-HD has merits vs. prosumer HD. HDguy just used (video vs. film debate) to illustrate a point. So please at the risk of this thread jumping way off course lets keep this A-HD only ;>)

funkydmunky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2007, 4:56 PM   #245
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

back on topic:

As I finsihed a review with the Aiptek as the main device, and cut in and out with a standard definition camcorder? I could not believe the outcome, near perfect. The only issue I think would be the low audio. I have taken out the hissing from the Aiptek, and left the Jvc alone, magix edit pro 12 isan awesome program, but is made for a faster machine.

having

A the Aiptek A-Hd that needs a faster machine

B a program that needs also faster machine

you'll see video and audio issues for sure.

I have basically missjudged at one time about this and hopefully can correct the problem, wile others who expierience this you'll need to be updated with all areas of editing and hardware



Enjoy the video

http://blip.tv/file/449575/
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2007, 7:41 PM   #246
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 62
Default

How did you get the JVC to shoot the same 16:9 frame as the A-HD?
Your face looks a little weird on the JVC footage, like the image is vertically stretched?
funkydmunky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2007, 8:28 PM   #247
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

Jvc is a 16:9 ratio camcorder as well

I wonder if I saved in wmm as 4:4 ratio, and that may be the reason it looks stretched? why the Aiptek did not hmm it would be the same as well?

Now I could not place thecamecorder in the exact spot as the jvc or Aiiptek

it may have been a 6 inchs differece while the Aiptek seemed to have a different wide angle over the jvc a lesser angle

butth e Aiptek with the aspect ratio shows less on the screen but wider in playback?

I would still love to see a wider angle with the 16:9 ration imagine the panaramic video if that ever gets aroundwith these ?

I will try again from the same footage sae with magix this time rather with wmm, see ifa difference shows in that way?

but you have to say the Aiptek sure looks awesome compared to the JVC


fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2007, 1:38 AM   #248
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4
Default

Just joined the club. Could not resist having a standard definition camera. Anyway, I jumped in the hd camcorder wagon last week. This camera offer pretty decent quality. Best bang for the buck. Five months ago I was looking madly for the GOHD, but got tired looking for it. I went to Target and they got that sexy black camera inside its cheapass package. Bestbuy had the navy blueone. I picked up mine at Target. I concur with fishy, they must get better packages, they ruin the experience on getting new stuff.

The product got that "Sony" finish. I refer to this finish because the Ps3 & PSP got that painting job too, that retains all fingerprints easily. It is not a matte black or whatever, at least the black one gets dirty easily.

My camera worked flawlessly for about an hour and some pictures. Then I recordmy backyard and it is gone. First instanceI thought it was the camcorder. I tried the sdon three diferentscomputers and it fails miserably. It reproduce the behavious previously described in this thread. It starts and blacks out suddenly. No other options than to claim a refund/replacement that should be here anytime soon.

I am not familiar with the sd card universe. Is there any kind of troubleif Iuse a SDHC but class 2 ?They onlygot SDHC 4GB but that Class, the other were out of the budget if I wanted to buy Transformers HDDVD :P.

Well, hopefully someone could help me out pointing in the right direction of the sd compatible. For the record mine is a Sandisk 4GB SDHC with a USB Reader, bought at best buy in a royal blue.

Thanks for the heads up.
renerugerio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2007, 3:05 AM   #249
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 62
Default

Thanks for being the biggest video poster of this cam. I am glad you are now interested in some comparative testing.

Fishy, I can't seem to find anything on a simple search of JVC GRD-395u finds nothing. Am I hearing you right?

My first instincts are telling me that the SD cam is native 4:3 (as most all are) and any 16:9 must be cropped. Or worse yet it is a cropped squeeze mode! Meaning the image was shot in "squeeze mode (for later anamorphic projection) then the top and botom were cut off to make a 16:9 frame. You did something funky Fishy, hence the low resolution. This maybe why the SD image is shooting twice as wide? Your head is twice the size in the HD version! What is up with that?
As well the SD also appears to be suffering from low light auto-gain. This is what gives it such as washed out appearance and ultimately the lack of contrast, which is how we see sharpness. If gain and exposure can be controlled, then there is a much sharper SD image to be had.
So are we are only comparing operation while performing in full auto function?

funkydmunky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2007, 6:40 AM   #250
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

Funk,

I never sai dthe Jbc gd-397 U is a sd camcorder, I said it is a dvc tape unit on the video

See below the camcorder video, picture and review under the pic.

it is an upgrade of the 300 series that has everything on it extended battery controls and zoom.

The rato factor:

it was shot in 16:9 and somehow squeezed to 4:3 andwasedited in win moviemaker, I believe wmm is set in 4:3

aiptek was edited in magix and adjusted by the program, and yes edited again in win moviemaker? wouldn't that be squeezed to?

so I'll do a sample of 4:3 16:9 and see what the differences are again I had the camera set to Auto, and I also had taken note my tape needs cleaning maybe something the camcorder caught and adjusted

we'll do something new

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13jAcZHjjF4

[align=center][/align]
[align=center]http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=92[/align]
[align=center][/align]
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:49 PM.