Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Please help: D5MII export settings for best result on HDTV  (Read 14733 times)
larryrrw
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« on: January 04, 2009, 05:23:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,
I am professional Photographer with movie ambitions. I have captured and edited several clips that I have shot with the Canon D5 MII in iMovie.
Now i want to export the movie in HD format for best results on a Full HDTV (1900x1200p)
I want that the DVD will be also readable on older DVD players and televiosn in EU.

What are the right settings in the export menu to achive that ?

Please help me.
thank you !
larryrrw
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2009, 05:44:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: larryrrw
Hi,
I am professional Photographer with movie ambitions. I have captured and edited several clips that I have shot with the Canon D5 MII in iMovie.
Now i want to export the movie in HD format for best results on a Full HDTV (1900x1200p)
I want that the DVD will be also readable on older DVD players and televiosn in EU.

What are the right settings in the export menu to achive that ?

Please help me.
thank you !
larryrrw

Unfortunately DVD players don't read or play highdef content - you need a Bluray player for that. There are Bluray burners out there, but I'm not sure if they burn BDs which can be played on any BD player.

Alternatively you can store the video as compressed file format at full resolution on a data DVD, and watch using a computer. But then you need a hardware decoder since 99.9% of desktops can't play full-HD content without hardware acceleration.

If you are not adamant on showing HD content, just downsample to DVD resolution (720 x 576 pixels) and burn a region-free DVD - that way everybody will be able to actually see what you produce. You can also include the full-HD compressed file on the DVD as data for those with the hardware to play it - as long as you don't have a feature-length film.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2009, 05:51:07 PM by feppe » Logged

jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2009, 08:09:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: larryrrw
I am professional Photographer with movie ambitions.
How would you react if some one off the street said I've got a DSLR and want to be a professional photographer, but I don't know what the difference between a RAW and a JPEG file? I doubt you'd take them seriously.
Photography is very different from movie making and you have to learn a new set of skills, learn even more technical stuff and engage the help of a lot more people, plus it is even harder to get paying work in the movies. But if you do...
Also a 5DII is somewhat crippled for moviemaking and it would be a good idea to look at the film making forums where there is a lot of discusion as to how to use the 5DII, as basically it'a point and shoot camcorder albeit with an amazing sensor.
I'm not on main computer where I have a bunch of links to such places, but if I remember I'll post some tomorrow.
Neutral density filters are something you will really need to invest in and I think Vincent Lafloret is doing a blog post on them soon. Also now he's doing more video work, he also using a RED camera and not just the 5DII.


You need to decide what aspect of filmaking you want to do. Photography is a good grounding for lighting or camera department, or shooting some adverts, but most other aspects will be new areas. Directing, which is what everyone usually wants to do has very little to do with photography, it's about telling stories, which is not something many stills photographers have much experience in. So if that's where you want to end up, I suggest learning how to write scripts as it's the best way in to that area and also to fully understand movie making.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 05, 2009, 12:44:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jjj
How would you react if some one off the street said I've got a DSLR and want to be a professional photographer, but I don't know what the difference between a RAW and a JPEG file? I doubt you'd take them seriously.

JJJ

How would you react to someone who had been shooting professional stills for years on film and didnt know the difference between RAW and JPG - surely you would understand that they had the many of the skills in place to become a good digital photographer ?

Us photographers 'with movie ambitions' are in a wierd place a bit like the film stills photographer looking to translate to digital - knowing nothing about the workflow - but often more about lighting lenses and perspective than established videographers (not cinematographers), even some making a living at the game

Hey some videographers were buying piles of digital cards for their cameras like tape because they didnt get that you just download the card then erase its content - all digital stills guys know that - what dumbos

I think the word 'movie' needs to be clarified possibly you are thinking that "movie" = "general release feature"

I would describe myself as having "movie ambitions" but when I say "movie" I mean "2min corporate web short" like those displayed on other threads on this board

I would imagine the OP means the same thing

-------

Larry

I cant really help you apart from to say that there seems to be no one line answer, digital movie recording seems to be years behind stills in terms of standards which are pretty stable in photography in DNG Tiff and Jpeg

In digital moving images there appear to be heaps of output formats and often compressing to those is an 'art' of balancing the amount of compression for file size image quality - no one line answer

Google 'ken stone' tutorial site and 'dvxuser' a forum (many 5d threads in the D90 section!)  for some heavy reading

In terms of that patronising attitude you will run in to both good and bad on the video forums - I have been both patronised (by guys making crumby indy shorts) and, unbelivably, given simple clear simple advice from a 'camera operator' who has shot some very famous multi million dollar features - He knows even he started somewhere

SMM






Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 05, 2009, 06:52:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Morgan_Moore
How would you react to someone who had been shooting professional stills for years on film and didnt know the difference between RAW and JPG - surely you would understand that they had the many of the skills in place to become a good digital photographer ?
But I was specifically  talking about someone off the street with a camera, not a pro photographer who used film. So  
Besides there are an awful lot of skills in filmmaking that photographers are not experienced in at all. Sound, editing, writing.... Cinematogragraphy is only one small part of filmmaking and comes below the three skills I just mentioned in importance.

Quote
Us photographers 'with movie ambitions' are in a wierd place a bit like the film stills photographer looking to translate to digital - knowing nothing about the workflow - but often more about lighting lenses and perspective than established videographers (not cinematographers), even some making a living at the game
No, it is not like those using film wanting to start using digital. That's simply buying different/better kit to do the same job. 'Making movies' is a completely different job with a huge range of skills involved, the main one being the ability to tell stories, not one a stills photography is usually experienced in. Plus editing [in film terms] is a something photographers also have no experience of and it integral to the success of the end product. You are completely ignoring that vital skill, which is also important even if if someone else edits as you have to grok editing to be able to shoot footge that will cut together well. Also why assume those who don't shoot on film don't know about lighting and perspective or lenses? Aren't those assumptions like the patronising attitude you complain about on the DV forums.
Quote
of that patronising attitude you will run in to both good and bad on the video forums - I have been both patronised (by guys making crumby indy shorts) and, unbelivably, given simple clear simple advice from a 'camera operator' who has shot some very famous multi million dollar features - He knows even he started somewhere
And why ignore cinematographers? That's the obvious and most direct comparison between photographers and filmaking skills. And they probably know as much, if not more about lighting, than most photographers as they all have to be experts at lighting wheras many photographers don't even light their subects or if they do, they use a flash perched on camera.  Studio or advertising photographers may know lighting well, but many won't. And lighting for moving subjects is also different from stills.


Quote
Hey some videographers were buying piles of digital cards for their cameras like tape because they didnt get that you just download the card then erase its content - all digital stills guys know that - what dumbos
Or alternatively they keep the original footage on the cards as they know how unreliable HDs are. There's a discusion here about doing exactly that with one's stills and either Lexar or Sandisk have advertised doing that. So I wouldn't mock. Besides if people judged all photographers by some of the stupid online comments you get even on here, you be laughed at if you admitted to being one in public.


Quote
I think the word 'movie' needs to be clarified possibly you are thinking that "movie" = "general release feature"
That's because it does.
Quote
I would describe myself as having "movie ambitions" but when I say "movie" I mean "2min corporate web short" like those displayed on other threads on this board
Well say you want to make ads, say so then and it won't be confusing. It's not difficult and there are even less letters to type in 'ad' than 'movie'.  

Quote
I would imagine the OP means the same thing
Not necessarily, Dustblue made a simailar recent post about his film making ambitions - and he wants to direct features, but I did said in my post above photography is a good background if you want to do advertising.


I'm not saying some photographers won't make great filmmakers, but it is not the simple transformation that some think, there's a lot to learn.
For example you said
Quote
In digital moving images there appear to be heaps of output formats and often compressing to those is an 'art' of balancing the amount of compression for file size image quality - no one line answer
So just like stills, CMYK Vs RGB: RAW Vs jpeg, umpteen RAW file formats [or codecs]; ProPhoto Vs Adobe RBG Vs sRGB: imput sharpening, output sharpening, resizing sharpening, these are all things that people get confused by stills with rarely a one line answer either. So in that senses they are both similar in that there's lots of techy nonsense you need to learn and master between the pushing the shutter button and getting to the final output. Plus you also get the same 'nonsense' with sound, which is vitally important to quality filming and something photographers are generally clueless about.
It's patronising to film makers to think if you've shot some stills, you can suddenly make movies, without having to do a heck of a lot of learning of a lot of new skills. I'm sure some photographers will transition well, but they'll probably be the ones who don't think it's a doddle.
If you spent time on film sets, the [ex]photographers tending to be in lighting or camera department, rarely anywhere else. Directors are more often writers than techy people. Many know nothing about technical stuff as that is not what the job is about.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2009, 06:55:05 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 05, 2009, 07:57:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Fundamentally we dont disagree

some points..

Personally with the moving image I know what I want to acheive but dont have the skills to acheive it yet

This is different from not knowing what I want to achieve

Like the film photographer moving to digital - they know what they want but not how to get there

we dont know the position of the OP

---

Workflow

I can simply describe my stills workflow..

shoot raw, balance in capture one output to 16bit tiff, retouch in PS output as jpg 10 for client

I have not seen any videographer describe thiers so succinctly

---

"Movies"

The semantics of that word are interesting

I am not sure there is a word for "combocamming ex still photographers" yet

Videographer sounds too home movie/local news/wedding

Cinematographer sounds too much like they shoot multi million features

Digital Capture Artist ? - sounds like a 3D renderer or flash animator and too geeky


Sorry to the OP if this is hijacking..

SMM









Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
larryrrw
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2009, 08:20:45 AM »
ReplyReply

fepe,
Thank you for your help.

Quote from: feppe
Unfortunately DVD players don't read or play highdef content - you need a Bluray player for that. There are Bluray burners out there, but I'm not sure if they burn BDs which can be played on any BD player.

I own a new Panasonic BlueRay Player.

I thought it should be  possible to put HD size movie on a DVD, am I wrong about that ?

The purpose of my recent small private movie, is to test the final maximum output abilties of a movie made with the D5 m2.
With the purpose to understand if I would be able in future to offer decent work to clients.

Thank you again for taking the time to respond.

all the best,
larryrrw
« Last Edit: January 05, 2009, 08:25:02 AM by larryrrw » Logged
JMCP
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #7 on: January 05, 2009, 08:36:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Larry,

there are lots of folks that are burning High Definition to normal DVD's that will play in a PS3 (so it might work in your panasonic), think you can get approx 20 mins of HD on a normal DVD. I think the trick is if you are using Premier Pro,  rather than export your timeline, you do a print to tape/video, Premier will start processing the timeline and generate the file to be copied back to tape, once it finishes its processing, it asks you if you would like to proceed, you then click stop or cancel etc.. and the file that was generated will still be in one of the Premier folders, you then burn that file using whatever burning software you have.


PS. Have a read of this thread on the dvdoctor forums as it should help  
      http://forums.dvdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=45870

HTH

Cheers John
« Last Edit: January 05, 2009, 10:54:24 AM by JMCP » Logged
larryrrw
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #8 on: January 05, 2009, 08:55:27 AM »
ReplyReply

JJJ,
Thanks for your input.

In earnest, I was hoping in starting my post with the words "I am professional Photographer with movie ambitions." and telling that that I have adit the material i iMovie, I could evoid this kinds of emotions that followed.  
I tought I had put myself in positon that is not pretending to know, ore be in serious movie work and buisiness, but somebody who aks for the right settings to get out the best quality of his project.

In terms of Photography, that would be an amateur who ask about the rigth output settings for a picture that will be used as a street poster.
I would answer put PS color options to "print in EU". Than set the color dept to 8bit by RGB, put it on the max. pixel size of your camera @ 350 dpi, and save it as psd, tiff, or EPS.

And thats the kind of answer I was hoping for.

I am workind in fashion, press, advertisment and  for more than 30 years now. I made model presentation videos for an Model Agencies. Including script , directing and cut-
together with my coworker. I made the camera for a screenplay as well as the light settings with a small team (Beta Cam). I took still pictures for movies on the set.

So I know about what the real work is. And thats why I know what I am and what I am not.

I just want to understand what are there right output settings to learn how good is the basic D5m2 material.

But please keep talking on, I love discussions based on reason ;-)

Thank you again,
all the best
larryrrw



Logged
larryrrw
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2009, 09:00:53 AM »
ReplyReply

"Sorry to the OP if this is hijacking.."
no problem......

thanks Morgan for your input.

I agree with your opinion.

I hope that my later reply to the others made clear where I want to go with my original question.

I get myself back into discissuon later.

all the best,
larryrrw

Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2009, 01:32:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: larryrrw
I own a new Panasonic BlueRay Player.

I thought it should be  possible to put HD size movie on a DVD, am I wrong about that ?

The purpose of my recent small private movie, is to test the final maximum output abilties of a movie made with the D5 m2.
With the purpose to understand if I would be able in future to offer decent work to clients.

Thank you again for taking the time to respond.

all the best,
larryrrw

John had some suggestions which look like something worth checking out, especially as it sounds like you won't need to fit an entire 2-hour HD movie on a DVD.

You can put a HD-sized movie on a DVD with no problem. But this is only the nominal resolution, and you will have to do a LOT of compression. A Bluray is 25-50 gigs (going from memory here) for a feature, whereas a DVD is 4.35 gigs. BD has more advanced and efficient compression as well.

There are BD "rips" out there on the internet which can fit on a DVD, and look much much better than a regular DVD despite being the same size. But for those you need a decent (not top-of-the-line, though) computer, and right codecs - ie. they won't play on 99% of stand-alone DVD players, nor will you be able to play them on a PC without installing the correct codecs.

PS3 and Xbox 360 can play those rips if you convert them to a format playable by PS3 normally. But if your target audience is producers or directors, you'd be better served by something which plays on the vast majority of stand-alone DVD players. And the only thing I know which plays for sure is a plain old DVD - although some older DVD players won't read burned DVDs.

Echoing others above, (amateur) video is poorly standardized, and when they are, the standards are fuzzy or poorly implemented.

Something which just occurred to me: online distribution. Youtube (of all places) has HD content. I haven't looked at what they exactly mean by HD (again the same point about standardization), but it sure looks much better than traditional Youtube. Alternatively you could set up your own site with different versions of your content: streaming, 480p, 720p, 1080p for example. Then the visitor could decide which would suit her bandwidth and requirements. If your audience is limited, you shouldn't have problems with bandwidth.
Logged

larryrrw
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #11 on: January 05, 2009, 05:20:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you John that is helpfull,
I will try to fetch additional information on the site you have mentioned and make than my descion for the output.

all the best,
Larryrrw
Logged
larryrrw
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #12 on: January 05, 2009, 05:38:41 PM »
ReplyReply

feppe,

Thank you for taking the time to help me out.
I understand now better that the size ( time of my movie) will determine the media and options to
choose.

for those who are interested I will post here how I finalized my movie.

thanks again and all the best,
larryrrw
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 05, 2009, 06:40:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Larry - How long is your footage you want to show as that will determine the size of disk needed?

Quote from: feppe
Echoing others above, (amateur) video is poorly standardized, and when they are, the standards are fuzzy or poorly implemented.
Not quite true - There are very strict standards for TV, which are location dependent.  Cameras shoot SD [Pal or NTSC], pretend HD[720p] and HD [1080p or 1080i]. Less variation that stills cameras and all their stupid raw formats. Lots of ways and sizes you can save  the footage though afterwards, but that's just like JPEGs, Gifs, Tiffs, PSDs....etc and not really relevant. JUst save footage in the standard format for HD and SD for which ever country to be shown in - if showing on normal TVs
But you need to appreciate that we are also in a transition phase at the moment, with many people still using SD and HD is gradually coming in. What really confuses the matter is many TVs that claim to be HD and aren't. There HD ready TVs, not actually HD but can show HD at a lower non HD quality.



Quote
Something which just occurred to me: online distribution. Youtube (of all places) has HD content. I haven't looked at what they exactly mean by HD (again the same point about standardization), but it sure looks much better than traditional Youtube.
"The new video size is a huge 855*480 pixels (actual resolution is 1280720) and the player is 855*505 pixels" - So not HD in fact.

Quote
Alternatively you could set up your own site with different versions of your content: streaming, 480p, 720p, 1080p for example. Then the visitor could decide which would suit her bandwidth and requirements. If your audience is limited, you shouldn't have problems with bandwidth.
If you are serious about video, you don't use YouTube, unless your video of you cat barfing over your girlfriend's head!    Vimeo is much better and more appropriate and is where film makers often post their work.
This is the first film shot by Guardian photographer Dan Chung on the 5DII [other than some night test shots] and posted on Vimeo.
 Beijing HoopDreams  Click on the 4 arrows symbol to see it larger. And if you are wondering how good it is for a photographer's first go, he is a very experienced film maker too.
Smug Mug is another place that is good for hosting such things. They are the people helping Vince Lafloret display his work online.

To clarify -
HD is 1920x1080 px   anything smaller is not really HD, even though 720p claims to be - it's just marketing BS to sell to the masses.
Pretend HD 1366 x 768px is the size often used in HD ready TVs, which means no format shows natively on it which is pretty stupid.
SD is 720576px or in the US the home of the lowest qualty TV spec 720480.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #14 on: January 05, 2009, 07:36:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Morgan_Moore
Fundamentally we dont disagree
Wahey!  


Quote
Workflow

I can simply describe my stills workflow..

shoot raw
balance in capture one
output to 16bit tiff
retouch in PS
output as jpg 10 for client


I have not seen any videographer describe thiers so succinctly
Does that actually matter? Not really, but I would say

Shoot footage
import scenes from camera
label/keyword scenes
edit [inc add sound/music]
back up/archive
grade finished edit [optional]
output to required size/media.


Simple enough for you?
I'd say your stills workflow is either over simplified or missed some real world stuff out.
 
Shoot Raw
copy to computer
import to software [unless using say Bridge]
rename files
keyword
back up/archive
edit shoot to select keepers
develop keepers
export from RAW programme to PS for finishing/retouching [if needed]
or export from LR/Aperture etc in required size/format to required media.


Obviously the order can vary a little more in the stills workflow, but it's still not relevant that you can describe a simplified workflow for stills and not for video.
Plus in filmaking, the editing and post is more likely to be done another person, that it is in stills photography.
So the DoP/cameraman's workflow could be described as
shoot scene
Go home

 Very simple workflow.    
All these workflows ignore any prepwork that occurs before shooting starts. And that can be considerable.

I spent time every year working in Sweden. There's a chap who also videos everything that goes on and makes funny little shorts as well.
He can shoot, edit and output as fast, if not faster than I can shoot and prep my stills for slideshows and his stuff is very good. So it doesn't matter how you describe our workflows, he is still very fast and efficient. He's a really good editor too.


Quote
"Movies"

The semantics of that word are interesting
Not really, 'movies' means films seen at cinema to most people. Nothing very interesting there.
Short clips tend to be referred to as videos, even if shot on film.

Quote
I am not sure there is a word for "combocamming ex still photographers" yet

Videographer sounds too home movie/local news/wedding

Cinematographer sounds too much like they shoot multi million features

Digital Capture Artist ? - sounds like a 3D renderer or flash animator and too geeky

Videographer is not really used, as 'cameraman' is already there and is used whatever the recording medium.
A cinematographer or more commonly DoP [Director of photography] is responsible for lighting, framing and camera movement, what the action is captured on is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the budget of shoot.
A digital capture artist sound like you just made it up unnecessarily!
No need to make up a new word, if doing stills you are a photographer; if in charge of lighting a set, you are a DoP; if operating focus you are a focus puller; if fetching the tea, you are a runner.  
« Last Edit: January 05, 2009, 07:37:26 PM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 06, 2009, 02:37:22 AM »
ReplyReply

A cameraman wouldnt be thought of as producing stills so there still is no title
Digital Image Collection Kid ?

----

In terms of the moving workflow Im still not where I want to be

which is..

Download
Encode all different cameras (EX1 D90 SR12) to universal 'RAW' file format  XXX using software YYY
Edit with NO RED LINE in FCP
Out put edit as highest quality file type ZZZ (Tiff)
Save for web H264 (jpg)
Archive etc

----

I was at college with Dan at Sheffield incedentally - Im hoping to get to a standard when the Guardian commission me for film - I do stills for them already

S
« Last Edit: January 06, 2009, 02:42:49 AM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
larryrrw
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #16 on: January 06, 2009, 08:27:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jjj
Larry - How long is your footage you want to show as that will determine the size of disk needed?

Hi JJJ,
Thanks for giving your time.

* The orig. footage is 30min. (by what I heard so far here I will could it down to 10 min. to make it work as HD on a sl DVD for my test)

*I know about the games of true and untrue HD. my HDTV is one of the latest Panasonic 42" with true HD@100hz.(by the way, exellent blacks not clustered)
And I have their BlueRayplayer that works fine together with the HDTV.

*my first reference movie shot with the D5m2 was :http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/page/4/
(he used for web download able: H264 1280x720 @ 30fps


purpose of my test movie:

Since I do mostly available light and low light Photographie (so you do, as far as I could see on your site) my movies clips will be alike.
I want to understand how much pure beef I got from this Camera.( I do not plan to produce comercial BlueRay HD movies).
Its like cheking out what kind of maximum print size you can make from a certain Camera Raw, without loosing the story it should tell.
I need to know my material, to feel it like an extension of mine when I shoot. I should have no doubt during my work, like "maybe it will work, mabe not "

So I am unsure for the settigs, like 30 fps ore 24 fps to chooes an so on.
the attched pictures shows what I am talking about.

greetings,
larryrrw

ps: visisted the site of Dan, love his film.
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #17 on: January 06, 2009, 08:56:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Morgan_Moore
A cameraman wouldnt be thought of as producing stills so there still is no title
Digital Image Collection Kid ?
Are you just dicking around now?  


Quote
In terms of the moving workflow Im still not where I want to be

which is..

Download
Encode all different cameras (EX1 D90 SR12) to universal 'RAW' file format  XXX using software YYY
Edit with NO RED LINE in FCP
Out put edit as highest quality file type ZZZ (Tiff)
Save for web H264 (jpg)
Archive etc
If Adobe got their arse into gear and let LR recognize all file formats, that would be a start in making our lives a lot easier. And if it had a film  processing module, an edit module, a sound module.....


Quote
I was at college with Dan at Sheffield incedentally - Im hoping to get to a standard when the Guardian commission me for film - I do stills for them already
Do they even pay enough to cover the bus fare?
Dan's pretty good at the filmmaking stuff. Where did you study in Sheff? Psalter Lane/Northern Media Rip Off/Sheff College?
Psalter Lane is now closed I believe and definitely in process of being sold off.
Not that they'll get as much as when they first planned to do it.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2009, 08:59:29 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 06, 2009, 09:22:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: larryrrw
* The orig. footage is 30min. (by what I heard so far here I will could it down to 10 min. to make it work as HD on a sl DVD for my test)
Less is often more. Particulary if this is test footage. Who is going to view it?

Quote
*I know about the games of true and untrue HD. my HDTV is one of the latest Panasonic 42" with true HD@100hz.(by the way, exellent blacks not clustered)
And I have their BlueRayplayer that works fine together with the HDTV.
I've almost been tempted by the 42" Viera, but as most broadcast footage is still in SD, I may wait a bit longer as SD upscaled onto a bigger screen, doesn't look so hot. And I've yet to see a flat screen look as nice as my CRT.
I also very rarely watch DVDs, as I tend to see films at cinema on a 20m screen!


Quote
purpose of my test movie:

Since I do mostly available light and low light Photographie (so you do, as far as I could see on your site) my movies clips will be alike.
I want to understand how much pure beef I got from this Camera.( I do not plan to produce comercial BlueRay HD movies).
Its like cheking out what kind of maximum print size you can make from a certain Camera Raw, without loosing the story it should tell.
I need to know my material, to feel it like an extension of mine when I shoot. I should have no doubt during my work, like "maybe it will work, mabe not "

So I am unsure for the settigs, like 30 fps ore 24 fps to chooes an so on.
the attched pictures shows what I am talking about.
30fps is an American setting, we tend to use 25fps in Europe, Film is 24fps, But 24+30 setting are rounded out numbers.
Some more info here
http://books.google.com/books?id=Leq-1H_yy...4&ct=result

There's a lot of arguing in film forums about what FPS to shoot [5DII gives no choice sadly] as shooting at 24fps is said to give a nicer look.

Quote
ps: visisted the site of Dan, love his film.
There are a few more on his vimeo page, on a variety of kit, but well worth looking at.
Vince Lafloret is also showing some behind the scenes footage of his latest project.

I was wondering about getting a 5DII, but I reckon the video mode would drive me nuts as I like to use manual.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #19 on: January 06, 2009, 12:39:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jjj
bus fare?

No . But I still get warm feeling with a nice show - never got the centrefold yet although a couple of fronts over the years

Sheffield Stradbroke College Press Photography 1993 - probably demolished that dump years ago - very agressive and practical course though and plenty of sport passes to get into Wednesday/United/Steelers/Ice Hockey. Great times with my bicycle (could not afford the bus) Nikon F3 and my baby - a Manual 300 2.8 - Dan had two EOSs of course and even a mobile phone

Waaaaaaay OT

-----------

On the processing thing LR doesnt do film right ! - I use FCP but what I am after is an Mac APP that can batch processs all my 'rushes' (raw footage) into a red line free codec for cutting in FCP

I understand this could be a long process but I woulndt have to stare at the screen


S








Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad