What's the best camera for this video? We're trying to replicate the look of 35mm movie cameras and video cameras tend to work in a different way, but it's possible to get close with a few simple tricks.
Video cameras can have 360° shutters, which is something that's just not possible with traditional film cameras. A 360° shutter means that if you are shooting at 25 frames per second, the shutter stays open for 1/25th of a second. With film cameras, there is a mechanical process where one frame of film is exposed, the shutter is closed, the film advances to the next frame and the shutter opens again to expose the new frame. Typically, you would use a 180° shutter on a movie camera, which at 25fps equals an exposure time of 1/50th of a second.
Why does this matter? Motion blur is the giveaway. Fast motion on a video camera with a shutter approaching 360° looks smeary. Film motion blur, because it is exposed for less time looks crisper. By setting your video camera's shutter to 180° (or typically to 1/50th second for 25fps, 1/48 for 24fps and so on) you can go some way to emulating the look of film.
Film is a progressive medium (meaning each frame is shown in sequence in its entirety) while many video cameras shoot interlaced footage, which combine a lower resolution upper and lower field in each frame. With fast motion this can result in a horizontal "combed" look which is a dead giveaway. By using a progressive video setting if your camera has one, you can contribute to that filmic look.
I don't want to get bogged down with the technical side regarding angle of view and sensor size, but generally, standard lenses on a video camera have a much larger apparent depth of field than an equivalent lens on a 35mm film camera. You can create a shallower depth of field by moving further back with your camera and using a long lens, but that's not a great solution for every shot. Sometimes you need to get a bit closer.
Redrock Micro and other companies make 35mm lens adapters allowing you to attach 35mm lenses (usually Nikon stills camera lenses) to get that wonderfully filmic depth of field. This is better, but because the additional glass can soak up light, you may lose a stop or two forcing you to use more light or pump up the gain.
In post, you can adjust the gamma curves to replicate how light reacts on film rather than the more linear look of video. With some good grading, using something like Magic Bullet Looks, you can create a fairly convincing facsimile of film.
Finally, do yourself a favour and get a copy of Stu Maschwitz's The DV Rebel’s Guide. Each of us at Wyld Stallyons have a copy and they are referred to often.
In the office we have a couple of HV20s and access to Sony Z1s. There are 35mm adapters we can hire, but the HDV format is a bit crappy, with compression artefacts as big as a house. A better bet would be to use an HVX 200a from Panasonic, which shoots to the more robust DVCPRO-HD format, shoots proper progressive HD and has variable frame rates so that slow motion can easily be achieved without using interlacing hacks. It records to Panasonic's P2 cards, which can be a pain in the arse to use or directly to a hard drive. Footage from an HVX with a 35mm adapter can look simply stunning.
The ideal camera to use may well be the Scarlet from Red (makers of the Red One camera, which has shaken up the movie world) but sadly that's not going to be launched until early 2009.
Not sure what camera set-up we'll end up using yet, but I wanted to give you a heads up on the thought process behind our ultimate decision.
2 comments:
grav a copy?
Cheers Alex! Fixed!
Post a Comment