.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

High Definition Video for Independent Filmmakers
A How To Guide for Digital Filmmakers
Welcome all! This is my blog to share my latest research,
thoughts, etc. on utilizing HD for independent filmmaking.

YES, I am available for consulting
Contact me at mike@hdforindies.com

All content copyright 2004-2007 Mike Curtis.

Friday, April 06, 2007

OK Indies, listen up - 10 THINGS NOT TO DO 

OK, I'm blogging while irritated, which is not recommended. Or actually, blogging whilst frustrated is a more accurate description, because I keep seeing the same problems over and over.

Kinda like my friends that lived in the house right after the sudden curve on Enfield. They dubbed their house "Casa Magneto" because drunken frat boy cars seemed drawn to end up in my friends' front yard about once a month, and bonus points if the car was upside-down after launching off the berm in the other neighbors yard Dukes of Hazzard style. They'd hear a screeeeeeeeeeeech....CRASH and pick up the phone, walk out on the yard dialling 9 and 1, waiting to see if anybody was hurt to dial the final digit. The fact that they had A System For It kinda informs you of the situation.

I feel like that today. Not that indie filmmakers are akin to drunken frat boys (thank God), but that's the situational metaphor that popped to mind, so I'm going with it.

I just sent yet another email off to a client that approached me after all the shooting had been done for a doc or feature, and capture had been done, and once again, the classic mistakes had all been made.

DISCLAIMER: If you're a client and you've made these mistakes, this isn't aimed at you in particular, there are many, many of you out there. I may be grouchy here, but I am trying to help. Details have been changed or merged on some of these to better make the point. That Which Does Not Kill Us Makes Us Stronger (Nietzsche). Mike's Corrollary: That Which Does Not Kill Us Makes Us Want To Take A Nap.

It has long been said that most indies will gladly save a nickel Friday that costs them $20 on Monday, either because they don't know any better or simply don't have the $2 on Friday to prevent the $20 error on Monday. Add zeroes to amounts until it applies to you/your project.

So, even though this is potentially giving away some work, let me spell it out for folks out there, in no particular order:

1.) THOU SHALT NOT USE CINEFRAME MODE on Sony HDV cameras. EVV-ARR (that's "ever" with emphasis for the non-teenage literate out there). It looks bad, it isn't true 24p, there are Better Ways, even with that same camera. Somebody shot Cineframe to intercut with 720p24 and 720p60 in FCP - what a mess to resolve correctly (doable, but finicky & time consuming).

2.) If you want to "shoot a movie" on DV, shoot 24pA mode, or at least have only slightly bungled it and shot 24p. 30p is one of the worst frame rates to use. 24p doesn't compress as nicely as 24pA, therefore doesn't look as good. DV is already challenged enough, don't beat up the little bruised kid any further. The catch is in the capturing, which leads to Item 4 in a minute...

3.) If you want to "shoot a movie" on the DVX100/A/B, PLEASE shoot anamorphic. Anamorphic 24pA, to be precise. Having shot it letterboxed, or "Well, we'll just letterbox it and blow it up for the theatrical version!" is the usual self-pleased answer, not realizing they will have a grand total of 720x360 pixels to blow up to 1920x1080 - that's a threefold stretch vertically instead of 2.25 - congrats, you can reposition vertically, but you've thrown out 25% of your resolution - something you were already very thin on with the DV format. And even fewer if you want that 1.85:1 or 2.40:1 ultra-widescreen vibe. And plan for your festival HD uprez, and realize that bumping up DV to HD resolution looks several thousand light years not as good as having shot HD inthe first place, but that's a couple of other whole other long posts entirely....

Now, if you're going for regular 4:3 broadcast, skip the above. This only applies if you want a 16:9 deliverable.

4.) DO NOT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD AND ALL THAT IS EDITORIALLY HOLY capture 24p or 24pA as 29.97 "normal" DV if you want to "make a movie" and have a 24p master (which you probably do for more reasons than filmout). Easily 80% of the folks I talk to that shot on DVX100/A/B gladly and glibly capture all their footage INCORRECTLY at 29.97, which makes it a royal bitch to get to a 24p master. This happens with alarming frequency. It screws up your ability to make a 24p master, makes VFX harder, makes your DVDs look worse than they could, even if you're not going out to film. The fix? Go back and recapture all final selects again. UGH. Do it right the first time. EDIT - Jan Crittendon of Panasonic reached out to let me know that in my frothing fit I'd mis-stated the case - actually, technically, you DO capture at 29.97, but you're removing 3:2 pulldown and writing 24p do disc. My intent was to say end up with 24p footage on disc, not 29.97 for your timeline. Thanks Jan! Good eye.

5.) If you or your crew did screw up and shot 24p, 24pA, and 60i on your various tapes instead of just the intended 24pA during the shoot, label the tapes as what they are so you don't make the editor or asst. editor want to kill you. And then capture them correctly. Look at the captured footage to make sure it is right.

6.) If you are "making your own movie" and aren't a TRULY experienced editor, or sat down and had at least a 30 minute SOBER conversation with someone who is an editor about the exact and precise specifics of your project, odds are at LEAST 90% that you will screw up video capture sufficiently that someone else will have to come back and redo it ALL to get a proper 24p master done later on. Log your tapes properly too while you're at it. RTFM on that one. And get a real editor if at all humanly possible - it is what they do for a living.

I'm switching over to Q&A mode now, from a draft I'd never finished/published, and I was in a nicer mood. These aren't all "do not do's" but are still useful/informative I think.

7.) Question:I want to shoot my documentary fiilm on the HVX-200 out in the middle of nowhere and my budget is tight. Tell me how to do this without running over budget. I also don't have much crew."

Answer: You've hosed yourself most likely. If you're shooting a doc that doesn't lend itself to a small amount of footage shot each day, and ESPECIALLY if you need to shoot a lot of footage each day, the HVX200 doesn't lend itself well for that if you want to shoot HD remotely with small crew. For narrative projects with few and shorter takes, it can be a great solution if you have AC power and a backup solution or a P2 Store (the portable hard drive for offloading) - see this article for more on P2 workflows in the field. But with no AC power and needing to shoot a lot of footage, You Are In Trouble.

The HVX200 is a nice camera for a lot of reasons - I like the color on it, the Final Cut workflow is pretty good (still some rough edges), the over/undercrank ability is super sweet and easy to use, the flexibility of modes is great - DV, DVCPRO50, 720p, 1080p, 1080i - all good stuff. BUT...the P2 cards are the weak link - they are VERY pricey and small in capacity and you have to dump the data somewhere before you can reuse them, and this is what will kill a small doc shoot - you need too many cards, or too much extra gear (P2 Store is a good option though, or multiple P2 Stores, when are they putting a 160-200GB drive in that sucker? NAB I hope?), and the real killer - too many man hours tied up in managing all that stuff if you're a small crew. You also almost certainly need AC power as well, and in the boonies that can be a dealbreaker.

There are other options worth looking at. Email me about consultation.

Lesson to learn: tools that are great for one job aren't necessarily great for another. "I have a bucket of nails and my favorite shiny lovely screwdriver. Crap."

8.) Question:I want to shoot JVC GY-HD250 (because I can buy it cheap) to cut with my letterboxed DVX100 footage in Final Cut. I like that it shoots 60fps progressive that I can use for overcranking, and I like the idea of FireWire ingest. My post house suggests bumping it all to another tape format for ingest for HD conform and uprezzing with a Teranex for the DV footage, but I can't afford that.

Whew! OK, let's break down the many issues here:

-AFAIK, the JVC GY-HD250 isn't supported by Final Cut at this time for native FireWire ingest at 60p- anecdotally I'm hearing that 24p and 30p capture work, but I don't have a rock solid confirm on that. 60p is almost certainly out from what I'm hearing, but again I don't have a gospel answer on that one. Lesson here: Be SURE that not only does your camera choice make sense, but that your post options are as expected and affordable It is ALL to easy to pick the "wrong" format for your NLE or post workflow and end up spending more in post than you would have in production if you'd picked the "right" camera for the job. Dubbing to higher end HD tape formats has gotta be what, $75+ per tape? On a doc, that'd be lethal to the budget - shoulda bought/rented a different camera with a proven post workflow and saved money over the "I think this'll be cheap and good" approach.

-Next issue - intercutting with 4:3 DV. While you CAN just drop footage on an FCP timeline and mix sizes, codecs, frame rates, and aspect ratios, it has to render, and that is slooowwwww, even on fast modern boxes. And it'll render to the existing timeline's settings, converting your HD to SD if that is what the timeline is. Plus, there are other issues if you've shot letterboxed (mistake # 4 above) and want to intercut HD. There are ways around or to deal with these problem with minimal time and expense and quality sacrifice...available to my clients (See? I'm only SLIGHTLY evil....)

-Issue after that - conforming this mixed timeline to an HD master - because the 24p mode on the JVC is delivered as 2:2:2:4 cadence on a 60p stream, it is damn hard to extract to cut with a regular 24p timeline. The client's post house, an entity I've heard of from across the country, was suggesting an expensive and time consuming solution requiring dubbing ALL tapes to another tape format. I had a software based solution that wouldn't require that.

Other related issue - how to make deliverables - if an SD 4:3 and an HD 16:9 are requested, then how do you optimally prepare each deliverable? How do you conform to the HD version without expensive tape dubbing, uprezzing the DV footage using a Teranex, etc.? I have solutions for all this, and I've done it before. All it takes it some proper prior planning and some relatively inexpensive computer time...and the knowledge to drive it all.

If you're having trouble figuring out how you're going to conform or deliver to HD, especially from a mix of SD & HD acquired footage, I have extremely high quality, affordable solutions for you that don't require a lot of time on traditional "heavy iron" at a post house. As Stu Maschwitz of The Orphanage put it so well in his book on indie post, desktop tools can offer BETTER quality than the high end post facility tools, they just aren't as fast. You just have to know how to use them well.

Lesson to learn: look at your ENTIRE production process and costs in their entirety. It is all too easy to change a solid plan and think you'll be saving money, and end up hosing the production or the budget.

9.) Question, phrased in many different ways: "Will you work on deferral?/Will you take less money if I give you a better credit on the film?

Answer: Let me explain - almost all of my clients are making independent content. I don't do commercials, I don't do industrials, mostly indie content. There are so many independent films out there being made, by so many earnest, well intentioned people, that will never even recoup their hard costs, let alone sell for enough profit to pay full residuals. Everyone thinks that their film will be different, and sadly, regrettably only a slim few will be correct in that assessment. Look at the recent SXSW, for example - over 3000 films were submitted, they ran roughly 100 or so, and of those, if you take out the ones that already had distribution before they got there, and just look at the ones that truly walked into the festival seeking full size theatrical distribution...the number will be dishearteningly low. Probably fewer than can be counted on one hand. So based on those odds, I really can't.

The same thing applies for film credits - it doesn't behoove me to do so. I've had more than one discussion with clients where we walk through a whole range of options, often including them suggesting they edit the film themselves when they've never edited before, and want me to defer my fees "until we get distribution." I wish I could, but if I did, I'd go broke Waiting For That Day. Especially for self-edited films. Not to be mean, but that bumped up credit that is supposed to help me out? Everyone in the business knows what Executive Producer means these days, and if it is on a small film that wasn't acquired, how exactly does that help me? I'm uncomfortable claiming a title I didn't earn. I do what I do, no more, no less.

10.) Question, again phrased many different ways: "Will you just answer me this ONE more question for free? Then this one? Then this one? Then this one? (Repeat ad infinitum) or more bluntly "Will you spend lots of time on my project for free? It is a REALLY good project. C'mon, you know the answer already, just TELL me!"

Answer: I'll try and calm down and be nice on this answer, and it similarly applies above - answering questions is what I do for a living. I don't work at a post house or a rental house or have another business where this is a sideline - consulting is my living. Unlike working professionals who share information with peers freely because it isn't going to affect their business (and I do help out my friends and peers frequently), I can't afford to spend time answering all the questions that come in, especially without charging. I'd be at it all day. And moreso, answering questions, especially well, thoroughly, and accurately, takes time, even if it is just finding a link to something I wrote in the past. If you can't find it easily, I probably can't either.

Also, stating "I have no budget/I'm a student" does not change anything on my end about my time availability nor effort required to answer.

Kindly, respectfully, there are forums out there where you can get free advice, although the quality of that advice varies wildly. When in doubt, pray to Google, but YMMV. It never hurts to ask, but if I (or someone else) says no thanks I/we/they don't have time, please respect that. Asking nicely up front appreciated as well. Nothing turns my generosity of soul sour more lately than folks complaining, repeatedly, that I won't help them out for free. Sigh.

OK, that's a lame Item 10, and isn't really something to really avoid (nor is #9), but that rounds it out to a nice round 10, and lists need 10 items according to the advice I read on the Interweb tubes. But back to the general point:

It is not your fault that you didn't know before you started. But it IS quite arguably your fault that you didn't ask and find out before you started shooting.

Addenda - stating "I just want to make my movie/I'm the creative, I don't want to focus on the tech" is an excuse...and not a valid one. Stating you don't want to be an auto mechaic doesn't fix your blown engine, nor excuse you from never having changed or checked the oil before it blew.

I could probably whip out another 20 (or 50) tips like this, but it boils down to planning and research.

The key to making a successful indie project, AFTER you have a great script and good actors and DoP and all that other stuff, is to plan, Plan, PLAN it to death. Then have contingencies, preferably what I like to call graceful contingencies - so that if the big goal isn't met, it isn't an all or nothing deal, you can just slide down one rung on the ladder rather than fall all the way to the bottom. And how do you do that? You plan. You research. You ask questions. LOTS of questions. If you don't know, or don't have someone willing to spend a lot of time helping you figure it out who does know, find folks who do. Maybe even hire a consultant, but that isn't the only way.

OK, end of rant, apologies for the rude tone, but it had to be said.

-mike

ADDENDA: Commenters have said CineFrame24 is troublesome but CineFrame 25 & 30 are OK....but you're still tossing res, and I'd rather use a better software deinterlacer like Nattress' anyway for better results. I still don't like it.

When I say capture as 24 fps, I'm shorthanding to mean 23.976 fps. But that doesn't matter really, as the inexpensive cameras can't do 24.000 fps, they always do 23.976 anyway. Higher end production gear can do either, but if you're working with those and get it wrong...you REALLY should have known better.

When I mention shooting 24p as opposed to 24pA, 24pA is by FAR the preferable. when I mentioned capturing 24p as 23.976 not 29.97 fps, I was thinking of a particular project where we recaptured via SDI - FireWire based 24p capture is a different thing as someone noted in the comments, but it can be captured that way.

As for 60fps out of the HD250, 24 & 30 are claimed to work just like the 100/110, so that shouldn't be a problem. 60fps, however, is claimed to have same frame flags as DVCPRO HD and be capturable over component analog. That statement does NOT make sense to me, since a.) where are the flags on an analog signal as compared to HD-SDI, and b.) the patterns are different - one uses 2:3:3:2, the other uses 2:2:2:4. Anybody clarify that for me?

Tuesday update - just talked to the editor on one of these challenged projects - more on self-edited films:

One of my clients discussed how the filmmaker editted the film himself, capturing 24p as 29.97, and because timecode was giving him trouble he turned off abort on timecode break and just captured entire tapes as individual files...thus guaranteeing cadence breaks and making it impossible to correctly capture the footage.

This is the post production equivalent of snapping the key off in the lock then liberally applying superglue all over it.

Now that the footage has already been captured and edited as 29.97, it would almost be an entirely manual process to rebuild the edit correctly as 24p and still maintain best possible quality. There are fixes to get it to be 24p, but so far all involve quality losses due to either DV recompression, >100IRE highlight clipping, or both.

The fillmmaker also shot letterboxed not anamorphic as his coup de grace.

So if you'd like some help avoiding these and other other problems, or just want to know how to save money, make your movie look better, and stay flexible in your options, get in touch - mike [at] hdforindies [dot] com.

-mike

PS - another short way of summarizing a lot of this - never commit to a camera until you have a known, proven, MATCHES EXACTLY way to post that footage. If you need to change NLE package or camera for some reason, make sure you still have a working match.

Labels: , , , ,

Comments:
What absolutely, amazingly, and completely confounds me is the sheer AMOUNT of people who I have met that either A) Refuse to ASK SOMEONE WHO KNOWS and B) REFUSE TO LISTEN TO THAT PERSON ONCE THEY ASK.

The thing that blows my mind are the producers that have such a lot of credits under their belts, that don't have any experience or knowledge about any of these problems, and because you're not charging them 500$/hr for a leather sofa and a plasma screen in the lobby, they don't listen to you.

The thing is, all this information is out there, has been out there, or is not very far away. And soooooooo many producers are actively flinging cash out the window.

Most of it is right there in the Final Cut Pro Manual.
 
This is a nice post. An editor every now and then has to vent. It's always good to get information out in public that might lead to people doing a better job on subsequent productions. I think a nice read after this post would be the the 10 Commandments of Editing that I posted about a while back. Producers need to know this stuff!
 
Casa Magneto! Bwahahaha....

Excellent stuff, Mike. I totally agree. Have you also noticed that the projects where people treat you the worst are often the ones that have also the least amount of money attached?

My personal experience with the Big Studios is that though my idea often gets creatively mangled, they have always treated me with a huge deal of PERSONAL respect and warmth. That, combined with the decent pay, makes me never want to get involved with indies again, unless Bruce Allen is the director. Or unless I owe someone.

Mike, I had never stopped to think how many emails you must get asking for free help. Kinda fun, I guess, but it must become a total pain at some point. Anyone who thinks that Mike should be giving detailed advice out for free, please flame me instead. You can find my email on my site. I'll happily flame you right back, unless I'm working, in which case you will just be ignored.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Well spoken, Mike. This post should be required reading for independent filmmakers.

Matt Jeppsen
www.freshdv.com
 
Well said, Mike!

Hey, out of curiosity, I did a quick search for you on IMDB and came up with a short called Termination. It said you were the post consultant, and the location was Austin. There were six Mike Curtis entries, but that one seemed to match the closest.
 
mike your item # 4 is a bit confusing.
are you saying capture 24a at 24 fps
or at 29.97? the wording seems to contradict
itself. please clarify.

thank you,
great post.

my take; "whatever doesn't kill me just makes
me closer to being dead" or b. "hurts a lot"
 
"That which does not kill me makes me want to curl up into a fetal ball in a dark room, preferably with Kitty Boo purring atop me."
 
Don't worry Mike - you won't lose any work for having published this - everyone who needs to read this will, by definition, NOT read it!

-p
 
Dear Anonymous, Mike is saying capture 24a at 24fps.

That rule can be broken (most trailers are offline-edited at 29,97, believe it or not) but only if you really have a good reason for doing what you're doing. And only if you're doing short-form. Otherwise, you will have all of the problems Mike describes.

Bruce
 
Hey Bruce...why are trailers offlined at 29.97? That does seem rather odd, given the most likely source framerate.

Matt Jeppsen
www.freshdv.com
 
Bruce, the times you can avoid capturing at 24P and not screw up the project are incredibly rare. If trailers are cut at 29.97 they'll be difficult to efficiently encode for the internet (because you can't reverse telecine broken 3:2 pulldown cadence) and they can't be broadcast (broken 3:2 pulldown cadence at, potentially, every edit). Not quite sure what they're good for.

If you don't capture (or process back to 24P) for 24 fps material, you're making another rod for your own back.

Philip
 
Well, I'll toss another "BRAVO" into the mix. I have avoided ranting myself...well, at least in public. I end up ranting to my wife, who doesn't have a CLUE what I am talking about.

I hear all of the same crap that you do...people shooting, capturing and editing without clue ONE about what they are doing, and they don't ask until it is way too late.

And yes, they want the proper workflow advice for free. I am known to give a lot of it up for free on forums. If they can't find it, and want it direct...pay up baby.

OH...and on the 24p thing. Don't capture at 24fps...capture at 23.98. If you capture at true 24fps, you'll have issues.

And bravo on the HVX. Good camera, but not for every situation.
 
Hi Mike,

Cineframe 25 works perfect (PAL land). And if you forget about the small loss in resolution it is considered from many probably the best way to shoot, and then go from there to 24 if necessary. I am an FX1E owner by the way.

Andreas
 
Footage from the HD200 or the HD 250 in either dv25 or HDV 24P/30P is identical in post as that from the HD100-HD110, which just plain works when treated properly. There is no difference in the GOP structure. Captured through the BR50U deck, you would never know it was from a different camera, except for maybe the fact that its going to look better in some situations.

60P in the HD110-110-200-250 is not supported for capture into FCP or Avid. It CAN be brought online through a nasty little lossless process of DVHSCap and MPEG Streamclip (to generate image sequence plates). Same thing you'd use with the HD100U to bring in lower res HDV 60P there. Only useful for overcranking and short effects work, but that said awesome in those cases. Yes, it works. I'm on my third project with elements in 60P mixed with 24P and assorted other plates. Gorgeous slomo.

Elsewhere, Gary Adcock has apparently demonstrated that it uses the same frame flags as DVCPRO HD in 60 mode, and can be directly captured through AJA hardware through the analog components into DVCPRO HD just like any other frame frate available to JVC and the Varicam in common.

The JVC system has some problems, I'll grant you, but 60P isn't one of them, if as you say, you use it in the right situation and you use it right.

chawla
 
I'll second Andreas' comment.

The problem with the Sony cameras is the Cineframe24 mode, which does strange blendings of fields. Cineframe25 and Cineframe30 modes both are simple deinterlaced 50i and 60i signals, respectively. If you use these modes, you lose some vertical resolution but it doesn't result in the same strange motion artifacts that Cineframe24 has. And you can slow Cineframe25 to 24fps and make very nice looking DVDs.

Mike, I would respectfully suggest that you edit your post to make rule 1 "Don't unse Cineframe24 on the Sony cameras"...
 
I second mikes "don't use ANY cineframe mode" on sony cams..... instead, deinterlace in post with nattress' smart deinterlacer.... it retains enough res to be unnoticed. Personally, I don't deinterlace until I'm done with everything else.... that way, it looks more natural.

as for the other topics..... I've always found that the jobs I do four cheap or free, are the ones where I drop a lens, or a light stand tips over....

hey mike.... more pics of rose macgowen please!
 
On number 4, I would add that if your movie were to live on video only or going straight to video market then I feel that it is fine to capture 24p (not 24pA) as 29.97.

Although these days, it's more than likely straight to video means straight to DVD, in which case it may also be more advantageous to capture as 24p as 23.976 since you can save more space on your DVD and add more content or just have a faster burn.
 
All great advice Mike!

I would just like to throw my opinion behind the "Cineframe 25 is OK" camp. I have had no problems using that, for the reasons others have stated before. In theory (I have no hard evidence to prove that this is the case) Cineframe 25 should make better use of the limited HDV data rate, as you are not recording image data you are later going to throw away. I know it prevents you using an adaptive de-interlacer like the Nattress one to preserve vertical resolution in non moving areas of the frame, but I find that the non de-interlaced areas of an image still keep a "video look", although I can't explain why.

I prefer to use the de-interlacer in Shake's FileIn node (slow but very good) which can also be used to remove jaggies from Cineframe 25 material.

I would like to add another warning to indie film makers:

Do NOT confuse shooting 25 fps with using a 1/25 second shutter speed. Use 1/50 second, which is equivalent to the standard 180 degree shutter on film. 1/25 would be a 360 degree shutter angle on film, which is physically impossible, so your footage will not end up with the film look you want.

I have seen this done no end of times, including by experienced professional cameramen on HDCam shoots. I just onlined a short film shot on a Z1, and found the excessive motion blur resulting from doing this was very distracting on an otherwise good film.
 
Response to question # 8. I recently got a jvc HD250, and the simplest way to ingest 60p footage is to output from the camera's HD-SDI port and feed it into a Kona or Blackmagic. you can use the firewire port for "deck control". I know it is not the best solution as you are using your camera as a deck, but until jvc updates thier hdv deck to support 60p over hd-sdi this is a down and dirty solution. My 2cents.
-John Waterman
 
John - thanks for that tip, that IS the best way to get the footage in for your online off that camera. The catch is that it is then in a different codec than the rest of your footage and makes the editorial process a pain - you need to convert the footage to your offline timeline codec.
 
Joseph - I'll second that -

it is surprising how much resistance and pushback I get from folks who come in saying "I've got it all figured out but I need to know this one thing." - when you explain to them how they've made mistakes that are problematic for their intended deliverables, they STILL want to stick to their original plan, no matter how much you outline what a bad idea that is. If they have limited budget and crew yet persist in using the most complicated gear, for instance.

Grr. Deep breath, moving on...

-mike
 
What a great post. I am re-reading it and laughing so much because it's all of painfully true.

Since people asked, here is a more elaborate answer about trailers and 29.97:

Most offline edits for most trailers are done at 29.97fps, standard-def, on an Avid Media Composer OS9. Or rather, a bunch of Media Composers connected to an Avid Unity.

When revision 20 of Trailer Attempt Number 7 finally gets chosen, they convert the timeline to 24fps and online it. The web Quicktimes are then made from the 24fps online.

Bear in mind that the offline footage if often from film and that what we get usually has keycode, timecode burn-in, etc. We are also sometimes working from dailies.

There are other advantages to working at 29.97 - for example, if an editor is doing TV promos at the same time, they can work from the same shared project, selects, breakdown, etc from the feature. You don't want to work on your TV promos at 23.98 because then you don't have as much control over speed ramps, etc.

I have also worked on trailers where we started at 23.98 (for example, if we were digitizing from a HDCAM master) and worked that way through the end. It does make the online easier, but is not commonly done.

Ease of online is not that important in the grand scheme of things - it is a minor part of the whole budget and the studio would rather see the best creative edit possible.

I have worked with some amazing trailer editors who don't even know how 3:2 works properly. But they can lay down a sound bed and edit a story second to none. The know that there are high-paid Mike Curtis types who will get that whole online looking right at some point down the line. It's a symbiotic relationship.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
My mistake on Gary's HD250 workflow; he's coming out the HD-SDI from the camera and doing the conversion there rather than the analog components out. Here's the balance of his post on the COW:

"... JVC uses the RP188 flags just like Panasonic does so the flagged frame structure has been in use for awhile,


"Now the cool part of this is that on the HDSDI out of the 250 you are able to capture the uncompressed data stream with flags correctly using Kona cards.

"Holding true to form on Kona I was able to set the capture to my 23.98 varicam settings and then record only the needed frames with out redundant pulldown being adding to my video stream. This works for 24, 30 and 60p captures

"IF I capture into the DVCPROHD codec over HDSDI from the 250 via Kona you are then able to run the software FRC in final cut to accurately slow the 60p footage down."

I use DVHSCap and MPEGStreamclip to convert to tga's straight out of the transport stream. I do the same thing from live DVR transport streams pulled in from HDVRack. Same workflow. No flags, no extra frames
 
As far as rants go I think that was a pretty good one Mike. I don't think you meant it to be funny, but I couldn't help laughing a bit as I envisioned a montage of all the dumbfounded stares, forehead slaps, and hair pulling that you went thru before finally cracking like Michael Douglas in "Falling Down" and kicking out that rant.
 
One hand is up over here for 30p and documentaries destined for television (HD or SD). 30p is great for losing much of the "video" look and does much better with slow motion, speed ramps, and green screen, than 24p captured at 29.97. And you can watch on a television monitor for real WYSIWYG.

30p looks good and is FLEXIBLE for TV docs.
 
I'll throw my hat in the Sony CF25 vs. post de-interlacer debate and say that there are some situations when a CF 25 can be better than post de-interlacing. If shooting night scenes or high motion scenes I'd definitely use CF 25. Hand Held shots for example pretty much everything would get de-interlaced anyway and there'd be more chance of unpleasant artefacts left over from the De-Int process. I think this is why in Flags of Our Fathers they used Z1s on CF 25 for a few shots on the beach landing scenes.

In night shots, the high key contrast, especially with practical lights can cause problems if the light moves, and the colour will tend to bleed from one field to another (side effect of the 4:2:0 I think) leaving ghosting effects. It's particularly noticeable on things like car tail-lights, etc.

I'm with Nick abut on 1/25th shutter though -it looks wrong to me! I see it pop up in UK TV HD shows though. Often on little cutaways and inserts. ("Torchwood" is plagued with it) I wonder if it's the second unit not knowing what they're supposed to be doing and setting up the cameras wrong.
 
Mike -

Commandments #9 and #10 really struck a nerve with me. I've recently had the parent of a student, not even a student of mine, ask me to provide feedback on their [the parent's] screenplay! My solution has been to draw up a FAQ to answer questions I get all the time (like "Should I go to film school and if so where?"). It will also say what I won't do... like read parents' screenplays!
 
very nice. and it is hard not to agree about CineFrame 24. i shoot 60i with the FX1, and it makes BEAUTIFUL 24p with Nattress' plugins. absolutely stunning 24p, with little to no resolution loss. a smart deinterlacer in post can make good 1080p from 1080i better than faking it on camera anyday. 60i is so smooth, it only makes sense.
 
recently shot some doco segments for one of the bigger cable nets, they told me they were shooting everything with their sony ZU!'s and
to use the 24 fps whatever it is.

I tested it and think it looks like a bad gimmick,
nothing like 24fps or anything filmic...well
I am wrong there. They want the 24fps look t
to achieve a film flicker movement effect,
but that effect looks more like a film camera
shooting 32fps with the shutter at 45 degrees.
holey give me a seizure batman! I like using
a skinny shutter in film when it is a wise aesthetic choice but the cinelook on sony
DV and HDV cameras look toy.

I was told after I shot for the network above
that my shooting went so well that now they have to hire better shooters which will cost them more money, so they would probably
not hire me anymore. There lies the logic of the market.

fact is I have worked inside and out of networks and through and through they
are usually pretty clueless about everything.

"get the intern to shoot it" seems to be the credo.
 
Thanks Mike--very generous post
 
The V1E's progressive scan is a 25Psf, and it looks very nice indeed, thankyouverymuch :)
 
A very informative post, I enjoyed reading it.

But it can be confusing as to a preferable framerate when your output options are both online, dvd (NTSC and PAL) and a possible film screening. Would you shoot in 24, edit in 24 and do whatever pulldown/export to get it to the right fps?

As for my own editor gripe, do not under any circumstances accept footage filmed on a dvd-camcorder. It's far more hassle than it's worth.
 
OJ - let me say I'm a big fan of cutting at 24p (or 23.976, to be more precise) - easier to master to other formats from there.

DVD-Camcorder -- Eww! Shudder.

-mike
 
NO DVD CAMCORDERS?! Ah, but what about the Hitachi Blu Ray HD camcorder coming out this Fall?

-Ariel
 
Post a Comment


Links to this post:

Create a Link

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Listed on BlogShares