Video camera - help appreciated
 

Hello !

I've been re-editing short fiction movies I and my pals shot several years ago, and I'm considering buying a vidcam of my own, but I don't know where to start with.

So I'm gathering pieces of advice here and there to help me out when reading the descriptions of those expensive items.

I've got a bunch of questions :

Hardrive, mini-cassettes, DVD : which one shall I go for?
When I edited the film, something happened, rather unpleasant, and I don't know if it was because Nero was "exhausted" or if it was because the videos were in the mpeg2 format, but there was, like, see, the images looked folded and unfolded where the cut was made.
So : when it comes to editing, are all three formats the same or do they allow you to choose a format, be it avi, smurfinheaven or whatever they call it, and which are the ones that are the best.
I've got to add that when trying to apply a transition with Nero, the sound got fucked up and slightly delayed; as it occured early on, it was embarrassing, characters spoke after their lines.
So : do I have to look for another movie-editing device, or is performing stuff included in most of the cameras?

I've read that the captor size didn't matter (avoid jokes, please), and that 800 000 pixels would normally be enough.

To focus on something, I set my eyes on the following :
They are Canon HG 10, Canon HR 10, and the much cheaper Sony DCR-HC62.

Any clue, people?

different frame rates?

for you, for editing, and for the web, i'd pick a mini-dv camera (tapes).

the problem with tapeless media unless you go to P2 cards or sony xdcam or the red camera that can hold uncompressed footage is that it's very compressed and a pain to edit/color corect/composite, etc.

and mpeg cameras are shit-- mpeg should only be used for compression & delivery.

my question is-- what kind of picture size/quality are you looking at, and what is your budget?

ps- here an article about editing AVCHD footage:

http://www.internetvideomag.com/Arti...eo-editing.htm

would take the mini-dv and if you can afford it buy a hd cam, also tapes.
sony produces some ace ones, I am using the Z1 at university and its little sister, the sister rocks almost the Z1, only when it comes to darker spots, the Z1 is better, but 10 times as big

re: Z1

Z1 is DV/HDV. i hate HDV. the color is shit. there are motion shits. the Z1 shoots lovely DV though.

i'm saving $$ for a RED camera!!!

http://www.red.com/

yes I ment hdv...
and yes the DV is awesome of it

no thanks. the last thing I need is a camera to make my bowels move.

could be funny is you got a second camera at hand

i find that well-shot mini-dv with a nice 3-CCD camera and a good lens looks way better than hi def footage with poor lights, bad lenses, single cmos, and bad editing.

especially if you're compressing for the web, where maybe your box is 480px wide, standard def works better than hi def and with less headaches, less rendering time, less artifacts, less trouble all around.

the only thing i dislike about miniDV is the tapes themselves-- they can get dirty, corrupted, break, etc, but with good quality tapes and keeping the heads clean that shouldnt be a problem. however, the hvx200 can shoot miniDV straight to P2 cards. sweet.

consumer hi def is not yet ready for the big time imho.

you love getting colonoscopies. confess!

Bertrand-- if you can afford it, get a canon gl-2. it's a nice little camera! a bit passe perhaps in these times of changing formats, but good value for the money. think of it as the current equivalent of good super8.

Thanks for your contributions !
It clears things a bit, HD and DVD are ruled out.
As for my budget, I'd gasp if I was over €1000, but I accept donations.
Bedtime now.
I'll come back to the links later, struggle with technical English, may ask more questions during the week-end, til I get a firm idea of what would be the ideal machine.
Again, thanks !

a gl2 is selling here in the u.s. for about $1200 which is 800 euros? but there with tax & all they will fuck you up

in your case make sure to buy the PAL version of the camera, as ntsc wont play on european tv! but wait, in france you have still SECAM or what? oh, the complications.

but start here:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...L_Mini_DV.html

what about editing?
what programs will you use? final cut? after effects? etc.

yeah, HD is only good in high level cameras like the RED, DVD is shit cos DVD is compressed yuck yuck.

and you dont want a consumer type camera because the controls are ASS, i mean ASS.

it's better to have a more professional camera with pro-style controls for focus, f-stop, zoom & iris aperture than the crummy-ass consumer controls.

perhaps you can find a USED Canon GL1 (the previous model), or better yet a Panasonic DVX-100 or a canon XL-1, which are sweet prosumer cameras and probably only will require you to replace the heads for them to work like new.

--
so let me know where/how you plan to show your movies & we go from there!

--

as for programs, you can pretty much do anything in SD with intro programs like final cut express or adobe premiere elements. i am not sure if there is an intro version ($100) to sony vegas. moving up the chain then there is sony vegas, avid liquid, adobe premiere, and above is final cut pro, and better than fucking final cut is avid media composer which rules the fucking universe but costs $2500.

My intentions are to shoot short fiction movies (previous ones lasted around 10-15 minutes).
It's intended to be edited and burned on DVD for friends.
Nothing towards the internet.

The editing program is a question, yes, as I'm quite dissatisfied with the mpeg2-Nero combination. I haven't sorted that out now.

Looks like I'd have to spend twice as much as I can afford. Well well.
Plus if I do I'll feel embarrassed if I don't use the thing twice a year. It's gonna ruin the fun. Gotta think.

I gather that you're looking for a camera to film your own vids, so I would recommend getting a 3CCD camera with an interchangeable lens system (preferably). The Canon XL H1 is a bit expensive, but performs well. It films in full HD and SD on MiniDV tapes.
(Let's not forget that HD works way better than SD, in low light situations).
Another important feature to look out for, is a camera that has a DV terminal with in/out.
Handy for when you finish rendering your film and want to make multiple backups on tape, alongside the harddrive master.
I wouldn't count on any software you get with the camera. Most are too simple and unstable. Go for the real deal.

As for the Red, !@#$%!? Looks like a very nice Hi-end camera, but I can't find all the specifications on it to decide if it's worth the $$.
Besides, rendering anything above 3k is out of the question if you don't have the right hardware to handle the terabits of footage.
I can understand getting one of these if you're Bill Viola or someone working for a studio that uses the IMAX format.
Not your average consumer product.

Oh, and Final Cut rules above all. If you don't believe me, got take a look at what they're using in most professional film studios.

mpeg2 is standard dvd format. if you wanna do mpeg you hve to go with it. but there are differences when converting. good and bad. I use final cut (but only to make rough cuts), and then the major editing work with after effectts, including cutting again, fx of course and putting sound together.
dvd studio pro is a god one for macs to make a dvd out of it, you can do anything with the menu more then with premiere (somebody told me).

the xl h1 is way too expensive, about 20 times what he's thinking of spending (if im doing the math right, i havne't had breakfast). however, a used/older model standard def 3CCD should do fine. 3CCD however is not all that matters, i just bought some dvc20 pannys that are 3CCD and reportedly entry level "pro" yet lack good manual aperture controls to be any kind of pro anything, it's just a consumer camera on a shoulder-mounted shell. the CCDs are a mere 1/6" and they do ok but just ok.

the xl h1 doesn't really do full HD-- that's kind of a myth of prosumer cameras. that they do. they all take shortcuts with resolution & color. int he case of the h1 the cmos are 1440x1080 and have mpg audio.

if you want a real uncompressed hd you gotta get a cine alta. $$$$.

the red scarlet is threatening to other prosumer cams out of the water when it comes out. the red one (the current, pro one) is pricey and for digital filmmaking only. but the beauty of the red system (for what i understand) is that you decide frame size, framerate, and basically everything. i have friends who have attended live demos with the camera and unfortunately i wasn't able to be present at one. the other advantage is that it uses 35mm sensors & it takes advantage of having interchangeable cinema lenses.

anyway, resolution is not all that is cracked up to be; so for someone who wants to shoot little movies i'd rather recommend a GOOD standard definition camera with real controls. and fuck low light, learn to light a scene properly is what i'd tell him.


real deal needs not be expensive, final cut express lets you edit fine for $100, so does premiere elements.


well the xl h1 is hardly your average consumer product either. i'd pick the sony ex1 over it, but it's still $7K! but with the red scarlet coming out at under $3,000, it's going to blow the competition out of the water. and again for what i understand (i might be mistaken) you don't need to shoot at 3K with it, you can go smaller.

the red one, which shoots 4K, costs about 1/3 of a cine alta, so i'd say hell yeah it's worth the money for someone looking to get into digital filmmaking in a serious way, it's making huge inroads at the moment.


i use both, avid is way better for me, less dumb, more fine control, more options, better color correction tools, and it's better for a lot of film studios too. the latest batman was edited on avid for jeeves sakes. avid has a huge range of solutions for film & tv production that are industrial strength and can handle any size workflow. final cut works fine for small quick projects but when you have massive footage, avid works well. when you have 30 hours of footage avid kicks fcp in the ass.

fcp is nice, and convenient, but it's just another tool.

see for example:

http://www.avid.co.uk/company/press/...asp?taxID=3646
last king of scotland, the queen, pan's labyrith, babel, children of men, united 93, casino royale, pirates of the caribbean--edited on avid

and here's the latest feature on batman:

http://www.avid.com/showcase/the-dark-knight.asp

--

however for small amateur DV/HDV movies you can edit FINE on final cut EXPRESS without forking out a fucking fortune on PRO. it's almost identical to FCP minus the high resolutions and other high end tools.

http://www.apple.com/finalcutexpress/

anyway, he can do fine with little money just making a few smart choices.

oh man, interesting. we got an avid in our editing room and I think nobody uses it, everybody uses final cut on macs. maybe I should give it a try. how is the learn curve with it, is it worth it? (I think I may know the answer)

learning curve is higher, it's harder to learn, but the payoff is big. fcp caters to the lazy heee hee. well no, it's just easier. but if you do avid, you can do fcp; however, if you can do fcp you can't do avid. it's like driving stick shift.

i'd go nuts without my avid subclips. also the timeline has 2 modes (segment mode & trim mode) while fcp has only 1 (stuck in what would be avid's segment mode). they both have their strengths and weaknesses and you gotta choose what's best for each project.

what i love about avid is that it imposes a more systematic & organized approach which keeps you from getting confused down the line, whereas fcp is more fluid but more prone to make a mess. definitely learn & enjoy both!

I keep taking notes.
Next week I get new eyeglasses, after which I go to shops and ask clever questions based upon your reflections.
I'll eventually come back with one or two links to the object I might acquire within the next 10 days, so that you can spell a warning if it's not proper.

I'm well aware of Avid's capabilities !@#$%!, but to say that FCP can't handle large projects, that it's messy, for lazy people, etc, is a load of hogwash. Both of these software packages are used by professionals.
I've edited countless projects that were over two hours long, simultaneously working with 4-5 camera sources in the same timeline. Let me add that you'll at least need a dual-core, for it to run smoothly.
FCP isn't necessarily easier. It's interface is friendlier, that's all.
The rules for colour correcting are always the same, no matter what video software you use.
Again, the only thing that differs is the way it's represented. The calculating formula is almost identical.

"but if you do avid, you can do fcp; however, if you can do fcp you can't do avid."
^Sorry, but I won't even bother commenting on such an infantile claim.

I guess it's just a matter of preference.
Both of these programs can be upgrade or modified to speedup your workflow. For example, you can create your own filters, transitions, menus, actions (batch processing), and much more. It's very important to find your own way of sorting, naming and managing your files to suit all your needs. If you use any of these programs on a regular basis, you'll inevitably discover various shortcuts to make your editing easier and less time-consuming.

As for movies edited with these two powerful packages?
Well, the films you mentioned are just the tip of the iceberg. There's an equally impressive list of movies that you can thank FCP for. Happy editing.



Bertrand. I think that the Canon HG21 that comes out in September, is more in your price range. It's compact and has a full HD resolution (1920x1080). It'll cost around € 1500. Not bad at all.

oh hey man i seem to have missed this message.

i say get yourself a nice USED gl1 or gl2 canon. gl1 is older but you can find it cheaper. they were nice cameras! and a good intro level. i bet you can score a great deal if you search around hard enough. if you're super-lucky maybe you could even get a dvx100 for little money-- that's the camera i have and it makes lovely footage, the cine-gamma is great, and it has xlr inputs etc.

most important man that you dont get suckered into a consumer camera with shitty automatic controls-- you want MANUAL. manual focus, manual aperture, manual white balance, manual zoom. and i don't mean that you can adjust these with a little button inside a menu, i mean knobs that are sticking out of the camera body & that you can control while shooting.

that's the most fucking important thing you need really-- the rest is secondary/superfluous in my opinion.

and go for mini-DV. while it's already an ageing format, it's perfect for editing, media is cheap and widely available (you can find tapes in the supermarket), and any and all software will be compatible with it.

about turning mini-DV into dvd, that's another story that will require sorting out later in the future...

OK, so changes happened.
Last week I met this guy who had been looking for photographers for his wedding. We do a little talking, and he tells me people in power in his place of work have decided to get rid of what they'd been working with. Including cameras. I asked what kind of camera it was, he noted it down, and there could be news by two weeks.
Until then, I don't do any other research, as it'd come for free; the XL1; if there's one.

you are a lucky one

FUCKING A

GREAT CAMERA

CONGRATS

exactly what you need, and more! well worth the cost of repairs etc. i'd suggest you download the manual & study it carefully. it might need maintenance int he near future but that's usually replacing the heads and that's cheap. fuck man, the xl1 is one great little camera. SCORE!!!

Yes, that is a kick-ass camera.

But since I just saw this thread, I would highly recommend the Canon HV-30. Give it a lot of light and it produces an amazing picture. Limited manual control but there are workarounds. Yes, HDV with all its limitations and the CMOS rolling shutter thing but for the money, ya get a lotta bang for the buck.

like what? im curious.

usually those "workarounds" require the use of some kind of shitty menu screen.

i think the xl1 FTW. but convince me? i like to learn.

Oh, no, given the choice of a free XL-1 or pay for a HV30, I'd jump at the XL-1. But it depends on what you want to do with the camera. You can 'run and gun' with the XL-1. Change settings on the fly etc.

The HV30, for 'professional' use is more like a big film camera. Set your settings and hit record. Don't think about changing anything because it is so small the slightest touch will show as an earthquake in the image.

People think so much of this $1K camera that they put pricey focal length adapters on them.



But manual control on the HV20:

1. set your shutter speed--most people like the 24FPS mode so use 1/48
2. point the camera at a light--idealy you should be able to vary the brightness or you can just move the camera to a spot of correct brightness.
3. Set a fixed exposure value (+/-)
4. Now half-press the photo button and the exposure (f-stop/shutter) will appear on the LCD. If it is 2.8, you're ready to go. If not, adjust the light until it does.
5. Now, you have manual control of the iris using the exposure value control. Plus the camera will not add gain (which is otherwise totally automatic and invisible on the LCD display)

so how do you do a rack focus on that?

regardless, it shoots hdv-- major suckage.

im stashing funds aside for the red scarlet...

If yr using the camera itself, ya don't. If yr using a DOF adapter, you can do it there.


HDV ain't HDCAM but heck its a lot cheaper. Just like DV isn't DigiBeta.

Ya pays yer money and ya gets yer choice.

Again, HV30 is a kickass camera for the $$$