more professional look

[iCEbLuEORbitZ]

ok, so of course, like everyone else, i want to acheive a film-look with my crappy camera which we all know is not possible. however, there are a lot o techniques i have found that seem to give it a more professional look. first of all, i have found that just adjusting the colors and bringing down the saturation a bit has helped. also, i am in the process of building a back-mounted steadicam system which will give a smooth video while walking or running with the camera. this is one of the most important factors and i highly recommend browsing the net for ideas on making handheld steadicams at least. one thing i realized is that i have been videoing (is that a word?) everything all the way zoomed out. i have been paying attention to movies, and i'm almost positive that it is slightly zoomed in, what do u guys think? its hard to tell when watching a movie. the other thing that is a huge problem w/ home video camcorders is the sharpening it does on the light. i find that overlaying all the clips with the same footage, just slightly blurred and low opacity can dampen out some of the sharpening, but can be a loss of quality and LONGG rendereing times. tell me about what you think about zooming thing.

[hmbtnguy]

Well I think your onto something about the slightly zoomed in theory. Well what really sets motion pictures apart from home videos is the optics. If you watch a movie, normally you may notice that the background is slightly blurry (or very blurry). The effect emphasizes what the directors what you to be focusing on. Normal DV cameras are designed to make everything in the scene crystal clear, so this is a reason that a home video looks more unproffessional. Another big issues is the lighting, which should be self explanatory on how important this is. Movies are also shot at 24fps so the action scenes are more blurred and movement looks fast. There are also postvideo effects where your saturation, contrast, and colors are adjusted. Very nice ideas you have there though.

[BrownCowStudios]

i have been paying attention to movies, and i'm almost positive that it is slightly zoomed in, what do u guys think? its hard to tell when watching a movie.

If you pay attention to the depth of field in each shot, you can typically get a good estimate of the focal length.

[Markus]

I thought that the movies are shot at 25 fps? is it really 24?I have also noticed that many times when they are trying to make the movie to have a scary feeling it has slightly blue color. And I have also noticed the really slow zoom in the movies

[Epsilon]

Most Hollywood films are shot at a standard 24fps, that is what you see in a theater. PAL camcorders are 25fps. NTSC camcorders are 29.97 fps.

[maj_barnes]

I like the greenish sepia type thing for scary stuff, it looks cool. And the slow zoom, I've really notice the different. I wish my camera could zoom in super fast to give it that intense feel.

[DEDFX]

Zoom up the speed for a fast zoom.

[maj_barnes]

What like double the speed in post? I can't find a speed for the zoom on my camera.

[Carnage7p]

its actually not a slow zoom that you are seeing, its a slow dolly. they sounds the same but there is a huge difference in the way it looks.

one thing that really separates film from dv is the depth of field that can be achieved with film. however it can be easily mocked with dv. the reason we cannot get the same depth of field on dv is because when the light passes through the lense it goes through a series of three prisms. these totally screw that up for us. but if you want more depth of field you need to start your shot already zoomed in (so it helps to do close ups from further away). however do not use any digital zoom, only use the optical zoom. the more optical zoom you have the better depth of field you will get. it really helps if you have 16-20x optical but most cameras only have 10x optical.

some more suggestions for achieving a more professional look is try to make as few color and lighting changes during post. learn lighting! one of the biggest mistakes is flooding a room with light. don't just put a spotlight out, the key to good lighting is diffusing it. this can be done by using gels, but most of you dont have those available to use. in this case you can still make some white diffusion using silk and other fabrics of varying thicknesses depending on the amount of diffusion needed. there is a lot more to it than this, but i got an internship doing lighting on a film set in california this summer. I learned a lot and because i learned so much i got two job offers. i am doing grip work (which deals a lot with lighting) on a professional short film this wednesday, and i might have an opportunity to get an internship on x-men 3 in the fall. lighting is good to know no matter what area you are focusing on.

[BrownCowStudios]

the reason we cannot get the same depth of field on dv is because when the light passes through the lense it goes through a series of three prisms. these totally screw that up for us.

Not to mention the smaller the CCDs, the harder it will be to acheive a shallow depth of field. The tiny chips in our cameras make it difficult.

if you want more depth of field you need to start your shot already zoomed in (so it helps to do close ups from further away). however do not use any digital zoom, only use the optical zoom. the more optical zoom you have the better depth of field you will get.

In addition to using a longer focal length, you should also open up the iris as much as possible.

[iCEbLuEORbitZ]

ok another thing i thought about was exposure. in movies, you dont see them moving the camera between areas of different light, so the aperature remains constant, and if it doesnt remain constant, i dont think it compensates for the brighter areas.. i think while shooting, maybe if you just keep the exposure setting manual, and set it to what you will be shooting in that scene, that will keep it from doing all the exposure adjustments that camcorders do. i was also wondering if anybody knew if the exposure setting on digital handicams is in the chips, or if it controls a physical aperature, becasue if it did, leaving it all the way open may help with the dof perhaps?

[Carnage7p]

yeah that's a good call browncow. i forgot about that.

another quick suggestion is turn off the digital camera stabilizer. ESPECIALLY when you are shooting on a tripod. if it is turned on while you use a tripod it actually makes the image quality worse.

[reflexive_cinematics]

Here's is the easiest and best way to get a more professional look on a 0 budget. IMO ( just my $.02)

1)Like was said above, pay attention to your shot composition, angles, etc... and pay attention to depth of field. You can get an appearance of a shorter lens by backing up and zooming in to your subject.

2)Change your shutter speed to 30 ( down from what is usually 60 - 100) That will give a LITTLE bit of motion blur but not anything huge. Video has that look because the cams are usually set at that higher shutter speed and fast motion looks very sharp. BUT, if you are looking for that studdering effect or plan on doing some really slow motion from some action scenes, then set your shutter speed much higher, at least 250. I try to get near 1000 actually. Then fast motion will give that ' cool matrix fight scene look ' or when your want to change to really slow mo, this will help eliminate any motion blur that will ruin the effect. ( and by really slow motion I mean taking your 30fps interlaced footage, which is really 60i , 60 half fields put together by interlacing, and seperating the fields making one WHOLE frame from each half frame. This will get you 60 fps and full frames at that. Most movies and ones like the Matrix get that really cool slow motion from setting their cameras ( like the varicam ) to a higher frame rate, so when you slow it down you still have enough frames going past that you dont see the jerky-ness. But doing this trick will get you something really close.

3) Convert your footage to 24p. If your camera doesn't have a mode for 24p then you can do it in post. Every little bit helps. It might be time consuming but this makes it look a little less like a video camera still. Capture your footage, then place it on the time line, then export an AVI file setting it to 24p ( that's 24 frames per seconds , progressive scan, NO field, No interlacing ). Then when it's done, You can add that new video file to your project and go from there.

4)In post remember to set your black, midtones, and white ranges. Basically telling the compter what is suppposed to be black and white. This will make the video look a little less 'washed out'.

5) Do some color correction. Give your video a little bit of a style to it.

6) Good Audio!! Make your sound mix as best as possible. Sound is 70% of a movie! Use high quality samples if available and external mics during production if possible to get the best sound recording you can.

Hope all this helps. This the stuff I've learned over the last 3 years and it seems to help quite a bit.

[iCEbLuEORbitZ]

hey thanks man, but my problem is i have a sony trv-730 handycam, so i am not able to adjust the shuterspeed or anything, thats what sucks. if i had an xl-1 or something of the like, i probably would not be complaining at all right now. about the image stabilizer, i heard that sony uses optical image stabliization, where it moves the lens, so theres no quality loss. and does anyone know if this cameras "exposure" settings actually control a physical aperature or if its all something digital?

[reflexive_cinematics]

So it's this one then?


You can still make the footage look better though IMO, I have one like that and i have a VX2100. But the one I started out with was another sony JUST like yours. I leave the image stabilization on all the time and have not see ANY image quality loss. ( this is on my VX2100 )

as far as the exposure settings, I'm not super familar with that camera. Can you set your exposure to 'manual' in the menu settings? On my trv-250 you can manually adjust exposure and focus, even though it's sorta lame. I have a setting in the menu for ' auto shutter' . you can set this to off or on, but I dont know how to manually adjust it when you set it to off.

[iCEbLuEORbitZ]

yes that is my camera and i can set manual exposure, but idont know if it is an actualy apertarue, because if it is i can leave it open and get one of those diffusion filters or whatever they are called that restrict light so you can film with larger aperatures. yes i do manual focus too but it sucks, you hafto rotate it like 3 times to focus between its full range. its lame. and yes i also noticed the autio shutter "on/off" in the menu, but i could find no way to do it manually once i turned off auto? its stupid. i dont get what it does either.

[Epsilon]

Manual exposure adjusts the iris until it's all the way open, then boosts the video gain to get it brighter if necessary. So if it turns all grainy, you've gone too far!

[iCEbLuEORbitZ]

i was thinking icould just open up the iris all the way, then if its too bright use one of those darkening filters made for that use

[Carnage7p]

they are called nd filters which stands for neutral density. i had 2 nd filters on my camera and addition nd from nd gels.

by the way reflexive cinematics, i also have a vx-2100. i did some research on it, while it is not incredibly noticable, there is some quality loss on already stabilized shots.

[reflexive_cinematics]

there is some quality loss on already stabilized shots.

hmm good to know... thanks for the info.

[Magic-Man]

magic-bullet also helps...

[Epsilon]

by the way reflexive cinematics, i also have a vx-2100. i did some research on it, while it is not incredibly noticable, there is some quality loss on already stabilized shots.

Technically it should not though... It is optically stablized, right??? I'm lost.

[iCEbLuEORbitZ]

i heard it was optical, thats why i thought there would be no quality loss? prehaps it is not iwill have to look. the only quality loss i can see is when panning and moving around it like sways around weird and stuff. like if u switch directions quickly, it lags behind then swings back fast kindof, idk. it wont matter as soon as i finnish my steadicam!! wich is verry close to being done.

[UFProductions]

Yeah, never use image stabilization for moving shots, the lag will ruin it.

[Raptor]

UF hit it right on the head, on a static shot on a tripod, the image stabilizer should be off. Even though the vx2100 does use optical stabilization, it will react to movment in the image as if it were comarea movement and try to compenstae for it. Anytime you are shooting, set as much of the camera up manually as possible. It will prevent the 'searching' for focus and exposure that cameras are famous or infamous for. We had a nasty shoot on Monday that really put the skills of my crew to a test. Three cameras, bright sunny day, big a$$ white reflective background, and a tent over the talent. Compound that with the fact that it was a band's live performance at Warped Tour so they were really into the performance, and that there was a tent covering the stage, but the sun angle had the front portion of the stage in bright direct light, and the back 75% in diffused light. The final nail in my coffin was that my regullar camera ops were unavailable so my crew for the day were basically inexperienced ( my 17 yo stepson, and the front man from one of the other bands we have worked with and occasional fill in male talent on the show). I made their assignments pretty basic, shooting from the side, or back and not picking up any shots when the band stepped into the brighter direct light. Set their two cams up for them, kept a few auto settings but got an image I could live with then gave it to them and told them just to press record, and pick targets of opportunity LOL. I shot everything from the front of the stage with the vx, and worked my tail off trying to keep a consisten look to the shots. We haven't had a chance to review all the video yet, but hopefully they got pickup shots to cover the times I was adjustingall my manual settings. I suppose that is one of the advantages we have in doing all multi camera shoots for the music videos, for any given point in time, one camera will probably have a useable shot. Not always LOL, all you have to do is look at a couple of the videos.
Anyway, to reiterate, for the best appearance-
Do as much manually as your camera will allow.
Image stabilization off any time the camera is locked down
Learn your camera and how to set it up so everything looks the same in all shots.
Learn how to light your scens so you can maintain that consitency.

If you find you end up with issues like I had for the Warped Tour on the set of your movie, then you need to work on the lighting and you're really not anywhere near ready to actually shoot that scene yet! In a doco, or live situation like we had where the lighting and setup are totally out of your copntrol ( don't read that as you don't want to put forth the effort to light the scen properly, I mean a situation where there is no possibility that you will be able to do ANYTHING to control the lighting and setup ) then you just have to do the best you can to control the cam. Ideally I would have set up and shot some of the other bands on that stage, then reviewed the tapes to see what worked and what didn't work. Unfortunately the agreement we had with the Warped Tour media/press people restricted us to shooting only the one band, and some limited areas that had no stages for our setup shots with our on camera talent. It wasn't the ideal situation, but was the only way they would issue us media credentials to come into the venue with mics, tripods and all the other gear we packed in for the day.