HD Ski Movies

but if your a pretty big ski movie production company, i think its worth the little extra money to shoot 16mm just cause it looks sooooo much better.

I was talking to my photo teacher about filming, cause he is into both photography and cinematography.  he was saying how everyone now is obsessed with digital cameras, but pretty much any professional photographer only uses digital for things like weddings where they have to be sure they get exactly what they want. otherwise they use a 35mm film camera for most everything else, and in a digital photo magazine he is subscribed to, every cover shot is done with film.

digital is just one other type of photography that is insuperior to film, its just easier to use. and the same goes for cinematography.  digital/hd is going to continue to be popular and wont go away, but film is still and always will be superior.
 
Seider,

The Panny HVX does shoot true HD.  When you shoot it in the tapless media format to the P2 storage cards.

HDV is High Definition to DV tape.  Yea its better than SD.  But not quite true HD.  I use HDV currently and love it for the quality and cost of it.

The HVX is actually used by alot of news crew now to broadcast news in HD.  While i've heard rumors that the image is stretched when shooting the camera in 1080i/p.  I know for the 720p mode is true HD.
 
It's marketing.

Everyone wants HD-everything these days, even if it isn't the same type of HD in the sense the consumer thought they were getting. Even if it won't be high definition when you watch it, the catch-phrase "shot in HD" sounds damn great.

Look at Oakley's ads, even they are jumping on the HD-wave with their phrase "HDO - High Definition Optics"
 
And before someone jumps on me about the small, minor differences that a HD-filmed DVD and a standard filmed movie will have, the difference is quite negligable once it's projected on a large screen tv.
 
i think hd will be greater than film soon. one reason why is that if you attach a 35mm adapter to your HD camera, and then slap on a 35mm camera lens on the adapter. You get the "FILM" like look and the quility of HD.

Thats what im gonna try out this year

and to Jeff_Lo

Thanks for the calarifications, but im still not too sure about one thing. That is i think HDV can be HD (im not sure if your saying it isnt...), the reson why i think your saying it isnt because i think HDV compresses the footage, but there is a way of uncompressing and deinterlasing it, to acheive full HD (thats if your camera can record full HD).

and what camera do you have?

 
HDV still isnt true HD.  Its on a DV tape dude.  Its compressed into MPEG 2 format. while it still is used in many places and still looks better than SD and is usually in the 1080i60 format its still not TRUE hd.  Once you've shot the footage and its on the tape its in the MPEG 2 format.  Its awesome quality dont get me wrong but you cant uncompress the MPEG 2 format to the best of my knowledge and i've asked a few people about it in the past because i too was very curious about this.  And i trust those people they have a great understanding and a good amount of time behind using the Sony HDV series cameras.

and i Shoot w/ the FX1 momentarily.
 
shanghai six was in HD... and they wouldn't be using their bandwidth most likely.

9.9 million dpi screen? I know you're using hyperbole but shit, 1080p video only has 2 million pixels on the whole screen. Its not uncommon for people to have something capable of viewing HD resolutions. Your computer monitor for instance, is probably high res enough.
 
First of all, people always associate HD with digital. Native film is HD. the difference between HD and SD in film is how you output it. Any movie you see in theatres is HD. If you take it home and watch it on your little TV, it is SD (assuming it is on any standard DVD).

HDV - the moment any "hd" footage touches tape, it is not actual HD because tapes use a 60i framerate and there is a substantial loss in data.

SD DVDs can not be upconverted to HD DVD content. You cannot insert something that isnt there. Its that simple.

That being said, the HVX does not actually shoot 1080p. It shoots 960 x 720 for the 720p mode, and 1280 x 720 for the "1080p" mode. The pixels are rectangular and are stretched for output. As far as I know, there is no such thing as an HD consumer camera.

Another overlooked aspect is light processing. I have seen countless HVX shots in flat light and it looks horrible. CCDs in general just aren't that good for lowlight snow shooting. 16mm in flat light looks remarkable. No CCDs, just light hitting chemicals. Very natural, very clean.

No doubt, consumer HD looks good and all, but I still don't see the point in prefering it.

And no, HD footage played on an SD tv doesnt look that remarkable to me. I saw Picture This, and I thought it would have looked much better as a 16mm film. And the Level 1 vids just looked like vx footage to me, and I was playing them on a pretty new, big, flatscreen SD tv.

The only occaision that I really liked digital HD footage as much as film was when I went and saw Sin City in theatres, and even that was a digital movie being played on a film format.
 
like what quility can film get to (in pixel dimentions?) becase i know of one camera that can shoot a pixel dimension is 7680 x 4320. and thats just a pretty common pro hd cam(low end of the pro hd cams).
 
Film is pretty much unlimited, it doesn't have pixels, you can make it as big as you want.

And 4k HD cameras are near the top end of professional cameras, the most common are 2k.
 
so your saying that when recording hd footage on hdv, you lose quility. Isnt there a way of uncompressing it and deinterlasing to get the REAL footage uncompressed 100%. Becase i was reading a thread about my camera on some other site and they said there was a way of getting the footage uncompress completely, it ends up in a m2t (or it was a mt2) file.
 
so how is the quility of film determined? is it by the film size (8mm,16mm...)?, or the type of film, or the camera recoding onto the film, or a mix of all of them?

and my camera (a consumer cam) shoots 1980X1080, would that be considered 1k or 2k?

and the pro hd camera that i listed the dimentions for, was a RED camera (just wanted to put that out there, if anyone wanted to know more about it)

 
Pretty much yeah, the film size. The type of film just effects how the footage will end up looking (coloring, light sensitivity ect.)

1080 is 1k I suppose. It's really all you need for normal filming. The higher the resolution, the more you can crop/frame shots in post production without effecting the quality of the final print/product.

The Oakley RED camera is supposed to be a cheap alternative for a 4k camera, the first one built for a lower price point ($75,000 or so IIRC) Most other feature quality HD cams (Arri D20, Viper ect.) are $300,000 or more.
 
just curiose, whats that average film size do they use for holiwood movies?

and for all those ski filmers out there...what do you think about filming skiing in 24p? I know it would be AMAZING for urban shots, but what about for on the slopes?
 
99% of Hollywood movies are filmed on 35mil film. A few are filmed in IMAX which is 70mil film. And more frequently recently some movies are being filmed with digital.
 
im not sure, but shit 7680 x4320?  thats just overkill anyway, why would you ever need that?  shit a normal sd camera is around 450, and that looks good enough. i dont see why having that good of resolution whould make the picture any better.  anyway the reason film will always look better is because the picture isnt picked up digitally, its pretty much a natural process, so film always has that amazingly smooth look, nomatter what size. its all blended togehter where digital is pretty much lines stacked.
 
i think thats when deinterlasing comes handy...but not 100% sure

and film is converted to digital, so......
 
I cant quote Happy-Fun for some reason but this is in response to his last post:

The reason you would want a resolution that high is so you can crop, or

adjust the huge image and the end result can still be at least 1080

lines high, which is the most any HD TV's or media can support.

Thats like saying why do you need a 10megapixel digital camera when the

1mp on your cellphone takes pictures that are big enough to print out

and post on your wall.

And you can get an 'amazing smooth look' with digital cameras, the

difference is pretty much how film reacts to light, you can get a much

broader range between white and black with film then you can with most

digital cams, right now anway.
 
I don't really dig it for the slopes. I like it for urban, sometimes lifestyle, but I usually shoot 30p and slow it down to progressive slow motion in post.
 
even after you de-interlace footage, it still looks pretty damn digital. you are shooting interlaced, so in the end the framerate is going to look smooth; not like 24p. Digital doesnt automatically mean interlaced. You can shoot fully progressive footage on a 35mm camera, and get it converted to full resolution, progressive footage onto a computer. film transferred to digital is absolutely nothing like DV footage.
 
i'm pretty sure you heard wrong.  its set at what it is as a mpeg2 file.  Once it hits that tape it is what it is.
 
ya, sorry i was worng

so my camera records 1980:1080 footage onto the hdv, the hdv compresses it to 1440:1080 and it also takes away some colour. (i think im right this time)

there is one way of recording of true 1980:1080 (from my camera), and that is you need a "black magic intensity card" and attach the camera to the computer via HDMI, and record strait to the computer, not the HDV.
 
Yeah but it still won't be progressive, and it will still have miniDV color sampling, unless I'm missing something.
 
ya, you are probally right, you seem to know quite abit about this stuff, do you go to film school? or just read up about it?

i learned most the stuff i know (which isnt much) form this website " www.hv20.com ".
 
good call, i was looking for this thread in ski grabber, but i just couldnt find it, then i used search for it for the past three posts, and finally i looked in media arts for this post, but i forgot what i was gonna say.
 
I wonder if any companies that film 16mm have considered scanning it to HD. I think they would need to be shooting super 16 for that to work well with all the aspect ratios though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top