DV Cameras....

[cameraguy]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Stuffisk:
what Price Range would I be looking at for a camera that could give me really rich-full color like in the movies?</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

$100,000 for a Panavision 35mm

[Stuffisk]

[img]rolleyes.gif[/img] oh god, um, anyway i can get something under 1000$ and buy some kind of Ultra Filter and edit it in Adobe premiere? also, in Adobe, can i gave a clip a Certain Hue, ( i.e - The movie payBack " ( very dark blue hue ) ) .


?tuffisk

[Alex]

How good something looks isn't just a function of the camera, it's also the function of the Cameraguy (couldn't resist that one).

You can add color to any picture when you edit it. But you need texture, less depth of field, less contrast, and luck to pull more color out of the picture if you shoot in video.

Film still is the color king in my book. Digital video can look very good, but it still doesn't look like film.

Just remember the basics, avoid shooting with harsh, overcast white skys as a backdrop, instead use a blue sky for your backdrop. This tends to make your overall picture look more colorful. Add a polarizer to the equation. An excellent tripod allows you to do intense telephoto shots without annoying camera jitter.

HMI lighting can add an intensity to your coloring scheme. Portable units cost a thousand bucks, and will only deliver an acceptable result if you are shooting indoors but balancing all of your lights to outside light that is being used in the scene.

Or you can use HMI lighting outside in shady areas, it can add a nice "glow" to a persons face. Most importantly, experiment!

Or buy a nice Super-8 camera for $300 bucks, shoot Super-8 Kodachrome 40, do a high quality transfer to video, and edit on a non-linear platform.

[TA152]

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ August 28, 2003 11:10 PM: Message edited by: S8 Booster ]</font>

[cameraguy]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Stuffisk:
So my best bet is to either grab a 300$ Super-8 Canon Camera, Grab a good Filter, Bring it Into Adobe and edit the Color in there, or, Drop 3000$ on a Canon XL1S DV camera ?

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ July 27, 2002 12:06 PM: Message edited by: Stuffisk ]</font></font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, your other thread says that you want the look of the Star Wars movie which was shot Digital (24p HD or something, anyone??). The look is better achieved with a digital camera and thousands of dollars to throw around on special effects. Super 8 will look nothing like DV, really it won't. We shoot Super 8 here because we like (prefer) the look over Digital (video in general).

[Stuffisk]

k, so i go for the Super-8, or canon and then how do i import into my comp for adobe Premiere?

[chasm4u]

Bad thing bout editing super8 non linear is youll spend enough to have been able to get an xl1s - get this

you have to buy the camera,proper lighting, film stock, processong, transfering to some video format for editing, buy or renting the video deck to import the transferred file to your computer, when your done itll be on video anyway, might as well shoot on dv. If not youll have to pay to have the dv footage transferred back to film. when your done with all that hooplah you couldve bought 2 xl1s's.

if you shoot on dv the tape costs 4.00 to 9.00 when your done shooting hook your firewire cable to the camera and your set. thats it! you can now edit.

Which one sounds cheaper and easier to you?

[cameraguy]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by chasm4u:
Bad thing bout editing super8 non linear is youll spend enough to have been able to get an xl1s - get this

you have to buy the camera,proper lighting, film stock, processong, transfering to some video format for editing, buy or renting the video deck to import the transferred file to your computer, when your done itll be on video anyway, might as well shoot on dv. If not youll have to pay to have the dv footage transferred back to film. when your done with all that hooplah you couldve bought 2 xl1s's.


Which one sounds cheaper and easier to you?</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahhh, the typical delusion that video does not need lighting, seperate audio and other stuff that all good production needs [img]graemlins/thumbs_down.gif[/img]

[Mike Buckles]

A three chip dv camera will bring out a better, more colorful picture than a 1 chip camera. But acceptable results can be obtained from a less expensive, 1 chip mini-dv...but if you are shooting on video instead of film, make sure you can still adjust the aperature and shutter manually...I've gotten some really creative results with that. I have the sony trv-900...cost about 2500, but has a really nice picture, and features..I believe it was recently replaced with the trv-950...I would check out the review section of a few Home Video magazines or read camera reviews on C-net.com before buying a dv camera. With that being said, nothing matches the excitement of viewing my super 8 film when it comes back...a good movie camera can be a wonderful addition to any video setup. I shoot some of my projects in video, and some in audio. For lighting, I purchased an NRG photoflood unit awhile back...was very affordable (about 400.00 I believe). Now some may say, must have quartz or something "professional"...but my kit came with 3 light heads, three fully adjustable stands, and each light can instantly switch between 250 watts and 500 watts..no changing bulbs...I've gotten excellent results with both film and video..so you don't have to spend a lot on lighting to get quality. Mike

[Alex]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by chasm4u:
Bad thing bout editing super8 non linear is youll spend enough to have been able to get an xl1s - get this

you have to buy the camera,proper lighting, film stock, processong, transfering to some video format for editing, buy or renting the video deck to import the transferred file to your computer, when your done itll be on video anyway, might as well shoot on dv. If not youll have to pay to have the dv footage transferred back to film. when your done with all that hooplah you couldve bought 2 xl1s's.

if you shoot on dv the tape costs 4.00 to 9.00 when your done shooting hook your firewire cable to the camera and your set. thats it! you can now edit.

Which one sounds cheaper and easier to you?</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

But once you have your digital set-up complete, it actually costs next to nothing to shoot an occasional project in film!