Anyone do video?

Harvey_nikon

Harvey_nikon

Messages
3,749
Edit My Images
Yes
I find myself being more and more drawn towards doing video and slideshows but I don't know why.

Does anyone else do either of these?

links? :D
 
I've experimented with the video mode on my D90 and was pretty impressed with the results (considering I hadn't bothered to read that bit of the manual). I bought a DSLR to take stills and if I want to take video I'll use the camcorder ~ unless I've left it at home, of course.

Never created a slideshow. I just use Windows' "Preview" feature if wanting to show pictures to friends.
 
Using a simple movie editing program like iMovie, sorry I'm a Mac man, is a great way to produce slideshows with a bit more 'punch'. Fast forward, reverse, repeats etc. Merged with clips shot on either DSLR or Camcorder you can get creative and have some fun. Moderate learning curve, can be time consuming though.
 
I mix and match footage between the D300s and Sony EX1 & EX3 cameras, I do most of my stuff in After Effects, Premiere, and occasionally Edius.
 
Harvey_nikon said:
Perhaps you should tell that to all the pro's using DSLRs to record things like House ;)

Thanks Dab, i'll check that book out :)

No one have any links to anything they've done?
Click to expand...


Harvey, I'm not knocking the makers of House but my experience of video shot on DSLR's has been less than outstanding.

To be fair, it has been a while since I've had an excitable director rush in brandishing a CF card, chuffed to bits because he's just shot a whole documentary on a 2MP Canon Sureshot. As far as I know, HD video from DSLR doen't meet either the BBC's quality standards and Sky review on a case by case basis.

Now, I'm sure the day will come, and maybe it already has, when video from a stills camera is widely accepted as broadcast quality, and I'm always happy to be proved wrong but until somebody turns up in my edit suite with acceptable footage I'll stick with my assertion that if you want quality stills buy a stills camera and if you want quality video get a video camera.
 
Double post :(
 
RaglanSurf said:
Harvey, I'm not knocking the makers of House but my experience of video shot on DSLR's has been less than outstanding.

To be fair, it has been a while since I've had an excitable director rush in brandishing a CF card, chuffed to bits because he's just shot a whole documentary on a 2MP Canon Sureshot. As far as I know, HD video from DSLR doen't meet either the BBC's quality standards and Sky review on a case by case basis.

Now, I'm sure the day will come, and maybe it already has, when video from a stills camera is widely accepted as broadcast quality, and I'm always happy to be proved wrong but until somebody turns up in my edit suite with acceptable footage I'll stick with my assertion that if you want quality stills buy a stills camera and if you want quality video get a video camera.
Click to expand...

I'm sceptical about video on DSLRs, but i have to admit I was still pretty impressed with the entire episode of house that was shot on a 5DII.

It's called 'the last 30 seconds' or something, have a look at it!

Chris
 
RaglanSurf said:
Harvey, I'm not knocking the makers of House but my experience of video shot on DSLR's has been less than outstanding.
Click to expand...

Your experience of shooting video on a DSLR? or video that you've seen on a DSLR?

As with photography, a lot of the same rules apply to videography. You can put a crap camera and equipment in the hands of a genius and watch him produce a masterpiece. You can put the best camera in the world in the hands of somebody who doesn't know what they're doing and you'll see a lot of crap come out. That doesn't matter whether they're shooting with an HD-DSLR or a Red One.

You guys can doubt HD-DSLRs all you like, and you know what? You don't have to use it, nobody's forcing you to. Plenty of folks disagree.

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout

Edit : http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/28/short-film-shot-on-canon-dslrs-fuses-fiction-and-documentary/ <-- Just saw that one posted on Twitter, thought I'd add it
 
chris321 said:
I'm sceptical about video on DSLRs, but i have to admit I was still pretty impressed with the entire episode of house that was shot on a 5DII.

It's called 'the last 30 seconds' or something, have a look at it!

Chris
Click to expand...

Thanks Chris, I'll certainly check it out.
 
Kaouthia said:
Your experience of shooting video on a DSLR? or video that you've seen on a DSLR?

As with photography, a lot of the same rules apply to videography. You can put a crap camera and equipment in the hands of a genius and watch him produce a masterpiece. You can put the best camera in the world in the hands of somebody who doesn't know what they're doing and you'll see a lot of crap come out. That doesn't matter whether they're shooting with an HD-DSLR or a Red One.

You guys can doubt HD-DSLRs all you like, and you know what? You don't have to use it, nobody's forcing you to. Plenty of folks disagree.

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout
Click to expand...

Kaouthia, I can only go by the footage I've had presented to me and so far it's been less than impressive. And unfortunately as a 'hired hand' I don't really get the choice whether I use the footage or not, so to an extent I am being forced to. And it would appear that the jury is still out on whether it achieves the quality desired by UK broadcasters.
 
RaglanSurf said:
And it would appear that the jury is still out on whether it achieves the quality desired by UK broadcasters.
Click to expand...

Of course, because it's encoded h264 by the camera (assuming Canon), then it needs to be edited, and re-encoded to whatever, then it's converted and re-encoded back into h264 by the BBC or whoever before it's sent down to your TV at home. It loses a lot of detail along the way with several steps of recompression and re-encoding, so they need to have the highest input quality possible - not everywhere is capable of maintaining the quality given that your source footage is all h264 to begin with (which wasn't really designed to be a codec to use for raw unedited footage, it's a delivery format codec).

But out of all the people shooting video (whether it be on a HD-DSLR or a "real" video camera) how many are making programmes to attempt to sell to the BBC?

Much of the latest season of 24 was also shot on 5DMk2 and 1DMk4 Canon bodies, and Hollywood have accepted it (I believe there's a couple of full blown movies being shot on them, but don't recall the titles off-hand), the new patch for the 5DMk2 that adds 24p and other video modes was purely because of those Hollywood types that have been testing these in a working environment.

The BBC are just playing it smart is all and letting others do their testing and research first, and learning from the results of others before they spend our hard earned TV license money. :)
 
I've been using the video on my D5000 a lot, I'm quite pleased with the quality, and the audio is a lot better that is expected. Haven't been editing them though - my macbook 13 almost dies. :/
 
Bristolian said:
I've experimented with the video mode on my D90 and was pretty impressed with the results (considering I hadn't bothered to read that bit of the manual).
Click to expand...

Same here, in fact it was only two weeks ago that I even bothered to use it having owned my D90 for four months. I was really impressed and considering I only have a Handycam that uses tape, this is going to be the way forward for me from now on. I didn't buy the D90 based on the video but I'm glad I did now, although manual focus is pretty difficult in bright conditions. I like the way it produces avi files too, I'm no good at video editing so just stick to what comes straight out of the camera.

I remember seeing footage of some Japanese videographers using some 5D's to shoot weddings, I was completely blown away by what they achieved, incredible stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top