DSLR vs. Camcorders: What’s The Real Difference?

     The video production world is an interesting maze of equipment vs. skill vs. creativity vs. monetary means, and it's really easy to get lost in a world of frame sizes, codecs, lenses, frame rates etc. Even harder to navigate: a topic that has two very stubborn sides to it, both with very valid arguments and both unwilling to budge on what is better and why. In this blog, I am going to attempt to keep things as neutral as possible and just stick to the facts, but I will make it known early on that I prefer DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex). I own a 5D Mark iii, but also love shooting on camcorders. So here are the most starkly contrasting points between the two mediums; I leave it to you to make up your own mind.

1. Recording Style

     In the beginning, DSLR cameras were created for photo-journalists to be able to take high quality pictures in non-optimal conditions while on scene. This idea translated into capturing high-def video in the same situations. Camcorders were always made for fiction cinema creations. They were designed to be put on a tripod or glidecam, and used to tell an intricate and beautiful story. For this reason, videographers and DP's (Director of Photography) prefer the look and feel of a camcorder because that's what we've been shooting on for the last century. People look at my 5D Mark III on set and wonder if I forgot to take my meds because that's a photo camera (at least in appearance).

"Hey guys, I'm here to shoot your movie... one frame at a time"

     DSLRs were never meant for fiction storytelling, as anyone against them will tell you, and that they're not up to standard for capturing the medium. The reason you're seeing them used more is because of how inexpensive DSLRs can be. Here at EFillF, we shoot on both types of cameras depending on the scope and budget of the project. So, for the type of camera chosen, their are two components to look at. What you can afford and what it is you are shooting.

2. Audio Capturing

     It is a well known fact the DSLRs fail completely when it comes to capturing any sort of usable audio. Each camera comes with some form of built-in microphone but it's sub-standard at best; and then is run through a massive compression that comes out as unusable audio. Camcorders likewise come with microphones but those are meant to capture single voice audio in front of the camera and it isn't run through a huge compression. Though, HVX owners will tell you that the audio is also unusable. The end point is that with both systems, you should hire a Field Audio Recordist who solely captures audio to a separate capture device.

3. Storage Capacity

     The good news is that every type of camera is moving toward high speed SD cards in their cameras; i.e., Blackmagic, GoPro, All DSLR. But the high-end cinema cameras HVX (p2 cards), RED and Arri need attached SSD's (Solid State Drives) in order to capture their high quality. (Yes, I know the Arri Alexa has an in-camera capture system too, which is awesome and should be praised). Those things add some real high dollars to your camera costs, which are worth it if you have the capital, because the picture is unbeatable. But in comparison to SD cards, which are super cheap and plentiful, those are outrageous additions to your budget.

Call me the Dragon.... Because I'll burn all your money away.

 

4. Lenses and DOF (Depth of Field)

    The really good news between emerging Camcorders and what DSLRs always had concerns interchangeable lenses. The ability to adapt your recording device to any sort of picture look that is required will always need a change of lens, and the first version of digital camcorders didn't include that ability. It was up to the user to manually set the settings so the camera gave the look you wanted, rather than the lens. Now, that's no longer an issue; all high-end digital cameras have interchangeable lenses, especially now that Panavision is releasing their first line of digital only lenses (see last week’s blog: "Newest Camera Tech: November Addition"). Depth of Field is an entirely different story. The second reason video makers gravitate toward DSLRs (the ones with full frame sensors) is that the DOF field can be likened to a 35mm film camera in how narrow you can make it. This has been beyond the ability of most camcorders until now, but once again with the new lenses coming out that will most likely change for all camcorders too.

     So what do you do? Save all your money for the expensive equipment that everyone agrees is better and should be the only standard for fiction video making? Or, go for the cheap DSLR set up that affords you more opportunities to put that money toward production quality and acting? My advice is neither. I wrote a blog a while back entitled "5 Best Investments When Starting a Career in Video" and I still stick with the points I laid out in that blog. Cameras can be rented and the fact that digital technology keeps doubling every 13 - 18 months, even if you buy the most expensive newest and biggest thing on the market it'll be out dated by the next year. As for which type of camera you should use, try them both, see what you're comfortable with and which ones gives you the best production value. We at EFillF are unbiased as to which camera is being used, as long as it is the best camera for the job at hand.

Written By: Jeremy Hatfield

Associate Producer/Blogger

Edited By: Laura Ettinger

Public Relations

EFillF Productions, LLC

www.efillfproductions.net

Newest Camera Tech: November Edition

Video producers in this day and age know that it’s very important to be up-to-date on the newest technology; not necessarily in order for them to upgrade and change, but to know where the future of the industry is heading. While there are those who still love shooting 35mm film, they still need to know what the digital industry is up to, even if just to compete. So, here’s a list of the new things happening in the field of digital video hardware and software:

1. Panavision announces Primo V lenses.

     This is a very big deal, because Panavision has been one of the last bastions of celluloid film-making in a post digital world. Their various sets of both spherical and anamorphic lenses have been used on many of the greatest films of all time, and the Primo line of lenses has even won an Academy Award for technical excellence. Now Panavision is making their first series of glass designed exclusively for high-resolution digital cinema. Here’s an excerpt from Panavision’s press release:

“The Primo V lenses are designed to bring the look and feel of Panavision Primos to digital cinematography, using the lens elements from existing Primo lenses, long an industry standard for top cinematographers. Primo V lenses take advantage of specific design adaptations to work in harmony with digital cameras, maximizing image quality while delivering Primo quality and character.” ^[1]

The Primo V lenses are compatible with any digital camera equipped with PL or Panavision 35 mount systems. No street date is set yet.

2. Blackmagic adds CinemaDNG RAW recording.

The new Blackmagic Camera 1.5 software update adds CinemaDNG RAW file recording so customers can now capture super wide dynamic range in a single file. Wide dynamic range RAW image recording allows users to attain the brightest highlights and the darkest shadows simultaneously, capturing more of the scene than is possible with a regular video camera. High quality lossless CinemaDNG files are fully compatible with DaVinci Resolve 10 for seamless color grading and editing workflows. Lossless CinemaDNG RAW files are an open standard; however, not all video applications can open them, although those that can are increasing all the time. CinemaDNG is an Adobe brainchild and has seen the best results with their products.

"Adding CinemaDNG RAW recording to the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera is incredible," said Grant Petty, CEO, Blackmagic Design. "It's amazing that we are now able to record the highest quality RAW images on such small SD cards! We think customers are really going to enjoy the extended creative flexibility that color grading wide dynamic range RAW files will bring to their productions!"^[2]

Even though this version of CinemaDNG is compressed, the compression is very minimal, and will affect picture quality because the format is lossless, meaning the compression doesn’t affect the picture quality. The Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera can be found in any high-end camera retailer and goes for less than $1,000. If you already own the camera, then go to the Blackmagic support page and download the newest firmware update.

3. J.J. Abrams decides to shoot “Star Wars VII” on 35mm film.

     This is an important fact only because George Lucas spearheaded the digital camera movement, along with James Cameron, and designed one of the first digital cinema cameras to shoot “Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones”. This not only created quite a stir among classic filmmakers, but also looked really, really bad at the time. He shot it using the HDW-F900, developed by Sony and Panavision, a digital camera using an HD digital 24-frame system. He continued to use digital cameras for Episode III as well. So what does it mean that J.J. Abrams is shooting on 35mm film this time? Firstly, you can get used to a lot more of the lens flares for which he is so famous. Secondly, that means the 3D will be a post-conversion, which is what happened with “Star Trek: Into Darkness”. The film was visually appealing but the 3D certainly fell short.

The good news is “Star Wars” fans are going to get the picture quality and film emulsion they loved about the original trilogy, meaning IV, V, and VI. It really speaks to Abrams’ roots as a “Star Wars” fan as a child; he’s trying to recapture the feeling of the old movies, which is admirable. Maybe his next step should be to use all models for his SFX rather than digital, but that might be reaching a bit far…

Written By: Jeremy Hatfield

Associate Producer/Blogger

Edited By: Laura Ettinger

Public Relations

EFillF Productions, LLC

www.efillfproductions.net

---

^[1]  http://www.panavision.com/content/panavision-unveils-new-primo-v-lenses-optimized-digital-cameras

^[2] http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/press/pressdetails?releaseID=48061

Color in Digital Video, How Things Have Changed.

There has been a major change in the digital video workflow; Adobe has created a direct link from Premier to their new color grading program, SpeedGrade. This has created new techniques and enabled faster workflows; now, you don’t have to export and render every time you want to start color grading your video work. This has inspired me to look back and examine how color grading used to be done and how these new changes in the color workflow, and especially new cinema looks, are changing every day in this digital age.

What is interesting about the new digital workflow is that people are shooting their footage according to logarithmic curves, or to put that simply, we’re shooting the image as flat as possible in order to do the best color work in post. It can be debated whether it’s the best way to shoot for color, but that isn’t the focus of this blog. The point is that most of our “high-definition” cameras natively shoot according to logarithmic curves, so that choice is being made for us. The new black magic pocket camera, for example, shoots its raw footage in an almost black and white looking picture so that it can later be color graded with DaVinci. This style of shooting is causing issues though, mostly with DP’s whose job it is to make the set and lights give the look that is called for. Is this the best way to shoot now, though?

This new style goes completely against 100 years of celluloid shooting where the only color work you could do in post is to add red, green or blue to the entire frame of film. I find that I like having the choice to either properly light and color a set or to make a plan to shoot flat and color later. Though if 4K and higher cameras keep being made the way they are, and RAW footage keeps acting the way it does, that choice is being made for us. So, regardless, video producers have to start thinking about algorithmic workflows. I found a great video on Vimeo that covers most of the basics for those who want to know more about digital color grading. http://vimeo.com/73746421

The downside to this new age of coloring is that programs like SpeedGrade are making it almost too easy to shoot a flat picture, apply a Lumetri look and call that good filmmaking. I myself get caught in this trap of what appears to be an easy way to professionally color film, but there’s no soul behind the color scheme now. Don’t be surprised to find that more and more independent films start looking the same because of the lazy way that coloring can be done. I’m sure that lots of DP’s will agree with me that future generations must not get used to lazily coloring their films, but that they use color to advance and enhance the story they are trying to tell.

Our fearless leader at EFillF, Eyal Filkovsky, is quickly becoming a noted colorist and color grader in the local Colorado community. Having just finished work on the short film, “Black Friday”, he got a firsthand look at the new color workflow and has a natural talent for bringing the best picture he can. He provided several insights into this blog and is available for all your coloring needs! Check out the coloring reel below.

Written By: Jeremy Hatfield

Associate Producer/Blogger

Edited By: Laura Ettinger

Public Relations

EFillF Productions, LLC

www.efillfproductions.net

HD Vs. 4K, 8K - What's really going on?

Ever since RED cameras hit the market and digital video started to take over film, there has been a lot of hype over whether to upgrade to this exciting new technology or if us smaller filmmakers have to make the switch to stay current. EFillF prides itself on being on the cutting edge of new technology, (see Adobe Cloud Blog), and we have seriously looked into 4K cameras. But is this new “depth” of color all it's hyped up to be? Here are three reasons why upgrading to 4 or 8K may not be the magical video genie we've been waiting for all these years.

1. Most people jumping on the 4K wagon don't know what they're doing.

I've run into more people than I should who have gone out and bought a GoPro or even a RED camera and then turned around and complained that they couldn't edit it properly or that the picture wasn't what they were expecting. DO YOUR RESEARCH! You can't keep that same computer that you were using to edit DSLR or even high def camcorders and expect that the 4K is going to act the same. IT’S NOT!

The amount of information in a picture when you double the pixels doesn't double the RAM power needed; it's an exponential value, so you need at least four times the computing power and that's just to get the picture to play properly. For true RED RAW editing you're going to need 32gigs of RAM; that's just a fact. Also, RAW footage is shot for post-production. The picture you get from the camera looks almost black and white, or extremely desaturated, and needs to be put through a professional editing program such as DaVinci or SpeedGrade. There has been a lot of hype around the BlackMagic Pocket Cinema, but once people looked at the RAW footage it shot they were surprised at the lack of color and depth. The information is there, but it needs some help in post.

2. There is no delivery system, except for Web

I'm going to preface this section by saying this is strictly a temporary stop. Once we get to the next disc or delivery system above Blu-Ray that can hold 4K information, this isn't going to be an issue. As of right now, though, there is no cheap way to get your 4K video to your client. You could keep giving them your 250 gig flash cards, but you're going to see a serious dent in your budget if every change made to a video had to be delivered that way. Right now it's the model to deliver completed works by DVD or Blu-Ray, because the producers can afford to give up those discs to the clients.

If there's one thing that's true about the video industry is that it's hard to change the current business model. People in this industry like they way things are done and are very slow to adopt new, possibly faulty, technology. If you are delivering by Web, then there's no problem when it comes to cost, but the sheer size of the files means you're going to spend more time uploading than working on projects in order to make deadlines.

3. We have no way to watch it!

Since you're going to be reading this on your computer, you can easily see the pixels that your laptop or desktop screen have. Go ahead and check, I'll bet you it's 1080p. That means the full size of your screen is 1920x1080 or about 2K. Now go check your television in your living room. If you're lucky enough to have one, and yes it's a privilege, not a right, then it will also be 1080p at best; 720p is what most people have and that's even less. What happens if you watch a larger pixel frame on a smaller screen?

It's in the beginning of every movie ever: “This movie has been formatted to fit your screen.” Formatting means compressing, and compressing means that you're not getting 4K. So unless you're one of the lucky, and rich, people who can afford a 4K TV or computer monitor, then you're watching in 2K or less. So make sure when you're editing 4K footage that it's scaled down so you can see the true look or you're just editing it in 2K and lying to yourself.

All of this nay saying aside, the question still stands: is 4K and higher the future of making movies? The answer is a definitive yes. In the near future it will be commonplace to shoot, edit and watch in 4K and even in the further future to get to 8K, but for the moment our cameras are outracing our delivery system and watchable media. Just have patience and focus on what has always and will always be much more important than what we shoot on, and that's the content that we are shooting.

Written By: Jeremy Hatfield

Associate Producer/Blogger

Edited By: Laura Ettinger

Public Relations

EFillF Productions, LLC

www.efillfproductions.net

Gravity: Technical Specs and Movie Review

Gravity: Technical Specs and Movie Review

This past week I had the pleasure of viewing Alfonso Cuarón's new space thriller “Gravity”. The first point I'll make is that if you're going to see this movie, it is worth the few extra bucks to see it in IMAX 3D. In that way, you will really be able to grasp the true scope and feel of the long and harrowing shots that Cuarón is known for in the film industry. Alfonso Cuarón is best known for directing “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban”, but also directed the Clive Owen drama “Children of Men”, and the breakout foreign hit “Y Tu Mama Tambien”. With such dramatic work under his belt, it's easy to understand where the conflict and drama of “Gravity” originates.

The main challenge in the creation of “Gravity” is the location of the story. Obviously a team of filmmakers can't go to space on the shuttle Explorer and shoot in the International Space Station, or destroy it for that matter.

“For the Cuaróns, space offered a rich field of metaphor. In weightlessness, the inertia of one's personality — gravitas — can become an almost physical force. There are cocoons of survival (spacesuits, ships and stations) challenging the stark deadliness of the universe for an unprotected human.”[1] Dave Brody, Space, Science and Culture Writer.

      The idea seemed simple in concept: shoot the movie in a green screen studio and have the actor flip about in harnesses. Once they got into the studio however, it seemed this wasn't going to be as easy as they once thought. Early in the pre-production process, Director of Photography Emmanuel Lubezki foresaw a problem. In space, light comes from only one source, the Sun. Once the light hits an object, it bounces all over the place and creates serious problems for the camera; especially during some of the more intense sequences where Sandra Bullock's character is free-spinning through space. The crew couldn't just rotate and spotlight around the actor and get the same effects as if she were tumbling through space. To overcome this obstacle, Lubezki completely recreated the way we shoot movies. He created a “light box” with 196 panels, each containing 4,096 LEDs.[2]

Looks like light #2,058 is out!!!

     Needless to say, if our EFillF team could get our hands on anything like this we'd never need sets again. Actors and set pieces could be put inside the box and the panels would move to accommodate the necessary views. The rig for “Gravity” was over 20 feet tall and 10 feet wide. I imagine when George and Sandra Bullock were in the “light box” it really did feel as though they were in space.

The second challenge in “Gravity” is gravity itself. Making a person appear to be in a weightless environment when they're still stuck on earth is a difficult task.

“Our brain thinks from the standpoint of gravity, of horizon and weight…It was a whole learning curve because it’s completely counterintuitive, and we started choreographing with pre-vis, meaning animations. The problem is that animators, they learn how to draw based upon horizon and weight. It was a big, big learning curve, with experts coming to explain the physics and what would happen. You would tell who the new animator was in the room because it was a guy who was completely stressed out and wanted to quit.”[3] Alfonso Cuarón

I'm sure there were actors on set who may have been intimidated by the scope of the production equipment, but Sandra Bullock found a way to get comfortable with the new approach.

“There were various contraptions that existed on the soundstage which that, when you first saw them, you just made them your friend as quickly and as physically as you could because if you didn't, they were so confusing and complex.” Sandra Bullock

So I'm in space now? Oh that's the coffee maker

“Gravity” was shot exclusively on the Arri Alexa using Zeiss master prime lenses. This is another example of a heavy technical shoot done with a digital-only workflow, and the IMAX effect is not lessened because of this fact. The effects and long shots that Cuarón is known for could not be accomplished with super 35mm film because the canisters don't shoot for that long. It also helped with the post-production to shoot digitally because they could make all the visual effects first, and I mean ALL [4] (The Pre-vis stage of the movies took two years before any cameras rolled.) and overlay them on the line monitor, so the actors and crew could see the exact outcome of the take. Filmmakers can learn from this new way of shooting, and it's certainly another reason EFillF will remain a digital. We've also picked up a few tricks for our upcoming “Defect” series that uses a few of these same principles.

While some of the physics were completely off from what astrophysicists would call accurate, (see Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take here.)[5] “Gravity” does manage to keep the audience involved throughout the entire movie. There were moments when I literally was on the edge of my seat. Even those not particularly interested in space or sci-fi movies will find the human emotion and drama very compelling---as compelling as any drama that takes place on Earth. Overall, “Gravity” was a great ride through the terrors of the vacuum of space, and a cinematic achievement that should withstand the test of time.

Written By: Jeremy Hatfield
Associate Producer/Blogger
Edited By: Laura Ettinger
Public Relations
EFillF Productions, LLC
www.efillfproductions.net

---

[1]    http://www.space.com/23073-gravity-movie-weightlessness-alfonso-cuaron.html

[2]    Picture from: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/re-creating-weightlessness-major-challenge-crew-gravity-article-1.1467699

[3]    http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Gravity-Creators-Explain-Learning-Curve-Weightlessness-39715.html

[4]    http://www.space.com/23073-gravity-movie-weightlessness-alfonso-cuaron.html

[5]    http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/neil-degrasse-tyson-trolled-gravity-on-twitter

5 Best Investments When Starting a Career in Video

     When I graduated from film school with stars in my eyes and ideas in my head, I put every penny I had toward a brand new camera, thinking that once I had this important tool the rest of the world would come to me. I found out I was wrong in this assumption, and while I love having my camera, I am now wise enough to know that I should have spent my money on more lasting and practical investments, such as:

1. Lights: Nothing can compare to a good light kit on any set. Even a small, cheap soft box will immensely help your production quality. And being able to expertly light an interview or certain wedding moments will lend credibility to any freelance video maker, especially one just starting out. Additionally, and best of all, lights won't become outdated in six months. Sure, more expensive lights are better in all situations, but if budget is a consideration, a good light kit can pay for itself many times over.

2. Lenses: In this day and age, camera types and bodies are changing on a yearly basis; six months in some cases. This makes investing in the expensive camera bodies financially impractical, but investing in versatile lenses always comes in handy. No matter what kind of camera is being used, there is a lens adapter that makes all lenses functional on any shoot. A wide variety of lenses can be useful when on a shoot that requires a specific type of shot or situation.

3. Sliders/Jibs/Steadycams/Tripods: I've lumped all of these in one category because they're all effective for the same reason--they're stabilizers that can be used for every single shooting situation. Tripods are the safest bet when working in the video industry; you will always need a steady stable shot. This is also true for the other three, they help to make dynamic and interesting camera movements while stabilizing the picture. This equipment is universal in usage and adaptation; you can attach any sort of capture medium to a stabilizer (even an iPhone).

4. Storage Media: This is a fundamental tool that every filmmaker needs to own. No matter what is being provided or shot, the footage will need to be stored on something. The new filmmaker should own that storage device; don't chance losing footage because you have to return a CF or P2 card to a rental house.

5. General Tool Set: Lastly, go get yourself a set of basic tools--hammer, measuring tape, gaffers tape, screwdriver, ratchet, etc. One thing I have learned is that a shoot can be unpredictable. You can make yourself stand out on set by having that tool that everyone needs but for which no one came prepared. Especially gaffers tape. More than one shoot has been saved because someone came through with gaffers tape.

Written By: Jeremy Hatfield

Associate Producer/Blogger
Edited By: Laura Ettinger

Public Relations
EFillF Productions, LLC
www.efillfproductions.net

Adobe Hacked!

     Two weeks ago, the Adobe servers were maliciously hacked and the information of almost 3 million users was stolen including credit card information, usernames, e-mail addresses, and passwords. You may or may not have known this, but more importantly, this comes at a very inopportune time for Adobe. Adobe has been trying to reassure their users that switching to their new Creative Cloud, a monthly subscription based service, is a good idea. With the recent security issues, this has a lot of users wary. At EFillF Productions, we have been looking into switching to Adobe’s Creative Cloud, but are also leery of security concerns as well as  a list of other valid concerns.

     What does this really mean for the future of Adobe? In order to glean that information, we looked at a similar security breech that occurred two years ago on the Sony PlayStation® Network. Sony never revealed how far reaching the hack was but stated it potentially reached all of their 70+ million users. This security breech caused Sony’s network to be down for almost six months (which hasn’t happened with Adobe), and everyone was forced to change their personal login information (Adobe has only done this with those affected). While this was a major inconvenience for Sony PlayStation® Network users, the company didn't see a decrease in users to the system. Two years later, PlayStation® is still one of the biggest online applications.

     "Cyber attacks are one of the unfortunate realities of doing business today," Brad Arkin, Adobe's chief security officer, wrote in a blog post Thursday. "Given the profile and widespread use of many of our products, Adobe has attracted increasing attention from cyber attackers." Perhaps, the inclusion of the Adobe Creative Cloud model only made it that much more tempting for the hackers. More than likely this experience will have Adobere-examining their Creative Cloud model for those who do not wish to put their personal information, such as credit cards, on the internet and will also force Adobe to upgrade their security protocols for future customers. It remains to be seen how this has affected their user base, but everyone we have spoken to are still using Adobe Creative Cloud. One thing that is almost certain though is that users or those considering using Adobe Creative Cloud should be on the lookout for Adobe “Apology freebies” like PlayStation® did when they were hacked.

Written By: Jeremy Hatfield
Edited By: Emily Ledergerber

Filmmaker/Tech

EFillF Productions, LLC

www.efillfproductions.net