Best I've seen so Far

[Murrelet]

Saw this and it has that wow factor well in place, sorry if this posted here somewhere, it just got me really excited.

http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=93855&highlight=hv20

It is the "Rainy Day" clip and the thread.

[sp8ce07]

I'm disappointed more similar movies have not been created by others yet.

[Mal]

Well, that's nice footage, but we have to be a little careful.

Most NEW footage from a new cam is DELIBERATELY left uncorrected to show the true nature of the cam's look, feel, and capability.
The clip in question has had a good amount of color correction & curves (although it's stunning footage nevertheless).

I think it benefits from (in no particular order):

1) Nice color correcting
2) 1/100 shutter
3) Size reduction to 720p
4) Good editing/good DP
5) HV20! :)

I hope Solomon won't mind me adding this pic here; but this does clearly show that
the original footage is quite bland, but that Solomon is a master in getting the best out
of the HV20 with superb color correction:
http://hv20.info/yopu/colorgraded.jpg

[kbrafford]

to get the resultant video? I am new at this and am trying to build up some "instincts."

[Mal]

Well, from quickly looking at it, he boosted the yellows, blackened the blacks and raised the contrast. It's fairly easy to achieve, no magic here.

[sp8ce07]

Very neat to see a bland and boring rainy day turn into something surreal.

[Yann]

And Solomon says his Cam Settings
"My Camera Settings:
Shutter Priority Mode
Shutter Speed: 100
Exposure Locked: -2

Custom HV20 Settings
Col. Depth -1
Sharpness -1
Contrast -1
Brightness -1"

[SuperSean23]

yah Solomon did an excellent job, looks like i'm gonna have to refresh my editing skills!

[Mal]

... looks like i'm gonna have to refresh my editing skills!

Well, maybe. Maybe not though...

There's definitely a trend for us to "perceive" completely distorted images as more appealing than natural ones.
This would be the reason we think Solomon's piece looks so GOOD.
In fact, it is quite UNNATURAL though, and the pic of the HV20's raw footage is much more ACCURATE of course.

As it is right now, we seem to like very heavily color corrected pictures. If done right, this will instill an emotion not present in the original footage. Solomon's example is a good excecution of it. And although it might be a bit misleading in the sense where some might think they could get that look out of the cam directly (you can't), it is visually striking. It does get OVERUSED though...a lot!

We do want the cam to reproduce the most accurate image possible, so we may modify it in post. The HV20 gives us this ability like nothing I've seen at this price; there's no doubt about it.

Just a bit of a shame that if we see a CORRECTLY represented image nowadays, we think it's boring. :hv20-smilie51:

Well, there you go...my rant of the day! :hv20-smilie03:

[SuperSean23]

lol 300 anyone?

[Lunchbox]

Mal,

How were you able to obtain the raw footage from Solomon? The before and after image difference were amazing!

Takt

[Ian-T]

Just a bit of a shame that if we see a CORRECTLY represented image nowadays, we think it's boring. :hv20-smilie51:

Hey Mal. I'm new here. This is a nice site you have.

In regards to your comment....I basically agree with your rant..but..isn't that what we are all after. Most of us who are interested in making shorts etc. are trying to emulate what we see on film....that "beyond reality" dreamy look. I look at Solomon's clip and think of it sort of like the movies we all watch on th "big screen" where with the original film you can have different film stock or bleach processes to make that particular image. DP's (I think) do that for film (we all seen some sort of behind the scene footage before). I guess what I'm saying is that if we were to see some of the original footage in some of our favorite movies they will more than likely be boring also. But with good editing (like Solomon's) you can make that same scene jump out at you.

In his case he did not do much if anything in post (loos like Sony Color Curves in Vegas...and he chose "Yellow Tint...that automatically gives the yellow tint/adds contrast which increased the blacks). For me his skill showed in his filming (sort of that crane look when the subject was sitting on the sidewalk...steady cam look...etc.). That part (and the example pics above) where shot in 24P. He used the higher shutter speed in the slow motion running scenes. Also, the music with the flash cutaways made everything come together in the end.

This example by Solomon is what I have been waiting to see. Yes..I like the flower closeups and trees examples that we see all over the place but I think his showed us the cam's potential for other ...more cinematic purposes. I would love to see more of this type of "heavily edited" footage from this cam.

[Murrelet]

Good stuff Mal. I see your points, the clip comparisons illustrate quite well the editing that has gone into this short. As Solomon was quite forthright regarding all he did, it sure opened my eyes to the possibilities of this little cam.

Now I'm running around the property with cam/tripod in hand trying to see if I have a hope of even coming close to smooth motion. So far just confused looks from two cats and a dog :hv20-smilie01:

[Ian-T]

Mal,

How were you able to obtain the raw footage from Solomon? The before and after image difference were amazing!

TaktSolomon actually posted it in one of his threads

[DSleep]

i have to say Mal I don't agree with your rant at all. Using color as a creative tool is not a "trend".
"Distorting" reality is a huge part of what film is all about, using color as one element to manipulate to create a mood or feeling or tell a story. Think about editing, it is overtly manipulating reality and compressing time etc. Manipulating color has been around since the dawn of color film and will always be a part of film and video. It is just easier to do now, but it will ALWAYS be part of the process. I don't even agree that the unprocessed image looks much like reality(too flat and dull), at least not the way I see it. Not that it matters at all for a piece like that.

Some folks do tend to use color correction distastefully but it still is a powerful tool that is taken VERY seriously in all film making and again, always will.

It is one thing if you are just using the HV20 for shots of the kids but obviously that isn't the case with this clip. The use of music and the editing is great. The camera work is impressive. This is exactly the kind of clip that people should see to see the "true" capabilities of the camera. Someone that knows how to shoot, edit, and process a cool little idea and make it sing. I made the decision to buy the HV20 after seeing this clip and seeing what it can do in skilled hands. There is a reason people respond to pieces like this and it isn't just the color correction.

Anyway, this is kind of a douche-y first post for me. I dig this site just strongly disagree with your take on the clip and the idea of film/video and it's role in reflecting reality.

[Worley]

DSleep, I think Mal is referring to video rather than film. Television programmes today are littered with obviously colour graded material, in a way they weren't a few years ago.

There are certain trends as to the way in which the colour grading is applied. Here in the UK, the fashion is to vignette the video, as if the lens hood is just in shot. And the sky is given a brown/orange gradient. When I first saw it, I thought my LCD screen was faulty!

Film, I think, is less obvious in it's use of colour correction. But I could be wrong - it's been a while since I went to the movies.

(I've recently make a film and deliberately desaturated the colours, put a gradient and vignette in, and it looks so much better than the raw footage.)

Worley.

[DSleep]

i am saying "film" generically without regards to medium. film meaning using a camera to tell stories, create moods, etc. All of that applies, regardless of medium.

I do think certain looks do come in and out of style but the idea that manipulating color is something that will go out of style is flat out wrong IMO.

again, it is easier to do so today because of the tools on the desktop. Things are evolving rapidly, I just think that flat and dull video will never be the rage.
Skilled "film" makers will always use every element available to maximum effect. Not everything has to be over the top but regardless of what is currently in vogue, for that rainy day piece the processed video is superior to the unprocessed video.

[Mal]

Heya,
very neat discussion; I like it.
But DSleep, I think you either misunderstood my posts or I didn't clearly represent my position.
I wrote several times that I think the Solomon footage looks better, e.g. "Solomon is a master in getting the best out
of the HV20 with superb color correction". I certainly never meant to imply that "Using color as a creative tool is a "trend"."
It was more about our ever increasing "need" to see things distorted from reality. What I was going on about was our perception of what looks good and what doesn't. And this was in a thread about footage from a new cam.
It would be more advantageous to see uncorrected footage from a cam when trying to make a buying decision; once color corrected like that you will have lost information & distorted dynamic range, not added to it.

As a bad analogy it's like the car ads where they show the souped-up version: "Starts at $12,500.00, as shown: $35,000.00"; well, I'd much rather see the $12,500.00 version that is NOT modded, and souped up. Show me the basic car, and I am clever enough to know that it can look better once I modify and add $22,500.00 to it!
:hv20-smilie77:

Furthermore, I do still think that color correction & effects are WAY overdone nowadays, and we are moving further and further into gimmicky and cartoony looks.

Worley, I know what you mean about the vignetting; I watched a Channel 4 documentary film a while back, and this was driving me nuts. I've used gradients myself, but the vignetting thing....geeze...
It ranks right up there on my "I hate that effect" list with the artificial blurry background effect, and the heavily overdone shaky-effect.
And yes, I do believe those things are trends. It would be sad to think that we can't make any production now without blurring 80% out, making it shake all over the place, adding vignetting to the edges, having each clip no longer than 0.5 seconds, and showing everything in unnatural colors...

Hey, I realize I'm in the minority here...
:hv20-smilie21:

[fstopopen]

1. I consider tape to be film. The medium is made of Mylar with a "film" of magnetic material atop it.

2. I love vignetting and color correcting. It is definitely a trend, but we as artists are the people who deliver the views of our culture to future generations. Yes, they will look back and say "wow, why did they color correct so much" but then we do the same thing about old star wars special effects.

3. I want to see pretty colors. I watch television and films for a distorted sense of reality. This kind of reminds me of the debate about "real" models. I.e. fat ones. To be honest, a model is a model because she is beyond the norm, in other words, I WANT to see skinny hot chicks with abnormally large breasts, it is just more pleasant to look at. Same goes with color correction if you get my drift. Not to mention, I would argue that the flat video inherent in ALL cameras is not reflective of reality.

4. I understand the point that you want to see video straight out of the cam. But to be honest, this thread is full of that. Click on all the other videos and you can see that. I am glad to see someone USING their "twenty". Gets me more excited about it. Now if B&H will just get me mine, I'll upload some overly color corrected video with a nice vignette.

All said in love.
Drake

[Mal]

Now if B&H will just get me mine, I'll upload some overly color corrected video with a nice vignette....

...of skinny hot chicks with abnormally large breasts?
:hv20-smilie81:

Great post, good points; just don't agree...sort of; I am guilty of the same thing that I criticize here, maybe just not AS guilty! :)

[Mark Dog2]

i get your point of view it be good hv20 members post color corrected and un color corrected footage i personally lke to see the uncorrected cause you get the natural view of the footage before the bells and whistles you get to see what it can do out the box with out any help from CC in vegas or magic bullet etc.

peace n luv

Mark Dog 2

[Worley]

Some effects are very distracting, sometimes they are appropriate. Vignettes and brown skies and shaky camera work very well in "Top Gear", but don't lend themselves to a documentary about teenagers with a severe stammer (that's what made me think my television was faulty!).

I've nothing against colour correction, but it must be appropriate. Another fine example is the colour correction used in "Iife on Mars". That really made everything feel so 70s and 'Manchester'. Perfect.

Worley

[Murrelet]

Man, this Forum is expanding well beyond the little camera from Canon that could.

When I posted this, I just thought it was an excellent use of the cam. I liked the post production, the story, and was amazed it could be done with this little camera. So far it is still the best I've seen....but let me qualify that by saying I am waaaay down on the experience pole, this is just one of those "I know what I like, but don't know why", kinda things. I've been stuck in family events/personal activities doc mode, this has shocked me out of that.

Now we have an interesting discussion that has been very helpful to me, particularly in the way members have responded to the short. I can see what each is getting at, which imparts a personal value to me, some understanding, where there was none.

Thanks everyone,

Keep it up, I'm learning with every post.

[fstopopen]

awesome!

to tell you the truth, I am surprised by this forum as well. This has been one of the most friendly and active forums I have been a part of. I have actually posted to exactly 2 forums in my life, and the other one has become a major part of my life, including meeting people in real life, and learning a great deal from it. I hope the same for this one. Keep buying "twenties" people.

lol.

drake

[DSleep]

yeah, good stuff here. Mal, I see what you are saying more now. The part that I agree with is with these new tools there is some abuse. It is a bit like photoshop. When photoshop was new or at least new to someone using it, there is a tendency to overuse it or use it without regards to taste. Everyone has seen that or done that at some point.

I just think the idea of distorted or dreamlike or stylized footage being less "real" or true isn't necessarily the case. I guess I am from the Werner Herzog school where you are using distortion and stylization and dreamlike worlds to get at a larger and more real truth.

that is just my personal cup of tea though.

[pintoplex]

My first contribution ... loved this topic.

Movie as art can give us an impression of reality more impressive than showing only a raw image. If you see an action scene in a making of, without filters, or other effects, you think its fake, mediocre, even amateurist. But when you see the same scene in the theater, you think its professional, exciting and very realistic. If you are an artist, you'll never be satisfied - what magic we can see in a raw footage? - we can explore much more. make poetry out of a simple walk in the rain...

one thing cinema creates is transform banal into extraordinary.

[Eugenia Loli-Queru]

Some people online have been asking how to reproduce this look, but Solomon never replied on how exactly he did it. So, I took on the job tonight to try and reproduce it. Here's my result:
http://hv20.info/yopu/rain.png
And here's how I graded the original pic:
http://hv20.info/yopu/rain-plugins.jpg

[dr jones]

solomon has an eye for filmmaking. what makes most people struggle to create, is probably relatively effortless and natural to him.

[cinemasteve87]

It says on one of his replies in youtube that he did not even use a 35 mm adapter or anything! Even the raw footage looks very crisp too. I am a sucker for using natural lighting and I would have used that instead. But the color correction still makes that clip look amazng!

[c.g._eads]

All of film is a manipulation, from the moment you give actors something to say that they would normally never say. So, the fact that you're still changing things (in this case - color) after you've shot your footage is just another extension of this manipulation. I think it's funny when people talk about breaking the 'purity' of filmmaking. Everything that's pure now was once new and groundbreaking - and someone else was complaining that it was ruining film. Can you imagine anyone now complaining about color film? Well guess what, people thought it was the death of film at one point.

Anyway, enough of that. My question about this footage is the -1 readings in brightness, sharpness, contrast, and color density (I know i got those wrong but you know what I'm talking about). Did this affect the footage dramatically? If so, how? When I fooled around with those settings, I literally couldn't see any difference at all.

My second question is the shutter speed being at 1/100. How does that affect the image? Why was that ideal for this particular situation? (an overcast rainy day). I thought 1/48 was the magic number to make it the most filmic.

Thanks.

[Ian-T]

In regards to your second question the 1/100 was perfect for slow motion footage. When you plan "ahead" for a slow mo scene you shoot in 60i and a higher shutter (preferrably at 1/100 or 1/120...but the HV20 does not have 1/120). Anyways while in post you render that particular footage to 60p and slow it down either before or after you get it back in a 24p timeline.

[Ian-T]

In regards to your first question...well...the LCD on the consumer cams are terrible for judging these types of things....some folks opt for an external monitor...a bigger one (obviously) that helps them to judge the picture better. But the difference is really there...and it jumps out at you with a bettter quality monitor.