|
|
Posted by none on 02/07/06 07:42
On Sat, 04 Feb 2006 22:36:35 GMT, "Larry J."
<usenet2@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote:
>Waiving the right to remain silent, Mark <nospam@nospam.com> said:
>
>> Larry J. wrote:
>>> Waiving the right to remain silent, Martin Heffels
>>> <mot@sneeuw.nl> said:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 04 Feb 2006 11:56:53 -0800, Mark <nospam@nospam.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> * I know that lighting is critical, particularly when there
>>>>> is only artificial light available. Since this will be a
>>>>> one-off, we don't want to buy lights. What would the best
>>>>> lights be to use that we have hanging around. Are
>>>>> incandescent lights okay? What about fluros? Perhaps a
>>>>> combination of both? I think the lab is lit with fluros, but
>>>>> we can probably supplement this with globes. Are there
>>>>> particular incandescent globes that give good light for
>>>>> video?
>>>> Your best bet would be to create a nice big soft light source.
>>>> Fluoro's will do for that. If you want to improve on the look,
>>>> buy a couple with a high CRI, as they have "purer white"
>>>> light.
>>>
>>> Good advice, but this all depends on the size of his "set." He
>>> hasn't said if it's a rat running around in a little 3-foot
>>> square maze, or a much larger area. A description of the
>>> conditions is necessary.
>>
>> It will be more like 1-foot square.
>
>That's tiny, but could still be difficult to light and shoot if
>it's something like a maze with high walls.
>
>Not knowing, I'd suggest some simple soft light, from the top to
>eliminate wall shadows as much as possible. If it's like some
>mazes I've seen with clear lucite walls, then you could get a lot
>of reflections. Soft light will help here, too.
>
If you plan to go Flourescent I suggest a daylight balance circular
tube directly above the foot square area. you can pick them up locally
your local department store, hardware store, or lighting center.
I have a circular tube flourescent fixture that I retubed with a
daylight balance tube picked up at my local Wal-Mart for about 7 bucks
and it works great for flat copy work and the likes.
>>>
>>>>> * We are thinking of using a PAL camera, and then converting
>>>>> to NTSC. Does software conversion do this okay? We do
>>>>> currently have Adobe Premiere. Does that do it with good
>>>>> results? Any recommendations for other software, hopefully
>>>>> free?
>>>> Software does this, but the results are usually not that
>>>> great. Canopus Procoder is probably the best choice for you,
>>>> or if you shoot mini-DV/DVCAM, FireStore DV Standards
>>>> Converter might do the trick as well.
>>>
>>> I don't know why he would even think of using a PAL format
>>> camera, unless he's in a PAL country, which he's not. He's at
>>> UCLA.
>>
>> Yes, I'm at UCLA, but I brought my camera from Australia. I was
>> thinking that the PAL - NTSC shouldn't be such a big deal as we
>> can also just give it to the TV station to convert. They must do
>> this all of the time when they get overseas footage to show??
>
>Many TV stations have no cheap, easy method of converting PAL to
>NTSC, and if they have to go through that process, won't bother
>with it. They get a lot of promotional stuff.
>
>>>>> * The camera can record in both interlaced and progressive
>>>>> scan. Should we use interlaced given that the footage might
>>>>> be broadcast? Or do the tv networks now prefer progressive?
>>>> Go interlaced. Progressive will look jerky. For some reasons
>>>> some tv-station here have decided to record progressive
>>>> recently, and it looks abysmal.
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>> Addiionally, I might add that UCLA has HUGE video production
>>> resources there on campus. He should consult with those
>>> departments.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I've been thinking that too. However, I don't know how to
>> contact them or where they are. I did a quick search of the ucla
>> website and didn't come up with anything obvious. We do want to
>> do this quickly, rather than contacting someone, waiting for
>> them to get back to us, having to book the equipment a week in
>> advance, paying a lot of money in rental, etc.
>
>As Martin suggested, maybe the TV/Film Department students could
>take it as a quickie project. It might cost you nothing. You're
>there, and it's much easier for you to check this out than for the
>rest of us.
>
>Otherwise, you'll just do it yourself, and the results will be the
>best you can manage with limited knowledge and time.
>
>Either way, I'd suggest shooting it in the format that the MAJORITY
>of your reciipient TV stations will want, be that PAL or NTSC, and
>provide the alternative format yourself. Don't expect them to do
>it.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|