Shooting videos with a mkIII

[Ben Rubinstein]

Yes I said mkIII!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf917rilmr4

Actually this was just at 5 fps to show me what it would be like shooting with my new 1ds mkIII which is arriving in two days time. Friend lent me his 1D mkIII to play with while he was abroad so I spend some time machine gunning off the balcony this afternoon and then loading the frames into Premiere.

Firstly there has to be a better program for doing this kind of thing, Premiere doesn't really like dealing with stills and only stills.

I'm looking to achieve a kind of stop action look to video similar to this incredible project and its results http://www.pdnpulse.com/2009/09/canon-1d-mark-iii-profoto-strobes-stopmotion-music-video.html

Even at 10fps I couldn't get anything to look as smooth as what they did in that video, I assume there is a whole heck of a lot of magic involved with the post work on that shoot.

The idea though is to transform that 'look' into street work for a combination between incredible stills and the 'feel' of the locations where they were shot, done all with stills.

Can that 'look' be done with video alone if we discount the DOF advantage of stills?

Methinks that I have a long long way to go.

If anyone is interested in this kind of thing and has any suggestions, I'm seriously interested in this project but don't have the education or tools at present to make it a reality. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[kevinparis]

couple of things

1) shooting at 10fps will make a noticable difference in smoothness

2)working with stills only as big as you need them will make a big difference... Full HD video is only 1920 x 1080 pixels... about 2 mega pixels per frame... trying to force bigger images into video editing programs may cause them to choke.


3) cant really help you on the editing software on the PC side as I am a Mac user and Final Cut handles stills just fine.

cheers

K

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

I'm going to do the same scene again at 10fps then post it up for comparison. I do realise that the images need to be small, was shooting at the smallest jpg size with the 1D mkIII and then downsizing them further before feeding them into the program.

Question, can you get this 'look' (see the posted music video) from pure video alone, i.e.with a regular video camera, am I wasting my time and shutter trying to do it with a DSLR instead?

 

[ustein]

couple of things



2)working with stills only as big as you need them will make a big difference... Full HD video is only 1920 x 1080 pixels... about 2 mega pixels per frame... trying to force bigger images into video editing programs may cause them to choke.



cheers

K

I would shoot slightly bigger and downsample later before turning it to video.

 

[kevinparis]

also take into consideration differences in aspect ratio of stills and video

K

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

That's actually annoying the heck out of me as each output medium seems to have its own aspect ratio. Do I choose widescreen, do I choose 4:3, etc. I have no idea whatsoever about video and it's a very new world.

 

[LJL]

Seems that one of the more practical solutions for what you are trying to do would be a 1DMkIV camera with true video capabilities. For the investment, you would be able to take some pretty high resolution stills (16MP), even if slightly cropped (1.3x) compared to the 1DsMkIII, work at higher ISOs if needed, have a frame size aspect ratio that is pretty close to what is used in high end movie work, and be able to work with the short video clips more easily. It may not have that stop motion look, but for what you are describing you are looking to do, it might actually look better. One of the things that has really struck me is how photojournalists are now starting to put together their work pieces with both still and video clips, much as you are describing. Even some of the recent application releases, such as Aperture 3, are building in the capabilities to create QT movies that incorporate high resolution still with HD video clips, complete with titling, fades and some other features to do what you are describing.

Again, not trying to take you off the track you have set, but there just seems to be some gear already out there that could deliver the kinds of things you describe, without putting your 1DsMkIII through heavy duty use, and yourself through some of the torture of the work to compile things into a makeshift video. Just my thoughts on this. Feel free to completely ignore the suggestion ;-)

LJ

P.S. While I guess you are probably not trying to create something exactly like that one video, consider the lighting gear that was used to create that....Profoto 8a packs, at a significant cost per unit...much more than the 1DMkIV camera which would be able to deliver a very impressive real video. The updated 5DMkII, would even be able to get your full-frame high resolution images, and now some good video at the same time. Heck, if you wanted the stop-motion jumpiness, you could probably achieve that with the video app as an option. Just some thoughts from a different perspective.

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Not looking of course to replicate that video with the whole profoto shebang. It was the look and concept of the 10fps video applied to street work that piqued my attention. As such a 'real' video DSLR wouldn't really fit the bill, the look is for the stop action rather than specifically the DOF advantage.

 

[LJL]

Ben,
I understand what you say you are looking for. One way to achieve this same sort of stop-motion look with real video is to drop every other frame or so. The video can be shot at 25fps, so dropping frames could get you near the 10fps "looK", and still have the fairly smooth look to the motion. That was my point with suggesting the app could handle that for you, rather than you trying to manage individual frames and stressing the shutter mechanism in the process. There may be more than one way to achieve the look you want. (I also realize that you were not suggesting going the Profoto 8a route, but thought about the cost and set-up those guys needed to do the video they did. They obviously had budgets that permitted it.)

There are many others here that can probably offer viable suggestions. I was just struck by what you were trying to accomplish the long way around, when there are some very cool solutions within grasp. That stop-motion look is kinda cool for some things for sure.

LJ

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Do you have any idea what programs can do that kind of thing LJ, I'm so clueless about this stuff. I can experiment with it and my little digivid cam and see how it looks. You're right of course that a DSLR is overkill for this kind of thing if that's all I'm looking for.

 

[LJL]

Ben,
Honestly, I am probably as far behind this curve as you are on what apps and stuff to use. I would think that if you are using Premier, you should be able to select the video clips and tell the app what you wanted to do. If nothing else, you should be able to delete frames from the clips manually, if you had to, which could be a bit of PITA, especially for longer clips.

This is why I was sort of hoping other folks that have some much more advanced knowledge could chime in. There have to be ways to do this stuff. I guess the one part that will still be a time sink is going to be rerendering things after you edit, but you would have that issue anyway.

I really do not feel that a DSLR is overkill for this stuff. I actually like the idea that one may be able to combine both in use that helps convey your ideas. I am actually looking forward to this sort of thing myself, so I too need to bone up on what can be done relatively easily. I do know that Apple's Aperture 3 is set to do the blending of still and movies, and from the looks of it, one should be able to edit the video clips....length at least, not sure about dropping frames. In theory, you would be doing sort of opposite what you are now trying to do. Instead of worrying about frame rates of stills, and getting the smoother flow, you would be editing out frames that already have the smoother flow. The one issue that keeps coming up in my mind is that movies are usually shot at relatively slow shutter speeds, and there is a bit more of a motion blur that the eye/mind smooths out when viewing as a continuous stream of frames. If you interrupt those frames by removing every other one, for example, you will get a "speeded up" look, and it should be a bit more stop motion. So there would have to be another way to increase the frame speed in viewing a shortened clip length to keep it looking more "normal" in sequence speed. So shooting 60fps would render as a "slow motion" look at normal speed, but if every other frame was removed, it would look normal speed, but a bit jerky due to missing frames.

Sorry I cannot be of more help. I am just entering this path myself, and that is why I engaged in the discussion. Others here should know a lot more, and I hope they can chime in with suggestions.

LJ

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

I meant using a DSLR at 10fps was overkill if it can be done otherwise.

I did work out that at 5fps at least 1/30th seemed to be the optimum for motion look. Not sure what it would be at 10fps. Apparently on the 5D mkII using the video at a 1/50 refresh rate seem to be optimum for natural motion.

 

[LJL]

Got it. I was thinking more that not having to carry and manage two or more different devices makes the video capable DSLR attractive ;-)

LJ

 

[wbrandsma]

Ben, one of the application you might want to use is Quicktime Pro. When you have a sequence of images at 5 or 10fps you can open these image sequence in Quicktime, choose a framerate (similar to the number of fps unless you want to do timelapse photography) for the video and export them at high quality video format. For instance photo jpeg at 100% quality for Windows or Mac or Apple Proress when you work on a Mac. For editing there are so many suitable applications available for the PC like Adobe Premiere Pro or Sony Vegas. And there is always Avid Media Composer, but the price tag is rather heavy.