Pros and cons of a PAL camera
 

Someone told me that PAL is better quality than NTSC and that if I had a PAL camera and converted it to NTSC the footage would look better than with a NTSC camera. Truth, lies? Any other things to consider when looking at a PAL camera? More specifically, the Panasonic AG-DVX100BE. If someone needed another camera person with a DVX would there be a problem with me having a PAL camera or would it just get converted without any second thought to it. I never thought about it at all, I always thought that you didn't even look at PAL cameras if you were in North America. :confused:

It costs almost 150$ less for the PAL version.

PAL shoots at 25 frames per second as opposed to NTSC which shoots almost 30. Real film shoots at 24, which is likely why you were pointed in that direction.
Glad to hear you're still at it btw :D
CK

..I dont know whats the best system...but its no problem converting from PAL to NTSC or the other way around....but I guess NTSC is better since it got 30 frames per second ...but remember pixels ( more pixels = better) and 3CCD are also important...next camera I buying gonna be HD....

Pardon me, Slasher, but I have to ask just out out mild curiousity : ARE YOU INSANE ? I just need to ask since it sounds like you've never shot a movie before then tried to actually convert it one way or the other after capturing it to to it's standard format. Going back and forth between DVD formats alone is bad enough (hence my entire Russ Meyer collection explained), but to shoot in one format and try to capture as another is seriously unwatchable at best if even possible. Long gaps, paused pics, etc. It just doesn't work with the flip of a switch like that. Try putting a Betamax tape into a VHS VCR because the tapes themselves have similar styles. Doesn't quite work. I've been thumbing through huge articles for months now on the subject so I can make my current movie stop looking so much like it was shot on video and more like film and even the best of the best are clueless on a simple solution. That's why PAL is a preferred alternative to actual film since they have similar fps look.
Angela, sweetheart, if it comes down to it, stick with an NTSC camera for now and save yourself a lot of capturing-rendering headaches. Some Hi Def cams shoot at 24 and look absoulutely amazing (but I can't mention film I worked on since anti-spam beliefs). hmmmm I'll leave website address with a missing letter for you to figue out. ok ?
http://_ _ _.springbreakmassacre.com

The DP was Silas Tyler, who not only being a technical wiz is a great guy. I'll ask him to e-mail you more details than you'd like if interested.
Shame on you, SM.
CK

...actually I havnt done it...I use PAL cause I live in Europe...but it dont look hard to convert it into NTSC ...but I guess you have tried...and if you have a shitty pc it probably take a long time :D

I'm sooo glad, I asked you.

That movie looks really good, I'm scared of HD cameras though. :( I've never used one and I've heard that everything is a lot more complicated. PM me all your "spam" by the way, I'm totally interested in it. :)

pal does look better than ntsc that's a fact but converting is time consuming, expensive and a huge pain in the ass. we just shot our new movie in hd. worth every penny....the hd software to edit was a little pricey, hd uses almost triple the hard drive space and regular digital video but the picture quality is totally incredible.

...
 

What about lighting for high definition? What camera did you use?

...
 

Thank-you for linking me to the dvxuser website btw. I would have been ripped off big time if I hadn't went there. I checked the reseller rating of the site I was buying from and it was horror story after horror story. How is it legal for these scammers to do "business" anyway?

Anyway I did find a good price for a used one that I bought. :) Now I have to wait for it to be shipped here... *paces* *worries* I was so nervous before talking to him but now I'm pretty confident that everything will go as planned. :p

Thanks for all the help, any advice for hiding the big goofy smile on my face and getting sleep at night? :D

Watch any movie directed by Uwe Boll. It will first bore you to tears and then put you to sleep. I hope that helps :D
CK

...
 

hahah oh god, that will only keep my up at night thinking of unanswerable questions like "Why is he still allowed to make movies?" :D

This is off the subject and I know you never say specifics on your work-but I am curious since I haven't seen anything about it in awhile....without giving away any secrets or crossing spam lines-how is the editing going?
And once an edit is done completely,what is the next step in putting out a movie?
This process is very mysterious and there isn't much common knowledge about it.

I once read that a movie was canned for 5 years and then didn't make it out in general distribution because the actor got famous?
And there was this other movie 2 years waiting and was buried because of 'politics'?

So did you wind up going with PAL or NTSC? I know PAL was always considered a good choice because of the 25fps rate, but once the DVX 100's came out with 24p it seemed like a moot point. 24p or 24p HDV are the best indie alternatives to film if you can afford them.

...
 

NTSC

I'm so happy about it, it would be cool to have enough money for an HVX200 but I don't know. I think some basic lighting equipment better than worklights, shower curtains and black tarps would be a little more important. :D

Re: ...
 

as far as lighting goes. you light it as if you were lighting for film. the camera we used was the sony hdr-fx1 what a great little camera and it uses mini dv tapes. very affordable. if you wanna see pic quality go to my website and watch the trailer.....the footage is straight from the camera, no color corrections at all. i'm not spamming, just showing the pic quality. click on last rites. http://www.insane-o-rama.com

Re: Re: ...
 

ehhh its very different from lighting a movie shot on film...more like as you see it on HD...on film you have to think different cause the light doesnt "come out" as you see it in the monitor...therefore much easier on HD....by the way "Once upon a time in Mexico" was shot on HD...

Distribution ?
http://www.ctcfl.ox.ac.uk/Chinese/images/lesson10.jpg
"Ancient Chinese secret, huh ?"
Distribution has got to be the ugliest part of filmmaking. Since you want your film out there for as many people to see, you now have to take into consideration at what lengths you'll go to do so and how much of your time, effort and money are possibly going to be lost now to have it seen (I'm surprised this has never turned up on an episode of 'Fear Factor' yet). I always equate it to "People Who Had Nothing to Do With Creating This Will Now Be Taking 50% or More From It's Sales". Depending how much they actually push your film, it may or may not be all that bad. None of them are going to give you money up front to make your masterpiece (much like getting your band signed doesn't mean you're a rockstar I'd hate to say). You might be an artist, but they are still a business. Business takes care of itself first and foremost and little guys are an afterthought (which is why we have tons of "celebrity" reality shows starring people who were famous 20 years ago rather than corporations like Sony).
Yes, distribution companies sometimes do sign lengthy contracts to tie up the rights to a film and shelf it for years. I've read dozens of horror stories about an unnamed indie company that had one of the cheesiest, goriest movies turned into a cartoon and action figure set years later <hint, hint> signing distribution contracts on movies that were never seen or heard from again.
Personally, I've always been interested in putting together an indie distribution network in an effort to keep the spoils of sales in the pockets of the people who deserve it most - the guys who made the film in the first place. They did the work and who wouldn't want to have more money to get started on the next movie ? Can't be any worse than the usual Hollywood remake.

As for why Uwe Boll is still allowed to make movies, Angela, I can only speculate that he must have a very interesting photo collection of some very important people in compromising positions :D
CK

...
 

Bwahahah :D

For my first feature length movie, I want to have a website where people can watch it for 35 cents or something (then I'm going to go on every forum in the world saying "Hey, have you guys seen this movie yet? It's amazing!!1 omfgz!"... then I'm going to get some photos of important people in compromising positions. :p

Re: ...
 

but it's essential for you to pretend that you know nothing about the film ... you just heard about it on the grapevine and was wondering if anyone knew anything.


of course - it never explains why you have the link ... but we've all seen that before.

Re: Re: ...
 

haha exactly. :)

You would all of course be sent free DVDs. If it's really bad and immoral to subject other humans to, you could always burn copies for coworkers you don't like when Christmas rolls around :p

I'm more than looking forward to seeing it :D
CK

Re: ...
 

Cool. Glad you like it. I love the stuff I shot on the DVX-100. Can't wait to get my hands on teh HVX-200. My editing system is pretty much ready for it, but my lenses aren't./

As far as lights. Worklights are more workable than you may think for big shots as long as you have a nice white balance card. I kept the white cardboard from a pair of stockings my wife got and it did a nifty job until I got the portabrace white balance card. I also have cards of other colors to help nudge the camera's color balance in one direction or the other.

For cheap balanced lighting, Smith Victor makes some nice starter sets that are a step or two up from work lights and I have been thinking about getting some lights from Impact. I have used their stands and loved `em, but the lights on them were home made by a guy I worked with.

Re: Re: Re: ...
 

as was collateral and the new star wars. yes, you do see it immediately. but good lighting should always be essential. a lot of indie filmmakers neglect this fact and also good sound.

and plot and writing and... LOL ugh! I got a pair of movies the other day that were so awful, I can't believe they even have distribution. Total trainwrecks. Both look like absolutely no effort was put into anything and they should've stayed in the "filmmaker"s den for when friends and family are over as a gag. No wonder so many people naturally equate "indie horror" with "crap" when rubbish like these is sold on Amazon.
CK

ever see axem? so god awful......you even hear the director yell cut in one scene.....couldn't even edit that out? LOL

Nope, but you can hear director yell "go !" a few times to start scenes in one of my recents LOL. If it's really so funny for your friends and family to keep snickering at camera during scenes, it's very well likely they should be the only ones who ever see these movies. No effort at all. Sad.
CK

...
 

I have it in my hands now. I'm in the middle of finding out what everything does, there are a lot of "things" though. :D

Re: ...
 

This manual on this was pretty well written as I recall. I like to play with one feature at a time to see what they do. I still haven't got near the camera's potential out of it. So often you're shooting on a schedule, so you do what you know will work and experimentation gets put off.