Amateur Videographer Group

PB Forum :: Pinkbike Groups
Amateur Videographer Group
Author Message
Posted: Aug 24, 2012 at 7:42 Quote
this is my second edit made. so im reallllly new to all the camera work haha

https://vimeo.com/47235205

Posted: Aug 24, 2012 at 9:03 Quote
StuHaight wrote:
fixed!


HHHNNNGGGGGG

I love my 2k.

And my new:
- D3200
- VND filter
- 28mm 2.8
- 50mm 1.8
- 85mm 1.8
- 135mm 2.8

Everything live action was shot in one day.

Green screen shoots were on a different evening.
Stu that was rad! I kinda felt that each scene lasted an overly long time, she was kissing him for a solid two minutes. I actually skipped ahead becuase it was getting boring. I think there should be some more shots of him like running and singing, or with the dancers, mixed in with the kissing thing. I also don't understand how he got tied up.


Also, the effects were really cool, so good job on that. And how awkward was it to film that kissing scene? Pimp

Posted: Aug 24, 2012 at 11:40 Quote
natewynanscreations wrote:
StuHaight wrote:
fixed!

snip DERP

HHHNNNGGGGGG

I love my 2k.

And my new:
- D3200
- VND filter
- 28mm 2.8
- 50mm 1.8
- 85mm 1.8
- 135mm 2.8

Everything live action was shot in one day.

Green screen shoots were on a different evening.
Stu that was rad! I kinda felt that each scene lasted an overly long time, she was kissing him for a solid two minutes. I actually skipped ahead becuase it was getting boring. I think there should be some more shots of him like running and singing, or with the dancers, mixed in with the kissing thing. I also don't understand how he got tied up.


Also, the effects were really cool, so good job on that. And how awkward was it to film that kissing scene? Pimp

YOOOO I completely agree it was frustrating working with them when they proposed this idea, but it was done pretty damn cheaply, which meant I had to make up for it in post with the cheesy effects.

I Poker Face'd the entire time while filming.

I would have much much prefered to have most of the guy-girl interaction be in a club, them being center stage, with partiers around them as the action was going on.

What do you think of the D3200??? lol

Posted: Aug 24, 2012 at 11:44 Quote
StuHaight wrote:
natewynanscreations wrote:
StuHaight wrote:
fixed!

snip DERP

HHHNNNGGGGGG

I love my 2k.

And my new:
- D3200
- VND filter
- 28mm 2.8
- 50mm 1.8
- 85mm 1.8
- 135mm 2.8

Everything live action was shot in one day.

Green screen shoots were on a different evening.
Stu that was rad! I kinda felt that each scene lasted an overly long time, she was kissing him for a solid two minutes. I actually skipped ahead becuase it was getting boring. I think there should be some more shots of him like running and singing, or with the dancers, mixed in with the kissing thing. I also don't understand how he got tied up.


Also, the effects were really cool, so good job on that. And how awkward was it to film that kissing scene? Pimp

YOOOO I completely agree it was frustrating working with them when they proposed this idea, but it was done pretty damn cheaply, which meant I had to make up for it in post with the cheesy effects.

I Poker Face'd the entire time while filming.

I would have much much prefered to have most of the guy-girl interaction be in a club, them being center stage, with partiers around them as the action was going on.

What do you think of the D3200??? lol
Fair enough. Looks like it did pretty darn good!

Posted: Aug 24, 2012 at 11:56 Quote
natewynanscreations wrote:
StuHaight wrote:
natewynanscreations wrote:
Stu that was rad! I kinda felt that each scene lasted an overly long time, she was kissing him for a solid two minutes. I actually skipped ahead becuase it was getting boring. I think there should be some more shots of him like running and singing, or with the dancers, mixed in with the kissing thing. I also don't understand how he got tied up.


Also, the effects were really cool, so good job on that. And how awkward was it to film that kissing scene? Pimp

YOOOO I completely agree it was frustrating working with them when they proposed this idea, but it was done pretty damn cheaply, which meant I had to make up for it in post with the cheesy effects.

I Poker Face'd the entire time while filming.

I would have much much prefered to have most of the guy-girl interaction be in a club, them being center stage, with partiers around them as the action was going on.

What do you think of the D3200??? lol
Fair enough. Looks like it did pretty darn good!

Man that was great Smile The image looks really crisp and the editing was bang on. How did you get the image looking so good ? I'm using the D5100 so they are pretty much the same but I can't seem to get it looking that nice after uploading it to Vimeo... How to you compress your video to get it so nice ? Because man, it looks mint ! :O

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 0:15 Quote
Anyone here film any motocross edits?

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 0:38 Quote
JakeTheRake wrote:
natewynanscreations wrote:
StuHaight wrote:


YOOOO I completely agree it was frustrating working with them when they proposed this idea, but it was done pretty damn cheaply, which meant I had to make up for it in post with the cheesy effects.

I Poker Face'd the entire time while filming.

I would have much much prefered to have most of the guy-girl interaction be in a club, them being center stage, with partiers around them as the action was going on.

What do you think of the D3200??? lol
Fair enough. Looks like it did pretty darn good!

Man that was great Smile The image looks really crisp and the editing was bang on. How did you get the image looking so good ? I'm using the D5100 so they are pretty much the same but I can't seem to get it looking that nice after uploading it to Vimeo... How to you compress your video to get it so nice ? Because man, it looks mint ! :O

One thing to always remember is the domino effect when it comes to technology. If you're image aquesition isn't done properly up front, it will forever be degraded. Sort of like shooting a beautiful film shot in 65mm imax, only to have it be viewed through a crappy projector. Another example being shooting on a DSLR with the crappiest lens.

To answer your question, you need to do a lot of testing. When I do a final delivery export, I export in native DNxHD (ProRes 422) in RGB "web" color space, and have Sorenson Squeeze do the work from there. Compression is about a 1:4 on my Q6600 processor when going to x264, so a 5 minute video would take 20 minutes.

The lenses I used were quite good quality and because I'm good at lighting I make my subjects look good. I used all prime lenses that were 10-15 years old. Old Nikkor E-Series and Vivitar.

I have not used the D5100, however, I will confidently say that the sensor in my D3200 is much different compared to the other DSLRs I have used (both Canon and Nikon). It is most likely due to the sensor recording some minor grain as well. Canon's plastic image has become so noticible, that when you see the D3200 image, you wouldn't think it was shot on a Canon DSLR because it's just weirdly different. not sure how to explain it.

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 1:39 Quote
StuHaight wrote:
JakeTheRake wrote:
natewynanscreations wrote:
Fair enough. Looks like it did pretty darn good!

Man that was great Smile The image looks really crisp and the editing was bang on. How did you get the image looking so good ? I'm using the D5100 so they are pretty much the same but I can't seem to get it looking that nice after uploading it to Vimeo... How to you compress your video to get it so nice ? Because man, it looks mint ! :O

One thing to always remember is the domino effect when it comes to technology. If you're image aquesition isn't done properly up front, it will forever be degraded. Sort of like shooting a beautiful film shot in 65mm imax, only to have it be viewed through a crappy projector. Another example being shooting on a DSLR with the crappiest lens.

To answer your question, you need to do a lot of testing. When I do a final delivery export, I export in native DNxHD (ProRes 422) in RGB "web" color space, and have Sorenson Squeeze do the work from there. Compression is about a 1:4 on my Q6600 processor when going to x264, so a 5 minute video would take 20 minutes.

The lenses I used were quite good quality and because I'm good at lighting I make my subjects look good. I used all prime lenses that were 10-15 years old. Old Nikkor E-Series and Vivitar.

I have not used the D5100, however, I will confidently say that the sensor in my D3200 is much different compared to the other DSLRs I have used (both Canon and Nikon). It is most likely due to the sensor recording some minor grain as well. Canon's plastic image has become so noticible, that when you see the D3200 image, you wouldn't think it was shot on a Canon DSLR because it's just weirdly different. not sure how to explain it.

It's not the lenses as I shoot using a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 and I even get to use my mum's pro lenses too if i'm lucky. I also turn all off my camera's image tinkering features (i keep the colors neutral, turn down the sharpening etc etc).

I think the compression is where i'm going wrong. Unfortunatly I'm using Apple Compressor and not Sorenson. I compress it to a 1080p Quicktime Movie file, H.264 codec, limited to 10 000 bps... The next page I turn off as i'm not quite sure what it all does (frame re-ordering, anti alias, image resizing...).

Is this where the problem is coming from ? Would moving to Sorenson make a difference or is it me not knowing what I'm doing..?

Just to give you an idea of the difference in image quality, here is a link to the latest video i shot on the Nikon. You'll see what I mean about it looking much less clear than your vid... https://vimeo.com/47402266

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 2:49 Quote
For pinkbike/vimeo or whatever

1920x1080 (square pixels 1.0)
29.97fps
H.264 codec with a quicktime movie wrapper (.mov/mp4)
Frame blending off
Anything over 5000kbps bit rate
Audio whatever the hell you want

I learnt not to export with my NLE (premiere) and rather to send the job to adobe media encoder. If you're using final cut then do it with compressor.

Also your original sequence settings for editing want to exactly match the files going in. Use MPEGStreamclip to encode your footage almost losslessly into ProRes422. Editing in h.264 is laggy as it's so compressed and rendering each clip is a huge time consumer and I've noticed degrades the quality a bit.

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 7:57 Quote
Whats the reason for sending it over to encoder or compressor rather than NLE? I have noticed other people saying that too.

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 9:28 Quote
It's not very scientific but an encoder was made to encode things, the NLE was made to edit them. As a result, the encoder is hella better. Mine takes about a quarter of the time and has visible quality improvements

Image on the left is exported through media encoder and image on the right is exported directly through premire considerable detail loss

Shot on the left is with the encoder, shot on the right is with the editor, if you maximise them you'll see what I mean

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 15:52 Quote
Ah, so you figured that issue out then, haha.

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 16:16 Quote
elliotgraham wrote:
For pinkbike/vimeo or whatever

1920x1080 (square pixels 1.0)
29.97fps
H.264 codec with a quicktime movie wrapper (.mov/mp4)
Frame blending off
Anything over 5000kbps bit rate
Audio whatever the hell you want

I learnt not to export with my NLE (premiere) and rather to send the job to adobe media encoder. If you're using final cut then do it with compressor.

Also your original sequence settings for editing want to exactly match the files going in. Use MPEGStreamclip to encode your footage almost losslessly into ProRes422. Editing in h.264 is laggy as it's so compressed and rendering each clip is a huge time consumer and I've noticed degrades the quality a bit.

Jesus I use those settings for encoding... I don't understand why it looks shitty... Y U NO LOOK NICE

So I convert the video files into ProRes422 before editing them? And then export them in H.264? Maybe that's the problem. I just import them in H.264 and start editing...

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 16:19 Quote
JakeTheRake wrote:
elliotgraham wrote:
For pinkbike/vimeo or whatever

1920x1080 (square pixels 1.0)
29.97fps
H.264 codec with a quicktime movie wrapper (.mov/mp4)
Frame blending off
Anything over 5000kbps bit rate
Audio whatever the hell you want

I learnt not to export with my NLE (premiere) and rather to send the job to adobe media encoder. If you're using final cut then do it with compressor.

Also your original sequence settings for editing want to exactly match the files going in. Use MPEGStreamclip to encode your footage almost losslessly into ProRes422. Editing in h.264 is laggy as it's so compressed and rendering each clip is a huge time consumer and I've noticed degrades the quality a bit.

Jesus I use those settings for encoding... I don't understand why it looks shitty... Y U NO LOOK NICE

So I convert the video files into ProRes422 before editing them? And then export them in H.264? Maybe that's the problem. I just import them in H.264 and start editing...

File > Export > Quicktime Conversion

try with that menu

Posted: Aug 25, 2012 at 16:21 Quote
StuHaight wrote:
JakeTheRake wrote:
elliotgraham wrote:
For pinkbike/vimeo or whatever

1920x1080 (square pixels 1.0)
29.97fps
H.264 codec with a quicktime movie wrapper (.mov/mp4)
Frame blending off
Anything over 5000kbps bit rate
Audio whatever the hell you want

I learnt not to export with my NLE (premiere) and rather to send the job to adobe media encoder. If you're using final cut then do it with compressor.

Also your original sequence settings for editing want to exactly match the files going in. Use MPEGStreamclip to encode your footage almost losslessly into ProRes422. Editing in h.264 is laggy as it's so compressed and rendering each clip is a huge time consumer and I've noticed degrades the quality a bit.

Jesus I use those settings for encoding... I don't understand why it looks shitty... Y U NO LOOK NICE

So I convert the video files into ProRes422 before editing them? And then export them in H.264? Maybe that's the problem. I just import them in H.264 and start editing...

File > Export > Quicktime Conversion

try with that menu

So strait out of FCP without using Compressor then?


 
Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.017817
Mobile Version of Website