k9TechBlog

Ninja and GH2

2012-02-10T23:27:00.000-08:00

B&H delivered my thousand dollar Atomos Ninja on the same day I received my Intel X25 160gb SSD and 16" HDMI cable. I already confirmed on my HDTV that the Panasonic Lumix GH2 has clean HDMI output as long as zebra is off.

I can't really tell on my old 15" MacBook Pro with coarse screen how sharp the ProRes movies are, but they appear much better than AVCHD-to-ProRes. At bitrates of 100Mbps, 150Mbps, and 200Mbps, archiving will be massive. Before the Thailand floods 2tb 3.5" bare drives were $60. They are now double that with no decrease in sight. Perhaps Ninja sales were affected by this, as well as speculation on DVXuser concerning the AviSynth script. Investing a grand is something a casual shooter probably doesn't want to do, although Ninja is the lowest-cost external ProRes recorder on the market.

My assessment

DVXuser senior member Ralph B says the "insane perfectionist" needs AviSynth, even with GH2 firmware 1.1. However, I don't see any anomalies in the raw ProRes footage. I'm certain on a good Dell UltraSharp U2410 or U2711 monitor, Ninja ProRes kicks butt. The caveat is output: ProRes is an editing format, we don't watch ProRes movies, and at 1.7gb per minute (HQ), how can a clip of any length be broadcast on the web or fit on a disc? So we reached a predicament: absolutely stellar raw footage goes downhill when it's compressed to H264.

The following videos exemplify that in the real world ProRes must be downsized to H264 (in this case with Compressor 4, single-pass, medium resolution). The MTS-derived files are somewhat dreamy (read: soft), since they are shot compressed, converted to an editing format, then compressed again on output. Conversely, ProRes is shot uncompressed and only downgraded once, to H264 on output. Hence, Ninja does its job by producing high bitrates to appease companies or projects with demanding Mbps requirements.

ProResHQ > H264:

MTS > ProResHQ > H264:

ProResHQ > H264:

MTS > ProResHQ > H264:

Exposure

Ninja exposures are darker with more contrast than the GH2. It makes sense to expose for ProRes and let AVCHD overexpose. Lenses also make a difference. Lumix glass seems accurate with the exposure meter near center; third-party lenses need underexposure of -1 to -2 EV for Canon/Nikon and -3 EV for Pentax. I had to experiment to reach these conclusions, and adjust accordingly to Ninja. Unfortunately, neither LCD screens are accurate to be reliable. EVF and meter are more realistic. Nevertheless, slight exposure anomalies can be adjusted in post.

Consistency

QuickTime player shows Ninja files as 30p. Nevertheless, I tried to shoot at the new "high bitrate" 30p option on the GH2 for consistency, but could not get Ninja footage deinterlaced using various FCPX and Compressor settings. Apparently frame rate on the GH2 affects HDMI output, even if it's set to 60i. So I revert to my standard rate of 24p. Reverse telecine in Compressor de-interlaces Ninja footage to ProResHQ 24p. Hence, on a 24p FCPX timeline mixing Ninja and GH2 clips is fine. Exporting to Compressor H264 at 24p shows no interlacing.

Why no sound?

GH2 only outputs video through HDMI. Audio needs to be fed from a mixer or Zoom (triple audio!). Ninja's 3.5mm input is line level, so no mics directly to Ninja. Furthermore, in my tests sound is 10 frames out of sync, after the video. DVXuser says audio precedes video by .07 seconds, but that's not my synopsis, and I used a clapper slate to align video and sound in FCPX using the "detach audio" command. Long GOP (group of pictures) will drift further, so periodic re-alignments are required. The complicated AviSynth command-line procedure for Windows reportedly syncs a/v.

Some technical aspects Ninja/GH2

bitrates: 100Mbps (LT), 150Mbps (422), 200Mbps (HQ)
file size per minute: 725mb (LT), 1gb (422), 1.7gb (HQ)
160gb SSD recording times: 3hrs (LT), 2hrs (422), 1.5hrs (HQ)
HDMI frame rate: 60i

Epilog

During my first few minutes of shooting Ninja I was appalled by the sound snafu. After more shoots I realized Ninja's potential and benefits. The cruciality is the GH2's clean and stellar HDMI and maybe audio will eventually be added. Ninja is also useful for other gear such as the AF100 or Nikon D800, if the opportunity should arise.

Atomos apparently updates firmware regularly to incorporate new technology and trends, so Ninja is forward-thinking. Although hacked GH2 firmware reportedly yields 175Mbps, I question hack reliability, especially for long GOP. For hobbyists hack giveaways and experiments are OK. But I often shoot lengthy footage for gigs and documentaries, so I won't place my reputation on a hack. No footage, no pay!

For my own doc I'll likely shoot MTS for long GOP talking heads. What's the benefit of high bitrate and massive file size for a face? And I don't want to grapple with post-sync and pulldown for interviews. However, B-roll, location, and non-narrative footage in HQ might be worth the effort.

3LT X1.1 Brian

2012-01-10T17:25:00.001-08:00

The long name of this small tripod is "Three Legged Thing 2nd Generation X1.1 Brian and AH1 Ballhead Carbon Fiber Tripod Kit, Built In Detachable Monopod, Blue." In short, I shall refer to it as "3LT" or "tripod."

There hasn't been much hoopla about this specific tripod because Adorama just received its first shipment January 3, 2012. I ordered it December 13, 2011 and it arrived today. Hence, I post some pictures and information I wish I had seen and known before expending $399. Nevertheless, I probably would have still bought it, although I considered similar travel models by Gitzo and Slik.

Foremost, the 3LT --with or sans bag-- has to fit inside a Pelican im2720 case, sharing a center aisle with a Manfrotto head and boom pole, flanked by a Sennheiser shotgun mic with windscreen and filters on one side, and audio cables, peripherals, and mics on the other. Fortunately, it all fit.

Snug, appropriate for airplane travel check-in or inside a car trunk.

Strapped onto a Lowepro Pro Runner x350 Rolling AW Backpack with wheels.

Reference shots for size and measurements.

Bottom leg could be a bit thin for heavy loads.

I would not extend it all the way up unless imperative, and I wouldn't leave it that high unattended. Some people asked if it's flimsy that high. Yes, it is flimsy. However, a sandbag anchored from the bottom of the column adds stability, and I would be OK with a non-caged DSLR with this configuration:

This is as high as I would go sans sandbag: legs fully extended, column completely compressed.

With a Manfrotto 128RC fluid head.

Size comparisons to a Manfrotto 3021. You probably already know the 3LT folds inward, wrapping its legs around the head like an octopus.

The 3LT has many pieces which deviates from the traditional Manfrotto tripod. Because of the additional elements (and perhaps due to my unfamiliarity with the engineering), I find that fluidity when shooting video with either the AH1 or 128RC is not always guaranteed. I suspect it's the mounting plate:

And to what do these inner threads connect?

With a removable spindle that can go deep or shallow into the center column that interconnects with a free-form mounting plate that has threads-to-nowhere (when using the column), I'm not surprised that it's not rock-solid tight. Hence, some panning will be bumpy. The approach I find effective is to keep the top friction lock inside the plate. This helps mesh the plate and column to prevent most panning bumps, at the expense of not extending the column fully.

3LT explains in the manual the modular design allows the complete removal of the center column. (Vis-a-vis a Manfrotto column, mounting plate, and spindle are melded into one piece). Thus, those mystery inner threads mesh with the tripod furniture which garners a tight connection. I wouldn't leave the center column at home when traveling, but the option exists to remove it for smoother panning. The compact, lightweight, mobile, and flexible aspects of the 3LT means it would be my only tripod for travel. Conversely, for crucial local gigs I might favor Manfrotto legs, which is rock solid without sandbag even when it gets as high as the 3LT, around seven feet.

With the center column removed, the mounting plate tightens and rests on the tripod furniture:

The Manfrotto 128RC fluid head seats well on the 3LT and is solid without the column:

Although a cage on the AH1 ball head might be appropriate in some cases, the head itself is not suitable for video (excessive lateral friction and no arm):

The following photos are various components of the 3LT x1.1 Brian, plus monopod option.

The monopod stud is on the tripod furniture. This requires a special spindle on which to attach the mounting plate onto the leg:

I find the monopod conversion method cumbersome since I prefer to keep the Manfrotto fluid head on the tripod. By using a dual 3/8-16 stud I can have the AH1 ball head on-the-ready for the monopod:

In two steps -- remove leg, attach head:

Video lenses

2011-12-23T19:32:00.001-08:00

Lumix 14/2.5

Tiny wide angle lens (28mm equivalent) with fast aperture (ƒ2.5) creates sharp images at every ƒstop. Wide open aperture produces effective bokeh under specific conditions while narrow ƒstops offer universal in-focus imagery for location or scenics. Thus, the wide angle is conducive to handheld shooting with tolerable shake. As with all Lumix lenses, the 14mm is native to Panasonic Micro 4/3rds bodies for autofocus and autoexposure, with unlimited manual options on the GH2.

My uses:

Carry-around for grabs, especially with the GF2
Wide scenics sometimes with circular polarizer
Close foreground wide open or with ND (neutral density) filter for mild bokeh
In-yo-face individual or wide group shots
Appropriate for events and ENG (electronic news gathering) such as protests
Moderate low-light at ƒ2.5

Tests: I received this lens 29-Aug-11 with the GF2 body. The lens is sharp and produces decent bokeh when shooting close foreground wide open. Most M43 shooters complain about lack of wide angle lenses because of the 2x crop, but I find 14mm sufficiently wide. In fact, it's usually too wide. Get that close to people and face jail time for alleged terrorism harassment. It's a niche lens I take to gigs because it's small, but it might not see the light of day.

Olympus 14-54/2.8-3.5

This 28-108mm (equivalent) lens has reasonably fast apertures for indoor use. It is appropriate for interviews, narratives, and events to adjust the focal length on-the-fly in lieu of committing to a fixed lens. The mount is standard 4/3rds but a Micro 4/3rds adapter provides ƒstop control and slower-than-native AF. A tripod is best suited for this lens, especially towards the long end. It lacks OIS (optical image stabilization) on my DSLRs, but wide-angle handheld and monopod might be OK. This lens is big and heavy, with compromised functionality because of lens mount conversion. But fast AF zooms do not exist for M43. Far from being my ideal choice, the Olympus is an interim solution until the rumored Panasonic 12-35/2.8 is available. It usually takes a year for Panasonic to transcend from rumor-to-reality...Q1 2013 at the earliest.

My uses:

Shooting in varying light from dark to bright
Wide-to-portraits for talking heads, ENG, and scenics
Individual and group people shots

Lumix 20/1.7

Small "normal" lens (40mm equivalent) with super fast aperture (ƒ1.7) creates sharp images at every ƒstop. Wide aperture produces effective bokeh and is appropriate for two-person interviews. Narrower ƒstops offer full focus scenes. Focal length is conducive to tolerable handheld shooting. The Lumix 20mm lens is a highly-praised and sought-after Micro 4/3rds lens.

My uses:

Carry-around for grabs, especially with the GF2
Normal focal length for two-person video interviews
Appropriate for ENG people shots
No-to-low-light at ƒ1.7, bokeh indoors or with ND filter outdoors
"go to" lens for dark environments, especially handheld

Tests: I received this lens 20-Oct-11. It is sharp with stellar bokeh at ƒ1.7. Outdoors requires one or two ND4 filters for open aperture and slow shutter. Handheld is OK but better on a tripod. The ETC (extended tele converter) is acceptably sharp for one-person interviews.

Nikon 50/1.4

This 45-year-old (built in 1967) completely-manual AIS prime rivals contemporary Nikon lenses. Some reviewers say Nikon mastered the 50mm lens during the Nixon administration with no incentive for refinements. The main differences between then and now of course is today's in-camera AF, AE, and aperture control, none which apply to Micro 4/3rds body using a passive adapter. The AIS's long and smooth ring offers precise focusing, especially when used with the camera's EVF (electronic viewfinder) and manual assist function. The extremely fast ƒ1.4 creates bokeh beyond belief, whereas narrower apertures produce super sharp images. A compromise, e.g., ƒ2-2.8, gets stellar bokeh with ultimate sharpness, all from a totally outdated lens. The aperture ring locks the ƒstop on both the GH2 and GF2. This is the perfect lens for controlled interviews, 100mm in full-frame parlance. A tripod is mandatory for steady footage.

My uses:

The only legacy and manual lens in my kit
Close portrait with intense bokeh for indoors interviews
Creative short-tele outdoors with ND filter for intense bokeh
Focus and aperture rings for manual control, especially on the GF2
Effective for no-to-low-light conditions
Well-suited for stationary or slow-moving subjects

Tests: I bought this lens with metal hood 23-Dec-11 from a vintage seller on eBay. It is sharp at ƒ2 and narrower. Wide open it is soft or "dreamy", typical of most lenses ƒ1.4 or faster. Outdoors needs ND filter(s) for intense bokeh. Indoors interviews I shot at ƒ2 are sharp.

Lumix 45-175/4-5.6

This X series lens is a whopping 90-350mm (equivalent) telephoto PowerZoom with focus and zoom rings for optional manual operation. It has built-in OIS for handheld shots, but long zooming requires a sturdy tripod. It's relatively short (9cm) and light (8oz) with internal focusing. The barrel does not extend so the lens keeps its small size at all focal lengths.

My uses:

The only slow and OIS lens in my kit
Extremely niche for specific purposes - not a "go to" lens
Exclusively suited for outdoors, not even good under KinoFlo
OIS for short-tele handheld run-n-gun
Deep telephoto when tripod-mounted, useful for precarious situations such as violent protests
Appropriate for fast-moving objects with AFC
Electronic PowerZoom emulates camcorder

Tests: I received this lens on 21-Oct-11. It's sharp at all focal lengths and the ETC produces acceptable imagery. It has OIS that is effective under certain handheld conditions. Unusable indoors, so ironically if I'm hired to shoot telephoto in darkness, I'll rent a Canon 70-200/2.8 (ISO 400, not 1600 or 3200). Nevertheless, I'll keep this lens because it's small and will be OK on a road trip. There is a lot more to say about this lens, mostly good but with caveats. See detailed review.

Handheld on GF2 to illustrate AF and OIS.

Filters

Tiffen UV for Lumix and Olympus lenses
vintage 1A for Nikon lens
Tiffen ND4 for fast lenses
Cokin P for creative shots
- P164 circular polarizer
- P153 ND4 neutral density
- P121 graduated neutral density

Why these five lenses?

Fast lenses offer low ISO, no-to-low-light shooting, and sharp, creative cinematic video. Wide apertures allow effective depth-of-field control. Neutral density filters keep ƒstops open in bright light outdoors. These lenses are excellent for tripod-mounted sessions, with the wide primes also useful for handheld footage. The zooms have their place in run-n-gun, where 14-54mm is a desirable range and acceptable handheld at wider focal lengths. The telephoto zoom might not see much action, but it's small and lightweight to fit into an already-packed bag for just-in-case opportunities. k9sound's emphasis is interviews with excellent video and sound, perfect for documentaries, and b-roll with creative approaches.

Bloggers constantly advocate manual focusing to emulate Hollywood, but never take into consideration the operator's eyesight, presuming that every shooter has 20/20 vision. My progressives prescription lenses are deceptive when looking through an EVF or small or coarse LCD screen, unlike Hollywood with the luxury of enormous monitors carried by a roadie and constant retakes. In documentary shooting there's only one chance. If subjects appear to be sharp but are not, footage is unusable. Thus, instead of fussing with uncertainty or appeasing bloggers, I use AF when appropriate and reliable, even with touchscreen.

FCPX-OMF-Logic-Pro Tools

2011-11-28T14:21:00.001-08:00

FCPX became much more appealing when Apple offered a free trial at about the same time Automatic Duck closed up shop and gave away Pro Edit FCP for OMF output. I fetched them all, paid for FCPX after the trial ended and bought Motion and Compressor, too. Henceforth, FCPX is my video NLE, while Logic Pro and Pro Tools remain my mainstay audio sequencers.

I've done a lot of experimenting with FCPX and OMF export and experienced a lot of snafus. None of this stuff is documented in printed matter as far as I know. The internet is fairly scarce on this procedure since it's new and niche.

Prepare FCPX timeline

After numerous attempts for perfect integration between FCPX and an audio sequencer, I finally discovered that it's better to Detach Audio on a complex FCPX timeline before exporting OMF. Detachment can transpire en masse or individually, depending on existing elements.

All the detached audio is grouped below the primary track, allowing for universal enable/disable by drag-select-V. Logic and Pro Tools work better with detached audio, otherwise some clips will be out-of-sync. On a simple timeline, detaching audio is unnecessary. For Logic's sake, enable all audio.

complex timeline

simple timeline

Export OMF

Highlight the project to export and drop it onto the duck in the PEFCP window.

These are the settings I use:

Of course a reference movie is helpful in the audio sequencer, so I created a Compressor preset for a very small lo-res mov file. The 25% refers to the size of the original. In this case 1/4 the size of a 1920x1080 movie.

Logic Pro

The OMF can be opened or imported in an audio sequencer. For Logic Pro, it's better to launch the application first, set the sampling rate to 48 khz (or create a user template), then import the OMF.

Oops! If you exported the OMF with audio disabled, this is what you get in Logic. Nothing!

For Logic you'll need to assure that audio is enabled before OMF export (this does not matter in Pro Tools as illustrated later). All clips should be void of keyframes and kept at the default of 0db. Logic will not import keyframed audio clips resulting in blanks. All keyframing (aka automation) and muting should be done in Logic.

Review:

detach audio from video
enable keyframe-free audio in FCPX
export OMF
launch Logic
set sampling rate to match video, usually 48khz
import OMF
open reference movie
import external audio
activate automation, mutes, buses, etc
incorporate Rewire/Reason to go crazy
configure FCPX audio clips to not follow tempo changes or they will go out of sync if you change tempo, which you might do for the music

Pro Tools

Pro Tools doesn't care if you export an OMF with audio enabled or disabled. All the clips will show up as active. Crossfades also appear, but not audio keyframes. It's OK to right-click the OMF file in the finder to open in Pro Tools since a prompt will ask you to select the sampling rate. However, there might be a snafu upon entry.

If you get this error, let Pro Tools automatically find the missing links. After several minutes, you'll be greeted with this window.

Once all the missing files are found and linked, commit to it.

Import the reference movie and start working! Again, watch out if you make tempo changes.

Logic vs Pro Tools

Editing: Pro Tools (clips have independent envelopes)
Crossfades: Pro Tools (significantly simpler than Logic)
Bouncing: Logic Pro (offline in Logic much faster than realtime in Pro Tools)
Voiceover: Logic Pro (Pro Tools had awkward record monitoring until version 10)
Plug-ins: both (Pro Tools upped its included collection in version 8)
Snafus: Pro Tools (might drop files on import)
Drives: Logic Pro (Pro Tools can't write to thumb drive and has buffer troubles)
Loops/MIDI: both (they're about the same: EXS, Alchemy, Rewire)
Soundcard: Logic Pro (Pro Tools before version 9 required proprietary interface)
Dongle: Logic Pro (Pro Tools needs iLok)

In spite of its massive faults, my tip is to Pro Tools. Autonomous clip editing is stellar, as is crossfades, two essentials in video edits. Too bad Logic's Hyperdraw isn't clip-autonomous, forcing the use of nodes. Furthermore, Logic can only crossfade on overlapping regions on the same track and physically have to be extended to overlap. Whereas Pro Tools detects a virtual overlap, even on different tracks, so drag the edit tool over regions and with key command F create the fade.

Nevertheless, it will be easier to crossfade in FCPX. Trim videos on the FCPX timeline, select clips, ctrl-T to add crossfade transitions, then export OMF. This will save a lot of time and effort in Pro Tools.

Pro Tools shows and activates FCPX crossfades

Logic Pro shows crossfades created in FCPX, but doesn't implement them

FCPX import

When the audio, music, and effects are completed in Pro Tools or Logic Pro, the bounced file can be placed on the FCPX timeline and the original files muted.

Approaches

Your approach will obviously be different than mine, or anybody else's. You might want to mute some files in FCPX that you don't need and tolerate blank space in Logic. This more accurately mimics the FCPX timeline in terms of used and unused audio clips, but there's no flexibility if you want to activate unused clips.

Conversely, even muted files show up in Pro Tools, essentially starting from scratch. Obviously it would be ideal if both apps read keyframes (as in FCP7 OMF exports), but we don't have that luxury with FCPX. I always go for scratch since I don't know what the audio will sound like with effects and music introduced within the sequencer.

Hence, you should devise your own procedure suitable to your needs. Mainly, the audio sequencer misplaces un-detached clips, maybe because they're strewn all over in a complex "trackless" timeline. (There is one track - the primary track, so "trackless" is a misnomer).

I have no idea why Pro Tools drops files. Perhaps it doesn't in version 9 or 10 (I have version 8 with Digitranslator). Or maybe there are different snafus depending on version, operating system, and computer.

Since Automatic Duck PEFCP is the only app to get OMF out of FCPX, and since AD is out-of-business, until similar software is developed, we have to make do with what's available. PEFCP is free, so no complaints.

Compressor 4

2011-11-02T19:11:00.001-07:00

I haven't read anything yet that Compressor 4 for FCPX is any better than its predecessor Compressor 3 for Final Cut Studio. All I know is that Compressor 3 received across-the-board negative reviews when pitted against Adobe Media Encoder, Sorenson, joey's hacker encoder, etc. These days critical reviewers are very quiet about Compressor 4. If it's good, say so; if not, say so. I don't fathom why there is dead silence about Compressor 4. Therefore, it must be good!

Compressor 4 is a utilitarian application, thus retains its uneventful interface which Macworld says is a positive.

I'm not interested at all in aesthetics of a utility application as long as it does its job. And it seems Compressor 4 does its tasks sufficiently exporting H.264 files with high quality yet small file sizes. However, I can't tell the difference between the old version and new version, but I'll presume the new version has better output. Just in case it doesn't I also created an x264encorder preset using the best settings.

Conversely, I created a minimalist preset as a reference file for Pro Tools. I couldn't output a regular QuickTime file from FCPX as I did in FCP6 that would open in Pro Tools 8. The prompt said I need the Avid engine. No, I don't need that engine, I just need Compressor.

Generally I don't think direct output from FCPX is very good. There are many consumer settings such as YouTube and Facebook, but I prefer more control, and that's what Compressor 4 does. It allows me to configure precise export settings.

FCPX has no in/out points. You cannot export a segment of a sequence from FCPX as was done in previous versions. The entire timeline is exported. Hence, the only possibility to export part of a sequence is with Compressor 4. Consumers don't really need this, but for documentaries this is helpful. Notice also that FCPX cannot transcode a segment of a file; it processors the whole thing! This is one of many consumer-ish aspects of FCPX, presuming all goes in and all goes out.

Certainly there are many other things Compressor is used for, but my only intent is to export high quality QuickTime H264 movies that are on par with other encoders. Hopefully version 4 finally nailed it.

fcpx, pro tools 8, compressor 4, x264encoder

fcpx, pro tools 8, compressor 4

Why FCPX runs on old computers

2011-11-02T01:30:00.000-07:00

Apple gave into user pressure when people complained about FCPX and bailed en masse to Media Composer and Premiere Pro. What Apple did was unthinkable during Steve Jobs reign: offer a fully functional trial version and tease what's forthcoming in early 2012. If this is how Apple will be in a post-Jobs world, so much the better. Apple needs to carve a new and improved identity and depart from Jobs' methodology. His secretive approach is no longer appropriate. Thankfully Tim Cook is opening FCPX to third-party developers and providing source code.

Almost simultaneously Automatic Duck closed up shop after the owner got a fluffy gig with Adobe. Again, the unexpected: AD gave away all its formerly pricey plug-ins, including Pro Export FCP. See where this is going? Free NLE and free OMF to Pro Tools.

Pro Res

During Final Cut Pro's 10-year reign, Apple created a decent editing codec called Pro Res 422. Instead of scrapping Pro Res in FCPX, Apple compromised by creating small temporary files that allow for instant editing of AVCHD clips. This isn't native editing as Premiere Pro does. FCPX edits immediately with interim AVC1 files while transcoding to Pro Res in the background. When done, AVC1 files are transparently replaced with Pro Res files on the timeline.

FCPX will scatter your files

FCPX strewns the internal harddrive in the user library under Movies with folders and large files. For consumers who shoot occasional family videos this is fine. But I like to keep track of where my files are and in logical order. With some rouge investigation and experimentation, I figured out how the application does its own media management and how to manipulate it to keep everything in one place on an external drive, leaving nothing on the internal drive. Without this knowledge FCPX gets very sloppy and frustrating for sharing and archiving.

FCPX creates two folders in the root of the user-selected drive: Final Cut Events and Final Cut Projects. Under those folders are user-named subfolders corresponding to user-created Events (bin) and their associated Projects (sequence) in FCPX. Events and Projects don't need to be named similarly, but I always keep them the same so I know what Event clips go onto what Project timeline. In the Finder AVC1 is located in Final Cut Events/user-named-subfolder/Original Media. The mov is about the same filesize as its mts counterpart, so it's created quickly to allow instant editing. Some users say these may be trashed after Pro Res files are created, but that's not true if a red square appears in the Events Library instead of a clip. Pro Res files are located in Final Cut Events/user-named-subfolder/Transcoded Media/High Quality Media. These huge files will go to the timeline.

What about proxy?

When transcoding you have the option of selecting optimize, proxy, or both. I only select optimize for AVCHD since FCPX will automatically create AVC1 files anyway. If I select optimize and proxy I might end up with triplicates of each file.

When I want to incorporate external footage, audio files, and photos I place them in the Original Media folder. They appear in the Event Library to drag onto the timeline. My external files are FCPX-ready so they aren't transcoded or duplicated but there might be some rendering. In fact, FCPX renders a lot and who knows what it's doing. Let it render and pay no attention. It's happening in the background anyway. Command-9 to see what's goin' on.

FCPX is a hard drive eater

What I discovered about FCPX as opposed to previous versions is that FCPX is crazy about replicating files and occupying valuable hard drive space. Copy an Event or Project and see what happens! Just because hard drives are relatively affordable and drop slowly in price doesn't mean you shouldn't clean up the drives. FCPX will take full advantage of your naivety and swiftly fill up every drive. An $80 2tb drive won't seem like a bargain if you need to buy seven or eight of them for a 90 minute documentary. That's how bad FCPX can be.

I use a 128gb USB thumb drive for mobile editing. This allows me to edit anywhere at my leisure with a laptop. It also forces me to scrutinize FCPX and avoid duplicating Events and Projects. If I see a significant drop in available free space as I do little or few tasks, I'll investigate what the app is doing, where it dumped the load, and if that load is even necessary.

A thorough understanding of media management helps to manually eliminate redundancies and do things in the Finder. If you rely on FCPX you'll never clear the hard drive of unwanted files. In my rouge approach I trash folders and files to see if FCPX needs them. If so, I put 'em back. If not, I empty the trash.

BIG files!

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a way to transcode only a certain segment of a large clip, as in earlier versions with Log and Transfer. Long interviews in particular can eat up massive hard drive space once transcoded. That's the trade-off with instant editing.

Now is an opportune time for Voltaic to deliver an advanced version. The current Voltaic version skips frames in preview and has no audio, but it can trim clips, thus transcode only the desired segment. But it needs a smooth preview and audio for effective and precise trims.

Of course a workaround is to use an earlier version of FCP and transcode with Log and Transfer, selecting only the wanted portions. I have FCS2 in a separate folder, so that's probably the best solution for now if I want to transcode parts of a lengthy clip.

All or nothing

When FCPX starts transcoding files it doesn't like to stop. You can pause the active file, but once you quit FCPX transcoding ceases and does not resume when the app is re-opened. You have to know where you left off and understand how to read the Events subfolders in the Finder to determine which files need to be transcoded. In this scenario I prefer to transcode in Voltaic and drop the files into the Original Media folder. FCPX assigns its own filename, so it's painstaking to compare the mts to the mov. 'Gotta figure out the nomenclature.

Native elements

Adobe never created a noteworthy editing codec, so Premiere Pro went for native AVCHD editing instead. It's cleaner file-wise, but the task is a major chore since AVCHD was never designed to be edited natively. To do so requires extremely hefty processing guts. The HP EliteBook 8740w with GPU acceleration costs $3,400 at Tiger Direct! Even the monster Alienware gamer laptop with 2gb GDDR doesn't meet Premiere's graphics card qualifications for GPU acceleration, and these are Windoze machines!

Avid Media Composer isn't much better. System requirements are high, requires specific Nvidia cards, and is still better to transcode to DNxHD for smooth editing. Avid was so hardheaded and thwarted AVCHD until a year ago. Hence, Avid's AVCHD processing was infantile until version 6. Avid's horrendous short-sightedness wasn't popular with the AVCHD crowd who had no choice but to avoid Avid. Too little too late for Media Composer 6?

So-called veteran editors who talk excessively about the past are cutting their last projects on Final Cut Studio and will finish out their careers on another NLE or retire, particularly from post-productions houses which are going belly up fast. A word of advice: do not start a documentary in FCS! Finish what you have and move on or out.

FCPX isn't for yesteryear's editors. It is for aspiring independent editors who will grow and work with the application, produce award-winning movies, and create companies based on FCPX. Mac/FCPX is a frugal approach to filmmaking with a lot of optimism in future development, especially third-party enhancements where Apple can't wing it.

Trick or treat

There's a lot of focus right now on visual "tricks." Already the viewing audience is weary of gimmicks, as evidenced by the 3D and Blu-Ray debacle. An alternative to tricks is catchy scriptwriting and storylines. In the near future it won't be the NLE that produces movies, but effective human vision and presentation.

Old does new

Apple's retention of Pro Res via intermediary files allows old or tiny computers to run FCPX with native-like editing. Cutters report success on an 11" MacBook Air, which makes sense since Apple's software requirements shouldn't exceed its hardware. Conversely, Apple reportedly will faze out the mighty Mac Pro desktop, which means FCPX is efficiently designed for compact computers.

FCPX runs fine with my outdated antique early 2008 MacBook Pro with 4gb RAM and a paltry 256mb VRAM. During background transcoding the computer's resources are max'd out, but I can still edit concurrently. However, I seldom edit immediately, so I can do dedicated transcoding within FCPX, which is quick, or use Voltaic outside of FCPX.

In FCP6, my old laptop choked on keyframes, transitions, and other tasks. I don't know how Apple kicked new life into an aging machine, but apparently FCPX is much more efficient, perhaps the programming has been streamlined. Hence, I should be able to squeeze several months out of my old Snow Leopard laptop.

Macrumors reported that the MacBook Air and Pro could merge in 2012. This likely means elimination of the Superdrive. Thus, an Air-thin 15" should be able to hold an i7 quad, 2gb VRAM, and SSD. OWC confirms that current MBP models accept and read 16gb RAM (2x8gb for $580), so the RAM capacity is already decent. If Macrumors is correct, a thin 15" laptop with good guts should be valid for three years. This would be a boon to independent and mobile editors, and a further threat to the dwindling post house.

Pro Tools 11 (2012? 2013?) will have major changes, e.g., offline bounce and end-of-life for TDM and perhaps RTAS. Until then I can still run yesteryear's Pro Tools 8 and other legacy Rosetta applications alongside the latest Apple NLE on my old computer while I prepare for new gear as they appear. So I'm relieved that FCPX is low-tech, which allows me to be patient.

Don't buy obsolescence

2011-10-29T17:38:00.001-07:00

After Apple released FCPX in June, the only way to export OMF to Pro Tools was to buy the $500 Pro Export FCP from Automatic Duck. I surmise a sizable number of editors bought this expensive plug-in. Two months later, AD was gobbled up by Adobe and went belly up. That was the dealbreaker for me: no OMF, no FCPX. Previously I was willing to pay the high price for AD if I was certain that I'd adopt FCPX as my NLE.

With the industry topsy-turvy I watched and waited. I lurked on forums as alleged pro editors griped about FCPX and bailed to Media Composer and Premiere Pro. Perhaps many veteran editors called it quits and retired, especially as the movie industry faces a long economic battle with consumers who shun watching the ongoing trend of unimpressive flicks. Another major challenge to the once-budding movie industry is the flurry of indie filmmakers who don't rely on Hollywood and corporations to gain notoriety. With a few bucks and Kickstarter, intrepid producers proceed adequately without the oldskool method of yore that often involved corndogging executives.

Apple gave into user pressure by offering a fully functional 30-day trial of FCPX, a rarity for an arrogant company. Soonafter, AD officially terminated its operations and gave away all those expenses plug-ins for free. I downloaded the lot, upgraded my antique MacBook Pro to 10.6.8, and installed the FCPX trial. All is good.

There apparently will not be an uprising from those who bought AD between June and August. Perhaps user's companies paid for such obsolescence and have funds to kick around. The lessen here is to be patient. Initial criticism of FCPX rescinded significantly with the release of a notable patch and a tease about what is forthcoming in 2012, the first time ever that Apple announced their intentions. With bullish Steve Jobs gone, perhaps Apple will become upfront about its products as it should be. Avid, for example, publicly outlined a one-year plan to discontinue TDM and RTAS so Pro Tools users can act accordingly. We will likely see a much-needed offline bounce for long-form video and music.

Some pros have adopted FCPX as their NLE of choice, citing a version 1 application has a lot of potential. Many oldskool veterans who talk too much about shooting film in the 1960s chose to retire, as they should. FCPX is for the future and is openly and quietly embraced by unknown indie and newbie editors who will grow and succeed with it. That is forward thinking.

Be patient!

The video industry is constantly in flux. Products are short-lived with production runs as low as three months. A year ago there was a lot of hype about the Sony NEX VG-10 being the camcorder to replace the DSLR. The VG-10 was a paper tiger, and early buyers suffered great disappointment and financial remorse. It did not meet the expectations of brutal fussy amateurs who debate intimately about sensor size, resolution, pixels, and other jive. Ironically, their intent is to make a pretty picture to gawk at instead of focusing on a project or documentary for public release. They are the true suckers for obsolescence, constantly going deeper into deep debt to buy the latest overpriced device every 2-4 weeks.

I waited several months to assess the then-forthcoming Panasonic GH2. After extremely careful examination I bought the GH2 and built up a Micro 4/3rds system. Although hype about the GH2 and AF-100 has quelled, the GH2 is still a reputable device with highly-rated 24p video and very sharp Lumix lenses that rival Canon.

Sony superseded the VG-10 with the VG-20, so pity the poor souls who bought into the VG-10 knowing it was bad and destined to landfill, whereas the GH2 is the same age and will have years of use even after it goes out of production in a few months. The industry standard is 24p and will probably remain that way for several years. Although fussy amateurs push for 1080p60 to become the mainstay for digital video, there will always be the 24p crowd for its cinematic qualities, akin to photographers who shoot 35mm film, musicians content with 48khz, and DJs spinning vinyl. Just because the stiffs give us a lot of crap, that doesn't mean we want it.

50mm lenses for GH2

2011-10-27T12:09:00.001-07:00

Old is new

It's tough to find a decent 50mm ƒ1.4 or ƒ1.2 lens for the Panasonic Lumix GH2. Old lenses, although abundant on the used market, are simply old, not taking advantage of the current technologies to create new lenses and eliminate anomalies that were not rectifiable during the 35mm film era. Conversely, new lenses, such as Sigma, are designed for autofocus and have few provisions for manual focus. Ironically, Canon 5DM2 shooters have the same dilemma: lenses that don't autofocus when shooting video and have a flimsy manual focusing ring. In fact, 5DM2 users have it worse: they can't mount old MF-only lenses.

Canon's EF 50mm ƒ1.4 USM hasn't been improved for 40 years, according to DP Review.

Although it was introduced in June 1993, fully seven years after the birth of the EOS system, it can actually trace its roots back much earlier, being based on the classic manual focus FD 50mm ƒ1.4 design of 1971. As such, it's designed as a 'standard' lens for the 35mm full-frame format, with an angle of view offering none of the 'perspective distortion' associated with wideangle or telephoto lenses. More recently, with the popularization of APS-C as the dominant DSLR sensor size, it's taken on a new role, and behaves like a short 'portrait' telephoto on this format.

Sigma stigma

Sigma's 50mm ƒ1.4 EX DG HSM gets rave reviews for shooting wide open, having corrected some chromatic aberration and spherical aberration. Side-by-side with the $380 Canon above, the $500 Sigma usually wins. The caveat is that the manual focusing ring is only a quarter turn, which reviewers say cannot perform precise focusing. I had this same snafu with the budget Canon 50/1.8....the manual ring is pathetically short and cheap. One nice thing about the Sigma is the 4/3rds mount apparently available for the 50mm EX DG HSM, although B&H Photo lists it as discontinued. Nevertheless, with a $116 adapter, this lens will autofocus with aperture control on the GH2, although users report slow and noisy AF.

M43 EOS with aperture

I recently procured the Kipon EOS to M43 adapter with aperture control which users say works fairly well. Hence, I'm geared up to use EOS lenses and not have to shoot wide open at all times as I did with my older non-aperture EOS adapter. The caveat of course is the Canon EF 50mm lens is reportedly no better than my FD 50/1.4 from the 1970s and the Sigma has a bad focusing ring. But I am considering the Canon 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 in anticipation of a possible 5DM3 procurement in 2012. Canon's just-released EOS-1D X breaks the 12-minute video recording barrier by extending the time to 29:59. Perhaps that's still not good enough for interviews, but the new length is a significant improvement.

I still can't confirm if the GH2 is on par with the 5DM2 as some biased users speculate. However, on a pure mathematical calculation, a half-sized sensor at 24Mbps AVCHD cannot readily compete with a full-frame 38Mbit or higher that Canon has. Furthermore, Canon gets gigs, the GH2 doesn't, so there's a major marketability limit with Micro 4/3rds.

Old and new-old

A couple more 50mm lenses to consider. The extremely old Pentax SMC K (pre-M and A) ƒ1.2 that is very hard to find. One dude on Craigslist had it for sale for $400 but did not respond to my inquiry. Apparently it was sold although the ad was up and reposted for more than a month. eBay sells them for $600.

One viable 50mm lens however is apparently the $700 Nikon AIS ƒ1.2 that is still in production. Reviewers say it is very sharp at ƒ2 and beyond, but still suffers from haze and dreamy effects wide open. Nevertheless, the manual focusing ring is smooth, long, and precise, and the lens has the necessary aperture ring for ƒstop adjustment on the GH2. One possible snafu is that if I intend to buy the Canon 5DM3 in 2012, this expensive lens will be shelved.

Zeiss hype

A not-too-old Zeiss Planar T lens for the EOS mount had aperture rings. The new ones don't. There's always a lot of excitement about Zeiss, with its reputable German reputation equated with sharpness and quality. As with many western nations, Zeiss contracts offshore for some of its "lower-end" products, meaning it'll cost $700-$1k for an Asian-made normal lens that reviewers say isn't any sharper than Canon or Nikon at half the price.

The $3,900 Zeiss Compact Prime CP.2 50 / T2.1 Cine Lens has interchangeable mounts for EOS, Nikon, PL, Sony, and Micro 4/3rds. It's a fairly universal lens and gets rave reviews even wide open at ƒ2.1. The 14-blade iris (as opposed to eight or nine) reportedly proffers amazing bokeh. The aperture ring is continuous and doesn't click. Hence, adjusting ƒstops while shooting video shows gradual light changes which is ideal for cinematography. It's a hard-core item, not for the casual user, and expensive mounts cannot be changed on-location without serious tools and concentration. Nevertheless, this is a decent approach for shooting video on various bodies, although shooters who claim to be rich say you need a set of these expensive primes in various focal lengths to cater to each scene.

The front-of-lens is large to accommodate a matte box for rails and to hold 4" filter gels. Needless to say, using such a setup is 'way-over-the-top'!

What?

So what to do? Perhaps nothing! Maybe just keep what I have for now (old FD 50/1.4) and hold off until definitive purchase plans are formulated in 2012.

Voltaic, MPEG Streamclip, x264Encoder, Perian

2011-10-17T02:16:00.001-07:00

Voltiac HD

For a while I've used Voltaic HD to deinterlace 60i mts files to 24p. There's a whole explanation of telecine on the ShedWorx website. My old Canon HF100 shoots 24p wrapped in 60i and I want to use some clips to put on a 24p timeline with the Panasonic Lumix GH2 that shoots 24p native. I prefer not to mix frame rates in FCP6 so I can edit and export in 24p. When I bought the GF2 which doesn't have 24p I wanted to convert 60i to 24p and again I used Voltaic. Unfortunately, Voltaic takes a long time to deinterlace clips and the final file still has lines. All that waiting is futile.

Nevertheless, the best things about Voltaic ($40) is its quick transcoding of mts files to ProRes in its original frame rate, and the folder structure is not required. But to solve the 60i to 24p issue I had to look elsewhere.

MPEG Streamclip

This freebie application doesn't process mts files. However, I discovered that the Voltaic ProRes 60i mov files are swiftly and adequately converted to 24p in MPEG Streamclip by using the deinterlacing option and specifying a 23.98 frame rate. It converts both 24p/60i and 60i to 24p void of interlacing lines or other anomalies. Nevertheless, very fast moving objects shows some noticeable jitter from the dropped frames. This approach is more hacker than pro, and most professionals would quibble at this process and recommend re-shooting the footage in 24p. I shoot documentaries....the scenes cannot be re-enacted. I make do with existing clips and available tools. The Voltaic/Streamclip workflow is fine.

x264Encorder

Apple's Compressor continues to get bad marks even in the controversial FCPX. Bloggers recommend the free x264Encorder. There's no website per se but the dmg download is bundled on a page with other apps. The instructions are very technical and the developer is ESL.

The latest version of x264Encoder is 1.2.26 and recommends the computer have installed the latest versions of MPEG Streamclip and Perian. Until now I've used an earlier version of x264Encoder and the update is stellar in comparison. Some anomalies I previously had are gone!

x264Encoder settings

In Apple's Compressor select x264Encoder in the Compression Type window. Set Frame Rate to Current and I think everything else can remain as is. For quality you can choose various options from fast single-pass to best multi-pass. I find high multi-pass is a good compromise for render speed, file size, and quality. Clicking "Options..." takes you to the x264Encoder where many more parameters can be set. It's very technical so I merely activated Load1 and assured Behavior settings were appropriate: 23.976fps (FILM), CRF unchecked, Progressive conversion selected, and 3-pass (which gave me a lot of problems) unchecked. With these settings I get excellent results and saved it as a preset.

Round-about?

Using all the aforementioned applications is undoubtedly a round-about workflow. Unfortunately the NLE industry is in shambles and very fragmented, with FCPX dropping major features such as OMF, and Avid and Adobe scrambling for marketshare. Adobe swooped up Automatic Duck which for a few weeks offered an OMF option for FCPX which Adobe dropped. There are also variable insane hardware requirements so who knows what works with what. Thus, I'll stay with my old outdated obsolete vintage legacy gear until all these software companies clean up their act.

Mp3 and Apple

2011-10-05T21:27:00.001-07:00

I was working at ZDTV during the dot-com era in the late 1990s for Fresh Gear that included the late James Kim. We were inundated with mp3 players of all shapes and sizes. It was big hype because mp3 and broadband just came onto the scene. There must have been an mp3 player review every other day. There was Nomad, Yepp, and Rio, and of course the prominent Microsoft Zune. Yet, amid all these products none of them could create a buzz. They were interesting gadgets but not chic. Just another techtoy.

Later I worked for the short-lived Italian-based Vitaminic website that had offices in major European countries and one in the US where I was web editor. Vitaminic was one of many music sites trying to capture the DIY music crowd that was popular at the time. The Vitaminic CEO promoted the company as a distribution portal for independent musicians. Wannabee artists thought they'd get recording contracts because of their online presence.

The big deal in 2000 was encryption, or lack of. CDs were created before any concept of encryption existed so people used Jukebox to rip the file to an mp3 and post it on Napster's server for everybody to download for free. This pissed off Metallica and other artists immensely. Music sites were scrambling with proprietary encryption via software such as Real Player. It was a mess because each computer had to have a specific player for each format. Amid all this fragmentation, there was a major disconnect with portable players that were compatible with only one common file format: unprotected mp3.

In a year or two companies would have figured this out. Unfortunately progress stalled. VC currency was spent with no profits, the dot-com craze went downhill muy pronto, the economy tanked beyond belief, and the US was attacked. The once ubiquitous music sites swiftly closed up en masse. Many of us were dot-com casualties and most could not find work. The lucky ones held H1B visas or were from out-of-state who all went home with their cash.

Ricochet "wifi" in 2000.

It's amazing what Apple did with music. Under Steve Jobs the company took several already-existing technologies and melded them. Apple created the encrypted m4p file format for the iPod and iTunes. Everything was elaborately controlled so the music file could exist in only two places concurrently. There was no way to give these files away. Such innovation satisfied both consumer and recording industry. Furthermore, Apple did what nobody else could do including Microsoft with its Zune: create a buzz and make an mp3 player stylish and chic.

Well, we all know how Apple went further to develop the iPod, but also reinvented the desktop, wireless, cellphone, laptop, tablet, and video editing software with its controversial Final Cut Pro X. Apple essentially takes failed products and reworks the technology with functionality and design that makes it attractive to consumers and professionals. No other company can do this. Dell, HP, Sony, Acer, Alienware, et al don't make sleek products. Functional? Yes, but they all have Borg influences.

24p

2011-10-05T14:57:00.001-07:00

Things change fast in this industry for k9sound. Soon after I bought the GF2 and LVF1 I decided to embark on a documentary adventure using the GH2 at 24pn and 24Mbps. You can see where this is going already: the GF2 only shoots 60i at 17Mbps!

Hence I plan to buy the GFX1 when it's released allegedly by year's end. Rumors indicate the GFX1 will have 24pn and 1080p60. I'm not that interested in 60p....my target is compatibility with the GH2 and documentary format. Another nice feature of the GFX1 is the reportedly same battery as the GH2. Apparently Panasonic is seeing perhaps subliminally these two cameras as fitting companions. Ironically, the GH3 will be released soon. Nothing stays current long in the Panasonic lineup. The tiny GFX1 will be a good replacement for the GF2.

As long as 24p remains the standard for indie documentary films, then I will stay with that format. 24p was formulated in the 1920s by Hollywood filmmakers to cut costs on film. It was determined that 24p is on the threshold of flicker....any slower and it's not smooth, akin to the silent films that were as slow as 14fps. 60i was introduced with television to adhere to electronic parameters. Strange that even with digital, theaters still prefer 24p. Seems like 30p would be a smoother choice by putting the two halves of 60i together. Apparently it's not that simple and perhaps in the very far future the digital standard could be 60p. After all the debates I read, shooting progressive is much better than shooting interlaced, so I'll heed to such advice.

Meanwhile, 60i to 24p

VoltaicHD ($30) has 60i to 24p telecine pulldown to transcode to ProRes 24p footage inside a 60i wrapper, albeit slowly. It works well with my ancient 2008 Canon HF100 camcorder that offers 24p/60i. Voltaic doesn't work too well with the GF2 because there is no 24p-inside-60i option. All the footage is 60i, although for being interlaced it looks pretty good with no noticeable anomalies. However, it needs to be converted to 24p before it gets to the NLE so it'll reside comfortably on the timeline with GH2 24pn footage.

Neoscene ($130) is supposed to be all the rage for 60i-to-24p conversion and when I transcoded using the trial version the quality was very good on the few clips that were successfully converted. The major snafu of course is that the software seldom works on my MacBook Pro even if my hardware conforms to the system requirements. Neoscene interprets most of my GF2 mts files as 720x1280 that were shot at 1080x1920. This leads to 2x speed of the video, cuts off the clip, and doesn't give me the full HD I need. Audio remains realtime or there's simply silence, another glitch. Other users have this very same problem with no resolve. Furthermore, the application freezes up and crashes every time. Obviously this pricey utility software needs to go back to the developers for refinements. Unfortunately Neoscene is not the scene for me, but at least the company Cineform puts up a 7-day trial to test it out without any investment whatsoever.

My old crusty FCP6 mixes frame rates on the timeline so that's a viable option for the GH2's 24pn and GF2's 60i footage. The de-interlacing plug-in works pretty well too and Compressor/x264Encoder produces a decent final video.

But I wanted to try one more conversion method and it's the combination of VoltaicHD and MPEGStreamclip (free). As mentioned previously Voltaic does a good job of transcoding mts to 60i ProRes mov, and Streamclip is decent at converting the 60i mov if I designate a 23.98 framerate, click the deinterlace box, and export to ProRes 422 at 100% quality. In short, this method will suffice with the GF2 until the GFX1 is released and procured. Meanwhile, I'll prioritize the GH2 for the documentary but I don't want to dismiss the GF2 which specializes in being small-and-light for routine carrying and stealthy shots to inhibit curiosity and questions which obstruct capturing useful footage.

More glitches

With the FCP6 sequence set to 1080p24 (23.98) when I drag clips from the bin to the timeline I'm prompted if I want to conform the clips to the sequence. If I say no the laptop crashes. With yes the mixed clips are ok, including export to Compressor/x264Encoder. Evidently FCP6 reads the hacked 60i-to-24p clips as an anomaly that raises havoc. Ultimately it's best to stay with one frame rate from head-to-toe, from the camera to finished product. Such consistency will transpire upon receipt of the GFX1. Until then, I'll have to endure and limit the use of the GF2.

The new paradigms

It seems the latest versions of Premiere, FCPX, and Media Composer have all successfully addressed the issue of mixed frame rates. I haven't tried any of the newfangled offerings yet so I don't fathom the final outcome. It could be good, perhaps stellar, so there's no need to shy away from using different cameras. In the future I will probably adopt one of these applications and all my woes will be over, or not?

Media Composer, Premiere Pro, FCPX.

Lumix culture

2011-10-03T19:44:00.001-07:00

In the beginning of this Micro 4/3rds crusade, there weren't many lenses from which to choose. The big hype was to buy many adapters to fit legacy lenses with aperture rings from various manufacturers. Why this is possible without lens anomalies such as aberrations and vignetting is because the 2x crop means the sensor only focuses through a small portion of the lens center. Because legacy lenses tend to be on the slow side and long end many zooms in particular become super zooms with extended reach into the telephoto world, which is not very helpful for most shooters.

Panasonic is working very fast to cultivate the M43 culture it helped create as Nikon, Canon, and others try to creep onto this niche. Panasonic makes a lot of bodies, upgrading or adding models every three months or so. The early lack of diverse lenses is being replaced by an aggressive release campaign to swiftly address user needs and tap into potential massive profit in the face of competition. Fast and/or tiny lenses are rapidly appearing on the market. The legacy lenses of yore will return to their graves after a short-lived revival.

Trio of Lumix lenses that are only 27mm thin:
14/2.5, 20/1.7, 14-42/4-5.6.

Blogger and shooter Steve Huff said "Smaller cameras and lenses are the future...people are dumping their DSLR’s for small cameras like the NEX system, or Micro 4/3 cameras. One reason why Nikon and Canon sales are DOWN this year and I predicted this over the last two years."

Unfortunately, early adopters of Panasonic's 1st generation larger M43 offerings will be remorseful when they have to reinvest in the newer M43 products. The 45-200/4-5.6 is a good candidate to stay at home while you're out shooting with smaller and lighter glass. This beast already has a successor: the 45-175/4-5.6 that has internal focusing and power zoom, and no physical lens extension when zooming in!

see lot of pictures

By year's end there will be a lot more lenses not just by Panasonic but also Olympus, with rumors of other companies jumping into the M43 fray. Voigtlander/Nokton is very hot among aficionados with thick wallets or deep debt. And as usual, Panasonic will deliver a few more bodies in short time. The GF2, released late last year, has long been obsolete, and the poorly-marketed GH2 is slated to be replaced with the GH3 and AVCHD2 with 28Mbps mts files.

There's no end to this madness! Canon hopefuls wanted a 5D Mark III November 3 announcement but that'll be a routine preview of upcoming camcorders. The real deal will be in January 2012 and Photokina. That buys time to aid Huff's revelation about "dumping DSLRs." Life is too short to wait for products. Ya' want it now, get it!

Nevertheless, if 5D Mark III specs are enticing enough to upgrade its four-year-old predecessor, loyalists will stay with the bulky fullframe DSLR system and many M43 users will switch gears. If Canon misses the "Mark" so to speak, many could join the M43 camp for its smallness and lens lineup which will be massive by and at Photokina.

Some intrepid documentary filmmakers praise the small M43 system because they're able to capture footage without attracting attention and haul ample gear into remote areas sans backbreaking equipment. I hail M43 because it allows me to pack full HD video equipment, e.g., two bodies and five future lenses, as well as professional audio gear (shotgun, lav, mixer) and MacBook Pro or DSLR cage in one small carry-on rollable backpack. I can even strap on the forthcoming 3LT travel tripod. This has always been impossible until now. Hence, small is obviously better.

GF2 and LVF1

2011-10-01T11:09:00.000-07:00

The Panasonic Lumix GF2 is explicably limited for shooting video. The almost completely pre-programmed automatic movie mode thwarts most user manipulation. This is where its competitor shines, the Olympus E-PL3: total manual control when shooting videos! Tilting LCD! Internal IS!

Nevertheless, not only did I recently buy the already-obsolete GF2 but I also procured the already-obsolete and horrendously overpriced proprietary DMW-LVF1 electronic viewfinder specifically for the GF2 and two other outdated consumer cameras. Well, what's done is done and make do with it.

Manipulating d-o-f

The first method for depth-of-field control on the GF2 is to use the Peripheral Defocus mode found under the SCN menu. This mode blurs the surrounding area by prioritizing a wide aperture. The camera selects shutter speed and ISO which varies depending on light. The f/stop and shutter speed are displayed on the preview screen, but not the ISO, and no information is shown while shooting. That's not to say that the camera will shoot at the previewed aperture or shutter speed, but I think generally it will at least shoot at the prescribed f/stop, which is the whole point in Defocus mode.

For d-o-f influence, use SCN Peripheral Defocus for Lumix lenses and A for legacy lenses.

In my tests on a sunny day the Lumix 14/2.5 lens maintains an aperture of f/2.5-f/3.5 with a shutter speed up to 1/3200. Hence, in bright areas an ND filter is imperative to force the aperture at f/2.5 and slow down the shutter, yet maintain a non-grainy ISO. The 14mm lens works best on a close subject since it's tough to get bokeh at a wide angle. Alternatively, the Extended Tele Converter transforms this lens into a "normal" focal length, around 55mm (35mm equivalent), for deeper blur. f/2.5 isn't real fast, so the bokeh isn't dramatic. The Peripheral Defocus with AF spots a user-selectable area on which to focus and blur the rest, or focus manually to avoid AF searching. The small focus spot is selected by touch screen or dial. In this mode exposure compensation is possible but there is no selectable white balance. I surmise many functions are not user-selectable, which requires post-production fixes. Nevertheless, Peripheral Defocus with ND filter will henceforth be my default mode in most cases.

Fader ND filter: variable 2 to 8 stops by rotating the ring to keep a wide aperture, thin d-o-f, and non-grainy ISO in diverse light.

The second method is with a Lumix lens in aperture-priority mode and Flicker Reduction set to 1/50 or 1/60. The manual states

"The shutter speed can be fixed to reduce flicker or striping in the motion picture. Applicable modes: PASMC. [OFF][1/50][1/60][1/100][1/120]. Note - Shutter speed for recording a motion picture will be fixed to the selected shutter speed when settings other than [OFF] are selected."

Theoretically in A mode set to f/2.5 and with an ND4 filter and Flicker Reduction set to 1/50, the ISO becomes the priority parameter the camera will automatically adjust. I don't know if this actually happens, but the shutter speed is displayed in the viewfinder during shooting and indeed is fixed. And if it's in A mode the GF2 should stay on the selected aperture, even in daylight if there's an ND filter and keep the ISO low.

The third method for manual video influence on the GF2 is to use old fast legacy lenses with aperture ring and use aperture priority or manual mode on the GF2. The camera will select shutter speed and ISO, and allows for exposure compensation and selectable white balance. My long-obsolete vintage Canon FD 50/1.4 lens manufactured during Nixon's second term has pretty good bokeh wide open, although it's a bit "mystic" at f/1.4 but increasingly sharper from f/1.8 onwards. An ND4 filter during daytime gives added d-o-f manipulation in bright areas. This is a 100mm lens (equivalent), so handheld is precarious. Hence, with this lens set to f/1.4 and Flicker Reduction at 1/50, the ISO should remain low. An ND4 allows for daytime shooting with these settings, where the camera only selects the ISO.

Without shutter speed control on the GF2 (above) it's impossible to get the silky flow as the GH2 does (below).

Aftermarket electronic viewfinder

The GF2 is obviously better suited for the fixed-position touch-screen-focusing LCD on a Lumix lens. It's cumbersome for manual focusing a legacy lens and troublesome to do so at any angle other than dead on. So I bought the now legacy LVF1. It's a decent EVF, although fussy users say the screen is too coarse for precise focusing. There's some truth to that, but I find that it's OK for pull focusing and spot-on for pre-focusing via focus assist. Unfortunately, as with the GH2, the GF2 does not focus assist while shooting and there will be no firmware fix to do that. Because Panasonic releases an upgraded camera every four months, there's never a new firmware nor time for hackers such as Vitaly to release a hack with sought-after features. These days, firmware on products that have miniscule life spans stay with the original firmware eternally.

The LVF1 adjusts from zero to 90 degrees north (extremely useful for low-angled shots) and allows the eye to rest against the viewfinder for more stability. Furthermore, the diopter adjusts to my corrected vision via glasses whereas when I use the LCD I have to remove my spectacles, although the diopter knob doesn't always stay put....gotta adjust it periodically. The tilting ability of this viewfinder is stellar. Too bad the GH2 has a fixed viewfinder, although the LCD swivels. Thus, this EVF puts the GF2 one over the GH2. I find it's always better to shoot with an EVF.

Camera is what you make it

The GF2 has its place in the k9sound arsenal as a straight-ahead carry-around and stealth shooter. Reviewers always say the point-and-shoot products are for amateurs and novices, but I say you can do anything with it to go beyond that misguided concept. I can (and will) use this (and the GH2 and perhaps other devices) for my forthcoming documentary about technology. The days of taking big gear on sets with monumental preparation are over for us stealthy shooters. You can do a lot with small products and the setting is more organic (people put on a show when they see the big guns).

Software hype

2011-09-30T18:38:00.001-07:00

Two years ago I was excited about Propellerhead's Record release announcement and followed the updates regularly for several months. During that period I used the beta release and recorded a folk band during a live performance. The band ultimately used the tracks as their demo. The Record beta was excellent and the time-stretching was supreme, surpassing any other application including Pro Tools.

Come release date in September 2009 I reneged on my excitement to buy Record. I didn't buy it. Eventually I upgraded from Pro Tools 7 to 8, which had stellar time-stretching ability on par or beyond Record. Two years later on September 30, 2011 Propellerhead dropped Record altogether and incorporated it with Reason 6. Reason (version 4 is what I have) is the best MIDI software I've ever used and its Rewire feature makes it compatible with Pro Tools, which opens FCP6 projects via OMF. Hence, I can do a lot of creative audio stuff with FCP6, Pro Tools 8, and Reason 4, all yesteryear's old, outdated, obsolete software applications of yore.

Unfortunately, it's this trio combination that works so perfectly that I'm skirting all the upgrades: Reason 6, Pro Tools 9, and FCPX. FCP6 exports OMF (FCPX doesn't). Pro Tools 9 doesn't have anything I need over Pro Tools 8 and I bought Digitranslator two years ago. Reason 6 doesn't open OMF, so I'd still have to slave it to Pro Tools, therefore what's the use of having audio capabilities in a MIDI app I can't use? All this disconnect has killed software upgrades for me. What's worse is that I can still create videos with audio using three-to-five-year-old software and hardware, and what's totally insane is that even if I bought the latest MacBook Pro with upgraded software the results would be the same with the same resolution and bitrate: a video to post on Vimeo.

I follow the audio video tech industry closely. Perhaps too closely because the more I assess the virtues of the abundance of new products the less impressive I am because I always look at the end result: it has been the same for five years! A $7,000 investment will garner the same results with the same effort in about the same time.

For a while I was hoping FCP would offer native AVCHD editing. Apple finally incorporated that feature in FCPX at the expense of OMF exports, hence posing the question: Is native editing more important than Pro Tools editing? The answer of course is no, so I declined FCPX. FCP6 and Voltaic HD transcode fast. ProRes on the FCP6 timeline edits smoothly with no bumps on a legacy ancient MacBook Pro on its last leg.

Conversely, what I'd like to see in Pro Tools is offline bouncing and Avid says it's coming. But to what expense? I reckon the hardware and OS requirements would be too much for me for that one feature. (I can alternatively use Logic Pro 8, another antique application in my collection, which has an offline bounce). I spent/spend a lot on software, so if the industry wants my hard-earned currency developers have to stop compromising. FCPX is a bomb sans OMF and Automatic Duck is now Adobe. Reason 6 is a bomb sans OMF or some creative futuristic method to mesh with FCPX that I can forget about Pro Tools altogether. Pro Tools 9 has too many stipulations to use its much-heralded 'any interface' concept and all my soundcards are M-Audio anyway. My current trio works. The industry needs to collaborate, not fragment, the workflow!

Sensor sizes

2011-09-29T10:59:00.001-07:00

I've been reading on the Yahoo Doculink forum about potential interest in smaller camcorders, particularly the $2000 Canon XA10 and its consumer version the $1500 HF G10. This duo attempts to bridge the gap between DSLR and camcorder by offering a fast f/1.8-2.8 zoom lens with manual focus ring. There's a trend emerging for stealthy videography, particularly in questionable areas where filmmakers have been harassed, imprisoned, or nullified.

The XA10 seems to garner attention among documentary shooters because of its XLR inputs and 3.5mm inputs, whereas the HF G10 has only the 3.5mm input. The XA10's handle can be removed and it will essentially become an HF G10. The lens on both is the same: 30.4-305mm (35mm equivalent) with f-stops of 1.8-2.8. Both shoot 24p native at 24Mbps AVCHD, and have an LCD and EVF.

I think this is a significant step forward for camcorders since the DSLR is painstaking for run-n-gun audio. The bokeh from the 1/3 CMOS sensor is OK and at f/1.8 there is noticeable background blur at wide angles that was lacking in previous camcorders with slower lenses. Of course when zoomed in the bokeh becomes more obvious, but blur was virtually non-existent when zoomed out on original camcorders (everything was in focus).

Panasonic just announced the HPX250 which has a 28mm (35mm equivalent) wide angle lens but doesn't indicate f-stops. Panasonic has always been oldskool when it comes to apertures, using the "iris" nomenclature that usually doesn't have any bokeh affect. The sensor is 1/3 3MOS.

Canon touts the XA10 as a pro model whereas the HF G10 is categorized as consumer, but I think for the traditional camcorder form factor either of these can pull users from the DSLR crowd who are serious about audio. There have been fewer people shooting camcorders in recent months and some reviewers predict the demise of the camcorder. Obviously these naysayer reviewers have no interest in audio and are unaware that filmmakers simply do not care about supermegapixel stills capability on the DSLR. Ironically too many filmmakers who shoot DSLRs promote themselves as hybrid artists who can shoot both video and photography, but in essence are fairly stoic at both.

New gear, experiments, future

2011-09-22T20:17:00.000-07:00

Panasonic Lumix GF2

The GF2 has more exposure options in stills mode than in video mode. I knew that before I bought it, but I wanted something small and lightweight to fit inside my new tightly-packed Lowepro Pro Runner X350 all-weather DSLR rolling backpack. There is virtually no manual control whatsoever in video mode on the GF2. It changes ISO, shutter, and aperture (with Lumix lenses) according to lighting conditions. With a manual lens with aperture ring and adapter, such as Canon FD or Nikon AIS, you can of course lock an f-stop. ISO and shutter will still change but a set aperture allows depth-of-field control.

The Olympus ELP-3 seemingly has more manual control for videos because of the physical dial to lock the camera in movie mode and shoot in aperture priority. However, as with the GF2 the ELP-3 will still change aperture, shutter, and perhaps ISO according to lighting. The major caveat of the ELP-3 is its 29 minute shooting limit, although it now shoots 1080i60 (the first two models were 720p) and there is an aftermarket accessory to shoot with an external mic. So with these two competitive cameras what is more important?

Longer shooting times? (unlimited on the GF2)
External mic option? (ELP-3 has it; dual-audio with Zoom H1 on GF2)
fast 14mm lens? (on GF2; ELP-3 is slow 14-42)
Internal IS? (on ELP-3; lens IS on GF2)
Manual video? (possibly on ELP-3)
Cheaper? (GF2)

GF2 with Zoom H1 and shag

My original intent was to use the GF2 as a backup or second camera for the GH2 on audio-intensive video shoots where I can set both DSLRs at 1080i60 to prevent compatibility issues on an NLE timeline. I found, however, that the GF2 is convenient for carrying around town or wilderness trekking, especially with the tiny pancake 14/2.5 Lumix lens, which is AF with touch screen or manual focus. There is no mic input on the GF2. The internal mic is stereo and prone to wind noise. Eventually I'll get a WindCutter for it. Unlike its successor the GF3, the GF2 has a hotshoe to mount a Zoom H1 (I finally bought a Zoom H1 and is much more convenient than my old Zoom H2). My Plural Eyes trial expired, so until I get FCPX next year (which has built-in a/v sync), I manually sync audio and video, using time-of-day to approximate collaboration on the timeline.

Although no longer the smallest DSLR (the GF3 is), the GF2 is miniscule enough to fit inside a small waistpack for stealthy shooting. With the fast 14mm lens and automatic ISO in video mode, the GF2 shoots in extreme lighting conditions (from bright outdoors to dark indoors). The GF2 doesn't get high marks from fussy reviewers (70 points out of 100), but I'd give it a very high rating. The best camera is the one on the person, and the GF2 is an on-person camcorder because of its size.

Lowepro Pro Runner X350 all-weather DSLR rolling backpack

After several years of breaking my back with a non-wheeled Lowepro CompuTrekker AW I finally fetched a sturdy rolling backpack for video and audio gear and 15" laptop. This Chinese-made product with lifetime warranty has ample frills to hold a lot of gear. Theoretically it'll fit under a plane seat or overhead and allegedly meets TSA measurements for carry-on luggage. There are two noticeable sacrifices compared to a non-wheeled backpack: 1) the mechanism takes up significant space and 2) the mechanism adds significant weight. This beast is nine pounds empty!

The bigger x450 is obviously the better choice if you can guarantee that you'll never fly with it. The x450 does not meet TSA measurements for carry-on. You'll have to check it in and at your destination will be a backpack full of broken DSLR parts. Hence the x350 is an excellent compromise. Nevertheless, to compensate for the smaller space, Lowepro offers a variety of Slip Lock add-ons to attach to the x350 and comparable packs. I bought the S&F Audio Utility Bag 100 for wireless lavs. It's a two-piece system that unzips to create two bags that attaches to both sides of the x350. It swiftly transforms into a waistpack.

I also bought two Edit 110 cases, one for the GF2 system and one for audio cables and adapters. In my configuration, these cases attach underneath the Utility Bag and need to be elevated to clear the ground. Ultimately I was able to maintain the airplane-ready x350 pack but yet expand its space with Slip Lock peripherals when on land, which is more often than not. Nevertheless, I must be airplane-ready for faraway assignments.

With audio and video gear, laptop, tripod, and Slip Lock cases, this backpack is easily 40 pounds, which is OK since it'll be rolled at least 98% of the time. Uncertain if any of the straps can tolerate such weight, but Lowepro offers a lifetime non-transferable warranty and I will hold them accountable for any failure.

Zoom H1

I planned to buy the 2-channel H1 when it was released two years ago but didn't really need it since I already had the 4-channel H2. But the bulkiness and odd shape of the H2 finally spawned an H1 purchase that's more practical with the GF2 dual-audio and as a backup recorder for the Sound Devices MixPre on professional sound-for-video shoots.

The H1 is stealthy for field recording and as usual the mics catch a lot of wind noise so I ordered it with the shaggy Mic-Muff. The muff is useful in mild gust but eventually it'll shed to smithereens. I always keep plastic wrapped around the shag when stored to prevent it from catching onto something and ripping apart.

As reported by users the H1 has a plastic tripod thread underneath but it seems sturdier than what most fussy users complain about. Attaching to the GF2 and GH2 required buying some cheap hotshoe swivel mounts from eBay sent directly from China. The H1 doesn't have a menu structure or dial, so to do certain things depends on what buttons are pressed while turning it on. It has the 48/16 resolution I need (among other resolutions) and manual level control (with auto-level option). Recording mode is one-touch, convenient while on a hotshoe, and a hold switch prevents accidental stop when in a bag during pro gigs. The sound quality is of course excellent, so no qualms there.

ambient speech with internal mics

One unexpected convenience was the ability to swiftly remove the H1 from its hotshoe and place it front of a PA amp to capture close sound (as opposed to ambient) for this video.

H1 and GF2

WaCru DSLR cage

The caveat with overpriced Zacuto and Red Rocks DSLR cages is they have too many "features" I don't need and in fact interfere with my innovative MixPre mounting system. I don't want sliders, shoulder mount, or other crazy stuff, and I'm not concerned what Philip Bloom uses. Bloom doesn't have to innovate a mounting system, but I did and the WaCru is compatible with my design. All I wanted was a pro quality and sturdy DSLR cage (not the flimsy DIYs sold on eBay that look like hell) that has solid metal to accommodate the GH2, Zoom H1, Sennheiser shotgun mic, Sennheiser lav receiver, Litepanels, and of course the MixPre, in addition to future gear.

Again, referring to eBay for its cheap, unique direct-from-China products, I was able to procure six hotshoe adapters for the WaCru to mount peripherals when on pro sound-for-video narrative sessions. The WaCru is appropriate for steady shots on my Bogen tripod and for shaky handheld run-n-gun grabs during precarious moments such as violent protests.

Powerfilm foldable solar panel

The time has come to be able to shoot in remote areas off-the-grid as documentary producers and sci-fi feature filmmakers shoot in the bush. Wilderness sessions weren't possible before because power-hungry laptops and video gear needed 120vac. DSLRs, Mac laptop, and low-voltage dc-powered devices don't require high-voltage alternating current.

With the 20w, 15.4v, 1.2a panel that weighs about two pounds and folds 7"x11"x1" and an intermediary battery such as the sexy HyperJuice (which has overcharge protection) or stoic lead acid, you can shoot, offload, edit, and recharge far from civilization as long as the sun is up. Hence, choose your location and season wisely. I recently did a multiday experiment in Yosemite and had ample juice to do all my tasks without being near an outlet. I took a large tent, folding table, and chair which served as an editing station even during rain. Of course I slumbered in the tent too on a portable cot and sleeping bag. In the past I could not accommodate rustic rural sessions, but now I can.

18.78 volts with no load

recharges from solar panel, powers MacBook/Pro/Air with custom Magsafe cable

Globetrotter blogger suggests this $30 Chinese 12v li-ion battery from eBay, although some commenters say the PowerFilm won't charge it because of the battery's internal protection circuit.

Apple is innovative to create efficient laptops and not-too-demanding video editing software that keeps a strong battery churning for hours. You can shoot and do rudimentary edits in the field. No need to wait to get home before formulating the piece. If something is missing, you simply go outside and shoot the scene. Later at the base suite you can add the heavy stuff such as effects and Pro Tools processing.

powers MacBook/Pro/Air from 12vdc source

Avid and Adobe ignore the needs of the adventurous filmmaker, emphasizing gigantus power-hungry computers and suites with massive hardware peripherals such as Matrox and Aja. That's fine for old skool of yore, but the future is mobility, not confinement in a dark room.

dark and gloomy

light and airy

production house for Roots and Webs

Gobi Crossing relied on solar power during a 1,000 mile trek with an 11" MacBook Air.

k9sound suite in Yosemite

eBay has opened the flood gates for unconventional products, and the GF2/GH2 dc charger for $6.99 is a big asset to shoot video without packing a thousand-mile-long extension cord. This particular model, obviously unsanctioned by Panasonic, is designed for the GF2 battery, but with minimal effort (such as a small crumpled piece of paper) it will also charge a GH2 (both batteries are exactly the same voltage, same width, and same connectors, the GF2 being just a tad longer physically). The unique eBay charger runs off 110-240vac or 12-24vdc, meaning the PowerFilm will drive it directly to essentially operate these two DSLRs from the sun. It also means I only have to pack one charger when on international treks. Why Panasonic could not make such a universal charger is beyond me.

Too many companies are locked inside a small box, not catering to outside thinkers and tinkerers. For anybody who wants to do things eccentrically you have to tap into your own creativity and not rely on status quo. It's really a disgrace how boomers took over filmmaking and the internet and pass their old ways to potential innovators. How can people look to the future if mentors are from the past? Essentially there is no such thing as "wrong" or "error", only experiences which often lead to vicissitude and success.

Contour HD wearable camcorder

The company of this playful device targets sports aficionados and is a direct competitor to GoPro. But unlike GoPro, the Contour is small and stealthy, particularly because of its elongated shape. It's also cheaper, especially on sale. Mine was $139 out the door! (Apparently a clearance price). It comes with an attachment rig to adhere to a surface such as a helmet and another apparatus to strap onto goggles. My attempt to buy the headband accessory was futile, so I used the goggle mechanism to strap to a headband. That works fairly well and reviewers say the dedicated $20 aftermarket headband is unnecessary.

Unfortunately for Contour, GoPro apparently has more revenue to fuel venues such as Best Buy, REI, and Sports Basement with a prominent glass display and accessories bin, prompting impromptu purchases. Nevertheless, the Contour HD is totally capable and shoots 1080p30. I presume the mic is inside because I don't see a hole, and its audio recording is OK.

Aside from jovial uses the Contour is appropriate and stealthy to record police brutality at protests and other street animosity. It's somewhat heavy on the head but it records effective video and is easy to turn on and off without looking. The lens is wide angle but fussy reviewers complain about the lack of stabilization. An easy solution for that is to keep your head steady like a zombie, just look straight and never turn.

What does all this gear mean?

If there's any pattern to these recent procurements, it's small, portable, stealthy, and mobile. For me the days of relying exclusively on local gigs are nearing an end. I need to jump onto opportunities that might transpire elsewhere. There seems to be an increase for professional sound recording in remote areas and although I've had windproofing mechanisms for several years, it's been sparingly utilized because most gigs were in controlled, pristine environments.

My focus remains on sound services for filmmakers for revenue, but I also want to examine my own documentary and sci-fi reality possibilities. I'm not a DP per se so even if I had a massive Canon 5DM2 system I probably wouldn't qualify for those filmschool gigs that fussy producers want. The Micro 4/3rds systems is miniscule in comparison and does two things: 1) shoots acceptable if not stellar video and 2) fits into my tight packs shared with pro audio gear.

I've experimented in the woods with my a/v array, camp gear, and solar setup and had success in shooting emo footage and editing in remote areas. There will be a lot more action in rural areas either as crew or for my own projects.

I've never been much of a bigger-than-life social media marvel and don't carry the internet with me 24/7 like most more-important-than-thou people do. In fact I'm drastically downsizing tech and am sparingly "connected". Sometimes I'm offline and out of reach several days in a row, and there will be longer days of absentia to concentrate in the wild. My objective is to produce video stories focused on perception and imagination.

MacBook Air and FCPX

According to this blogger and this shooter, Air and FCPX work fine. The fussy users who complain about lags are those who don't envision what a portable setup truly means. What it means is that if you're out in the field shooting a doc or sci-fi reality video, you can offload footage and start putting together the piece while on-location. The story line can instantly be formulated and if you need to shoot more to fill any story line gaps, you go shoot it. Save the hard-core post-production work for the big suite at home.

The major snafu with today's shooters is they need a lot of effects to compensate for their lack of imagination and vision. They can't put together a video with footage alone, and will tax a MacBook Air with a horrendous amount of resource-demanding plug-ins and very few raw clips. These folks don't need a lightweight laptop since they're urban hipsters. More suitable is a hefty desktop computer in a dark suite equipped with all the latest power-hungry dazzling software and hardware to create luscious imagery. More dazzle, less story, and a helluva lotta flower footage!

I plan to buy Air and FCPX and run faraway with it. Skeptics say I will fall flat, but that's fine if I do...I will savor the experience for good or bad. The main thing for me is to go out in the world and do something crazy, totally insane! No limits.

Soundman anatomy

2011-07-22T19:17:00.001-07:00

Unlike DPs, soundman are not vetted and are hired on a 1st come 1st serve basis. The standard protocol is the producer calls, soundman picks up, soundman gets gig. If there's no answer, the producer leaves a message but keeps calling the list until there's a live answer and hires that person. The other soundmen, which are abundant, call back to leave a message, but essentially the gig's been filled and that's the end of it.

should soundmen sit by the phone?

The smart soundman sits by the phone because he has no skills other than sound. He picks up the phone on the first ring because it might be a gig or it might be a defaulted creditor. So he'll either accrue revenue or expend currency, but it's better to take a chance and answer the phone since there's a 50% possibility of the call being a gig.

are all soundmen alike?

Yes, they use the same boom (Sennheiser 416, Sanken CS-3e, Rode NTG3), lavs (Sennheiser, Lectrosonics), and mixer (Sound Devices, Wendt). The soundman himself might have a slightly different aesthetic than the other soundman, but that's merely a superficial departure.

are sound duties generic?

Very generic. Unlike DPs who can play with angles and settings, capturing sound has the same technique across-the-board. Boom over and in front of head. Lav on lapel or in cleavage. Soundman stands far away from the DP's view, gets in nobody's way, and does not speak.

they are the bass players of sound?

Word! When John Entwistle of the Who died during a tour he was eulogized and replaced in the same breath. The show must go on! That's how it is with soundmen, too. Except soundmen don't die. He lives forever safely next to the telephone.

Hire me for video production sound, not post!

2011-07-22T13:28:00.001-07:00

While posting an ad on Craiglist and Creative Cow, I contrived a chart of sound snafus that can be rectified during production but mostly hopeless in post-production. Producers and DPs evidently do not fathom location sound and even so-called professional audio creators grapple with their productions.

bad scenario 1

Using a low-output dynamic mic with a high-noise preamp is a recipe for disaster. There's a 100% guarantee that the signal-to-noise ratio will be very tiny, maybe 2-to-1, and perhaps 3-to-1 on the lucky side. I normally don't care about these things but unfortunately these jobs end up in my inbox. I often recommend the Shure SM58 for location sound with the stipulation that it requires a strong preamp. The 58 is abuse-tolerable but has very low-output and the dynamic coil can is prone to picking up radio frequencies. If RF isn't a problem, the 58 will sound stellar on a low-noise preamp.

bad scenario 2

Out in the field in the Bay Area I often observe DPs and videographers shooting with no foam or only foam over a mic while the wind is gusting heavily in all directions, and of course no headphones to monitor the snafu. Furthermore, this is oftentimes on-cam but occasionally and unknowing "soundman" will try to capture audio with a foam boom in undesirable conditions. I can only envision the sound that appears on their NLE in post-production. Unusable. Just don't call me to fix it because I can't.

bad scenario 3

Shooters who don't adorn headphones while recording can't hear anomalies such as wireless interference, echoey room, distant miking, distortion, no signal, or any of the two dozen common sound production mistakes in addition to the virtually unlimited sonic snafus that can destroy an otherwise good intention. Most of these errors cannot be fixed in post. The best case scenario is voiceover, and even then that doesn't ensure quality sound depending on the mic, preamp, or mouth technique.

my approach

Fed up with these frustrations, in my latest advertising campaign I am requesting that people hire me for production sound instead of post-sound, the rationale being that if a producer needs to pay somebody, why not front those funds for guaranteed usable sound instead of hit-and-miss (usually miss) in post. If it's the same price, pay for good.

Here's the blurb verbatim on Craigslist and Creative Cow.

------

If you're going to pay someone, why pay to try to have something fixed in post when you can pay to have it recorded properly in the first place. I'm talking about production sound, and you (producer) and I (soundperson) are both sick and frustrated trying to fix troublesome audio in post-production that was poor from the onset.

Here's a chart of major caveats I've encountered over the years. It's unbelievable that krappy-sound still happens! I can do everything in the green column, so send me an email right away or visit my website. DO NOT contact me if you have snafus in the red column, proceed to next soundman.

enlarge

ART SPLITComPro: 2 > 3 channels

2011-07-18T02:25:00.000-07:00

cheap hack

The ART SPLITComPro ($23 at B&H) is a low-cost passive mic splitter and combiner with four XLR inputs and outputs. It's a significant improvement over its predecessor which only has three XLR inputs and outputs and requires gender converters to use as a combiner. The newer SPLITComPro replaces the transformer with a capacitor circuit to isolate the secondary channel that blocks phantom power. Only the main channel passes phantom power. This deficit has no effect when combining receivers to a location mixer.

The SPLITComPro is a decent hacker tool to combine two Sennheiser wireless lav receivers to go into one channel of the Sound Devices MixPre, reserving a boom for channel two. Each receiver has an AF output control and each transmitter has a mic sensitivity control. By making adjustments on the four devices unity output can be achieved. This adheres to the SPLITComPro instructions that recommend using identical mics. There is a notable but unadvertised 10db insertion loss. Fortunately the MixPre has adequate gain to compensate without introducing the noisefloor. The MixPre preamps are very low-noise and the noisefloor isn't noticeable until 4 o'clock, so there's plenty of headroom because the receivers' gain is less than 12 o'clock. This hack won't work very well with low-output dynamic mics and crappy preamps. The signal-to-noise ratio would be extremely low.

Generally in a three-channel configuration two lavs go to one channel and boom to another. It would be self-defeating to do otherwise, e.g., lav#1 and boom on channel 1 and lav#2 and boom on channel 2. There would be no way to separate the boom from the lav in post-production.

The caveat with combining two lavs is the crosstalk between two persons. However, that is an editorial concern but if I am afforded any say in the matter I would recommend the interviewer not talk over the interviewee. But my job is technical, not editorial, so if the two talk concurrently that won't affect my duties.

saves $1300

Hence, in lieu of expending $1300 for a 3-channel mixer the SPLITComPro allows 3-channel emulation from a MixPre. Furthermore, because I also record to a backup Zoom, it's possible that the DP can shoot untethered in a dual-audio scenario for utmost visual creativity. What's not to like? Three channels, untethered, cheap, all good.

Maybe in the future when funds are available I'll buy a Sound Devices 302 ($1300) or Wendt X3 ($1150). Initially the 4-channel Sign Video ENG-44 ($529) was on my wishlist but user reviews were marginal. Ultimately the ENG-44 was discontinued and perhaps it lacked professional quality. It was not recognized by DPs or producers, so it wasn't a gig-getter.

be frugal

In my audio and video service I don't ever envision doing 6-channel surround sound projects or interfacing with camcorders that have more than two inputs. In fact, multi-channel productions are usually hifalutin feature films where equipment requirements far exceed my hacker run-n-gun gear. Hollywood-type jobs are reserved for upscale veteran globe-trotting soundmen who have been in the business for decades and need to support family, mortgage, and lifestyle with substantial revenue. The few opportunities that exist or will exist are earmarked for nepotism. Outsiders don't get in.

The type of gigs that I garner are local, indie, non-profit, or self-financed endeavors with compensation adequate for my needs. There is no travel or adventure, oftentimes not even lunch. Surprisingly I've also worked on projects funded through grants or sometimes sponsored with decent revenue. That's not to say these are high-paying gigs since I have cheap overhead and no liabilities. Comparatively, what a doctor makes in a month I'm lucky to make in a year, if it's a good year. So I can understand why post-production workers are upset that FCPX will put them out of business. C'est la vie.

Working on low-cost projects has its perks. I've seen DPs hack together a system or shoot with very little gear, essentially a camcorder and tripod with no backup. The DIY movement is in response to cut-throat gear prices, and lot of these backyard inventions work well. Filmmakers have to be frugal these days.

Lavs in wind

2011-07-15T18:43:00.001-07:00

These days it's common to record interviews outdoors. In fact, as video gear becomes smaller and more portable and producers want to venture out, this trend could spike, and k9sound wants to be there. I've done a lot of outdoors sound-for-video since HD came onboard in 2006. All conditions are different and each shoot has its specific challenges. There are always challenges! At no time is everything smooth...ever.

Unlike camcorders, DSLRs, and NLEs, sound gear improves slowly and incrementally. There's not much difference between today's and yesterday's lav. The Sennheiser G2 wireless lav has been in production at least five years and was superseded by the G3 in 2010, adding a diversity antenna to the receiver. The G3 will remain current for several years.

No lav comes with a truly functional wind-thwarting apparatus. Those items are aftermarket and the accumulated expenditure can be pricey. Most shooters don't make that investment, and even some sound people don't, but their location possibilities are narrowed. I wanted to assure I can shoot in any condition within reason, and if the wind is too overwhelming then advise the producer that no amount of gear can rectify the snafu to garner usable sound.

Mostly I emphasized the boom for outdoors: shotgun mic wrapped in a Softie inside a blimp covered with a shag. If that can't stop the wind, nothing can, and I've had some gust leak inside the blimp while shooting in Tildon Park in the Berkeley hills.

I also surmised that the wind up there is thicker than in San Francisco, where often a Softie will suffice. At Tildon, the boom made it, but the lav didn't. Some lav sound was usable, but not all.

There aren't many options for wind-resistant lavs. Rycote has some products as does WindCutter. I procured a variety of WindCutter screens for lav'd outdoor sessions. These foam covers are a lot bigger than WindCutter shows on its website.

I'm still trying to figure out how to mount the foamed lavs onto the clip.

Surprisingly, the foam ($4.55 each) does well. I was never a big fan of foam, but the lav itself seems to be very enclosed. Hear a comparison between foam and non-foam:

The WindCutter standard lav fur ($24) is OK, but not as effective as it should be for the price and the hype. I think this is about as best as it can be but there should be a baby ball gag for lavs.

Again, these furry windscreens are a lot larger than WindCutter shows on their website, and I haven't been able to find internet photos of these windscreens with lavs. These fur screens shed, as do the Rode Dead Kitten ($25) and the Sennheiser shag below. It'll take a while for any of these to shed beyond effectiveness, with the Rode being the most likely to lose fur first. Conversely, the Rycote Softie does not shed. It's a different design.

There's an attached gold safety pin on the standard fur. It should be black.

My collection of WindCutter products:

left to right: lav mini fur, lav standard fur, stick-on for the GH2, two lav foams.

The ultimate system, unfortunately, is not a well-covered lav but a well-covered boom. The caveat is that a boom can seldom be close enough to the mouth and thus picks up ambient sound.

Generally for outdoors, audio is gritty and ya' just gotta accept it. It's not a studio. Far from it.

Sonic snafus

2011-07-13T20:24:00.001-07:00

The best thing about doing sound-for-video is that gear has longevity and stays current much longer than its video counterparts. The caveat is that there isn't any development to improve capturing on-location sound. The endeavors require aftermarket gear, innovation, a thorough understanding of sound, and improvisation.

My second visit to record an interview in Berkeley's Tildon Park wasn't as smooth as anticipated, especially I already did sound there previously. Tildon Park is notorious for constant and strong winds, especially around Inspiration Point where videographers like to shoot. Scenically the setting is OK, but not stunning. When shooting tight, it could be difficult to distinguish Tildon from any other city park which will have less wind but more inorganic ambient sound.

I used the ultimate windproof kit and yet some wind got through. A Sennheiser MKH416, wrapped with a Rycote Softie, inside a blimp, covered with a shag, and positioned on top and in front of the interviewee. Perhaps the caveat is that she spoke softly, Sarah Shourd, which diminished the voice-to-ambient ratio. The shoot was for the Sierra Club.

The Sennheiser G3 cardioid lav sounded stellar when there was no gust, but those passages were sporadic. It's possible the editor (and DP) Javier Saldena will select clips based on the good lav audio, otherwise settle with the boom sound.

Compare the above to my previous experience at Tildon.

Overall, the G3 lav has the best sound but was thwarted by wind. It's possible that a WindCutter fur screen could have made the lav sonics usable. I planned to order that shield ($24) for the G3, but had to wait for available currency, and surmised the 416 would do the dirty work as it has before.

The boom audio is usable but gritty. With some EQ and music it will be more than acceptable. Furthermore, perhaps the ambient sound, which is all organic, gives a feeling of "location" while watching the video. If not for the lav, I would have thought that near-studio quality sound wasn't possible in that environment, but it could be with the proper apparatus. Nevertheless, I captured the entire interview, it's not peaked, and the words and message are loud and clear.

The WindCutter lav fur screen has been ordered and is enroute for the next outdoors interview. In the Bay Area outdoors narration is common and winds are guaranteed.

Makin' do

2011-07-09T21:09:00.001-07:00

Being in video/sound and any other art form is seldom lucrative. There might be an extremely small percentage of people in corporate settings who can be artful and sustainable to maintain family and house, but that's the exception. Life-threatening occupations such as doctors to prolong corporeal existence and law-related jobs to put us in the slammer and take us out are the only two essential bigbucks professions with longevity.

Video/sound is pretty much on the bottom of the list for revenue and most ads on Craigslist, Creative Cow, DVXuser, etc. offer credits and no cash on an emo film few will watch. Who reads credits anyway? Usually nobody!

I just sold a lot of junk at the flea market that were leftovers from idealist days of an aspiring starving musician and project studio aficionado. (Many people are closing up their project studios and selling all the gear. The 10-year run on this trend has evidently ended). Unfortunately I could not sell everything since much of it is outdated. My plan was to reinvest accrued currency from sales into sound-for-video endeavors. Because planned revenue did not materialize I had to dig deeper into DIY innovation to shave potential costs.

The first thing I did was cut the Halo Rig Mini ($130) from my budget and devise a DSLR mounting scheme using two low-cost BestBuy mounts. It does the job although it's ugly, cumbersome, and fragile, but suitable for tripod narratives.

I anticipated buying an Audio-Technica AT803b ($140) wired lav for use where wireless is unreliable. Again, because I couldn't raise ample funds I had to delete that from my wishlist. Hence, I revived an obsolete Radio Shack 33-3028 tie-clip stereo omni mic that I procured 12 years ago for a minidisc recorder. By soldering Radio Shack jacks to an XLR connector, I configured the lav into mono to occupy one channel of the Sound Devices MixPre. In a side-by-side sonic comparison to an AT899 wired lav, the RadShack is comparable and suitable for professional interviews.

When the MixPre-D was released in February 2011 I was somewhat enthralled that a MixPre sequel was finally compatible with DSLRs. After careful assessment I surmised I don't need the $750 MixPre-D and instead contrived a mounting and electronic system to properly interface with the GH2 DSLR. I browsed Cole Hardware to figure out how to do this and told salesmen to leave me alone to analyze.

Being piss-poor in a marginal artistic profession, I have to carefully assess my needs and budget. Spontaneous spending is a luxury reserved for doctors and lawyers with $600 per day incomes. A good sound gig might fetch half that and come around once or twice annually.

When I read posts from big-spender filmmakers and hear expensive shop-talk at industry seminars, I always wonder if people are actually earning bigbucks or if it's just tough-talk with deep debt. Many so-called pros who preside at workshops and webinars or sit on panels are usually yesterday's experts who focus excessively on the one or two super projects of yore and refer to celebrities on a first-name basis. To the celebrities these broods were merely one nameless crew member so it's not like anybody's buddy-buddy. Mostly, however, these moles are hired to promote expensive products during their presentation.

I've had gigs from alleged millionaires who had a tough time paying my indie rate, so I'm certain a lot of people talk tough but can't produce cash on an invoice. We're all artists, and I know all too well it's not the most lucrative profession. More people need to attest to the facts and get behind their jejune shield.

DIY DSLR bracket

2011-07-07T21:44:00.001-07:00

I almost clicked an eBay offer for the Halo Rig Mini, and the seller would include a hotshoe mount (allegedly a $20 value) for $130 with free shipping. What was attractive about the unit was the price, design, and facilities to mount numerous devices: Litepanels, 416 shotgun mic, Zoom H2. What stymied me to forego the purchase five hours before the offer expired was the inability to mount the MixPre.

The tripod interface looks particularly precarious. That'll wobble:

DSLRs were not originally made for video, resulting in a third-party frenzy to make expensive DSLR-specific products such as Zacuto and Redrock, then send sponsored gear moles (e.g., Philip Bloom et al) to promote the apparatus on forums. DSLR filmmakers are completely lost when it comes to peripherals, so they always seek guidance (tutorials and webinars garner megabucks) and buy what the moles recommend. Everybody's happy: mole gets a cut, company accrues super profit, shooter goes further into deep debt.

DSLR products are expensive, which doesn't mean they're useful or will get gigs. When searching for a rig, mainly I wanted a method to mount devices and incorporate my MixPre hack. I considered this cage on eBay:

The seller makes these with Home Depot components and definitely looks it, but he didn't design it. It's based on a YouTube video. A lot of DIYers make and sell these with household parts. This particular seller could benefit from better photos, but even so, the rectangular design is a bit rambunctious and unwieldy, and probably still won't mount my MixPre.

My objective was a simple design for tripod mounting. Too many cages have features I neither want nor need, e.g., panning, low-riding, sliders, shoulder-mount, etc. My intent is mostly standard interviews and oral history sessions with no pans or zooms.

I already had a $16 Sima video bracket made of metal that I bought from BestBuy in 2009. I surmised two of these together might serve my purpose.

When I went to BestBuy again, the Sima was swapped for a Dynex. Still $16 but unfortunately made of plastic.

To prevent a wobbly tripod interface (see Halo above riding on a knob) I bored holes in the mounts, modified a quick release plate, and secured the hack to the GH2 with a 1/4"-20 screw. The weight rests on the plates. Screws that go into the MixPre are hard nylon to avoid electrical contact: two small screws on the bottom and one 1/4"-20 on top with some masking tape to prevent slippage.

This DIY setup is appropriate for stationary sessions but doesn't seem durable for run-n-gun. I've used an earlier version of this configuration for an oral history shoot with one bracket and no Zoom.

After all this peripheral and wirey mess, there's still a dormant hotshoe for another device. Furthermore, I can incorporate a Cool-Lux to add another hotshoe.

As with all DSLR rigs, this system is top-heavy yet lateral and somewhat wobbly. As cumbersome as DSLRs are, the benefits of interchangeable lenses, low-light shooting, effective aperture control, etc., outweigh using a camcorder. Of course for run-n-gun, I simply mount a self-contained mic and use ambient light, or sometimes use the internal mic (with permanent Windcutter) and call it a day.

How is this transported? It's dismantled and packed. Because of its bulk and precarious shape, it's not readily transportable as is. The best-case scenario is in a private motor vehicle with a dedicated space to absorb movement. Otherwise, I usually unpack and compile outside before entering the venue since I need to concentrate on details which is best done without distractions. The process takes about 20 minutes. Conversely, I repack outside after the session. Of course in bad neighborhoods nothing is done outside since getting jacked is likely. Just got to do my best to compile inside amid distractions.

Bring on Veaper

2011-07-06T21:06:00.001-07:00

It's overwhelming to assess all these video NLEs made by companies that start with A. Adobe, Apple, and Avid all have NLEs that suck badly in many ways. Adobe and Avid are expensive. Apple's new FCPX is simply bunk. Is it possible to transform bunk into pro? I don't think so.

Although Reaper didn't take the audio world by storm in a big way, it set the precedent to say 'f*ck you' to the big expensive audio sequencers. It's time Reaper tell NLE makers to 'eff off' and create Veaper, an affordable, constantly updated, independent video NLE that'll send all the As to the back of the bus.

Instead of making a decision right here right now which NLE I will use, I'll continue with an obsolete copy of FCP and see what transpires in 2012 or 2013. Perhaps Veaper, or some other indie NLE with pro features, will appear and I can call it a day.

Reaper does a lot of pro things for audio recording and editing. It's got a slightly different method of editing (they all do), but it gives Pro Tools et al a run for its money. Pro Tools remains on top of its game as the industry standard (for 20 years), so that keeps audio pros on one application and makes compatibility universal.

But if audio was as screwed up as video (video editing is completely rouge and fragmented) with no definitive leader, Reaper would likely be among the top three pro sequencers. My synopsis: Pro Tools, Cubase, Reaper. Apple plans to dumbdown Logic Pro like it did to Final Cut Pro and will become GarageBand Pro. I don't think there's a future with Logic Pro.

Conversely, if Veaper ever materializes, I surmise the top three pro NLEs would be: Media Composer, Premiere Pro, Veaper. FCP is history. Nevertheless, I will wait it out and use what I have for a prolonged duration. Video editing is neither my priority nor revenue generating. It's at best a secondary function where the client needs a video of what I shoot, irrespective of what I use to create it. The NLE world is topsy-turvy and post-production services are on the top of Yahoo's list of doomed industries. Both FCP and old editors will fade away very soon.

Hopeful shooter meets gat shooter

2011-07-06T18:05:00.000-07:00

A shooter responded to a high-end video gear ad on Craigslist in hopes of acquiring equipment for a filmmaking project. Instead he was robbed of $2,000, assaulted, and pistol-whipped in broad daylight on a residential street. Even with a felony at hand, the cops merely said "Let us know if you see the perps again. Have a nice day."

Craigslist is a precarious free ad service stuck in the 1990s. Any fool can post or flag an ad. I've been advocating for the old skool site to offer paid service ads that are vetted and cannot be flagged. Imagine responding to a 'crew wanted' ad only to be jacked of all that precious gear.

Be vigilant

Nevertheless, there are ways to prevent being stymied when applying and arriving for a gig.

Cops always say to use common sense. Their common sense is packing heat, and they are never without a gat. Should you listen to somebody who is always armed? Of course not!
If you don't know the producer or get the lead off Craigslist, ask questions beforehand, e.g., what the movie's about, who's the crew, where the staging area is, and website clips. You can get a lot better indication of sincerity by talking on the phone.
If there's a pre-production meeting sans gear, that's even better and attend without much cash or cards at a public venue such as a cafe, preferably during daylight hours.
If the Craigslist producer is putting together a crew, ask for emails of some crew members to organize logistics. A soundman will want to know the DP and interfacing configurations anyway.
Be observant at the staging area. If it's at a venue, large office building, decent neighborhood, or busy public setting, it's probably OK.
Upon arrival at the site, turn off the radio, get off the phone, and tread wisely, maybe scope it out before unloading gear. Too many crew members are too relaxed too soon with their guard way down. It if feels precarious, it is precarious. If it's in a bad 'hood at night, your ass is grassed.
If you work with a turnkey there is protection in numbers, but there's also more gear, and likely more perps. Maybe spread out a little instead of grouping together like sheep. Use walkie-talkies, which are often used on the set anyway.
If it's a mult-day shoot, the biggest risk should be the first encounter, but perhaps not. Be cautious on consecutive days, but by then you should know if something is fishy or not.
Just as you don't know if the producer is up to something, the producer doesn't know if you're up to something. If everything's on the level, everybody should chillax and assure it's all good.

Craigslist is bad news

Akin to the lad above, buying off CL can be extremely precarious. Realize that people have often been jacked buying gear and killings have occurred from people responding to CL ads. CL is notorious for crime. Perhaps the aspiring video buyer was hoping for a Canon 5DM2 to launch a filmmaking career. Instead he has nothing. If he still wants to be a shooter he'll have to slowly save up from his barista job and maybe buy gear in a year or two when he has the dough, or charge it and go deeper into debt to China.

It's tough to blame the victim, as naive as he was. Perhaps the perps are good at texting or if he talked on the phone they were convincing actors. Chances are the criminals don't even live in Visitacion Valley. Maybe they know Wilde Avenue is not very wild and is empty for a quick score on prey while residents hide in the sand or are not home. Hence, as the lowly victim is in VisValley looking for evil, the dudes are in the Western Addition buying crank and paying for sleazy sex on the vic's dime!

Craigslist is real bad news for item transactions, and it's the high-ticket products that attract the culprits who want a swift one-off transaction for lotsa loot. Motor vehicles are particularly conducive to robbery and it's easy to get jacked during the test drive or while showing the car.

Sip coffee, be safe

OK scenario to buy/sell video gear: meet at a public venue such as Starbucks during busy daytime hours. You can even go it alone, but do not be talked into a street meeting. Complete the transaction but don't leave together. Wait 10-20 minutes before venturing outside, and go directly to your transport and get out ASAP! You'll have gear or cash on you and the other person knows that.

Sell publicly, no tricks!

But I have the ultimate selling solution. Sell at the flea market and advertise expensive wares on CL, Facebook, and Twitter. There's hardly a way somebody can jack at the flea market. There are too many people, a security staff, and no easy way to position a getaway car or establish an escape route.

You won't sell pricey products to passerby at the flea market. Buyers have to ask for them, and I've had a lot of success in selling that way at the San Jose Flea Market while the items remained in the car until the sale. I use CL to advertise several days in advance, telling the time and venue. I also setup a Twitter account with mobile settings and write on the Flea Market Facebook wall.

On sell day, I have a laptop and wireless modem card to update CL, Facebook, and Twitter. Buyers come and ask about the gear. I sell it for cash, then Tweet that it's gone and update CL. The buyer has several hours to come over and buy the stuff if it's still available.

Although it's still possible to get jacked, it'll take some serious logistics to contrive an elaborate heist among many witnesses and surveillance cameras. How do I respond to emails asking to meet before Flea Market day? Ignore them. They might be sincere, but they can also be perps. Serious buyers will meet on my terms with cash not guns.

Avid, Adobe slated to kill FCP!

2011-07-01T08:16:00.000-07:00

Avid responded to disgruntled FCPX users by extending the Media Composer crossgrade until September. The previous two-month $995 pricing ended June 17, a few days before Apple released the lackluster FCPX (aka iMovie 'pro'). With Avid's extension (July 5 - September 30), there's plenty of time to see if Apple responds with FCPX updates that are truly pro. It puts a lot of pressure on Apple, otherwise come September 30 or sooner, the pro editing community could shift from FCP to Media Composer.

Not to miss the action, Adobe saw Avid's extended offer and jumped in with their 50% off sale for Premiere Pro ($799) not just for angry FCP users but offered to Avid editors as well. The combined crossgrade sales will surely dissolve FCP by September 30. With FCPX catering to "tweeners" (YouTubists who are more iMovie than FCP), the entire pro editing community has absolutely no reason to switch to a more appropriate NLE with the opportunity to ditch Mac computers as well. After September, the battle will be between Avid and Adobe, while Apple patronizes beanie-baby editors who use ifones to shoot home movies. (This is what Apple is banking on? iBabies can get by with the $79 Premiere Elements 9.)

k9sound has no plans to go anywhere. Because editing isn't a priority, I can continue to use FCP6 (released April 15, 2007; obsolete July 23, 2009) as long as clients only require the finished product: a video on Vimeo. Not only does this prevent a $1,000 crossgrade expenditure (which might not be possible for technical reasons) but also spares a $2,500 investment on a new MacBook Pro. Total "savings" = $3,500 on stuff that won't remain current for more than a few months.

Production audio gear lasts well more than two months. It'll stay current for years or decades, akin to the Sansui stereo receiver 1010 and Realistic Minimus-5 speakers, the heart of my living room DAW, which sound stellar and don't break.

Nevertheless, when it is time to revamp the editing suite, it could be a PC application (Media Composer, Premiere, or maybe an indie app [how about Veaper?]) on a Windoze laptop. If the required results are the same (a video on Vimeo), there's no hurry to change anything. Long live FCP6!

With a dumb-downed FCPX, Logic Pro becomes Apple's most professional product, which was rumored to be terminated in favor of GarbageBand 'pro'. I'm sure Logic Pro will downgrade into consumerism. Ironically I've returned to Logic Pro temporarily over Pro Tools for relatively simple reasons: offline bounce (Avid says Pro Tools will offer this soon) and playback mutes an armed track (can't rehearse without recording). I'd prefer the former over the latter, and that's the only reason I don't use Pro Tools fulltime. The latter can be done with the existing mix knob, albeit cumbersomely.

Other than these two anomalies, Pro Tools has better editing processes, especially with sound-for-video envelopes (aka keyframes in video). So losing Logic Pro won't be disastrous, and I can remain with version 8 (released September 12, 2007; obsolete July 23, 2009). I had a good run with it, but Pro Tools has been top dog since 1991. With Apple going down and Avid/Adobe going up (reverse of the millennium decade), FCP, Logic, and Macs can bid adieu.

Audio-Technica repair; USPS vs UPS

2011-06-30T19:16:00.001-07:00

When my AT4050 howled badly and needed service, the only thread I could find was from early 2009 on Gearslutz where an AT4033 repair was $78. I was hoping the 4050 repair would be in that ballpark, but it was a lot more.

This invoice shows $40 labor, $180 element replacement, and $22 shipping for a whopping total of $242 (add the $12 I paid to ship it to AT, total is $254). The ATUS service form is not very useful other than telling you it'll cost $30 for AT to look at the mic. This fee is applied to the cost of repair, otherwise you lose it and have to pay $22 shipping for a total of $52 for a useless mic.

I forgot to indicate “call for credit card” when I sent the mic, so AT debited my card right away and shipped the refurbished mic back to me. If I did indicate “call for credit card” I probably would have approved the $242 but likely would have added a one to two day delay. AT is old skool so they ship UPS by covered wagon. I'm not a big fan of UPS ground because it's slow, makes many transfers, and doesn't ship during weekends. Notice it stalled in Kentucky for more than two days! Also that it was out for delivery at 6 a.m. and didn't get to me until nearly 4 p.m.

Compare the pony express to USPS when I shipped the mic to AT. It only took two days (not two days sitting in a horse stall) and a half-hour from arrival in town to the recipient.

Anyway, the mic is fixed at a cost and I finally identified the mysterious snafu that stymied me on many sessions, having tested cables, preamps, etc. to figure out where the evil was in the chain. The AT4050 finally coughed up when it howled like crazy on several preamps.

The AT4050 seems almost as warm as my Neumann TLM193, and has the added advantage of three polar patterns: cardioid, omni, and figure 8. When assessing which one to sell, I decided to keep the Neumann. Perhaps that will haunt me in the future, and surely any possible Neumann repairs will be extremely costly. My only hope is that German engineering surpasses Japanese engineering and the Neumann has longevity without needing repair. Neumann is also easier to market when vying to record voiceovers for film.

Having closed up the project DAW for sound-for-video the Neumann remains one of my few products that carry over to my new endeavor. Before I sold the AT4050, I recorded some tracks to help sell the mic, guitars, and Carvin amp.

Fender Jazz Bass, Carvin amp, AT4050 cardioid:

Godin Acousticaster, Carvin amp, AT4050 omni:

Ibanez Mikro, Carvin amp, AT4050 cardioid:

Sennheiser MKH416

2011-06-28T14:14:00.001-07:00

For years I recorder production sound with a borrowed Sennheiser MKH416, an industry-leader on-location shotgun mic that has few challengers (Sanken CS-3e for pros with bucks and Rode NTG3 for low-cost renegades). Thanks to a legitimate eBay seller I fetched my own 416 at a decent rate.

In my setup the 416 with the Panasonic GH2 DLSR requires phantom power from the Sound Devices MixPre, which I mount underneath the GH2. My first tests were done outside at a very noisy street festival. Hear how the GH2's automatic gain control (AGC) responds to a signal coming off the MixPre (which never hit the limiter). AGC brings foreground and background sounds to unity, compromising the directionality of the 416. For serious shoots, I'd dual-audio to a Zoom recorder with manual level control to exert true directionality of the 416.

When used indoors, especially in tight quarters, the 416 is less effective because sound bounces off the walls. With AGC the 416 mimics a cardioid mic, as talkers to the side and back are more pronounced than they should be. However, ambient noise remains quelled. The video below is part of the Crossroads Irish American oral history project.

For comparison, here is an oral history project shot with the Sennheiser ME66 connected directly to the GH2. The ME66 is known or scorned for its hi-mid peak.

External video recorders - no thanks

2011-06-27T15:20:00.000-07:00

Sound Devices, known for paramount on-location audio recorders such as the MixPre, has jumped into the video recorder fray with the PIX 220 ($1600) and PIX 240 ($2600). These ProRes recording devices join nanoFlash ($2900), Ninja ($1000), and Ki Pro Mini ($2000) that appeal to videographer connoisseurs who need/loathe high bitrate video files.

Of course, these devices are not without caveats.

They are extremely expensive. Most require additional pricey peripherals such as harddrive, CF card, batteries, and mounting hardware, easily an extra $500-$2000.
Likely the HDMI output from DSLRs and camcorders are not clean, being jumbled with icons and text. These recording devices are essentially hacks.
Recording 24p is desirable, but rare. Most DSLR HDMI outputs, if clean, are 60i. The GH2 is reportedly clean. Fortunately, deinterlacing in post-production with Compressor is easy.
Run-n-gun? Forget it! External recorders are totally cumbersome, adding weight, bulk, and wires to an already precarious system.
More stuff to be concerned about when it comes to shooting (gotta activate this device to shoot, in addition to the camcorder), power (gotta watch battery drain), environment (these units are not sealed), babysitting (these units are fragile), etc.

I haven't seen anybody using external recorders in the field. There is way too much gear to attend to as it is, let alone adding another unit. I think most external devices cater to well-funded production companies that can afford on-location teams.

Although I would be enthralled to have 100Mbps ProRes files, for web distribution that is overkill. And after having seen my 17Mbps 60i AVCHD files projected on a big screen, I surmised that less-than-mega bitrates are acceptable. Operatives such as the BBC and Discovery require super HD because of revenue garnered from advertisers, sponsors, and subscribers, and send their teams out with at least an AF-100 and not a DSLR.

The gear I take to shoot interviews as a one-man crew is already insane: GH2 DSLR, MixPre, Sennheiser 416, Litepanels, Manfrotto tripod, headphones, and a backpack of extras and just-in-case peripherals. And this is a single-mic shoot! Add a wireless lav and I'm outta space. Nevertheless, it looks as if I'll have to procure the $130 Halo Rig Mini.

Unstable industry

2011-06-23T12:52:00.001-07:00

The video and audio industry is evidently unstable. Apple's June 21 release of Final Cut Pro X was met with remorse by so-called oldtimer veteran pros. After 10 years of expensive and expansive peripheral investments such as AJA, Boris, Automatic Duck, etc., oldskool editors are upset that FCPX is an enclosed ("walled garden") application. Granted, an enclosed app can make it difficult but not impossible to collaborate with other editors. In fact, relatively newbie editors are already collaborating. The file-sharing procedure is different than FCP7 and earlier.

I think this is a generational snafu, with oldtimers' jobs on the line in an outdated industry. Apple bought FCP from Macromedia more than 10 years ago and built an entire professional system to sell high-end computers. Third-party vendors jumped in to capitalize on the profits and everybody was happy and phat. Those days are over, according to Yahoo:

Calling Cut on Video Postproduction Services

One of the least publicized industries in terminal decline is video postproduction services. This field encompasses everything needed to prepare a film for distribution after the cameras have stopped rolling (or in the current age, after that little red recording light goes dark on the video camera).

Why the decline: Consolidation in the entertainment business is to blame. Movie studios are moving post-production in house. Meanwhile, technological advances have boosted efficiency -- as anyone who has seen the controlled chaos of a traditional celluloid cutting room versus the neat efficiency of digital editing software can attest. The results:

• Decline in revenue last decade: -24.9 percent.
• Forecasted decline in revenue in the next decade: -10.7 percent.
• Forecasted decline in the number of establishments next decade: -37.8 percent.

Conversely, the "walled garden" approach allows indie and newbie editors to work natively on a MacBook Pro with footage from a DSLR. Oldskoolers gripe that FCPX caters to hobbyists and YouTubists, but it won't be long before renegades take FCPX and run with it, creating stellar and popular movies and starting FCPX production companies. Just as audio project studios (aka DAW for digital audio workstations) cut into the marketshare of pricey commercial studios, FCPX threatens oldskool editors, especially with newbies on the cusp of producing wicked flicks frugally. Apple says you don't need all that overhead anymore and there is one blogger thus far who tends to agree.

Avid had a $999 crossgrade to Media Composer 5.5 that ended four days before FCPX was released. Those who want to bail from Apple are vying for a repeat sale to bid FCP adieu. Avid also blew it on Pro Tools 9. When 9 was released the big broohaha was that 9 ended the messy segmented versions, e.g., HD, LE, and MP. Avid toted three versions: HD, Native, and PT9 for any audio interface. As far as I can tell, there are now four versions: HD, Native, PT9 for any audio interface, and MP9 for M-Audio interfaces. It's again somewhat confusing, but for my three M-Audio interfaces MP9 is $200 instead of the previous $350. Early adopters often pay a premium on new software releases. If there's no hurry to upgrade, always wait for the hype to dissipate and prices to drop.

Ironically, the big attraction for PT9 is the ability to use any audio interface such as RME, so I won't buy PT9 unless I buy a different audio interface. Although PT9 comes with OMF support, because I bought Digitranslator in January 2010, I don't need PT9 for that purpose and can stay in business using PT8.

In fact, software upgrades these days seem to be more incremental instead of stellar. Reggae artist Lasana Bandele attends many Avid events to talk tech with people and hubnub, but he's creating top-notch Rasta music on Logic Pro 7, which was released September 29, 2004. However, I found that the upgrade from LP7 to LP8 was somewhat significant, but I can't say the same for LP8 to LP9. Hence, I remain on LP8, released September 12, 2007.

Future k9sound upgrades

I'm in no hurry to upgrade anything. Besides being piss-poor, upgrades seldom seem to be as stellar as the hype. Amateurs and techsumers embrace constant upgrades to enhance their stoic lifestyles but those who are actually working and creating product in the industry with old gear are fine staying locked into outdated systems. The end result is the same and nobody significant can detect or give a hoot about what version was used in its creation.

My long-been-obsolete 2008 MacBook Pro is max'd out at 4gb RAM. 64-bit software and Lion are useless on this outdated machine. The main attractions of FCPX are native rendering and built-in PluralEyes. Because my main gig is production sound with old and vintage equipment that doesn't break or go obsolete, a post-production system is not vital. Native rendering would be a luxury for my purposes. PluralEyes is more vital for my dual-audio gigs, but at $150 I won't buy it. If I need to sync massive dual-audio I'll buy FCPX for $300 with integrated sound sync and surprisingly my MBP still fits the system requirements. Nevertheless, all these upgrades can wait.

Sound Devices MixPre-D

Another industry blunder is the MixPre-D. I was initially enthralled with this $750 field mixer mainly because of its physical and electronic compatibility with the GH2 and other DSLRs. But I was able to rig my current MixPre to mount and interface with the GH2 by doing some easy and near-no-cost hacks. Thus, it was the MixPre-D that spawned the effort to modify my MixPre.

Using the MixPre-D photos and asking questions on DVXuser, I was able to create my own mount and use an existing pad to convert the line-level output to a mic-level output. DVXuser had photos of an opened-case MixPre and a user explained how I can open the case to drill holes. By hanging out at Cole Hardware I discovered strong nylon screws and nuts to use in my hack since the MixPre is so tight inside that metal screws would make electrical contact with the circuit board , surely to short-cicuit.

Another company that's asking for a paid upgrade is Amadeus. Fortunately paid Amadeus upgrades are rare, but it seems all these upgrades are coming at the same time. Is the economy getting better? Or worse, that companies desperately need revenue?

More appropriate appropriations

By not expending currency on non-essential software and computer upgrades, which go obsolete within months, and by hacking my mixer, I prevented thousands of dollars going nowhere. I assessed what was missing in my sound-gear arsenal and snagged a deal on a Sennheiser MKH416 shotgun mic on eBay and a Sennheiser G3 diversity wireless system from ProAudioStar. Both these items will stay current, last several years, and most importantly will help me get gigs, as opposed to expensive junkware, which gets me nowhere.

below: First sounds recorded with the Sennheiser MKH416, MixPre, and GH2. Hear how the GH2's AGC responds to a signal coming off the MixPre (which never hit the limiter). There are some off-axis shots in the video. For serious shoots, I'd dual-audio to a Zoom with no compression.

Street smart videography

2011-06-16T20:54:00.000-07:00

These days there seems to be more revenue and notoriety in teaching and endorsing products than there is in shooting or editing. Many respected big names are more involved in doing seminars, webinars, and workshops, and sitting on panels than actually performing the tasks they teach in classes. These folks are armchair shooters charging up to $5,000 per student per session and oftentimes appear on internet forums openly or clandestinely promoting their wares and products. What's truly unfortunate is that in the ever-changing landscape of videography it's difficult to learn contemporary specifics from successful people of yore using yesterday's gear. And if these teachers don't have deadlines to meet and productions in progress, they can't feel the pain of those on the streets. In addition to individual teachers, organizations are capitalizing on this expensive trend. SFSDF, BAVC, SFFS, Xpression, etc., offer back-to-back classes year-round.

I'd be cautious about investing for many reasons. Firstly, there needs to be a time sooner-than- later to break from academics and venture into the real world. Secondly, even with years of training no classroom study prepares anybody for the unexpected and on-location chaos. I've worked with lot of certified DPs who totally freaked out over changes in the itinerary or circumstances in the field. Thirdly, you'll make mistakes even with years of academic hypothetical education, so you might as well skip skool, stay out of deeper debt, and jump right in. Fourthly, being an over-trained zombie thwarts innovation and creativity, always at the mercy of a mentor to explain what to do and how to react to situations. There are many lost people these days who think they can't figure out things for themselves, having been conditioned to pay others for guidance.

The 1960s laid the foundation for free thinkers. There are too many names to mention but one comes to mind: Jimi Hendrix. Not only was he a stellar axeman, but as a producer his approach was so new and innovative it sent his bassist and producer out the door. Hendrix' producing style was based on improvisation and he constantly rolled tape. That was tough for players who needed study time, but 40 years after his death some acceptable takes of these sessions are now being released. Hendrix touched ground where nobody has treaded before.

These days people who copy more than innovate produce mediocre, often overproduced videos with unnecessary technological annoyances. After all, why spend all that dough and time on skool if you don't use it. Which goes back to "don't go to skool." If you don't know something is "wrong" (according to yesterday's "experts") then you'll do it and it could be "right", a la Hendrix.

Get out of a rut!

2011-06-12T20:36:00.001-07:00

This article says that Asian men are the worst on the planet and cannot get dates. This category of nerdish dudes is in such poor shape they can expect to live a lifetime of being perpetually single. Unfortunately some lowly Asian men are upset about this proposition. And worse, the real losers agonize over being a social dud instead of focusing on their strong points.

Dating oftentimes leads to the cumbersome burdens of marriage, family, boredom, stuck in a jejune job, and dire straights when the economy tanks. A lot of Asian men are money chasers setup by their parents to pursue almighty US currency. The geekish Asian or Asian American male seems like a stereotype but a lot of dudes become software engineers or other hi-paying nerd profession so they can become rich and support a future family with tons of kids and bills. Undatable Asian men who can't join this "party" have an alternative major area of expertise: the freedom to experiment and take risks!

Filmmakers and musicians live on the edge but do what they want, whereas office pogues with baggage only dream about being a pro shooter. Accruing currency from artistic activities is rare and there are constant financial uncertainties, usually surviving gig-to-gig. The upside is that if this is what you want to do, then do it! Those sans family and debts are the best candidates to embark on an exciting pursuit that has limitless opportunities if you're able to take chances and be flexible. Being responsible only to yourself can propel you from the dismal ho-hum cubicle to a vibrant existence of fulfilling life and being happy.

Quality video gear isn't cheap and camcorders and DSLRs constantly evolve. Production runs are in the months, not years. Producers embrace the latest gizmos to highlight in marketing campaigns that showcase astuteness of cutting-edge-technology. The indie-pendent videographer needs to stay attuned to gear changes and upgrade regularly to be marketable. Oftentimes paramount products appear on the used market at bargain rates which usually requires swift action, e.g., BIN on eBay or an offer on DVXuser payable immediately. Getting gigs is often first-come first-served, so you've got to be able to commit and be on the set at the designated time and place. None of this is possible if other obligations take precedence or you need approval, in which case a stoic daily job is more appropriate.

However, it seems that the dateless Asian nerd has other, perhaps previously unperceived, options. The article is a godsend. It essentially says the gates are open and it's time to follow dreams.

Another mic bites the dust

2011-06-10T12:48:00.001-07:00

There's something to be said about the short popularity of HD video camcorders and DSLR models: they will go obsolete and be e-cycled before breaking down. These devices will be lucky to be in use for five years, with three years being the record thus far this millennium with the Canon 5D Mark II.

The same cannot be said about audio equipment. Top-notch mics and preamps should last decades, and I know my Sennheiser MKH416 and ME66 are at least 10 years old and my Neumann TLM-193 was probably created during the Nixon administration (that's 1968-1974).

There are always challenges to the proven old skool mics, but the newbies simply can't keep up in one way or another. My latest mic to bite dust is the "highly acclaimed" Audio-Technica AT4050/CM5.

This mic howls like a dog and I tried two preamps to confirm the snafu. I think I've heard this mic make trouble before in my project studio and while recording the radio drama "The Realtor and the CEO" but could not pinpoint the culprit. I thought it was the cable or Hosa snake, but alas it was this mic that caused all the havoc. Listing for $699 new from Sweetwater and B&H, I bought this used on eBay 14-June-06 for $264 plus $10 shipping. I guess I can't complain because it might have gone through hell before my ownership and it sounded good for about four years in my studio.

Its lifespan was longer than my previous mechanical failure, the loser Rode K2 bought 19-Aug-04 for $541 on eBay and sold for junk a year later at substantial loss.

I had planned to keep the AT4050 as my sole side-address mic (closing up the project studio) because of its triple polar pattern (cardioid, omni, figure-8) for voiceover recording. I sold my other two side-address mics, the AT4033 and Neumann TLM-193 on eBay. I bought the former 30-Sept-05 for $195 on eBay and just sold it on eBay for $157.01. I also sold the TLM-193, an eBay purchase from 1-June-06. However, the L.A. studio engineer who bought it requested a refund because it's really old with old characteristics.

I won't site details or prices (let's just say Neumann mics retain value and then some), but as destiny goes it's good it was returned since the AT4050 broke down. I will leverage the Neumann as an excellent voiceover mic that "thwarts sibilance and mouth cacophony."

Audio-Technica requires $30 plus shipping for a repair estimate, the $30 applied towards the repair or forfeited if repair is declined. From the get-go, that's a $45 expenditure (with $15 shipping/tracking). I figure the sum of repair (at least $200) plus the $274 I originally paid plus shipping equals around $500. After repairs I'll be lucky to fetch $350 for this on eBay (and pay fees) or Craigslist. These mics are $490 new with free shipping on eBay. Uncertain if I'll call it a day on this mic or have it repaired.

Over the years I bought a lot of junk gear, especially low-budget/big-hype products, e.g., project studio gear, with cheap mics and preamps being the most painful to the ears. Even big-budget mics ended up being hell, so it's important to interpret marketing blurbs. Here's what Sweetwater writes about the FET AT4047: "This mic is absolutely smooth on vocals, treating them with that natural presence boost. It rounds transients slightly, adding a silky overtone to most voices, which is perfect for when you want the singer to stand out in the mix." The catch phrases here are "presence boost" and "stand out in the mix." I wasted $313 on the AT4047 because it's an all-out treble mic that boosts sibilance and lip-smacking. This mic is akin to playing a Telecster through a Fender Twin with presence on 12! I owned the 4047 for three years but fortunately did not lose a lot on it when I sold it to an unknowing soul. So watch out for phraseology ("good for the price") and reviewers who downplay caveats ("forgiving" polar pattern on a shotgun mic). Be weary of project studio stuff that has poor sound and can't be used professionally.

I was further stymied by the AT3060 tube mic that didn't have any warmth. I took a $200 loss within a year on this deceptive mic that Audio-Technica promoted at the onset (it has a tube, whoa!) but discontinued after a couple years. If there's any consistency it's that AT mics are not very good, even the expensive ones. The other brand that has a questionable inventory is Rode. Aside from the K2 failure, the NT5 matched pair I'm selling is OK in some cases and not in others. Rode caters to casual users and is popular with DSLR shooters who aren't sound savvy. I need mics that sound good everywhere all the time for revenue-accruing gigs.

To give Rode some credence, I own a pair of NT3 handheld mics that are flexible (9v battery & phantom power) and appear to be sturdy with usable but not magnificent sonics. The $99 Shure SM58 and SM57 dynamics, even those made in Mexico, have a decades long reputation that work well directly into my GH2 DSLR. They have low output and require a strong preamp for successful sound.

Professionally I need to stay with the old skoolers that have proven to be durable and long-lasting with excellent sonic quality. My Sennheisers, Shures, and Neumann are the only ones in my mic arsenal that fit the bill.

Sound snafu and gear

2011-06-08T20:35:00.001-07:00

As a soundman I can never get too comfortable thinking that even the simplest gigs will be snafu-free. I was on a recent shoot accompanied by a dedicated interviewer/audio recordist doing an interview for an oral history project. My duty was to shoot video, but I wanted to experiment with the sound.

My rig was comprised of a Sennheiser ME66 shotgun mic, Sound Devices MixPre, Pansonic GH2 DSLR, and Zoom H2 recorder. Lately I've been getting occasional hum from the ME66 and I could neither pinpoint its origin nor duplicate the anomaly in my home studio. This snafu transpired in two previous similar interview gigs and in front of City Hall outside. My intent with this rig was to monitor sound off the MixPre and solve the mystery.

After a quick setup I was ready to shoot video and audio. All was well until the interviewer plugged in her Marantz recorder and turned it on. The hum in my cans was loud and clear. There was no time to fidget as we were ready to roll, so I engaged the low cut (80hz) on the MixPre. I just had to resign to fixing it in post because I needed to concentrate on the visuals, using a prime manual focus lens.

I prefer to stay disconnected from AC and I think the Marantz, which derived its power from the strip plugged into an AC wall outlet, emitted 60hz RF that the ME66 picked up. I've been reading about RF interference and that certain mics have RF filters, such as the Rode NTG-3 and Sennheiser MKH416.

In fact, a few days prior to this session I tried to trade the ME66 for a Rode NTG-2 thinking the hot output of the ME66 raised havoc with the GH2 and produced hum. Because I was monitoring off the MixPre, the GH2 was not the culprit. I surmised that the ME66 is receptive to RF and that also explains the hum I heard at a City Hall press conference, with wireless signals everywhere.

Using an Izotope RX plug-in with Logic Pro, I was able to cut the hum from the interview.

During the last segment of this interview, both the MixPre and ME66 bass rolloffs were engaged, as well as the Izotope in post. It sounds thin, but at least it's clean.
[video will appear here soon]

Why not the NTG-3?

The ME66 isn't high enough on the shotgun mic hierarchy to have RF rejection, so I picked up a 416 on eBay by clicking BIN for $650 shipped, including AT8010a shockmount. Just a few days earlier I had a great opportunity to click BIN for a Rode NTG-3 at $575 shipped. I was tempted, and even had some regrets after someone else snagged it. I think I did OK for $75 more by getting the 416 because there is one noteworthy deficit the NTG-3 has that prompted me to wait for a 416 bargain: polar pattern.

A lot of users say the NTG-3 is a serious challenge to the MKH416. Perhaps it is in many respects, and it is a decent buy for $699 new. NTG-3 supporters say the wider polar pattern is "forgiving" and allows the shooter to go off target without losing dialog. That's kinda krazy because the biggest complaint from filmmakers and producers is the annoying ambient sound that clouds dialog, particularly in uncontrolled environments indoors or outdoors and especially in run-n-gun scenarios.

"Forgiving" doesn't kick it for me. I need a tight pattern and as a soundman or shooter I will follow my target faithfully. I've often used a borrowed 416 in crappy conditions and it always served me well, with usable dialog and attenuated side and rear noise. Although I embrace new technology (e.g., GH2) to challenge old skool (the 416 is very old skool, at least three decades), Rode doesn't seem to cut it in most cases.

In my project studio I bought a low-cost Rode K2 tube mic. It sounded good when it worked but the power supply went kaput after only one session. I have a matched pair of NT5s which generally sound OK, but again Rode must have cut corners on pencil mics because sometimes on acoustic guitar they sound like hell. One producer I worked with on a live concert with Zepparella said he's heard of the NT5 but never used them and for good reason. They were just OK as drum overheads for Zepperella.

Shotgun mics

Rode has become the mainstay for low-budget DSLR shooters and continues to patronize this niche. All the rage is about the VideoMic, VideoMicPro, NTG-1, NTG-2, and NTG-3, always with the stipulation of low-cost and "good for the price." What's wrong with just "good?"

At first glance it appears there are a lot of shotgun mics on the market but only a handful are acceptable for truly professional circumstances. It's nearly impossible to try out every mic, so sound people have to rely on testimony and listen to actual samples by watching documentaries and movies. All those "tests" on YouTube and Vimeo are mostly bunk because these are not reality situations; it's usually a dude sitting in front of mics at a safe distance in a quiet room or setting. I've engaged a couple of these "testers" to no avail.

(This is my reality test for the ME66....

... with contrary audio).

So when I went hunting for an alternative to the 416 before I bought one, I found an excellent documentary using the Sanken CS-1, a cardioid shotgun mic. I had kind words to say to the soundman and his reply was that the mic is too short, too bright, and not very directional. Although the movie sounded stellar, the interview shots are tight (aka close-up, mic was probably "in yo' face") and I reckon he toiled in post-production to clean up the sound. The CS-1 was on my wish list before I realized that a strong directional supercardioid mic needs to be long.

Professional sound persons say the Sanken CS-3e is the closest challenge to the Sennheiser MKH416, taking into consideration sound quality, directionality, durability, and resistance to moisture. The CS-3e sells for $1415 at B&H compared to $995 for the 416. I have not seen a used CS-3e on the market.

When people denote quality, it almost certainly is based on "warmth." I think warmth and "muddy" are often confused, but in either case the mic is adding color to the sound. Unlike the recording studio where transparent audio is often called for, transparency is not an objective in sound-for-video. But I'd be careful of fake warmth on cheap mics where the high end is simply cut off, akin to a low-end preamp that doesn't have enough umph to get clean and clear high end, so the makers chop the frequency response.

I had an opportunity to work with a Schoeps CMIT 5U and was captivated by the sound quality. It sounded more real than a lav, almost like a mic up to the mouth but it was over the head.

Unfortunately, the Schoeps fails in durability as pro users say it shuts down in less-than-perfect environments, especially moisture. This is real bad news for doc shooters who don't have the luxury to redo a scene and who cannot always anticipate conditions of the next shoot. The Schoeps cost $2,000 but I think that's way too expensive for something that needs babying. Again, it's hard to beat the 416.

Of course there are other mics and some sound people use other Sennheiser models, Audio-Technica, DPA, Shure, Sony, etc. Surprisingly, Neumann doesn't get rave reviews for its shotgun mics. People always say you have to try out a mic to make a decision, but there is no place I know of where you can audition shotgun mics (or any mics) and compare them side-by-side. Even if there were such a venue that carries numerous lines, a pristine room does not represent reality. Hence, the best source is user reviews and movies from professionals out in the field who are not sponsored by mic makers.

Switching gears

2011-06-01T00:01:00.000-07:00

Now that the main thrust of my project studio gear has been sold on eBay, I can reflect on the trials and tribulations and what to expect in my exclusive endeavor as an on-location sound-for-video specialist and shooter/soundman.

The hardest part of being a project studio engineer is to emulate a commercial studio. That's not possible, and I knew that during the 15 years of operation. The acoustics are bad, with room noise and ambiance, whereas real studios are sonically-treated to deaden refractions and of course to quell external sound from entering.

Contemporary example of vocals in a pro studio:

The project studio does not have the luxury of pristine sonic control. The venue is airy, there's room tone, and outside noise gets in. The best I can do and afford while still maintaining a living space was to erect two Auralux Max-Wall panels. It's not soundproofing. The main intent of the dense foam is to thwart refractions.

The other element to try to achieve near-studio sound is gear. Too many companies capitalize on the DIY trend and promote cheap and bad-sounding products specifically for the project studio, especially mics and preamps, two crucial components in the vocal recording chain. For several years I was stymied by cheap equipment, constantly upgrading as frustration increased, deceived by low-cost "tube" mics and preamps that had no warmth. Ultimately, expensive Neumann and Audio-Technica mics, Grace Design preamps, and RME a/d/a converter resulted in the high-quality sound I required. None of these products cater to the project studio.

The sound file below is perhaps the best sonics I can get in my project studio. It's neither bad not perfect, so imagine what it would sound like with typical cheap stuff. You can't even produce demos with junkgear because it makes the performer sound bad. In a competitive industry bad musak doesn't get gigs and the performer remains invisible.

In retrospect the Neumann TLM-193 mic, which has a flat response, might have been overkill to quell sibilance. Here's the same track with a 4 db increase at 5.1 khz:

In the 1950s before overdubbing was developed musicians often recorded live in hard rooms with ambient miking instead of close miking. The sound is airy and distant, which was acceptable back then. These days people prefer a more intimate sound, but the roomy aura of yore has its place in a historical context.

The project studio might always have its place for cheap recording, especially for DIY musicians who want to build their craft and listen back to their tracks. My synopsis is that serious performers should shun the project studio and pay for a commercial recording session with its paramount gear and pristine rooms.

Ironically the project studio movement attributed to the demise of commercial studios. There are only a handful of pro recording venues in the Bay Area and they aren't booked all the time. The upside is that certain days and hours can be affordable for the serious musician with flexible hours.

The music industry, especially indies, has always been ambivalent. In essence few succeed. Bay Area bands such as Beth Waters, Kulica, and Jolie Holland had their moments then disappeared or moved away. The currently popular Rupa and the April Fishes with its multilingual gypsie-ish frontwoman can be bygone tomorrow. The rare bands that stay together long enough such as Native Elements can gig regularly as long as their members hold day jobs. It's equally worse for those who studied music recording. Ex’pression College graduates are well-versed in Pro Tools to no avail. With hefty student loans and no other skills, aspiring engineers seldom get audio jobs and have to hustle for pay.

Ironically I accrued some revenue through audio engineering. The time, effort, and finances I invested reaped personal, professional, and monetary rewards. I was there for the fledging indie movement during the MP3 explosion, and I was ready when podcasters needed my services. Those trends dissipated when HD video emerged that needed sonics, and now onto the sound-deprived DSLR. Hence, my studio endeavors aren't just dormant, but pretty much DOA, with just enough leftover gear for voiceovers.

I am now concentrating on location sound-for-video and post-production audio-intensive video which has its own set of challenges and specialized equipment. From the onset I invested in top-notch products that proved itself professionally from the first gig and is still in operation today and will be in the future. No more trial and error with cheap lackluster gear and constant upgrades. Furthermore, location sound takes me away from the confines of a stoic room and exposes me to the world that requires a large chunk of journalism know-how to effectively interact with people and get the story. The sound is gritty but acceptable. This is real world stuff, not holed up in a foam-padded cell.

Revenue from the sale of the Grace Design preamps, RME converter, and Neumann mic have been reinvested to sound-for-video devices lacking in my "gear arsenal." Specifically a diversity wireless lav (Sennheiser G3 band A), my own [not borrowed] phantom-powered shotgun mic (still pending: Sennheiser MKH416; Sanken CS-1, CS-2, or CS-3; Røde NTG-3; or other hi-end mics); Audio-Technica AT803B wired lav, WindCutters for all the lavs for outdoor use, and Avenger C-stand with removable base for easy transport.

There are still lot of pro audio possessions and musical instruments that need to be sold for re-investment into sound-for-video or to save during dry periods. Rack gear, guitars, amp, redundant products, etc., should fetch significant revenue once unloaded this month at the San Jose Flea Market progearsupersale.

2much talk

2011-05-28T11:35:00.000-07:00

Obviously this is an election year in San Francisco because so many politicians are babbling more than they normally do. Many videos I submitted to local blogsites are rejected because of all the long-winded banter that lingers like fog.

I tried to be diplomatic with this video by putting in some background musak, but the talk is very prolonged, and this particular politician is known for consistent non-stop chatter. Ironically, the video is only half of what actually transpired.

When I was shooting the video below about Small Business Week I was trying to figure out if any of these rambling politicians had a significant message. Perhaps the only vital information was the part about small businesses paying taxes (city revenue). Some talkers hyped up the hiring aspect, but most independently-run establishments maintain minimal personnel, so obviously it's simply lip service to say small biz helps cut the unemployment rate. The awards are kinda patronizing too, but if it makes the recipients feel good, gopher it! Anyway, I trimmed down the banter and added lotsa musak.

I'll continue to shoot politicians and speech-heavy protests but will edit the banter to minimal and increase the musak and even drown out jejune talk when appropriate.

Audio demands always in flux

2011-05-17T01:52:00.000-07:00

I jumped into studio digital audio at its onset back in 1995. Sixteen years later it's time to jump out. My current focus is on sound-for-video, where after being spoiled by good studio-quality audio, capturing location sound is often acceptably gritty.

After careful assessment, I don't see myself doing ADR or continuing studio-quality audio recording, so it's time to unload some boutique gear which has been mostly dormant recently. Two Grace Design 101 preamps, RME ADI-2 a/d/a converter, Neumann TLM-193 mic, and Audio-Technica 4033 mic are all up for sale and will be gone soon. It's somewhat sad because the technical quality of all this savory gear is supreme. The clean, rich, and full sound of this system is paramount. It deserves to be in a soundproof studio, but it even sounds good in a bad room. I know that because I've often used this equipment in bad rooms: echoes, room noise, and background sound in homes and offices plagued the full potential of this chain. My intent, however, was to get the best possible sound irrespective of environment. I think I achieved that goal, and can only imagine how horrible cheap gear would sound under the same conditions.

Most of the 90s were tough times for audio engineers. Back then, MIDI was the craze where music creation entailed synths and soft synths and not much else. It wasn't until MP3s, fast computers, and broadband around 1998 that spawned musician websites and a DIY recording trend among singer-songwriters. The DIY stuff was technically fair to OK. The serious singers sought professional audio engineers. I know all this because I worked for an mp3.com competitor as a web editor and listened to hoards of CD submissions.

I was busy the first few years of the millennium recording singers with my boutique gear and Pro Tools or Logic Pro. I also helped other DIY recordists by setting up their systems, including the much-ignored compressor to limit peaks. Distortion was common among the DIY crowd who didn't fathom dynamic range.

When podcasting emerged in 2005 I was mic-ready and at its initial stages I was the only one on Craigslist offering podcast recording services. Consequently I acquired numerous clients, including working on a weekly radio show. The consensus was that the sonic quality was very high.

Listen to a professional podcaster using the Neumann TLM-193, Grace Design preamp, and RME ADI-2 in an echoey room (converted from raw AIFF to MP3 without enhancements).

The podcasting trend was intense but brief. Only those who persevered and became successful survived. By then audio demand shifted to HD video and I was aboard in 2006. I was initially stymied that the sound quality had to be good without having a mic in the talker's face. I can attest that the sound is not good compared to the studio. It's compromised by aiming a mic from afar or grabbing audio from a miniscule lav pinned to a shirt. In other words, it's gritty, but acceptable as long as we can hear and understand the talkers's words. Most videographers quell sound altogether and simply layer musak over visuals. It's extremely rare to encounter a videographer who's adequately prepared for location audio. Surprisingly I have seen a few savvy shooters who had the proper provisions for usable sound, including the all-important shag to thwart wind.

Although I reached a pinnacle in studio-quality recording, the new challenge is to attain a similar standard with location sound-for-video. The challenge is exemplified with the DSLR, which has limited audio functionality. The lack of headphone monitoring is the most obvious.

I've been prepared for the DSLR even before it was introduced in 2008. I've been doing mic'd recording since 1995 and am a lifelong electronics tinkerer. The use of a portable mixer, shotgun mic, and wireless lav, and acclimation to chaotic video shooting since 2006 enabled easy integration with the DSLR, namely the Panasonic Lumix GH2.

My current objective is to function as a one-man crew with creative visuals, particularly with fast prime lenses, while always capturing the best sonics possible, and also offer some post-production tricks. There seems to be a growing demand for video producers who are technically prolific, have journalistic vision, and understand effective viral distribution. My education is journalism and my employment background since 1995 has been audio, video, journalism, multimedia, and the internet. Bring on the gigs!

Video clip of an Irish American oral history project:

"Fun" stuff I shoot and try to make interesting during the edit (my experiments will get worse....politicians babble immensely):

Addendum

My tests reveal that it's still possible to achieve adequate near-studio-quality sound for voiceovers and other narration using the MixPre, M-Audio interface, and one remaining side-address mic.

M43 enters mainstream

2011-05-14T13:16:00.000-07:00

It could be months or years before the Micro 4/3rds system enters the mainstream, but the BBC is the first major broadcasting network to adopt the Panasonic AF-100. The BBC uses a very limited number of high-end cameras for their broadcasts. A freelancer used the AF-100 for a shoot in the Congo.

As with the GH2, the AF-100 shoots AVCHD at 24Mbps. The BBC requires external recording to up the resolution to 50Mbps and selected the NanoFlash for the job. There are other alternatives, such as the Ki Pro Mini, Ninja, or HyperDeck Shuttle.

The NanoFlash and Ki Pro Mini external recorders are barebones. At $2,900 and $2,000 respectively, these units need batteries, mounts, compact flash cards, and other peripherals, easily adding $1,500-$2,500 to the barebones cost. The $900 Ninja is more forgiving, as is appears to come with batteries but still needs an SSD or hard drive, about $225 for a 120gb SSD and $350 for a 240gb SSD. The HyperDeck is the most affordable option at $325 which includes internal rechargeable battery but requires an SSD drive.

The major caveat with external recorders is that most DSLRs do not have clean HDMI output. The GH2 apparently does, but not Canon. However, the Canon 5DM2 doesn't need an external recorder, as Magic Lantern hackware increases the bitrate to 66Mbps. Hackware also increased the bitrate on the Panasonic GH1 to 50Mbps, dubbed the GH13. GH2 users are waiting for Vitaly or other hackers to produce hackware, but Panasonic encryption has stalled development for the time being.

I haven't read testimonies or seen videos from any GH2 user recording HDMI to an external device, so it's speculation that the HDMI is clean. Furthermore, the HDMI is reportedly 60i output, which means the recording will capture interlaced video but at a high bitrate. Hence, it might be better to wait for hackware to shoot high bitrate 24p.

"Mystery" cable revealed

2011-05-14T12:00:00.000-07:00

In previous posts I indicated that the Sound Devices MixPre field mixer is compatible with the Panasonic Lumix GH2 DSLR via a "mystery" attenuation patch cable. My impression was that this unknown cord was procured from the defunct MiniDisco website. It was not. The source was actually MiniDiscAccess, which is still in operation, and the cable was purchased from their online store.

It's the Stereo Attenuator Cable that was about $30 six years ago. To my surprise it's only a 20db drop but is the only attenuator cable that works between the MixPre and GH2, to transform the line-level MixPre output to the mic-level GH2 input.

I've tried various attenuation schemes between the two devices with no avail: -20, -30, -40 db Hosa XLR adapters and homemade -25 and -50 db cables. They all drove the GH2's AGC circuit wacko, by adding bad hiss, increasing the noise floor, and/or inducing locomotive-type noises which is evidently the AGC circuit trying to compensate for a signal it can't handle.

So the mystery is solved and tech details of the appropriate cable revealed.

Dealing with the GH2's AGC

2011-05-07T18:03:00.000-07:00

The Panasonic's GH2 circuit is both Heaven and Hell (referencing metal icon the late Ronnie James Dio). On one hand AGC works well with low-output dynamic mics such as a Shure SM58. I seldom used an SM58 for video before, but with a Dead Kitten and set at level 3, the audio and cardioid characteristics of this mic is superb for video.

The Sennheiser ME66 sounds better with the AGC circuit than without since it chops off the peaks. The ME66 is known for having a spike in the upper mid frequencies which Rode users say is "harsh" sounding. Set to level 1 and padded with a -25db resistor (10kohms) in the chain, the ME66 is usable for directional micing with no peaks.

The hellish aspect of the AGC circuit is evident when interfacing with a mixer. I've tried the Sound Devices MixPre (not MixPre-D) with the GH2 and failed all but once in getting these two devices to shake hands. The only success is a mystery cable I bought from the defunct MiniDisco site five years ago. I don't know its decibel attenuation, but the resistance is 15kohms. It's a small stereo patch cable with a 3.5mm male plug on one end and a 3.5mm female inline jack on the other. It interfaces with the GH2 via a 3.5mm-to-2.5mm patch cable I made.

Because I don't like adapters, which tend to get scratchy or have questionable connectivity, I attempted to make a 3.5mm-to-2.5mm attenuator cable using Radio Shack resistors: 10kohms for -25 db and 33kohms for -50db. Although these pads were able to send an undistorted audio signal from the MixPre to the GH2, the GH2's AGC circuit introduced anomalies that rendered the sound useless.

In compensating for the signal, AGC introduced massive hiss, major pumping, and/or pulsating sounds akin to a locomotive. In trying to identify and rectify the snafu, I did numerous experiments using Hosa XLR attenuators (-20, -30, -40), a mic-level output on a Mackie mixer, and various condenser mics. The results were all the same: bad sound. Unfortunately, I didn't care to save any of this bad audio, but take my word for it....the GH2 AGC's circuit is fussy and will wreck havoc with a less-than-perfect signal fed into it.

As mentioned, the only thing that saved me is a mystery cable from a dead website. I shall continue to use that cable with the MixPre but will always record dual-audio to a Zoom H2 sans compression to maintain dynamic range and have a back-up recording. My intent is to use the MixPre only for paid professional sessions to monitor audio and assure proper recording. For fun shoots, the MixPre is too much hassle to setup and requires a lot of planning and logistics.

For my own run-n-gun shoots, I'm fine with a hotshoe-mounted SM58 or ME66 even if I cannot sonically monitor it. But I know these mics and what they pick up, and can watch the level meter in the viewfinder.

Then what about the MixPre-D with its mic-level output? Is it compatible with the GH2 as is? Theoretically Sound Devices would have tested compatibility with various DSLRs, and likely did with the Canon line, but unsure about the GH2. It will take a bold GH2 user to buy the MixPre-D for $749 and report the findings on DVXuser.

My synopsis is that the MixPre-D has a 50/50 chance of GH2 compatibility, a chance I would not invest in. Because I already figured out the MixPre electronically and affixed a hack-mount, I don't need the MixPre-D. I think AGC could be bad for any mixer, be it Sound Devices, Juicedlink, or Beachtek. The GH2 AGC is too hot and easy to overdrive, resulting not only in peaks but also the circuit tries to overcompensate but introduces its own noises in the process.

The only way to know for sure is by experimenting, which is also costly. Nevertheless, for serious sound-for-video always plan on dual-audio recording with post-production sync using Plural Eyes or the alleged sync in the forthcoming Final Cut Pro X.

Using legacy lenses

2011-05-07T17:09:00.000-07:00

One of the highlights of the Micro 4/3rds system is being able to use old and dirt-cheap legacy lenses with low-cost adapters on eBay. Shooting through the center of the lens on a M43 system eliminates side and corner distortion and does not vignette. The focal length is doubled, which allows very fast apertures with cheap telephoto lenses, such as a Nikon 100/2.8 which becomes a 200/2.8. In the full-frame world a 200/2.8 is big, heavy, and pricey. For the M43 system 200/2.8 is about forty bucks.

Of course using old lenses and adapters is not without caveats. Finding fast wide angle lenses is difficult. Japan's earthquake caused the Lumix 20/1.7 to spike in price to about $400, if you can find it. Nevertheless, a 20/1.7 is 40/1.7, almost a normal lens and not a wide angle. The Lumix 14/2.5 is a 28/2.5, officially a wide angle lens. Before digital cropping, the favored lens among photojournalists was 20-35/2.8. It allowed shooters to get up close and shoot at fast apertures with decent bokeh.

Times have changed since then. The number of credentialed journalists has dwindled dramatically and a huge band of DIY blogger journalists have emerged. The former have press access where a 20-35 is helpful. The latter must remain outside the prime zone and need longer focal lengths. However, the 20-35 is still valuable for freestyle videojournalism and creative filmmaking. Availability of 20-35/2.8 (10-17 of thereabouts) lenses is rare.

Fast legacy lenses are superb indoors. The metering, EVF, and LCD all seem accurate when shooting in low or available lighting. This is where such lenses excel. Unfortunately, fast legacy lenses have problems outdoors. I first noticed this in a harrowing rally shoot which was partially in the shade and partially in the sun. Not only was the metering, EVF, and LCD stymied, the images looked weird and with ghost-like edges when viewed on a computer.

Akin to bad lighting, legacy lenses have confused me outdoors since I bought a system in January 2011. The contrast was bad, which I attributed to haze or bad lighting. After some experimenting, I discovered that these lenses overexpose up to two stops. The metering is wrong. If is shows "properly exposed" (using icons), it needs to be stopped-down by one or two stops. When the EVF or LCD shows "proper lighting" (visual assessment), the image needs to look dark by stopping down.

It's tough to shoot video when everything reports an underexposure in the camera, or when subjects are dark in the EVF or LCD. But with these old lenses that's the only way they'll be properly exposed and sharp on the computer. I toiled with this snafu for months and compensated in post-production by increasing the contrast in Final Cut Pro. All this time, the videos were drastically overexposed from the onset. It's hard to fix those things in post.

The GH2 meters showed this scene below as being properly exposed, but was actually overexposed by two stops and enhanced in FCP. It still lacks punch and contrast.

In review, the rule of thumb with legacy lenses outdoors with the GH2, particularly in sunlight:

Set the EV compensation at a one or two stop underexposure in aperture priority mode and leave it at that. Do not be tempted to adhere to "proper exposure" as reported in the meter. The video will be overexposed and lack contrast and sharpness. Underexposure compensation can be saved to a C setting on the dial.
The meter oftentimes will simply not work in manual mode. Hence, use aperture priority using the guidelines above.
Do not believe what your eyes see in the EVF or LCD. Old lenses and their adapters stymie the in-camera screens. If the subjects appear noticeably dark, the exposure is correct.
Only with Lumix lenses is the metering, EVF, and LCD correct. Hence, override any underexposure compensation and consider the EVF and LCD accurate.
Know when you are shooting with a legacy or Lumix lens and don't get confused.

This video below in horrendous lighting with high contrast was deliberately "unexposed" by two stops. Essentially it is properly exposed.

Micro 4/3rds

2011-04-27T19:57:00.000-07:00

Over at the Micro 4/3rds rumors site, there is a very long thread about the alleged impending demise of this infant camera mount. The debate began when a sole blogger questioned the future of the M43 system, and in fact calls it an apocalypse.

The M43 system is a fairly new entry into the competitive world of camera mounts. The Lumix GH2 in particular is Panasonic's precocious answer to the popularity of the DSLR for video. Some surmise the GH2 is a rebuttal to the Canon 5D Mark II, without the time limits. Needless to say, Canon was the initiator of DSLR video and remains the de facto system for filmmakers for full-frame and higher bit rates, even if it stops after 12 minutes and burns up in an hour. Perhaps the 5DM3 will address those limitations and quell competitors. In any case, M43 has a major challenge to meet, its biggest hope being the Panasonic AF-100, a true-form camcorder for serious filmmakers. There's even an adapter for the AF-100 made by Birger Engineering to mount Canon EF lenses with electronic AF, exposure, and IS. The adapter costs $700 and is obviously targeted to professionals or deep-debted amateurs who have or crave a hefty collection of expensive EF glass.

For piss-poor M43 shooters EF lenses and the adapter are completely out-of-reach. In fact, hacks go the other way by using trashy-looking legacy FD lenses from the 1970s and 1980s. The M43 sensor is half the size of a 35mm sensor. Focal lengths are doubled. Shooting video uses the middle part of the lens, the so-called sweet spot. Hence, there are M43 adapters for every camera mount with no side or corner distortion or vignetting. Old stock is in, for now.

I think the market for legacy lenses will be short-lived. They are in demand currently because they are cheap and can be used for video on new 21st century DSLR camcorders. The downside is that these lenses have problems. They are decades old, have been tossed around to hell and back, and commonly suffer from dementia: scratches on the elements; oil, fungus, and haze inside; dirty barrels with sticky goo and other nasty substances; mechanical anomalies. Thankfully M43 only shoots through the exact center of the lens to avoid some of that crap! Otherwise these lenses would be in the recycling mill where they were headed before the M43 craze.

My Canon 50/1.4 (100) has a loose aperture ring and is soft wide open. It's a chrome model which requires severe tightening to stop down to f/16. It came with both caps and a Canon 55mm filter. Can't complain much if it lasts a year.
My Canon 50/1.8 (100) was in a $5 bin at Gasser's with no caps (but scratched filter that protected the front) and a major mark on the rear element that's outside the M43 range. Not a bad bargain for five bucks but only usable on M43 bodies. Will sell soon on eBay to highest bidder or donate to Goodwill.
My $25 eBay Canon 28/2.8 (56) has a mounting snafu. The mechanism goes out of wack and doesn't mount. When this happens, the unit needs to be opened by removing three small philips screws from the casing. Once inside, the mechanism needs to be realignment and snapped into its proper position. This lens is on its deathbed.
My Nikon Series E 100/2.8 (200) seemed like a good bargain at the time, an offer of $44.99 on eBay. After a few uses the focusing ring makes noise and is getting tight in one direction and loose in the other. It'll be lucky to last a year.

In fact, legacy lenses are on their last leg, revitalized only by the M43 movement. M43 users have limited options for native lenses. The selection of available Panasonic lenses is small. Although Olympus M43s are technically compatible, Olympus uses internal IS, so no Olympus lens will have IS on a Panny body. Panny bodies need Panny IS lenses, but there are no fast zooms and only a hard-to-get and expensive (apparently because of the Japan earthquake) 20/1.7 and 14/2.5. The six Lumix zooms are all slower than sin, only good outdoors on a sunny day or with a gaffer in tow.

Some M43 users with liberal credit card limits go bonkers over Zeiss M43 fixed lenses. They are sharp, fast, extremely expensive, manual focus only, and have aperture rings. That's the other caveat: M43 lenses from other makers need aperture rings with one significant exception: Nikon G. However, the Nikon G adapter is simply a very short-rotating slider where the user must guess the f/stop. In essence, it was only happenstance that the aperture on G lenses can be controlled because unlike other non-aperture lenses Nikon G stays stopped down at its smallest aperture by default.

Hence, it's possible to use all Nikon lenses from old non-AI 1950s products to contemporary G and D lenses (D retains the aperture ring). This also includes new Nikon-mount G lenses from Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina. Alas, there's another caveat with AF lenses: the manual focusing ring (because AF cannot be enabled) is usually short-rotating and loose. This means hard-to-focus and easy to slip out of focus. Furthermore, lenses without an MF switch don't seem to disengage the motor mechanism. Feels creepy and damaging to rotate the focusing ring without a motor release. New lenses are designed for AF. That's where legacy lenses shine, because of the long and solid focusing ring.

Using non-native lenses is a short-term solution. There's no longevity in that approach. Panasonic, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Samsung, and other makers need to produce native M43 lenses with 100% electronic compatibility for AF, exposure, IS, and every electronic feature on the GH2 and its successors. Furthermore, fast and wide zooms such as 10-17/2.8 (20-35) and fast tele zooms 35-105/2.8 (70-210) need to hit the market and be somewhat affordable. Fast 20-35 and 70-210 focal lengths were standard photojournalism ware in the early 1990s before cropped digital cameras evolved. We need to get back to mainstay focal lengths with fast and consistent apertures for professional M43 shooting.

Mounting the MixPre

2011-04-21T13:29:00.000-07:00

The major snafu with DSLRs is sound. As with all DSRLs, the Panasonic Lumix GH2 does not have a headphone circuit and jack. It's ironic because according to connoisseur still shooters the GH2's photo quality is under par compared to Nikon and Canon. Given that the GH2 lacks such quality, Panasonic should tout the GH2 as a video camcorder DSLR and put audio monitoring in its successor.

Many shooters spend a lot of time and effort to get sound in and out of the GH2 using ready-made components. That's not the best solution for me because it requires costly product investment and a slew of adapters and workarounds. I prefer to innovate by making special cables and devising workable and low-cost configurations.

The GH2's awkward 2.5mm mic jack (instead of the more common 3.5mm) introduces precarious connections via adapters when outfitted with Beachtek, Juicedlink, Zoom, and Tascam audio components. Other issues involve mic-level vs line-level incompatibility, the GH2's 4-level AGC circuit, and where and how to mount products, i.e., hotshoe extenders, cage, etc.

The Sound Devices MixPre-D announced at NAB will satisfy many GH2 and other DSLR users because of its mounting capabilities and mic-level output option. Instead of settling for Juicedlink or Beachtek, the MixPre-D offers the same features as the MixPre, e.g., quality preamps, multiple outputs, XLR i/o, phantom power, limiters, tone oscillation, slate, effective gain controls with meters, etc. The MixPre-D is $750 and the XL-CAM DSLR mount is $80.

Needless to say, that's a lot of dough. Unlike Beachtek or Juicedlink, the MixPre-D does not have internal 1/4-20" threads.

Because the MixPre-D requires external mounts, the DSLR is not flush with the unit, adding significant verticalness.

The MixPre-D and the MixPre use the same case with exact identical dimensions. The deal breaker would have been a MixPre-D with internal 1/4"-20 threads on the top and bottom to mount between a DSLR and tripod. Because I already own the MixPre, my primary interest was the XL-CAM DSLR mount. After further research, the need for the mount dissipated.

I researched mounting options for the MixPre and saw many crazy and innovative concepts for integrating the unit with a camcorder. There are massive metal housing units, velcro creations, and DIY brackets.

Ultimately, most folks settled on keeping the mixer separate from the camera such as in a waistpack. None of these approaches were ideal for me, but most had one thing in common: none entailed opening up the MixPre, although one user did and mounted a separate bottom plate (photo below).

On the internet I saw rare photos of a MixPre removed from its casing. Fortunately, the case and chassis are completely autonomous. The case is merely a housing, so no electronics connect to the case, making separation very easy by removing the side screws and jack screws, then sliding the case laterally, akin to being "pulled out like a pillow" as one blogger described. There are at least two caveats. The use of sheet metal screws can eventually bore the holes with excessive unscrewing and rescrewing. The other downside is the tight fit and minimal space between the circuit board and metal casing. Thus, planning ahead is crucial.

The XL-CAM offers a viable solution to integrate the GH2 to the MixPre. I haven't seen photos of the bottom mount, but I presume it's similar. But I surmised a quick release adapter could suffice, especially I already have a Velbon adapter that I used on a monopod. I had to assess where to install the 1/4"-20 x 1/2" without making contact with the electronics. A visit to the hardware store did not reveal screws with a low-profile head, so I bought a philips head screw and shaved 2mm off it. After careful alignment, I drilled a hole on the cases' top, installed the screw, and mounted the quick release adapter, which stays aligned by manipulating turns and tightening it until it's in the proper position.

The distance between the screw's head the circuit board was minimal but adequate. Layers of electrical tape on the screw head and board insulates potential contact. Although the adapter fits tightly, I'm concerned that it might twist while out in the field (a lot of things happen during chaotic shoots in the field), so I am assessing methods to stabilize its position, perhaps with more holes and screws. For now, the adapter seems secure.

The next challenge was to install the quick release plate on the bottom of the case. Unfortunately, the space between the chassis and case was tighter than I thought. My original plan was to mount the plate using a 1/4"-20 x 1/2" screw, filing the head, and covering it with electrical tape, just as I did on top. But it was too tight to do that, so I visited the hardware store to assess options.

I discovered 8-32 x 1/2" nylon screws and nuts that seemed sturdy enough and of course non-conductive to securely hold the quick release plate. I bought an assortment of screws and nuts for just a couple dollars so I can experiment. I figured a pair of 8-32s would be sturdier than one 1/4"-20, and not twist.

With precise positioning, I drilled two holes in the case and plate, and installed the plate. Washers were required to prevent excessive screw tip protrusion, which initially prevented the chassis from being inserted fully. There was no contact between the circuit board and nylon screws, which are not electrically conductive anyway. The quick release plate seemed securely attached to the case.

After careful inspection and tests, I put the MixPre back together, screwed down the unit, and put it on a tripod.

As expected, the MixPre-GH2 combination is heavy, top-weighted, and cumbersome for excessive mobility. Therefore, it is mostly suitable for tripod shots, with occasional monopod and run-n-gun, especially if also recording to a Zoom.

The verticalness of my rig is no different than what appears on the Sound Devices website, due in part to the lack of flushness between the mixer and camera. This photo is likely a Canon EOS-1D Mark IV that doesn't show the mic, but imagine that it's way up there!

A big advantage using the MixPre is the ability to use phantom-powered mics such as a Sennheiser 416 and EV RE510 hypercardioid mic (shown with red foam in photo above). In the future I hope to have a Sanken CS-1.

Ironically the introduction of the MixPre-D, given its dimensions, spawned me to hack-mount my MixPre. With effort, time, and assessment, I was able to prevent (for now and hopefully forever) buying the costly MixPre-D and XL-CAM.

Apple thwarts PluralEyes; Premiere threatened

2011-04-12T20:46:00.000-07:00

Blogs about Final Cut Pro X

Film editor and Final Cut specialist Larry Jordan speculates in his post The Sound of 1,700 Jaws Dropping
Using indents, Apple Insider lists new and changed features. Apple previews new $299 64-bit Final Cut Pro X to arrive in June
Information Week offers a business perspective and the plight of enterprise users. Apple Unveils Final Cut Pro X
Stark Insider is the first to consider the switch to FCP from Premiere. For two years the migration was from FCP to Premiere. Overnight FCPX sent Avid and Adobe vying for second place. Final Cut Pro X increases temptation to switch from Adobe Premiere Pro

Highlights from other bloggers.

Photography Bay:

Auto-syncing audio waveforms. Like a built-in PluralEyes. Holy crop. Big applause.
64-bit confirmed. That got a huge applause.
No more waiting for ingest. Media is ready for editing even before ingest is completed. On the way in, media can be analyzed for stabilization. Deal with rolling shutter on the way in.
FPC X will be available in June 2011 for download from the App store for $299.

Tuaw:

Can start editing during ingest of AVCHD and other media, switches silently to local media as it ingests.

Crunch Gear:

Now 64-bit, with OpenCL support.
All editing native – no transcoding (for supported formats incl. H264)
Media ready for editing immediately – but stabilization, audio and shutter correction, shot detection and preliminary color balancing automatically applied during ingest.

PhilMug:

NO INTERRUPTION for rendering. NO TRANSCODING. Drag-and-drop editing with the ability to edit media even before it is ingested in the project. Will silently switch from AVC to media drive once clip has finished ingestion.

k9sound's synopsis:

Audio waveform sync. Apparently no need for PluralEyes. Hopefully OMF export is still available for Pro Tools editing.
Native editing or background ingesting of AVCHD. Can edit immediately after transferring files from SDHC card to hard drive. ProRes is evidently still prevalent, and once ingested editing switches to the ProRes file instead of the MTS file.
64-bit to access all RAM and CPU cores. Quicker overall workflow that exploits hardware resources with no limitations, e.g., MacBook Pro, 8gb RAM, 1gb GPU, quad-core i7.
Affordable and modular apps downloaded from the App Store. FCP, Motion, and Compressor are useful to k9sound. Not big on STP, Color, or DVD Studio.
Premiere led NLEs for two years with native editing and 64-bit, but FCPX no longer gives FCP users incentive to switch. Premiere doesn't have a top-notch codec such as ProRes, so had to rely on native editing with essentially non-editable formats, oftentime choppy. Avid has the DnxHD editing codec that requires transcoding. FCPX's background rendering is a reasonable compromise between ProRes and native editing.

MixPre-D

2011-04-07T14:33:00.000-07:00

Sound Devices finally did what so many audio professionals wanted: a MixPre compatible with DSLRs. The $749 MixPre-D is essentially a MixPre with DSLR-friendly capabilities:

Mounting options to attach underneath a DSLR.
Switchable mic/line options for XLR input and output, and new TA3 mic-level output for DSLRs. Tape out remains at line-level.

Other new features:

MS (matrix) options for stereo shotgun mics such as the Sanken CSS5.
USB connection for use as an audio interface for Mac or PC without drivers. [Sound Devices is vague on this, stating "24-bit, class-compliant USB streaming output for interconnection with Mac OS, Windows, Linux, and select iOS devices, computer audio in MixPre-D headphones". Can audio be recorded in Pro Tools 9? Can the MixPre-D connect to studio monitors?]

The MixPre-D is beyond anything Juicedlink or Beachtek can offer, with pro features such as slate microphone, tone oscillator, effective gain control, precise LED metering, limiters, return audio monitoring (from camcorders), and power options (two AA or 10-18vdc via Hirose connector). Of course there's phantom power. The unit functions with a DSLR or pro camcorder as per the MixPre. Juicedlink and Beachtek will probably not respond to the MixPre-D, as the dedicated sound professional is not the target market. The MixPre-D apparently includes all the features as the MixPre, so it's an expansion and for now not a replacement, as the MixPre still appears on the Sound Devices website.

k9sound has been experimenting with many painstaking mounting or carrying options to interface the MixPre with a DSLR. The MixPre-D addresses the mounting snafu. With its already small size and low weight, it was presumed that eventually Sound Devices would modify the MixPre for use with today's ubiquitous DSLRs. That time has arrived, and it was worth waiting for instead of buying into Juicedlink or Beachtek.

It will be easy for k9sound to buy a TA3 connector and make a short cable that terminates to a 2.5mm right-angle plug for the GH2.
.
With the TA3 going to the GH2's 4-level AGC circuit, the "tape out" line-level can feed a Zoom recorder for backup recording without compression.

Ultimately, the XL-CAM accessory mount is perhaps the most vital part of the MixPre-D. Some conniving minds might simply buy the XL-CAM and affix it onto the original MixPre. Both units are exactly the same dimensions at 43 mm x 94 mm x 140 mm (h x w x d). Hence, it seems possible that two holes on the top and bottom of the MixPre can accommodate the XL-CAM.

Links:

Mounting the MixPre

New FCP at Supermeet?

2011-04-05T21:39:00.000-07:00

Larry Jordan, Philip Bloom, and perhaps SF Cutters know the truth. Steve Jobs does.

Apple to Introduce New Final Cut Pro on April 12th?

This is apparently an unusual move for Apple, to appear at a trade show in which they have no exhibitor table, or even to participate at a trade show at all since they bailed from MacWorld long ago. Nevertheless, in the past few years Supermeet, originally an FCP Users Group, has been heavily infiltrated by Avid and Adobe, especially since Media Composer and Premiere Pro have, for the time being, outdone FCP.

Hopefully, with the Supermeet announcement, both FCP and FCPUG will get back on track. Individuals and companies who cannot or do not want to switch NLEs shouldn't have to endure endless sales pitches from Avid and Adobe. Two years of that is enough!

FCP to STP or PT?

2011-04-05T21:17:00.000-07:00

There's been much hoopla about a "roundtrip" from Final Cut Pro to Soundtrack Pro and back. Within FCP one menu item is "Send to Soundtrack Pro" and within STP an option is to "Send back to FCP." The perceived connotation is that an editor can work in both applications and see changes accordingly. That's not true. The menu items are all you get.

I never used Soundtrack Pro since I use Pro Tools and that STP's layout and workflow is a cluttered mess. It's unlike any audio sequencer and is more complicated than it should be. Yet STP is designed for video editors. Having this perceived notion of integration, I "attended" Larry Jordan's FCP/STP webinar. I was hoping to witness a workflow akin to Avid's Satellite which melds Media Composer to Pro Tools. Changes in either app is reflected in real time in the other app.

A satellite workflow does not exist between FCP and STP. Jordan merely exported the project from FCP and opened it in STP, followed by an hour explanation of navigation and how to perform tasks. My only interest was to see how he gets the project back to FCP. Alas, that moment came and it's the same as my workflow with Pro Tools: export a stereo AIFF and place it on the FCP timeline. In fact, Jordan said not to use the "Send back to FCP" option because it is "quirky."

OMF export from FCP is considered an older method of working with audio, by opening up the OMF in Pro Tools or similar audio sequencer. Essentially audio enhancement is done after the final edit in FCP, and the final AIFF file is one of the last steps before project completion. As Jordan said, if the producer decides to revise the video at this juncture, audio work has to start over again.

Nobody knows what features the FCP update at NAB will have, but it probably won't be like Satellite, which is an expensive Avid collaboration that requires hardware, software, and Pro Tools HD. It's not for a laptop.

Jordan's webinar confirmed what I already surmised: if FCP and STP don't interact in real time, then STP is not worth knowing. The OMF to Pro Tools is a more advanced workflow, with 'Tools being the top application not just for ubiquity but the editing functions doing sound-for-video are more streamlined than Logic Pro. In fact, Pro Tools is heralded for its editing features for music. Furthermore, Rewire opens up MIDI capabilities lacking in 'Tools, not to mention the stellar time and pitch shifting. None of this is available in STP with its clunky layout.

Hence, I'm glad I didn't waste time learning and grappling with STP. I always thought it had real time integration and the few times I attempted such a feat resulted only in frustration. When I was a heavy Logic Pro user I really thought that if Logic could slave to FCP, akin to Reason slaving to Pro Tools, then FCP and Logic would have the best CPU-based video and audio workflow. With new Macs having enormous processing power, such an achievement is possible. Sony Vegas Pro has done this for years, having started out as a multitrack audio sequencer, then adding video as an afterthought, using a Windows PC natively with no hardware requirements.

Nevertheless, being able to edit sound-for-video in Pro Tools via OMF offers complete flexibility. 'Tools is a top-notch editor and universal for recording studios and post-production facilities. After Jordan's webinar, attendees were asked to submit what they had hoped to accomplish from the presentation. Here is what I wrote:

I hoped for integration between FCP and STP, i.e., changes made in STP are reflected in FCP. Apparently that's not the premise for the workflow, and that Mr. Jordan uses "export" (2-ch AIFF) instead of "send back to FCP" (which he said is quirky). Thus, the workflow Mr. Jordan showcased is similar to my workflow, except I use Pro Tools (OMF export from FCP, AIFF export from PT). Hence, I will continue to use Pro Tools until there's better FCP-STP integration.

f/1.4

2011-04-05T14:06:00.000-07:00

Fast lenses have been coveted since the introduction of the SLR, enabling photographers to shoot in low light and fast shutter speeds. These days, the emphasis in on extreme low light and bokeh with superwide apertures f/.095-1.4 on prime (fixed) lenses. Boutique glass offers more shooting options than slow consumer and kit zooms which start at f/3.5-4.5 on the wide end to f/4.5-8 on the tele end. Although smaller with less weight, these zooms are most useful on sunny days or with artificial illumination.

Lenses are sharpest at middle apertures, usually f/8-11. Many photographers shoot in that range. Conversely, HD camcorders with small sensors don't offer effective aperture control. Most of the scene is in sharp focus with no discernible emphasis.

When Canon released the 5DM2 DSLR with HD video capabilities in September 2008, shooters immediately gravitated to the new realm: low-light, bokeh, and pull focus. Independent filmmakers went bonkers. What was once exclusive to Hollywood with megabudgets was made available to guerilla filmmakers with modest funds. Hence, a frenzy developed for super fast primes and insanely fuzzy backgrounds. Portrait videos show people's noses in focus with everything else blurred, including the eyes. Not only is wide open hard to focus, it's also not very sharp.

I recently procured a used 2nd generation Canon FD 50/1.4 to replace the 50/1.8 in my lens arsenal. It was of course used (FD was discontinued in 1987) and relatively cheap at $60 out-the-door. Immediately I went out and shot the usual flower images on video and stills at f/1.4. It looked sharp on the small LCD screen and EVF on my Panasonic GH2 DSLR.

In my home studio, I saw soft images on the computer screen. My first thought was that the lens is either broken or the adapter is incompatible. Further indoor tests confirmed what photographers have known for decades: wide open is soft. f/1.4 isn't bad and is useful in no- or low-light scenarios where better-than-nothing is appropriate. And since video usually involves moving objects and generally for the web, softness would be less noticeable.

Fortunately, going on the premise that middle apertures are sharper, the Canon is ok at f/1.7 and acceptably sharp at f/2, a good compromise for low-light, bokeh, and talking heads interviews. I'll only use f/1.4 in extreme situations (dim San Francisco shooting is common). Applying the same physics to slower lenses, an f/1.8 isn't sharp until f/2.8, and an f/2.8 isn't sharp until f/4. Of course, it depends on the lens. The point being that slower lenses must compromise on low light, sharpness, and grain.

Undoubtedly newer f/1.4 lenses (EF, Zeiss, Voigtlander) are sharper wide open than a 38-year-old FD. However, modern lenses come at a price, from $460 Nikon to $725 Zeiss Planer. The fastest Micro 4/3rds lens is a $380 Lumix 20/1.7. Ultimately, the $60 lens I bought is a decent compromise given its caveats.

f/1.4:

f/1.7:

f/2.0:

f/1.4 cropped:

f/1.7 cropped:

f/2.0 cropped:

Links:

Shooting solo

2011-04-02T17:58:00.000-07:00

According to Documentaries: And How to Make Them, "These days, there is an emphasis on the multi-skiller or self-shooter, i.e., a single director/cameraperson who can record their own sound and go it alone. Many budgets, especially for news features and overseas documentaries, are too small to justify bringing a crew with you. As such you need to be quite competent at doing it alone."

Related to that, the author Andy Glynne says "A lot of documentary films are made using only natural available light, rather than brining in lights. It's good practice to be able to use natural light effectively; it helps cut down on the amount you have to think about, and most importantly keeps costs down. Often, especially if you are filming overseas, you really don't want to be lugging lights around with you."

The books suggests taking a shotgun mic and wireless lavs which "prepares you for all types of filming, from filming a group of people interacting to a formally set up interview." The book was published in 2008 and thus excludes any notion of DSLRs, which since then have greatly impacted filmmaking. The DSLR is the perfect camcorder which with a few fast prime lenses and small Zoom recorder is conducive to shooting solo, natural light videography, and travel.

Related to shooting solo is the recommendation to log your own footage. "The process of logging is at some points painstakingly boring, but really important. Don't let someone else do this for you, as it's you who needs to get to know your material as well as you possibly can. And don't think just because you've been around during the shoot (or even shot the thing yourself) that you know the material. You don't; and when it comes to looking through your material you'll see how what you thought you had is sometimes vastly different from what you'll really get."

The book includes a DVD, but all the files are also available online. One of those files is a logging sheet.

The book, written in British English, is mostly still relevant today although it appeared before DSLRs and apparently has not or will not be updated. Nevertheless, much of the information is still essential, aside from most of the gear choices.

In summation, if shooting solo:

don't take lights
shoot in natural light (prime DSLR lenses are perfect)
use a shotgun mic and lavs (plus Zoom for dual-audio DSLR)
do your own logging

In addition, the author recommends storyboarding in pre-production, but remain flexible. "A storyboard is effectively a visual way of seeing what your film will look like before you've even pickup up a camera. Because it's a documentary, rather than fiction, you cannot always predict the action that will unfold, and there might be times when your storyboad is effectively thrown out the window when you're in the middle of filming. But it's important to have a structure in place in the first instance; you're going to have so much to think about when you are making your film that, without some kind of reference to how you wanted the film to look, you're seriously likely to forget everything."

Low-light lenses

2011-03-30T19:04:00.000-07:00

Although the Panasonic Lumix 20/1.7 lens has escalated to the $400 range (allegedly because of Japan's earthquake), unfortunately that's still a good price considering it's AF, compact, and is designed for the GH2.

Looking at Canon, Nikon, and third-party offerings, 20mm lenses are slower and don't come cheap. The Canon FD 20/2.8 is huge (72mm filter) and costs $225+ on eBay if available. The Nikon AIS 20/2.8 is $600, while the Nikon D 20/2.8 is $500, gray market prices. eBay rates for used stock are about 60% of new.

After shooting with the Panasonic Lumix GH2 DSLR for three months, including full coverage of the three-week Crossroads Festival, I surmised there are very few instances where shooting with slow lenses is technically possible. Kit lenses, zooms, and camcorders with slow apertures (f/3.5 and above) are usually appropriate outdoors in the middle of the day. For indoors, cumbersome Arri or similar lighting is required for critical sessions.

The caveats of artificial lighting are obvious: more gear to haul and setup, creates shadows, and can be annoying on the subject. All this trouble because of slow lenses.

The DSLR revolutionized low-light video, making it possible to shoot with affordable lenses in the f/1.4 to f/2.8 range. More adventurous shooters with deep debts have lenses with apertures as wide as f/.095. Fast lenses work well in low and natural light. For no-light environments, on-cam illumination such as a Litepanels or LED 5001 will suffice.

Therefore, the 20/1.7, although it appears pricey, saves a lot of money and effort from buying studio lights and erecting them. During three months of GH2 ownership, I find that f/2.8 is oftentimes insufficient. San Francisco thrives in dark places. Most shoots transpire in dim venues or at night, so at f/2.8 the ISO must be cranked to 3200! An f/1.7 lens allows for lower ISO and less grain.

Although I have low-cost legacy lenses (Canon FD 28/2.8, Canon FD 50/1.8, Nikon E 100/2.8), it's already time to rethink those choices. The wish list is to replace the 28/2.8 with the 20/1.7, and the 50/1.8 with a 50/1.4 (Canon FD, Nikon AIS or E, or Pentax K). The Lumix 14-42 kit lens isn't very useful and is noisy for video, so it'll probably be up for sale on eBay.

Shooting Crossroads

2011-03-28T01:57:00.000-07:00

After having shot the three-week Crossroads Irish American Festival, here is my assessment.

GH2 - stellar camcorder!

The Panasonic Lumix GH2 with legacy manual focus fast prime lenses was an excellent gear choice. Only once did I use the Lumix 14-42 AF lens. All other times I used the Nikon AIS 100/2.8 (200mm), Canon FD 50/1.8 (100mm), and Canon FD 28/2.8 (56mm) because of low-light and/or bokeh requirements. Also only twice did I use a shoulder mount or monopod. In retrospect, I should have used a tripod instead of the shoulder mount because I didn't need to move around as anticipated. Post-production stabilization is appropriate for some clips. The monopod was an excellent choice for run-n-gun interviews outdoors with the 28/2.8 and ND4 filter for bokeh.

The GH2, all shot at 60i and de-interlaced in post-production, proved appropriate because of long-form sessions, interchangeable lenses from various makers, and quiet 4-level AGC audio circuit. All these factors put this above the Canon 5DM2, especially the GH2 breaks the 12-minute, 1-hour limit. The GH2, at 1/3 the cost of the 5DM2, is a worthy camcorder in a DSLR body.

Sound knowledge

Incorporating audio knowledge and technique was vital for documenting the Festival since all programs were sonic-oriented. A videographer with no or little sound experience or reliance on a separate soundperson would not have been suitable for the gig. Conversely, a separate soundperson was unnecessary, given the Festival's budget and lack of lav or boom use.

DSLR shooters in particular grapple with audio and oftentimes fail since there is no headphone monitoring and some cameras have no audio level display. Videographers also do not fathom how to interface with venue systems where interconnections are not standardized. This is well beyond a shooter's capability. To add to the complexity, most clips during the Festival were dual- or triple-audio (GH2, Vixia camcorder, Zoom H2). PluralEyes knowledge in post-production is imperative. I've often packed an array of audio adapters and cables to venues that required the flexibility to interface with whatever type of output was available. Pads and splitters were the most common connectors.

Speed over zoom

Although a zoom lens would have been convenient in some cases, primes are faster, smaller, quieter, cheaper, and sharper. Aside from using the noisy Lumix lens once, the only zooming was from a backup Canon Vixia HF100 camcorder shot at 60i in automatic mode. Even then, I only zoomed in periodically. The Vixia's primary function was to shoot wide or capture "bridge" footage as I changed batteries and cards on the GH2. In the future I hope to use a GF2 for 60i backup; for 24p, either another GH2 or its successor.

Proactive producer

Fast lenses, unlimited recording, audio knowledge, and a proactive producer who served as a go-between were the key factors to a successful event shoot. Of course I prefer to collaborate with a proactive producer instead of someone who tells me to make my own arrangements. As work-for-hire, I should not make autonomous logistical arrangements. I look forward to shooting other events that require sound and video.

Delivery

Delivery was unspecified from the onset so I setup a workflow that I deemed feasible, and perhaps this can be a model for future sessions. After each day's work, I transferred the SDHC cards' content (GH2, Vixia, Zoom) to a hard drive (backed up to a second hard drive) into properly labeled folders. The producer gets a copy of all this raw data on an external hard drive to edit themselves (PluralEyes is needed).

Within each session's folder, I created a subfolder entitled FCP (Final Cut Pro). The producer does not get the FCP folder. I transcoded the GH2 and Vixia MTS files into the Capture Scratch. Then I used PluralEyes to properly sync all clips and Zoom audio files onto the timeline and applied a global de-interlaced filter. From the timeline I exported segments (using the in and out points) to Compressor/x264Encoder which created h.264 MOV files. The MOV files were uploaded to my Vimeo Plus account into password-protected folders for the producer and authorized persons to access.

Hence, the producer has the option to download the MOV files from Vimeo and edit them, embed videos from Vimeo onto their own website, and edit the raw files on their hard drive. Although it wasn't specified that I do any post-production, as with any pro or casual shoot, I want to swiftly analyze my productivity for quality assurance and improvements.

Because I knew the producer was not techically-inclined, I wanted to provide easy assess to raw clips, at least to show what was recorded. In this situation, a set fee was suitable over an hourly rate. However, if I were paid hourly I would not have included post-production on my invoice since that was not a designated task. Nevertheless, as a serious videographer I need to assess my work whether paid or not.

I surmise that on some assignments the producer might provide SDHC cards which are relinquished after the gig. In those cases, quality assurance shall perpetually remain a mystery. That's neither good nor bad, although it eliminates a lot of effort from the workflow. It's shoot-and-go!

GH2 Dpreview critical assessment

2011-03-23T15:43:00.000-07:00

The lengthy but super-detailed review focuses on every aspect of the GH2. With 22 web pages of text, graphs, photos, and videos, it will take hours to read and assimilate all the information. For those interested in how well the GH2 shoots video, here are some short excerpts:

Guerilla shooters

2011-03-18T19:45:00.000-07:00

During the 35mm film era, cameras stayed in production a long time. Nikon's FM2 and Pentax' LX remained current for 20 years. That doesn't happen anymore. These days, cameras have run times of 6-18 months. Consumer interest in a specific product doesn't exceed three years. Filmmaking is in constant flux, so equipment gets outdated swiftly and products and companies come and go.

Envisionistic Panasonic grabbed a huge hungry market in late 2005 with the HVX200, which became ubiquitous among the indie filmmaker crowd. Final Cut Pro accepted the proprietary file format early and was the top NLE. Sony's latecomer XDCAM had a tough time challenging the HVX. But there was something missing in HD. Filmmakers who wanted bokeh outfitted their rigs with costly and unwieldy Letus systems and prime lenses. The image was shot off an internal screen.

HD was taken by surprise when in September 2008 the Canon 5DM2 DSLR stormed in. Canon's original intent with the 5DM2 stills camera was to allow photojournalists to shoot video b-roll clips, but filmmakers immediately embraced the camera to shoot "film look" video. Interchangeable lenses and the much-coveted bokeh was within financial grasp in a portable system. A new genre of "guerilla filmmakers" emerged and steered the industry. Apple could not adjust appropriately to Canon's file format, enabling Premiere Pro to leap ahead as the NLE of choice for guerillas. Catering to the DSLR mob, mathematical genius Bruce Sharp developed PluralEyes software that syncs multi-cam and audio files in major NLEs, eliminating cumbersome timecode arrays that fueled Nagra revenue. Oldskool shooters are abhorred by DSLRs.

The Panasonic GH2 takes guerilla to the next level. Unlike Canon, the GH2 is tiny, mirrorless, and cheap, not limited to 12 minute clips, and doesn't retire after an hour of use. The Micro 4/3rds sensor is small but sensor advancement creates robust footage, some say on par or better than the 5DM2. The small sensor size accepts most lens mounts via dirt-cheap Chinese-made adapters with no vignetting. There is no system outside M43 that can mix numerous mounts without caveats.

After the GH2, Panasonic broke from the DSLR form factor and developed the AF100 camcorder. SDHC was favored over P2 and AVCHD over a proprietary format, with clean HDMI output for ProRes recording to AJA or Ninja. Ironically, intermediate codecs are threatened by native editing as Premiere Pro has proven that the MTS capture format is editable.

Those who embrace the new technology are releasing movies, TV shows, and documentaries which have varying depths-of-field and other attributes associated with the DSLR. Conversely, yesterdays shooters fed up with guerillas are retiring or trying to stay afloat with older gear.

DSLRs will not reign forever, and we'll be in the same boat three years from now trying to sell these products to a small market at a great loss as we move onto the next big thing. The only upside is that instead of losing $100k as with older HD systems, the loss will be around $5k. The M43 system temporarily revived old Canon FD and Nikon AIS lenses, which are super cheap, but when M43 is superseded, FD and AIS will meet their last hurrah and finally be put to perpetual rest.

Who knows what's in store three years from now. Sony thought it was time to kill DSLRs and prematurely released the overpriced lackluster NEX VG10. The product was met with user remorse and returns. Everything was wrong about the VG10.

As the HVX was the leader for several years, Panasonic might again take center stage with M43 products. The AF100 and GH2 are appropriate companions on a multi-cam shoot. Canon, resting on its laurels with the 5DM2, is not expected to challenge the AF100, instead fixated on the 5DM3. Panasonic says it's not trying to entice Canon users, but the Birger EF lens adapter which allows the AF100 to read EF electronics (AF, aperture, IS) is attractive to anyone with Canon glass who wants to shoot with a bonafide camcorder. The AF100 is primed to lead for a while.

Fiio headphone amplifier

2011-03-14T16:32:00.000-07:00

After seeing this video, I was enthralled that I'd be able to monitor the Sennheiser ME66 shotgun mic as it goes into the GH2 using a minuscule Fiio E5 headphone amplifier, instead of buying an expensive and cumbersome JuicedLink DS214.

But the ME66 is not the proper impedance to allow headphone monitoring. The E5 accepts a line-level input, not a mic-level. In the video, the user connects the amp to a Rode VideoMic. I have a Rode NT3 mic, which I experimented with. The impedance is a close match to the E5 but not quite. It might be possible to monitor the Rode mic at full volume with loud noiseless headphones.

In lieu of sending the Fiio back to Amazon, I found another use for it. The AV cable included with the GH2 emits a line-level output that when connected to the E5 allows for very loud playback of recorded material. I've already used this in the field to assure proper audio entering the GH2. Unfortunately, the GH2 does not output audio during recording. If it did, or if it will in a firmware upgrade, that would be cake.

Hence, I went back to the drawing board to devise a configuration to enable headphone monitoring during recording, a hellish task for any DSLR. The result was this ugly but functional tri-cable.

XLR to ME66
3.5mm to Zoom H2 audio recorder
2.5mm to GH2

The big blob of tape houses two resistors for a -25db pad of the ME66 going into the GH2. It is not padded going into the Zoom since the Zoom has its own pad. Everything is mono. I can monitor the ME66 loud and clear while recording to the Zoom concurrently. There is no audible impedance or gain change although the ME66 is passively electronically split between two devices. Audio into the Zoom (with limiter off) and the GH2 (AGC) is clean and usable.

I've used this rig for run-n-gun interviews using a Cool-Lux bracket for the Zoom and ME66 and was refreshing to finally be able to hear what I was recording. There's no room for a Litepanels, which would require a cage or extender. A secondary feature of this ugly cable is that I can disconnect the 3.5mm plug from the Zoom to record and monitor stereo sound from the Zoom 2-ch or 4-ch mics while sending the ME66 signal to the GH2. In post-production using PluralEyes the shotgun and Zoom audio can be combined and mixed. That could sound stellar in some situations.

Although the Zoom H2 is an old product and the H4n and H1 are all the current rage, the H2 has some advantages as being lightweight, small, and stands upright since the 1/4"-20 hold is on the bottom. Thus, the level meters can be seen swiftly in the upright position, which is also good for 4-ch recording and can be outfitted with a Dead Kitten to thwart wind.

Later I will make another ugly but functional tri-cable to connect a wireless lav receiver and ME66, with an ME66 pad going into the GH2. The Radio Shack 2.5mm right-angle plug is very difficult to work with because the soldering contacts are very small and the surrounding plastic melts easily. This is the fourth cable I made using the Radio Shack plug, and it does get somewhat easier to work with. Here's what I've made thus far:

Tri-cable for mono shotgun mic monitoring and Zoom recording
XLR right-angle to GH2 mono
XLR right-angle -25db pad to GH2 mono
3.5mm stereo plug to GH2 stereo

The GH2's unconventional 2.5mm jack compels me to make my own cables since I prefer native connections instead of adapters. Thus far, I have never used audio adapters to get sound into the GH2, and I don't plan to. Adapters are finicky, and more often than not result in scratchy connections or a complete disconnect.

GH2 in-depth

2011-03-02T15:59:00.000-08:00

After seven weeks of intensive video shooting (24p NTSC) with the Panasonic Lumix GH2, I present a detailed, ongoing in-depth review. New info will be added accordingly. This technical and editorial synopsis is merely testimonial with no scientific evidence or confirmation from other users. Everybody has different experiences. At the moment I'm primarily a run-n-gun video journalist (as opposed to feature film or romanticist), so I need to move swiftly and adjust to the existing shooting environment. However, I am evolving into a Documentary Video Producer and perhaps slow down the pace a bit.

Backlight - Backlighting impairs the Auto White Balance. I realize manual white balance is preferred, but these clips demonstrate the GH2's AWB. In this example, those in the shade have a reddish tint, whereas persons in the sun are reasonably white balanced. In run-n-gun situations, it's difficult to determine if AWB is inaccurate or necessary to address at the time (especially with a small LCD or EVF), since there are more important matters to attend to, such as composition, focusing, stabilization, and sound. Color correction can transpire in post-production, but the aforementioned matters cannot be easily compensated in post, if at all.

Backlit video above with basic RGB color correction in Final Cut Pro. This video was taken with the Lumix 14-42 at 14mm in aperture-priority on a monopod. You can see manual aperture changes I made to adjust to the light before he sings. Because I used an external shotgun mic (Sennheiser ME66 with 25db attenuation cable) there are no operational noises while changing apertures (which the internal mic would have picked up). Backlit video below without color correction.

Fortunately, setting manual white balance on the GH2 is simple if there's a white card available. I do that when there's ample time and the lighting is fairly consistent.

Intense backlight - With Highlight (aka zebra), the entire background in the clip below was flashing black (drastically overexposed). Unfortunately, it was difficult to focus because the LCD was stymied by the intense backlighting. In this case, I stopped down to increase depth-of-field to bring the speaker into focus. The speaker's exposure and AWB are not correct.

Low light - I did a shoot on the second day I had the GH2 at an event that started at 8pm. Because I didn't have a fast lens, all I could do was increase the ISO and open the aperture. Nevertheless, ambient light was ample illumination to shoot the video below, although very grainy and way warm, but better than nothing. That night I had a Litepanels Micro to shoot in complete darkness. The AWB was inaccurate, but at least I was able to capture some footage in total darkness, which appears toward the end of the clip.

Again, an almost completely dark environment with a slow zoom lens and no Litepanels in the video below. As a run-n-gunner, I pretty much take what I can and document the event as it unfolds. My intent is obviously not to create an awe-inspiring presentation with technical perfection and clarity. The GH2 was on a monopod in aperture-priority or manual, and it's quite possible I was shooting well below the recommended 1/60th shutter speed for 24p footage.

Unfortunately, it seems that there are few instances where available ambient light is sufficient, e.g., outdoors during the day with low contrast. The big plus with the GH2 (and perhaps other DSLRs) is aperture, shutter, and ISO control, as well as a selection of interchangeable lenses, preferably with fast f-stops (1.4-2.8).

Manual focus - Focus assist is not available while shooting, and that is a detriment. With the small LCD and EVF, it's very difficult to attain precise focusing with moving objects, especially with heavy backlighting. The first two clips of the video below were taken with a Canon FD 50/1.8 lens that I bought for $5 at Adolph Gasser's two hours earlier. With proper focusing, the lens has excellent sharpness. Many old FD primes are fairly sharp.

Auto focus - It seems touch screen auto focus works best in consistent lighting and with stationary or near-stationary subjects, as least with the Lumix 14-42 lens. There are some methods to assure proper focusing: 1) Use better lenses. Supposedly the Lumix 14-45, 14-140, and 45-200 have responsive and accurate AF. 2) Stop down the aperture and bring a large area into focus, particularly when using touch screen on a perpendicular moving subject. 3) Read the manual. Several sections explain AF and MF with various methods to achieve proper focusing. 4) Ultimately I'd like to see MF assist (enlargement) while shooting video, particularly for moving subjects. Hopefully that'll be offered in a firmware upgrade. Until then, it might be better to stop the video and use MF assist, then resume shooting. That's also one good reason to use dual-audio, to overlay b-roll during pauses. 5) Buy a Z-Finder or Zacuto knock-off. 6) Use an external monitor such as a Marshall. Although some LCDs are portable (4" to 6") with hotshoe mount, one caveat is the 12v external power supply, thwarting mobility. These generally do not connect to HDMI yet. My tests show that MF assist and teleconverter mode is unavailable when HDMI is plugged in. I also could not playback to HDMI, which could be a configuration issue.

Lens adapters - I bought an EOS adapter because I already had a Canon EF 50/1.8 II lens, which I soon discovered is not very useful. It shoots wide open and manual focus with a loose and short focusing ring. In daylight the lens is too bright and requires ND filters. EF lenses are designed for electronic aperture and autofocus on EOS bodies. Why pay dearly for EF lenses if aperture and AF are not available on the GH2? Hence, I switched to a Canon FD adapter with an Open and Lock setting and a Nikon F mount adapter. FD and F lenses have a physical aperture ring to stop down, a long and sturdy manual focus ring, and extremely low prices, especially FD optics which became obsolete in 1987 when Canon switched to the EF mount.

FD lenses are sharp and well-built, and the Micro 4/3rds system is instrumental in reviving FD, F and other old lenses. Furthermore, the 2x crop factor allows longer focal lengths at fast apertures, e.g., a 100/2.8 (200mm telephoto on the GH2), 50/1.8 (100mm, aka "portrait"), and 28/2.8 (56mm, aka "normal"). The video below was taken with the 28/2.8 FD lens. FD lenses are a decent compromise for low-cost, high quality, and availability, but not without caveats. Generally, I think old prime lenses are adequate for scene-specific tripod shoots. It's easy to over-accumulate cheap primes, but there is no stabilization. Only Lumix optics have in-lens stabilization, and it might be wise to stay with Lumix zooms for handheld and impromptu grabs. The Olympus M43 systems have in-body stabilization, useful for old optics, but Olympus video is outdated motion JPEG at 720p with a seven minute recording limit. One Oly model offers 1080i but no 24p, and also limited to seven minutes.

Stabilization - As is common with camcorders and exacerbated with DSLRs, stabilization is challenging. There are many expensive robotic-type systems available from Redrock, Zacuto, etc., that capitalize on the DSLR trend and are often featured in sponsored reviews and webinars. Many of these systems are designed for feature films and controlled documentaries. None of them work well with unpredictable video journalism, notably within crowds of people in engaging political animosity. I seldom see complicated systems at events because it's cumbersome and nearly impossible to cut through a mass of agitated people. Notice the TV field camera, which is one big, heavy self-contained untethered unit with no protruding cables or mounts. Of course, TV people park anywhere and work out of a truck. Hence, moreso for the independent v-journalist to be extremely compact with all gear on their person.

My video journalism approach has been the same for years: camera, shotgun mic, monopod, small pack. The cheap Velbon monopod with quick release is effective, as shown in the singer video at the top of this techblog page. The QR allows me to snap the GH2 off the mount, temporarily abandon the cheap monopod (akin to TV videographers who leave their tripods), and shoot handheld from various angles.

Purists and amateur shooters of stationary serene objects always promote using a high-end tripod and spending a lot of time setting it up. In video journalism there's hardly any time or space to be meticulous. That's why generally the cheap monopod concept works best for me, the major caveat that when I plop it down, the impact noise gets picked up by the mic. The solution is to land it slowly or plop it down during an irrelevant moment. I've shied away from shoulder mounts from Zacuto and Redrock because of the expense and cumbersome nuances, but took a chance on the Adorama $45 shoulder mount, as used in the video below. As it turns out, it offers decent stability and mobility, especially with other journalists running around and subjects moving in unpredictable directions.

Although Lumix lenses have in-lens image stabilization, they don't compare to steady, physical support. The video below could have benefitted from a monopod, but sometimes I prefer to travel light and stealthy, especially at a business affair. Although not perfect, SmoothCam in Final Cut Pro at least made the clip less shaky and tolerable to watch. Canon 28/2.8 FD lens, handheld, internal mic.

In the video below I stood still and motionless for several minutes, using the Canon 28/2.8 lens with no post-production stabilization. Purists and fussy amateurs would not have even shot this video, and I ended up snapping stills as well. Because I didn't know the circumstances or agenda beforehand, I merely took the GH2 barebones with no stabilization or external mic. There's nothing wrong with shooting barebones, understanding that the video will be technically imperfect.

Although not quite DIY nor a major money grab, the Media Cage heavy metal bracket starts at $115 plus $10 shipping, or maybe make your own. With innovative creativity and knowledge, there's no need to go further into debt for overpriced products.

Sound - As I surmised and confirmed by others, the 4-level gain is not true manual, but various levels of AGC, which is generally fine. It's a quiet circuit and adequately thwarts distortion by limiting peaks, a form of compression. The caveat with all DSLRs is the absence of a headphone jack. Although the GH2's level display indicates a signal, there is no way to determine any audio anomalies. Something went bonkers in this clip below. Apparently, the mono external mic plug inadvertently dislodged from the jack, as consequent audio was picked up from the internal stereo mic. Fortunately, none of this audio was crucial, and in fact sounds pretty good in stereo. The cavity surrounding the jack is too small for some plugs, and the pressure the cover puts on the plug can easily pull it out. Just one millimeter of movement will break the electrical connections. My remedy was to file protrusions in the plug's housing, secure the cable to the shock mount to limit movement, and to assure in the EVF or LCD the microphone icon is always on. A more complex solution is a dual-audio system with headphone monitoring, where I would have heard the anomaly and corrected it.

There were moments in this chaotic video below where the plug inadvertently dislodged and the internal mic took over.

The GH2 is unusual with its precarious 2.5mm input jack. Most shooters reportedly use a straight 3.5mm-to-2.5mm inline adapter, which puts strain on the jack and is conducive to bumping. My precautionary approach to help attain jack longevity is to use right-angle plugs. Given that specialized cables, such as 2.5mm to XLR, are uncommon, I make my own using Radio Shack parts and a Neutrix right-angle XLR-F from eBay. Furthermore, the hot Sennheiser ME66 mic needs a pad, so I soldered resistors inside the XLR head. Refer to the singer video at the top of this page for the result. I will make many GH2-specific cables during the course of ownership to compensate for the GH2's non-standard audio configuration.

The biggest caveat thus far for sound has been run-n-gun shoots with headphone monitoring. Whereas the above paragraph describes run-n-gun without sonic monitoring and the below paragraph explains a tethered pro setup, the middle ground remains a challenge. I have considered inserting a Zoom H2 (which I own) in the chain or buying a Tascam DR-100 for headphone monitoring and dual-record. The Juicedlink DS214 headphone amp for $170 with tax and shipping seems to be a viable, albeit expensive solution for mic monitoring during recording. While investigating the DS214 I stumbled upon a Juicedlink-related blog with a comment and link to a DIY video that the shooter purports is a low-cost alternative to the DS214 with a FiiO E5 miniature headphone amp. He connected the mic directly to the FiiO. Thinking this was workable, I procured the item only to discover the input needs to be line level, not mic level as shown in the DIY video. I don't fathom how he amplifies the mic signal with the FiiO.

For paid sessions, I have to haul a lot of gear and dual-record. As a soundman I used a Sound Devices MixPre for several years interfacing with professional video camcorders. I continue to use this system with the GH2 and, of course, have to customize the configuration and tether to a waistpack for the sound equipment. Most notably, the MixPre's line-level output needs to be padded to the GH2's mic-level input with an inline 25db attenuator. I prefer this setup over a BeechTek or Juicedlink because of my familiarity with the MixPre, exceptional sonic quality, 1khz slate tone, dual anonymous outputs to the GH2 and Zoom recorder, rideable gains, adjustable compressor, phantom power for the Sennheiser MKH416, and switchable source/Zoom headphone monitoring. This system effectively compliments the GH2's audio circuit.

Mics - In lieu of the $229 Rode VideoMic Pro, which seems to be all the rage currently, I'd probably opt for the $95 Panasonic DMW-MS1 for its low profile, lower cost, short 2.5mm right-angle plug, and apparent optimization for the GH2. A Dead Kitten windscreen should thwart all but the heaviest gusts. This seems like a decent lightweight compact mic for kickin' around town and might possibly be useful in pro shoots, although YouTube videos show this mic is OK but not stellar. I don't think any short consumer mic will have adequate sound and rear isolation and wind rejection.

My current mics of choice are the Sennhiser ME66 or MKH416, both hypercardioids with Rycote Softie, essential for serious or pro shoots, whereas a small but heavy Shure SM58 with Dead Kitten is fitting for grabs or serious shoots where cardioid is useful, e.g., music events. The snafu with XLR mics is the rear protrusion of the XLR plug, which interferes with EVF access. Workarounds include the $30 Cool-lux bracket and/or right-angle XLR plugs.

I devised a low-profile rig using half of a mic holder, a hotshoe 1/4"-20 adapter, and a Shure SM57 dynamic mic, which unfortunately is somewhat heavy. However, the SM57 sounds excellent for location video. In my DIY rig I'm unable to cover the mic with a Dead Kitten because it protrudes into the lens, so two layers of foam must suffice. Because of its close proximity to the body and cardioid pattern, there's a possibility of picking up operational noises. The position does not interfere with EVF access, thanks to the right-angle XLR plug.

Ergonomics - The GH2 is very tiny, and is significantly dwarfed by the Canon 5DM2. The disadvantage of the smallness is that if I'm not careful when doing rambunctious shoots, my fingers hit a button on the back which throws me off. The remedy is to not hit any buttons, but if I do, to know how to get out of that dilemma ASAP. The benefit of the GH2's compactness is that subjects, especially activists who are weary of exposure, think I'm a snapshot shooter. Conversely, the giveaway is the big shotgun mic, but people still don't realize I'm shooting high-quality HD 24p native footage adequate for large-screen projection.

A possible downsize to smallness, is that producers might have a notion of amateur, and that the device is an off-the-shelf Best Buy consumer camcorder, whereas producers equate the Canons' big black bodies with massive lenses and outrageous Philip Bloom stabilizers and gigantus peripherals as professional attributes. Granted, the 5DM2 shoots full-frame, but if producers want to be on the cutting edge, they need to learn about the GH2, which doesn't explode after 12 minutes. The GH2 could reign, at least until the 5DM3 is released.

Battery - My most intense videography was about 1.2 hours of footage within two hours of start-and-stop shooting when the battery dropped to one bar (out of three). I could probably shoot 1.5 hours (one 16gb SDHC card at 24p) on a single battery, but because I have a spare, I prefer to change at one bar. The DMW-BLC12 battery is expensive and unique to the GH2. It is incompatible with the GH1 and visa versa. Because Panasonic does not include the AC adapter and coupler, a second battery is the cheaper option and two batteries should garner up to three hours of continuous footage on two 16gb SDHC cards.

The travel-sized battery charger has a pop-up plug and charges a dead battery to full capacity in two hours, which is fairly swift. Hence, if shooting where AC is available with two batteries, it's possible to extend the session by charging one battery while shooting with the other.

Snafu - Unfortunately, I have experienced one snafu thus far with the GH2. Occasionally the GH2 stops recording 2-3 seconds after starting. Depressing the record button again usually gets things started properly, but sometimes it takes a few starts. Some users report a bug in 24p shooting, and this could be it. Hopefully a fix is enroute via a firmware upgrade.

Money grab - Generally, I think the DSLR movement has been exaggerated so as to market an entire line of niche products when items made for earlier HD camcorders work just as well. Or perhaps no peripherals are really necessary, as I see an increased DSLR population shoot barebones.

Stabilization, for example, can be easily achieved by using a simple tripod. DSLRs are lightweight, yet gear moles tout heavy tripods with fancy features designed for a TV camera. The best tripod is the one on hand during the session, and if it's a "flimsy," so be it, or use it with a sandbag. Similarly, there is a slew of unbelievably overpriced robotic-type stabilization products, with Zacuto and Redrock being the main perpetrators. These are more appropriate for funded shoots, but bilking the indie filmmaker has its limits. Fortunately, copycats are entering the scene and pushing down the prices for nearly identical products. They're all made in China, so WTF? There are also innovative DIY techniques using generic parts to achieve such things as pull focus with lens filter wrenches or extended battery life with model car packs.

Personal recorders are all the rage in the DSLR industry and many bought into the big, and cumbersome $300 Zoom H4N, even those who never use phantom power and can get by with a $99 H1. Although I have a Cool Lux hotshoe bracket, it's easier to simply mount a shotgun mic. Because I've use the ME66 for years, I know its capabilities and proper placement. The GH2 has level meters and adjustable AGC, which I've tested thoroughly so I can set it and forget it. I'm also compelled to make my own custom cables. 'Just keep an eye on the meters, make sure the mic icon is displayed, and periodically use the instant playback speaker to check sound and footage. For pro shoots, I use the same sound system I've used for five years. Not explicitly mobile, but no need to invest in a Juicedlink that doesn't have a slate or dual outputs.

Shooting a DSLR is not much different than shooting a camcorder. In essence, the only thing missing is the electronic zoom control. Big deal! You can still shoot with one hand if necessary or convenient. When shooting with a prime lens there's no zooming anyway. Although amateurs go bonkers and deeply into debt over Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses to shoot pretty pictures, the obsolete Canon FD lenses in most cases are capable and dirt cheap; they're just not much to brag about, but produce pro results. Some folks are savvy to FD, as there's a slight price spike of certain FD lenses on eBay.

Gear moles, webinars, rumor sites, sponsored reviews, etc., are either given gear or aspire to be given gear, and amateurs awed by stoic technical perfection instead of content will always scorn less-than-expensive gear. With diligence, piss-poor filmmakers can procure the GH2, one of the few "cheap" pro camcorders that offers 1080p24 native and DSLR goodies such as effective aperture control. Ultimately, it's the story that drives the video, and the GH2's high-quality HD is up for the task.

Shooting without a heavy load?

2011-02-25T08:24:00.000-08:00

No Parking!

San Francisco is unique in a very bad way because it is impossible to travel by automobile. There's a big push by city officials and advocates that citizens use public transportation or ride bicycle, reflected by strict parking rules, limited metered slots, expensive parking violations, overpriced garages, and extensive red, blue, white, and yellow curbs for special vehicles, particularly in bustling parts of town. City officials have exclusive private parking spaces. Mainstream media have police permits. Bicycle advocates aren't videographers and carry nothing. Unlike every other town on the planet, independent videographers in San Francisco have to shoulder all their gear onto their backs, ride buses, walk long distances, pass security checks, and thwart muggings.

With some planning, DSLRs such as the minuscule GH2 provide an opportunity to travel small. Its 2x crop factor and extended tele mode allow shooting telephoto in low light at wide apertures. Such was the case when I shot a California Public Utilities Commission meeting with public comment about Smart Meters. Emotional opponents of Smart Meters were scheduled to speak en masse to CPUC commissioners about the Meters' adverse health risks and to persuade the board to abandon the effort to replace analog meters in every business and residence in town.

Pack it in, pack it out

I've never been inside the State building before, nor the hearing room. I had no idea of lighting, distance, what to pack, or security. I only knew that I'd have access to the sound mixer board but uncertain if the output was XLR, 3.5mm, 1/4" or RCA. Needless to say, I had to pack a lot of gear, including a tripod, into one backpack to fit on my back, on the bus, and pass the security check. My agenda was to shoot the meeting and the protest afterwards, offload and assess the files onto a laptop at the public library, then attend another meeting at the Federal Building. Hence, I had to travel compact, although not necessarily light.

I knew the 14-42 lens would be adequate at the protest, slated for outdoors under rainy skies. I knew an umbrella and plastic bags could help but not waterproof. I knew the public would speak at the hearing, but I wasn't sure if a monopod or a tripod was appropriate. If the latter, do I want to carry that around all day?

I packed a 14-42 lens, 50/1.8 lens, ME66 shotgun mic, Zoom H2, laptop, and a slew of associated cables and adapters. The stabilization device I settled on was a Slik 450g tripod. This isn't just a flimsy, but a super filmsy. It compresses to 14", expands to 32", and could be wobbly at times. Pros and fussy amateurs won't touch this thing. Would they carry a full-sized tripod all day around town and on the bus? Probably. But I wouldn't, and prefer to make do with what I have. It's called practical logistics.

I surmised beforehand that I'd need to record dual-audio, and I was right on target. The Zoom with two long-lasting lithium AAs and XLR-to-3.5mm adapter stayed at the mixer to record the public comment. I would shoot from elsewhere, initially in the back of the room. That wasn't a good idea, so I scurried to the front of the room line-of-site from the public podium. Space was extremely tight as there was a shooter on a tripod already set up, and I was told to allow space for two signers for the hearing impaired and two paths for staffers to pass.

Low profile

I was crouched down, since the Slik only extends 32". That tripod was a good choice afterall since I could lay low and not interfere with the signers or be visible to anybody. It wobbled momentarily after hitting the record button, but settled down after a few seconds. The 50/1.8 was also a good choice for the low ambient light wide open at ISO 800. What wasn't good was the reach. The 50mm on the GH2 is 100mm, and that wasn't enough. I should have brought the 100mm (200mm) lens instead, but that's only an f2.8, although it could have sufficed. Fortunately, the GH2, like no other DSLR, has the extended tele option which protrudes the 50mm lens to almost 200mm with good results while maintaining its 1.8 aperture.

My main gripe about the GH2 is its lack of MF assist while shooting, especially with shallow depth-of-field. Initially I focused on the podium mic, but each person stood at a difference distance and I wanted to focus on the face. Hence, sometimes I sacrificed the beginning of some presentations to focus. Knowing I was getting separate audio, I could always interject b-roll if what that person said at the beginning was useful. Usually it wasn't. I also shot the commissioners and audience during uninteresting or unrelated comment, again knowing I was recording separate audio.

Ultimately, shooting a short telephoto prime lens at f1.8, ISO 800, auto white balance, extended tele, shotgun mic, and on a flimsy tripod yielded usable results. DSLR with flexible settings and interchangeable lenses, and the exclusive GH2 extended tele feature, saved the session. Without any of these the video would be barely usable. There's still the option for post-production tricks such as scaling.

Negotiations

Because I negotiated with the signers and the existing videographer, I maintained a good low-profile position. Two mainstream media cameramen tried to squeeze in last-minute, but authorities told them to move, which they did. Mainstream only needs b-roll or a quick soundbite, so they don't need to stay long. However, I observed three mainstream video setups in the back of the room. With their telephoto zooms, they got decent shots of the commissioners, but probably not very good footage of the public speakers.

Overall, everything worked out fine. I got there early to assess the room and attend to separate audio off the board. The early arrival allowed me to establish a strategic shooting angle without being obtrusive. The GH2's features, compactness, and interchangeable lenses provided flexible technical options.

Luck of the draw

I will probably never shoot in that room again. I will shoot in other places with different circumstances and have to pack in anticipation and carry it all on my back. The gear I take could be hit or miss. Usually it's a miss, because in San Francisco there's no luxury of having backup gear tucked away in a nearby parked vehicle. This shoot was just luck and not much else.

Changes

It might be a good idea to have a "backpack kit," standard gear that can be stuffed into a pack yet flexible enough for various scenarios. I think what I took to the State Building was a good selection of equipment but at least two modifications would have been appropriate.

100/2.8 in lieu of the 50/1.8 and bite the dust with a slower lens.
Invest in the newer version of the Slik 450g, which has long been obsolete. The Slik Compact II collapses to 14" but extends to 39" and costs $30.

GH2 24p and 60i

2011-02-22T13:14:00.000-08:00

Both the GH2's 24p and 60i modes have snafus. The 24p sometimes doesn't respond immediately when the record button is depressed. This reportedly is a firmware issue and not specific to my GH2. Otherwise, 24p is stellar.

60i has a snafu that is not specific to the GH2. It's simply the inherent properties of interlacing. The lines appear on transcoded files, during editing on FCP, and after exporting with Compressor. Vimeo and YouTube convert video files to 30p, so when using these sites for distribution the interlacing is gone. But what if you don't distribute videos like this or prefer interlace-free files after transcoding?

My experiments show that precise settings in Voltaic HD, my method of transcoding MTS to ProRes, results in deinterlaced MOVs that are easier to edit with technically acceptable exports from Compressor.

Voltaic cannot deinterlace 60i in quick mode (Faster Conversions). I tried it and the result was still interlaced. Hence, when shooting 60i with the GH2 and transcoding in Voltaic it must be in slow mode (untick Faster Conversions). Of course, it's probably better to use the filmmaker's standard of 24p, in which case the quick mode is effective. There's no need to tick the Export as 24p button; that's pulldown for 24p over 60i (the GH2 shoots 24p native).

In the stills below you can see the interlacing in the top photo which was transcoded with Voltaic's quick mode, edited in FCP, and exported with Compressor. The interlacing stays within the video all the way to the end product. That's not good. Hence, use the appropriate settings right from the get-go to immediately deinterlace the MTS file to MOV. The bottom photo shows this result after being editing in FCP and exported in Compressor.

Using these methods offer the option to shoot 24p or 60i with good results. Although 24p is the recommended format, many instances call for 60i, e.g., the aforementioned snafu with the GH2, collaborating with filmmakers who do not have 24p camcorders or prefer 60i, smoother footage of moving objects, or shooting a two-cam or backup cam with the GF2. Bear in mind 60i in Panasonic Lumix G cameras is 17mbps. Only 24p offers the higher bit rate of 24mbps.

Old is new

2011-02-19T10:31:00.000-08:00

The momentum of the Micro 4/3rds (M43) format for compact Panasonic and Olympus DSLRs, including the much-heralded GH2, is revitalizing last century manual focus lenses. When Canon abandoned the FD mount in 1987 in favor of the EF mount, it was a death call for the mechanical metal FD lenses. Canon's excellent effort toppled Nikon's reign, which it held after displacing Pentax during the Eisenhower era. With the advent of autofocus, Canon elaborately built onto its electronic bodies and lenses and sent Nikon to second place in the 1990s.

Nikon tried to hold onto its F mount lenses with physical aperture rings while also developing AF bodies. Whereas Canon had nothing to lose by switching mounts, Nikon relied on loyalty from professional photographers with an extensive collection of AIS optics. The trick didn't work, obviously, as pros rebuilt from scratch with new Canon gear, which had faster AF that AIS could not match. Nikon finally shunned the aperture ring with its all-electronic G mount initially intended for amateurs. The company then realized pros preferred electronic aperture control with its intermittent f-stops, and made pro lenses. But the G mount was too late.

After Canon's takeover, the used market was flooded with unwanted prime F mount lenses, to join its dusty FD sibling already dormant for a decade. To exacerbate this abandonment, a new generation of photographers materialized in the 2k decade committed to Canon EF or Nikon G with no lens interchangeability. FD and F mount did not bode well during the 2k decade, and essentially left for dead.

The M43 sensor is smaller than APS size and totally compatible sans vignetting with 35mm lenses with adapters, available for virtually every mount dating back to the 1950s. Although EF and G lenses work with the proper adapter, they must operate at wide open aperture and manual focus on a short rotation. Not only are EF and G products expensive, M43 shooters don't want to pay exorbitantly for plastic lenses with limited functions. Thus, the best lenses are the older ones with aperture rings that allow stopped-down exposure in stills and video mode, and long smooth rotation for precise manual focus.

FD and F mount lenses are being revived by M43 users for dirt-cheap on eBay and Craigslist. A $25 50/1.8 (100mm) becomes a stunning portrait lens, a $30 28/2.8 (56mm) is an ideal normal lens, and a $90 100/2.8 (200mm) becomes a fast telephoto on a GH2. There's even nostalgia for the screwmount Pentax lenses from the 1950s, but availability is sporadic. Perhaps the best zooms for cost and quality are the Nikon F mount AF non-D series, good ranges being 28-85 (56-170), the $90 35-105 (70-210), or the $100 70-210 (140-420). Of course, these are manual focus on the GH2 with no stabilization, and best suited on a tripod.

It's unknown how long old FD, F mount, screwmount, or PK lenses will be coveted, but sellers generally are unaware of this demand among GH2 videographers. (The industry is focused primarily on Canon's 5DM2 as the de facto video DSLR). It's interesting that optics originally designed for film photos produce stellar bokeh-ish video with 2nd decade 21st century DSLRs. M43 users lavish the low-cost they can spend on a collection of fast, sharp, metal lenses to enhance their filmmaking endeavors.

above: Trio of dirt-cheap 1970s lenses revived in 2011. Excellent for GH2 video and bokeh.

below: Lenses that would be stellar for GH2 video if I had kept them. Pentax 40/2.8 pancake, Nikon 24/2.8 AIS or Pentax 24/2.8, Tamron 90/2.8 macro.

Music or not?

2011-02-18T20:25:00.000-08:00

Background music can have an impact on the visuals, giving the editor more control over emotion and speed. This could be good or bad, depending on how much influence the editor wants to project onto viewers.

I prefer music now that I'm doing longer pieces with narration. It used to be that I'd cover a protest or rally and shoot the angst and signs, which depicts the excitement and enthusiasm of the crowd. In fact, there are a lot more journalists and citizens at rallies recording only the anger.

Nowadays, there's usually a major cast of speakers at these events to present their point of view. I prefer to record as many speeches as possible and highlight the important and/or inspirational part(s) of the diatribe. Not surprisingly, these presentations can be very long, and some presenters are not very prolific. It also means slow editing, since I listen to each speech and piece together a comprehensive collection of clips that make sense. That's a nightmare for newsroom same-day edits. I generally don't do same-day edits and consider these rallies a piece of history.

Nevertheless, rallies focus on the speakers, and perhaps cops like this because it keeps people in a stationary location instead of meandering through streets smashing windows. Journalists and citizens don't listen to these speeches, or merely include the angst in their videos and delete the rest. The narratives tell the story; why they're rallying and who the perpetrators are. Hence, I've included speeches in recent videos.

Naturally, this means the clips are longer, usually too long for anybody to watch. I'm not concerned about massive hits. There are plenty of videos to watch anger and violence. My intent is to inform the viewer if they want to be informed. To do this effectively, control some emotion, and make the speech flow I include background music.

Using Pro Tools (or Logic Pro) and Reason, I'm able to drag appropriate audio clips into relevant parts of the video and manipulate tempo accordingly. Music also conceals irrelevant ambient noise. Some companies offer royalty-free cinematic clips and the better ones come at a price. SmartSound is the best that I've found because of its multitrack format. Although intended for their own Express Track application, SmartSound is compatible with Pro Tools, which has industry-leading editing features and excellent tempo shift algorithms. Unfortunately, SmartSound is very expensive at $100 per album, but sometimes a sale drops that to $33. Still expensive, but the only multitrack cinematic music I've found.

Stock20 sells songs for $20 each and has various versions of each song. Like SmartSound, Stock20 is instantly downloadable after payment. Footage Firm often has DVD "giveaways" (pay for shipping), but have to wait for delivery. Celebrity remixer Moby gives away selected tracks at Moby Gratis for non-commercial endeavors, but takes two days to acquire permission and download.

For the musically inclined, PeaceLove Productions sells loops in wav, aiff, and rex format for those who can create music with construction kits in Pro Tools, Logic Pro, Reason, etc.

The videos below compare no music and music.

New trends stalled

2011-02-17T14:15:00.000-08:00

Panelists at an Avid event in San Francisco entitled "An Evening Discussion of the Future of Non-Linear Editing" seemed to buck three trends.

1. Native editing

Steven Cohen, a digital editing pioneer and author of "Avid Agility", continues to transcode HD feature film files to DnxHD, bucking the growing trend among news outlets and amateurs to edit natively. Unfortunately, files such as MXF and MTS are delivery, not editing, formats. Editing these files directly in Premiere Pro, Sony Vegas, or Media Composer, or wrapping MOV around MTS in ClipWrap leads to jittery editing, which might be OK for strict deadlines in newsrooms or impatient amateurs.

It's tough to overlay and trim a lot of files on a native timeline, whereas ingesting conforms to the NLE. Hence, for quick editing for one-off short-lived pieces (such as TV news), native editing is appropriate. For longer pieces that require numerous revisions, transcoding still reigns, particularly with clips from various sources on one timeline. In FCP, mixed files that are transcoded to Pro Res offer smooth and precise editing.

Nevertheless, as technology progresses and computers become more powerful, native editing of current formats will probably improve. Conversely, future formats with higher bit rates are regularly introduced, constantly leaving NLEs several steps behind.

2. Cloud editing

What works for consumers such as calendars and PDFs is not suitable for serious filmmakers because of hacking and piracy. Although it could be convenient to collaborate with remote staff, piracy is the major obstacle that thwarts the popularity of cloud editing. Panelist Jim Duvardo, Chief Engineer of Hoff Productions, said his company does not use cloud editing primarily because of security concerns.

Unfortunately, for the foreseeable future the internet will remain unsafe and insecure, although fast bandwidth speeds are available for cloud editing. Hence, the technology exists, but only those working on projects where security is unimportant is cloud editing appropriate. Imagine working on a documentary with exclusive footage, only to see a hacker filmmaker release a video on the very topic with pirated footage. If the perpetrator is from a third world nation (likely), there's not much the legitimate producer can do about it. Be safe, skip cloud editing.

3. 3D

Panelists agree that 3D will not gain momentum until movies can be seen with the naked eye. Duvardo surmised 3D might improve in two years, but perhaps that's being optimistic. Panelist Casey Richards, Avid Applications Specialist, said Media Composer releases will embrace 3D development. Panelist Tony Welch, Creative Services Director of Beyond Pix Studios, said his company has not jumped into the 3D foray. Welch was the only panelist who splits his workflow between Media Composer and Final Cut Pro.

other concerns

Apple recently announced the demise of Xserve, not surprising to the panelists, to which Welch expressed very poor success using it. Avid's Unity provides better collaboration between editors, and panelists cited Unity as one of the most usable products in their workflow for in-house collaboration.

Cohen's book has an entire chapter on frame rates. "Before television, editors didn't have to think much about frame rates. Film moved at 24 frames per second or 90 feet per minute. There were 16 frames in a foot of film. That was just about all you needed to know." Frames rates are a mess, with 24, 23.976, 29.97, 59.97, and 30 on the NTSC side, plus a few more with PAL. The original Canon 5DM2 shot at 30 (not 29.97) and put audio out of sync. Television, color television, video, US standards, and European standards all attributed to the frame rate inconsistency.

Cohen seemed to be the most intriguing of all the panelists. Although a veteran, he has a better insight of the industry in its current state. He was quick to scorn Avid for charging exorbitantly for Media Composer ($2300), but mentioned the academic version for $300. Cohen did not appear too concerned about the ubiquity of bootlegged Final Cut Studio, which has no dongle or encryption. He seemed supportive of the bootleg concept, which forces bootleggers to buy an Apple computer, and from which Apple has amassed significant revenue. Apple is carefree with most of their software. Perhaps this approach has helped put FCP in the lead, whereas bootlegged copies of Adobe CS5, which are generally crippled, don't help Adobe at all. Media Composer, like Pro Tools, is dongle-protected with very strict and limited usage.

GH2 needs a mic pad

2011-01-15T19:54:00.000-08:00

I suspect the GH2's user adjustable 4-level audio gain is AGC instead of true manual gain. It seems to handle well the various mics I've tried, from high output mics (ME66) to low output mics (SM58). However, because the ME66 is so hot, I made a 20db attenuator cable (right-angle XLRF plug to right-angle 2.5mm TRS plug) specifically for the ME66 but probably for other mics as well.

Thus, I have a custom attenuated right-angle mono-ganged cable to natively plug into the GH2 and XLR mic. I have not seen a mic cable such as this commercially, and probably never will. Attenuation on the scale of 20db is a lot, essentially line-to-mic level.

Aside from a Neutrik XLRF plug from eBay, all the parts are from Radio Shack: 10k ohm 1/8 watt resistor (275-0006), 1k ohm 1/8 watt resistor (271-0004), 3/32" TRS plug (274-298), and 2-conductor shielded audio cable (278-0513). The Neutrik was the easiest to solder, and the two small resistors fit into the head with ample room. Conversely, the 3/32" right-angle plug is very difficult to work with because it is so small. But surprisingly I was able to resolder a previously used plug since I originally made a non-attenuating cable that was too short.

The stiff audio cable is somewhat tough to work with. For tight turns I used grounding wire, meticulously-trimmed leads, three-hands soldering tool, 15 and 25 watt soldering irons, and an assortment of wire cutters and needle-nose pliers. All these tools and a couple hours to make a unique cable that I hope is durable and long-lasting in the field. Because the cable is stiff, I made a longer length than needed and the nice thing about stiff cable is that it stands up on its own. So instead of the excess hanging freely and being cumbersome, I can position the cable upwards and away, and it will stay put. Hence, what I thought were bad properties turned out to be advantageous.

k9sound ready to gig with the GH2

2011-01-13T02:04:00.000-08:00

Overview

As a soundman, I have significant experience and IMDb credits capturing interviews for videographers for documentaries and feature films. I also have experience shooting solo interviews with a rented Panasonic HVX200. Now I have my own camcorder, a Panasonic Lumix GH2 DSLR that I use for shooting 1-or-2-person interviews as a one-man crew.

Some considerations

The GH2 is not without its caveats, all which I can work around. As a DSLR it has minimal provisions for audio and no headphone jack to monitor what's being recorded. Thus, I merely interface my existing pro sound gear that I've used for years with the GH2: lav, mixer, shotgun mic, Zoom recorder. I monitor off the mixer and watch the level meters on the GH2, which has user-adjustable gain. Audio is dual-record, so if there's anything amiss with the GH2 audio embedded in the mts files, I have the Zoom files that can be sync'd in major NLEs either manually or with PluralEyes. My intent, however, is to avoid syncing in post-production.

The other "caveat" is that I prefer to travel light, especially in high density parts of San Francisco where public transportation or bicycle is advantageous and less expensive than driving. In those situations, all the gear must be on my person. Hence, I need to know in advance what to expect with no flexibility for surprises.

"Minimalist" gear

Panasonic Lumix GH2 DSLR
Lumix 14-42/3.5-5.6 lens (AF)
Canon 50/1.8, 28/2.8 lens (MF)
Sound Devices MixPre 2-channel mixer
Sennheiser G2 wireless lav
Sennheiser ME66 or MKH416 shotgun mic with Rycote windscreen
Zoom H2 audio recorder
headphones
tripod
desktop mic stand
LitePanels Micro
cables and adapters

That's a lot of gear. The interviewee is lav'd and/or boomed, with fill-in illumination if required. The producer is off-cam, but the questions will be picked up by the mics. All this equipment fits into a backpack.

Specialty gear

Sennheiser blimp and shag for extreme outdoors wind
Boom with self-sufficient holder and stand
Rented Olympus AF or Canon MF lenses from BorrowLenses.com

This gear requires special handling and advanced notice.

Resolution

The GH2 shoots 1920x1080 HD native 24p at the maximum AVCHD bitrate of 24Mbps. The alternative is 60i at 17Mbps. Filmmakers prefer 24p. Files are mts that can be transcoded to ProRes in Final Cut Pro or third-party apps such as Voltaic HD. Avid Media Composer can import mts files and convert them to DNxHD. Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 can edit mts natively with the most powerful 64-bit computers.

I generally don't carry a laptop computer, but can offload the mts files onto your computer so the editing process can begin immediately. Offloading onsite is preferred over sending the large folder through the internet.

Sound and video

Because I'm shooting both sound and video, the visual is straight-ahead. I can't do any fancy angles or panning like dedicated DPs can. Generally, documentary interviews are narrative-intensive, so the visual impact might be secondary to the audio. This is not to say the interview cannot be exciting. Post-production techniques such as B-roll and cinematic music can enhance a talking head. My task, however, is to shoot the rudimentary interview with portable gear and fast set-up.

Send email if interested.

Premiere Pro is top dog at FCPUG

2011-01-12T18:47:00.000-08:00

If the San Francisco Final Cut Pro Users Group (FCPUG) is any indication, then a lot of FCP users prefer Premiere Pro CS5. In 2010, the FCPUG annual Supermeet began offering free workshops to participants. That was Adobe's first foray into FCPUG, when the Premiere Pro CS4 instructor said he wasn't trying to lure FCP users to Premiere.

Since then, Adobe has released the wholly popular CS5 suite with a new version of Premiere Pro that is killing FCP and even Avid, with its 64-bit software, native editing, and integration with After Effects. Adobe no longer has to entice FCP users to switch, they are switching on their own accord.

This year's Premiere workshops sold out fast! Also popular is the Canon DSLR workshop.

Caveat

Premiere Elements 9 is a scaled down consumer version of Premiere Pro. It does native editing of mts (AVCHD) files, including 24p, which is uncommon in cheap software. In my experience with the demo, PE9 truly edits native 24p mts footage from the GH2. No need for transcoding. Native editing is all the rage in the Premiere vs FCP threads, as shooters can immediately edit their material. The low-cost of PE9 is worth having for quick basic editing, albeit without the fancy features of pro NLEs, and no OMF export for Pro Tools audio editing that k9sound prefers.

All is well with PE9 with decent cropping, fairly smooth preview, and good H.264 exporting. The major caveat I found is the resulting file size. A three-minute 1080 clip ended up being 3gb. In other words, 1gb per minute. And rendering was much longer than the same material in Compressor, with a resulting file of 300mb.

Furthermore, uploading a 3gb file to Vimeo takes all night and swiftly eats up the weekly allotment. In the overall picture, PE9 takes much longer than FCP, especially if transcoding mts files to ProRes using Voltaic HD's very fast quick mode. My workflow is to transfer files from the SD card to a hard drive, which takes a few minutes depending on how much was shot, then begin Voltaic transcoding. I don't sit there and watch Voltaic, it continues on its own without putting the MacBook Pro to sleep, as FCP seems to do during log and transfer.

While Voltaic transcodes I do other things, such as start recharging any batteries used on the shoot, examine the gear, and properly return the equipment to its organized place ready for the next gig. I also attend to some business and personal chores. In fact, I'm usually not ready to edit right after a shoot, but if I'm in a hurry, I already know the footage I want and will only transcode specific clips or parts of clips.

Putting those ProRes files on the FCP timeline might even be better than working natively, as ProRes is optimized for FCP. I also have the OMF export option for Pro Tools. Compressor is quick to export 24p footage and the resulting H.264 movie file is way smaller than PE9, which will upload to Vimeo in minutes, not hours.

Conclusion

If Premiere Pro's exporting protocol is similar to PE9, then FCP and its extra steps are actually a much quicker workflow. I surmise that when Apple offers 64-bit software and native editing, it will be optimized for the new MacBook Pros and FCP will retain its reputation. It might not attract a return from Premiere bailouts, but those who stuck with FCP should be content.

GH2 mf, zebra, audio

2011-01-09T17:53:00.000-08:00

Panasonic must have realized that a continuous manual focus ring is unpredictable. Hence, the GH2 is equipped with a focusing guide, essentially a line with infinity to the left and close-up to the right. With this guide, the shooter can see where the focusing is and rotate the ring accordingly.

The other helpful feature is MF Assist, where the image is enlarged in the viewfinder for precise focusing. The menu option is 5x or 10x, and this also works with the extended tele. To cancel the enlargement, tap the shutter button or start shooting. Both the EVF and LCD are very sharp, making manual focusing easier than camcorders with coarse screens and/or menu focusing. Furthermore, the diopter is very effective, so EVF is usable for spectacled videographers.

What is usually absent from consumer camcorders is zebra, where overwashed sections are highlighted with blinking black lines. Panasonic doesn't call this zebra, it's called Highlight. Consumers don't know how to use zebra, and is unnecessary in programmed mode. Pros use it to adjust exposure manually, and even then it can be annoying if you're not used to it. Normally you don't want to expose zebra areas if they are not the subject; just let them wash out.

Sound

More about sound (as per earlier blog entries). I tried the ME66, a hot mic, in a fairly noisy environment at all gain levels, 1 thru 4. The results were similar: moderate waveforms with no peaks, pumping, or noisefloor. Probably I will keep hot mics on level 1 just to be safe. It's an interesting audio circuit and fortifies my theory that the 4-level option is AGC, not truly manual gain.

In comparison to the Canon Vixia, which has true manual gain, the GH2 appears to limit dynamic range, whereas the Vixia would peak. With the Vixia, I had to monitor the audio level closely and ride the gain between hot and cold passages. With the GH2 I merely set the level to 1 and let the limiter kick in. Even if the meter goes to red, it is not clipping...probably an indication that the limiter is activated.

Hence, wide dynamic range is diminished on the GH2. So for serious shoots when I need dynamic range, I will use a dual-audio system with a Zoom recorder that has true manual gain.

GH2 custom settings

2011-01-09T12:48:00.000-08:00

The 208-page GH2 manual is massive, and it's not a multilingual book. There are four manuals, each in a specific language. Hence, the instructions are detailed, although stealth in some respects. It's totally possible to shoot videos with the GH2 straight out of the box, as if handing it to someone to shoot, but with its array of features, dials, and multilevel menus, reading the manual is recommended.

That's not to say one should read the manual like a book. To do that would not just be uneventful, it would not make sense. Fortunately, the manual is written as a reference book, so when the user is curious or ready to use a certain function, then the user can reference a specific section.

Such is the case with the custom menus, labeled C1, C2, and C3 on the dial. Initially, I was not going to fuss with these settings, but after three days of shooting and experimenting, I have covered the basics and needed to move on. It won't be long before I've examined all the features, then can assess what's missing or what's not right.

In any case, the custom menus and assignment to the dial will be useful in the field. C3 is my main video setting in aperture priority, with C2 being the extended tele mode, and C1 as manual exposure. Likely I will modify C2 and C1 as needs arise. The custom menu option is a memory setting that saves every user-configured menu item. It's a big deal because there are so many menu items.

Caveat

The first caveat I discovered concerns the limitations of the 14-42 lens, in addition to the zoom and AF noise mentioned in a previous blog entry. The stabilizer on this lens is set with a menu item, unlike the 14-45 and 14-140, which are noiseless video-optimized lenses. Thus, I could not figure out a way, if there is a way, to disable the stabilizer and shoot 24p footage. I can only disable it when shooting 60i. Perhaps this isn't such a monumental issue, but I will often shoot videos while the GH2 is on a tripod, which is usually advisable to disable the stabilizer.

I'll keep the 14-42 for now, while I consider other lens options. As much as professionals allegedly shoot most footage with manual focus, I've relished having touch-screen focus while shooting with a Canon Vixia for three years that only auto-focused in the middle. In too many shots the subject was off-center and out-of-focus. Hence, touch-screen AF is an element I prefer to use in quick-moving run-n-gun situations. MF is akin to the 35mm SLRs of yore, when crucial shots were blurry. The GH2's AF is very fast, even with the 14-42 kit lens. During my first real shoot, which was in the dark at a very high ISO, the AF seemed to hunt. But I surmise that daylight and AF area adjustments are in order to get sharp shots.

If I were to go the MF route, as certain pros suggest, then there is no need to stay with m43 lenses. There's a larger selection of affordable Canon fast fixed primes compatible with the GH2 via a cheap EOS adapter. I have a budget Canon 50/1.8 EOS lens to use for interviews, and I'm waiting for its arrival from eBay and USPS. But I don't think MF lenses are my forte. I think the 14-140 or the 14-45/45-200 combo is an appropriate objective. All of these lenses are slow, however, essentially defeating the bokeh craze.

RAW

Another factor I wasn't planning on addressing was RAW still images, since I didn't want to mess with finding a plug-in for Photoshop. But, alas, that wasn't a problem since Panasonic included free Mac and PC Silkypix software that opens and edits RAW files. So my stills setting is RAW and I use the software to open and export RAW files to tiff for Photoshop editing. Eventually I might search for the Photoshop plug-in, but this workflow is fine. My emphasis is video, and as long I can open RAW and export it in Silkypix, it's all good.

GH2 is AGC

2011-01-08T14:51:00.000-08:00

The 4-level option on the GH2's mic gain is AGC, which essentially has varying levels of limiting, according to my tests and assessment. In my tests using Rode NT3 and Sennheiser ME66 mics with a Hosa XLR pad and the GH2 set at level 1, there is virtually no difference in gain, as the waveforms show.

Is it safe to surmise that when using hot mics, especially the ME66, at level 1 the GH2 will limit peaks? There's only one way to find out and I will shoot a noisy outdoors event at the next opportunity.

The other challenge is how well the GH2's multi-level AGC gain can handle an external mixer, in this case the Sound Devices MixPre.

Note 1. This is the 1khz slate from the MixPre at level 1 on the GH2. Although the meters hit the red, the GH2 limiters prevented the slate from peaking and in fact kept the waveform at a moderate level. Bear in mind that the MixPre outputs are line level. To make them mic level to conform to the GH2 I inserted a -25db stereo 1/8" pad cable between the MixPre and GH2.

Note 2. ME66 through the MixPre and pad as stated in Note 1. The ME66 is a hot mic, so there are traits of pumping, but not outlandishly. The MixPre has a fast-acting limiter, but keeping the gain at or below 0db prevents the limiter from kicking in. Overall, the ME66, MixPre, and GH2 work well together, but actual in-the-field shooting will confirm this array.

Note 3. NT3 through the MixPre and pad. The NT3 is not as hot as the ME66 but much hotter than the Shure SM58, which works well with the GH2. The NT3, MixPre, and GH2 also seem compatible with no pumping as described in Note 2.

Note 4. Sennheiser G2 wireless lav and MixPre. This is crucial for me since I want to shoot interviews for filmmakers. Fortunately, this setup works and sounds clean and clear with no pumping. Generally, however, I would dual-record to a Zoom H2, which has line level input and manual gain. The Zoom serves as backup in case the audio embedded in the mts files are not usable. My intent is to avoid using the Zoom backup files which requires the painstaking task of PluralEyes or manual sync in post. Nevertheless, I think the G2, MixPre, and GH2 will work well together professionally.

Note 5. Sennheiser G2 wireless lav direct to GH2. In a pinch, I can shoot interviews in this manner although I'd have no way to sonically monitor the sound. But using the meters on the G2 transmitter, G2 receiver, and GH2 display will confirm the audio workflow. Recording audio in this manner could be precarious because I can't hear possible drop-outs, interference, and other anomalies prone to wireless systems. The GH2 has a small speaker for preview, so that comes in handy.

Note 6. Audio-Technica wired lav direct to GH2. Again, no way to monitor the sound, but a wired lav is not prone to possible anomalies as a wireless lav. Generally, however, I won't do professional shooting without monitoring the sound, and prefer to record backup in a dual-audio scenario.

Conclusions

There's been a lot of threads, assessments, and sound systems concerning DSLR audio recording, mostly based on the Canon cameras which offered nothing or little sonix considerations. Panasonic apparently learned from earlier DSLR and their failures, by incorporating serious sound options in the GH2 within the original firmware. The 4-level AGC circuit is a very good compromise between manual gain, which doesn't limit peaks, and single-level AGC, such as on the Sony NEX VG10, which reportedly pumps tremendously.

All my tests with the GH2 produced usable sound, and as of this juncture, I conclude that Panasonic needn't change or improve the audio options in future firmware. Perhaps that notion will change if I encounter sonic anomalies.

GH2 first session

2011-01-08T04:11:00.000-08:00

My first actual shot with the GH2 was not representative of conditions under which I normally shoot. This session was dark, loud, and mobile. Nevertheless, I was prepared. The Shure SM58 mic with shag worked out very well because that mic has low output. A condensor mic would have peaked, and apparently hot mics will need a -25db pad. I'll have to make a special right-angle 2.5mm to right-angle XLR cable with resisters in the head of the XLR housing since an XLR pad will be too bulky.

The caveat with the 14-42 stock lens is the noise generated from physical zoom and perhaps AF. This anomaly is outlined in the user manual and even during a noisy shoot, there were times when zoom noise was present. For budget reasons, the 14-42 will remain in my kit for a while. I'm waiting for the EOS adapter for my Canon prime.

The GH2 in single-area focusing seemed to have trouble focusing on the touch screen area I chose. Hopefully it's because of the darkness, although some people recommend doing manual focus at all times. That's not a bad idea, but I'm hoping the touch screen focusing works out, especially for off-centered subjects. Otherwise, if manual focusing is the way to go, then m43 lenses are not imperative. Canon and other lenses with adapters opens up an unlimited selection of fast prime glass oftentimes at affordable rates.

Shooting in near darkness required a very high ISO, e.g., 3200. That's the maximum in video mode, and oftentimes with ambient light some creative effects can be achieved. For times I needed the subject illuminated, I brightened up the scene with a LitePanels Micro that I kept in my pocket and handheld and pointed. It's daytime balanced, but the color wasn't always accurate, but at least the subject was lit. What concerned me most was the high ISO would result in grainy, unusable footage. Fortunately, that wasn't the case. The footage is usable and looks fairly good. I also shot a few stills when it was so dark that video was impossible and the LitePanels couldn't reach. The stills were shot at its highest ISO of 28000 and they, too, look OK and not as grainy as anticipated.

This first session was all handheld. There wasn't time to setup a monopod. The GH2 is small enough to hold against the shooter to brace the camera, and the stabilizer works really well also. I read a lot about how DSLRs handle differently and that you need all those expensive newfangled shoulder holders and gizmos with numerous attachments. Perhaps that was true when the 5D was released 2 1/2 years ago, but I don't find shooting the GH2 much different than shooting a Vixia. When I had the LitePanels in one hand, I was indeed shooting the GH2 single-handedly. There's a lot of hype in the DSLR industry and I prefer minimal but effective gear.

Overall, the night shoot was successful even if I had to change ISO a few times. Exposure mode was aperture priority wide open, meaning 3.5 to 5.6 depending on focal length. Hence, in low-light, extreme low-light, and run-n-gun, the GH2 captured usable video and audio, whereas I thought there could be none, although the LitePanels helped immensely in total darkness. Nobody else was shooting video; they were shooting stills and some had DSLRs with big flash units. I couldn't use the pop-up flash on the GH2 because the hotshoe was occupied by the Shure.

GH2 initial response

2011-01-07T03:03:00.000-08:00

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2, aka GH2, arrived a few hours ago, so these are my initial reactions and comparisons to other reviewers. Thus far, no caveats. UPS came late in the day and I only had a few minutes of daylight to shoot a few unimpressive 24p videos right out of the box and they were fine. Nothing spectacular, but good focus, color, and sound.

During the night I read significant portions of the 208-page manual, grappled with some of the many menu and button settings, created a 2.5mm to XLR right-angle custom fit cable, experimented with external mics, tested various settings, and analysed a few seconds of footage in Final Cut Pro 6 and Premiere Elements 9. All good.

What reviewers said about the 14-42 mm lens is probably true. It's not the best build quality, but better than anticipated, and the zoom is neither smooth nor great. Nevertheless, it's a good lens, and I'm certain it will do well in the field and have longevity. The GH2 body is small, fairly lightweight, and very sturdy. Given the array of options, there's evidently a lot of micro circuits inside.

Sound

There's never much written about audio, so I was curious to hear how external mics sound and the response of the manual level control. Well, manual gain is only a four-step increment, so there's not a lot of leeway. There's also no attenuator like on the Canon Vixia line, so a hot mic such as the Sennheiser ME66 could peak in loud instances without a pad, even on level 1. I'll experiment later with XLR pads on that mic.

I plan to use a less directional mic with the GH2 for casual and event shooting, the Rode NT3. It's not as hot as the ME66 and is fine at level 1, although sometimes it could hit the red. The red, however, doesn't really indicate a peak, according to initial tests using Amadeus. I suspect that the NT3 might also need a pad in loud environments.

I tried a Shure SM58 dynamic mic and at level 1 the gain is very low. Level 3 might be appropriate for this mic and perhaps even level 4. I will experiment further with this mic. The SM58 just might be a good choice for loud scenes since it has low output. It's also very light and smaller than condenser mics. The $25 Rode Dead Kitten windscreen fits the SM58 as it does the NT3, which is ideal for gusts.

The internal stereo mic seems fine and of course it is prone to even the slightest breeze. That can be rectified easily and cheaply with a $15 Stick-On WindCutter, which is a permanent installation. There will be times when I'll just want to kick around town sans external mic, so the Stick-On will play a vital role in pickup videos.

One surprising element about the GH2 that nobody has mentioned is a tiny built-in speaker for reviewing videos. Because the GH2 is a DSLR, it does not have a headphone jack, and I was somewhat concerned that I'd have no method of confirming audio until I got to a computer. The tiny speaker will come in handy. The GH2 has left and right audio meters with the option to include it in the display during recording, so that's a definite plus for capturing sonics and watching the peaks.

The next audio test will be to connect a Sound Devices MixPre. Of course, I'll do video tests and actual shooting with the 14-42 lens, and when the EOS adapter arrives, I'll do bokeh tests and serious shots with a Canon 50/1.8 wide open. I'm enthralled to be able to set aperture, shutter, and ISO for video, just like shooting stills. I think only Hollywood cameras offered these adjustments, so it's stellar to bring that option to consumers. Also later, but not immediately, I'll assess stills, but video comes first.

Sonicfire, Pro Tools, and FCP

2011-01-01T02:23:00.000-08:00

Creative Cow is always a good source of information and oftentimes it's worthwhile to click their advertiser links, which are relevant to filmmakers. One such link is Sonicfire, an audio application that's intertwined with SmartSound cinematic music. The free Sonicfire Pro 5 Express Track showcases 30 second previews of tracks that can be purchased. Music can be searched by style, intensity, albums, genre, and keywords. Once procured, music can be mixed according to length, variation, mood, and tempo. Downloadable albums are $99 each, but stay attuned to specials. SmartSound had a short sale, so I was able to buy an album called "Investigative Journalism" for $33. Who knows, that sale might come up again, so visit SmartSound to get on the email list.

Sonicfire offers a $99 audio sequencer called Sonicfire Pro 5 Scoring Edition, or download the 14-day demo. Although it has similar attributes as other audio sequencers, such as envelopes, it's definitely not as robust as Pro Tools, and certainly isn't expected to be. However, Scoring Edition and Express Track are adequate, if not somewhat overwhelming, for NLE video editors.

I prefer Pro Tools to take full advantage of its state-of-the-art editing features, so I don't need to buy Scoring Edition. When you buy SmartSound albums, you are guided through a stringent security question process to assure you and only you can open the large ssdl file. When clicked, it launches Express Track. After answering the security questions and accepting the licensing agreement (which I read thoroughly), the ssdl file extracts and produces very-well-labeled sds files, which play in Express Track, where you can modify and export. But because I prefer Pro Tools, the sds files need to be converted.

On the Mac, Amadeus converts sds files to aiff very swiftly using the batch processor. These files can then be imported into Pro Tools as "ticks", each track being a certain instrument, such as drums, bass, percussion, etc. The last track, however, is the full song, which I simply mute. By creating a group, the SmartSound song can be time-stretched and moved to any location on the timeline. The mixer and envelopes go well beyond what Express Track or Scoring Edition can do, and there are tons of other flexible features that Pro Tools has, perhaps incorporating Reason or other midi elements.

By importing an OMF and video from Final Cut Pro, the SmartSound song can be placed where appropriate and mixed and time-shifted according to scene. Make sure the video soundtrack is set to "sample" to avoid being affected by tempo or elastic properties. There are a lot more details about this process which you'll see if you know Pro Tools and OMF, and experiment with Sonicfire.

SmartSound albums are some of the best and professional cinematic music I've heard, certainly much better than what I can create using samples, construction kits, and Reason. With the flexibility of Pro Tools, I'm able to manipulate these stellar songs and incorporate them into videos to enhance moods, from exciting to solemn. And I've read the licensing agreement that does not say I can't remix the songs in this manner.

Soundbite

Soundbite+SmartSound

Soundbite+SmartSound+Reason

2011 DRM, FCP, PRC

2010-12-29T20:47:00.000-08:00

Two tech bloggers make predictions or hopeful aspirations about 2011. One guy says movie piracy will cease if DRM includes simultaneous release of flicks in theaters, on disc, and online.

Another dude says Final Cut Pro will not be overhauled until 2012 but will have a modest upgrade in 2011. Furthermore, he says Apple doesn't care about all the amateurs bailing to Premiere.

What won't change in 2011 or anytime soon is the lackluster internet and wireless connectivity. Internet speeds remain slow and are of no use to HD filmmakers who collaborate with a worldwide talent pool. Filmmakers send flash drives to colleagues by traditional delivery methods such as USPS, UPS, and FedEx. Meanwhile, cell-to-cell communications are still bad and maybe worse than 1995 when I got my first cellphone. Drop outs and dropped words prevail.

Hence, not much change in 2011. Unemployment, uninsured, inebriation, and a flood of cheap Chinese products shall continue. Hopefully, China won't redeem the US treasury bonds.

Welcoming 2011 with the same old Chinese gear

2010-12-29T20:03:00.000-08:00

As we enter 2011, k9sound inventory remains unchanged.

The 2005 MacBook with a paltry 64mb GPU will enter its sixth active year of operation in May 2011. It runs Final Cut Pro 6, but not Motion. It's beaten up, looks hellish, Airport doesn't work, and has occasional screen flicker and speaker cuts, which makes it ideal for totting around town since it's essentially not worth stealing. And of course the original battery and power adapter have long been trashed.

The "outdated" aluminum non-unibody MacBook Pro built in 2008 is still strong and was recently outfitted with a new mobo, courtesy of Apple. It runs Final Cut Pro 6 and Motion and seems to do it "swiftly," although I have no way to compare it to faster and current laptops.

My first HD camcorder was procured in April 2008, the long "obsolete" Canon Vixia HF100. This battered workhorse has been through hell but still works almost flawlessly, except the headphone jack is kaput. Although stamped "made in Japan", there undoubtedly is a lot of Chinese technology inside. This camcorder will take a backseat to the Panasonic Lumix GH2 DSLR when it arrives and if it is as good as reviewers say. The HF100 will eventually be replaced, perhaps with a newer Vixia.

I don't own anything that starts with "i", but my prepaid phones are miraculously holding up, and we all know how mobile gear takes a beating. Nevertheless, if either of these breaks it just means buying a cheap Chinese replacement at BuyBest.

My three M-Audio interfaces (1814, Fast Track Pro, Transit) are all functioning as they should, ditto with an Alesis rackmount equalizer and Lexicon effects processor, and one of two RNC compressors. The Colby 15" HDTV which I use daily as a monitor for a cheap PC clone laden with Chinese parts is holding up well, same with the DVD and dual-cassette player of yore.

Perhaps what will malfunction the soonest are hard drives, with the myriad components and moving apparatus. The workaround is that these drives get full within six months with HD video, so they are archived and used sparingly. Hard drives are the epitome of sweatshop technocracy and are expected to crap out.

Although the USA is heavily indebted to China and Americans are unemployed, uninsured, inebriated, and on the run from collection agencies, China keeps yankees complacent by providing cheap affordable gadgets that even the most downtrodden can embrace.

HTML5 has no DRM

2010-12-21T13:24:00.000-08:00

One major concern about HTML5 is the use of the SRC tag. HTML5 proponents never acknowledge or care about this when promoting HTML5 over Flash, but finally there is an article that mentions it.

Excerpt

When to Consider HTML5
Video/Audio Streaming (non-DRM): If the content you’re streaming is not proprietary in nature and does not require rights management, HTML5 is a great option for providing that content with very small overhead.

When to Stick with Flash
Video/Audio Streaming (DRM): When you need to protect the rights-managed content you’re streaming to prevent pirating, sharing or unauthorized downloading of that content.

HTML5 Vs. Flash

FCP longevity

2010-11-25T03:56:00.000-08:00

A lot of people who are not in the middle of projects, particularly amateurs, are migrating to Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 for native editing of major formats, including XDCAM, DVCPRO HD, and especially AVCHD. Although users are impressed with the speed and swift native editing without transcoding and salivate over high-end Mercury compatible graphics cards, nobody openly discusses the dollar amount of the investment.

Typically, desktop PC systems that take full advantage of the 64-bit capabilities of the Premiere software are at least $2,000, especially considering that 16gb RAM and 1gb VRAM on an i5 or i7 CPU is a recommended configuration. There are few elite PC laptops that can fully tap into Premiere, and these machines are generally available only from boutique manufacturers in California, and cost $3,000 or higher plus 9.5% sales tax.

Hence, a true Premiere Pro CS5 system is about $3,000 for a desktop PC and software, or $4,000 for a comparable laptop. Avid Media Composer 5 is worse. The software alone is $2,300. Thus, an Avid system is $4,300 and $5,300 respectively.

AVCHD was never intended to be edited natively, but Adobe and Sony Vegas have developed expensive ways to do it by exploiting top-end hardware with demanding system requirements. Amateurs are always quick to adopt to the latest gadgets and upgrade and change systems regularly, since they don't have any ongoing projects. The video industry relies on amateur investment who faithfully follow gear moles such as Philip Bloom. The difference is that Bloom gets his equipment for free and profits from reviews.

Conversely, filmmakers whose projects span several years are cautious about upgrading software or operating systems, not just with version upgrades but increments of version upgrades, such as Snow Leopard 10.6 to 10.6.5. In fact, incremental versions of Snow Leopard reportedly deems some elements of Final Cut Studio 2 non-functional, and Apple advises an upgrade to Final Cut Studio 3.

My approach to operating system upgrades is a clean install to wipe out junk and expired demos. Like many filmmakers, video content resides on external drives. Although Snow Leopard was released in August 2009, I did not upgrade until November 2010. By that time Snow Leopard had progressed to version 10.6.5, which I quickly discovered disabled Compressor 3.0.5. Hence, I reformatted the hard drive again and installed only 10.6.0 with Rosetta to run legacy software. Each clean install of the operating system and software takes me six hours.

I will not upgrade to Lion. In fact, I don't think either my five-year-old MacBook or three-year-old MacBook Pro will be Lion-compatible, given their archaic hardware. Nevertheless, I do not plan to upgrade my Mac laptops, Final Cut Pro, and operating system for two years, and I have discovered methods to add life to these aging systems.

Voltaic HD

I first dabbled with Voltaic in 2008 after buying a Canon Vixia HF100 that year. I was hoping that Voltaic would transcode AVCHD quicker than Final Cut Pro, but it didn't, so I stayed with FCP. I also experimented with ClipWrap (good concept but choppy editing and slow export) and Xilisoft (no ProRes).

Voltaic HD was released in 2009 and the latest version has two features that interest me: an experimental expedited conversion and 24p pulldown, both with resulting ProRes 422 files for native editing in FCP.

Expedited conversion is probably no quicker than Log and Transfer in FCP, and Voltaic's preview does not yet have audio. The one advantage Voltaic has over FCP is that FCP tends to enter "sleep" mode during long conversions and stops converting. Otherwise, transcoding 60i is the same, with the annoying interlacing lines in the file.

The biggest feature I see with Voltaic HD is the 24p pulldown, where shooting AVCHD 1080p24 inside a 1080i60 wrapper needs telecine conversion. Compressor doesn't work with MTS files and the pulldown process in FCP is not well defined. Some users say to Log and Transfer and drop the file onto the timeline and let FCP adjust the sequence accordingly. Others say to drop the file onto a 24p sequence. Neither of these methods is telecine, as far as I know, whereas Voltaic is very clear about the process, and the resulting ProRes 24p mov file is clean and sharp with no interlacing lines.

from Voltaic:

Many cameras that have the ability to shoot in 24p mode do not actually store the footage at this frame rate. We have found this to be the case for the Canon AVCHD range of cameras.

When shooting in 24p mode they will capture 24 full frames per second, but then actually store the footage in 60i (i.e. NTSC which is 29.97 frames per second, interlaced) format into the video file.

This process is known as telecine and can be done several different ways. Commonly it is achieved by splitting the full frames (progressive) into interlaced pairs and periodically repeating a frame to increase the frames per second from 24 to 60. The is known as 3:2 pulldown, as 2 progressive frames are split into 5 interlaced frames. For example two full frames (A and B) are encoded as A1:A2:B1:B2:B2, where A1 is the first interlaced half of frame A, A2 is the second interlaced half of frame A and so on.

It is possible to perform the inverse operation (inverse telecine) and retrieve the original 24p footage.

VoltaicHD can perform a inverse telecine pulldown to restore the original 24p movie from the recorded 60i movie.

VoltaicHD can also preserve the 60i movie and create a 60i output movie.

Pulldown

Even with expensive workstations, editing 24p over 60i AVCHD natively is not possible. Premiere Pro CS5's method is complicated and one expert recommends using After Effects instead. Wow! It really is easier to do the pulldown in Voltaic HD.

from Coert Vonk:

Premiere Pro makes a fair attempt at removing the pull-down, but on high motion scenes, it misses the boat and doubles frames or leaves interlaced frames. At first glance, playing with the the Field Options appears to help, but closer inspection of the rendered output will reveal doubled frames giving the video a stuttered look. Those who shoot “24p wrapped in 60i” and expect a correct pulldown will need additional steps.

Oddly enough the companion product After Effects CS5 (AE) does a better job at removing the pull-down. Maybe one day, the Premiere Pro developers will decide to reuse the .mts import functionality from After Effects. Until then, you will need some additional legwork to extract the 24p from the 60i container. For this, the following approaches come to mind:

Import the Premiere Project in After Effects. Right-click each clip and have it Interpret and “Guess 3:2 pulldown”. This can be automated by using a script such as ReverseTelicine.jsx. The only downside is that AE only supports a subset of the Premiere Pro elements. Titles and most transitions will be rendered as black video.
Import the clips in After effects and have it guess the 3:2 pulldown, create compositions and dynamic link those for use in Premiere Pro. This will only work in the Premium version.
Use After Effects to convert the 24p-in-60i .mts files to 24p .mp4 files. This can be achieved by importing the .mts files; select them all; and runReverseTelicine.jsx to have it guess the cadence; select them all clips and add them to the Render Queue. One would then import these 24p .mp4 files in Premiere Pro, or if you have an existing project using .mts files, you would replace the .mts assets with the equivalent .mp4 assets. Note that AE still makes some mistakes, but beats PP.
Stick with the approach outlined in Editing AVCHD 24p using Adobe Premiere Pro CS3. It takes a lot if disk space, but it is fast and accurate. This might feel as two steps forward and one step back, but it is correct and the approach that I use myself.

Conclusion

I'm eyeing a 24p native system with clean HDMI output that will also salvage my old FCP workstation. Buying a Panasonic Lumix GH2, Canon Vixia HF S200, and Atomos Ninja (ProRes recorder) is not only cheaper than a Premiere Pro CS5 system, but I'd have both native editing and marketable gear for paid sessions.

Perhaps the big question would be "Is time or money more valuable?" The few minutes I spend transcoding is well worth saving thousands of dollars over a native system. Amateurs savor the latest gadgets, have no loyalty to any application, have no ongoing projects, do not collaborate with others, and assimilate gear hype, so they always buy stuff to be awed by flower videos with bokeh and classical musak.

Conversely, professional editors need to consider profit, workflow, and training before procuring costly upgrades. I'm seldom under strict deadline, people I work for do not require quick turnaround, most clients use FCP, and I'm leery of profitless expenditures. Hence, a native Premiere or Avid system is simply a bad investment.