projected Mini DV has the wiggles

[Michael Carter]

"Woah! What is that? Why does it wiggle in a zoom?" I wanted an answer. "SHHHH"
was the only reply. Everyone was in rapt attention for the showing of the
movie.
Nuts.
If this is DV, I want no part of it.

[Ned C]

"Michael Carter" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:

"Woah! What is that? Why does it wiggle in a zoom?" I wanted an answer.
"SHHHH"
was the only reply. Everyone was in rapt attention for the showing of the
movie.
Nuts.
If this is DV, I want no part of it.

First check that the "wiggle" is present on a regular TV/Monitor if it is
then the fault is with the original and is most probably due to poor camerawork.
If the "wiggle" is present only on the projection unit than there is some
form artefacting introduced by the projector. DV is a very good format and
is widely used for program acquisitiion. Perhaps you mean DVD?

Ned C

[Michael Carter]

Perhaps you mean DVD?

Nah, it was a miniDV tape in a Sony player machine then into a video projector.

It might look better as a DVD I grant you that. However, I'd rather have
a 16mm projector and not see such "artifacts" at all. Previously, I'd only
seen such things on plad shirts and the like. This occured on every part
of the image where there was an edge. Considering the cost of a video projector,
it is very unacceptable for sure. And the Sony player costs more than a camera!

I suppose no one wants to admit such things happen because of how much was
invested in the latest and greatest. But I SAW IT, I saw it.

[AN]

"Michael Carter" <mcarternospam@16mmoviemaking.com> wrote:

Perhaps you mean DVD?

Nah, it was a miniDV tape in a Sony player machine then into a video projector.
It might look better as a DVD I grant you that. However, I'd rather have
a 16mm projector and not see such "artifacts" at all. Previously, I'd only
seen such things on plad shirts and the like. This occured on every part
of the image where there was an edge. Considering the cost of a video projector,
it is very unacceptable for sure. And the Sony player costs more than a
camera!

I suppose no one wants to admit such things happen because of how much was
invested in the latest and greatest. But I SAW IT, I saw it.

I have a Bolex 16mm reflex camera and Bolex projector.
I also have a Sony TRV900 video camcorder and Sony VPL CS2
projector and the miniDV player you mention too.
Cobwebs are now beginning to bury my Bolexes into history, the
video gear is used all the time now when giving film shows etc.
That says it all.
Albert....saying things.

[Michael Carter]

video gear is used all the time now when giving film shows etc.

Certainly, it is much easier than using film and looks good enough. All I'm
saying is to work around the limitations of the media. Avoid things that
cause the artifacts to show up in the first place. Do not zoom. Do not pan.
Have actors change clothes to solids or patterns that do not create wierd
effects on screen.

I am very interested in all things movie, film, or video. Both are used.
I'd like to have a 3 chip miniDV camera in order to transfer my film movies
in the higher quality (higher than Hi-8mm video) into the computer. And I'd
like to have the miniDV format in order to play miniDV tapes made by Pro8mm
in London of S8 negative transfers and of 16mm film negative transfers. Negative
film is difficult to transfer to video because so much dirt shows so clearly.
Reversal is easy to clean and transfer at home and looks professional if
you have a Dual 8mm WorkPrinter as some S8 shooters do. I'd even consider
a 16mm Workprinter to go with the 3 chip camera for ultra high quality. That
would make fantastically great images.

[AN]

"Michael Carter" <mcoo7fo737nospam@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

video gear is used all the time now when giving film shows etc.

Certainly, it is much easier than using film and looks good enough. All
I'm
saying is to work around the limitations of the media. Avoid things that
cause the artifacts to show up in the first place. Do not zoom. Do not pan.
Have actors change clothes to solids or patterns that do not create wierd
effects on screen.

I am very interested in all things movie, film, or video. Both are used.

Hope you can get a 3ccd miniDV camera soon. That and nle and the world is
your oyster!

When one considers how far digital video and computers have come in the last
5-10 years it's quite amazing. I guess quite soon all mechanical systems
will be obsolete and everything will run silent, solid memory taking over
from tape/CD/DVD etc. The car has been around only 100 years or so, PCs
and digital far less.
I reckon we are about at the little Austin Ruby car stage in
digital video...one day we shall be shooting with a Jag!!
Albert....putting his foot down.

[Michael Carter]

I reckon we are about at the little Austin Ruby car stage in
digital video...one day we shall be shooting with a Jag!!
Albert....putting his foot down.


Well, I'm using a scooter then with analog Hi-8, however, I do have Premiere

5.1 and I make some pretty nice SVCD disks for my DVD player.
Some day we will have HD widescreen progressive consumer cameras to upgrade
to. That and solid memory cubes will really turn the corner. When that happens,
I'll sell tickets to my film studio collection as a museaum. Till then, I'll
use it some more.

[AN]

"Michael Carter" <mcarter@16mmoviemaking.com> wrote:

I reckon we are about at the little Austin Ruby car stage in
digital video...one day we shall be shooting with a Jag!!

Well, I'm using a scooter then with analog Hi-8,

I used to ride a 125cc Lambretta scooter, years ago....now
they are collectors items. Bought mine for 125 quid...on HP!
Albert....scooting off.

[Ned C]

"Michael Carter" <mcoo7fo737nospam@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

Certainly, it is much easier than using film and looks good enough. All
I'm
saying is to work around the limitations of the media. Avoid things that
cause the artifacts to show up in the first place. Do not zoom. Do not pan.

I use DV and zoom and pan and have no problems when the results are shown
on a large projection TV. So your problem has not really been answered. Do
the wiggles show up on a regular monitor or are they only seen on projection?

-

I am very interested in all things movie, film, or video. Both are used.
I'd like to have a 3 chip miniDV camera in order to transfer my film movies
in the higher quality (higher than Hi-8mm video) into the computer.

We have transfered reversal film, 8mm S8 and 16 to DV with excellent results.
It helps to have a camera with clearscan. I have a chum in the UK who does
this commercially at reasonable rates.

And I'd

like to have the miniDV format in order to play miniDV tapes made by Pro8mm
in London of S8 negative transfers and of 16mm film negative transfers.
Negative
film is difficult to transfer to video because so much dirt shows so clearly.

I had a look at the Pro8 prices, very expensive, Have you used their service
and what do your think of it?


Ned C

[Michael Carter]

Do the wiggles show up on a regular monitor or are they only seen on projection?

The DV was only seen projected. I don't know if a tv would show them.


I had a look at the Pro8 prices, very expensive, Have you used their service
and what do your think of it?

Not yet. They are one of the few that transfer negative film. I will use

them eventually as they sell some really interesting negative films (asa50
to 800asa) and at those prices I don't want to mess up the films. It'll be
a good test to see what real professionals are doing and how close I can
come with what I currently have to use. The low light filming especially
interests me.

[Michael Slowe]

"Michael Carter" <mcarter@16mmoviemaking.comnospam> wrote:

Do the wiggles show up on a regular monitor or are they only seen on projection?

The DV was only seen projected. I don't know if a tv would show them.


I had a look at the Pro8 prices, very expensive, Have you used their service
and what do your think of it?

Not yet. They are one of the few that transfer negative film. I will use
them eventually as they sell some really interesting negative films (asa50
to 800asa) and at those prices I don't want to mess up the films. It'll
be
a good test to see what real professionals are doing and how close I can
come with what I currently have to use. The low light filming especially
interests me.

The professionals are gravitating towards the new High Def. tape cameras
developed by Cine Alta and Sony. It's as good looking as 35mm. film and I
was with a well known director last evening who has just shot a feature on
it in America.

Many TV programmes in Germany and in Italy are originated on it. Rather expensive
for us at present but we know how fast things are moving.

By the way my Mini DV, originated on DV CAM does not wiggle when projected,
even a 12 foot picture. Its a brighter, better image than my 16mm. prints!

[AN]

"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:

By the way my Mini DV, originated on DV CAM does not wiggle when projected,
even a 12 foot picture. Its a brighter, better image than my 16mm. prints!

Yeh, that's what I like to hear. Get rid of 'sweet 16' !
Now how can one do this on film? > 1 3/4 hour(!) film with 242 dissolves.
Took me a mere 8 weeks to complete. On 16mm I would now be in the nut
house struggling with dissolve No 2.
Albert...never again sweet 16!

[Michael Carter]

By the way my Mini DV, originated on DV CAM does not wiggle when projected,
even a 12 foot picture. Its a brighter, better image than my 16mm. prints!

Was that a miniDV camera, single chip, three chip, or a larger version DV

camera that takes miniDV tapes?

[Michael Slowe]

"Michael Carter" <mcarter@nospam16mmoviemaking.com> wrote:

By the way my Mini DV, originated on DV CAM does not wiggle when projected,
even a 12 foot picture. Its a brighter, better image than my 16mm. prints!

Was that a miniDV camera, single chip, three chip, or a larger version DV
camera that takes miniDV tapes?

No it is not Mini DV but DV CAM which is a format originally developed (I
think) by Sony. The camera is a three chip, rather heavy, the size of a Digi
Beta but about eight times cheaper! The tape gets more information (better
pictures and sound I think) than Mini DV. Some TV stations will accept it
but still prefer Digi Beta. Although I master back to DV CAM for archiving
I also master from the computer to Mini DV because that is what most people
(and festivals) can show.

[Brian Hazelden]

No it is not Mini DV but DV CAM which is a format originally developed (I
think) by Sony. The camera is a three chip, rather heavy, the size of a DigiBeta

but about eight times cheaper! The tape gets more information (better pictures
and sound I think) than Mini DV.

Sorry Michael, both DV CAM and mini DV record at 25 Mbits/sec. The potential
image quality is, therefore, identical in both formats. The difference is
that DV CAM tapes run faster giving a greater track pitch and, theoretically,
less drop-out. Oh, and shorter recording times.

I say theoretically because I have yet to see drop-out in mini DV, but have
found my DV CAM VCR to be a bit "picky", particularly with output from NLE
systems.

Wiggly images sounds like timing jitter in an analogue signal, but what do
I know?

Brian Hazelden