Calling all pros please

Randy Brown wrote on 7/9/2002, 3:44 PM
I have a small recording studio in an area with a population of about 80,000. I get most of the business here but as you can imagine I need to supplement my income with another source. I'm thinking about purchasing 2 Sony XV2000s and 1 Sony PD150(to enable XLR connection of pro mics, etc. via a mixing board). I have 2 teenaged kids to operate the XV2000s while I stay with the stationary PD150. I'd like to be able to monitor what they are shooting (from my stationary point)and tell them via headsets what angles,zoom etc. I want them to do. I'll also need to buy tripods,editing software (probably Vegas Video 3) and various other accesories. Any advice on where to purchase equipment(or anything else you may think of) would be very much appreciated.

Thanks in advance,

Randy

Comments

tserface wrote on 7/9/2002, 5:16 PM
If you get a small Videonics mixer you can attach all of the video sources and see them on one tiled screen (for each camera). Then you can transition to any of the cameras as the main source (that which you are recording) at any time and talk to your people about future shots while a current one is recording. This works pretty well for recording live events where you know something is coming up that you will want to have close up or far away, but you don't want the distraction of zooming on your recording.

Tom
Randy Brown wrote on 7/9/2002, 5:33 PM
Sounds great Tom but I'd like to have all 3 camcorders recording and decide in post what to use. I just want to monitor what they are recording so that I can tell them what to record. I have a feeling I,m missing something in what you wrote or implied but forgive me please, I'm new to this.
Thanks again,
Randy
Chienworks wrote on 7/9/2002, 7:18 PM
What Tom suggested will work fine, just keep the tapes running in each camera. Actually if you record the Videonics output as well while you're taping you'll have a nice multiview version to mull over while planning your final edits.
seeker wrote on 7/9/2002, 7:30 PM
Randy,

I like your idea of keeping all camcorders running and deciding in post what to show. I am a bit confused by your mention of "2 Sony XV2000s". Are you referring to Sony DCR-VX2000s?

You mentioned tripods. Sony has several models of tripods specifically designed for their camcorders, including several that are "smart" and let you operate the camcorder by remote control. This is particularly important for when you are using extreme telephoto settings, where just touching the camcorder to change a setting would cause a noticeable movement of the image. You might want to look into the Sony remote control tripods.

Sony has been widely criticized for their poor implementation of progressive scan. Vegas Video can convert your footage to progressive by interpolation between scan lines, and there is a third party program that claims to do an even better job of converting interlaced to progressive scan. But the camcorder should "take" good progressive and Sony's present 15fps progressive is, in my opinion, scandalous for a high-dollar camcorder. Canon's progressive is much better, but even it could be improved on.

Also, the top-of-the-line MiniDV camcorders right now for both Canon and Sony have archaic image sensors that are several years obsolete. For example, the Sony DCR-VX2000 is equipped with three 1/3-inch 380,000-pixel sensors. The Canon XL-1s is equipped with three 1/3-inch 270,000-pixel sensors. Both cameras are older models. Newer Sony camcorders are equipped with mega-pixel and up sensors. For example, the Sony DCR-TRV30 has a single 1/4-inch CCD with 1,550,000 pixels. I anticipate that an upgrade to the Sony DCR-VX2000 will have lots more pixels in its sensors.

-- Burton --
Randy Brown wrote on 7/9/2002, 7:37 PM
Thanks for the reply Chienworks,
I checked out the Videonics (breifly)and I couldn't tell how you would feed the video from the cameras to Videonics. Is there a web site you know of that would elaborate on this?
Thanks again,
Randy
swarrine wrote on 7/9/2002, 11:04 PM
Toaster II
Chienworks wrote on 7/10/2002, 12:05 AM
Randy, just about every video camera has a line level video output jack. Often it's an RCA (phono) jack, or a combo jack that you plug an adapter cable into which terminates in an RCA plug (usually yellow). Some of the higher end camcorders will use a BNC connector or maybe S-Video only. Get some long RCA patch cables (you'll need a female-female adapter if your camera uses the adapter cable, or appropriate adapters to connect to BNC or S-Video) and run these outputs into the video inputs on the Videonics mixer. Since you'll be recording the sound on the tapes in the cameras, don't worry about running sound from the distant cameras into the mixer. One audio line from the central camera or whatever the primary audio source is will be enough. If you're not recording the output of the Videonics, then no sound is necessary at all.
Randy Brown wrote on 7/10/2002, 1:15 PM
Sounds good Chienworks, but what if, say, we were doing a wedding, think about the cables running through the crowd not to mention the long unbalanced cables (I don't know about S-video but RCA for sure is unbalanced) introducing interference?
Thanks for your suggestions,
Randy
Randy Brown wrote on 7/10/2002, 2:01 PM
Just when I thought I had finally decided upon which cameras I was going to buy...
I understand the more fps the better and the more pixels the better but I don't know if 3 CCDs with a combined pixel count of 1,140,0000 is better or worse than a single CCD with 1,555,000. Is the TRV30 you mentioned different than the one at http://video.multimedian.com/reviews/camcorders.html. In my recently acquired, limited knowledge I have learned CCDs are dealing with true color reproduction(for lack of a better term) so I know I'm comparing apples to oranges (in regards to the chart at the above mentioned website)but I've seen several comparisons on a variety of the "prosumer" camcorders and they all seem to favor the VX2000(overall features considered). Your comments are very much appreciated Burton.
And to all: thanks very much for your patience...I'm learning!!!!!!
Thanks again,
Randy
Randy Brown wrote on 7/10/2002, 2:04 PM
Toaster II is all I see in your post...is there more or should I know what that means?
Thanks,
Randy
Chienworks wrote on 7/10/2002, 3:03 PM
Randy: i wouldn't worry about the length of the unbalanced cables since you aren't planning on using the material that goes through those cables. The picture may be a bit fuzzy, but it will still be good enough to let you know what the other camera operators are seeing.

If the cables themselves are a problem, then there are wireless video broadcasting units available for home use that should suffice for your purposes. They usually come in up to 3 channels, so you would be able to expand to one more operator. They're probably not very cheap though. I haven't looked them up lately but i think they're around $200 to $1000 for each set. Check out Azden; i know they make wireless audio for video. They might make the wireless video transmitters/receivers too.
Randy Brown wrote on 7/10/2002, 6:22 PM
Thanks Chienworks, I went to Azden's site and it appears they are still doing audio only. I did a search for "wireless video broadcasting units" and I'm thinking it would be outside my budget ($1500 with the monitoring device). If you were shooting,say,a wedding with lots of people to contend with, how would you go about getting 2 teenagers to get the shots you wanted?
Thanks again,
Randy
Chienworks wrote on 7/10/2002, 6:49 PM
Practice makes perfect! Or, in this case, rehearsal makes perfect.

Definately videotape the rehearsal if at all possible. Most wedding rehearsals run through all the "mechanics" of the ceremony at least twice, the first time through is usually rather slow and drawn out. Tell the operators to try lots of things the first time through; just go crazy and tape anything and everything. Encourage them to think about such things as finding someone in the congregation with a huge smile or a few tears, look for little kids playing around etc. Extra stuff like that adds a lot nice touches. I once got a wonderful close up shot of the flower girl playing with the bow on the back of one of the bridesmaid's dresses. Everyone loves it!

The second run through, have them concentrate on what they think looks good, or give them some specific suggestions such as, "during the exchange of rings, operator one zoom in on the hands and operator two show show the groom and best man", etc. Then go over the tapes with the operators before the wedding and pick out what they did that you like so they know what you are looking for. Write up some short simple cue cards, maybe with even a few storyboard drawings. These cards can be taped to the tripods for quick reference. With a little practice, you might not need to communicate with them at all during the wedding.
Nat wrote on 7/10/2002, 9:20 PM
If I had to buy a camera right now, i'd wait for the Panasonic AG-DVX100 camera. It's the first miniDV camera to include a real progressive scan CCD. It's a 3CCD model that can capture at 24p, 30p and 60i. That means it's ideal if you want to have a film look appearence to your video but you can also record some corporate videos at 60i. It also features manual focus/zoom and iris wheels. And the best thing about it are the 2 XLR connectors with 48v Phantom Power and VU-meters. The camera is about 3500 $ which makes it cheap for the features it has. Here's a link :
http://www.panasonic.com/PBDS/subcat/Products/cams_ccorders/f_ag-dvx100.html
Also, I asked Sonic Foundry in a previous post and Vegas should be able to handle the 24p format without any problems !
kkolbo wrote on 7/10/2002, 9:32 PM
Well, everyone has an opinion. Even me. I reccommend that you use three matched cameras. I just did a sunrise wedding on the beach (I did it as a favor, no I don't do weddings if I can work on ANYTHING else. I used only two cameras, but with solid operators. The result was very good. Having matched cameras makes a big difference to me when I go to post. I prefer to use cameras that I can Jam sync or have free running time code like the PD-150 or even the 500.

You do not need to see the shot that your pickup camera is getting if the operator is good. You just need a cheap wireless headset so that you can point them to where you see the action heading or to coordinate to keep each other out of each other's shots. The wedding I just did we did not have comm and did not need it. We knew that Cam 1 was cover shot and Cam 2 was reverse and cutaway except during the vow's. Then we split the bride and groom for close up.

Weddings are the hardest thing to make a profit at. The clients are under presure and seldom rational. A tech failure can result in not only a lost shot, but very bad blood. I do not reccommend spending a lot of money on lots of equipment. Get good cameras and better yet good ops. Get a small light kit. Basic wireless headsets for comm if you want. I do the multiple audio by having each camera grab 2 channels of discreet audio. I mix it later.

Again I do NOT do weddings. (OK, flash enough green and we will talk)

Last note. To be honest, when I do a multi-camera wedding, I hire the second camera with the shooter. It is worth it. The op is more important than owning cameras. I pay a day rate and get solid footage I can trust.

k
seeker wrote on 7/10/2002, 11:01 PM
Randy,

> Is the TRV30 you mentioned different than the one at http://video.multimedian.com/reviews/camcorders.html. <

No, it is not different. It is the same TRV30 in that review. I was not touting the TRV30 as better than the VX2000 because, with only one CCD, it definitely is not. The TRV30 is just an example of the new crop of better CCDs.

You definitely should go with a three-CCD model and, right now, the VX2000 is a prime candidate. But in my opinion it is due for an upgrade. I want to find out more about the Panasonic AG-DVX100 that Nat commented on. It sounds like it has good progressive. In the meantime I will rely on software solutions to convert interlaced to progressive.

-- Burton --
kkolbo wrote on 7/11/2002, 8:38 AM
I hate to differ with the discussion, but I do. Yes the new generation CCD's are always improving. We could wait until our business freezes over to get whatever the next best thing is, but my camera rig paid for itself in three weeks, so I can upgrade whenever I see a real improvement.

What brings me to this is ... unless you are sure you are going to be transferring to film, progressive scan is not needed right now. Television is interlaced. Computers are progressive, but most computers can not handle larger than 352x240 anyway and that comes nicely from an interlaced source. I would not buy a camera for commercial purposes right now based on its progressive scan unless you need to transfer to film. I would look for the best camera with all the right manual ability etc for the budget.

You may now throw spoiled fruit and rocks at me.

k
Randy Brown wrote on 7/11/2002, 10:00 AM
Dumb question : what does the p and i stand for in 24p,30p and 60i. I've checked all of my glossaries but can't find them.
Thanks for everyones patience,
Randy
Randy Brown wrote on 7/11/2002, 10:27 AM
>The TRV30 is just an example of the new crop of better CCDs<
gotcha
>I want to find out more about the Panasonic AG-DVX100 that Nat commented on<
From what Nat wrote I'm guessing the 24p and 30p is for the "film look". I don't anticipate needing that feature (at least for a while). Also , I can't wait until September to buy for reasons I won't bore you with.
Thanks,
Randy
Nat wrote on 7/11/2002, 10:49 AM
Randy :
The video can be captured in 2 different ways. It can be progressive or interlaced. This also depends where your video will end up. As an example, a 35mm film projector is considered as progressive because it displays 24 frames each second. NTSC video doesn't display a full image each second, it displays half of the lines the first 1/60th of a second and the rest the other 1/60th, which makes 30 full images for 1 second if you convert. That's why it's called 60i, i for interlaced. 60i is the format most video cameras will use to be compatible with TV systems. However, newer digital cameras have the abilitie to capture a given number of full frames each second. This first appeared on cameras like the Canon GL1 which as a 30 frame second movie mode. However, it's not a true progressive scan ccd. The CCD capture in normal interlaced mode and then put the 2 fields together. The new Panasonic camera has real progressive scan ccds meaning it can capture true full frames at either 24 frames second or 30 frames seconds. So this is where the 24p and 30p comes from, for progressive. Note that it can also capture in normal interlaced mode at 60i. Capturing at 24p is interesting for people trying to get a movie look to their video, because 35mm movies is a film that runs at 24 fps and is progressive. Now if you wonder what is better between progressive and interlaced, it depends on where you will watch your movie. To simplify things, if your going to use a TV, interlaced is the best choice. However, if you will view it on a computer, a projector hooked on a computer or burn it to DVD, your best bet is progressive. Computer screens are progressive and can have some difficulties to read interlaced material, you will get what is called "Interlace flickering" meaning you'll see horizontal bars when there's a lot of movment.
I hope I was clear, i'm not an english native speaker so if there's something you missed just tell I will try to re-explain.
Randy Brown wrote on 7/11/2002, 11:03 AM
>I reccommend that you use three matched cameras<
I was thinking 2 VX2000s and 1 PD150 (what do you think?)
>You do not need to see the shot that your pickup camera is getting if the operator is good.<
I've pretty much given up on the monitoring plan. Hmm...good operator...You guys may consider this as a blind leading the blind kind of deal as I haven't shot "professionally" in 14 years (and I've never done any serious editing) . My clients and I considered myself sufficient at the time but I'm really starting to get "cold feet" hanging out with you guys! As I mentioned I have teenaged kids that both handle my cheap piece of crap camcorder very well for their age. I was hoping to "train" them before we started shooting the local high school sports and the occasional wedding. I live in a relatively small town so there are no serious videography classes available at the 2 local colleges. Can anyone guide me to a decent course on video, book, or website that would make me as smart as y'all? :)
No, actually as I mentioned before I'm just trying to supplement my recording studio/music composition income so I really don't want to spend years to get to the level you people are at.
Your patience and advice are very much appreciated,
Randy
Nat wrote on 7/11/2002, 11:23 AM
I personnaly would get 2 PD150s.
I prefer to shoot with 2 cameras rather than 3. It's easier to edit and costs less in media and such.
It's very personal though, you might be more comfortable with 3 cameras.
Randy Brown wrote on 7/11/2002, 11:25 AM
I wish I spoke a second language that well, you made it very clear. I would imagine that the majority of my clients will be viewing on TV but I am definitely interested in burning to DVD (at some point). If I am shooting with the VX2000 and PD150 will I be able to convert to either progressive or interlaced in VV3?
Thanks Nat,
Randy
Randy Brown wrote on 7/11/2002, 11:41 AM
>I personnaly would get 2 PD150s.
I prefer to shoot with 2 cameras rather than 3. It's easier to edit and costs less in media and such. <

Good point

>It's very personal though, you might be more comfortable with 3 cameras.<

After trying to keep up with the forums I've been trying to keep up with for the last 3 days I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with 1 camera in a pro sense. On the other hand, had I not found such a great NG I'd *really* be in the dark and probably would be making all kinds of bad and costly decisions.

Thanks again everyone,
Randy