Okay, I'll admit I've slacked here and there and gone the auto route on white balance but that's about it. The thing about auto is that because the camera is constantly making adjustments it can ( but wont always ) look like you didn't know what you were doing. Colors shifts, brightness changing, searching for focus, not the mark of a pro. A friend of mine asked if my XL2 ever went out of focus as she was seeing that on some of her tapes. It was actually not going out of focus but because she had the white balance set to auto she was perceiving the shifts.

Not always easy but manual is method.

- Ray

www.undergroundplanet.com

Manual is the way to go. Just make sure you can get to the focus and aperture controls easily when you buy your next camera.

In my own limited experience shooting choirs while on tour as well as in performance, I leave my VX2000 on full auto while walking around. When in a formal theater setting, however, I try to use manual focus in order to avoid any focus hunting while doing slow closeup pans.

In an enclosed setting I also usually try to do manual white balance, but I really got burned last May. The performance was in a large new church with a significant expanse of glass on one side. Problem was that there were a few clouds in the late-afternoon sky, and during the performance the lighting would suddenly go very blue as the sun was obscured for a few minutes. To make matters worse, the other camera on the shoot was set to auto white balance, so it was doing its own thing trying to follow the average light value. It was a pain to have to not only try to color-correct both shots, but also try to have them match each other. Since both cameras were Sonys, it might have been better to leave both in auto mode; I really don't know.

head down......

after over 30 years in broadcast, shooting from low-band through to digibeta, and now retired and shooting on a 170, all i can say is...

i wish i'd had the auto facilities of the 170 during all those years of shooting pro! true, there's any number of situations where you're going to want to 'set-up' a shot, but for run 'n gun, such as weddings, i've found auto, wide angle on wide (well, just slightly off full wide), the 170 handles my indoor to out door white balance, along with exposure, et al, with amazing speed and accuracy. true, i've had the odd fuckup, but not enough too go back to manual in those circumstances.

hey, before all you other old farts jump in on me - there's nothing quite like rack 'n pinion, weston mk5, gaffer with hmi and gel, hydro rostrum, sungun, etc.,

then again, i opted for a nikon fe rather than a 5 (or was it 7?). i've always like point and shoot - that way my mind is on the shot, not on the technicalities...

leslie

Nowadays everyone is so thoroughly indoctrinated and brainwashed by television news with all auto cameras that it doesn't bother them to see the continuos changes in front of them. The Z1 has such good auto focus it doesn't bother me anymore either. And after you keyframe into the final project the color changes, contrast changes, brightness changes, etc. it's such a perfect blend nobody notices anything. Fact is it might be even better. Manual is best but you miss to much stuff.

JJK

Lower-cost cameras typically have smaller CCDs, so more of everything is in focus. This may make focus hunting a lot less noticeable and mean you can get away with auto-focus 95%+ of the time.

It won't fly with a 2/3" CCD camera...

2- The BBC has shooting guides for the VX2000 and the PD150. They suggest you triggle the auto functions (focus, exposure) on as you need them.

Triggle?

JJK

OK!

Somebody help me here . .

We were given a link - maybe farss - to an Oz site where there were a series of "Teach-Ins" - "Why Manual focus/WB ?" . .. etc etc . .I've been thinking of this site while ready this thread over the last 4 days. It was a website that was part of a well known Film Festival - "Firefly" could it be?

Where is that Oz site?

Grazie

grazie,

can't remember the site - bookmarked it and now lost....

have a guide on my site, a lot from film & tv school. maybe of interest?

http://users.bigpond.net.au/kay.wand/video_course/index.htm

and of course, there's the bbc's guides....

leslie

Maybe I'm just a little out a touch, but autofocus is a dead giveaway for a shooter who doesnt know what the hell they are doing, and it sucks on screen and is noticable on screen. And to see the auto iris and /or auto gain kicking in well, guess I'm just wanting a better shot.
But hey thats just me.

don't get me wrong.....

i'm noy suggesting that auto is the answer to every situation - but as i wrote earlier, shooting wide defeats the necessity for 'hunting' with auto focus, and auto white seems, at least on my 170, to do a pretty good job most of the time.

of course there's no answer to well lit setup, but in general use, i'm a happy automite....

leslie

The auto technology gets better and better and it's good to hear of people's critical experiences using the technology. I'd suggest that the first step (particularly in dynamic situations) is to know your camera so well that you never have to think about which button to press, which way to turn to follow focus, and so on. When this is all intuitive then you can go manual without losing shots because you couldn't react quickly enough. Of course the viewfinder has to be good enough for you to detect correct focus. In HDV 16:9 the subject is usually not centre frame and I've found that the auto focus (fx1e/z1) in medium shot can latch onto really well defined background objects (patterns). Manual focus is mostly the only way to go.

Well, I do seem to have opened up a can of worms on this subject!
I agree with most of what has been said.
In my own experience of wedding work, I tend to let the camera do most of it itself since there is not time to set up a shot due to the spontaneous nature of the work.
I use the XM2 (GL2). White balance wise, auto seems to cope with most situations. I never use the preset outdoor and indoor modes as they are set to standard colour temperature values. The only trouble I have is in mixed lighting such as in a church where you can have natural and artifical lighting to contend with. Manual w/b should be used here, but who has the time to hold up a white card to set on? Not all brides wear white!
Focus wise, providing zoom is not used too quickly, auto seems to be ok. There was an instance recently where in went in far too quickly and suffered the a/f lag - that shot went in the bin!
Manual exposure - yes I should use it more often to cope with the unexpected like panning into a bright background, but with things like zebra pattern etc to contend with - all these take from the spontaneity of the situation.
We do have Vegas at hand to cut out little bits that don't suit, or to apply some degree of correction like colour balance and curves!


Mel.

ok .. I've been "biting" my tongue on this one. ( cracks knuckles .. )

Understanding and using Manual is not about looking non-pro - well it might have that result - BUT here's the thing. Without "knowing" and understanding "how" my camera works - using manual and all its functions - I will most certainly be less likely to adjust for all the different environments I get to work in; see opportunities that would make for a more dramatic/sympathetic shot or develop beyond AUTO. I repeat: it is about understanding not about appearing pro or not.

An example: I've been desperately yearning after short, effective and impressive DoF. For me this is my next quest. I can achieve a bit with my XM2, but I want even less DoF. To do what I do do with the XM2 has meant underastanding and using filters to reduce the OE as a result of have a
M A S SI V E wide iris. I know this 'cos I've read masses and used manual for nearly 2 years now. This has meant that I have had to purposefully apply manual.

I just wish we could find the links to the site where this OZ chap was explaining Auto<>Manual AND with samples of the two. When I saw this I thought - "Riiight! So that is what and why I use manual.!"

However there is an irony developing. Stuff IS being shot that takes ON the appearance of AUTO, as if it is Indie and kinda "funky" - now that IS ironic! But again it is DONE for that purpose.

Do I use AUTO? Would I use AUTO? It has become less and less of an option for me. The other thing is that AUTO can really make life difficult if stuff keeps altering in front of me!

Best regards,

Grazie

Good point there Grazie -- you look professional when you get professional results and handle the "talent" professionally. Most people at a wedding aren't watching the videographer (unless he/she falls over and sets fire to the church). Manual gives the videographer complete control, but without expertise then auto might well do a better job. Provided white balance isn't out too far I think it better to be consistent so correction in post is easier. However having exposure vary as the background varies is a disaster, and public buildings tend to have large windows and lower level internal lighting so auto-expsoure winds all over as viewpoint changes. Nor do you want shutter speed adjusting itself. I think all these are good reasons for using manual settings unless the camera is more expert than its user.

For Grazie.
You obviosly have great experience with the XM2 so perhaps you could answer questions on that cam.
In manual mode the smallest aperture is f8. What if the conditions require a smaller lens - do you use the ND filter to cut down light even more?
Also would you consider using exposure lock and doing plus or minus from there?
The manual does not seem to be too explicit on a variety of topics.

Thanks - Mel.
(If it's not in keeping with the forum reply to mel58i@aol.com)

I use ND to cut down light and open iris.

"What if the conditions require a smaller lens" - I guess you mean "iris"?

I don't use "Exp Lock".

Might I suggest if you want masses of XM2 and GL2 stuff responded to:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?f=20

Great forum and great website: http://www.dvinfo.net

Expert? - Huh . .. Head-banger!

Grazie

Thanks Grazie - will look into

Mel.

As a result of all this - when in manual mode is it just better to control the aperture (using the ND filter if too overexposed) or to resort to shutter speed to control the exposure?
I feel that the more you control, the more it makes you become a "manual controller of auto mode" or is it a "auto controller of manual mode"
Can things go any further than this??

Mel.

There's no hard and fast rule to any of this and really if you don't know what you're doing then at least in auto you will not badly stuff up a vital shot. Live events are NOT the places to be learning how to use anything period, be it cameras or mics or lights.
Of course you CAN oftenly get better results with manual everything and I'm certain Grazie puts a lot of time and effort into what he does but try telling a bride you want to shoot 10 takes of her saying "I do", I mean lets give the sound guy three takes to set his levels to peak to -1dB while we're at it.
To be honest I've seen an aweful lot of footage that's obviously been shot with manual focus that's just a little off focus and that's really off putting. Setting focus particularly on cheaper cameras with color EVFs and no focus assist isn't easy, best solution is to zoom right in in auto and then switch to manual and zoom back out except this takes time and the footage from whilst you're doing this is useless. Even if you haven't got auto focus and most good cameras don't, you still need to do this but at least those cameras have good B&W viewfinders.
I will say though as said before, most churches are difficulat to shoot in, the lighting is usually a nightmare and the acoustics are just as bad. You really need to be there before the event at the same time of day to get an idea of the lighting and plan how you're going to shoot it, that's the time to try different camera settings, even in full auto Backlight and Spotlight can make a big difference, also many cameras let you dial in offsets against the auto exposure, they're worth learning to get the most out of as well.
Bob.

I use a PD 170 and shoot in both manual and auto mode - depending entirely on the type of shoot and/or even a particular circumstance, but predominantly with auto settings.

As far as focusing - my auto shots are in focus because I give the camera time to adjust to whatever I'm focusing on before I start shooting - (if it's stationary subject) and I switch to manual briefly if needed.

I do an auto white balance whenever the light changes - from room to room or outdoors bright, shady, etc. I let the camera run for at least 10 seconds on my white balance background and vid colors , balance etc. look perfect.

For the type of shooting I do (involving spontanuous situations), it would be impossible the shots if I was constantly changing F stops and shutter speeds. I very rarely have to correct anything in post because of shooting in auto.

From vids I've viewed on the web that are made by "professionals" who have been in business for a lot longer than me, I see that my video quality is as good as or much better. (please note - not referring to anyone in the forum at all - just misc. websites I've checked out in the area where I live that advertise "professional video production").

I think a lot may depend on the camera one uses, but the PD170 has really come through for me and produced excellent quality - "non amateur" looking work that I'm quite proud of whether shot in auto or manual.

Bob, I totally agree.

I can often be heard shouting at the top of my voice, "Stop the Ceremony! I need to White balance again .. and the sound is off . .and the focus has now moved!" But there again I am just soooo lucky to have such agreeable clients!

Grazie