OT: focus "breathing" on DVD

Serena wrote on 10/6/2006, 6:28 PM
An interesting query/observation has just been posted on a CML -post forum. I would think the defect might be observed whenever excessive mpeg compression is employed.

CML-post:
> I've been getting DVD dailies for this TV series I'm shooting in 35mm,
> and they have this problem of the focus drifting in and out, the lower
> contrast the image is, with soft lighting, the more the focus seems to
> pop in and out.

A filmmaker recently called us in panic mode: the DVD dailies
of his film shot with the Penelope's 2Perf movement prototype
was showing breathing in the gate! Shame and consternation
in the Aaton R&D dept.

Two days later we received the DVD and discoverd the questionable
scenes were the ones showing a lot of moving details (background tree
branches moving in the wind), the foreground seemed to pop in and out of
focus in sync with the branches as if the wind was blowing in
the camera gate...
Explanation which probably applies to your case: the 'Mpeg'
compressor was allocating more space to the moving foliage
than to the static foreground... Bad settings, cheapo compressor,
too high compression ratio, we don't yet know.

Better to carry four dailies DVDs than one containing
a DOP's heart-attack trigger.

Comments

farss wrote on 10/6/2006, 7:40 PM
The dailies were probably done on a STB recorder!

Isn't 2 perf not much better than 16mm?

Bob.
Serena wrote on 10/6/2006, 8:35 PM
Better than S16, but similar except for giving big aspect ratio. The original poster had shot 4 perf. The problem had arisen more than once, but the most complete response was the one I included.
Coursedesign wrote on 10/6/2006, 9:28 PM
2-perf 35 is a lot better than S16.

Hard to imagine that an Aaton camera would get sloppy also, they really are works of art. If you ever have a chance to [not] hear a blimpless Aaton in operation, you'll immediately get the idea.

An ARRI camera is something you buy with your brain, while the Aaton is one you buy with your heart. That's what I thought for myself, and I have later heard it from many other filmmakers also.
Serena wrote on 10/6/2006, 11:04 PM
well, 2 perf is a maximum of 7% higher frame height than S16, but you get 2.5 AR without anamorphics. Of course you're right that 2-perf is a great deal better than S16 if you want 2.35:1, and that's the reason for using it.

The Aaton people agreed with you -- that's why they were so disturbed that they seemed to have delivered a camera with gate float.