tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-73337063886629213682024-03-14T04:22:16.047+00:00Anthony's video notesArticles on filming and post-productionAnthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.comBlogger31125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-58432511956830300872014-04-02T16:46:00.000+01:002014-04-02T20:43:54.973+01:00New film: Scarborough & Whitby<p>Not exactly new anymore (shot and edited in August-September 2013) but this film was popular with the other members of <a href="http://www.huddersfieldfilmmakersclub.org">Huddersfield Film Makers Club</a> when it was entered into our annual competition last month.</p>
<iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/78985160?byline=0&portrait=0" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>
<br />
<br />
<h2>Techniques used</h2>
<p>For the first time I used exclusively Manual mode with a <a href="http://anthonysvideo.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/fun-with-variable-nd-filter.html">variable ND filter</a> to keep exposures consistent, and slow enough to capture motion blur -- which I find looks great for fast-moving subjects like people and vehicles. The filter tends to confuse the camera's metering as to what the correct exposure should be (I think it errs on the side of underexposure) so I would use aperture-priority mode set to maximum aperture size, get a rough idea of what shutter speed would be suitable, and adjust to suit and take a few test shots. (For the shot of the fishers on the harbour wall at about 2:00, I must have left ISO on Auto by accident and it was adjusting exposure slightly, resulting in a mild flicker.)</p>
<p>Shots that didn't make the cut included a test with a Canon 75-300mm lens. This model was unstabilised and everything was mounted from the camera body, which meant it was very front-heavy. Even a gentle breeze would cause enough wobble to ruin the footage (with some odd motion blur as the lens bobbed up and down). Perhaps using long lenses would work if a rig was made where the lens was mounted, similar to Canon's large zoom lenses, but perhaps even more solid with a mount near the front glass.</p>Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-84039673708535605812014-03-29T12:03:00.000+00:002014-03-29T14:29:57.711+00:00Judge dread: building up or knocking down<p>Creatives and judges have argued over subjective details of their work since the dawn of time, and the world of amateur film making is no different. This post is about judges' feedback and its value to the film maker.</p>
<a name='more'></a>
<br />
<h2>A competition like many others</h2>
<p>We recently had our annual competition at our film makers club, where any member who has a film can enter. There is no cost of entry (other than our membership fee) and in return we receive feedback from a panel of two judges, and the chance of winning an award if our film is deemed worthy.</p>
<p>A long running club like ours, which was established in 1932, has now accumulated a number of trophies to award. Many honour past members of note who made extraordinary contributions to the club. In addition a number of commendation certificates are awarded. Altogether we have about a dozen awards or so.</p>
<p>This is all very well when there are thirty or forty entries and the awards dinner is attended by up to a hundred people, which used to be common in years past. Unfortunately those days were decades ago and the 2014 competition was contested by just 15 films (and half of those were entered by two film makers).</p>
<p>Handing out a dozen awards amongst just 15 entries is always going to be difficult for the judges -- although the better films might pick up two or three awards, possibly you'll see some choices that were unlikely in more well-attended past competitions. However we still have another component to fall back on, which is not dependent on the quantity of entries: written feedback by the judges directly to the film maker.</p>
<br />
<h2>The value of feedback</h2>
<p>Personal feedback is considered invaluable by many. Judges' comments can focus on tiny details of the film that might pass by the audience's eyes in a fleeting moment, but nevertheless may contribute to the narrative, the specifics unknown to the lay viewer. Small errors and inconsistencies that have an effect on the flow of a film, more profound than first thought by the film maker, can be explored by the experienced judge who may impart some insight that cannot be gained elsewhere. For some, myself included, feedback is the prize over the silverware. Trophies are a lovely form of recognition but constructive comment can stick in the mind for years and inform choices made in the middle of a future shoot.</p>
<p>The quality of feedback depends entirely on the judges of course. Our club's competition officials seek out suitable judges, recruiting those who are experienced film makers and have judged competitions before. A trained eye is needed to understand a film and what the film maker's intention might be. The quality of feedback also depends on how the judges approach their task.</p>
<p>All creatives could sometimes do with a thicker skin. Responses to our efforts are occasionally unfair or not worth getting upset about. Equally, it is easy to bask in praise and welcome positive comment. But this is the way many of us are. Putting a film in front of an audience after working on it for many hours can go well, poorly or indifferently. The worst comments are "I just don't like it", and perhaps "I <em>do</em> like it, but I don't know why."</p>
<br />
<h2>The role of judges</h2>
<p>Thus we have experienced judges to not only determine if our efforts are any good in the grand scheme of films, but why. Which shot spoiled the tense conversation scene? Which minor sound effect completed the illusion of a country stroll? While these details may appear inconsequential, it's precisely these small matters that have a big effect on how we approach our next film. How we plan camera angles on a piece of paper, how we decide which gear to load in the car, how we take an extra minute to direct an actor while everyone else is waiting and the shopkeeper wants you out before opening time in 10 minutes.</p>
<p>Unfortunately our judges for this year's competition mostly failed to provide this service. Some films received no constructive feedback at all, with just an off-hand comment to the effect of <em><strong>YouTube audiences would probably like this</strong></em> or that <em><strong>it looks like you applied colour grading, or perhaps there is a fault with your camera.</strong></em> The feedback was very brief, in some cases came across as dismissive, and for film makers who had spent much time on their projects it felt condescending and unhelpful.</p>
<p>This might not have been surprising if the club had inadvertently recruited inexperienced judges. But this year we had two judges who are senior figures in <a href="http://www.theiac.org.uk">the IAC, the Institute of Amateur Cinematography</a>, the national organisation that supports film clubs and their members. The IAC is an organisation that is often looked up to by local clubs such as ours.</p>
<p>This piece is not intended to criticise the IAC, which is a large organisation of volunteers. They (amongst other activities) operate a successful international competition, which is judged by several panels of three judges each, and in my experience and that of my colleagues, the judges of <a href="http://www.theiac.org.uk/eventsnew/biaff/festival.htm">BIAFF</a> deliver excellent quality feedback. I still remember the comments made on my two entries to BIAFF in 2012.</p>
<p>I felt the club as a whole was sorely disappointed with the two judges of our competition this year, as we expected a much more professional job, even for a small competition like ours. Unconstructive feedback risks discouraging film makers from entering future competitions, and to see a drop in the already-low entry numbers would be a great shame.</p>
Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-57406133359036593152013-08-23T12:15:00.001+01:002013-08-23T12:15:34.576+01:00Crib sheet: ND filter effect on shutter speedThis week I had more numbers floating about in my head, this time about ND filters.<br />
<br />
<h2>
About ND filters</h2>
'ND' refers to 'neutral density', meaning that the filter reduces all wavelengths (i.e. colours) from passing through in equal amounts. Looking through the viewfinder the photographer sees a darkened image with no particular colour cast. ND filters are available in various strengths. Below I consider the effect of plain ND filters, rather than the graduated ones (which are used when you want to darken a particular part of the image, such as the sky). More info in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ND_filter" target="_blank">the Wikipedia entry</a>.<br />
<br />
<h2>
Stops, light reduction, filter numbers</h2>
I've always found it difficult to grasp the concept of 'stops' of light. When looking at various ND filter strengths I was getting confused by how much a stop was, when referring to shutter speed. The numbers below explain how to figure out what effect a given ND filter will have on shutter speed.<br />
<br />
<h2>
Daylight conditions</h2>
On a recent time-lapse shoot in changeable daylight conditions, I found when shooting in Aperture Priority mode at f/8, the shutter speed would vary from 1/640 in bright sun to 1/320 when cloud passed over. Afterwards I considered what effect on shutter speed and whether it would introduce any motion blur.<br />
<br />
<h2>
ND filter numbers</h2>
Hoya and many manufacturers quantify their filter strength by using a set of numbers that double: 2, 4, 8, 16, etc. Tiffen uses a different scale of numbers: .3, .6, .9. I was researching the Hoya style when I put together the numbers below.<br />
<ul>
<li>ND2, ND4, ND8, etc refer to how much light passes through, as a fraction. So ND4 allows 1/4 of light to pass through. ND16 allows 1/16 through.</li>
<li>If you test your exposure without a filter, you can calculate what effect the ND will have. In my example above, an ND8 filter (in bright conditions, exposure normally 1/640) will slow the shutter to 1/80. ND8 allows 1/8th of the light through, which would extend the shutter time by 8 times: 640 / 8 = 80. In the lower light conditions, normally 1/320, with the ND the shutter speed would be 1/40: 320 / 8 = 40.</li>
<li>If you want to measure the effect of the filters in the units of stops of light, this is also easily figured out: 2 to the power of [stops] equals the ND number (and therefore division of light), for example ND8 is 3 stops: 2^3stops = ND8. ND32 is 5 stops: 2^5 = 32.</li>
</ul>
<br /><ul>
</ul>
<h2>
In practice</h2>
When shooting you need to know what the normal shutter speed for exposure would be. Then you can calculate what effect a given ND filter would have on the shutter speed. You're unlikely to have a vast array of filters so you'd have to make a judgement call on what is to hand.<br />
<br />
What if you want to hit a target shutter speed? Say you want a shutter speed of 1/2 and you only have a ND16 filter. From the calculation above you can see that normal exposure should occur at a shutter speed of 1/32, which is quite slow for daylight. Perhaps you could achieve that with a tiny aperture, or if you were exposing for a dark area of the scene and didn't mind over-exposed areas elsewhere in the picture.<br />
<br />
Maybe you're shopping for an ND filter to use in daylight conditions. Using the same f/8 aperture as above, you'd need the equivalent of ND320, something you can't buy off the shelf. There are ND128 filters available, but in square sheet form rather than screw-in filters, so you could use two of those stacked together (equivalent of ND256) and close the aperture slightly. However using multiple filters can introduce ugly reflections between the elements if the sun catches in a certain way. And using very strong ND can introduce a colour cast, which is more prevalent in cheaper items.<br />
<br />
<br />
I hope this guide is useful. If you are looking for professional film making services (including time-lapse shooting of any duration from one day to several years), see the website for my new company: <a href="http://www.constructfilms.co.uk/" target="_blank">Construct Films</a>.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-34534743264269949732013-08-14T21:11:00.000+01:002013-08-23T12:15:53.147+01:00Crib sheet: Time-lapse calculationWhile on a day long time-lapse shoot today, I wondered about how long my various cameras' card space would last and how much video I'd end up with. I had various memory card sizes. In the past I'd just work it out on the fly but today I thought a quick crib sheet would be useful.
<br />
<h2>
Calculating video length</h2>
(assuming playback is 25fps, as it always is here in Europe)
<br />
<ul>
<li>30 seconds interval = 5 seconds of video per hour of shooting</li>
<li>10 sec interval = 14 seconds of video/hr shooting</li>
<li>5 sec interval = 29 seconds of video/hr shooting</li>
<li>1 sec interval = 144 seconds (2min 24secs) of video/hr shooting</li>
</ul>
<h2>
How long before the memory card is full?</h2>
(assuming 1.7Mb per picture and actual card capacity is ~90% of nominal capacity)<br />
(1.7Mb is the average file size of 'Medium Normal' quality on the Canon 600D, YMMV etc)
<br />
<ul>
<li>30 seconds interval: 4Gb card in 17 hours, 8Gb card in 35 hours, 16Gb in 70 hours</li>
<li>10 sec interval: 4Gb in 5.8 hrs, 8Gb in 11.6 hrs, 16Gb in 23.2 hrs</li>
<li>5 sec interval: 4Gb in 2.9 hrs, 8Gb in 5.8 hrs, 16Gb in 11.6 hrs</li>
<li>1 sec interval: 4Gb in 35 minutes, 8Gb in 70 mins, 16Gb in 141 mins (2hrs 20mins)</li>
</ul>
<h2>
How long before the battery is flat?</h2>
Canon (or your camera manufacturer) will have their own claims about the number of shots the camera will make on a single battery. The typical battery capacity in my various Canon SLRs is 1200mAh.
<br />
In recent months I've been experimenting with battery technology, and I have a custom-modified battery pack which has a capacity of 6500mAh, and in my tests will last for 3700 shots. I also have a 9800mAh pack which I will test soon.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-32554392804385982552013-04-11T11:25:00.000+01:002013-04-11T11:27:24.879+01:00The importance of having engaging charactersI regard the two Star Wars trilogies like many other fans: great original films, disappointing prequels. Until this week I'd never thought much about why that is, beyond the obvious facts that Episode I's political story is tedious and the vast majority of its acting is wooden.<br />
<br />
This time last year a comprehensive review of Episode I: The Phantom Menace appeared on YouTube courtesy of RedLetterMedia. It is delivered alongside crude comedy and regular swearing but it also (unexpectedly) offers sound film making advice.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Amateur writers and film makers are often told that the audience needs to engage with a character, but this has never been so clearly demonstrated to me as in this video review of The Phantom Menace. I heartily recommend everyone watch at least the first instalment of the review, and if you can get past the crude humour I hope it helps this concept click with you as it did with me.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="405" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FxKtZmQgxrI" width="540"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&t=112" target="_blank">At 2:15</a> it's explained how the audience needs to engage with at least one character. We see how Episode I fails due to a lack of an "everyman" character, along with some plot oddities.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&t=406" target="_blank">At 6:50</a> some friends are asked to describe characters from the original trilogy and the prequel trilogy. As you might expect they perceived Han Solo and C-3PO as fairly complex, fully-formed personalities and Qui-Gon Jinn and Queen Amidala as flat and monotonous.<br />
<br />
The remainder of the review (it is split into <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&feature=share&list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D" target="_blank">7 parts</a> running at over an hour) also competently explains how other elements of Episode I put barriers in the viewers' path to appreciating the film, and in some cases the method of producing the film against blue screens made it difficult for the actors to interact convincingly with their surroundings.<br />
<br />
All these problems contribute to making it a less-than-enjoyable film, but I see now that engagement with the characters is the viewers' gateway to the world within the film. By identifying with an "everyman" character (such as Luke Skywalker) the viewer can see the film's world through their eyes.<br />
<br />
<h3>
How it works in other films</h3>
<br />
In the couple of weeks since I started appreciating these concepts I've been looking at characters in films and TV programmes. What is interesting is that the viewer might identify with different characters at different points in the film, such as in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086879" target="_blank">Amadeus</a> where the viewer may initially sympathise with Salieri's bemusement, and then later with Mozart as pressures pile upon him and Salieri's tricks become more underhand. I also see that these rules need not apply to short films, as patience with less fleshed-out characters (in a similar way to suspension of disbelief) could last through a 5-minute film without any help from the characters.<br />
<br />
There's no doubt that making a new Star Wars film has many challenges, but it shows how even seasoned professionals supposedly at the height of their game can make mistakes. Perhaps the lack of engaging characters was a key reason that audiences found the prequels disappointing. Hopefully novices like myself can learn these lessons and find an insight into what makes a great story and perhaps a great film.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-52623733370940849222013-04-04T09:26:00.000+01:002013-04-04T09:26:23.301+01:00Recent video experimentsA couple of new video clips of experiments I've been playing with recently:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="304" mozallowfullscreen="" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/61308766?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="540"></iframe><br />
<br />
'A Month of Rust' is a 30-day time-lapse shot in 1.5:1 scale macro; what you see in the frame is about 5mm across.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="304" mozallowfullscreen="" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/63262672?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="540"></iframe><br />
<br />
'Orbs' is my first attempt at combining CG animation and live action video.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-82104732468326486142013-03-28T16:16:00.000+00:002013-03-28T16:21:58.831+00:00Video file containers<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ4BOiufmhqZKN78zFdDUDoAt2eK80ptNW1rUz079ErDxqNMnv300KU7so0MxbJcoRzTHNje8zzou9ERLqnUMLrZf0AFYcnBG-1JXkkJJzkNsm1vUNm47gylLgTI3o9TQKNeiZAASeu6xe/s1600/containers-comp.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ4BOiufmhqZKN78zFdDUDoAt2eK80ptNW1rUz079ErDxqNMnv300KU7so0MxbJcoRzTHNje8zzou9ERLqnUMLrZf0AFYcnBG-1JXkkJJzkNsm1vUNm47gylLgTI3o9TQKNeiZAASeu6xe/s400/containers-comp.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Anyone who uses video on a computer, from editors to casual users, knows that sometimes different video formats can be incompatible with software. Luckily all the major video player applications that come with a computer (e.g. Windows Media Player, QuickTime Player) or are downloaded from the Internet (e.g. <a href="http://www.videolan.org/" target="_blank">VLC</a>, <a href="http://www.squared5.com/" target="_blank">MPEG Streamclip</a> and many others) can play almost any video we throw at them. But if you want to know more about formats and their peculiarities, read on.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
A video "format" is a loose umbrella term, but can be said to comprise a container and the audio-visual tracks within the container.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwE7smpMSOtBzOi02pX_cZMWZTIMJQMwSE-NW4YPVClvib20wBTYKoZij0fobHEf5u_R-DAg5h6kaJ6rMI8QqWGcN8_ps12Dw1KESwNRN-rvYN5HhI5BlOjVhz6pxT3kJ9BPq3RZo30GCK/s1600/QTX-file-icon.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwE7smpMSOtBzOi02pX_cZMWZTIMJQMwSE-NW4YPVClvib20wBTYKoZij0fobHEf5u_R-DAg5h6kaJ6rMI8QqWGcN8_ps12Dw1KESwNRN-rvYN5HhI5BlOjVhz6pxT3kJ9BPq3RZo30GCK/s1600/QTX-file-icon.jpg" /></a></div>
The file container is the most visible part of the file to the user. It determines the file extension, which often determines what icon is given to the file and what application will open it, such as Windows Media Player, QuickTime or VLC. The container is not just an empty shell though, it gives information to the software about how the various tracks (or "streams") are interleaved together for synchronisation, which include not just video and audio but also subtitles data and chapter markers.<br />
<br />
There might be many media tracks inside the container, such as multiple video for varied angles (as found on DVDs), multiple audio for mono, stereo, surround sound etc, multiple subtitles for various countries, chapter markers, and other metadata such as keywords for searching. Some software can extract these tracks to separate them, which is useful if you want to copy the audio track from a video and use it elsewhere.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: -webkit-auto;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisiBsGl4MSrD5u_boYl-OzPvTV6NFIajJawM2tjBrL06H9PRNqzvcxHQEpnpsRJSwkN6aSJl7ujgcWM7pMzPNGIWDQAxvlNnozd3-SU-aW4YOrfCs5lFQzlMyFHT_rnyYHKAzpiGLXXC4Z/s1600/QT7-movie-properties.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="312" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisiBsGl4MSrD5u_boYl-OzPvTV6NFIajJawM2tjBrL06H9PRNqzvcxHQEpnpsRJSwkN6aSJl7ujgcWM7pMzPNGIWDQAxvlNnozd3-SU-aW4YOrfCs5lFQzlMyFHT_rnyYHKAzpiGLXXC4Z/s400/QT7-movie-properties.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">QuickTime 7's Movie Properties shows the media tracks in the container and allows some modification to them.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Different containers have different capabilities. Matroska MKV is fairly modern and can contain unlimited tracks. Audio-Video Interleave AVI is older and is more restricted.<br />
<br />
The video, audio or subtitle tracks are each encoded in a codec. The details about the codec are usually not shown to the user but can be revealed in an information panel, for example in QuickTime go to Window -> Show movie inspector.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcdFwTFVlEgr1pfNx9BmsHHIYa71-qMKzmV3KOPGEMv_DoJNNpNRfmOtNTVJ3PxwQ-BQd0KG6a6ZQNMD3WGPYn616OIDMhoCuexjCe4CUpwmJ78ZMSPpewzWDfBkXSga5R-DZWC27uSE3W/s1600/QT7-inspector.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="343" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcdFwTFVlEgr1pfNx9BmsHHIYa71-qMKzmV3KOPGEMv_DoJNNpNRfmOtNTVJ3PxwQ-BQd0KG6a6ZQNMD3WGPYn616OIDMhoCuexjCe4CUpwmJ78ZMSPpewzWDfBkXSga5R-DZWC27uSE3W/s400/QT7-inspector.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">The Inspector panel in QuickTime shows additional details like the codecs of the media, frame rate and frame size.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
The file container doesn't describe how its media is encoded, it is up to the software to decode the media for playback. You might be familiar with the situation where a video file could (or should) be opened by the software, but cannot be played; this is likely because the software is not equipped to decode the particular codec inside the container.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQFtMRhZd7APYyWppyJO_m6hbmr03YjqrkMTMmOPWhL1fZjFUTKtPtWmqNJ9dJ66GczWq_sC5_oSOYuo2FxirySAvi3Fl3YgXRdCk00zQlW-cOEA092YVgzqDiltB6o0Dm_Gp-Y9NFQEvs/s1600/QTX-error-msg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQFtMRhZd7APYyWppyJO_m6hbmr03YjqrkMTMmOPWhL1fZjFUTKtPtWmqNJ9dJ66GczWq_sC5_oSOYuo2FxirySAvi3Fl3YgXRdCk00zQlW-cOEA092YVgzqDiltB6o0Dm_Gp-Y9NFQEvs/s400/QTX-error-msg.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">QuickTime X shows this message when it requires a codec which isn't installed. Clicking the "Tell Me More" button takes the user to an Apple web page which explains the various codecs supported by default.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbY4MX21A_vmf1_8GW67pRQzyiAI4ymwx5XTkiWUj5SZ_LKjw0AU5gwBDJFAIdZZvDSTELBeC6EGqrWhQp6VTBRXVKkaCbu-U0uJ6N-LIHCJXQJRaE8f6fH8LVxPQxC9vsHlLIdflJIgPT/s1600/QT7-error-msg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="173" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbY4MX21A_vmf1_8GW67pRQzyiAI4ymwx5XTkiWUj5SZ_LKjw0AU5gwBDJFAIdZZvDSTELBeC6EGqrWhQp6VTBRXVKkaCbu-U0uJ6N-LIHCJXQJRaE8f6fH8LVxPQxC9vsHlLIdflJIgPT/s400/QT7-error-msg.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">QuickTime 7 gives the user less useful information.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
MPEG-4 is now a very common format to record and play video, but it is also the most confusing. It is both a container with the .MP4 file extension, but it is also a codec. The MPEG-4 codec also has two alternative names which are H.264 and AVC (or AVCHD). Also consider that the MPEG-4 codec can also be in a different container, such as AVI, QuickTime MOV, Matroska MKV, or MTS from a camcorder, etc. So if someone says they have an MPEG-4 video for you, who knows what you will get!<br />
<br />
Awareness of file containers is not necessarily a requirement for enjoying video, but it helps to have some background information when an error occurs, or when someone vaguely requests their video should be encoded as "a QuickTime" or "for Windows Media Player".Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-91033059497506519502013-03-06T12:13:00.000+00:002013-03-06T12:13:19.265+00:00New film: In Flight time-lapseIt's been a lengthy hiatus since my last post, and a while since I've edited and finished a film. Here is a brief compilation of time-lapse clips from a recent flight from Manchester to Shetland.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="303" mozallowfullscreen="" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/60768690?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="540"></iframe><br />
<br />
Music: "Interlude VII" by Ending Satellites (<a href="http://endingsatellites.com/">endingsatellites.com</a>).<br />
<br />
All footage is from stills shot on an iPhone 4S using the <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/timelapse/id301050966" target="_blank">TimeLapse app</a>. There is a free version which allows 50 shots to be taken at a time, which equates to about 2 seconds of video. Upgrade to the paid version to shoot unlimited images. The app works well, allowing you to choose image size and to lock the exposure and focus. The app recommends you switch on Airplane Mode to prevent any notifications or calls interrupting the shooting (and you'd have Airplane Mode on anyway during a flight); an interruption can stop a shot being taken or can rotate the image 90 degrees, but then shooting resumes thereafter. For one of the sequences I was shooting for about 20 minutes without a problem.<br />
<br />
All shots were taken from behind windows. Sometimes I set the phone on the window ledge, or held it as solidly as I could against the glass for short periods. Later I found that my sat-nav suction mount could be used as a makeshift shelf on the window, and the phone would sit there happily with a bit more freedom for composing the angle. Luckily I didn't have many problems with reflections, even when the sun was shining in through the window.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-29830003616533653172012-08-28T13:50:00.000+01:002012-08-28T15:35:21.364+01:00Discs, media and encoding<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsJ4B9xA3MPrh_KW-sKXm2adhIFp6z2hIKKjuMhi2Ejm7j4eV1VW5ZhhY_2ZxIA-BJuwQcxogUWry2Uurx4-5tSFVtvYPHS40C4db-P205JVedKZcnBaLbXfenh4HUY_FoQi1n9pQIIRDQ/s1600/AVCHD_disc-small.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsJ4B9xA3MPrh_KW-sKXm2adhIFp6z2hIKKjuMhi2Ejm7j4eV1VW5ZhhY_2ZxIA-BJuwQcxogUWry2Uurx4-5tSFVtvYPHS40C4db-P205JVedKZcnBaLbXfenh4HUY_FoQi1n9pQIIRDQ/s1600/AVCHD_disc-small.png" /></a></div>
Recently I've seen more folk try burning AVCHD discs as they've started using high definition camcorders and have balked at the cost of Blu-ray burners and blank BD-R discs. Unfortunately there's a bit of confusion about what an AVCHD disc is, which is not surprising since it is a strange hybrid of things, and (for most of us) arrived quite unexpectedly.<br />
<br />
The key to it all is understanding the difference between what is disc media, and what is encoding ("encoding" is often informally referred to as the format of the disc).<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><h3>
Haven't I seen this "AVCHD" before?</h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgV61RZTVc_l3-pW4VXwEZi2vLv_rJ-fAv389fLEunJrHKEE_MvEhdK7GeVr0aB73LpPhZeRrJr_WtaQdAWAiBpFvhS9f-GCfAF4-GHa1s5_I-dkfrsEEGZbWUDwlhCvCaYVpp9coV3LhrG/s1600/avchd-logo.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="43" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgV61RZTVc_l3-pW4VXwEZi2vLv_rJ-fAv389fLEunJrHKEE_MvEhdK7GeVr0aB73LpPhZeRrJr_WtaQdAWAiBpFvhS9f-GCfAF4-GHa1s5_I-dkfrsEEGZbWUDwlhCvCaYVpp9coV3LhrG/s200/avchd-logo.png" width="200" /></a></div>
The acronym AVCHD is stamped onto many consumer camcorders that record video files onto memory cards or hard drives. The "AVC" part is Advanced Video Coding, and the "HD" part I'll leave you to guess. Unfortunately for users, the AVC codec is referred to by three different names which makes things confusing at times. AVCHD, H.264 and MPEG-4 are all the same thing. H.264 is usually used when referring to video on the web, and MPEG-4 seems to be a mongrel term that is used in all sorts of contexts. The AVCHD files in your camcorder might be saved as .MTS files, but on your computer they might be .M2TS, .MOV or .MP4, simply to keep us on our toes.<br />
<br />
AVCHD was created by Sony and Panasonic but is also supported by other camera manufacturers such as Canon and JVC. There is also a range of professional camcorders labelled AVCCAM.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Disc media</h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEq1FwiorjdDEXvoXfdFSKl8ul6tCR5M8gytcvBDdJbDI6GrO5yOh218D0CymWSecxIXCjxuRBEarX0B0aV6QHZ8MS6bnPE6JRTrwErEkL17X5YID3TM0oltpkKECi5ezIwh5VESSdhPzp/s1600/dvd-discs.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="111" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEq1FwiorjdDEXvoXfdFSKl8ul6tCR5M8gytcvBDdJbDI6GrO5yOh218D0CymWSecxIXCjxuRBEarX0B0aV6QHZ8MS6bnPE6JRTrwErEkL17X5YID3TM0oltpkKECi5ezIwh5VESSdhPzp/s200/dvd-discs.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
This is the optical disc itself, the shiny round thing you pop into the drive tray. There are only a limited number of types, being Compact Disc (CD), Digital Versatile Disc (DVD) and Blu-ray disc (BD). There are variants of these such as the writeable types with the "-R" suffix.<br />
<br />
Long ago the re-writeable "-RW" discs were popular for a short time, but flash drives (aka USB drives, thumb drives) quickly became cheaper and offered larger storage, making re-writeable optical discs irrelevant for saving data. They might still be of use if you want to write films to the discs and write over them again a number of times.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Encoding</h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCFIlQvrpNhvXamS4sgJHEoP5Nt3VNB_quS1Tve3ga1MQ2vwyPbWyWqBfOWdqbZa2C3KTGW4S6CNyPJDr6IbnvZzGpGTlbhlbhi5AfxYJodKdpqiFdQ08WmFk08YPTMMiDUIBmFYpkfYFv/s1600/toast-encoding-progress.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="145" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCFIlQvrpNhvXamS4sgJHEoP5Nt3VNB_quS1Tve3ga1MQ2vwyPbWyWqBfOWdqbZa2C3KTGW4S6CNyPJDr6IbnvZzGpGTlbhlbhi5AfxYJodKdpqiFdQ08WmFk08YPTMMiDUIBmFYpkfYFv/s320/toast-encoding-progress.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Optical disc media is flexible enough to lend itself to various uses (besides being dangled from twine to keep pigeons off the allotment). Encoding is the format of the data written to the disc. Different types of encoding will make the disc behave differently; the disc can be used to store 'data', that is computer files that can be read or written by a computer. I'm sure most of us have burnt CDs and DVDs with computer files at some point.<br />
<br />
Alternatively the disc can be encoded to play video or audio in a specific format (the most common being audio on a CD and video on a DVD, but there are others). Encoding video to play back on a domestic DVD player, for example, needs to be formatted in a certain fashion. Simply burning video files onto a disc is no guarantee it will play in a CD player or DVD player, so software needs to encode the video/audio, such as iTunes or Nero for burning audio CDs, and iDVD or PowerDVD for burning video DVDs. These encoding schemes are referred to by names such as DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, CD-Audio and CD-ROM ("ROM" refers to "read-only memory"). If a disc is marked "DVD-Video" then you know it is encoded to play back on a domestic DVD player for viewing on a TV (and could also be played on a computer if you have the right software).<br />
<br />
<i><b>Note:</b> Just to confuse things, some fancy DVD players have extra capabilities and can play certain media from CD-ROMs and DVD-ROMs, such as MP3 audio files and AVI video files. There was also a short-lived encoding scheme named Video-CD or VCD, which can be played by some DVD players.</i><br />
<br />
<h3>
Encoding AVCHD</h3>
So the AVCHD disc is a new way of encoding onto existing disc media. All the benefits of watching high definition films but using the regular DVD burner in your computer. Video files are encoded to a certain codec (similar to the codec used by Blu-ray discs). Although it is burnt to a regular DVD disc, the video can't be played by a regular DVD player, since it's codec is outside the DVD-Video specification. Many domestic Blu-ray players can play AVCHD discs, possibly due to the similarities in the codecs between the AVCHD-encoded videos and the Blu-ray-encoded videos.<br />
<br />
Burning an AVCHD disc is possible using a variety of software. Certain versions of Adobe Premiere and <a href="http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/burn_br_mac_superdrive_stone.html" target="_blank">Final Cut Pro</a> have the capability, and there is specific disc-burning software such as <a href="http://www.roxio.com/eng/products/toast/default.html" target="_blank">Roxio Toast</a>. These applications will encode your video to the correct format and burn the disc media.<br />
<br />
<i><b>Some superfluous info:</b> Encoding a disc to play a film is performed by converting the movie files using a codec, and each encoding scheme has a strict specification. For example, DVD-Video is encoded with the MPEG-2 codec, and a Blu-ray Video is encoded with either H.264 or MPEG-2 codecs.</i><br />
<br />
Now because AVCHD videos are file based, and burning them to a DVD disc is a way of storing the files, it is possible to do the same with a memory card. It is not advisable to pop your memory card onto your Blu-ray player's disc tray (some crunching noises may result) but many Blu-ray players have SD card slots, or perhaps a USB socket where a memory card reader can be plugged in. If you want to play unedited shots you can usually plug in your AVCHD camcorder and the Blu-ray player will play the files.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Nomenclature</h3>
It is common to get mixed up when referring to different encodes and media. To refer to "DVD" could mean the disc media, or the DVD-Video encode that allows the disc to play in a domestic DVD player. But then what is a "DVD player"? It could be the set-top box that plugs into your TV and allows you to watch films, or it could be the optical drive in your computer. But the DVD drive in your computer won't be able to play films if the computer doesn't run the right software. So it can be a bit of a minefield if you're particular about getting your terms absolutely correct.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Software</h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCGn_rPeBIVT7peoUGOoApxcYxrAM1WAM63y3yyIdbbZ0mun88Zyw3R2SsgncHqajyoLvhSmtO3dPt94R08EbaTdiGvlrYpuu42I4gqakqNHyM2iVDNrDVK2mDqW3JLfBycWngGE4L1KBp/s1600/dvd-in-drive.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCGn_rPeBIVT7peoUGOoApxcYxrAM1WAM63y3yyIdbbZ0mun88Zyw3R2SsgncHqajyoLvhSmtO3dPt94R08EbaTdiGvlrYpuu42I4gqakqNHyM2iVDNrDVK2mDqW3JLfBycWngGE4L1KBp/s200/dvd-in-drive.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
One drawback with burning AVCHD discs is that you will need extra software for playback on your computer. But if you have a TV plugged into a Blu-ray player then you probably won't think this necessary. One application I've found is <a href="http://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/www/disoft/int/playmemories-home/introduction/index.html" target="_blank">Sony PlayMemories</a>.<br />
<br />
As a user of both Windows and Mac for years, I find it quite impressive how Mac computers are so well prepared for using optical media. The Mac OS X system includes licences and software for playing and burning films onto DVDs, easy burning of files onto a DVD-ROM and burning custom iTunes playlists onto CDs. If you're using Windows there is third-party software available (and some are pre-installed on new Windows computers) such as PowerDVD for playback of DVD-Video discs, and Nero for burning CDs. A Mac user usually has everything to hand whereas a Windows user might need to hunt around bit.<br />
<br />
Newer Mac computers such as the MacBook Air and the latest Mac Mini have abandoned optical drives as the world moves to flash storage and online software distribution. Fortunately there are plenty of USB-connected optical drives available for burning and playback of CDs, DVDs and now Blu-rays.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
So I hope this offers good information on the fundamentals of discs, encoding and what these AVCHD discs are. If you find a solid workflow and you know that the intended audience has a compatible Blu-ray player (such as <a href="http://www.huddersfieldfilmmakersclub.org/" target="_blank">my local film making club</a>), burning an AVCHD disc of your film offers a high-definition alternative to the usual DVD version.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-14177841239582600972012-08-26T19:03:00.000+01:002012-08-26T10:43:57.403+01:00New film: Burpee MileRecently I helped edit a film for a friend. Caroline Birkinshaw, a personal trainer from Leeds, decided to do the Burpee Mile, a full mile of one of the most gruelling exercises ever imagined. Dave Hackney was on hand to shoot the event, getting some great shots of the hard work and the struggle Carrie went through to complete her task. After a bit of a delay Dave and I sat down to review the footage and I put together an edit.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="304" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/47768924?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" width="540"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
Going through the raw clips I could see there was plenty of great material to use, and seeing them chronologically there was a plot arc of sorts emerging. Caroline begins alone on the running track but is soon joined by her parents, more family and friends and by the end she had a small crowd cheering her on, jumping burpees alongside and celebrating when she made it over the one-mile mark. This slow build up of momentum was a key feature I wanted to preserve in the edited film. The latter shots of Caroline feeling the strain contributed to the film reaching the peak of tension before the relief at her achievement.<br />
<br />
Originally it was discussed this film would be set to rousing music, but when I saw those raw clips I was certain that a documentary style would suit it better, lending more gravitas to Caroline's achievement. A little comedic relief is provided by interviews with Caroline's dad and some spectators who were impressed by her determination.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-34071480990150352032012-08-25T18:23:00.001+01:002012-08-26T10:43:42.779+01:00Fun with a variable ND filterA little while ago I set out to do a bit of casual filming using my stabilised 18-55mm lens. I wanted to shoot wide open for narrow depth-of-field so I screwed on a ND8 filter (which blocks 8 stops of light), but at the maximum aperture of f/3.5 the picture was underexposed. The weather was a little overcast but mostly bright. So I swapped the lens for my 50mm f/1.8 and the picture was exposed enough, but I was shooting hand-held so the unstabilised 50mm wouldn't do.<br />
<br />
Back on the computer, I ordered a variable ND filter. Comprising two polarisers that darken considerably when their orientations are crossed (see video at the bottom), these filters are great when you want fine control over exposure in bright environments. As soon as it arrived I tried some experiments in my back yard.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6UuJfBZWTdSGQ0S0C3VWJ-Kav6pUUlNUt2rnaOcwa2vtORQgZl7y2SYuZ7_nWHPrRV03APdEYnmuYoMk8DGNyPxBTZm8gGiAhwsedFfplF68z_-CkKaEyNLLewleBsEFg23pSP6mthf7o/s1600/varind-f3.5with.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="Shot at f/3.5 with variable ND filter" border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6UuJfBZWTdSGQ0S0C3VWJ-Kav6pUUlNUt2rnaOcwa2vtORQgZl7y2SYuZ7_nWHPrRV03APdEYnmuYoMk8DGNyPxBTZm8gGiAhwsedFfplF68z_-CkKaEyNLLewleBsEFg23pSP6mthf7o/s400/varind-f3.5with.jpg" title="shot-at-f3.5-with-nd-filter" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">f/3.5 with variable ND filter</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLPknd7aax_hv9jJQ_gGcJ_7V4h3_5V3bpPKpJAK2zuD5dhpjrlbAdTMzSeRK4U5lcRpvwXAj1gGDBs2UKm5huS08dNLRdovnRmp6yk6SApCKythrIvJ5YmqTsjnQ_JprcDkLDBlJ-jISu/s1600/varind-f18without.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="Shot at f/18 without ND filter" border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLPknd7aax_hv9jJQ_gGcJ_7V4h3_5V3bpPKpJAK2zuD5dhpjrlbAdTMzSeRK4U5lcRpvwXAj1gGDBs2UKm5huS08dNLRdovnRmp6yk6SApCKythrIvJ5YmqTsjnQ_JprcDkLDBlJ-jISu/s400/varind-f18without.jpg" title="shot-at-f18-without-nd-filter" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">f/18 without filter</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
These two stills are grabs from video clips I shot with 1/50th shutter. In the first picture I set the aperture first, at the maximum of f/3.5, and then adjusted the filter so that the highlights were just below clipping. In the second picture the filter was removed, and then I adjusted the aperture to retain the highlights, which turned out to be at f/18. Quite a difference, which is demonstrated in the noticeably narrower depth-of-field in the first picture.<br />
<br />
One other noticable difference is the colour tone. With the filter, the picture looks cooler with a blue tint, and possibly desaturated. I have found with cheap ND filters that the optical quality is not perfect and colour shifts can occur, usually pushing towards blue. The effect varies with the severity of the light loss, and the quality of materials used -- one time I tried a plastic filter and the effect was something akin to picture taken with a <a href="http://www.lomography.com/" target="_blank">Lomo/Diana toy camera</a>, or something tweaked with <a href="http://instagram.com/" target="_blank">Instagram</a>. In the case of this variable ND filter, the colour shift is not so bad that it can't be <a href="http://www.vimeo.com/hfmc/cc" target="_blank">corrected during editing</a>.<br />
<br />
A short video to demonstrate:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="304" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/48205873?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" width="540"></iframe>Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-59003633351617689652012-08-20T15:54:00.000+01:002012-08-28T13:53:38.046+01:00After Effects CS3 performance comparisonA while back I had an After Effects project with 640 layers of footage. I've had to learn patience with my <a href="http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/specs/powermac_g5_dual_2.0.html" target="_blank">ancient Power Mac</a> which struggles to render anything in real time, even simple comps, but I shouldn't have been surprised to find that 640 layers took about 40 seconds per frame. The entire 90-second animation took 23 hours.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Last winter I upgraded the Power Mac's standard GeForce 6600 LE video card to a GeForce 7800, which was the fastest available when the computer was new back in 2005. I remember testing a single frame render took just over 20 seconds, but after a couple of weeks of ridiculous fan noise the video card died and I had to refit the 6600.<br />
<br />
So this week I decided to try the same render on different hardware. At my disposal I had a <a href="http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook/specs/macbook-core-2-duo-2.2-white-13-late-2007-santa-rosa-specs.html" target="_blank">2007 MacBook</a> and a <a href="http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_pro/specs/mac-pro-eight-core-2.8-2008-specs.html" target="_blank">2008 Mac Pro</a>. I tried the render a couple of times on each using After Effects CS3. I guesstimated that the MacBook's lack of decent video hardware would be made up by faster CPUs and RAM. And I tried the Mac Pro, well, because I could. Both are running Snow Leopard 10.6.8, whereas the Power Mac is on Leopard 10.5.8.<br />
<br />
The Power Mac took 36-40 seconds for the single frame.<br />
<br />
The MacBook took 25-28 seconds for the single frame. Extrapolating this to render the entire animation should take about 16 hours.<br />
<br />
The Mac Pro took 13-17 seconds, to render the full animation should be about 9 hours.<br />
<br />
All this just serves to make me more impatient to replace the Power Mac. But it's likely I'll remain about 5 years behind state of the art, this time due to software incompatibility with the latter Mac OS versions. How did we manage before ebay?Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-16239418588036351642012-06-25T00:35:00.000+01:002012-08-26T10:44:42.574+01:00Rapid film makingI've made an entry for a <a href="http://www.viking-direct.co.uk/emptySpecialLinks.do?ID=officeref" target="_blank">video competition</a> run by Viking office supplies:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="304" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5_8jettV6Ts" width="540"></iframe><br />
<br />
It was shot in about 30 minutes in our tiny office at the end of the day. Luckily my boss Gareth was willing to act in front of the camera, or it would have been just me!<br />
<br />
Setting up the camera and leaving it to record takes a bit of practice, as can be seen in a few wonky shots. We didn't have time to re-shoot anything so a bit of clever editing hid the problems to some extent.<br />
<br />
Jumping into a project and shooting it quick is incredibly liberating. Knowing that the project doesn't have to be your best work frees you to try things with little expectation. It's been the first time in a few months that I've just gone out and shot <i>something</i>; it was very satisfying and good skills practice. A while back I read a blog post explaining <a href="http://sivers.org/kimo" target="_blank">there's no speed limit</a> to learning things, and it certainly applies here.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-42851384117421834452012-06-03T20:27:00.000+01:002012-06-03T20:30:28.193+01:00Time-lapse: what is it?<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
When we think of a time-lapse clip, we think of seeing action at high speed. Plants growing, clouds passing overhead, buildings being constructed, vegetables rotting. What we are seeing is a disparity of time; the rate of playback of the action is different to the rate it was shot. Action that really takes hours or days or months is being seen in a few seconds or minutes, and it can be captivating in a way unlike live action footage.
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I'm writing a series of posts about time-lapse. How it is shot, some techniques and why to use them, how to achieve certain effects during shooting and in playback, and so on. Hopefully it will be useful to introduce time-lapse to new fans but go over things thoroughly enough to be of interest to experienced photographers.
</i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<i>I work for a time-lapse production company, <a href="http://www.site-eye.co.uk/" target="_blank">Site-Eye</a>, who films projects from any duration of half a day to several years. We use sophisticated camera systems, and my job is to help build them and install them, and occasionally I edit the footage when a project is finished.</i></blockquote>
</div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<h2>
A question of time</h2>
In regard to this disparity of time, time-lapse is related to slow motion. Both time-lapse and slow motion shoot at a given rate and playback at a <b>different</b> rate. If you're unfamiliar with regular filming (which I refer to here as live action), this is very unusual; a clip captured at a given rate is almost always played back at the very same rate, in order to recreate the motion as it was performed in front of the camera.<br />
<br />
For time-lapse the shooting rate is very slow, capturing relatively few images of the action, and playback is at normal speed hence we see fast action; for slow motion the shooting rate is high, capturing more images of the action than usual, and playback is at normal speed hence we see slow action.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Precariously-stretched metaphor:</i><br />
Imagine keeping a diary, but you only wrote a short sentence each week, just a few words. Ignoring the dates of the entries and reading a few years' worth at a time, the reader might presume you lead a non-stop frenetic life full of hundreds of activities a day.</blockquote>
<br />
These differing rates are measured as frame rates, usually in frames per second (fps) [note1]. (The techniques are often confused due to some overlap of their terminology; 'slow motion' refers to the slow playback of the action, but in order to capture this action the filming is run at high speeds, so it is also known as 'high-speed filming', which some mix up with time-lapse. For simplicity's sake we'll use 'slow motion'.)</div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<h2>
What counts as time-lapse</h2>
The definition of time-lapse is therefore difficult to pin down to specific criteria. How is it different to a regular film clip that is speeded up in post-production? How slow does the shooting frame rate have to be, in order to be considered as time-lapse? [note2.] For my own purposes I consider time-lapse as a shooting process where abnormal time has lapsed between shots, which therefore excludes the practice of speeding-up a live action clip (see photography notes below). But what is defined as 'abnormal time'? Live action shooting (i.e. shot at a regular frame rate with the intention of playback at the same rate) takes pictures at a fast rate, just a fraction of a second between each; 24fps means a picture every 24th of a second, or "1/24th sec." So is abnormal time considered to be just a bit slower, say 1/10th sec? In my personal opinion I would say time-lapse is shot at 1fps or slower; 1fps yields a 25x speed-up during playback at 25fps. Of course the shooting rate can vary wildly depending on the subject and the scene; clips of fast movement, such as people walking nearby, would need to be shot at 1fps in order to capture relative movement at all (as opposed to people appearing and disappearing, or flickering, from frame-to-frame), alternatively slow action such as a building project might be shot at one frame every ten minutes, which for comparison is a 15,000x speed up during playback at 25fps.</div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<h2>
A brief note on cameras</h2>
Most time-lapse shooting of any scale (i.e. to record events that are longer than a few minutes, which is almost always), is achieved using a stills camera. While it is possible to shoot a live action clip and speed it up during the edit, using a stills camera offers a range of advantages, such as efficient use of memory card space. A timer gadget fires the shutter at an interval of the photographer's choosing, so the filming is automated to some extent.</div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<h2>
Coming up</h2>
In future posts I will be going into more detail about shooting time-lapse, covering how to choose time-lapse variables to suit the subject, such as frame rate, shutter speed and exposure, and also how to process the footage in post-production. If you have any questions along the way, give a shout in the comments below.</div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<hr />
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Note 1. Frames per second is a measurement used throughout film making. The general assumption is that the playback of a clip will be at the same frame rate as what it was shot at, for example clips shot at 24fps will be played back at 24fps. For slow motion clips, specialist camera equipment is often used to shoot at up to 1000fps (but some consumer cameras can shoot 60fps). But the clip will be played back at 24, 25 or 30fps (depending on the region and the distribution format). The term 'frame rate' takes on a different metric when discussing time-lapse shooting; instead of frames per second, it is more often measured in seconds per frame, or in some cases minutes per frame. Strictly speaking this term should be seconds <b>between</b> frames, i.e. the time lapsed between frames, commonly known as 'the interval' which will be discussed in a future post.</div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 17.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 14.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Note 2. Time-lapse is shot at a very low frame rate. Consider that <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_of_vision" target="_blank">persistence of vision</a> (the phenomenon of the optic nerve that tricks the eye into seeing 'moving pictures' instead of a series of distinct still images) can be achieved at a playback frame rate of 18fps or higher; I'm drawing a line in the sand for the purposes of this discussion — any rate between 18fps and the usual playback rate of 24-30fps cannot be termed time-lapse, since it was not shot at a rate faster than that of a convincing moving picture.</div>Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-52811565345452493052012-05-18T20:29:00.000+01:002012-08-25T19:04:19.444+01:00New film: Vintage Kino promoFor the past six weeks I've been working with organisers of the <a href="http://www.kinofilm.org.uk/" target="_blank">Kinofilm Festival</a> based in Manchester. The festival has been in existence for many years but has recently been subject to a rejuvenation, with regular showings of local and international short films, feature films, and 16mm curiosities from the archives. (For news on upcoming events, see the <a href="http://www.facebook.com/groups/kinoshorts" target="_blank">Kinofilm page on Facebook</a>).<br />
<br />
This promotional film is for the Vintage Kino events where a programme of shorts are projected from the original 16mm celluloid. The films vary from documentaries such as <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052380/" target="_blank">We Are The Lambeth Boys</a>, to public information films on the dangers of drug abuse, to short cartoons and comedies. Each event aims to focus on a particular year and includes Pathe news reels that summarise the year's events.<br />
<br />
It is the first film I have produced under my new brand, <a href="http://www.aenimated.co.uk/" target="_blank">aenimated films</a>. It serves a basic function of giving my films a shared identity, and a website that collects all my various scattered media across the web into one place. It was chiefly motivated by working on the Vintage Kino promo, which may be seen by people interested in my other short films.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="304" mozallowfullscreen="" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/39923373?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="540"></iframe><br />
<br />
<h2>
Post processing</h2>
All the shots in the film were heavily colour-corrected in After Effects, usually with Curves effects. The captured projections usually needed to be squared up and brightened; some needed work to remove a colour cast. The outdoor shots on Oldham Street had some 're-lighting' effects to draw attention to the murals and signage.<br />
<br />
<h2>
Camera settings</h2>
The film was shot using a Canon 600D (T3i). The material in the Three Minute Theatre we mostly shot using a 50mm f/1.8 lens (the brightest I have) and some were with a 10-24mm f/3.5. ISO was set to 800 except for the occasional shot where it needed to be pushed to 1600, along with 1/30th shutter. Interview sound was recorded separately using a Zoom H4n with a Rode VideoMic plugged into the mini-jack.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-56862590119675866082012-05-17T12:19:00.000+01:002012-05-17T12:19:28.617+01:00After Effects CS3 crashing on saveI recently found a bargain-priced copy of Adobe After Effects CS3 on eBay. It's the full professional version for my Mac so I didn't foresee any problems. I'd been using it for a few weeks before I ran into what seemed like a terminal issue...<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>The other day After Effects crashed on me during a save. I'd already saved recently so it wasn't such a big problem. I reopened the project and resumed working where I left off. I made a few changes and pressed Cmd-S to save, and After Effects crashed again, in exactly the same manner. This looked like a recurring problem, and I managed to replicate the crash a few times.<br />
<br />
Now CS3 is not new software, it's four years old. However I found an update online, taking my freshly-installed version 8.0.0 to the updated version 8.0.2. Unfortunately this did not fix the crashing problem.<br />
<br />
<h2>
A simple project</h2>
The work I was doing on After Effects was a collection of motion graphics. I'd made three separate compositions and I arranged them one after the other in a 'master' comp, with a card wipe transition between them. At my last-good save I'd applied half of the card wipes. When replicating this crash, I'd apply the other card wipes and try to save, and the crash would occur. I wondered if it was something to do with the card wipe transitions, despite being unlikely. Otherwise, my master comp was relatively simple. My ageing PowerMac G5 often took its time rendering a complicated comp, but it hadn't ever crashed when being taxed by a heavy-duty render.<br />
<br />
<h2>
A corrupted comp?</h2>
After plenty of experimentation by adjusting other compositions in the project and trying the Save command, I'd found that the crash usually occurs when working on my master comp and trying to save the project with that comp open on the timeline. When working on other comps, the crash didn't occur so often. I suspected there was something wrong with my master comp -- even though it was a long shot, I was getting fed up by this stage -- so I deleted that comp from the project viewer and re-built it. This was a worthwhile experiment because my master comp was relatively simple, so it didn't involve too much work. Lo and behold, after creating the new master comp I haven't experienced a crash since. Is it possible a composition can become corrupted in After Effects without affecting the rest of the project?Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-9073872992694988022012-04-26T12:37:00.001+01:002012-05-17T12:30:51.379+01:00BIAFF 2012<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica;">I'm pleased to report my two entries to the </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica;"><a href="http://www.theiac.org.uk/eventsnew/biaff/biaff2012/festival2012.html" target="_blank">British International Amateur Film Festival</a></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica;"> (BIAFF) this year, </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica;"><a href="http://vimeo.com/19807138" target="_blank">Brew-hoo</a></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica;"> and </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica;"><a href="http://vimeo.com/30534259" target="_blank">The Wheels</a></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica;">, were both awarded three stars! My short comedy Brew-hoo was screened on the Saturday.</span><br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuCvgvs9zBUOZypNdjNzDSJmDeofE6CruFFwLZYXGosyVdCR-si29lAcCmfl36jcFrHZM5rVw1uPrbYpkpDv-9e43s7gKKUmiwrIySojx3EJJ2rfDF3SIzH07w6bQNCaB_45WykKHebB04/s1600/soco-biaff-2012.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuCvgvs9zBUOZypNdjNzDSJmDeofE6CruFFwLZYXGosyVdCR-si29lAcCmfl36jcFrHZM5rVw1uPrbYpkpDv-9e43s7gKKUmiwrIySojx3EJJ2rfDF3SIzH07w6bQNCaB_45WykKHebB04/s320/soco-biaff-2012.jpg" width="320" /></span></a></div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Every entry receives a star rating (one to five stars, plus a special diamond award) and feedback from the judges panel. It is considered relatively difficult to achieve the higher star ratings; from 270+ entries this year, three were given a diamond award and ten were given five stars. For the barely-prepared Brew-hoo and the rather off the wall nature of The Wheels I am very pleased with the result. The feedback was very encouraging, more in-depth than I expected, and showed the judges understood the intent of the films even if the execution was lacking in certain areas.</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">My congratulations go out to <a href="http://www.rochdalemoviemakers.org.uk/" target="_blank">Rochdale Movie Makers</a> for their film <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kToPt7PhvpE" target="_blank">Daylight</a> which was awarded five stars and the Denham Gold Cup for Best Film by an Affiliated Club. Also congratulations to my friend Bob Lorrimer whose films <a href="http://vimeo.com/26709949" target="_blank">The Steps</a> and <a href="http://vimeo.com/25339585" target="_blank">The Windermere Row</a> were awarded four stars and three stars respectively. The Steps was screened on the Sunday evening. I assisted Bob with some of the cutaway shots on The Steps so I am particularly pleased to see it do well.</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Also awarded three stars was The Skills Are Alive, a documentary by Trevor Spencer and Jim Kenworthy, fellow members of <a href="http://huddersfieldfilmmakersclub.org/" target="_blank">Huddersfield Film Makers Club</a>, on the reconstruction of a bandstand in a local park.</span></div>Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-23953316499331554662012-02-27T18:04:00.000+00:002012-08-25T19:04:34.483+01:00New film: Lock GatesThis short video depicting the hand-construction of a pair of canal lock gates is a natty combination of time-lapse sequences and live action clips. I helped shoot the time-lapse for <a href="http://www.site-eye.co.uk/" target="_blank">my work</a> during the three week process, and went back to the workshop to shoot some extra live action video, up close to the materials and the craftsmen who work them.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/36972767?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="540" height="304" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe>Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-40301512305844275772012-02-20T13:30:00.000+00:002012-05-17T13:10:07.046+01:00A fix for Final Cut Studio crashesOne of the Macs in our office has just been updated to Snow Leopard (yeah, we're a bit behind the rest of the world) and we found that Motion 4 and Compressor 3.5, the versions in Final Cut Studio 2, were crashing. Compressor would hang or crash if you tried to change the output location from the default 'Source', and Motion was particularly frustrating because you couldn't even save a project, or export from an unsaved project, without it crashing and losing all your work.<br />
<br />
After a bit of searching I eventually found a fix. It was tricky to find because it's not an issue specific to Motion or Compressor, but across all of Apple's Pro applications after Mac OS has been updated to 10.6 Snow Leopard. The fix is here:<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3155576?start=0&tstart=0">https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3155576?start=0&tstart=0</a></span><br />
<br />
It requires a bit of typing in Terminal which can be a bit scary due to using the superuser commands. Copy and paste the lines in the instructions if you're not a confident typist!Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-87181937788321441262012-02-17T18:38:00.000+00:002012-02-17T18:38:55.449+00:00New film: Timelapse 2011A compilation of all the little time-lapse clips I made last year.<div>
<a name='more'></a></div>
<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/35557986?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe>Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-38216061283653218692012-01-10T22:08:00.001+00:002012-05-17T13:10:22.525+01:00Retrieving pictures from multiple folders<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2cGhtn8Wx2V29hUA606adDxSR_WjnRI9swB_SnlGZXRol6I0RjsZNFT-t8kS5z3idckK4Jb3-kOTJSgSlxCmOqhGNCpjunUdFaB4dRY2G9hsnuasKN7kDK0g9iWVPS-MgGV4EJdfwXb1w/s1600/imgcap-folders.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2cGhtn8Wx2V29hUA606adDxSR_WjnRI9swB_SnlGZXRol6I0RjsZNFT-t8kS5z3idckK4Jb3-kOTJSgSlxCmOqhGNCpjunUdFaB4dRY2G9hsnuasKN7kDK0g9iWVPS-MgGV4EJdfwXb1w/s1600/imgcap-folders.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">That there is 214 folders. You, Canon 350D sir, are an arse.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
If you take a lot of photos (say, a couple of thousand while time-lapse shooting) one of those chief face-palm moments is when you pop the memory card into your computer, and find the camera has sorted your tidy sequence of photos into lots of folders. <i>Hundreds</i> of folders. Going back and forth copying a folder of images at a time is not my idea of being productive. Lucky, then, there's a standard application in Mac OS X that can do this for you.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKoAwzrsN7d70AO_UPaMpoR2OuqDHu5xBPkQxW3Na6sLGuTkfZ83D32mdo1Su-BJo-mhQeJNYc11Puzh3Ba2T_6_L7hFw2LB2SJeO1uczi3nYJBnJvHgkJwWLeBy50SGbD-zHHFk8fi8Ow/s1600/imgcapicon.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKoAwzrsN7d70AO_UPaMpoR2OuqDHu5xBPkQxW3Na6sLGuTkfZ83D32mdo1Su-BJo-mhQeJNYc11Puzh3Ba2T_6_L7hFw2LB2SJeO1uczi3nYJBnJvHgkJwWLeBy50SGbD-zHHFk8fi8Ow/s1600/imgcapicon.jpg" /></a></div>
Image Capture (found in the Applications folder, naturally) can be used to copy content from a memory card or a camera. It doesn't browse the folder structure like the Finder, instead it lists all the media files together (photos, video etc.), allowing you to select the batch you want and instruct it to copy to a destination of your choosing. No back-and-forthing required.<br />
<br />
(Incidentally, iPhoto also does this in a roundabout way, but I find iPhoto to be a bit slow when loading up my entire photo library, which it insists on doing upon launching, whereas Image Capture is a relatively lightweight app and just gets on with it.)<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjP2aghOlIittNasnHy_cPb1Yt7kyOLlRQUm8obsXPWJW4S88zu8bn_W8vINiFDafdVK4l1qyc92pQ3jySLE5OOpYlaSef84tEqf342exZk0NeEJY4vDAjhT0AbTCzafmGbtVhOLwTA51YH/s1600/imgcap-import.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjP2aghOlIittNasnHy_cPb1Yt7kyOLlRQUm8obsXPWJW4S88zu8bn_W8vINiFDafdVK4l1qyc92pQ3jySLE5OOpYlaSef84tEqf342exZk0NeEJY4vDAjhT0AbTCzafmGbtVhOLwTA51YH/s400/imgcap-import.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Simply open Image Capture, tell it to Download Some, switch to list view, and tell it where to copy your images by way of the Download Folder setting. Voila, all your images in one folder by way of a few mouse clicks rather than millions and gabillions.</div>Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-5472837470475491762011-12-06T00:32:00.001+00:002012-05-17T13:10:36.679+01:00On the definition of film-makingWe often use the term 'film' (especially here in the UK) in place of 'movie' or 'motion picture', despite the relative rarity of celluloid in modern movie production.<br />
<br />
The word 'filmic' is banded about to describe a film as being film-like (despite how unneccessary that sounds); but it could mean that the film in question exhibits the gloss and elegance of a classic Hollywood production, or merely that the film maker has achieved the hallowed 'film look', otherwise known as disguising the consumer video origins of the footage.<br />
<br />
And amongst all this are the film makers. This one term bridges the gulf between the hobbyist grabbing shots at an antique car rally, and the household name in a far-flung country managing a crane shot with equipment that costs more than our house. Both of those film makers each see something that pleases the eye, that describes the moment so succinctly that we must preserve it for others -- which could be the intense stare of an outlandish character that we've come to know so well in just 30 minutes, or it could be the evening sun glinting off the chrome bumper of an Austin Healey. Nevertheless, we film makers nod to that dividing gulf with qualifiers such as amateur, or novice, or hobbyist -- lest someone might suppose we claim to be in the same business as Kubrick or Minghella.<br />
<br />
Film makers are often described as storytellers. I've found that only good film makers qualify as storytellers; only great ones can be called story makers -- so refined is the skill to make film tell a story without the anciliary aids that other media can employ. But all of us film makers possess the core ability to visualise a shot and translate it to the screen. To develop we have to show patience and diligence to hone those choices, one day go beyond the pleasant images, and say more with less.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-89567807801944723852011-10-22T16:00:00.000+01:002012-05-17T13:11:00.259+01:00Lessons from The Wheels: Auto WBBack when I bought my Canon 600D specifically for film making, I had everything set to manual. Most of the settings had to be locked anyway; 25fps, 1/50th shutter, ISO 100 unless you're indoors, and so on. This bit me in the bum during a shoot for <a href="http://vimeo.com/26801816">a friend's film</a> when I realised my first half-dozen shots of the day were at the wrong white balance setting.<br />
<br />
So white balance went back to Auto and this served me well for a while, until recently when I was shooting <a href="http://anthonysvideo.blogspot.com/2011/10/new-film-wheels.html">The Wheels</a>. Once again when I was reviewing footage (back home at the computer this time, far too late to do anything about it) I found it to be all wrong.<br />
<br />
The cause this time was the mixture of light sources. At the location I had mistakenly assumed that the outdoor light coming into the room from two sides would be sufficient, but we ended up using a couple of domestic incandescent lamps as well. I knew the footage would look a bit orange, but what I didn't realise was that the Auto WB setting is taken from the brightest part of the picture, rather than the centre of the frame (as auto exposure is, when taking stills).<br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>When Auto WB gets it wrong</b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIkcIHkBc-EP57gHe3uT0aBqO-aSH4Co-_9YJP7ZKJdui3UiBpFbDZdiy8ses85zuRmz6wMmNOGzQLVb-1Un_Fxj4n4Dn_C7Ny90s4DPUbs5D4_g2-els9_MIa9G5nv-kBF9DFKoDCyw50/s1600/Bad+Auto+WB.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIkcIHkBc-EP57gHe3uT0aBqO-aSH4Co-_9YJP7ZKJdui3UiBpFbDZdiy8ses85zuRmz6wMmNOGzQLVb-1Un_Fxj4n4Dn_C7Ny90s4DPUbs5D4_g2-els9_MIa9G5nv-kBF9DFKoDCyw50/s1600/Bad+Auto+WB.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
The pictures above show Dave at the table, mostly lit by the incandescent lamps, but the brightest part of the picture is the outdoor scene beyond the patio doors. The Auto WB has set itself to suit the bright outdoor scene, and as a result Dave and much of the interior is a red/orange hue. This can be corrected in post but I found the shot above was so pushed to red it was tricky to bring it back to resemble something approaching normal without ruining the rest of the frame, especially when trying to brighten the noisy shadows. (My discoveries about noise in shadows is a whole other post.)<br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>When Auto WB gets it right</b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjukVCBhQ0D-HnLbKa_LQHZKdRbyZHxVLGBtd_9-CxhyphenhyphenmMsDO3CP3oT_2n0R6KTR51WCycMMvHLFIpJPgeBlqaiI2Hlzb573Ggyfv8m6ie3-6KqufBtwbwFJRsOmw2_jv6CO-IGdi94_Oo0/s1600/Good+Auto+WB.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjukVCBhQ0D-HnLbKa_LQHZKdRbyZHxVLGBtd_9-CxhyphenhyphenmMsDO3CP3oT_2n0R6KTR51WCycMMvHLFIpJPgeBlqaiI2Hlzb573Ggyfv8m6ie3-6KqufBtwbwFJRsOmw2_jv6CO-IGdi94_Oo0/s1600/Good+Auto+WB.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
This picture shows a different composition, which does not have an outdoor scene in the background; on this occasion the Auto WB has set itself to suit Dave and the interior rather than the outdoors. As per my usual workflow, some colour balancing was made to match the shot with the others, but you can see it required far less work, and therefore the image wouldn't need to be 'pushed' so far and degraded so much to achieve this.<br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>Learning a lesson</b></span><br />
When you're on an important shoot (as opposed to grabbing some shots on a day out with the family), white balance should enter your consciousness as one of those things you just need to check, like adjusting ISO to get the histogram looking right. Unfortunately white balance isn't something that's so visible on the camera, but luckily allowances can be made in post if the results aren't terrible. Perhaps a reminder on the shot list / storyboard would do the trick.<br />
<br />Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-39929782283582361242011-10-17T09:23:00.000+01:002011-10-17T09:23:35.922+01:00New film: The Wheels<div style="text-align: left;">
"Sometimes you don't realise you're working too much..."</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/30534259?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="500"></iframe></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
A short film created specially for the fixed theme of "The wheels went round" for the Chairman's Challenge at <a href="http://www.huddersfieldfilmmakersclub.org/">Huddersfield Film Makers Club</a>, October 2011.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Although the upcoming Chairman's Challenge had been known of for some months, it didn't feel like a proper <i>challenge</i> if we couldn't cram all the work into the final 10 days before the show. It was at this point that I, and my semi-reluctant star Dave, realised we had just one weekend left.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I cobbled together the basic premise of the story and drew up a storyboard, only the second time I had bothered to do so. I thought it would be useful to tick off shots once they were in the can* but it was also very handy to ensure shots followed-on from one another and didn't look too disjointed. And of course I looked very professional, so much so that I left the beret at home.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
We shot during Saturday and Sunday and I spent the next four evenings beavering away at the computer. There was a lot of time consuming post-production effort for a modest project like this one but the deadline really helped to spur me on. By this time Dave's work was done and he was relaxing in his trailer.**</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Shot on a Canon 600D digital SLR with Rode VideoMic. Raw footage was transcoded to Apple Intermediate Codec using <a href="http://www.squared5.com/">MPEG Streamclip</a>. Edited in Final Cut Pro, transferred to After Effects using <a href="http://basicfcptoae.laurenthenriot.net/index.en.html">BasicFCPtoAE</a>, where graphics were composited and shots were colour graded.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<hr />
<div style="text-align: left;">
* I keep all my camera memory cards in a biscuit tin.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
** Dave lives in a trailer. The house in the film has been empty for months so we helped ourselves. We call it 'being resourceful.'</div>Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7333706388662921368.post-88771901500309194722011-10-14T09:22:00.000+01:002012-05-17T13:11:18.972+01:00Loading a Picture Style into your Canon DSLR<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIroF3Ioc0OXDd4JwRFBbmVfBXF39lyyR0oPGHr_UMCTsiX7omUDlSPRlRTza1ldEt5vAARHq5Sgu4CIosIodiI8INKKQL14LXzeO9Wg6YyTKZTuLm4tDbgyx3JoXpID0jIqY9xbSZft1X/s1600/cinestyle_userguide_small.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="120" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIroF3Ioc0OXDd4JwRFBbmVfBXF39lyyR0oPGHr_UMCTsiX7omUDlSPRlRTza1ldEt5vAARHq5Sgu4CIosIodiI8INKKQL14LXzeO9Wg6YyTKZTuLm4tDbgyx3JoXpID0jIqY9xbSZft1X/s200/cinestyle_userguide_small.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
If you want to load a custom Picture Style into your SLR and use it for movie mode (such as Technicolor's CineStyle), it seems Canon's EOS Utility has a funny way of doing things.<br />
<br />
To save anyone the hassle of finding out by trial and error, or perhaps trying to decipher convoluted forum threads, the process is as follows:<br />
<ol>
<li> Connect the camera to your computer via USB, start up EOS Utility (version 2.6 or later).</li>
<li>Switch the camera's mode dial to a still picture mode, such as M.</li>
<li>In EOS Utility's side panel, click the camera button to show the Shooting Menu. Click Register User Defined style.</li>
<li>Choose one of the User Def tabs at the top, then click the Open File button. Choose the picture style file. The picture style is now on the camera.</li>
<li>Switch the camera's mode dial to movie mode, click Register User Defined style again, then you will find your new picture style is in the drop-down list.</li>
</ol>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXdVdgcQ5R6l-4hmFLdx7CVNe0gEvKeJB0P7tH3Nww0PfmLgeStQp7HkDaqYb-2wzkWYsq4r1BnqBKOS3KN8FTE7r_BOedv9sNjZUgy7n2dgKDUscgftY0DHKD9qzwM1O1lfC9zRcU-daX/s1600/import+picture+style.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisuMifma3o15uAR1i-vlGpMYpxxmR8O37ZgYzMk04Lg_Z2uVp14S7LKwxIU1WCZNNiuIJrco-7NMAYx9yl_63ZjfANvaWkKuZCOBZbvYuUZOKKgriJRf7U__MPp49lJB6UoPHxeMDfw84V/s1600/side+panel.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisuMifma3o15uAR1i-vlGpMYpxxmR8O37ZgYzMk04Lg_Z2uVp14S7LKwxIU1WCZNNiuIJrco-7NMAYx9yl_63ZjfANvaWkKuZCOBZbvYuUZOKKgriJRf7U__MPp49lJB6UoPHxeMDfw84V/s1600/side+panel.png" /></a> </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXdVdgcQ5R6l-4hmFLdx7CVNe0gEvKeJB0P7tH3Nww0PfmLgeStQp7HkDaqYb-2wzkWYsq4r1BnqBKOS3KN8FTE7r_BOedv9sNjZUgy7n2dgKDUscgftY0DHKD9qzwM1O1lfC9zRcU-daX/s1600/import+picture+style.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="195" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXdVdgcQ5R6l-4hmFLdx7CVNe0gEvKeJB0P7tH3Nww0PfmLgeStQp7HkDaqYb-2wzkWYsq4r1BnqBKOS3KN8FTE7r_BOedv9sNjZUgy7n2dgKDUscgftY0DHKD9qzwM1O1lfC9zRcU-daX/s320/import+picture+style.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">You can upload picture styles whilst in a stills mode.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKkOS_jNtQy4kH-7iXllKbWZqoQ9g1b7wliu8gAVykxcvtxRFClCfefNk_-8cOqKhf-tmoQsuZ-GOlKRWOvsUeekC6ze1DcL43X7uhw5A1coGRi77x8mWyTyzXFslht8JgAG5F8JdaZX8T/s1600/choose+picture+style.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="234" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKkOS_jNtQy4kH-7iXllKbWZqoQ9g1b7wliu8gAVykxcvtxRFClCfefNk_-8cOqKhf-tmoQsuZ-GOlKRWOvsUeekC6ze1DcL43X7uhw5A1coGRi77x8mWyTyzXFslht8JgAG5F8JdaZX8T/s320/choose+picture+style.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Once the picture style is uploaded, it can be chosen in movie mode.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
For some reason, movie mode won't allow you to upload the picture style file, this has to be done in a stills shooting mode. The picture style then becomes available in movie mode and you can assign it to a user defined setting.Anthony Elliotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15639605046353428907noreply@blogger.com5