|
Home
| |
Common answers to common questions.

- Why shoot HDTV? Nobody I know has an HDTV.
- What is the resolution of HDTV?
- What kind of latitude can I expect from HDTV?
- What can I expect from the colorimetry of the HD
system?
- How sensitive is the HDCAM camera?
- What is the aspect ratio of HDTV?
- How do I protect for 4x3 and 16x9 aspect ratio?
- What are some set design considerations?
- How is makeup different?
- What are my monitoring options?
- What kinds of signals interface with the HDCAM equipment?
- What kind of shutter options do I have?
- How do I light for HDTV?
- How do the lenses compare in HDTV?
- What are the focus and depth of field considerations?
- How do filters react in the HD system?
- What is the audio quality like in HDCAM?
- Does the HDCAM work well with cranes?
- How well does HDCAM work with handheld shots?
- What changes can I make in my crew with HD?
- Where can I realistically expect to save money?
- How does HD production affect my talent?
- How can HDCAM improve lessen my risk on speculative projects?
- Why digital?
- Can I get a film look with HDTV?
- 24p? 1080i? What does it really mean to my production?
- Why should I use HD instead of Digibeta?
- How do you edit HDTV?
- new question?

Nobody I know of outside the business has a 35mm projector at home either. HDTV can
be treated just like film and transferred to any format including NTSC, PAL and even
back to film.
When we went from 3/4" U-matic to Betacam we got about a 10% to 20% improvement. When
we went from Betacam to Betacam SP we got about a 10% to 20% improvement. When we went
from Betacam to Digibeta we got about a 10% to 20% improvement. When we go from
Digibeta to HD we get about a 500% improvement. And it doesn't cost much more than Digibeta.
Possibly no other time in your career in television and film production will you be able
to offer your clients an increase of quality of this magnitude with only an incremental
increase in cost.

HD has about 5 times the picture information of regular NTSC video, produced on 3 CCD
chips with 2.2 million pixels each. The pixel array is 1920 by 1080. This
provides an image with such fine detail that many production elements that would
be "good enough" for regular video stand out as glaring problems in
HD. But this high resolution along with other attributes of HD allows electronic
image making of a caliber that could heretofore only be achieved with film. This
resolution is better than that with 16mm film, and can surpass 35mm film.
Kodak's own literature contends that an enlargement from a 35mm still image,
24mm x 36mm, 864mm2 or 0.94 x 1.42 inches, is equivalent to an
enlargement from a 2048 x 3072 or 6 million pixel Photo CD scan (digital image). However,
the 35mm motion picture negative, because it is rotated 90 degrees is about half
the size of the still image negative. And on top of that the area of the
negative that is scanned for TV transmission is only .594 x .792 inches.
So based on Kodak's own math only 2.2 million pixels are needed for the TV
Transmitted area of the negative to give the same results of the highly
acclaimed Photo CD digital imaging process. It is interesting that the
current HD standard hovers around the same 2.2 million pixel range. And
when you compare it to the 350,000 pixels of Digital Betacam you are getting
more than 6 times the information recorded.
It’s pretty early in the transition in a rather traditional industry, but
already some feature filmmakers, most notably George Lucas, contend that HD can
deliver an image to theatrical projection that is on par with that of 35mm film.

HD has somewhat more latitude than regular video, and less than film. The blacks
in HD are strong, with excellent detail visible into the shadows. HD black is at
0, rather than at 7.5IRE, as with NTSC. Although this is a minimal increase every
little bit counts. Highlights can carry good detail right up to 100IRE and
the HDCAM format records up to around 108IRE. You must be careful not to
overexpose highlights, as the HD camera will clip them almost like any digital
format. If anything err toward underexposure of highlights.
Tools to optimize exposure include viewfinder zebra, picture monitor, and
waveform monitor. These tools can provide more precise assurance of exposure
than incident and spot metering for film.
With careful engineering adjustments, it is possible to manipulate the
contrast and gamma characteristics of an HDCAM to increase the effective latitude.
However there are some trade offs and special attention should be given to your
distribution medium.
Back to Top

HD has a rich, saturated color palette, and discriminates subtle color
differences better than regular video. While carefully staged and exposed scenes
do not necessarily require color correction, HD does have lots of "headroom" to
allow fine tuning and refinement of color, gamma and other pictorial attributes.
There are several preset color matrices available and the color matrix can
also be configured for particular projects.
The Snell & Wilcox switcher in the HD VISION edit suite has substantial color
correction capability as does the AVID DS HD.
For critical color correction the Pogle in Video Post and Transfer's Spirit
room is an excellent choice.

F8 at 2000 lux, nominally about like 400 ASA film. The HDW 700 (and F900) are
the same speed as the BVW 600 or DVW700, or similar to a high speed film
emulsion like 5279. Most scenes can be shot at 6 to 9db gain without serious
noise degradation, if low light conditions require it, but more often you’re
using negative gain or ND filtering to get a lower stop.

Compared to the nearly square 4x3 aspect ratio of regular video, HD is a wider
16x9. That’s a 1.78 ratio of width to height, similar to cinema wide screen at
1.85. The 16x9 HD frame provides a wider canvas, more attuned to human field of
view. Naturally composition within the frame, and blocking of action, can be
somewhat different. For instance, scenes that would require cutting between close-ups
in 4x3 might be carried through in a single wide shot in 16x9. This
wider aspect ratio is crucial if the production is to be transferred to film for
theatrical presentation. For home HDTV, the wider aspect means that movies
can be viewed without cropping and pan-and-scan.

The HD viewfinder, and some monitors, can be set to clearly show the 4x3 frame
centered within the full 16x9 frame, so that action can be kept safe if the
final product will be 4x3. If the program is only to be seen in 4x3, this is
fully satisfactory. However, it will always compromise the aesthetics of
composition to try to pull both 4x3 and 16x9 versions of a show. A better
compromise whenever possible is to compose optimally for 16x9, and letterbox for
the 4x3 version.

Of course the wider aspect ratio requires that sets be designed wider, but the
more important difference here is that the higher resolution in HD will reveal
details that would not be visible in regular video. “Good enough for government
work” may not suffice in HD. Carefully viewing the scene in a monitor will often
reveal problems that need cleaning up compared to the nearly square 4x3 aspect ratio
of regular video, HD is a wider
16x9.

As with sets, faces will show up problems in HD that were submerged in the
lower resolution of regular video. But too much makeup can also show up as
a problem. Makeup needs to be done with extra care, gently feathered out,
and generally done with moderation. Advanced makeup techniques such as
airbrushing may be helpful to achieve a more natural look. Wigs must be
of high quality to look natural.

Use of an HD monitor on the set is a valuable production discipline for
quality control. When an engineer is employed, he will also need an High Definition
waveform monitor. The HDCAM camcorder has quality color playback directly
out of the camera, with no need for a separate playback adaptor. The camera
output is analog Y, Pb, Pr through 3 BNC connectors. An HD monitor (with analog
input) is required, unless a downconvertor is available, which would allow
the use of regular NTSC monitors for non-critical purposes. The monitor will
be more valuable for judging the image if it is hooded to shield off ambient
light, especially in exterior setups. HD monitoring differs from film video
assist in that you have a much higher quality image to monitor, and you can
playback the actual recorded image, not a low resolution substitute.

It’s important whenever planning a particular application involving HD gear to
be sure that the input/output connections will mate up. For example, monitoring
from the camcorder will require an HD monitor with analog inputs (3 BNC’s accepting
Y, Pb, Pr), but monitoring or projecting from the studio deck (HDW500) will require
an HD-SDI input, which is a single BNC. Transcoders are available to bridge these
connections.

The electronic shutter provides shorter effective exposure times from 1/100
sec down to 1/2000 sec to control motion blur, and ECS (Extended Clear Scan)
allows scan rate adjustments in small increments from 30 Hz to 7000 Hz in
order to sync up with computer monitors and minimize roll bars.

Lighting for HD is similar to lighting for film or for high-end video production.
It’s a pleasure to light for the HD camera due to its ability to capture fine
nuances. Subtle lighting touches that would be muddied down to oblivion in the
relative low resolution of standard video can be retained in HD. Because the camera is
quite fast, similar to high speed film stock, and because a low f-stop is usually
desirable to minimize depth of field, not much quantity of light is required.
Still if it took 10 lights to get that Academy Award winning look on 200
ASA film you will still need 10 lights. They just do not have to be as
big.

The special high definition zoom lenses made by Canon and Fujinon have extraordinarily
sharp optics. It is possible to use regular broadcast lenses (2/3”), although
they’re not recommended due to inferior resolution, particularly around the edges.
Although quite expensive, prime lens sets are available from Fujinon, Canon, Angenieux,
and Optex.

Because of the high resolution of HD, focus is more critical
than with regular video. When the cameraman is using the viewfinder as the
primary means of judging focus, it’s crucial that he have proper dioptor
adjustment for his vision. Whenever possible, it’s desirable to have another
crewperson (engineer or video tech) helping to watch in a monitor for focus,
exposure and other parameters. Alternatively, a film-style assistant cameraman
can tape-measure focus distances and control focus from the side of the lens
as would be done with a film camera.

The high resolution, strong chroma, strong blacks, and robustness of the HD image
will permit the use of diffusion, enhancement, polarizer and grad filters with
results similar to film. However, considering the smaller pickup device in
HD compared to a 35mm film frame, you may want to consider lighter filtration
than normal.

HDCAM format has 4 channels of 20 bit AES/EBU audio, providing a very clean digital
audio recording exceeding DAT. 2 channels can be fed into the camcorder in the
field (XLR connectors), with whatever’s going to channels 1 and 2 redundantly fed to
3 and 4. It’s important to understand the difference in setting levels for digital
audio compared to analog audio: Peak reference audio should be set at -20db,
compared to 0db for analog audio. For HDTV in the home, the provision for 5.1
channel surround sound is an awesome enhancement over regular TV.

The HD camcorder can be easily adapted to all of the many tools of movement used
in film and high-end video production: dollies, cranes, jibs, helicopter, steadicam,
etc. Since the HD analog signal out of the camcorder is not viewable on conventional
monitors such as are built into the steadicam, or might be used on a jib arm, it’s
important to plan for an accommodation. The conventional monitor can be replaced with
an HD monitor, or a small portable downconvertor can bridge the HD camera output to a
conventional monitor.

The HD camcorder is well balanced for handholding. Its weight of about 20 pounds
is similar to a BVW-600, a D30/PVV3, or a 16 SR. The frequently used controls
are well-placed, and will be familiar to any cameraman accustomed to Sony
camcorders. There are a great many adjustments that are controlled in a
voluminous menu system, so the cameraman or engineer will want to spend some
time becoming familiar with these. Although not necessary at all times, a CCU
can be connected to the camera to control image parameters remotely. This allows
the engineer to fine-tune the image somewhat like a colorist would in a film
transfer suite.

Of course the excellent ergonomics of the HD camcorder makes it possible to do
the one-man-band thing. But for building a solid, balanced crew, standard
practice for HD production crew should be more like best practice used for
standard video EFP. A good cameraman should be able to adapt to shooting HD,
but it will be helpful for him to get some practice before the first shoot.
An engineer or skilled video tech is a crucial crew position in HD production,
analogous to a first assistant cameraman on a film shoot. The audio recordist
familiar with video field production will have no surprises with HD.
Higher end film production is typically crewed the same with the
exception of adding a vision engineer and removing the 2nd assistant camera
operator.

For the superb quality it provides, HD production is a great value. A single
HD tape cassette costing less than $80 records 40 minutes, which in 35mm film
would require ten 400’ loads. With film processing and basic transfer, that
40 minutes of film would cost over $5000.

For production with talent, the ability to record 40 or 50 minutes of performance
without interrupting the flow can be a big help in getting the optimal take. More
takes can be recorded in less time, for much less money than with film, and it is
practical to let the camera roll between takes where this facilitates performance.

The production of independent features is extremely risky, since most projects
never achieve distribution, much less turn a profit. With film production, it’s
necessary to spend the big bucks on the front end for film stock, processing, and
transfer. But with HD production, the front end costs for stock are modest and
nearly insignificant. An HD theatrical production can be shot, edited, and sold
before spending the money to transfer back to film for theatrical projection.
This can substantially reduce the risk confronting prospective investors,
particularly if several projects are packaged together. Very soon there will be a
sufficient critical mass of digital cinemas around the country that a moderately
wide theatrical release can be done without spending big bucks on film transfer
and prints.

Since “digital” is such a buzzword these days, many statements get made about
digital TV that are fuzzy, confusing, and imprecise: Beware TV salesmen, etc.
HDTV is a kind of digital TV--But digital TV is not necessarily HDTV: it may
be a lower resolution cousin. The current generation of DVD is not HDTV. DV,
DVCAM and DVCPRO are digital tape formats for small consumer, prosumer and
professional camcorders – while they are revolutionizing the low and middle
range of video production, their image quality at best is only as good as Beta SP.

The holy grail for electronic cinematography is to achieve the elusive “film look”.
But one reason for its elusiveness is that “film look” is very subjective, very
much in the mind and eye of the beholder, and means very different things to
different people. In order for a director of photography to achieve a certain
look sought by a director, the first step is to get a good mutual understanding
of what the look is. Reference to paintings, photographs, movies or any visual
medium can help to achieve a mutual understanding: a picture’s worth a thousand
words. Just as when developing a special “look” for a film project, test shots
can be done and discussed to zero-in on what the director is visualizing.
The DSP (Digital Signal Processing) technology in the HDCAM camera allows precise
adjustment of image parameters such as gamma, color matrix, detail, etc. which can
be saved in internal memory as a custom look. Combined with conventional film
techniques such as artistic lighting, lens filters, and colorist-style image
manipulation in post, HD allows a variety of “looks” that approaches the range
of film.

Because it has got so much positive buzz lately in the independent feature world,
many people new to HD assume that they should shoot 24P, especially if they want
a film look. Actually most aspects of the image are the same between “24P” and
“1080I”, including most of the strengths of HD that can contribute to a film look:
strong chroma intensity, strong blacks, good handling of highlight details, high
resolution, and general robust quality of image. Of course, both are actually
“1080”. The difference: with “24P” there are only 24 discrete frames per second,
compared to 30 frames per second presented as 60 interlaced fields with “1080I”.
The 24P frames are liable to much more blurring if there is camera movement or
subject movement. A 24P sequence is more “jerky” and subject to flicker than the
comparative smoothness of 1080I. Depending on the content, message, or means of
presentation, these differences may be good, bad, or indifferent. Either format
can be transferred to film with excellent results.

With more than 2 million individual picture elements captured on every frame of
HD compared with only 350,000 on Digibeta, the 500% gain should be enough to
sway any client. How about the ability to blow up an image more than 5
times and still be completely lossless on your Digibeta master. Or the
ability to create effects or cut mattes with 5 times the detail. It
boggles my mind that Digibeta would be even considered as an acquisition format
in the 21st century. Just as in the past you would shoot film and transfer to 601 digital video (like
Digital Betacam) when premium quality is sought, HD can provide a premium production
format to capture optimal camera originals, which can likewise be transferred to
Digibeta for the rest of post production. HD can be viewed as an “electronic
negative” that gives the highest quality in the camera originals, so your project
will have more evergreen value.

HD can easily the transferred to Digibeta or BetaSP just as film is. HD
originals transferred are easily digitized into an Avid or
other conventional edit system. The down converted output of the HD studio deck
can also be digitized directly into the Avid. A final product in standard
definition can be derived this way, or the EDL generated can be used for HD post
production. Many nonlinear systems can now be HD capable, including Discreet Fire
or Smoke, Quantel, Avid (Softimage) DS/HD, Fusion Boxx and even inexpensive Mac
systems using Final Cut Pro on special boards: Pinnacle Targa CineWave and Digital
Voodoo. However, because of the large file sizes entailed with digitized HD,
linear editing can still be a good way to post HD, especially for long form.
HD production has passed through nearly two decades of experimentation,
development, and refinement. It is now a practical, solid, reasonably priced,
and easy to use medium. Providing superlative image quality with all the
advantages of an electronic medium--for a great many production situations HD is
now the way to go.

Author information goes here.
Copyright © 1999 [In-Sync, Inc.]. All rights reserved.
Revised: July 19, 2001
.
|