Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Best HD camera for untrained scientists?

B

Brent J. Craig

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
1,801
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Toronto
Website
www.brentjcraig.com
Say you were working on a documentary, shooting on Red (obviously), and needed to send an inexpensive B-camera along with some scientists on an expedition where adding a real cameraman is completely out of the question. What would you send with them??? If the fixed lens Scarlets were out the choice would be an absolute no-brainer!

Would it be some sort of DSLR that happens to shoot video? Something pro-sumer that shoots to flash cards?

The project is for HD delivery to some very particular networks, so things like the Flip camera are out. I'm not sold on cameras that shoot h264 until someone can show me something that looks almost broadcast quality coming from one.

Should I get a 7D and train them how to make the video look good, or send something idiot-proof but lower quality?

I would appreciate everyone's advice.
 
I don't know about sending a scarlet setup with a bunch of scientists on an expedition. I'd almost have to say your real choice is either something like a 7D or some small prosumer camcorder. I think I'd pick the 7D over that.

What I'd really do, though, if you could, is wait for the next line of vDSLR's. Hopefully there will be enough improvements. Either way, I'd do a little training session, as much as you could.
 
I did this with a scientist that was crossing the West Antarctic ice sheet with an expedition on a NOVA project that was shot on film. The important thing is the training on the guy so his footage is usable. If the material is going to be clearly stuff that is shot in a scientific context, as long as it is HD, it shouldn't matter. But the network specs often do matter. I'd talk to them and see what flexibility they have in this special case.
 
I thought Philip Bloom's pictures from the ranch were pretty decent...

http://vimeo.com/8100091

It would seem you'd have some room to work in a broadcast documentary. Sometimes people seem to like the look of bad footage for realism, if it does happen to turn out not so great. Also, the small form-factor of a DSLR (plus the ability for great stills) or a little HD camcorder would be good for traveling and getting quick footage, if say... they find a dinosaur.
 
I think it depends a lot on shooting style. If they're going to be plunking the thing on a tripod, or at least use a shoulder mount/brace of some sort, and they'll take time to focus it, sure, a VDSLR could be a good choice.

But if they are going to be running around handheld, you'll get out-of-focus jellocam. I'd rather send them out with a prosumer CCD video camera in that case.

And don't discount h.264 as being the sole factor of "not broadcast quality." h.264 at a decent bitrate can outperform XDCAM-EX:
http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/25
 
Everything about DSLRs is wrong for this

DOF, record time. jello, lack of 'steady shot' etc

Ex1 even sony SR12 handycam or whaever the latest generation is

OF course scientists are clever people who operate complex mechanical instruments more demending than cameras

So given training a DSLR could be a good bet !

(I think I just mirrored the post above!)

S
 
Being a scientist has nothing to do with being able to shoot usable footage. Look at all the horrible home movies made by smart people. They have to be taught the basics: If you are going to pan, plan. Don't waterhose the camera. Think about your shot. Lean up against something to hold the camera steady. Learn what a wide shot, medium shot, and close-up is and why you use them. Don't try to shoot on the long end of the zoom lens unless you are on a tripod. Don't shoot everything. It has to be a story. And so on. If you can come up with ten basic ideas that they can remember you will be doing well. Remember they still have to be scientists while they are doing this and that means their minds are busy.
 
Hi Brent,

Our go to camera for this type of application is the Sony HVR-A1. Not solid state of course but tape falls into the KISS and you don't have the media management hassles. With the XLR top box you can easily add a shotgun, wired or wireless lapel mic. The audience will mostly forgive bad video if they can hear what is going on.

The Panasonic HMC40 and 150 have been getting good reviews if you want to go solid state:
http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/review_panasonic_ag_hmc40_1_4_3_cmos_hd_camcorder/
 
David Mullen ASC said:
If they are bright-enough to be scientists, you'd think they are bright-enough to be trained to use a basic video camera.
Click to expand...

NASA's rocket-scientist astronauts seem to be able to shoot decent footage, but have you seen the checklists that get them there? I definitely don't have NASA's training budget, nor their "If subject A moves left, pan camera left at a rate proportional to subject A's motion divided by the focal length" checklists.

Capturing facts for scientific purposes is quite a bit removed from shooting interesting footage in my experience.

Do you think storyboards or a 'shopping list' of shots would help? How would you approach the training of these scientist-cameramen?
 
Rob Gardner said:
Being a scientist has nothing to do with being able to shoot usable footage. Look at all the horrible home movies made by smart people. They have to be taught the basics...
Click to expand...

You raise an excellent point, Rob. If my only options are to put a camera in the hands of (shudder) a scientist, what is the best way to approach their film education? What are the few main points that I have to teach them, perhaps by video-conference if the budget doesn't come in?
 
It seems your options are fairly clear, if limited:

#1 If the footage has to look good, hire a professional to shoot it.

#2 If it has to be shot by the scientists, then train them to shoot it if you want it to be usable.

I assume that #1 isn't an option, which leaves #2, regardless of whether these scientists have a talent for videography or not. I mean, I assume you have no choice but to have them shoot it, so take whoever is going to use the camera through the menus, have them shoot some sample footage and then go through it with them and critique it. What other choice do you have anyway? And write-up a checklist for them in terms of procedures, tape labeling, timecode, etc.

Or at least hire a talented PA to assist them, although that person might as well shoot the footage.
 
morgan_moore said:
Everything about DSLRs is wrong for this

DOF, record time. jello, lack of 'steady shot' etc
Click to expand...


Exactly. I call those crazy rigs people build with DSLRs, microphones, monitors and grips Frankenstein-cameras. Having said that, handing them a 7D might be the best way to meet our technical requirements and match the other footage. Am i crazy?
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I assume you have no choice but to have them shoot it, so take whoever is going to use the camera through the menus, have them shoot some sample footage and then go through it with them and critique it. What other choice do you have anyway?
Click to expand...

I think you are exactly right. Adding a person to the expedition would be ideal but realistically it is a long shot. It seems the best situation might be for me to travel to their home base and spend a day or so playing film school, then send along a detailed wish list.

It's difficult because the expedition footage is a critical part of the program. I really appreciate everyone's advice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top