Frage von xzenonbenz:
Hey guys, look at my little video here. I would like to know how I got done ", that everything is a bit sharper and not as" grainy "(see synonymous http://forum.slashcam.de/viewtopic.php?p=151537 # 151537)
Am I a junkie quality, or is there actually a trick I can do more rausholen s.Bildqualität from my recordings??
Camera = Panasonic GS75 (3 chip)
Software = Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0
Format = DV Avi
http://www.nandger.de/forumtest.avi
Antwort von Acer:
Sorry, but s.PC monitor looks like something always suck. There are countless (well, vielleich 200) threads to fight "Pc Monitor versus TV monitor"
You burn (this sequence or halt the pre-cut film) on DVD and s.fernseher didst see in you, you would be very pleased with the outcome.
Ciao;.)
Philip
Info:
Video recordings see s.PC-monitor does not look good
Antwort von Schleichmichel:
Go closer s.das motif ran.
In this case, the foreground is very empty, and the details are in the background () which then disappear naturally. When are you around the church (go do it I do not think so, because you vorbeischwenkst quickly ... but just suppose), and you still do not want to "framing" losing the focus, condense!
Moreover, you will go next to the back (if possible) and more zoom in the telephoto range. You get a result, the Church "forward", and moreover, they revealed more details. Will reduce the depth of synonymous but what you can deal with the sunshine through an increase in stopping again, to a certain degree!
This is video, it is quite grobauflösend. So a "Closeup" medium.
Incidentally, is a good example that inexperienced Wide Anglefür are so good.
Antwort von mkrawietz:
Schleich @ Michel
How now?? I should go away next and ranzoomen prefer? What exactly changed the fact that I get up on a rickety tripod without a Picture??
Please veeery slow for me again Fachidioten :-)
The video image is otherwise normal, or can I somehow rausholen more quality??
Would not a HDV camera with a big difference to my picture?
Antwort von Axel:
Would not a HDV camera with a big difference to my picture? Oops! Newcomer on Block C of Resolution neurotic. Thus we see again.
With 375% more potential Resolutionals DV? Clear! The chip of this image would be no larger than your old DV puppy *. With the result that the overall sharpness would still strongly enhanced by a greatly increased depth of field (search). Not desirable, because (if you use the search function, you will learn why), sharpness, to be perceived as such, must be embedded in blur. Focus is thus relative.
Test: Observe your critical view. How much do you actually sharp?
No point for DV, but only a meager for HDV.
HDV is also considerably more compressed than DV, and although
limited mainly. Make yourself smart with HDV! (Search)
A minus point for HDV.
What surreptitious Michel says, is that wide-angle panoramas and beautiful pictures of the weakness of DV reveal - at least on a PC screen -. Good shots mean striking images with clear screen layout and - if possible - another well-contrasting foreground and background. This is regardless of the Resolutionvöllig.
If you really want to shoot landscapes, get a tripod!
* (If loving meant.)
"Did he swallow it?"
"He's still brooding about it. Precaution, I had time to pull the syringe."
Antwort von Nightfly!:
Moin moin!
Here I have replied in your other thread SAME time:
http://forum.slashcam.de/re-bildrauschen-normal-ich-meine-nicht-interlacing--vp152672.html?highlight = # 152,672
Nightfly!
Antwort von mkrawietz:
On the other thread I mentioned in my first post! In addition, he was without beisielvideo and has developed only in this direction, so the new here! The old is happy to be of an admin closed
Antwort von mkrawietz:
The difference between Wide Tele Angleund (and what with the perspective of the scene rejuvenation happens) you see s.allerbesten in 'Vertigo' (staircase) of Hitchcock. Also wonderful to see this effect, but with a narrative completely different meaning in the movie 'Hass' (Paris).
Incidentally, I can not log in right now! Wat is going on up there?
Schleich Michel
Antwort von Der Arzt:
Login is
out. Strangely, only interested in the same figures for this thread, the shunted like such a gnawed bone is out-and. It would be nice of xzenonbenz when he told us that the last picture on the TV Dissatisfied synonymous. I do not want to annoy, just calm down, this thing can be bad if you sleep.
In the movies, my job, I work with the really big resolutions.
Many of the best movies of the wildest directors will be in half the potential Resolutionherausgebracht-voluntary.
Spielberg - one may think of him what you want - never came under suspicion of wanting to eat humble pie. Still have already been published on
Minority Report and
Munich has all of his movies in widescreen format (equivalent to approximately 16:9). The second major movie format, Scope (if the canvas is wide and gaanz remain even on the 16:9 TV is still black bars) has a much higher resolution.
With widescreen happened the same as if you simply programmed in the Editing letterbox bars lay on a 4:3 video. Free resolution, if you magnify it on a 16:9 television.
Scope is a typical format for action films or epic adventures. Here it is ( "Gladiator") to the clarity and beauty of the picture.
Wide-screen, however, is more intimate. It is for
stories. When did you last seen in the movies a good
sharp film? Believe me, the only one bogey Resolutionist!
Antwort von mkrawietz:
Öhm ... yes, I know not what you described as sharp, but if you look at yourself a reasonably current DVD ... as a Picture I would like to create for yourself!
What do I need to heranzureichen least for software and hardware for that?
Viewed as an example: If you for example you Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Spiderman, King Kong, Pirates of the Caribbean, Star Wars ... All look at what no preference, then not all the edges are blurred a bit and it is not synonymous looks as if someone with Blur is drübergegangen nem!
ALSO ON THE PC IS NOT!
No. I ranging picture on the TV monitor is not! :-)
So again ... what can I do? What is the minimum equipment to get the same quality?
Antwort von Wiro:
Hello,
I'm your 1sec clip synonymous times taken to the chest.
At first I thought you wished us a bit estimate. . . between. Should not you do. But maybe that is really in earnest. How this remarkable recording is it created? From the bicycle with one hand filmed?
So again ... what can I do? What is the minimum equipment to get the same quality? 1. Hold the camera still (a lot of use even a tripod More)
2. Give the automatic time einzupegeln itself, or manual focus
3. Practice, practice and more practice.
Every day, with the GS75 miles of film rotated - with good quality. Could be more than that s.Deinem camcorder which is not true. Have you let it ever fall?
;-)
Gruss Wiro
Antwort von mkrawietz:
3. Practice, practice and more practice. If you see a picture from the aforementioned blockbusters as a typical example of a worthwhile, take a screenshot and ask for something similar! First, analyze the frame. You'll find:
1.) Interesting subject. Interesting? Sensational!
2.) Good screen layout, everything what you see, supported the action.
3.) Good Lighting.
A friend plays Trinity. First of gelled hair. Lackklamotten. Makeup?
No makeup: Make-up! Powder! Do not look so ironically, is serious about what we do here!
Now the set. No Hightechset available.
Then we can do something with light patterns, greenish shade. Only a Baustrahler there? Regardless, there heat-resistant color transparencies. But should the structure of the wood-chip wallpaper you do not see better. But that's not enough. Ne black glossy, pale chick (nit mean anything by it) before Green. What is on the screenshot
or otherwise? Somewhere there is light of the page, its contour is emphasized with light. But the construction lights for the background overcook.
And what is with the desk lamp? The has only 20 W halogen.
No matter. Trinity, you have to hold the lamp, unfortunately, with links to shoulder height, so that's just looks. Okay. What else is different? The Lackanzug glitters is not correct. Crap. The left is right, black-green and black and yellow of the desk lamp has on the screenshot but whitely shimmering folds. How the hell I get out
it? The suit has a great thing to reflected white. A bed sheet?
For example. The sheets must be brought into the vicinity of the suit that he may be reflected in it. So here is the smaller Staiv yet, because I will hang this over it.
In addition, the sheet must be illuminated very strongly in order to shine s.besten of up there in the corner. Have more but no lamp. Wait, I could do the construction lights in the closet to anzustrahlen the sheet, could the pattern on the wall I do with the old slide projector. Now it seems to me the construction lights in the lens, so there reflexes.
Positioning times a cardboard above the lens. Reflexes gone? Good. Three hours later.
It is
almost correct. The image format is different.
(Warning! The 16:9 mode, your cam will cost under warranty resolution, but you can now get views on it. Take 16:9!)
Anything else is different. Anything. I'm not coming on it.
The screenshot is blurred! Huh? Actually. Only the contour to trinity's face is sharp, I had never seen. Strangely, for me everything is sharp, well, what is just as sharp in this wee call display. How do I get everything else blurred?
Behind you's go to the hallway. Go all the way back to the stairs. Then zoom to the picture of earlier. So, if your cam and that allows, in places from the auto-focus, and make only the sharp contours, crisp sharp (be careful, the light may not illuminate parts of the face really bad video can deal with contrasts and transitions of overexposed spots on normal Exposure never work out. A delicate outline, not more!).
Later, after the capture. The Picture on the PC display.
Wow, looks great. But it is a bit fuzzier.
That comes of the 16:9 mode. Decide for or against. The colors are weird.
The White Balance are you doing in the postpro perhaps on the white in the Lackanzug. The picture looks a bit pale, slightly increases the saturation.
The Picture is slack, such times in the chest after the effects of gamma and play around with it. There! A tiny bit of increase .... What say you? Looks like the presenta
Antwort von Schleichmichel:
... as a Picture I would like to create for yourself!
What do I need to heranzureichen least for software and hardware for that? Do you have real estate that you can give as security?
But the Lenses Prices have, as you go for a walk erstmal!
Look! At Arri the video on the working procedures of King Kong
(http://www.arri.de/video_diary/index.htm), and then you can direct your views compare with the entire camcorder Geraffel there.
But to make it short, your needs are, unfortunately s.The sharpness absurd. And a Sharper (HDV) Camera will not satisfy you because it makes the pictures not be interesting if you ankarrst greasy equipment. Afterward, this philosophy makes you smarter, but it broke (just for you, it has the industry synonymous except # # # # Create dream worlds with our award winning camcorder VDPF 6,261,209 with an unbeatable color brilliance ... so that you all put forward !#### )
If it is possible to you, then once you pull the color channels of your DV clips one by one mind. And I say to you before: Yes, that's actually NORMAL!
Antwort von Maik:
Am I a junkie quality, or is there actually a trick I can do more rausholen s.Bildqualität from my recordings??
Hm
Sounds to me like a typical comprehension problem
but with a fundamental study of the sources can be remedied:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlacing
http://www.100fps.com/
all of the above is strongly recommended synonymous. Not the camera makes the
Images, but the cameraman.
M.
Antwort von mkrawietz:
So once again s.Alle ... I KNOW that the example image from the subject, shaky and can filmerischem is total crap! I have put just any building material! My movies are not so shaky and the choice of subject, and movies are literary finesse then available! With is not about how I make an interesting film, but I just can rausholen more quality in the technical sense, in my Camera! My fear is fast and easy it is just s.der hardware, or changed a tripod, image noise which occurs on a flat solid surface no preference whether one is moving or not?
I do shake a tripod of course, and thus improves the sharpness somehow, but I mean no!
So ... again my question:
What is the minimum equipment to get a similarly good picture like in Hollywood?? I do not know what to use in Hollywood, but what should I buy in order to achieve sendetaugliche shots!! Camera model and manufacturer's name and maybe the price would offer me:-D
Antwort von Markus:
What is the minimum equipment to get a similarly good picture like in Hollywood?? That irritates me apart to get rid of a (true, in essence) saying that occurred to me spontaneously this:
To create
similar images as those in Hollywood, you need
an equally great team with
a similar knowledge / skills, and
similar equipment (usFilmkamera, not video camcorder). ;-)
The test video, I can s.dem Calculator, I am currently sitting s.dem not download ... maybe later more. Then I might have read the above posts, all synonymous. ;-)
Antwort von mkrawietz:
Oh ... me just what a fall ....
could not ask someone a little movies in the length of my post was supposed to be qualitatively better !?!?! Then I can compare and say whether there is a difference for me or not!
(I mean not the better senses of filmed better, but better image quality!)
Antwort von mkrawietz:
I have looked at me the sample videos of 100fps .. Although the DivX ... So not 100% comparable to ... but all have the same flicker what I mean! So I guess I'm an easy resolution, and can help the Qualitätsjunky only a camera for much more money:-P
Nevertheless, I thank you for the many tips and suggestions for improvement!
Liebe Grüße
Xzenon
