@CubeAce, @kate-m

Hi Kate, Ray

. . . . Dedicated camcorders are much better for video but quite poor for stills. . . . .

I totally agree that a dedicated video camera is the best option - a DSLR is a still camera, with the addition of the capablity to record video. This results in limitations in the length of recording time possible due to the sensor overheating and the camera stops recording. Dedicated video cameras do not have this issue.

However I would qualify Ray's statement over the still images from dedicated video cameras - it all depends on how you are going to use them and the video camera used.

I have a Sony FDR-AX53e which takes still images and I have it set for 3840 x 2160 still image size, I use them in 4K UHD video and have had pictures printed up to 24" x 16" maintaining good quality, sharpness etc.

HTH

John EB

@johnebaker @kate-m

I like sparring with John verbally as we often seem to have equally valid but opposing views and I think (hope) a mutual respect for the others point of view. I agree a camcorder is capable of obtaining a good stills image. I disagree from practical experience that a DSLR or mirror-less camera is more likely to overheat due to running for a long time. Some cameras are renowned for overheating during prolonged use whether it is during continuous rapid stills shooting or recording video.

I have in the past done an eight hour time lapse with my D500 which in the field where having that type of power last for that duration can be quite challenging except when you can hot swap out batteries without interrupting shooting or on a hot UK summers day record continuously a one and a half outdoor concert at 4K. The main problem is keeping the memory cards from overheating.

Also on a question of scale it depend on how large your work is going to be exhibited at and if you get a setting wrong how recoverable an image may be. This image as a jpeg was completely overblown but from a 14 bit uncompressed raw file it was retrievable.

As a closeup from a 12 MP full frame camera (My D700) it will not have as much detail as your Sony Kate but the £1,600 70-200mm zoom lens helps with excellent image stabilization and clarity of optics.

But again, horses for courses. I wouldn't expect my DSLR to perform as well on the move as Johns video camera for video.

Also it depends on your print needs. I was asked to supply an image for a poster for an upcoming event as I had covered the past one for them. So along with the relevant model release and parental permission slips handed over I provided this one.

It's a bit cropped. I never put up full images or full resolution stills on the web. I had no idea at the time what sized poster they were thinking of. The largest I had seen them use at that time was A0. That is from my APS-C sensored D500 using a f2.8 24-70mm full frame constant aperture zoom.

This was the poster they produced from it.

This was one of the two at either main entrance.

But I would equally be pressed to produce the quality of some of Johns video footage.

Ray.

@CubeAce, @kate-m

Hi

. . . . I think (hope) a mutual respect for the others point of view.  . . . .

Very much so.

We are both in agreement about the need to use the right tool for the job, and are looking at the problem from both sides with respect to equipment.

Ray

. . . . . I have in the past done an eight hour time lapse . . . .

OT, however, is the sensor only used when the image is actually being taken and in an 'idle' state in between. I have done 4hr+ timelapses with both my sportscam and FDR-AX53e and the sensor is on all the time.

John EB

@johnebaker

Hi John.

It depends on how the camera is set up. For night time astro stuff the sensor stays active and produces a (negative) image it combines with the taken frame to produce a noise free image. Not that the sensor suffers much from 'hot pixels'.

it also stays on in live view which I tend to use for both video and time lapses. So the shutter curtain is permanently in the open position.

I could shoot through the view finder to save battery but that means I can't access live shooting data like exposure zebras or monitoring the volume or whether the camera is actually level.

It has tons of features I like. it has buttons or dials for every normal function so I don't have to delve into menus and practiced fingers mean I can ,when shooting stills, keep my eye on the viewfinder and get a new setting in under 8 seconds. All the buttons also illuminate on the back of the camera for those I don''t use as much.

I'm a bit out of practice though.

Ray.

Hey Ray, John

thanks for all your comments and nice pictures, Ray :-)

Yes, a dedicated camcorder seems like a good idea. One that is best for green screen. It would have to have a good auto focus, or else i focus on the place where i will act and not move away too far from that point,because i'm filming myself with the camera on a tripod. I wonder if i would like to film in 4k, because the files are probably quite big and that means lots of storage space?

So i am thinking about getting the right camcorder for my green screen - self filming - requirements or finding the right lens for my Sony Alpha a7ii.

I'll meditate on all you have said and keep researching on the web :-)

Kate

@kate-m

Hi Kate.

I'm curious about a few things.

If you are doing all of this for a green screen recording of yourself, why the need for the wide aperture. Not only is it making the focusing issue harder but it is not needed for the cinematic effect. That can only come from the video you place behind you which in effect would have had to have been filmed at the aperture you want for the desired bokeh effect and at the focus distance you would have to be as if you were standing at location as if you were actually there compared to the background distance to get the out of focus background effect you desire.

Have you thought the complications through?

Ray.

Hey Ray,

actually the background will be sand paintings i have painted and photographed, so i will tell the story in front of sand paintings that depict it, and they have the color of sand. Therefore you are right, the background will not be blurry anyway. Right now i'm experimenting with light (lighting myself separately from the green screen, and / or lighting the green screen separately from me.

@kate-m

Hi Kate.

I wouldn't think from what you describe that you would need a very expensive lens. Just a lens that can be stopped down to about f5.6 without too much vignetting. (purple fringing). That way focus will not be as critical as you will have a greater depth of view. Also a wider angled lens would help with depth of view and be easier at close distance to keep you in frame. If you can afford one, a 14mm or wider (12mm or 10mm) lens in my opinion.

Separate lighting for you and the green screen is, in my opinion, a good idea. Reducing the shadow areas you may cast. More light will also mean less exposure time for each frame lessening the blur effect and giving crisper edges to your profile.

Good luck.

Ray.

Hey Ray,

i have experimented with a Panasonic HDC-SD300 and it has a 43mm lens. It already makes a difference to my 50mm lens for my Sony, in that i would need a bigger green screen, because i have to scoot in closer to the green screen, so it's all in the picture, but them there's less of me in the picture.

I'm still experimenting with several LED FRESNEL XAL lights that i have borrowed over the weekend, but it seems to me that soft boxes may be a better choice to evenly distribute the light on the green screen and also for a softer lighting on me.

Do you have any experience with that maybe?

Have a lovely day :-)

Kate

@kate-m

Hi Katie.

Only in photography I'm afraid but even there soft boxes are the way to go for even light distribution of background.

It is always better for the camera to be closer to the person than the person to the green screen. So say camera to person ⅓ distance and person to green screen ⅔ distance. A wider lens should allow the lens to be closer to you and you closer to the green screen, but a larger green screen if you can fit one in might be cheaper then a wider lens. Also a larger green screen may need more or stronger lighting. A lot depends on how much room you have to work in. Also avoid coloured walls, floors or ceilings as reflected bounced light can produce colour casts where you don't want them.

Ray.

@kate-m

Hi Kate

For green screen setup, lighting and usage I would suggest you look on Youtube - there are many videos there explaining all you need to know.

I would suggest you start with this video .

HTH

John EB

Hey Ray, John,

thanks, yes, that's a really good one, i actually saw that exact video today :-D (and many more) Like this one, since i would like to film outdoors:

(get's interesting starting at 0:58 minute)

Since i'm filming outside surrounded by bushes or on the field surrounded by cows i luckily i have no bouncing of colors happening from the sides or top. Also i'm thinking of building a very large green screen and to stretch a green cloth across a board (so i have no more wind issues).

Kate

i just wonder if some wind will easily blow down a soft box?

especially because i will have to raise them quite high off the ground

@kate-m

Hi Kate.

What they don't show you is the amount of braces and stage weights or sandbags at the back of those panels for outside work. Don't underestimate the amount of force in even a slight breeze on such a large surface area. Unless you are blessed with such still weather most of the year or that material is more wind porous than it looks.

And yes, the tripods for the lights will need weights on them as well although a good wind will twist the heads regardless although lights for the background outside is a mute point if it is bright or even overcast. Even in a cloudless sky the light intensity will change over a ten minute period. You may find green screening outside more challenging than inside where you can control the environment more.

I'm no expert in this but I can see there will be a learning curve to be had. I have only ever seen pro rigs in use and they have crews looking after them and tons of gear. I have no idea what really awaits you in practice. I have my fingers crossed as my experience is with infinity screens and photo shoots which are similar but not identical practices. All my personal experience is within controlled indoor areas where everything close by was white and we had more lighting than we needed. Even that was very challenging at times working with still objects taking still images.

Ray.

@kate-m

Hi

I agree with @CubeAce on the need for substantial support/bracing for large green screens in even the slightest breeze.

Other issues arise from the mixing of daylight with artificial lighting eg:

In sunlight or bright overcast days the illumination power is going to have to be high (kilowatts) for the effect to be effective.

Colour balance ( colour temperature) between daylight and artificial light is going to change over time due to, as @CubeAce has commented, 'Even in a cloudless sky the light intensity will change over a ten minute period.', cloud movement, degree of overcast, and the time of day.

Are you intending to remove the entire outdoor background using green screens? If so, could the shots not be done in a more controlled, and controllable, environment where lighting, etc can be consistent and external noise eg wind can reduced/eliminated.

John EB

@johnebaker

Hi Kate.

I have one other thought to add to Johns and my own thoughts based on your comment.

Since i'm filming outside surrounded by bushes or on the field surrounded by cows i luckily i have no bouncing of colors happening from the sides or top

That will make for some green light bounce unless you film on grey tarmac. It may not be that noticeable as a moving image and just appear similar to having more noise produced by using a higher ISO setting then is actually being used. It is also a lot easier to do only upper body shots than including feet no matter where you film.

As well as lighting for outdoors you could also try large reflectors. Cheaper than lights and in bright sunshine can be very effective for lighting you, not the back screen. Setting up positioning of the screen and angle to the sun may become critical though. Either way it is a good idea to rope in an assistant or two who may save valuable time as it is difficult to be in front of and behind the camera at the same time when trying to figure out the best lighting positions.

I don't mean they should make the necessary adjustments. I mean they can stand where you would and you make the adjustments. A remote start stop may also be a good buy if the camera can do it and you have to be on your own.

Also if possible, mark your standing positions or walking routes to stay within the screen area and in focus if manually focusing.

Ray.

@kate-m

Nearly forgot.

If you were lucky enough to get this third party New Blue plugin with your copy of MEP, it is much more versatile than the standard chroma key option within MEP.

Although the controls look different in layout within MEP on the left, all the same controls are there as shown in the right image.

The video to watch is here.

You should watch that Video.

Ray.

Hey Ray,

thanks so much for all your help :-)

Yes, there are so many factors to consider. Right now i have another project that needs all my attention until the end of the year, so i will resume my green screen film in 2022. And thanks also for the video!

Kate

Hey John EB,

thank you for your helpful thoughts and advice. I was just hoping to take advantage of the beautiful sunlight outside, with its different hues during the day and evening - i really don't know if i can recreate it indoors? But in case the outside proves to be too challenging, i will have to film indoors.

Kate

old topic. but expirience the same with video deluxe 2024.
a clear green screen effect. using the color function.
all green turns into grey but no transparancy