Slap MessageBoards
Skateboarding => PHOTOS/VIDEO => Filming/Editing => Topic started by: suckmadeck on April 18, 2021, 05:12:04 AM
-
So I put this little tutorial together just to demonstrate how to shoot in 4:3 HD on the Panasonic HD cameras. Doesn't cost much at all, you don't need a mad amount of spacers or even a really expensive lens. This is a nice and easy way to get into it. Shalom
https://youtu.be/zf6VW3vOMZ4 (https://youtu.be/zf6VW3vOMZ4)
Some example footage from a project I've been working on where the entire video will be shot in 4:3 HD:
https://youtu.be/vXRktJ_otKM (https://youtu.be/vXRktJ_otKM)
-
neat! dont know if i missed anything or not, but how did you export it?
the rendered video looks really crisp and even plays 1080p.
-
neat! dont know if i missed anything or not, but how did you export it?
the rendered video looks really crisp and even plays 1080p.
Well for the example I rendered in H.264 at 1440x1080p 50p at 50mbps, but for actual skate videos that I post live, I usually go for 4k 50p at 68mbps for that extra bandwidth
-
Just wondering, why are you stepping down to 52mm instead of just spacing out to a 72mm Opteka? Is there a benefit to stepping down to 58mm/52mm as opposed to just going straight 72mm to 72mm and throwing an extra spacer ring?
-
Just wondering, why are you stepping down to 52mm instead of just spacing out to a 72mm Opteka? Is there a benefit to stepping down to 58mm/52mm as opposed to just going straight 72mm to 72mm and throwing an extra spacer ring?
My guess is, the image will get pretty fucky the further the back element of the fisheye gets from the camera lens. Stepping down to 52mm condenses the usable image to a 4:3 aspect ratio, without bringing the lens much further out.
-
Doing gods work. Thank you!
-
Expand Quote
Just wondering, why are you stepping down to 52mm instead of just spacing out to a 72mm Opteka? Is there a benefit to stepping down to 58mm/52mm as opposed to just going straight 72mm to 72mm and throwing an extra spacer ring?
My guess is, the image will get pretty fucky the further the back element of the fisheye gets from the camera lens. Stepping down to 52mm condenses the usable image to a 4:3 aspect ratio, without bringing the lens much further out.
I’ve put 5 spacers in with zero issues (was testing different looks and bought 5 rings at once), focus still locks in fine and the only difference is obviously more and more vig.
-
Hey, i´ve been filming in vx for 12 years, last year I got and HVX200 and the fisheye from vx1000market: 3x 3CCD Fisheye Lens - 72mm Thread Mount -
I want to edit the clip in 4:3, just because the fisheye filming.
so do you have any tips for settings in post prod 4:3 and render settings for Final Cut?? i got problem with running adobe premiere and HD files in my pc windows so I need to move to Mac.
-
Hey, i´ve been filming in vx for 12 years, last year I got and HVX200 and the fisheye from vx1000market: 3x 3CCD Fisheye Lens - 72mm Thread Mount -
I want to edit the clip in 4:3, just because the fisheye filming.
Side note fwiw, I have the same lens for 16:9 shooting, and the vig crops just outside of the 4:3 limits (or at least it does on my HPX). So if you're looking for a little bit of vig you may wanna get a spacer or two, or get ahold of a 52mm lens.
-
The hpx 170 can shoot 4:3 in camera and the hmc 150 cant. Im wondering if that makes a difference in image quality when you have to crop the hmc 150 clips in post?