• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Help with editing the footage from 5D Mark II

D

daniel_mop

I have been using my 5D Mark II for about a year now, and I am satisfied with the quality of the photos and videos. About a year ago, I was advised to use CineForm to convert the MOV files into something editable, so I did. But I am still left with some questions, and I hope I can get some good answers to them. Thank you in advance.

1. I am not a pro but I can't help but compare the quality of my videos to that of this piece of film called Reviere by Vincent Laforet which was also shot with the same camera as mine. His images are very crystal clear and there seems to be no noise in the shots filmed in the dark. How do I achieve that?

2. The rapid movements in my videos seem to leave somewhat of a brief residue of the image that follows the movement, kind of a ghost-ish aftermath. I am filming with my Mark II at the 24P rate, and I am editing with my Adobe Premiere at the 24P. How do I make it go away?
(For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6HMqLIJXjM at 4:08 when the rapper turns back to the camera.)

3. My PC is 3 years old, but if I bought some high-performance with up-to-date processor, ram and graphics card, would I be able to edit the MOV files straight out of the cameara or is Mac Book Pro with Final Cut is rather the way to go?

I am full of questions, but I will bother ya'll with these for now. Thank you in advance for your advices everyone!
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
1/50 or 1/60. Set it there and stay there.

If you cant expose properly the way u want by balancing between ur aperture and ISO, use light if its underexposed, use nd filters if its overexposed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
We had a big-ol' debate on here, not too long ago, in which we discussed the importance of the 180 shutter speed rule (a debate in which I was the opposition).

The debate ended when we agreed that we follow the rule because it's just plain-and-simple what the audience is accustomed to seeing. Too fast a shutter speed, and the video looks choppy. Too slow, and you end up with too much motion-blur (which is what it sounds like you've got).

If you're shooting 24p, 1/50 would obviously be the closest to following the 180 shutter speed rule. However, one of our more experienced cinematographers (a group I do not claim membership in) mentioned something about electrical frequencies used in the US, and that 1/60 would be safer to use, for this reason (and is close enough to the 180 shutter rule that it still looks the way we expect it to). I'd explain more, but the electrical frequency part is a little over my head, to be frank.

It's nice to see another Seattleite on here. It's been a couple years, since I visited home, but I'll be there next week. Can't wait to get my hands on some Ivar's, at Pier 54!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
To keep it simple, the problem comes in when you're dealing with fluorescent lights. Depending on the region, the frequency could be 60Hz or 50Hz. In the US, its 60 Hz. In Europe, its 50Hz.
So when filming under fluorescents, its a good and safe idea to use 1/60 shutter speed (if ur in the US) in order to avoid any flickering that might occur.

So either you keep this in mind all the time and remember to switch to 1/60 when dealing with multiple light sources and fluorescents, or just leave it at 1/60. I sometimes advise ppl to leave it there because most forget about this and then find themselves with ruined footage.

And Mr. Funk is much too kind and modest. With a completed feature, he is one of the more experienced cinematographers here.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Aww, shucks. Thanks, Ernest. What I meant, though, is that I'm only a cinematographer by necessity, not so much because I'm particularly passionate about it, or even good at it.

In fact, on said feature shoot, I made the very mistake we're discussing. I had one short scene, with multiple sources of light, one of which was flourescent. While recording, I didn't notice anything. But, yep, I did not have it on 1/60, and the flickering makes me wanna throw-up every time I see it.

So, let that be a warning to the OP -- either keep it on 1/60, all the time, or keep it in mind all the time, so that you'll be aware of whether or not there is a flourescent in the shot, or be prepared to throw up every time you look at that shot.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That's the old trick for shooting CRT's. 60, 120, and 240 - one of them would work the best. That was on SD video, so the shutter speed jump wouldn't be too noticeable.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Cracker Funk said:
In fact, on said feature shoot, I made the very mistake we're discussing. I had one short scene, with multiple sources of light, one of which was flourescent. While recording, I didn't notice anything. But, yep, I did not have it on 1/60, and the flickering makes me wanna throw-up every time I see it.
Click to expand...

Lol, is that when u remembered us talking abt this topic a year or two ago and me championing for 1/60?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I checked it out.

The original footage straight out of my camera, the MOV file, is actually very clear. It doesn't leave any ghostly shadows behind. When I converted it into MPEG with the NeoScene, and edited it in Adobe Premiere, the outcome was different.

I believe the Premiere settings were all right. What am I doing wrong?

And if I bought a PC with high performance standards, would I be able to edit those MOV files with no problem or should I just go with a MAC with the Final Cut?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top