Two Cameras

[selym]

I've been toying around with a consumer video camera for awhile to try and teach myself some general stuff like different types of shots, basic editing, etc. all while I've been outlining a documentary I'd like to shoot. I'm planning on making a purchase this fall on a more feature rich video camera to continue my education and begin shooting this film.

I'm wondering if it would be ok to utilize both video cameras for various aspects of the film, or if it would be obvious, distracting, etc. I know documentaries sometimes incorporate video from different time periods so some films can look different in that sense, but my film footage will likely be all in the present from what I shoot.

I thought it might be interesting to use the cheaper camera for one specific persons interview, or for the one off person on the street type interviews, while using the newer, feature rich camera for most everything else. That way I could start filming some things now, but if it would somehow compromise the integrity of the finished product somehow, I'd prefer to simply wait.

I'm curious what others might think.


Thanks,
Sel

 

[jax_rox]

There's a whole range of factors at play here.

Firstly what is your current camera, and what is your next purchase? If your current camera is a Bloggie, and your next purchase is an Alexa, then yes there's going to be a huge difference in the look. If you're comparing, however, a 1/3" CMOS to a 2/3" CMOS, the difference is going to be much more subtle.

Secondly, it depends on your dramatic content, and your vision for the film overall. I watched a documentary by Amiel Courtin-Wilson called Bastardy. He used a Sony Prosumer to film a lot/most of the actual 'meat' of the documentary. There are then a few beauty shots shot on Red. Is the difference noticeable? I'd say yes. But it's not unwarranted. He cut from beauty shots of the streets and the city, or what might otherwise be stock footage to an interview, for example. Keeping in mind, though, that Bastardy was shot over a 10(ish) year period.
If your story has enough dramatic content to keep an audience on the edge of their seat, then what camera you use won't really matter. If it's boring and it looks like crap, then they're not going to pay too much attention.

Thirdly, how are you recording audio? If the answer is 'using the in camera mic' then I'd suggest waiting for your new purchase if your new purchase has audio inputs, or otherwise putting some of that money towards buying a decent mic/recorder combo.
Some consumer cameras don't even have 1/8" audio in's, so unless you're using a mic/recorder, as well then I'd suggest waiting before starting any filming.

 

[selym]

Hi Jax,

Thanks for the reply.

I've been messing around with the Canon HF200 which has a 1/4" CMOS sensor and if I was to pull the trigger right now on something new, it would probably be the Panasonic AG-AC130 which has 3 x 1/3" CMOS sensors.

Well, I certainly hope my idea will keep the audience enthralled in the story instead of their boredom providing them the opportunity to highlight some technical shortcomings, but I suppose that's hard to predict until I get it in front of people. Since most of the idea is a retelling of a past event by the participants (sitting interviews or locale specific walking interviews where an individual recounts where/how something happened), I'm heavily dependent on the interest of the story, but I do predict some heated moments/responses as well as a few dramatic actions/reactions as well. Fingers crossed the finished product doesn't put people to sleep.

On my Canon, I have a DM-100 Directional Stereo Microphone attached, so I am not recording audio separately. I was thinking of ordering a decent shotgun mic for the new camera, something with a stand that I could take off the camera for better placement in a fixed position interview. I really have no experience with recording audio to a separate device, but I am certainly all ears if you think it's a necessity for a documentary.


Sel

There's a whole range of factors at play here.

Firstly what is your current camera, and what is your next purchase? If your current camera is a Bloggie, and your next purchase is an Alexa, then yes there's going to be a huge difference in the look. If you're comparing, however, a 1/3" CMOS to a 2/3" CMOS, the difference is going to be much more subtle.

Secondly, it depends on your dramatic content, and your vision for the film overall. I watched a documentary by Amiel Courtin-Wilson called Bastardy. He used a Sony Prosumer to film a lot/most of the actual 'meat' of the documentary. There are then a few beauty shots shot on Red. Is the difference noticeable? I'd say yes. But it's not unwarranted. He cut from beauty shots of the streets and the city, or what might otherwise be stock footage to an interview, for example. Keeping in mind, though, that Bastardy was shot over a 10(ish) year period.
If your story has enough dramatic content to keep an audience on the edge of their seat, then what camera you use won't really matter. If it's boring and it looks like crap, then they're not going to pay too much attention.

Thirdly, how are you recording audio? If the answer is 'using the in camera mic' then I'd suggest waiting for your new purchase if your new purchase has audio inputs, or otherwise putting some of that money towards buying a decent mic/recorder combo.
Some consumer cameras don't even have 1/8" audio in's, so unless you're using a mic/recorder, as well then I'd suggest waiting before starting any filming.

 

[jax_rox]

Audio is extremely important. An audience will forgive bad images if they can still follow (hear) the story, but they won't forgive bad audio for good images.

If you have no other solution, I'd wait until you grab the AC130, get a half-decent mic, plug that mic into the XLR inputs of the camera, and get the mic off the camera, as close to the subject as possible without being in frame.

 

[selym]

Thanks again for responding. From what I've read elsewhere, I kind of figured you'd say that. I guess I was looking for a reason to begin out of impatience/excitement, but I don't want to do so if it will adversely affect the quality.

So is there a huge benefit to recording audio to a separate device over recording audio together with the video? I don't know if it's worth doing so for a first documentary, but it is something I'd like to learn more about. (why it might be better to do so, what hardware options there are, how to use them, how to upload/utilize properly in a NLE system, etc.)


Sel

Audio is extremely important. An audience will forgive bad images if they can still follow (hear) the story, but they won't forgive bad audio for good images.

If you have no other solution, I'd wait until you grab the AC130, get a half-decent mic, plug that mic into the XLR inputs of the camera, and get the mic off the camera, as close to the subject as possible without being in frame.

 

[jax_rox]

Well it depends on what you're using.

If you're going straight into the XLR-ins on the AC130, then you won't necessarily need to run a seperate recorder, but you will need a mic and you will need to get it of f the camera and get it close to the subject. Then, whether you run it into a recorder or into the camera is essentially up to you. Considering you're doing it yourself, I'd probably run it into the camera, given you will running it into the AC130 - there are benefits of using an external recorder, but on a first endeavour, it 's probably better to go into the camera especially as you can monitor and adjust audio as you see/hear it peak right on the camera, rather than having to split your focus between recording sound and recording vision.

 

[selym]

Cool, thanks so much for the help. If I am going to use the sound on the AC130, I wonder if I could use both cameras together for stationary conversations where I want to get both parties. I just don't know what kind of difference there would be in video image quality to cut back and forth. I suspect anything outside would be fine and not much of a difference, but inside (where lighting can become an issue) would be a dead giveaway. I guess I'll find out with my first test. Thanks again Jax Rox.

Well it depends on what you're using.

If you're going straight into the XLR-ins on the AC130, then you won't necessarily need to run a seperate recorder, but you will need a mic and you will need to get it of f the camera and get it close to the subject. Then, whether you run it into a recorder or into the camera is essentially up to you. Considering you're doing it yourself, I'd probably run it into the camera, given you will running it into the AC130 - there are benefits of using an external recorder, but on a first endeavour, it 's probably better to go into the camera especially as you can monitor and adjust audio as you see/hear it peak right on the camera, rather than having to split your focus between recording sound and recording vision.

 

[jax_rox]

Yup, testing is your friend and will give you the knowledge to move forward with your options.
Just keep in mind that if you do use two cameras recording simultaneously, you will have to sync them somehow - whether that's by using a slate, PluralEyes, by ear, or any other way.