shaky cam film style on a big CIH screen is awful! - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 4Likes
  • 1 Post By Josh Z
  • 1 Post By GetGray
  • 1 Post By Josh Z
  • 1 Post By Gary Lightfoot
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 22 Old 07-08-2014, 11:01 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 5,786
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 564
shaky cam film style on a big CIH screen is awful!

I sit 13' back from a 144" CIH screen. I just watched Superman, Man of Steel. I love the movie, but man, the shaky cam is horrible on my big CIH screen. HORRIBLE!

The last time I watched it was on a 106" 16x9 and I didn't even notice the shaky cam. Now with my new larger screen it almost made me sick. Same seating distance. Any one else experience this?

I guess my solution will be not to use Scope CIH format on shaky cam movies with my Panasonic AE8000U, and just use my smaller size 16x9 lens setting. It was really so unnerving that I wanted to turn the movie off, but because I had guests who hadn't seen it I didnt. They were annoyed by it as well. Not cool when you are showing off your theater and your guests reaction is the screen is so big it makes you ill --- when a non shaky cam movie is nothing short of impressive immersion at the exact same size.

"Without subs it's just background music - with subs it's the main event!"
Archaea's Theatre Room
2011 KC Sub Shootout
2012 KC Blind Sub Shootout
My Subwoofer Recommendations by Pricepoint

Last edited by Archaea; 07-10-2014 at 03:26 PM.
Archaea is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 22 Old 07-09-2014, 04:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,334
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 120
The only movie I've had trouble with in my HT is Captain Philips, I felt like I was on a boat. But that may have been aggravated by overeating beforehand.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is online now  
post #3 of 22 Old 07-09-2014, 09:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,007
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 334
This has nothing to do with CIH and everything to do with the fact that you've increased your screen size.

I'm no fan of shaky-cam either, but I must point out that all of these movies played in cinemas with much larger screens.
Marc Wielage likes this.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #4 of 22 Old 07-09-2014, 02:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing, cycling or kayaking ) - Sacramento CA area
Posts: 4,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Liked: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
This has nothing to do with CIH and everything to do with the fact that you've increased your screen size.

I'm no fan of shaky-cam either, but I must point out that all of these movies played in cinemas with much larger screens.
When I first built our current theater my wife complained that she felt a bit sea sick watching " 24 " on our 122" diagonal 16:9 screen from 13 1/2 feet away. She's slowly gotten used to it, and the sectional sofa is now at 12 1/2 feet ( and the same distance from the 128" diagonal 2.35:1 screen ). Too bad I can't afford a Stewart Director's Choice masking screen - you could tailor the size to match the content and to your tastes !

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Direct Line - 585-671-2972
I'm available 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday Email me at craig@avscience.com
http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, Klipsch, and many more!
Craig Peer is offline  
post #5 of 22 Old 07-09-2014, 02:44 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 5,786
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
This has nothing to do with CIH and everything to do with the fact that you've increased your screen size.

I'm no fan of shaky-cam either, but I must point out that all of these movies played in cinemas with much larger screens.
A larger screen at the theater does not mean watching at the theater commands as much of your viewing peripheral vision as it does at home with a large screen. In fact my 144" scope screen (same as 152" 16x9 screen) at 13' well exceeds maximum viewing angles (which I knew going in). BUT - - I really like the big CIH for most movies --- however for shaky cam it's really bad --- that's the point of this topic. So it does have something to do with CIH - if only in a round about way. If I went with a 16x9 screen in my room (because I am height limited) I would have had to do a max of about a 120" 16x9. Perhaps then I wouldn't have had any problem since 106" didn't bother me in the least (didn't even notice as I mentioned earlier). Since I did CIH I could go the equivalent picture of a much bigger 16x9 image and thus the shaky cam frustration.

"Without subs it's just background music - with subs it's the main event!"
Archaea's Theatre Room
2011 KC Sub Shootout
2012 KC Blind Sub Shootout
My Subwoofer Recommendations by Pricepoint
Archaea is online now  
post #6 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 10:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,007
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea View Post
A larger screen at the theater does not mean watching at the theater commands as much of your viewing peripheral vision as it does at home with a large screen. In fact my 144" scope screen (same as 152" 16x9 screen) at 13' well exceeds maximum viewing angles (which I knew going in). BUT - - I really like the big CIH for most movies --- however for shaky cam it's really bad --- that's the point of this topic. So it does have something to do with CIH - if only in a round about way. If I went with a 16x9 screen in my room (because I am height limited) I would have had to do a max of about a 120" 16x9. Perhaps then I wouldn't have had any problem since 106" didn't bother me in the least (didn't even notice as I mentioned earlier). Since I did CIH I could go the equivalent picture of a much bigger 16x9 image and thus the shaky cam frustration.
Well, again, this has nothing to do with CIH and everything to do with screen size. Had you been able to install a super-large 16:9 screen, you'd have the same problem.

The fact that your larger screen is CIH is coincidental to this issue, not causative.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #7 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 10:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 89 Post(s)
Liked: 313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
When I first built our current theater my wife complained that she felt a bit sea sick watching " 24 " on our 122" diagonal 16:9 screen from 13 1/2 feet away. She's slowly gotten used to it, and the sectional sofa is now at 12 1/2 feet ( and the same distance from the 128" diagonal 2.35:1 screen ). Too bad I can't afford a Stewart Director's Choice masking screen - you could tailor the size to match the content and to your tastes !
I've had a few guests that feel the same about an image "too big" for their comfort. My sister especially suffers some vertigo if the image is too big, so I re-size my masked image to a comfortable size when she watched movies with us.
(E.g. between 100 to 105" diagonal for 16:9, vs my sometimes going up to 120 or 135" diagonal).
R Harkness is offline  
post #8 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 12:40 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
GetGray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Mid-South USA
Posts: 5,440
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 51
I hate shakey cam no matter what size it's on. I can no more enjoy it on my 60" LED upstairs than my 144" scope screen. C'mon guys, buy/hire a steady cam. Shakey is not cool.
Marc Wielage likes this.
GetGray is offline  
post #9 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 01:50 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 405
I'm sitting just past 10 feet back from 108" (2:35) wide screen and sometimes shaky cam does get to my eyes a little bit. It never was an issue on my 65" plasma.

I agree it's the sheer size, not aspect ratio. In fact, a taller image with the same width would only make the effect worse I imagine.

DavidHir is online now  
post #10 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 02:08 PM
Senior Member
 
kcnitro07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I've watched Man of steel (not superman) 3 or 4 times on my 120" screen and have never noticed an issue.....I can also fit 144" screen inside my peripheral

kcnitro07 is offline  
post #11 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 02:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
popalock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Doha, Qatar
Posts: 3,341
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 533
Send a message via Skype™ to popalock
Archaea,

There is one thing you seem to not be taking into consideration.

Last I remember MOS is filtered at 30Hz, or something ridiculous. Try watching a shakycam movie with FULLBANDWIDTH audio and report back to us.

I think Cloverfield doesn't dig much lower than 17Hz, but is a good example to try out.

Why the hell am I even bringing this up? Because you're clearly subconsciously irritated at the audio mix and it's somehow skewing your subjective viewing preferences.

I am not a doctor.
popalock is offline  
post #12 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 03:14 PM
Member
 
kimg1453's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by popalock View Post
Archaea,

There is one thing you seem to not be taking into consideration.

Last I remember MOS is filtered at 30Hz, or something ridiculous. Try watching a shakycam movie with FULLBANDWIDTH audio and report back to us.

I think Cloverfield doesn't dig much lower than 17Hz, but is a good example to try out.

Why the hell am I even bringing this up? Because you're clearly subconsciously irritated at the audio mix and it's somehow skewing your subjective viewing preferences.

I am not a doctor.
Yeah, I really wish these Director's would stop with it already. It is absolutely annoying and unnecessary. The big thing is you can't even see and take anything in before a flash to the next scene. And on and on and on!

Captain Phillips is one of the worst and I'll probably never watch it again because of it. Studio's, "Are you listening!"
kimg1453 is offline  
post #13 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 03:16 PM
Member
 
kimg1453's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Sorry Popalock,

My reply was not meant to be attached to your comment.
kimg1453 is offline  
post #14 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 07:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,007
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by GetGray View Post
C'mon guys, buy/hire a steady cam. Shakey is not cool.
In one of the behind-the-scenes featurettes for the 2009 Star Trek reboot, you can see J.J. Abrams crouching behind his camera operator and tapping on the film magazine with both hands to make the camera shake.

That's how shaky-cam is actually done. It's not just that the operator can't hold the camera steady. Someone has to go out of their way to rattle the camera around specifically to create that effect.
Marc Wielage likes this.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #15 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 08:20 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
GetGray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Mid-South USA
Posts: 5,440
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
In one of the behind-the-scenes featurettes for the 2009 Star Trek reboot, you can see J.J. Abrams crouching behind his camera operator and tapping on the film magazine with both hands to make the camera shake.

That's how shaky-cam is actually done. It's not just that the operator can't hold the camera steady. Someone has to go out of their way to rattle the camera around specifically to create that effect.
Now I really don't get it.
GetGray is offline  
post #16 of 22 Old 07-10-2014, 08:43 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
In one of the behind-the-scenes featurettes for the 2009 Star Trek reboot, you can see J.J. Abrams crouching behind his camera operator and tapping on the film magazine with both hands to make the camera shake.

That's how shaky-cam is actually done. It's not just that the operator can't hold the camera steady. Someone has to go out of their way to rattle the camera around specifically to create that effect.
Then you factor in his lens flare...

DavidHir is online now  
post #17 of 22 Old 07-11-2014, 05:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,334
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by GetGray View Post
Now I really don't get it.
I think it's supposed to give more of the effect that it was shot by someone live while the event was happening, to give you the feeling of being there. It's something that can be effective if done with moderation. I want to say Saving Private Ryan used it rather effectively, some of the combat scenes used it, but they didn't do like some movies today do where the entire movie looks like it was shot by some ADD kid with a cell phone.

FWIW, I don't recall the new Star Trek films being obnoxiously shaky, but yeah, I think a lot of movies overdo it.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is online now  
post #18 of 22 Old 07-11-2014, 08:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,007
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
FWIW, I don't recall the new Star Trek films being obnoxiously shaky, but yeah, I think a lot of movies overdo it.
"Obnoxiously" is subjective, of course, but yes Abrams' two Star Trek films are very shaky.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #19 of 22 Old 07-14-2014, 10:52 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mark12547's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Salem, Oregon, United States
Posts: 531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 109 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post
I'm no fan of shaky-cam either, but I must point out that all of these movies played in cinemas with much larger screens.
The shaky-cam feature I saw in a theater was actually at a theatre/pub. At $3/show, it is the cheapest place in town to see a movie on a big screen, plus they deliver food to your seat while watching the feature.

I saw Cloverfield at the theatre/pub. I turned to my left to the guy who was seated at the same table. "This must have been better with your drinking; it left me with a headache." He told me, "The beer didn't help."

Inquiries on fool.com had people coming down on two sides: those who ended up not liking the movie saw it at the theater; those who seemed to like it saw it on the small screen. (I now have a big screen HDTV, so I almost never make it to a theater, not even the theatre/pub.)

I haven't seen "Man of Steel" yet (it's in my Netflix queue), so I can't comment about it.

My very humble setup:
Man Cave:Vizio E500i-A1 "Smart TV" (50-in 1080p 120Hz LED/LCD, has Netflix app.), Blu-ray players (Sony BDP-S3100, old LG BD390), Roku (the original model: N1000), PC (Windows 7), Comcast Internet (25Mbps/5Mbps).
Bedroom:LG 32LV3400-UA TV (32-in 768p 60Hz LED/LCD), HD DVR (Motorola RNG200N), Xfinity Comcast cable (Digital Starter Package), DVD/VHS player.
Mark12547 is online now  
post #20 of 22 Old 07-14-2014, 11:00 AM
Advanced Member
 
rcohen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 961
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Whatever you do, don't watch Bourne Supremacy.

I totally agree, although in moderation, the "embedded reported" look can be cool. It was really used well in Battlestar Galactica (new series).

It is really sensitive to screen size/angle. Try zooming your screen smaller for those movies.
rcohen is online now  
post #21 of 22 Old 07-14-2014, 05:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary Lightfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 4,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Shaky cam doesn't bother me other than I'd like to see what's going on. With Bourne, I would have preferred to see the fight scene choreography than the blurry fast cuts and shaky cam. It didn't add anything for me, but instead detracted from the action.

If it's done well, it gives the effect of action going on/whatever the director is trying to achieve without losing focus on what is actually happening. I think Saving private Ryan was done like that, but for me that did add something.

Gary
John Schuermann likes this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elmalloc
Who says Cameron is "right" and why do we care about him so much - lol!

I trust Gary Lightfoot more than James Cameron.
Gary Lightfoot is offline  
post #22 of 22 Old 07-14-2014, 08:05 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northridge, CA
Posts: 443
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 219 Post(s)
Liked: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by GetGray View Post
I hate shakey cam no matter what size it's on. I can no more enjoy it on my 60" LED upstairs than my 144" scope screen. C'mon guys, buy/hire a steady cam. Shakey is not cool.
There are far, far too many young hotshot directors and cinematographers who are compelled to inject all kinds of artificial "excitement" into their images, using gimmicks like shaky cam, weird color, harsh exposures, trick lenses, and all kinds of stuff. I think on some level they're terrified that their story and characters aren't strong enough to succeed on their own, so they desperately throw in the kitchen sink in order to distract the audience from the film's inadequacies (real or suspected).

I've often said that I don't mind honest handheld camerawork, where the camera is walking around and "observing" the action, but I do object when the camera is zooming and jerking around in a contrived way. I far prefer the use of Steadicam, keeping the motion smooth and unobtrusive, but these gimmicks tend to happen in patterns. This year, it's jerky cam and the orange & teal look; next year, it'll be blown-out whites and long shots without a lot of cutting. Trends come and go.
Marc Wielage is offline  
Reply 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat
Gear in this thread

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off