HD Camcorder: I Know Very Little

It shows this is your first post here. Welcome!

I don't know a lot, but have invested about 18 months trying to understand video. Lots of people helped me, so I think it is fun to try giving some of that back.

So far, you say you "Know very little". Then you say you are going to do a documentary. So my mental picture is the equivalent of deciding you're going to be an astronaut when you have a student pilot's license.

Can you provide a little more information? What is your photographic experience? Have you used any video equipment? Do you have a computer and editor? Which one?

What is the documentary about? Is it for personal use or to be widely distributed? What will be the primary method of viewing when complete? Will you be using "actors"? Will you be shooting fast moving subject or relatively still?

To start, tapeless digital video and AVCHD (including 1080p60 settings) have done a lot to level the field in a way where you don't need to spend anywhere near $3,000. So, why did you set that budget.

With a little more to work with, myself and others are likely to try to help.

Bill

comrade - I know you're going to get lots of good advice, but, in my view, pro quality sound and a rock steady (but mobile) camera are your number one and two priorities. Modern cameras can handle exposure and focus - but shaky camera work with bad sound will lose your audience very quickly. Thus my suggestions:

Pro camera with built in pro sound:
Canon XA10 - about $2000 new, hard to find used
Pro lavalier mics for interviews (x2):
Audio-Technica AT831B - about $180 new, $150 used
Pro shotgun omni/cardioid for background sound ("Foley") and run and gun:
Azden SGM-2X - about $230 new, $195 used
Pro tripod to hold the camera rock steady:
VariZoom VZ-TK75A - $190 new
Dolly, for smooth motion that won't be overused (as a slider might be ;-)):
Professional Tripod Dolly - $33 new
Studio lighting kit with black, white and green screens for backdrops & visual effects:
2400 watt lighting kit softbox light kit video lighting kit - $206 new

All together, this will cost you about $3000 - and will give you:
- clean pro quality sound without external recorders
- rock solid fixed and dolly shots
- well lit studio shots with soft lighting
- and the ability to use Final Cut to put any backdrop behind your interview subjects that you desire.

This is very close to the setup I have, and it provides a lot of flexibility (I have a prosumer Panasonic TM900 camcorder instead of the pro XA10, but otherwise it's very similar - tripod, dolly, green screen, soft lights, two lavs and a shotgun mic).

The two things you'll be missing are an on-camera light for run and gun - and the "shallow depth of field" look that large sensor camcorders and DSLRs can give you. That said, as long as you have the skills, this setup will give you what you need to produce a pro quality documentary.

Good luck! Please let us know how it goes,

Bill
Hybrid Camera Revolution

Bill put some time and effort into a good list. There is little to add.

I probably would have suggested a cheaper camera like the one Bill owns and uses.

I might also suggest a second small 1080p camera like a Sony HX9V. While the primary camera is on a tripod collecting video and audio, the second one can shoot some "interest" shots that will be woven in during editing.

You wrote you had some experience in school. Since I assume time has passed since, consider a quick read of the book "How to Shoot Video That Doesn't Suck". It will get your head away from equipment long enough that you will be thinking in terms of planning, scripting, composition and creativity.

Make sure you version of Final Cut Pro is late enough that has no issue with the current standard of 1080p file structure.

Bill

Thanks, Bill


Bill - You're right - prosumer camcorders like the TM900 or the Canon HF G10 stack up very well against the XA10 - but the reason I recommended the XA10 over the less expensive G10 or TM900 (or X900M) was the XA10's exterior control of audio levels, the built-in XLR jacks and the ND filters. These are essentials for pro work, in my view. If you add up the cost and hassle of the matte box, myriad ND filters, external recorder, impedance-matching cable, etc. that I have hanging on my TM900 - I might have been smarter to save up my money and just get the XA10


Absolutely right. A great book. I agree with you 100% on the primacy of planning, script, composition and creativity over hardware.

Best,

Bill

comrade - the 64GB of internal flash memory will hold 5 hours and 55 minutes at the XA10's highest recording quality. To get video from the camera onto your computer, you will need to connect it via cable, which takes the camera out of action. With cards, you can pull the card, put it into your computer's card reader for transfer or editing and continue to use the camera.

Personally, I prefer cards. I use my camera's built-in flash memory for backup.

Komputerbay makes the least expensive 64GB SDXC card I have found. I have used their 32GB SDHC card and had good results.

Hope this is helpful,

Bill
Hybrid Camera Revolution

Congrats, Adam. Glad that the setup is working out for you! For the highest quality output, I recommend the highest bitrate mode (MXP) and the highest progressive frame rate (PF30).

I've seen good work from the XA10 posted to YouTube - the best stuff (to me) seems to be done at PF30, like these, which were cut in Adobe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSGq4EnQ_tI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWGYQuhUePM

This one was shot at 30p and cut in Vegas:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CE1vakhI1U

I'm a Vegas guy, so I can't really offer specific advice on Premiere settings, but, in general, if your computer and internet connection are fast enough, rendering at 1080p instead of 720p will result in uploaded video that is closer to the quality of your original footage.

Cheers,

Bill
Hybrid Camera Revolution

You didn't say if you were using Premier Elements or Premier Pro. I use Elements 10. There are two methods for getting video to YouTube.

First, under the share tab it there is an "Online" choice with several presets for YouTube, depending on your goals. It logs you on with your password, renders to a YouTube optimized format and uploads as efficiently as possible.

Second, under the Share tab there is Computer>AVCHD, then a drop down with both YouTube and Vimeo choices that will render a file to your computer that is optimized for YouTube. Then, you can send it to YouTube or Vimeo with their respective uploaders.

I prefer the second method.

"Which settings in that are preferable..."

Premier Elements settings cause a lot of confusion. The "Project Settings" are for real time preview and have nothing to do with the final output, whatever that turns out to be. So, picking the right project setting will make it so that little real time rendering is needed. Picking the wrong one makes you add a rendering process just to preview your work. Since I normally shoot in 60p, I use "AVCHD LITE 720p". I don't know what format you are shooting in, but your choice might be different.

A lot of the confusion seems to be that NLEs (editors) have to "render" more than once. Some version of rendering takes place while you work at setting markers, adding transitions, doing titles, etc. If you get the Project Setting right, it is a smooth and enjoyable process to preview your work, as you go. When you complete your project and are ready to produce the finished video, you have to make it match your chosen medium. In other words, YouTube needs something different than a Blu-Ray disk. Consequently, the NLE uses all the markers and your additions to "render" again so that it is correctly optimized.

It took me months of reading to figure out the relationship between Project Settings presets and output setting presets. The words "render" and "preset" are used frequently to describe different things.

If you are using Premier Pro, I have no idea if what I am writing makes any sense. In fact, I'm not sure I would spend $600 for software to make YouTubes when $60 will do it.

Bill