AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Was "Planet Earth" shot in 1080p24 or 1080p25? I was wondering that, since it was filmed by the BBC for broadcast, it could have been shot in 1080p25. I hope i'm wrong.

I'm asking this because i'm thinking of buying the BD series, and i'm worried that it could be 1080p25 "slowed down" to 1080p24. (on the disc it's 1080p24, right?)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
Planet earth was shot with Panasonic Varicam (land based) with a variable frame rate in 720p


hope this helps Davide
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,546 Posts
According to this:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=872992


Look for the post that does screen comparisons of Planet earth. It says that it shows greater than 720p detail, but I question if all of them are shot in 1080p.


I watched an episode on disk 4 (the one that talks about trees) on my JVC RS1 projector, and the detail on the leaves did not appear to be very good. Also, when I was in Best Buy, they were showing off the 1080p panasonic plasma with Planet Earth, and I asked the guy if they were showing the DVD version because it did not look very good. There was a scene where there were thousands of birds and I could see blockiness when they moved. There was also an area of a blue background with compression noise. I really question if that was setup correctly. It wasn't the tv... The week before, they were showing a blu-ray trailer and it looked awesome on the same panny 1080p plasma.


So does anyone have all the details? I think its given too much credit. Maybe they put the best episodes on the first disk so that reviewers would base their opinion on that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,500 Posts
Planet Earth was shot with over 200 cameras, so it should be stated that not all of these cameras are created equal. I watched the cave episode on disc 2 last night and it was very apparent that some shots were shot on SD cameras. Some of the cameras used in production were SD cameras, not HD. Majority of shots do consist of HD footage though.


-Brad
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
34,841 Posts
I think I'll watch it on my Discovery HD channel...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,857 Posts
I thought video footages as opposed to film are more likely to be 50 or 60fps. All video-based BDs up to now are 60fps aren't they?


In any case I'm going to get the upcoming UK 5-disc version, not out of worry about framerate conversion, but because of the extras.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,240 Posts
If the BBC learned anything from shooting Planet Earth, they should realize that HD isn't ready for prime time!


Using an HD camera in a helicopter caused the camera to wig out due to interference, or so says BBC video!!


They should have shot consistantly with good 35mm cameras and lenses and fine grain film stock when shooting in daylight if they wanted the best quality to capture life as never before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
577 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/0


They should have shot consistantly with good 35mm cameras and lenses and fine grain film stock when shooting in daylight if they wanted the best quality to capture life as never before.

Right, because no one's ever used film
not that I disagree with the overall sentiment, but for $25 mil? Film costs would've eaten that up a lot more quickly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,457 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/0


If the BBC learned anything from shooting Planet Earth, they should realize that HD isn't ready for prime time!


Using an HD camera in a helicopter caused the camera to wig out due to interference, or so says BBC video!

And that's generous since the helicopter footage was the best PQ they had. Whatever their process was, it didn't seem to gel at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,846 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9158 /forum/post/0


Was "Planet Earth" shot in 1080p24 or 1080p25? I was wondering that, since it was filmed by the BBC for broadcast, it could have been shot in 1080p25. I hope i'm wrong.

I'm asking this because i'm thinking of buying the BD series, and i'm worried that it could be 1080p25 "slowed down" to 1080p24. (on the disc it's 1080p24, right?)

This thread looks troll-free
.........errr I mean *outside* "supporter" free.



As somebody mentioned above, alot of different cameras were used for this feature (they even used a Photron camera capturing images at 400 fps
- remember the Great White leaping out of the water ?). Overall (percentage wise), most footage was probably shot with Panasonic Varicam HD Camcorders (native 720p, as noted above by davide?).


Due to the abundant variable frame rate footage, a Panasonic Frame Rate Converter was utilized to convert any off speed stuff back to a 25P signal or they utilized a Panasonic AJ-HD1700 VTR to convert 25fps footage acquired by Panasonic's AJ-HDC27 VariCam to 1080/25pin other words, they got 1080/25P direct from the Varicam rushes.


Have I plugged Panasonic enough ?



Also, of special note is the fact that some outstanding footage was shot with a Sony HDW 750 (1080i) recording to HDCAM - the same camera as was used by Richard Casey's cinematographer in Nature's Journey.



BBC Post Production ( http://www.bbcresources.com/postproduction/index.html ) converted all the variable frame rate material to its HD standard of 1080i/50 fps for post-production. For the U.S. audience of course, that material was transcoded to 1080i/60 fps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,846 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/0


If the BBC learned anything from shooting Planet Earth, they should realize that HD isn't ready for prime time!


Using an HD camera in a helicopter caused the camera to wig out due to interference, or so says BBC video!!


They should have shot consistantly with good 35mm cameras and lenses and fine grain film stock when shooting in daylight if they wanted the best quality to capture life as never before.

Dan,

The Cineflex cam (which they used) weighs about 80-90 lb. which is light and more compact than a lot of 35mm cams.

The aerial crew could stay up for hours (2-3) capturing footage with this camera because of its light weight translated into significant fuel savings and they just changed tapes on the fly. Had they used a 1,000 ft. mag with typical 35mm camera placement on the helicopter, they probably would have only gotten about 12 min. of footage before having to land and change film. Not very practical in what they desired to achieve esp. given their budget.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,240 Posts
Hmmm...


But if they chose to shoot on video for this reason and wanted the best possible PQ aren't there better 1080p cameras (some can do 1080p/50 or 1080p/60 now) than what they used?


It just seems like they got some very inconsistant shots doing it the way they did.


Again, HD as of right now may be more convenient and bit cheaper than good 35mm (or hell, 70mm) it still has many issues to be ironed out.


Dan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,928 Posts
There is a caveat on this video (or maybe its the box, cant remember) that says that not all shots were done with HD cameras....so definitely some different cameras used. I dont know what the big deal is though as 90% of the video looks gorgeous. Not the best HD picture out there, but still great. To me it looks good enough and the content is so interesting I dont think the cameras that were used, or framerates should play any part in the decision to purchase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,846 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/0


Hmmm...


But if they chose to shoot on video for this reason and wanted the best possible PQ aren't there better 1080p cameras (some can do 1080p/50 or 1080p/60 now) than what they used?

Dan

Well specifically, they were big fans of the Cineflex cam system

http://www.helicopter-charters.co.uk/cineflex2.html ,


which is designed around the Sony HDC F950 camera.

http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Broadcastan.../hdcf950.shtml


Although, they used a much more expensive lens than that listed in the specs on the link to the heli charters above.


B.T.W., the guy that did the aerial on this was the same guy that did Black Hawk Down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,846 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/0


Hmmm...

Again, HD as of right now may be more convenient and bit cheaper than good 35mm (or hell, 70mm) it still has many issues to be ironed out.


Dan

I couldn't agree with you more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I'll ask here since I don't think I need to make a new topic about it, but is there a difference in picture quality between the BBC and Discovery releases of Planet Earth?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Penton-Man /forum/post/0


( http://www.bbcresources.com/postproduction/index.html ) converted all the variable frame rate material to its HD standard of 1080i/50 fps for post-production. For the U.S. audience of course, that material was transcoded to 1080i/60 fps.

Are u saying all of them were converted to 1080i50 first for broadcast, then this 1080i50 is converted again to 1080i60 for US release ?


...hmm.. how does one transcode 50i to 60i exactly ? ... massive interpolation and/or "speed up" in audio ...?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Discussion Starter #19

Quote:
Originally Posted by c722 /forum/post/0


Are u saying all of them were converted to 1080i50 first for broadcast, then this 1080i50 is converted again to 1080i60 for US release ?


...hmm.. how does one transcode 50i to 60i exactly ? ... massive interpolation and/or "speed up" in audio ...?

That's more or less what i was worried about... i mean, don't all those "conversions" somewhat hinder the picture quality? I'm not saying they do, i'm just asking.

Because you know, the HighDefDigest review was very positive about PQ (5 stars), so i thought, it's strange that the video manages to have such great PQ with all those conversions. Again, remember that i haven't seen the documentaries on BD, so i'm just asking.


By the way, so on the disc it's not 1080p24? What is it, 1080i60 for the US edition and 1080i50 for the UK edition?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
I checked the HighDefDigest review of the new (US) release of Planet Earth and that's what it says:


"Presented in a new 1080i/AVC MPEG-4 encode (compared to the 1080p/VC-1 on the BBC/Warner versions), 'Planet Earth (US Version)' is still a feast for the eyes, but there are a few clear deficiencies to that kept it from reaching the same heights as its previously-released counterpart. "

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/983/planetearth_us.html


So the first release was in 1080pXX and the new release is in 1080iXX. Does anybody know the frame rates of the two versions?
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top