Jump to content


Operating on SD video tap

SD arricam monitor

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Evrim KAYA

Evrim KAYA

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 301 posts

Posted 14 July 2014 - 06:50 AM

Attached File  image.jpg   165.62KB   21 downloads

I'm operating with film first time since two years, after the extinction of film in Turkey.

I'm realizing that it is easier to operate with SD video tap. I guess limited picture information on my monitor actually helps me to concentrate on the essentials.

Do we really need that much extra resolution while operating which is already a multi task job? Isn't having the extra data that we don't really need most of the time a hindrance?...

Any thoughts?
  • 1

#2 Daniel Stilling DFF

Daniel Stilling DFF

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 257 posts
  • Florida

Posted 14 July 2014 - 08:01 PM

I myself operated just recently on the season finale for "The Middle" which is still shot on film. I have to say that I missed the pristine picture quality of HD on my LCD. The tap picture was grainy, left me wondering a couple of times if I had gotten a Cstand in or if it was something else. 

Honestly it was nice having a nice picture on my monitor on the following job...

  • 1

#3 Jerry Holway

Jerry Holway

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 716 posts
  • Philadelphia

Posted 15 July 2014 - 08:14 AM

I was one of the earliest adopters, along with Garrett, to get an 8.4 inch monitor - and I loved being able to see more details, like the C-stand or just how many pixels of ground under the actors feet or exactly where the frame lines where - what was in and what was out. And composing in color and finding those orange cones. That said, I worked mostly in rehearsed situations, so compositions and all that were worked out before take one (hopefully) so I was free to concentrate on the details as Daniel said. I wonder, however, if in a live situation, one might want a smaller monitor (or get the big one farther away) so that it would be easier to take in the whole image at once. I still think the more visual info one can get from the monitor, the better - at least up to that 8 inch size.. Beyond that seems big to me. 

  • 1

#4 Victor Lazaro

Victor Lazaro

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1196 posts
  • Sunnyside Queens, NY

Posted 15 July 2014 - 01:32 PM

I just did my first live gig last week on the network's archer 2 with HD ultrabrite II. The rig was wired on the SD line at first, I rebuilt the setup on the HD line because I had to check and pull my own focus which was a pain in SD.

The only upside of the SD was the frameliner that doesn't work in HD, put I'm planning on placing a transparent film sheet for projector on which I can print/draw the 4/3 lines along with the channel's bug and Lower third limit.


Personally I'm all for HD monitor, but again, do what you need to do to get the shot, no matter what your preferences are, as long as you get the shot and the client is happy.

  • 0

#5 PeterAbraham


    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 882 posts
  • New York City

Posted 15 December 2014 - 07:33 PM

Exactly, Jerry. When doing live shows I do tend to look at the overall image , when doing narrative I tend to look at the extreme details on the edge of the frame.
This is not to say in any way that live shows do not demand precision framing, but when I am 1 of many cameras I am aware of placement of talent and set elements in the frame, so that if I'm passing my frame off to the next person in the form of a dissolve , it works out well.
  • 1

Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: SD, arricam, monitor

Paralinx LLC

Omnishot Systems

Betz Tools for Stabilizers

GPI Pro Systems

Camera Motion Research

Varizoom Follow Focus

rebotnix Technologies

Wireless Video Systems


PLC - Bartech


PLC Electronics Solutions


Boland Communications

Ritter Battery