"nappy"
<joseft_nospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:kx%fb.9582$Fd5.9361@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
>
"David Ruether" <rpn1@no-junk.cornell.edu> wrote in message
>
news:blo00e$f1q$1@news01.cit.cornell.edu...
>
> > > "Dynamic Video"
wrote ...
>
> > > > I want to use the xl1 as the main camera, but the pictures
>
> > > > don't match, I'm white blancing on a warm card and all
>
> > > > in the same light but the xl1 still looks warmer and richer
>
> > > > then the gl1s any suggestion or should I just wait till
post
>
> > > > and fix it there?
>
> > "David Ruether"
wrote ...
>
> > > Do it in post - it is both easier and better (after doing the
best
>
> > > you can on-site...). For a multi-camera Premiere edit example
>
> > > with several different model cameras, see:
>
> > > www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/multi-camera.htm
>
> > > www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/multi-camera2.htm.
>
> "Richard Crowley" wrote
...
>
> > Or experiment with different white-balance cards?
>
> > "I'm balancing with a warm card...it still looks warmer."
>
> > See the problem here?
>
> >
>
> > It is possible that you are working on a long-form project
>
> > and/or lack real-time video manipulation, or have slow
>
> > computer in which case doing it in post will take days of
>
> > rendering. Evaluate your options and apply common sense.
>
> Even when rendering all of a 2-hour video on a 450MHz PC,
>
> including not only color balancing, but gamma, brightness
>
> and contrast adjustments, rendering Mini-DV would likely
>
> take less than 1/2 day (possibly a LOT less...). A faster
>
> machine would of course cut this time further, as would not
>
> needing to render all of the footage (as when one camera is
>
> "correct", and the footage from the others is modified to
>
> match it). Also, there is no need to modify all of the raw
>
> footage before the rest of the edit is finished (so only the
>
> footage used needs to be modified...).
>
yeah... and everyone has a half day to spare.... Much smarter not to pay any
>
attention to details while you are shooting and try to fix it in post...
Uh, you
overlooked (as usual...;-) this line in my earliest post,
"after
doing the best you can on-site", which, for your benefit,
means
"adjust the cameras for best match - but you will probably
benefit
from doing further adjustments in post" - and my whole
post
just above yours here. Not *really* difficult - really!...;-)
.
> I
suspect David has never really gone through complete post on anything.
More nonsense
from "nappy"...;-) You suspect wrong - I have
completed
many 2-hour+ videos, and over 50 frame-grabs from
one of
them appear here (though, as usual, you will probably not
bother
to look before spouting more nonsense...):
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/wedding-video2.html
and 3 and 4.
Can you
show us the results of your work? Or will you continue
this
silly "dump on David" posting? Was it something I did?
Like
declare your "fav" camcorder not the best buy in its class?
I
suspect nappy doesn't know how to image-match different
camcorder
models - which can be better and more accurately
done in
post since there are more image controls available
there.
And, in a long edit, one more half-day for a good matching
of the
cameras is nothing (and there *are* other things one
can do
while waiting...;-), but nothing in the OP's post mentions
the
speed of the computer in use - it's render speed may be a
total
non-issue, for all we know...
--
David Ruether
d_ruether@hotmail.com
http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com