I hear that one of the ways to make your video look more like film is to throw the background out of focus, and perform rack-focuses between your subjects when possible. With my current 1/6"ccd camera I've been able to use this feature VERY seldom. I usually have to open up the aperature fully, and then zoom in with the telephoto all the way. Zooming in is usually the only way I can have a short depth of feild, but thats obviouly inconvenient in small corridors, when I cant back up far enough to do this. I'm about to get a new camera, and dont want the dv953 for the simple fact that its 1/6" ccds wont cut it, at least I think compared to a vx2000 with 1/3" ccds.

I really want to be able to do this, and the most expensive thing I can get is the vx2000 with its larger ccds, which I hear help shorten focus fields better, but how much better? Am I really going to be able to rack focus somewhat easier with this camera, and is the vx2000 much better than the trv900 or gl2 with their 1/4 inch ccds at rack focusing? Any help on rack focusing with any of these cameras will be apreciated.

Well, a big part of it is the lens. In films, when you see that they have switched to a lens with a very shallow focus (some have a focus area of less then 2 feet) So, the only way to fake it is to either zoom in (as you mentioned) or get lenses for your cam, which most dont allow. Now I dont really have experience with the ones your refering to with the exception of the GL2, whih is a great cam. However it dosent seem to have what I would call a shallow focus. Atleast not alot more than any other video cam.
There is the possibility of doing it in post. If you shot from your set up a background plate out of focus, and then put your subject in with like a blue screen behind their head you could super impose them in post, and have a nice soft background. Just a thought.
R. Michael

"Luck, is when opportunity, meets preperation." "There are 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine, and the truth, and none of us are lying" -Robert Evans

The only *true* solution is with the XL1(S). I'm using it to shoot one of my films right now. To get the type of look you want you would use 35mm SLR still lenses on the XL1. For example, I'm using a Nikon 55mm Micro lens. At f2.8 it has an EXTREMELY shallow depth of field and a minimum focal length of around eight inches. But you'll also need a lens adapter unless you are using canon lenses.

Some celluloid films don't (or seldom) emloy your desired effect though. Take Raising Arizona, shot entirely with wide angle lenses, which bring the background into focus. It all depends on the look you're going for I guess. The truth is, no matter how well you shoot your DV, it will never have the RESOLUTION or the RANDOMNESS of film anyway.

another thing to think about is that these consumer cameras, with the exception of the DVX100 and the xl1s 14x manual lens (or any of the 35mm still lenses as Cyos pointed out), do not have accurate focus controls. To save battery power, the focus ring you control on these cameras controls a servo which does the actual focusing. What this means is you won't be able to replicate focus racks accurately. So, if focus racks is the deciding factor on what camera to buy, go dvx100 or xl-1s and buy the $1200 manual lens. Neither a cheap option.

For a project that's in post currently, there was only one shot that *had* to have a focus rack. We tried it on set with a gl1, but we couldn't get good results. We ended up shooting the with a deeper depth of field so all elements were in focus. Then, in post, we rotoscoped the actors and defocused them and the BG plate accordingly. Very time consuming, but it was only for one 3 second shot.

joren

I'd be interested in saying how that shot turned...maybe post up a screenshot?

I know that any consumer cam cant accurately rack focus, because they dont have numbers on the lens for focal lengths like pro cameras do, but I've still been able to rack focus somewhat fine when I'm zooming in alot. I cant afford the dvx100 or the xl1 with a $1200 lens, so I'm going to have to either get the gl2 or vx2000. I was hoping the vx2000 had somewhat of an edge at getting to a shorter depth of feild if I wanted it. The idea of retroscoping is kind of too time consuming for me, because i'm hoping to use short DOF as much as I can. I hate having everything in focus! Film is better to look at with short DOF.

I did it a few times in The Lost Soldiers. I think it happens twice in the scene on the site. But basically to do it. I stood kinda far back and just zoomed in. And turned the manual focus on. Then I just switched between the two subjects. It wasn't really that difficult. It just takes some patience to do because with the cheaper end cameras (like mine), the don't have acturate focus pulls, so you have to kinda "guess" on how far to focus.

Also, I always stand back farther than normal when filming and zoom in to blur the background as much as possible unless I specifically don't want it to be out of focus. I think that gives it a much more film like appearance. Check it out and you'll see what I mean.

And everyone go review the Lost Soldiers! Wahoo!

Thomas Verrette
tommy21485@earthlink.net
Imperial Pictures

ok this might sound stupid, i've never tried it, so i wouldn't know but when u edit it you could use the same video twice, overlay them, use a filter which subracts things that are the same (i know you can get those), then blur the one in the background...

...just a suggestion though i wouldn't be supprised if it looks like crap.

Try it. Experimentation is the key.

"Don't breathe or I'll kill you!"

While pro-sumer lenses don't breathe as much as the garden variety pro zooms, they do seem to have a different action than most primes. I would generally say rack-focusing would work against any film-look you try to give your video (Unless you're using 35mm lenses, and even then only in conjunction with something like the P+S adapter). Not to mention the problems that arise in trying to achieve an accurate pull.

Nota "Citizen Kane also had deep-focus" Mono