updated 14 Oct 2004

 

JVC HD10 on the Short Film "Release Me"
an article by Jon Fordham, Director of Photography

Jon is a contributing member of our DV Info Net Community.

Heath McKnight and I made some time to meet up and shoot a little short filmwith his HD10 over the Christmas Holidays. Heath and I have known each other for awhile and have been discussing my involvement as Director of Photography with his upcoming feature film. We both wanted a chance to see how we worked together and a short film with the HD10 seemed like reason enough to test out our working relationship. Prior to this I had been doing some informal tests with the HD10 thanks to Heath graciously loaning me the camera. After putting it next to the Panasonic HDC27F Varicam, I spent a couple weeks doing some side by sides with the Panasonic DVX100. I attempted to convince Heath to shoot this short film with the DVX100, but he was much more interested in working with the HD10 for tests purposes.

The script, entitled "Release Me", was a modest page and a half. We wanted to take our time and not make a big production out of an informal test of our working relationship and HD10 curiosity. Unfortunately, due to the fact that we didn't want to make a big production out of this one and also because we did not have a proper budget, I did not have the size of crew that I am use to working with. Nor did I have the size G&E package that I am accustomed to. Leaving us at the mercy of circumstance and our own ingenuity.

After doing some shooting with the HD10, I've found the edge enhancement (yes, even on the HD10) to be objectionable. I chose to use a moderate diffusion filter. I removed the JVC lens hood and replaced it with a Cokin A series modular hood and attached a C830 diffuser. For those who have asked, I used the A series size for two reasons. One, because they are the perfect size for the smaller handycams like the HD10. And two, because it fit much nicer in my backpack on the plane trip to Florida. And Heath owes me some warmer sunshine, cause when I got to Florida it was ridiculously cold that week! And if Florida weather is cold to a guy who lives in New York, then something is definitely wrong.

The shooting conditions consisted of a handful of day exterior shots coupled with some day interiors and some night interiors. The only G&E I had at my disposal was an Arri tungsten kit consisting of two 650's and two 300's, four stands, and few sheets of 250 & black wrap.

We started out with the day exteriors. The shot consisted of few angles of a couple putting some boxes in a SUV, getting in and driving off. With no 12x silk, no HMI's, no bounce boards, and no crew, I was forced to shoot with natural and available light only. Heath and I chose to put the SUV in a spot with as much shade from direct sunlight as possible. This helped out a great deal, but did not completely shield it from sunlight.

Immediately I had problems with highlights. The sunlight hitting the SUV's corner in a wide shot, hit the diffuser and created a bit too much of a noticeable highlight 'ping' in my opinion. Not enough to justify losing the diffuser, but enough for me to wish I had more control over the light.

Next we moved into MED's and CU's. These put us out of direct sunlight and the exposure evened out a bit. Unfortunately, I was again plagued by lack of control. This time the choice was between locking exposure or locking shutter speed. I chose to lock the exposure only to find that my shutter speed decided to change and compensate for my exposure level! We got through the MED's and CU's of the talent and decided we'd try a shot from inside of the SUV looking out of the actor opening the rear door and placing one of the boxes inside. I knew this probably wasn't going to work. But we decided to try it anyway. In true HD10 form, the camera tried compensate for the changing light levels, going from a bit underexposed to drastically overexposed, then clamped down to exposure, then to drastic underexposure. We tried it twice locking different single values down, but in the end we weren't able to get a shot that was usable from beginning to end. Perhaps the magic of post will be able to cut around it.

After getting the exteriors we moved inside for the rest of the shoot. With AC power, I was now able to use a small 19" consumer television as a monitor. Certainly not perfect, but a much appreciated CRT to view my shots. Unfortunately, being a consumer television we couldn't monitor our images in a letterboxed form showing us the "real" top and bottom of the frame. Heath and I found that the HD10 will only display a letterboxed image live when there is no tape loaded. Even with the menu set to "4:3 TV." Whether or not this is a quirk of Heath's unit or particular to all HD10's I don't know. I don't recall reading about such a function in the manual, but I could've missed it. The fact that once I noticed what it was doing, it continued to follow the same pattern of displaying a letterboxed image only without the tape loaded, makes me think that this a design of the HD10 and not a defect of Heath's camera. We pressed on viewing the image in its anamorphic state.

First we attempted a shot of the actor coming in through the front door and walking through a hallway into the room. I had lost most of the daylight coming through the windows and decided to break out the Arri's. I set up the 650's and attempted to give some highlights coming through the hallway. The 650 wasn't the right tool for the job and it showed. Lacking the proper tools I opted to try and get the shot without. This proved to create a very muddy image with little color at all and no contrast what so ever. I knew the HD10's lack of color and poor performance at handling contrast extremes. But I was a bit surprised at how muddy and horrible this particular setup proved. My hope was that the sharp edge enhancement and the 720 HDV resolution would save me. But alas, it did not.

We next attempted a few different setups in various places about the apartment. A hallway, a bedroom morning shot, etc. All with varying degrees of success. After a break for lunch, we tackled the remaining setups.

First up, a dinner scene. A simple setup of the two actors at a table having a meal together. With no color or contrast in the room, the shot was difficult. We were shooting into a window with mini-blinds and a bare wall. Heath did a little art direction by placing a poster for his film, ³Skye Falling² (go to his website and buy a copy on DVD today!), on the bare wall. He then dressed the table and brought in the talent. It was very small space to work in and my lighting options were limited. I was able to work in the 2 300's with a little 250 Diff and then adjusted the practical overhead to my liking. The table was candle lit and finding a balance of mood and exposure is always a bit tricky. Fortunately, this was one of those situations where all of the variables lined up in the HD10's favor. The lack of extremes and the ability to control as much as possible in the small space came together in a shot that didn't look half bad on the monitor. I was actually quite satisfied with what we achieved in this setup.

Finally we wrapped up with some shots of our beautiful leading lady getting ready for the dinner. Some CU's of putting on lipstick in the mirror some MED-WIDE's of her zipping up her boots from outside the bathroom, etc. These shots worked out pretty well also. Certainly not how I would've approached them with the proper tools. But definitely acceptable.

Following our Martini (that is, the final shot of the day), Heath and I took a few minutes to review some of the footage on his 16/9 HD LCD via the HD10's component output. Reviewing footage immediately after I shoot it is something I hate doing, but I ecided to relax and enjoy it.

What I noticed when viewing the footage on the LCD was the usual chroma and compression artifacting. The artifacting was most apparent in shots where there was a lack of contrast and large areas of black. The artifacting resulted in images that were not as clean as I would¹ve like and a bit muddy in terms of contrast.

Heath and I took some time to meet up a few days later at a local Circuit City and check out some of the footage on a few CRT selections. First up, a 34" Sony 16/9 High Definition CRT Television. We set the HD10's menu to "16:9 TV" and 1080i output. What was immediately noticeable to me was the MPEG compression and lack of color saturation. The image had a very "pixelated" or blocky look to it. As if you were seeing actual "pixel blocks" or something is the only way I can describe it. It appeared as if the 1080i CRT left nowhere to hide. All of the small imperfections were visible. We then connected the HD10 to a 32" Sony 4/3 Standard Definition Television and switched the menu to "4:3 TV" 480i output. The image looked better letterboxed on the SD set. But you could still see pixelated grid and compression artifacts if you were looking for it. It did take Heath a minute to see it. So we're not talking about something that most people would immediately notice. The next, and most interesting, was a 32" Sony 4/3 Standard Definition "HI SCAN" television with a 16/9 menu option. By switching the television's menu to 16/9, the television will squeeze anamorphic images to the proper aspect ratio. Thus using all of the active scan lines of the television and producing superior widescreen image reproduction. I turned on the television's 16/9 menu option and we set the camera back to "16:9 TV" and 480i. The results were better. The pixelated grid and compression artifacting were almost invisible. It seems to me that SD's lack of resolving power hides many of the HD10's flaws. Coupled with the anamorphic squeeze of the Sony HI SCAN television, the flaws all but disappeared.

Ultimately, this project further proved the many shortcomings I had previously witnessed with the HD10. It also showed the possibility of achieving some decent results when all of the right factors line up. Compression, color, sharpness (not resolution), lens, and MANUAL CONTROL are all still an overwhelming set of negative points to this camera. And I certainly would not recommend this camera for 99% of image acquisition needs. But I do applaud JVC for taking the first step to bring High Definition to the masses. And I do see extremely great possibilities for the future of the HDV format.

I do have one more possible project that has come my way where I may yet again give the HD10 a try. One that shows a little hope of achieving some cool results. If it happens, it will involve setting the HD10 to Black and White mode and shooting high contrast hard light situations. High contrast hard light situations sound like a nightmare for the HD10. But in B&W mode, I'm hoping that the issues of color, compression, and over/underexposure are diminished. If this project happens, I'll report the results to the forum.

In the side by side comparisons I performed with the HD10 and the Varicam, I was being paid to shoot a film with the Varicam. Not the HD10. My taking the initiative to put the HD10 next to the Varicam was my choice to see how it performed. However, my lighting, framing and approach to the cinematography was in every way possible performed specifically for image capture by the Varicam and not at all "tailored" to the HD10. Furthermore, the short film that I shot for Heath was as I have stated, more than anything a test of how Heath and I worked together. And while it did provide Heath and I an opportunity to further "test" the performance of the HD10, we did not have the budget to properly cater to the performance issues of the HD10.

As I have stated before, I applaud JVC for introducing the first "HDV" camcorder. And I look forward to JVC, Sony, Canon or any other manufacturer introducing newer and better HDV camcorders. With integration into popular post applications, I think the HDV format holds extreme possibilities for the future of Digital imaging. But I would never categorically rule out SD acquisition for continued or future use. I personally believe that I search for the most appropriate tool for the job. And in my humble opinion, as of today, the most appropriate tool for many low budget digital projects is still something other than the HD10.

Written by Jon Fordham, Director of Photography.
Thrown together by Chris Hurd.