Afternoon folks! Sort of a mix of an announce/request and hunt for an opinion. I've got some pretty good wide-angle footage of the Cardiff gig from last year's tour and was thinking about trying to assemble a multicam dvd like the ones we've seen for other venues. I was wondering what do people think about the whole multicam idea - is it being received well? Is it a worthwhile project or would people rather just get the footage as it is? It's in better quality than DVD (not HD though) with great audio but it's only about 45 minutes of footage. If people are interested then the next obvious question would be does anybody have any footage they'd like to contribute to the mix?
Vali · Member since
I´m sorry to say I don´t have any stuff to contribute but , please .... go ahead with this project !!!
45 min multi-cam from this show will be really welcome !!
btw ... congratulations FC Barcelona !!! finalist of the UEFA Champions League 2009 :D
ps: I´m sorry to say I´m a little bit drunk after celebrating the victory of my team ;)
brians wig · Member since
A multicam would be nice, but it's just as good to have the 45 minutes you shot yourself.
Can we be greedy and say "yes please" to both?! :)
onevsion · Member since
Multicams are always nice. Of course it all depends on the quality of the footage and the edits.
pittrek · Member since
Well the whole multicam idea is pretty good, but usually the final products aren't that good. Most of the multicam DVDs I have seen look like the edits are done by some "random edit generator".
Fast rock songs need hard cuts and for every scene a camera angle should be used which is showing mostly the person we hear mostly.
Ballads need slow crossfades and again, try to use the most "logical" angles.
The beginning of Hammer To Fall is a good example - we hear Brian's guitar solo, then Roger's drum "hit" etc. so it would be correct to SEE Brian, then Roger for a second, then again Brian ...
TimBHM · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]pittrek wrote: [/b]
Well the whole multicam idea is pretty good, but usually the final products aren't that good. Most of the multicam DVDs I have seen look like the edits are done by some "random edit generator".
Fast rock songs need hard cuts and for every scene a camera angle should be used which is showing mostly the person we hear mostly.
Ballads need slow crossfades and again, try to use the most "logical" angles.
The beginning of Hammer To Fall is a good example - we hear Brian's guitar solo, then Roger's drum "hit" etc. so it would be correct to SEE Brian, then Roger for a second, then again Brian ...
[/QUOTE]
Precisely - all the ones I've seen seem to be cut completely at random...
TimBHM · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]brians wig wrote: [/b]
A multicam would be nice, but it's just as good to have the 45 minutes you shot yourself.
Can we be greedy and say "yes please" to both?! :)[/QUOTE]
Well it largely depends on whether anybody offers any footage for me to cut it with! And interesting that you assume I shot the footage... ;-)
To clarify my statement regarding the quality, the footage I have is in QuickTime. The video is 640x480 at 30fps and the codec is AVC1 which compresses using h.264 (mpeg4) so although the resolution is slightly lower than standard DVD, the image quality should be better as DVDs only use mpeg2 - at least that's how it was explained to me. The real bonus is that the audio is in aiff-c/sowt which is lossless at 44.1kHz 16bit with a bitrate of 705 kb/s.
Attached are some screenshots...
Mkls · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]pittrek wrote: [/b]
Well the whole multicam idea is pretty good, but usually the final products aren't that good. Most of the multicam DVDs I have seen look like the edits are done by some "random edit generator".
Fast rock songs need hard cuts and for every scene a camera angle should be used which is showing mostly the person we hear mostly.
Ballads need slow crossfades and again, try to use the most "logical" angles.
The beginning of Hammer To Fall is a good example - we hear Brian's guitar solo, then Roger's drum "hit" etc. so it would be correct to SEE Brian, then Roger for a second, then again Brian ...
[/QUOTE]
Editing multi camera amateur shots is mostly not about what is logical, but what can be used from 2-3-4-5-6 camera sources - a lot of times the picture is shaky, blurred, heads in the way , or three camera focuses on Brian and the rest somewhere else... or one person records only 40 minutes from the beginning , the other stops when PR comes to stage etc etc etc...
e-man · Member since
I would LOVE to see something like this, I was at the gig and I thought it was SUPERB!!!!!!!
sadly, I have mostly pictures. I have some of Roger's solo, filmed on a crappy digital camera
TimBHM · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]e-man wrote: [/b]
I would LOVE to see something like this, I was at the gig and I thought it was SUPERB!!!!!!!
sadly, I have mostly pictures. I have some of Roger's solo, filmed on a crappy digital camera[/QUOTE]
Feel free to add that footage to the pot - all contributions are welcome :)
onevsion · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Miklos wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]pittrek wrote: [/b]
Well the whole multicam idea is pretty good, but usually the final products aren't that good. Most of the multicam DVDs I have seen look like the edits are done by some "random edit generator".
Fast rock songs need hard cuts and for every scene a camera angle should be used which is showing mostly the person we hear mostly.
Ballads need slow crossfades and again, try to use the most "logical" angles.
The beginning of Hammer To Fall is a good example - we hear Brian's guitar solo, then Roger's drum "hit" etc. so it would be correct to SEE Brian, then Roger for a second, then again Brian ...
[/QUOTE]
Editing multi camera amateur shots is mostly not about what is logical, but what can be used from 2-3-4-5-6 camera sources - a lot of times the picture is shaky, blurred, heads in the way , or three camera focuses on Brian and the rest somewhere else... or one person records only 40 minutes from the beginning , the other stops when PR comes to stage etc etc etc...
[/QUOTE]
Indeed
Wilki Amieva · Member since
I have a couple of videos and some photos ([url=http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2005855&id=1493105360]http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2005855&id=1493105360[/url]), and also a more or less decent audio recording... Contact me at: wilkiamieva@fibertel.com.ar
TimBHM · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Wilki Amieva wrote: [/b]
I have a couple of videos and some photos ([url=http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2005855&id=1493105360]http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2005855&id=1493105360[/url]), and also a more or less decent audio recording... Contact me at: wilkiamieva@fibertel.com.ar
[/QUOTE]
Done
e-man · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]TimBHM wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]e-man wrote: [/b]
I would LOVE to see something like this, I was at the gig and I thought it was SUPERB!!!!!!!
sadly, I have mostly pictures. I have some of Roger's solo, filmed on a crappy digital camera
[/QUOTE]
Feel free to add that footage to the pot - all contributions are welcome :)
[/QUOTE]
how do I get the footage to you? the file(or files, I can't remember) - are quite large
TimBHM · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]e-man wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]TimBHM wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]e-man wrote: [/b]
I would LOVE to see something like this, I was at the gig and I thought it was SUPERB!!!!!!!
sadly, I have mostly pictures. I have some of Roger's solo, filmed on a crappy digital camera
[/QUOTE]
Feel free to add that footage to the pot - all contributions are welcome :)
[/QUOTE]
how do I get the footage to you? the file(or files, I can't remember) - are quite large
[/QUOTE]
Good question. It's probably fastest/easiest if you split it/them into chunks using zip/rar and stick them on mediafire/rapidshare/megaupload - I think megaupload allows the largest file sizes.
