canon 814 az jitter question

[mondo77]

Anyone have particular problems with jitter using this cam?

Have a look at these two utubes

The first I shot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gKj71dbzbY . There's camera movement but that's not what I mean. I'm talking about the actual jitter. I know it's inherent in Super 8 but is this worse than normal. And is it fixable in post?

I thought it might just be my cam so I went to utube and there's some footage there http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gVWlHn4ssg looking equally jittery.

I'm asking as I damaged the lens on mine recently. And want another - but w/out the jitter!!

[alex-rus]

Your footage is good!

At shooting without a tripod, jitter will be imperceptible because of trembling hands

Better do not think about correction in a post - is does not work properly.

[themagickite]

i find mine to be quite good. it was in really good condition when i got (off the 1st owner who really looked after it). it has a smidgen of jitter but you can only really see it when you look for it.

[morales72]

I got similar results but with first batch E64T, even worse than yours, in fact, with the same camera. From 14 old Tri-X carts, 2 were a little defective, similar to yours. With new formulations (both Tri-x and Plus-X) I had not these kind of problems. I recently got another 814AZe just for parts, in case I need them in the future and are erased from the surface of the earth. Would be good practice to do it and test to compare both of them.

Good luck,

Morales.

[mondo77]

Morales72, I've got the plain version of the Canon 814 AZ not the electronic version. I really like it - big, bright viewfinder, smooth manual zoom, focusing dead easy. But, oh, the jitter.(':(')My Nizo 156 xl doesn't produce anything as bad as that.

Like I say I managed to damage the lens and won't invest in another 814 AZ if it has that severity of jitter. Of course I won't know til I put a film through.Weird thing is, jitter doesn't normally bother me. A moderate amount is fine by me. I find my example to be too much. That said, my son - who didn't know what a super 8 camera was until earlier this year - said "Oh I like it . It gives it a certain look. I thought it was supposed to be like that" (':?')Horses for courses.

I will shoot one more thing on it and see how it comes out.

[Mitch Perkins]

And is it fixable in post?

If you can transfer the footage 10 bit uncompressed, with the perforation visible, you can use the perf as an anchor point for stabilization, even for non-static shots. Then, since it's 10 bit uncompressed, you can re-crop, (blow up), to get rid of the perf, with the picture still looking good.

Mitch

[metaT8]

I've had jitter problems in my 814 AZ. mostly 64T.

I think there was a bad run of 64T a while ago. But the 814 does seem to be more susceptible than other cameras.

Do search on Jitter or my screen name to see my comments.

Let's hope for the best.

m

[themagickite]

And is it fixable in post?

If you can transfer the footage 10 bit uncompressed, with the perforation visible, you can use the perf as an anchor point for stabilization, even for non-static shots. Then, since it's 10 bit uncompressed, you can re-crop, (blow up), to get rid of the perf, with the picture still looking good.

Mitch

what a cool idea, if you capture to HD then you could blow up and down rez to SD

edit: i guess if you use a highly compressed codec like HDV then the end quality might not be any better than if you started with uncompressed SD

[Mitch Perkins]

And is it fixable in post?

If you can transfer the footage 10 bit uncompressed, with the perforation visible, you can use the perf as an anchor point for stabilization, even for non-static shots. Then, since it's 10 bit uncompressed, you can re-crop, (blow up), to get rid of the perf, with the picture still looking good.

Mitch

what a cool idea, if you capture to HD then you could blow up and down rez to SD

Yep. Simply anchor the frame line [top or bottom] to the perf, which of course may still have *some* jump and weave, but really shouldn't.

edit: i guess if you use a highly compressed codec like HDV then the end quality might not be any better than if you started with uncompressed SD

Workflow is important, but if the footage is unacceptably jumpy, and cannot be reshot, I think the procedure would be better than nothing.

Mitch

[eggart]

I don't understand - how do the perfs help? Do you mean mean it would align the entire frame into the same position in relation to the perf? Pretty neat if so.

[camera8mm]

appears to be jumping somewhat in the gate on projection, but its hard to tell without the shot being steady.
clean the gate on the camera, especially the claw, use fresh batteries, use a tripod and retest.

[Mitch Perkins]

I don't understand - how do the perfs help? Do you mean mean it would align the entire frame into the same position in relation to the perf? Pretty neat if so.

...align the entire frame into the same *motion* as the perfs, which should be none. The perfs on a properly set up projector should be rock steady, or have your transfers done somewhere else.

Once you've tracked the frame line to the perf, watch it jump like crazy, while the frame line now exhibits rock steadiness. Then get rid of the perf [re-crop].

Mitch

[mattias]

since it's 10 bit uncompressed, you can re-crop, (blow up), to get rid of the perf, with the picture still looking good.

10 bits does nothing to improve cropping and scaling compared to 8 bits, and it's still 720x480 so you'll get artifacts. the 4:2:2 color sampling and lack of compression helps slightly though.

/matt

[Mitch Perkins]

since it's 10 bit uncompressed, you can re-crop, (blow up), to get rid of the perf, with the picture still looking good.

10 bits does nothing to improve cropping and scaling compared to 8 bits,

I didn't say it did. I said the picture will still look good after blowup since it's 10 bit uncompressed. You only need a tiny bit of the perf showing, so you don't need to blow it up much.

I understand English is not your first language, but if you see something written by someone who is not wholly without technical savvy, and it looks absurd, perhaps a little more effort is required on your part to parse the statement?

and it's still 720x480 so you'll get artifacts.

We don't get artifacts using this tracking option in PP with 8 bit 720x480. Even better though would be to throw the HD cam up on the telecine, and bring the jumpy footage in 1080i. We can do this no problem.

the 4:2:2 color sampling and lack of compression helps slightly though.

/matt

1:1 vs 5:1 is an improvement of 500%. I guess you could call that "slightly". I'm simply trying to help these folks fix their jitter problem.

While it's true that re-compression is going to take place during output to DVD or whatever, as I said, if the footage is unusably jumpy, this procedure is better than nothing.

Mitch

[mattias]

since it's 10 bit uncompressed, you can re-crop, (blow up), to get rid of the perf, with the picture still looking good.

10 bits does nothing to improve cropping and scaling compared to 8 bits,

I didn't say it did. I said the picture will still look good after blowup since it's 10 bit uncompressed.

you did actually, and now you did again. i mean english is not my first language, but i know what "since" means.

/matt