In my previous review for the most excellent homemade movie ever made, Down and Dangerous, I mentioned that film was captured on the Panasonic AG AF100, which was one of the first consumer-level camcorders built for cinema. I also said that the filmmakers opted to utilize the cameras internal video codec known as AVCHD and further commented that I found it to be, arguably, the most underrated capture format for cinema even today. While I did provide a brief description of AVCHD, it occurs to me that it would be best to go into more detail as to why I personally believe the AVCHD format is so fantastic and does not deserve to be brushed off as an obsolete option for cinema. Because it's important to remember that the most excellent looking images can sometimes come from the smallest and unlikeliest of places.
AVCHD stands for Advanced Video Coding High-Definition. It is a file-based video codec jointly developed by Sony and Panasonic who introduced the format into consumer-level video cameras in 2006. The main attraction of AVCHD is the ability to record high-quality video while still utilizing specific compression methods to maximize storage space. While I admit that the exact science is lost on me, it basically boils down to gently squeezing the video files down rather than assertively cramming a square peg into a round hole. At least, that is how I understand it.
Most if not all consumer-level camcorders feature AVCHD as a recording option. Even those built for high-end cinema like the Canon C100. Even entry-level point-and-shoot digital photography cameras with video functions include AVCHD. While it may not be as fancy or as technologically advanced as other video codecs (which I will get into later on), it goes without saying that AVCHD is quite a versatile format for video regardless of the application.
Having said that, like anything else you can think of, there are pros and cons to AVCHD. Here are just a few.
PROS:
Image Quality:
Despite utilizing compression and capturing images at a maximum bit rate of about 28mbps (which is incredibly low when compared to some camcorders today) the images produced by the AVCHD format, which can also depend on the camera itself, are usually pretty high quality. I can remember when I started learning filmmaking, and my first HD camera was a little Canon camcorder which only recorded AVCHD. Although I still had yet to learn about many other aspects of image control, I remember being incredibly impressed with how my images were turning out and I am always impressed with them. I have yet to find any kind of film project captured on AVCHD that I didn't find to be aesthetically beautiful. Granted, in most cases, the films that were captured in that format were also well shot with good lighting and had a compelling story to boot. Even so, purely on a technical level, the images from the AVCHD movies I have seen were well on par with the likes of other more advanced codecs on the market, including ProRes. Don't believe me? Well, click here to learn the views of another filmmaker who also thinks so.
Storage & File Size:
Because of the lower bit rate, AVCHD allows for smaller file sizes to maximize storage space. Both within the camera and on any computers hard drive. This can be especially helpful when producing a feature film on an incredibly low budget. Part of the problem with using more powerful and advanced cameras, which are good things under the right circumstances, unless you have a powerful enough computer to handle the large files created by the camera, let alone enough storage space on your hard drive to store all of it, editing and storage space may prove to be a problem. While there are workarounds to better manage the larger files, which I have utilized before, most of the time, if you're trying to put together a big film on a small budget, smaller files tend to be easier to work with. Let's not forget that we live in an age when people can edit and apply special effects to a movie from their laptop.
Money Saver:
When considering a consumer level camera for making movies, most of the time filmmakers will want to include an external recorder. A device which connects to the camera and records higher quality footage directly from the sensor. This is a good option for capture when applicable. However, if you've already spent the money on a decent camera, and you still have the money within the budget for an external recorder, you might want to consider directing those funds towards more essential aspects of the film like sound design, special effects, and tasty catering for your cast and crew. Because when you really think about it, external recorders are more trouble than they're worth. Sure, they are more technologically advanced and can produce "better" images, but they're not a magic button that will automatically make your movies look more professional, nor are they likely to be a worthy investment. When you actually consider the numbers for buying the external recorder, extra batteries, connection cables, memory cards & readers, and hard drives to store the massive amounts of data, you might as well spend that money on a more expensive and powerful camera. Which, depending on the brand, can probably run for the same price of a consumer level camera and external recorder combined. Learn to do more with less, and not only will you likely produce beautiful results, but you will also save a lot of money, and possibly gain even more form your creativity.
Okay, now that we've gone over some of the pros, it's time to consider the other side of the debate.
CONS:
Compression:
Even though I have already expressed my opinion about compression time and time again, I understand where the counter-arguments are coming from, and they are mostly justified. Compressed footage can be a chore to work with. Information can be more easily lost, color correction can be more difficult, image quality can potentially be lost when exporting the final product, and it's generally unpopular within the filmmaking community. Even when there are professional cinematographers like Shane Hurlbut who work within the film industry praising the hell out of compression, it is still frowned upon as an ugly stain on cinematic image capture. It's almost hard to see why so many up-and-coming filmmakers are having such a hard time being taken seriously because they shot a movie on their iPhone.
Fewer Bits:
AVCHD is strictly an 8bit 420 capture format, meaning it has the barest amount of color space in the information available for color correction and somewhat limited dynamic range. Many editors have openly admitted that they flat our hate working in 8bit 420 because of the extra difficulty in manipulating the images. Of course, what many see as a limitation, I prefer to see as a challenge. As should any artist worth their salt.
Import Difficulties:
Some video editing software occasionally has difficulty recognizing and importing AVCHD files. To the point where it could potentially outright reject them. Even though there are tons of options for converting AVCHD files into more edit-friendly formats, many editors will outright refuse to work with the codec purely because they can't figure out how to get them into their software. Which, if you ask me, is like refusing to bake a cake because you only know one method of doing so, despite being able to quickly learn any number of alternatives. I'm just saying.
CONCLUSION:
AVCHD has been around for a long time now and will likely be sticking around for a little while longer. While I have enjoyed the advantages of higher video formats, I cannot help but feel that AVCHD is not only better than many give it credit for but is also a genuinely perfect format to remember when considering options for cinema, including feature films. AVCHD has proven itself time and time again to be a perfectly viable and totally usable video codec for cinema. You only need to examine some of the films I will be reviewing over the next few weeks as proof of that very concept.
To all filmmakers out there, both young and old, experienced and new, and so on, I implore you, do not disregard AVCHD as a viable option for cinema. As a capture format, it is genuinly much better than popular opinion would have you believe. Art is, and always will be, subjective. There is no wrong way to make a movie. The best camera for your film may very well be right in your pocket. Embrace the imperfection of AVCHD, and you just might make the most excellent movie ever someday. Technology is excellent, but don't be afraid of the older tech. Because it just might be exactly what you're looking for.
No comments:
Post a Comment