Technically, yes that is true. The camera will *always* shoot in the same resolution. However, the practical *effect* of the soft filter will be to lower the amount of detail by making the fine details blurred in order to hide all the blemishes (which is similar to having less resolution - no?). More often then not, this results in a "dreamy" quality given to the subject. And yes, I am aware such filters come in varying degrees of softness.
In my view, this is opposite of what most gonzo viewers desire. I believe they prefer seeing crisp footage. I've been reading soft focus criticism for years about certain adult studios that tend to release features. Perhaps some other people here can share their feelings about their expectations in this regard.
Also, I would be very hesitant to shoot with any kind of special effects filter on these days, because many of these these things can be done (and undone) in post production. But if the source footage is shot in this manner, there's no going back, you're stuck with it and the detail is lost forever.
As for my personal qualifications as videographer, I don't see where it is relevant to the discussion.
Not trying to jack the thread or anything but I just wanted to say that it really does my heart good to see that adult movie makers taking video quality seriously. I suppose some of them always did but in the old days with VHS, video quality could only be so good and VCRs had much more differences in video quality than DVD players do.
I used to get so frustrated with never really knowing what kind of quality I was going to see when I rented a movie from a studio I didn't typically rent from. Of all the adult DVDs I've seen lately, I really can't complain about the video quality at all. It's generally good to excellent and that's very refreshing. Takes at least some of the guesswork out of the consumer's task and leaves people who care about quality more open to sample product from a wider variety of studios.
Hey Quase How did the camera handle?? Somewhat boxy like the Z-1? Also do we have to cough up another thousand for a wide adapter (like the Z-1). I could see myself on a Zupko shoot going thru $20,000 of P2 cards. I'll wait till the firestore Hard drives are out...or the Market shakes out and gives us some maybe more ergonomic HDV cams. I do however love the Pany's colors & Blacks. G Hey to DAC & Jake
Oh and Kami...the DOF on the 1/3 chip cameras is so huge that matching f8 to 5.6 is pretty much a non issue....and with some sort of cut,even more so. G
It handles a lot like the dvx100 but it's about 25% larger. It's still a lot less cumbersome than the Varicam. The lens is also similar to the dxv100 which is the widest of the DV/HDV camcorders but if it's not wide enough for you you'll have to spring for the adapter which is pricey.
Just found my way back to this now-buried thread ... Hey, Gvon -- not sure who they are but if you're dealing with Zupko shoots you've been in the trenches!!!
Hey, Quaze, could you email me if you're able & willing to give a little private advice?
