How Do You Shoot? Digital Video for Live Performance

[BradKlein]

I'd love to hear from other video producers, amateur and pro on the subject of shooting live indoor video of musical performers. Hoping this thread might be a place to share examples of your OWN work - where the poster has first hand info on the equipment and circumstances. Really interested in seeing results of other audio and video rigs in conditions similar to what I shoot in - indoor, low light, bars and clubs.

There's a link to my own work in my signature. Almost all was produced with Canon DSLRs using the APS-C sensor. Even with that sensor, I typically have to shoot with an much higher ISO than I'd like, and the results are grainier than I wish them to be. 1600 ISO is typical.

Here's an example. The audio in this case, is a multi-mic stereo mix with some post production. The lighting was brighter than in most venues which helped some.

[oldwave]

Fast lenses
You can reduce some of the noise in the NLE you are using, DaVinci Resolve is free and has great tools, but there is a learning curve
I have a canon dslr and a canon c100 which is a low light king. The trick in video is just like audio, fitting the dynamic range into the sensor. I set my canon dslr color space to neutral so i can make some color adjustments in post
long shot seems a bit out of focus
I use a magic lantern firmware hack on this camera (use at your own risk) but it provides focusing aides

In the nle use video scopes to adjust exposure moving the blacks down to zero and make sure the highlights don't exceed 100%
Great videos out there on adjust exposure and color balance using scopes

Good luck

Looks good though
Keep learning, I know I am



Dynamic range in these apps is ok, maybe 8 stops, make sure your highlights aren't alone out, though expose looks pretty good
In

[avaldes]

Well, you are using a Canon DSLR, and you can spell "APS-C" and "ISO", so it seems like you have a good handle on things.
This was a little film I did of the local folk and roots festival. Different venues and lighting. Canon 6D, 24-105 F4 lens. I shot a lot in manual exposure, going down to 1/40 sec f4 and whatever ISO I needed (I recall 3200 and maybe even some at 6400). High ISO gives it a vintage concert footage look, so I don't shy away from going to it. Rode videomic mounted in the hotshoe. Hand-held, because I was also venue coordinator and had to deal with non-video stuff.

This next one was me in my music room, Canon 6D, with a piece of black fabric from Joanne's as the backdrop, and lit with a Home Depot LED worklight. ISO 800, 1/40, f 5.6. Rode NT3 pair of mic in XY configuration, Y cable double XLR to stereo mini for the camera mic input. NFI on Rode.

[Folkmusician.com]

What lens are you using? The cheap 50mm 1.8 does a surprisingly good job. It is no 1.2 (which we eventually replaced the 1.8 with), but it does fine in low light.

I would pickup an external Zoom (or similar recorder) and maybe 2. Also another vote for the Rode Video Mics. Good edition, but I would do a Zoom first.

Make sure to get your image as flat as possible, low saturation, no onboard sharpening, etc... Do all that afterwards when color correcting.

[avaldes]

What lens are you using? The cheap 50mm 1.8 does a surprisingly good job. It is no 1.2 (which we eventually replaced the 1.8 with), but it does fine in low light.

I would pickup an external Zoom (or similar recorder) and maybe 2. Also another vote for the Rode Video Mics. Good edition, but I would do a Zoom first.

Make sure to get your image as flat as possible, low saturation, no onboard sharpening, etc... Do all that afterwards when color correcting.

Robert, how do you align the Zoom audio and the video? Do you line up the waveforms in post so the Zoom track aligns with the camera audio track, then throw away the one from the camera?

[Folkmusician.com]

Yes, I just use the audio from the camera to align the tracks from the zoom, unless something went wrong with the zoom, or in a case where there is a good audio track on the camera, like a talking head shot where the camera was not far away, or I ran the line out from the Zoom over to the camera and the audio track was fine.

There is a great app called Pluraleyes, that is excellent at aligning audio in tough situations and multicam/multi recorder. It looks like there have been some massive updates on it (price went up to). I have an older version. This is so quick and easy if you have multiple cameras, recorders and takes. Just load em in, hit the button, and it all syncs, then it will export to your NLE as Multicam.

I use Final Cut Pro X and it does a pretty good job on it's own most of the time (not as good as Pluraleyes on complex situations or where quality is poor). Premier will sync audio as well.

I do also align it by eye with the waveforms. For live music performance, I will sometimes take Different angles from the same song but maybe a different verse or chorus and align them by eye.

We have tons of audio gear, so my challenge is keeping it simple and portable and doing things with one Zoom (h4n), and occasionally a couple of additional mics. I am not doing a lot of music related projects. In fact I have been steering clear of it for the most part. I find it stressful without trying to make a huge production of it. And when I do not drag lots of gear, lights, help, etc... it doesn't turn out so great. I think I would like to go along as a second and let someone else be in charge of it.

[Folkmusician.com]

I forgot too add...

The best thing I ever did was buy an actual camcorder. The DSLRs produce great looking shots and are outstanding in low light, but I found them to be a major hassle in live work. Like restarting every 30 minutes, swapping batteries, etc... Worst for me is, the 5dmk3 (we were using 2) don't do autofocus. No problem if you have time to set up all of the shots, but it just made live situations all that much more difficult.

I bought a relatively cheap Camcorder (Canon G40, G30 before that) and it sure made life easier. I can lock it down as the wide angle for the whole show and never touch it again... then use the DSLR for grabbing some cool shots as needed. My current DSLR is not a DSLR, but a mirrorless Sony A6000. This gives me a super compact easy and relatively inexpensive two camera setup. If the wife comes along, she deals with the 5ds...

[avaldes]

Yes, I just use the audio from the camera to align the tracks from the zoom, unless something went wrong with the zoom, or in a case where there is a good audio track on the camera, like a talking head shot where the camera was not far away, or I ran the line out from the Zoom over to the camera and the audio track was fine.

There is a great app called Pluraleyes, that is excellent at aligning audio in tough situations and multicam/multi recorder. It looks like there have been some massive updates on it (price went up to). I have an older version. This is so quick and easy if you have multiple cameras, recorders and takes. Just load em in, hit the button, and it all syncs, then it will export to your NLE as Multicam.

I use Final Cut Pro X and it does a pretty good job on it's own most of the time (not as good as Pluraleyes on complex situations or where quality is poor). Premier will sync audio as well.

I do also align it by eye with the waveforms. For live music performance, I will sometimes take Different angles from the same song but maybe a different verse or chorus and align them by eye.

We have tons of audio gear, so my challenge is keeping it simple and portable and doing things with one Zoom (h4n), and occasionally a couple of additional mics. I am not doing a lot of music related projects. In fact I have been steering clear of it for the most part. I find it stressful without trying to make a huge production of it. And when I do not drag lots of gear, lights, help, etc... it doesn't turn out so great. I think I would like to go along as a second and let someone else be in charge of it.

I have a Tascam DR 7 not Mk II, maybe 5 years old, so not as up to date as your zoom. I have thought of running the headphone output into the mic jack on my Canon DSLR, but I think it is a line level output and the Canon expects a mic level. I am afraid I might fry something. I have asked Canon, and they are not sure. Do you ever run the output of the Zoom into the 5D mic input?
I work at a university and get the Adobe Creative Suite (including Premiere) at very attractive pricing. Steep learning curve. It does easily align multi-camera setups on the audio:

[Folkmusician.com]

The DR7 looks pretty nice. I have never been thrilled with the odious quality on the Zoom, but it works fine for the purpose. I use an attenuator cable to run it into the 5D. They are readily available (just a little pricey for a small cable). It does make things a bit easier in post.


I messed with Premier a bit, but was already learning FCPX, and didn't want to switch. I am actually very happy with FCPX for what I am doing, but I do believe Premier is the more powerful. I am moving toward quantity over quality for a few youtube channels we are doing.

[avaldes]

Yeah, I thought about Final Cut Pro, but with what I pay for Adobe...Also, on stills, I had Aperture (Apple's once upon a time semi-serious image management program), but Apple pulled the rug and their "Pictures" product is useless for anyone doing anything more serious than taking selfies on Spring Break in Cancun. Did I mention I work at a university? Not that I get to go to Cancun, but the children do.
That said, I would not pay full retail for Adobe. Clunky and buggy at times. Like an operation does not work, you quit and re-open the project, and then it works. So 1987.

[BradKlein]

AUDIO: As far as audio goes, I use the Tascam DR-60 and DR-70 models with external microphones. I think that these models or their equivalent from other manufacturers including Zoom are a minimum for commercial work. The info above on syncing the audio seems right on to me. Although any decent recorder meant for use w DSLR will have an output to go into the camera's stereo mini jack - that is still meant for sync purposes. The audio in DSLRs is not good enough for music recording. That's why external recorders are in use. And they are an insanely good deal when the DR-70D gets you four decedent preamps et c for $225.

I'm really interested (as the Original Poster) in what camera/camcorders offer BETTER low light performance than the Canon APS-C sensor. The Canon 6D full frame sensor used in post #3 seems likely to be a significant step up, and used bodies should be available for $700 or so. And the 5D used in post #8 is available for half that used? Both would seem like a decent option where tracking focus is not called for. And certainly much much less expensive than moving to a PRO or PROSUMER camcorder that can AT LEAST match the APS-C sensor in low light that I typically work with in clubs. (again, I don't shoot festivals or in studio) I guess that means the Canon C100 that John mentions in post #2, or the XC10 if I forgo interchangeable lenses.

Here's another example - wide shot on the Canon 60D, close shots on a (full frame) Canon 5-D. Again, the wide shot is soft and with very little depth of field, since the lens is wide open at 2.8. (actually NO point is sharp in that shot. drat.) It seems as if the least expensive way for me to improve my shoots is to add a used full-frame DSLR body that can take my existing Canon lenses. Next is to move up to a camcorder with a 1" CMOS sensor or something similar. (The G-40 mentioned by Robert in post #7 would be a significant step down from the DSLR in low light video quality, I think)

[Folkmusician.com]

I use the Tascam DR-60 and DR-70 models with external microphones. I think that these models or their equivalent from other manufacturers including Zoom are a minimum for commercial work.

My Zoom only has line out. I think that is the case with many of these. But the attenuator cable works fine. I believe the DR-60/70 is somewhat unique in having the mic level out for DSLRs and I believe they are better choices for that alone.

Previous to getting the 5dmk3, we had a 7D (APS-C sensor). The low light performance, moving to the 5Dmk3 was improved, but not huge in itself. Then we pickup up the 50mm f/1.2L and the thing practically sees in the dark. This was the game changer. The problem being that running this wide open with the 1" sensor can be near impossible to keep in focus, but wow the shallow depth of field can get amazing shots with an otherwise boring set. I feel the lens is more important than the body

7D with EF 24-70mm f/2.8L and Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS 2.8

This was not able to get clean shots in dim clubs. It was acceptable, but not great.

5Dmk3 with the same lenses.

Better, not bad at all, but still leaving room for improvement.

5Dmk3 with 50mm f/1.2L.
Light problem solved. Never another issue with low light. But now we did have a problem with no zoom and the focus if wide open. But even at f2.8, this combo is still pretty acceptable in a dim club, and it gives the option to run wide and practically see in the dark. 50mm isn't too bad for hand held despite not having stabilization.

Somewhere in here we had a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 (I think we paid $85 at the time), that did surprisingly well. The image was a little soft, and it eventually broke when the camera was knocked over, but I would absolutely recommend it if you do not already have a better prime.

Lastly, I have a Sony A6000 with the Sony E 50mm f/1.8 OSS. It doesn't come close to the 5Dmk3/ 50 1.2 combo, but it isn't bad, and I have been preferring it over the Canon for what we have been doing (small/light/great autofocus/better codec). The new XAVC S at 50 MBPS holds up better to grading and I can crank the exposure highlights without destroying the image.

You are right on the G40 (same as the XA30). It is a nice improvement over the G30(same as XA20), but the low light performance just isn't there. I will say that when you run it at f1.8 (wide angle), it is much better than I expected and surprisingly usable in "most" situations. It holds up to grading better than I expected as well, but not to the extent of the Sony at 50 MBPS. It is a joke compared to the 5d/50mm 1.2.

[foldedpath]

My Zoom only has line out. I think that is the case with many of these. But the attenuator cable works fine. I believe the DR-60/70 is somewhat unique in having the mic level out for DSLRs and I believe there are better choices for that alone.

FYI, the Zoom H5 has that attenuator setting also for the line out, so you can go directly into a DSLR without overloading the mic-level input.

I've been using a Zoom H5 for video shoots and I've been happy with it so far. Like the others here, I'm sending audio from the Zoom to a DSLR as a scratch track/safety backup, because the mic preamps are so much better than what's in the camera. The H5 preamps are supposedly a little better than the H4n, but I don't think it's a huge difference.

I just align waveforms by eye during video editing. I don't do enough video to justify the cost of PluralEyes. Also, the Zoom H5 can be set to do an automatic "clap" audio spike at the start and end of each recording, which helps with alignment, especially if your'e recording live shows where you can't exactly ask the talent to clap their hands or use a slate.

The DSLR I've been using is a Canon Mk3, usually with a 35mm f/1.4 lens. I'm not doing remote live shoots though, just in-house stuff where I can control the lighting. I'm using soft boxes with color-corrected flourescents, can't afford the new LED stuff.

If I was shooting live shows, I'd still lean toward a large sensor camera like this for low light ability. Or even better a large sensor videocam if the budget is there. DSLR's have some frustrations, but at the minimal level I'm working at, it's the best current choice for me. What I really need now is another camera body so I can cut in B roll/closeups, and not just have the steady wide view. I'm just not doing enough video to justify it yet.

[BradKlein]

Thanks Robert. That's great information and just what I'm looking for.

I see that I was being over optimistic about the Canon XC10 - it's 1" sensor probably doesn't match my current dslr in low light. So the step up in Canon camcorders would be the C100, which is a pretty big step. Or a used Canon 5Dmk3, which is a more affordable step up from the 60D.

I do have the canon 50mm prime lens -- super fast and quite sharp -- but I find that I need the zoom for shooting live shows since I can't be sure of where I'll be setting up the camera. And I think I need f2.8 for a bluegrass band that is sharing one microphone and moving back and forth.

[BradKlein]

Foldedpath - I am guessing you mean the Canon 5D Mk3 and left out the model number? Do you have examples of your shoots that you're willing to post?

I would expect the Zoom H5 with external mics to work fine with a dslr set up. The recording device is really not a problem these days (for social media type video) - it's the microphones, placement, and post-production that account for more work, money and results in the finished audio, eh?

[foldedpath]

Foldedpath - I am guessing you mean the Canon 5D Mk3 and left out the model number? Do you have examples of your shoots that you're willing to post?

Oops, yeah it's a Canon 5D Mk3. Here's something I did for some friends a while back:



That's with 35mm f/1.4 lens. I forget the ISO setting but it wasn't very high to avoid blowing out the sunlit window in the background on an afternoon shoot like this. Main lighting was two 3x4 foot soft boxes with daylight temp flourescent bulbs to balance the window, so I didn't have to fool with color correction. if I was doing it over, I'd try a little harder to eliminate the softbox reflection on that huge 'cello body, but I didn't have much room to work with for light stands.

I would expect the Zoom H5 with external mics to work fine with a dslr set up. The recording device is really not a problem these days (for social media type video) - it's the microphones, placement, and post-production that account for more work, money and results in the finished audio, eh?

Yeah, something like this video under controlled conditions is easy compared to a "combat" live shoot, where you can't run your own mics, and have to either rely on a feed from the PA mixer, or (worst case) just recording what comes out of the PA speakers.

[avaldes]

AUDIO: As far as audio goes, I use the Tascam DR-60 and DR-70 models with external microphones. I think that these models or their equivalent from other manufacturers including Zoom are a minimum for commercial work. The info above on syncing the audio seems right on to me. Although any decent recorder meant for use w DSLR will have an output to go into the camera's stereo mini jack - that is still meant for sync purposes. The audio in DSLRs is not good enough for music recording. That's why external recorders are in use. And they are an insanely good deal when the DR-70D gets you four decedent preamps et c for $225.

I'm really interested (as the Original Poster) in what camera/camcorders offer BETTER low light performance than the Canon APS-C sensor. The Canon 6D full frame sensor used in post #3 seems likely to be a significant step up, and used bodies should be available for $700 or so. And the 5D used in post #8 is available for half that used? Both would seem like a decent option where tracking focus is not called for. And certainly much much less expensive than moving to a PRO or PROSUMER camcorder that can AT LEAST match the APS-C sensor in low light that I typically work with in clubs. (again, I don't shoot festivals or in studio) I guess that means the Canon C100 that John mentions in post #2, or the XC10 if I forgo interchangeable lenses.

Here's another example - wide shot on the Canon 60D, close shots on a (full frame) Canon 5-D. Again, the wide shot is soft and with very little depth of field, since the lens is wide open at 2.8. (actually NO point is sharp in that shot. drat.) It seems as if the least expensive way for me to improve my shoots is to add a used full-frame DSLR body that can take my existing Canon lenses. Next is to move up to a camcorder with a 1" CMOS sensor or something similar. (The G-40 mentioned by Robert in post #7 would be a significant step down from the DSLR in low light video quality, I think)

Thanks, I checked the specs on the Tascam DR60 and DR70. As I mentioned in one of my posts, I was worried about overdriving the camera mic input, but these have a "camera out" setting at the appropriate level. What is the point of the "camera in" on the recorders?

[BradKlein]

What is the point of the "camera in" on the recorders?

Connecting both the camera in and camera out, enable you to monitor the signal that the camera is recording, from the camera, through the headphones that are connected to the TASCAM, without unplugging and plugging... Sheesh... what a run on sentence!

[Folkmusician.com]

I was looking to see if I had anything done in poor lighting, with the older camera and a nice lens.

I wouldn't say that this is a great example of the quality this combo was cable of... This was a disaster. It was a live show at Circus Circus Casino. There was no plan to video it and we were totally unprepared. I think the camera/lens combo would have done better with some prep and more time. This was walk up, whip the camera out and go!
Problem number one, no one checked that the LCD was not in in 16:9 so it cropped! haha Downhill from there.

Also looks like it was uploaded as 720P.. Original video was quite a bit sharper.

anyway...

Camera is the 7D. I believe the lens was the 24-70 2.8L. I have no idea what was going on as far as F stop, etc..
Hopefully it gives some representation of high level glass on below average (by current standards) APS-C sensor. It didn't do terrible in the low light.

[Ron McMillan]

I just bought a Zoom Q2n, which I have yet to test in a live setting. I hope to try it out later today. The harmonica is only here to provide a sense of scale, as it's hard to imagine how small the Q2n is until you see it in person. Another strength: it is very cheap for what you get (it also works as a stereo recorder without video). I've seen USA prices of about $159 on Amazon.




It's an amateur tool compared to the equipment discussed so far, but I think it might have potential to capture a decent, fixed wide angle shot with quality audio that I might later be able to combine with video from a close-up camera capturing individual players and soloists. We'll see. The videos below are (obviously) from Josh Turner, who endorses the camera.

A selection of other video clips made by Zoom (involving an unknown amount of post-production expertise) is available here.

[avaldes]

I was looking to see if I had anything done in poor lighting, with the older camera and a nice lens.

I wouldn't say that this is a great example of the quality this combo was cable of... This was a disaster. It was a live show at Circus Circus Casino. There was no plan to video it and we were totally unprepared. I think the camera/lens combo would have done better with some prep and more time. This was walk up, whip the camera out and go!
Problem number one, no one checked that the LCD was not in in 16:9 so it cropped! haha Downhill from there.

Also looks like it was uploaded as 720P.. Original video was quite a bit sharper.

anyway...

Camera is the 7D. I believe the lens was the 24-70 2.8L. I have no idea what was going on as far as F stop, etc..
Hopefully it gives some representation of high level glass on below average (by current standards) APS-C sensor. It didn't do terrible in the low light.

I like the look. Own it!

[Ron McMillan]

The first YouTube upload from my new Zoom Q2n. The original Windows Movie Maker file, at 200MB, is considerably sharper, but for YouTube use, the processed file isn't bad (in my view). Audio quality is remarkable for such a tiny machine. The camera has its limitations, but appears to be very useful nonetheless.

[Folkmusician.com]

Ron,

You know, I wouldn't have expected that to do as well as it is. I am not a huge fan of extreme wide angles, but it is amazing what an inexpensive all in one like this can do. It seems very well suited to this exact purpose.

[Ron McMillan]

Ron,

You know, I wouldn't have expected that to do as well as it is. I am not a huge fan of extreme wide angles, but it is amazing what an inexpensive all in one like this can do. It seems very well suited to this exact purpose.

Hi Robert,

I am pleasantly surprised, too. I used to be a professional stills photographer, dependent on the most expensive 35mm equipment on the market, so to get such decent quality video and audio footage from a little plastic thing that costs so little, weighs a few ounces and can store many hours of HD footage on a mini-SD card is a big surprise. I agree about the extreme wide angle, though in some of the tiny blues bars I go to, that feature will actually get a lot of use. The field of view can be narrowed in three steps, but only to a 'longest' focal length that seems to equate to about a 35mm lens on a full-frame SLR. At least at that setting the lines straighten out.... It is also worth knowing that, before the file gets compressed during the upload to YouTube, the original definition of the video is VERY sharp.

I think I'm going to have some fun with this

[mikeonthemandolin]

I shot the video below with a Canon 70d. Natural light coming in from my window. The key for me was to install the Technicolour Cinestyle colour profile in the camera and then use the LUT for colour correction.

This was recorded first in Protools, two tracks - one for lead one for the rhythm. Minimal processing, some eq and a tiny bit of compression. NT5 matched pair into a UAD Apollo.

Then I went over and recorded three different camera angles and synced them as a multicamera sequence in Premiere.

It took about 2 hours start to finish.