One thought I had was that it might be beneficial to use in-camera effects if it helped with framing a shot.
For example, if you wanted your video to end up in letter-box, you might just go ahead and shoot the video cropped in order to adjust the framing accordingly. Just one possible example.
However, id still probably crop in post production so I didn't limit myself.
Yeah, it really does depend on what you're talking about. A number of filter effects, such as using a polarizer for example, can't be done in post. In the same way some camera movements, crash zooms and focus shifts can't be effectively recreated in post.
Great question! I should of been more specific.
I am thinking about the menu-effects that many prosumer camera's now offer like black and white, letter box cropping, "stretch mode" (which I think is an anamorphic filter imitator), frame rate speeds, etc. There may be more, but these are some of the options I have come across.
I am not talking about focusing, zooming, controlling the iris/shutter speed, or adding external filters, but I understand how those might be also classified as "In-camera effects." Thanks for the clarification.
Is there a better category for the effects I am asking about?
You are very right as well.
What are some of the filter effects that cannot be recreated in post? Are these internal camera options? Or do they require external filters that need to be added? I guess I haven't seen an internal polarizer effect on a camera-menu yet or really any other good filter effects at that. But I am totally open to the possibility.
It would be helpful to have a list of the in-camera effects that cannot be reproduced in post. Do you have any other examples other than polarizing the footage?
Oh and I kinda answer some of your other comments above.
Thanks for the reply.
The cost of equipment means i do much (too much I expect) in post.
I do lots of pulling of colour curves, tints, grades, sat adjust, sharpening, cropping (not too much on sd) and even throw a few virtual lights about sometiems.
I am sure much of this would be better done with filters on the camera and real ligts but i dont work like that yet.
I recently got myself a basic 'pro' camera, a JVC DV5001e (SD not HDV) and was very pleased to find that the much better exposure range, lower noise and colour depth and all round better picture resoloution means that quite drastic changes in post dont ruin the picture.
I would say in my expirience that if you do edit stuff heavily in post a really good camera ia a great investment.
I have never ever used any in camera effects - except for that groovy super night shot mode for sniper scope or bill oddy moments.
Bill Oddy moments Mark???
He means those times when he has to shoot short, chubby, hairy critters... Like hamsters, Bill Oddies and guinea pigs. It's a filter which works a bit like an anamorpohic by making things seem thinner and taller. It's used a lot in films, Jeremy Irons is, in fact, only five foot tall and quite fat but with the "thin filter" he looks tall and thin. Julia Roberts, in real life, looks like a bowling-ball with legs.
Either that or the "nightshot" mode.
Ok, I've got it now. So it doesn't involve being chased by a giant cat, falling off the roof of a tall building or constantly falling into a large bowl of custard then?