Canon XA20 and XA25 Announced

Canon has finally announced the next generation in their XA line of prosumer camcorders. Instead of one, there are 2 new models being released this summer. The Canon XA20 and the Canon XA25 (which is the same as the XA20, only with 4:2:2 SDI output, for approx. $500 USD more). If you follow my blog, or my Vimeo account, you know I own the Canon XA10, which is the first in the XA line to have been released.

The XA10 is a fantastic videocamera, with a few shortcomings, which are:

It records in 4:2:0 color space using the AVCHD codec.

The AVCHD codec isn't AVCHD 2.0; which allows 60p recording. Instead, the XA10 uses AVCHD 1, which only goes up to 60i.

HDMI-out is compressed, which means even if you plug it into a recorder capable of recording 4:2:2 color space, like the Atomos Ninja 2, you're not getting a better picture, so stuff like chroma keying and issues with color blocking and the possibility of floating objects are still things that might crop up. That's just an inherent weakness of 4:2:0 color space.

So how does the new cameras stack up against the old XA10? First up, let's compare the features from these 3 different cameras here:
Compare the XA10, XA20 & XA25 here.

So now, I'm just gonna go down the list and compare them from top to bottom.

The larger CMOS chip on the XA20 and XA25 should be a good thing. It's a 1/2.84-inch chip instead of a 1/3-inch chip. A bigger chip should collect more light, leading to better low light performance and overall better picture clarity.

A higher number of megapixels on the XA20/25 is a bad thing. The image may not be as crisp of a picture, since the image could be squashed from native to fit 1920x1080. If it's a crop and not a resize, then the image should be as crisp on the XA20/25 as it is on the XA10. One thing to look out for is if the XA20/25 takes still photos, these could be a little better quality because of the higher number of pixels. Not much better, but a little bit.

The optical zoom getting bumped up to 20x is nice, and the focal length seems decent on the XA20/25. As long as Canon's new glass is good, and it usually is, this part falls in the upgrade category.

The extra frame rates and finally the ability to export at least 4:2:2 video on the XA25... The ability to record in MP4 at 60P in 35MBPS and AVCHD 2.0 at 60P in 28MBPS are welcome additions. Same with uncompressed SDI video out. That means it's not being processed for AVCHD first before it gets to the SDI out. (The XA10 only has compressed HDMI out, which means the output isn't true 4:2:2 color space, but 4:2:0 color space. If you're color correcting, or chroma keying, having 4:2:2 video is huge and worth plugging in a separate hard drive recorder that can take advantage of it.) I'm not sure if the XA20 or XA25 will have the ability to export 4:2:2 video through the HDMI output yet. I couldn't find anything one way or another, but the SDI-out is why the XA25 costs $500 more than the XA20. SDI-out means thie XA25 can finally live either in a proper studio or mobile environment, unlike the XA10 or XA20.

The XA20/25 is apparently a little better in low light. Not sure what the quality would be like, with the new CMOS sensor, so I'd have to wait and see some footage on this one whether it's a good or bad thing, or even noticeable. The XA10 was 1.5 lux minimum, the XA20/25 is 1.2 lux minimum.

The XA20/25 has a higher resolution viewfinder, which is always a good thing, but it's not 100% field of view like the XA10 is. It's "Approx. 100%". It's a TFT screen, so the picture should be better looking on it. The odd thing is I have no complaints about the viewfinder on the XA10. I've never had any trouble telling when focus was on or off, so I'm gonna file this one under a downgrade because having a 100% FoV is more important in my books. When I had a HV30, the approx. 100% FoV meant I always had things on the edge of my shots that I never wanted, whether it was people walking around the edge of my shots or junk. That means I had to resize those shots, resulting in loss of image quality. This isn't a big deal because the majority of us don't use the viewfinder, we use...

The LCD monitor on the XA20/25 has a capacitive touchscreen! This is like an iPhone, so, as long as the software that drives the camera is good, this is a HUGE upgrade, since this camera is menu driven. The XA10 has a resistive touchscreen, which is older, cheaper and less effective tech.

No internal storage on the XA20/25. It's probably a cost saving measure, since capacitive touchscreens are expensive and Canon jumped on the wifi gimmick. The new cameras aren't that much more expensive than the XA10 when you consider it, so something had to go to keep the price down. This is a major letdown for me, since I use the internal storage a lot on my XA10 to prolong the life of my SD cards. This is a downgrade.

The XA20/25 is larger all around than the XA10, but both the XA20 and XA25 weigh less than the XA10. The slightly larger size might be a plus to someone with larger hands than me, but the difference between all three models here are so small, that this one's a draw. Nothing really to talk here about.

Finally, the cost:
XA10 - approx. $1,999.99 USD
XA20 - approx. $2,499.00 USD
XA25 - approx. $2,999.00 USD

My final thoughts are this...

It's a mixed bag. Some things are better on the XA10 than the newer models. Internal memory, less megapixels in the CMOS chip, 100% viewfinder on the back and no wifi, which is just a gimmick that drains a battery quicker. Overall, both the XA20 and XA25 are a step in the right direction. They have better frame rates, the ability to record either in MP4 or AVCHD 2.0 at higher bitrates. The newer cameras record in 60P, should have better lenses, and the XA25 has the ability to at least output 4:2:2 video through SDI. The capacitive touchscreen on the LCD screen is huge too. The bigger CMOS chip would have been a great help, but it's nerfed by having more megapixels. Minimum illumination on the XA10 is 1.5 lux, and on the XA20/25 it's only 1.2 lux, which isn't much better. If the number of megapixels had of stayed the same as the XA10, they'd be bigger on the chip, and in turn, the camera would be that much more sensitive to light. I can't help but think that it could've gone down to 1.0 lux for minimum illumination if they'd have left the number of megapixels alone. Shutter speed still doesn't see a 1/4000 setting, the XA20/25 still only go to 1/2000.

Now for the XA25. For an extra $500 on top of the cost of the XA20, you get the ability to export true 4:2:2 color space video through the SDI out, and also connect the camera easily to a studio or mobile unit. That SDI connector lets you export the picture to a format capable of recording 4:2:2, so your footage is closer to how it was meant to be seen. If you're selling your footage to broadcast companies, a stock footage website, or are creating your own features, typically 4:2:2 is the minimum that's accepted. So that's a no brainer. The downside is that the internal recording codecs are still consumer codecs, so if you're recording to memory cards, you're still stuck with close to the quality of the XA10. But let's face it, the XA10's quality is superb and nothing to sneeze at. Not sure if SDI out will work with video that's been recorded to memory cards, but if it does, the output would be 4:2:0 color space and not 4:2:2, so buyers should be aware of that.

The new zoom rocker is also nice, but the XA10's zoom rocker isn't bad at all. I'm sure the larger zoom rocker on the newer models will make finessing zooms easier for people with bigger hands, though.

I've got to say that on paper anyway, it seems that if you had to choose between the XA10 and the XA20 and internal storage wasn't a concern, the XA20 would be the way to go. For an extra $500 you get true 60p at a slightly higher bitrate, a 20x optical zoom, and a capacitive touchscreen. Trading internal storage for wifi connectivity is a bad move if you ask me. Having that internal storage was one of the great things about the XA10, but a lot of videographers have lived without internal storage without too many problems, so this isn't too big of an issue, it's just a shame that part got downgraded. Now if you don't record in 60p because you're not looking for slow motion, and you're someone that likes to record in 24p, the answer changes in favor of the XA10. The XA10 does true 24p, like the XA20 and XA25 do, but comes with 64GB of internal storage. Chances are if you're recording in 24p, you're not recording sporting events, and the 10x optical zoom will be good enough for you. If you work in an environment where SDI connectivity is a priority, then the XA25 is a must for you, even if it costs about $1000 USD more than the XA10. That's a no-brainer, because it's still one of the cheapest cameras out on the market with a 4:2:2 SDI out connection.

All that said, where's it all leave the XA10? Well, without a firmware upgrade to at least give it AVCHD 2.0 support, it's a boat anchor, because it's priced too close to the newer models and the G30 ($1,700). I can't see it still selling well when the only things it's really has going for it is internal memory and a CMOS chip with less megapixels for what should be a crisper picture (unless the XA20/25 does a crop on those megapixels, and not a resize). With the Canon XA10 lacking 60p recording, having only a 10X optical zoom and a capacitive touchscreen, unless the price drops considerably on it to under $1499 USD, my feeling is it'll just become a shelf warmer for stores. The XA10 really needs a firmware update to give it AVCHD 2.0 support for recording 60p at 28Mbps to stay competitive. I hope Canon realizes this and has one in the works for when the XA20, the XA25 and the G30 launch. Otherwise having this camera on the market with the others just doesn't make any sense at its price point. The XA10 is a fantastic piece of kit, but with all of the newer Canon models coming out soon to take up space on the store shelves, the lack of AVCHD 2.0 really makes it feel like a last generation camera.

For bigger pictures of the new models, you can check out this link as well.

The Winter 2012/2013 Trilogy

Usually when winter rolls around, I scale back the number of hobby videos I make. Not only because of the harsher weather that limits the amount of time you can comfortably stay out for, but also because there isn't a huge variety in what you can see when you're outside. I mean, let's be honest. It's white, most of the landscape's hidden, and the trees are bare.

This winter, I wanted to shoot 3 videos around the area I live in to highlight the colder months. The plan was to shoot three videos that could be watched back-to-back and have a flow to them, or could be watched individually as standalone pieces.

The first video I shot was Snowfallen. This video was shot during the first major snowfall of the season at the Mac Johnson Wildlife Area conservation area. I went out to try to capture that fresh snowfall look to the landscape while the snowflakes were still falling.

Snowfallen from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

The second one I shot was Winterscape, which was a highlight of the Lyn Valley Conservation Area.

Winterscape from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

The last one of the trilogy was Solitude, which was shot within the city limits of Brockville, Ontario in two city parks, along the St. Lawrence River.

Solitude from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

Each of these videos had their own challenges. The first, Snowfallen, was more from a technical perspective. Shooting at 30 frames a second is a limitation of the XA10, and you don't get to see the snowflakes fall very easily at 30fps. Slowing down the footage to 60fps solved that problem. So each clip that made up Snowfallen was changed from 60i to 60p and then color corrected to give a more pastel look to the color palette.

Winterscape was more of a physical challenge. We had a lot of warming and freezing right before I shot that video, leaving the ground ice-covered under a fresh layer of snow. Not only did it make staying upright tough, but it also almost led to a really nasty accident at the top of a cliff where I didn't realize it wasn't safe to try to get down to a ledge. So yeah, ice is really slippery. Lesson learned.

Solitude, I knew was going to have the biggest hurdles for me, since it was going to be shot all inside an urban area. I try not to shoot in city limits because the straight lines of civilization just aren't as interesting to me as the natural lines found in nature. I knew getting all of the signs of man out of my shots would be impossible, so I looked for ways to minimize them, or to make them flow into the shots. Color correction also was the most challenging on this video because of the changing daylight late in the day and the difference between footage shot in shaded areas (more blue) and in the sun (more orange). Both Winterscape and Snowfallen were filmed on overcast days, which made for nice, subdued shadows and uniform lighting. Color correction in the summer is always easier on sunny days thanks to all of the bright colors everywhere, but in the winter, there's so much white that changes in light temperature are easily noticed.

The point of all of these 3 videos was simple. Even in a small area, like where I shot these 3 videos, there's always a wide variety of things to be seen. You don't have to go far to get great pictures, you just have to keep your eyes open.

The Fall 2012 Project

Last year, I skipped over filming the fall colors, so this year I thought I'd focus on the different parts of fall as my next project. We had some beautiful colors out this fall, but the weather didn't always cooperate with me for filming. We had a warm & dry summer, and a cool & wet autumn. But the weather played nice often enough for me to get out and film the videos I'd hoped to film.

On the first day of fall, I ended up at Perrins Corners with Rhonda. The fall colors weren't out yet, but we were looking for a nice spot to film and came across a dried up creek bed. We walked along the creek bed, and I met up with the owner of the land who gave me permission to film anywhere I wanted.

This is the video that came out of that trip.

Emptied Creek from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

Within a week of shooting Emptied Creek, the reds, oranges and yellows of fall started showing up. I went out to the back country of Eastern Ontario to look for a few spots I've never been to before to catch the start of the fall change.

I found a few great spots while driving the countryside, including a great swimming hole I can't wait to try next summer at the opposite side of Charleston Lake from where I went camping and filming earlier in the year. That footage was what I used to make Autumn Beginnings.

Autumn Beginnings from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

Over the next few weeks, I collected a bunch of different shots from different places in Ontario as the colors reached their peak. The colors were really vibrant when the sun was out, but I never really had much time out in the field to film everything I wanted to capture before the sun would go hide behind more clouds. Still, I managed to get a few nice shots and I put together The Colors Of Autumn

The Colors Of Autumn from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

Things got busy for me, and I didn't have a chance to get out again until Remembrance Day. The weather was pretty cool by then, but we had a really nice day, so Rhonda and I went out looking for another place we hadn't been to before. We came across a trail maintained by the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority and while Rhonda went out shooting stills, I struggled to get started. Eventually, I came up with the idea shooting a video similar to my video Industrial, which is one of my favourites. We spent hours there on the trail, just looking at the scenery, enjoying the awesome weather and shooting. On The Trail is what I came up with.

On The Trail from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

The last video I did in the fall was one called The Back Lot. The fall colors were long gone, since winter was just on the doorstep, but there's that harsh reality that exists for a month or two before the snow settles in where almost all of the plant life is dead and the trees are bare, and that makes for some imagery that can be bold. This video was filmed literally a few meters from my home, in a back lot that's slowly being eaten away by a new subdivision that's being built.

The Back Lot from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

This collection of videos manages to document the entire season of fall, from beginning to end. Each of these videos was color graded differently to give them a different feel from each other. From the saturated greens of the first video, to the bright, larger than life colors of the leaves in their full glory, to the pastel hues of the last video. Some of the color grading took me hours and hours to do as I worked on different parts of each shot, looking to get it just right, and others were pretty quick, since I just looked to accent what was already there. It was a fun project to do, and I'm glad I decided to try to do it.

My Thoughts On The GoPro HD HERO2 ProTune Firmware Update

***UPDATED Feb 9th, 2013*** If you're a GoPro user, chances are you've heard about the ProTune firmware update, and if you haven't, what rock have you been hiding under? This upgrade was one of the most anticipated updates to the GoPro HD HERO2 in the last 6 months.

GoPro's are used by both enthusiasts and professionals alike. For professionals the new ProTune profile has a few changes that on paper sound just about perfect, but how do these changes make the camera hold up in the real world? I took out my HERO2 to do some testing to find out and these are my thoughts after experimenting with the ProTune profile. All video was shot at 720p, 60fps.

So what is ProTune? Well, ProTune promises a higher bitrate of 35 Mbps, compared to 20 Mbps from before. (To put that in perspective, BluRay is 36 Mbps. My Canon XA10 uses the AVCHD codec, and only gets 24 Mbps). The HD HERO2 will now also shoot in native 24P and 25P, thanks to ProTune and it has a new flatter "CineStyle" color profile. So what all is that stuff, and does it matter? Let's break them down one by one.

35 Mbps sounds impressive, but you have to remember that bitrate doesn't always mean everything. Compression algorithms is the other half there. How does it hold up after H.264 compression in an MP4 container?

See for yourself.
(Flickr recompresses photos, so the quality of this screen grab isn't as good as the original, but you get the point... There's a noticable difference.)

I was impressed by the low amount of compression artifacts that the new ProTune profile gives. Right away, I could see more detail in the leaves as I was running, less blocking on my face (noticably around the eyes and chin), and even in my clothing. There's a lot less jaggies. It's not perfect, but it's pretty darn good!

24P - 24 frames a second native filming. To be honest, this is useless to me. Some people feel this gives their filming a cinematic look. Me, I find it just looks jerkier and more like PAL television. I never film in 24P and won't start with this. But for those who like 24P or 25P, just knowing that the camera has this ability and can match up with your other cameras that are shooting at that speed is probably a great thing. It'll save you time and headaches converting footage in post since the new firmware update brings 24P native filming to the GoPro.

The CineStyle color profile... Is it all it's cracked up to be? Watch these 2 videos I shot with my GoPro to compare ProTune on and off as well as color correction before I talk about my feelings on it.

GoPro HD HERO2 ProTune vs. No ProTune Comparison from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

GoPro Hero2 ProTune Color Correction Comparison from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

The first thing I couldn't help but notice was how much softer the picture was when ProTune was turned on. I wasn't expecting that and was really surprised by it. The loss of picture detail is really noticeable when compared to the original color profile. Now, I only tested it at 720p, so it's possible that 1080p might be a bit clearer. I don't think it will be, but it's possible. If someone else tries it, let me know in the comments down below!

The next thing I noticed was the picture really was a lot flatter (the darks aren't as dark, the bright's aren't as bright). This should allow for more flexibility when doing color correction. When I color corrected the first video, I just copied and pasted my look from the original profile video to the ProTune profile video to compare what exactly happens if you do that. (Not pretty.) In the second video, I specifically color corrected to get the best look I could out of the ProTune profile. (You can get pretty good results with a little elbow grease.)

So that leaves me with the negatives and positives. Here are a few negatives I didn't get to above...

First, with ProTune enabled, you lose the ability to shoot super slow motion. That resolution isn't available on the camera anymore. 720p is the lowest you can go.

Second, a class 4 card won't cut it anymore if you're using ProTune. It's not fast enough. You'll need at least a class 6 card. I had a class 4 card in my GoPro, but I only filmed for about 10 seconds at a time, and even then it buffered for about 5 seconds after I stopped recording and gave me some warnings. I ended up taking a class 10 card out of my Canon XA10 to do the second ProTune test with. Take it from me, and do youself a favor and invest in a class 10 SD card so you can use all of the features of the camera and make sure it can keep up with ProTune.

A few postives are:
ProTune can be turned on and off in the camera's settings. So don't worry. If you don't like it, you don't have to keep it. You can use it when you need the extra bitrate, and lose it when you want the super slow motion.

My HD HERO2 didn't crash once after the latest firmware upgrade with the LCD viewfinder attached. Before, it was crashing ever time I used it, and I had the latest firmware before.

So my final thoughts are mixed. I love the extra bitrate, but would have loved to have seen this as a separate addition to the camera, so that you could use the extra bitrate without the CineSytle color profile. Unfortunately, it's a package deal. The camera is definitely much better all around thanks to the ProTune update, but the blurrier picture is something that worries me, and I bet will worry a lot of other people out there too.

Over all, I give this update a 6.5 out of 10.

My Experience Entering A Vimeo Contest

So I finally did it. I entered one of those Weekend Project contests that Vimeo does every now and then. This one was called "Wetter Is Better", and the rules were simple. The video had to be 60 seconds or under and the theme was water. This was my entry:

River Dawn from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

Before I came up with that idea and video, I spent a good few days thinking about what I could do. My ideas went from a short film (I even went as far as writing out the shooting script, and I'll probably film it either this year or next), to more underwater videography (ideas went from a 60 second compressed timelapse of the sun rising as seen from underwater to a fun, crazy water adventure like jumping off cliffs, water skiing, swimming, dock jumping and freediving) and a few other things.

I liked the idea of filming a sunrise over the St. Lawrence. While thinking of different ideas, I came back to that a few times and so that was what I went with. I ended up pulling an all-nighter before I went out to shoot the sunrise on Aug 18th just to make sure that Rhonda and I would be up in time (she went out to shoot some still photography of the sunrise).

I got a lot out of entering the contest; probably more than I thought I would. It was a challenge to try to get a bunch of varied shots when you're in a real crunch for time and there's a bunch of signs everywhere restricting where you can and can't go. The reason for that's because when you're filming a sunrise or a sunset, it's not about the sky in your shot. You're gonna get that no matter what, unless you're pointing your camera at the ground. It's about what else is in your shot. So being blocked to go to a bunch of places threw me off, because I was expecting to be able to get out on the docks and shoot a few different shots, and I couldn't. So I was forced to stay on the outskirts. I was planning to go out on the breakwater, but with the poor light, how hard the rocks were to navigate and the short amount of time I had, I called off that idea. The next challenge I had was editing. I wanted to keep the edit simple to compliment the simplicity of the images. I also wanted to make the colors pop more, but not really change them too much, since it was all about the colors of the sunrise. I was frustrated by one thing. I never got "the closing shot". I always shoot one shot that I pick to end out my videos on, but I ran out of time. So during the edit, I picked 3 different scenes that I filmed, and picked the best out of them, but it's not the shot I would have liked to have ended on. 60 seconds was really limiting, too!

Once I had the shooting and editing done, I posted it up on Vimeo. Since I had no DSLR looking shots and no fancy Magic Bullet color grading, I knew from the get-go that I'd lose the contest, but it wasn't about winning or losing. It was about being faithful to the scene that presented itself to me that morning. I was curious about how other Vimeo users would react to the video, whether people thought I went in the right direction or the wrong direction. Right from the get-go, the video was #1 in the "likes" category and hung up at the #2 and #3 spots for views and comments respectively right up until the contest winner was announced. Even now, almost a week later and 5 days after the contest closed and the winner was announced, the video is still #1 for likes, #3 for plays and #3 for comments. So though I didn't place or win the contest, I feel like I won in the eyes of my peers and that kind of floors me. The video might not have won the heart of the guy running the contest, but I'm glad that it was able to speak to others out there.

I'm not sure whether I'll enter another of these Vimeo contests or not. I guess it all depends on what the weekend project is about and whether it speaks to me like this one did. What I do want to say is thanks to everyone who liked the video (on Vimeo, Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and in person), commented on it and supported me in the contest! It's because of you that this was an awesome experience for me and it made staying up all night to catch the sunrise and all the time I put in for editing totally worth it!

Return To The Abandoned Motel

Ever wondered what happened to that old motel on the seldom used highway you came across one drizzly night 20 years ago when you were taking that road trip across the country? Now abandoned, this is a glimpse of the Midway Country Motel.

On May 1st, 2010, I paid my first visit to the motel. I was just starting to film some of the abandoned places I'd checked out, now that I had a decent HD videocamera. The motel was a pretty cool place to check out. It was larger than most houses I'd been inside and there was a lot to see there. The sheets were still on a lot of beds, some belongings were lying around and though there was vandalism, it wasn't the worst I'd seen in an abandoned place.

Some of the highlights for me were the pool, the sink with the bottom smashed out and the upstairs living quarters which people had left more alone than the motel rooms downstairs. I spent a good amount of time there when I was filming, and was more or less happy with the video I came up with, which you can see here:

Abandoned Motel (HD) from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

More or less means I was pretty happy with the feel of it, but some things that were out of my control bugged me. The tripod I was using at the time was an el cheapo tripod that didn't have a fluid pan and tilt. So any shots I was panning or tiling on I had to start my move early and hope that the tripod would let me do a smooth move. Usually the result of this was about 10 to 20 tries and the movement was always faster than I wanted because if I went any slower the tripod head would grab and the move was ruined. You can notice that in this video for the speed of the moves and you can catch it in a lot of my early videos. If you go through them all on my Vimeo account, you'll be able to tell the exact video I got my better tripod. It's pretty obvious, and it was limiting.

The other things were that I taped as I discovered the motel for the first time. So I had no idea what there was to see there. When you know what there is to see, you know what you want to capture. I was also happy with the edit, but I've changed a few things in my editing flow to give my videos a certain look and when I watch this old video, it just seemed "old" to me. There's no other way to put it.

With it being the most viewed out of my abandoned places series (between YouTube and Vimeo), I was planning a return to the motel to give it a 2nd look. Being busy with one thing or another meant that I never returned to the motel for over 2 years, but on July 31st, 2012 I finally had a chance to head back for another go. I had no idea if it was still standing or what condition it'd be in if it was, but I set out to find out.

My aim the 2nd time around was simple. I wanted to capture a few shots that were similar to what I filmed 2 years ago to show what was the same and what had changed, but I didn't want to re-do everything I did back then. I wanted a new video that took it in a different direction and showed different things. I loved the sink shot I got in the first video and I knew I'd recreate it as close as possible to how I originally filmed it. Other than that, the stuff I wanted to compare my plan was to use different, but similar angles. (You can see this on the front shot of the building, the pool shots, and the blue room.) The kitchen is the kitchen. There's just no great way to film it because of the dimensions of everything up there, so I went with how I did it in the first video. That one turned out kind of neat because you can really see how the last 2 years have taken their toll on that one part.

My first big shock was how much more trashed the rooms were compared to the last time I was there. Bed sheets were stolen, metal fittings were stolen, more stuff was smashed, peeled or just heaped up in broken piles in rooms. I wanted to capture the desolation of the motel, but filming the mounds of trashed things just really didn't seem to fit. Instead I went for things that kind of stood out by themselves, like the old wooden toolbox sitting outside of an open door, the opened cabinet that held a record player, or the porcelain soap holders and towel rack on the wall. The praying mantis on the bathroom door upstairs was really something to see. To me, that symbolizes nature taking over.

The wind was blowing a bit during while I was there, slamming doors and spooking me from time to time, but what really got me were the old drapes in the big picture window upstairs blowing in the wind. I knew I had to get that captured the moment I saw it.

The shot in the first video with the wagon wheel on the roof of the outbuilding was one I always liked the idea of. I wanted to try to recreate in some way, but the wagon wheel had been broken some time in the last 2 years. It made for a neat close-up of the wagon wheel hub lying on the worn out shingles of the roof. The stairs to the upstairs are now broken apart, and I got that in the new video. It was interesting finding a way to get myself and my gear safely up and down.

It was a weird experience being back and seeing the difference 2 years made. In my mind it was the same as it was back then until I set foot back there again. I can't see myself going back again. The motel's only going to go more downhill from here as more looters and vandals hit it, or when it finally gets torn down. I've done my job telling its story. I'd like to remember it as I saw it on the two times I visited.

So without anymore preamble, check out Return To The Midway Country Motel!

Return To The Midway Country Motel from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

Filming Underwater

One of the things that's always really interested me has been underwater filmng. I've always loved watching shows and films shot underwater, seeing a whole different world. From coral reefs, to jellyfish and shipwrecks, it all looks so different from our day to day that I've always found it fascinating. I've never really had a chance to do this, since I don't scuba dive & the cost of filming underwater isn't cheap. Taking lessons and then buying gear to film has always cost a small fortune until now.

I started toying with the idea of shooting a little bit underwater last year with these two videos.

First Day (HD) from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

Sharbot Lake Camping 2011 (HD) from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

The underwater shots in those videos were shot on an iPhone 4 using a $14 Dry Pak that I bought at Canadian Tire. If you've never seen one before, these things are fantastic little cases to keep your smartphones dry when you go out. Most of them are waterproof up to about 30 feet or so, which makes them easy to use for taking some pictures or video when you're splashing around near the surface of the water, but there's one problem with using something like this as a solution for filming underwater.

Re-watch one of the videos that I posted above here and look at the quality of the underwater video. Even though it was shot at 720p, it looks soft and out of focus, even on the close-up shots. The reason for this is that lenses are curved. Though that works in the air, it doesn't work underwater. To film clearly underwater, you need to have a flat lens. This allows the light to be reflected properly into the CCD or CMOS sensor, resulting in a clear picture. Here's a real world example. Most of us have a set of diving goggles or a mask, but have you ever paid any attention to the shape of the lens? It should be flat, to allow you to see clearly underwater. Want to see how things would look underwater without that flat lens? Get a round clear glass bowl or something else with a curved surface and look though that underwater. Unless what you're looking at is really close to the glass (less than a foot) chances are it'll look soft and out of focus, or you just won't be able to see that far.

So, filming with a Dry Pak, or something similar for a cheap price just doesn't make too much sense, unless you're looking to just shoot a little bit of video for family vacation or for some fun and don't care too much about having crystal clear results. they also don't typically go too deep in the water. I looked into dive housings for my cameras. One for my XA10 costs about $3000, which is more than the camera cost. When I had the HV30, one for it cost about $2000, which was double the price of the camera. When you're looking to just accent a few videos with a few underwater shots, or just to film a few things now and then, unless you've got money to burn, it really doesn't make sense to buy something so expensive just to have it sit most of the time. Renting out gear is always an option and less expensive, but it all depends on whether any place close to you has it in store, and with rented gear, you really never know how it's been taken care of, which always worries me.

The last option has always been a GoPro camera. The casing is rated for 60m (197ft) of diving, which is a lot better than most of the other cheaper solutions out there. The only downside with getting one of these historically, has been that the lens is curved on the casing. So video after video posted online you got nothing but blurry pictures. GoPro addressed that earlier this year by releasing their Dive Housing. It goes just as deep as the regular case, but it has one key difference. A flat lens. The price on these isn't bad at all either. Henry's sells it for $55 Cdn.

One other consideration is that it seems to get proper perspective underwater, you need a bit of a wide angle lens, so the GoPro seemed perfect here too. When I was filming with my iPhone underwater, everything seemed much closer to the lens in the videos I took than what I was expecting every time. So I thought I had a few things in frame and they were either cut off or not in the shot because though the lens was wide enough in the air, underwater, it reacts differently.

I picked up a GoPro HD HERO2 Outdoor Edition and a GoPro Dive Housing From Henry's. I then finished up by picking up a GoPro Tripod Mount from FutureShop. I rigged the camera to my right hand and went swimming a few times in the St. Lawrence River just to get used to the feel of it and to see what the quality of the video was like. I was pretty impressed by the quality of the video that came back and that the camera was seeing a little bit farther than I could with my dive mask. (Visability isn't that great in the St. Lawrence in the summer with all of the algea. You can get up to 20 feet in the clearer sections, and less than 5 in others. It all depends on how warm the water is.) The perspective on the widest setting the camera allows seems just perfect underwater too.

Now that I had the gear and felt comfortable using it, my next step was to go to some shipwrecks that I could freedive on. I picked the Conestoga shipwreck & the Wee Hawk. I spent 2 days freediving on these wrecks and then I brought the video home to look at and edit. The quality of the video was pretty good again, with the camera picking us stuff sharply and farther than I could see with my dive mask when I was there. The steadiness of my shots, though, was far from great. I knew the GoPro had a smaller lens, which means any camera movements are exaggerated. (The bigger the lens, the less you see smaller movements. Ever wonder why your camera on your smartphone gives you blurry pictures when you think you're holding it still or why your smartphone videos always shake badly? That's why.) One thing I didn't count on was the current. Where I was swimming before, there really wasn't any current, but on the shipwrecks, I was spending a lot of energy fighting the current, which meant I was always moving, and that didn't help out my camerawork. The other thing I didn't count on was getting cold near the end of my dives and shivering.

Even with all of that, I managed to get enough clips that I cut together a short video for my Vimeo account on the Conestoga. I didn't want to include the Wee Hawk with this video.

Freediving The Conestoga from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

I liked the idea I had for the video, but my camerawork really bugged me. The two words that kept going through my head (and still do) when it comes to this video are "amateur hour". I didn't scrap it for one reason; I've never been to a shipwreck before. That video captures my first experience on a shipwreck. Regardless of the quality of the camerawork, that's pretty awesome for me. So I started thinking. How do other people do it? Looking back, I guess I could have Googled something like "how to film smoothly underwater", but I didn't think about it. I started thinking back to shows I've seen where the video looked smooth and came up with two ideas to try out.

1) Go two handed. I had two ideas on this. The first was to use my GorillaPod with the GoPro tripod mount and go two handed. Stretch two legs out to the side and then curve the ends inwards as hand grips and curl the other one inside so it doesn't cause any drag. This would mimic the larger dive housings you see on TV shows that have 2 hand grips. The second one was to take one of my full size tripods out with me and spread out the legs and extend the camera far from me to make all of my movements smooth.

2) Troll the camera similar to how the Argo was used to find the Titanic. I came up with 2 ideas for this idea too. The first was to mount it to a tripod and collapse the tripod, with the camera upside down, but level to the horizon. The tripod would be attached to a rope, which I could play out or reel in as I needed to. The other idea was similar, but with the camera on the GorillaPod, which was weighted down with a large rock to keep it level.

So I had 2 ideas and 4 tests to try out and I returned to the Conestoga to give them a shot, since I was more familiar with this wreck than I was the Wee Hawk. I did the first tests with the tripod as I freedove on the shipwreck. I started by diving underwater and holding the tripod two handed and slowly moving it towards things I wanted it pointed at. Then I tried for some more stationary shots by swimming against the current to hold my position steady and holding the camera steady like this. The last thing I tried was trolling the tripod. So I collapsed it above the shipwreck and then swam the length of the ship back and forth a few times while trolling the camera. I figured out how to adjust the angle I was swimming at with or against the current to make the camera face different directions, and I was careful not to snag it on any debris inside of the ship by raising it and lowering it as needed. This was actually a lot more complicated than I thought, but I didn't snag the camera. After 30 minutes, I started shivering, so I headed back to shore to warm back up, get the GorillaPod ready and start the next test.

I started with trolling the GorillaPod, since it was easier to weigh it down first with a rock first, than it would have been to have to swim back to shore to get a rock, weigh down and then swim back out, after 15 minutes of being in the water. Trolling the GorillaPod was pretty easy. The rock was pretty heavy and the current didn't mess with it too much. Just like with the other trolling test, I was spending a lot of time keeping the camera and the shipwreck safe from any bumps, but I did it. I swam out past the Conestoga, dropped off the large rock away from the ship then adjusted the GorillaPod so I could go two-handed with it and then did a little filming around the stern of the ship.

This is what came out of my tests.

Freediving The Conestoga v.2 from Steve Savage on Vimeo.

I'm pretty happy with how it turned out and I used some of each of the different methods in the video. All 4 ways were a huge improvement over shooting with the camera strapped to the top of my hand and trying to be as steady as I could be. Instead of having the problem where I was struggling to find semi-decent shots to make a video, even though I had a ton of footage, I ended up having less than 1/4 of the footage I shot on the first two days and the problem was what to leave out since there was so much good stuff.

What I learned was going two handed gives you great control over what you're shooting and you pretty much know what you'll get. The farther away the camera is from your body, the smoother your movements will be with this method. So the tripod worked really well. Yeah, you'll look like a doofus bringing a tripod in the water and swimming with it, but the shots you'll get are pretty good. The more cinematic shots like the shot at 1:27 or the shot at 1:41 in my video were done by trolling my camera. What it comes down to is you need some separation between those small body movements you always make and your camera, when you're working with a smaller lens like the GoPro HD HERO2. The tests I did worked well when it came to doing that and that's how I was able to get such a difference so quickly in my two videos.

Oh, and I should make this clear. I used no stabilization in editing on my shots. Except for my usual crop at the top and bottom and some slight color correction, this is what came out of the camera.