Log in

View Full Version : A Cautionary Tale to All Videographers


Jason Dunn
12-14-2005, 05:00 PM
<i>Here's a little story, and an important life lesson, for anyone that uses a video camera to capture memories. Please learn from my mistake so you don't have to go through what I did.</i><br /><br />When I'm doing a job or favour for someone, I tend to take it pretty seriously. So when two friends of mine were getting married, and they asked me to videotape it with my Canon GL2, I went about the business of getting it ready and making sure it was working properly. I dropped $600 on a fluid head video tripod and busted out some brand new miniDV tapes. The night before the wedding at the rehearsal I tested my setup with an old miniDV tape to make sure everything was solid. It was. The next day I got set up for the wedding, opened up a brand new Maxell miniDV tape, and started shooting the event. I put the camera in LP mode to get 90 minutes in case the ceremony ran over 60 minutes. After the ceremony (which was about 45 minutes) I continued by shooting the reception line, some shots outside the church, then some video of the wedding photos at a local park. I switched tapes for the reception and captured another 45 minutes or so.<br /><br />The next weekend I sat down to edit it - I was eager because I had some ideas I wanted to try with the video<!>. It had been a while since I had a "serious" video project, so I was eager to use some of the new techniques and tools I now had at my disposal. Philip send me over the <a href="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/articles.php?action=expand,6744">Digital Juice Wedding Editors Toolkit</a>, and once I finally grasped how it worked I was very excited about using it.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/defective-tape-screenshot.jpg" /><br /><i>Figure 1: A screenshot from the video</i><br /><br />Once the video was transferred from my camera, I opened it up and started watching to see how it turned out - and my heart fell out of my chest and rolled around on the floor twitching once I saw what was on the tape. <a href="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/defective-clip.wmv">Here's what over 75% of the video</a> from the first tape looks like. You don't have to look all that closely at the screenshot above to see the problem - blocks of the picture are missing, or moved to the left or right. It comes and goes every few seconds, but there are large portions of the video where the distortion happens in constant waves, making it almost unwatchable. I had a full 90 minutes of video like this. The latter 45 minutes was stuff I'd edit the hell out of anyway, but the ceremony in the first 45 minutes would be almost unedited.<br /><br />My brain was churning. What was the problem? Media or source? Is my $3000 camera defective at playback, or was the tape bad? The Firewire cable? The Firewire port? Either way I'd be upset, but cameras can be replaced - wedding video footage cannot. I looked at the footage captured from the second tape, and it seemed to be fine. That didn't bode well. Sure enough, when I borrowed another miniDV camera and did a test capture from the first tape, the results were the same. I tried changing settings, the Firewire cable I was using, even the computer itself in case the Firewire port on the laptop was bad. Everything led me back to the same result: the brand new tape I used to capture the video on was defective.<br /><br />I was stunned - it never occurred to me that a miniDV tape would be defective in that way. Media can be bad - I've had blank CDs and DVDs that would refuse to burn, but a miniDV tape? The answer, and the lesson I learned, is obvious: miniDV tapes can be defective, just like any other blank media, and if you want to be sure what you're capturing is coming out properly, you need to test the media. Hard to do with CDs and DVDs, but easy enough to to with miniDV tapes. The next time I shoot an event, you can be sure I'm going to take some test shots with the tape, rewind it, and watch for problems.<br /><br />The couple in question was very gracious about the problem because they knew it wasn't my fault, but I still feel like I failed them - all this marvellous technology, and the whole thing was undone by a $2 miniDV tape. Test your tapes before using them, and avoid seeing yourself in the same situation.<br /><br /><b>UPDATE:</b> Over the months since I'd written this, with the help of some community members, I was able to rescue the footage and end up with exactly what I wanted. The solution was a combination of packing the tape and trying a new head cleaner. Read the discussion thread to learn more if you happen to find yourself in the same situation. Needless to say, I'm thrilled!<br /><br /><i>Jason Dunn owns and operates <a href="http://www.thoughtsmedia.com">Thoughts Media Inc.</a>, a company dedicated to creating the best in online communities. He enjoys mobile devices, digital media content creation/editing, and pretty much all technology. He lives in Alberta, Canada.</i>

jeffd
12-14-2005, 05:58 PM
Wow... even I'm a bit shocked. As far as compact disc go, I've never had a full bad disc, sure a ripple pops up making a small part of the disc defective, but were I direct burning to a disc with mpeg2, I could still play back all the good data. On DV tape it would be even more shocking, the density is way lower then compact disc, a small amount of bad tape would only effect a couple seconds.. to a couple of minutes if it was really bad. But an entire roll? The entire reel (batch) must have been bad. Thats just bad QA. The least I would do is complain and see if you can get a whole pack of DV cassetts. ^^

It really sucks you lost most of such a huge event. I allways keep checking my still camera images when im at an "event" to make sure no setting is wrong (I lost most of my graduation shots cause I mistakenly assumed the mode the camera was in resets flash to auto when I turn the camera on, and figured the flash didn't fire because there was enough light. It didn't and there wasn't, so I cam home to most of my pictures having blury edges.)

I don't have a DV camera, and with the quality of movies from todays cameras like the big-mutha-cannon (the 13x'er s2 ^^), you can get your high resolution stills and still squeeze in a few minutes of DV quality video on a memory card for those times it is really needed so I don't really plan to get one.

Now since DV tapes are digital and have error correction to some extent built in to the codec, does a used tape impact quality anything like old hi 8's did? I probably wouldn't bother with a new tape then untill one I was using develops a problem.

David Horn
12-14-2005, 06:19 PM
Maybe it's a cheap tape? Over here in the UK, you're looking at 8-10US$ each for a 60 minute tape.

Jason Dunn
12-14-2005, 06:33 PM
I allways keep checking my still camera images when im at an "event" to make sure no setting is wrong..Now since DV tapes are digital and have error correction to some extent built in to the codec, does a used tape impact quality anything like old hi 8's did? I probably wouldn't bother with a new tape then untill one I was using develops a problem.

Yeah, I do the same thing when photographing events, but when you're taping an event on camera, you can't stop, rewind, preview, queue up to recording point, and start recording again...all without missing the event that you're supposed to be recording.

Regarding using tapes over again, that's the sad part - I wasn't really gaining anything by using a new tape. You can use a miniDV tape at least 6+ times before there's any drop in quality, and realistically it's probably more like 10 times before it matters. But in my mind "important event = fresh tape". Now I know better, after the fact. :?

Jason Dunn
12-14-2005, 06:34 PM
Maybe it's a cheap tape? Over here in the UK, you're looking at 8-10US$ each for a 60 minute tape.

No, Maxell tapes are generally quite good - I used the figure of $2 as the bulk cost, I probably paid about $8 for it because I bought it in a six pack for abotu $50. Granted, you won't find me using a Maxell tape ever again. :wink:

RWC_Zippy
12-14-2005, 08:10 PM
Yikes! I never would of thought.... the tape?

Well, are there any nifty "smoothing" filters or effects that could be applied to the footage? It is digital after all... Or how about compressing the video dimensions? (ex 800x600 to something smaller like 640x480) I dunno - I'm as bewildered as you are!

Jason Dunn
12-14-2005, 08:50 PM
Well, are there any nifty "smoothing" filters or effects that could be applied to the footage? It is digital after all... Or how about compressing the video dimensions?

No filter can help me here I'm afraid. There are missing 0's and 1's in the footage, and I'm not aware of any filter than can add them back in. Changing the dimensions won't help either - the source data will remain the same, it would just get smaller.

jeffd
12-14-2005, 08:58 PM
Nah not filterable. Infact you may not even beable to run this through an editor (well, past any type of preview mode), they tend to react baddly when they encounter bad data.

Jason Dunn
12-14-2005, 09:09 PM
Infact you may not even beable to run this through an editor (well, past any type of preview mode), they tend to react baddly when they encounter bad data.

Luckily I can preview and edit the video without any problems - if I couldn't I'd be even MORE angry than I am already. :evil:

Lee Yuan Sheng
12-14-2005, 09:25 PM
Just a thought: Would the situation be avoided if SP instead of LP mode was used?

Tim Williamson
12-14-2005, 09:53 PM
Wow, that sucks. I wonder if it's a good idea just to setup a cheap analog video camera as a backup to the main camera? Do the pros ever do this?

Doug Johnson
12-14-2005, 10:00 PM
A few thoughts:

(1) NEVER use LP mode for anything important. In order to get the longer recording time, it moves the tape more slowly, but records at the same data rate, meaning that more data is packed into a smaller space.

(2) Make sure you clean your heads every 10 hours of recording/playback time. The commercially available tape head cleaners are just ok; I recommend the more highly concentrated rubbing alcohol (93%) and a lint-free cloth in addition. Even with all of this, have your heads professionally cleaned reguarly.

(3) Once you select a tape manufacturer, stay with them. Switching tape formulations in your camera can cause material build-up on the heads which will ruin recordings and cause problems during playback.

(4) Especially if you are using LP mode, make sure you play back on the exact same camera that you recorded on (not just the same make and model). LP mode is REALLY picky about this.

(5) Don't reuse tapes. Ever.

By cleaning the heads you may be able to retrieve the recording you have already made. I have seen the blocking you are seeing many times, and in most cases I have been able to retrieve a usable copy after cleaning the heads thoroughly.

For ultra-critical recording situations, use only Master quality tapes. Or capture to a laptop simultaneously. Or invest in one of the Firestore type of hard drive recorders that connects directly to the camera. Tapes just aren't that trustworthy.

Jason Dunn
12-14-2005, 11:03 PM
By cleaning the heads you may be able to retrieve the recording you have already made. I have seen the blocking you are seeing many times, and in most cases I have been able to retrieve a usable copy after cleaning the heads thoroughly.

Hmm. Well, I definitely trust your judgment because you know much more about this topic than me. When I tried it in another miniDV camera I got the same types of errors though - so unless both cameras had heads in need of cleaning, wouldn't that indicate that the tape itself was defective? I'd love to be proven wrong and have the footage rescued.

I wonder, how do I go about finding someplace in Calgary here that would professionally clean the video heads on my GL2?

Jason Dunn
12-14-2005, 11:07 PM
Wow, that sucks. I wonder if it's a good idea just to setup a cheap analog video camera as a backup to the main camera? Do the pros ever do this?

Yeah, multi-camera shots are commonplace for pros, but I only have the one camera and would want a second GL2 in order to get footage that matched up the first in terms of quality and colour tone.

Jason Dunn
12-14-2005, 11:10 PM
Just a thought: Would the situation be avoided if SP instead of LP mode was used?

I don't believe so, though I could be wrong. I've used LP mode in the past and never had problems like this.

Vincent Ferrari
12-14-2005, 11:48 PM
I was actually going to say the same thing about LP mode... I wonder if that's it...

Pony99CA
12-15-2005, 04:40 AM
When I was more into video, I learned that you should never use new tapes. You should always record at least once on tapes you want to keep before recording the event you want.

Why? Because the first time the tapes hit the heads was the most likely time for excess coating to flake off. If you play a tape back after the coating flaked off, you'll get drop-outs.

That was back in the days of analog tapes, and I don't know if digital video tapes have the same problems. However, given the symptoms Jason described, it wouldn't surprise me if he had drop-outs. Even if they aren't drop-outs, his experience shows why you should record (and play back) a tape before recording the main event.

Steve

Crocuta
12-15-2005, 04:47 AM
Wow, Jason! I feel for you man. I can only imagine how it must have felt to give your friends the news. Thanks for sharing this with us. I've never had a bad DV tape and it would never have occured to me to test a new one before using it. I will from now on whenever I'm shooting something of that level of importance.

Pony99CA
12-15-2005, 04:54 AM
Yeah, multi-camera shots are commonplace for pros, but I only have the one camera and would want a second GL2 in order to get footage that matched up the first in terms of quality and colour tone.
Don't worry about the quality matching exactly, especially if you're not doing this professionally. Even if you have two cameras that are the same model, the colors could still be off due to lighting differences. White balancing both cameras manually should reduce this.

And besides, how many people are going to care if the video quality or color doesn't match exactly? Getting the event taped well and edited nicely is far more important to most viewers, I think.

Running a second camera can have many benefits:

A different perspective on the event
A backup to fill in for some spots (somebody blocking your main camera, switching batteries or tapes, etc.)
A second source in case a disaster hits the first camera (you drop it)

Synchronizing the two videos will probably be the hardest thing, but if the second camera is put up in the balcony for long shots, you don't have to worry about lip sync as much.

In fact, you can probably run the second camera without an operator in LP mode if necessary to avoid switching tapes. That will also give you a consistent sound track if you are moving around with the main camera (but then you have to worry about syncing again -- but good editors probably make this fairly easy nowadays).

Steve

Jason Dunn
12-15-2005, 04:52 PM
Don't worry about the quality matching exactly, especially if you're not doing this professionally...And besides, how many people are going to care if the video quality or color doesn't match exactly? Getting the event taped well and edited nicely is far more important to most viewers, I think.

I saw some footage taped on a Sony miniDV camera from that same wedding, a small handheld one, and the difference between it and my GL2 was shocking (and so it should be). I think it would be a very jarring experience to cut from one camera to another when them looking so entirely different...although maybe it wouldn't matter as much if it were a wide shot. It's the perfectionist in me that would want the footage to look like it matched. ;-)

Vincent Ferrari
12-15-2005, 05:21 PM
And besides, how many people are going to care if the video quality or color doesn't match exactly? Getting the event taped well and edited nicely is far more important to most viewers, I think.

I don't know. I do a TON of photography, and if I'm not happy with the results, I usually won't even show the results to the people I want to share them with. Sometimes it isn't just about the "client," per se, but about the person handing it over. I wouldn't want to give them a job that I'm not proud of or that looked "half-a$$ed"

I know, we're usually our own harshest critics, but in reality, that's just the way the game goes with stuff like this, I reckon.

Pony99CA
12-15-2005, 05:44 PM
And besides, how many people are going to care if the video quality or color doesn't match exactly? Getting the event taped well and edited nicely is far more important to most viewers, I think.
I don't know. I do a TON of photography, and if I'm not happy with the results, I usually won't even show the results to the people I want to share them with. Sometimes it isn't just about the "client," per se, but about the person handing it over. I wouldn't want to give them a job that I'm not proud of or that looked "half-a$$ed"
Note that I wasn't saying the video quality could be bad -- just that if two cameras didn't match exactly, I doubt most people would care. In fact, if Jason had used two of the same cameras, he probably would have had the same problems because he would likely have used the same bad tapes in both. :D Using a second, different camera with a different tape format might have prevented this completely.

As for not being proud of something yourself, if you got a great shot of somebody that you knew they'd want, but there was a technical flaw, would you just throw it out or would you give it to them with an explanation of what happened? I suspect Jason gave the couple their video, flaws and all, because it was better than no video at all. Remember that it's about the client, not about you.

Now, if you're a professional, then higher standards certainly apply, but it's still about the client. If this disaster happened and I was getting paid for the job, I'd probably apologize, give them the best product that I could and refund all of their money. That should defuse any bad word-of-mouth.

Steve

Doug Johnson
12-16-2005, 01:10 AM
Hmm. Well, I definitely trust your judgment because you know much more about this topic than me. When I tried it in another miniDV camera I got the same types of errors though...

I wonder, how do I go about finding someplace in Calgary here that would professionally clean the video heads on my GL2?
It sounds like in your case you did have a bad tape. It does happen sometimes.

Look in the yellow pages or on the internet for professional video suppliers, and call them to ask for recommendations. Some may have in-store service. Calgary is big enough that I'm sure you have something there.

With some of my older cameras (5-7 years old) I was able to get regular cleanings as part of an extended warranty. The store I bought from had their own service department that would do that.

You could also always send it in to the manufacturer if nothing else is available. I'm not sure about Canon, but Sony charges $250 for my HDR-FX1 to service, clean, and repair everything.

Jason Dunn
12-16-2005, 01:41 AM
Thanks Doug. Turns out Canon has a Calgary office, so I'm going to drop it off tomorrow to get it cleaned. Here's hoping that it was the problem...I kind of doubt it, but I haven't had the camera professionally cleaned - ever - and it's about three years old. So who knows.

Mike Temporale
12-17-2005, 03:07 AM
Ah Jason, I could kiss you! Well, no. But almost.

After I had a tape jam in my device, I had paid for repair. I didn't check the camera too closely after getting it back (I didn't really have much time before the event) so I unwrapped a new tape, and recorded a couple different events. All in the course of a week or two. When I sat down to view it, the footage was all broken up. Exactly the same as what you're video shows. I thought it was a poor repair job and put the camera aside while I muled over what to do know.

After reading your post, I got to thinking that maybe it was just the tape. I had bought a 6 pack of TDK's and this was tape 3 out of the pack. I dug out the camera, plugged in another brand new tape and tested the camera. Everything works just fine!

When my camera was repaired, it was cleaned at the same time, so this problem has nothing to do with the heads being dirty. It appears that sometimes, for whatever reason, you'll find a bad tape. Now that I know this, I'll be testing all my tapes prior to recording ANYTHING from now on.

Woo Hoo! My camera isn't screwed. :mrgreen: Thanks again!

Jason Dunn
12-17-2005, 07:16 PM
After reading your post, I got to thinking that maybe it was just the tape. I had bought a 6 pack of TDK's and this was tape 3 out of the pack. I dug out the camera, plugged in another brand new tape and tested the camera. Everything works just fine!

Good to hear that it's not your camera!

I got my camera taken in to Canon for cleaning, and they have a SIX WEEK wait....!?!! So I didn't leave it with them, I'm trying to find another place. I'm almost positive that it's a defective tape and not an issue of cleaning, but I'm still hoping to get it cleaned...someplace. Gotta' go old-school now and try the yellow pages, Google Local was a complete failure in terms of finding a place for cleaning the camera.

Mustard
12-20-2005, 03:46 AM
I would have to agree with avoiding the LP setting on mini DV tapes. I've filmed a number of weddings and not a single one of them has gone longer than 60 minutes.

I recently did a video shoot with a professional who swears by using the 63 minute tapes. He told me that the quality difference is noticeable. Not surprisingly, the 63 minute tapes cost a bit more, but perhaps the added expense is worth it.

Jason Dunn
12-23-2005, 05:44 PM
A bit of an update on this saga.

I cleaned my Canon GL2 several times with a cleaning tape, and it seemed to improve things, so that got me down the path of thinking it was my camera. I called around to a few non-Canon servicing companies to see if they could clean my camera, but the first one I talked to said his "cleaning" consisted of using a cleaning tape. :roll: So I bought another cleaning tape (a Sony one) and did a few cleans (four) then re-captured it. It seemed to be better, but I still got the drop outs. I decided to go a little drastic because I needed to remove my camera from the equation.

So last night I went out and bought a new Panasonic miniDV camera for the express purpose of ripping this tape. My hopes were fairly high that I'd have a perfect recording, but alas, it looks the same as it did on my Canon - drop outs in the same place.

So I think I've come to accept that it's a bad tape, and that I'll have to accept the quality I have and make the best of it. :cry: Thanks for all the help and suggestions though, I've learned a lot.

ben_winter
01-01-2006, 04:33 AM
Never clean your tape more than once in a sitting with a cleaning tape. It can permanently damage the surface of the tape heads. MiniDV tapes use a wet or dry lubricant to make the rubbing of the tape against the head a frictionless task, and cleaning tapes purposely have no lubricant to "scrape off" the residue that comes from running many heads over the surface over a long period of time. Overusing a cleaning tape can rub down on your heads and seriously mess them up.

The Sony 63 minute tapes are great, but they use a different lubricant--if you use them, don't switch back, especially if you have a GL2 because it's been known to cause the common and dreaded "Remove the Cassette" error (a $250 fix).

Also, try what's known as "packing" the tape. That is, buy a $20 MiniDV cassette rewinder (you should have one anyway, tsk tsk!) and fast forward a new tape all the way. Then, rewind it all the way. This puts the tension in the tape on the opposing spool when the tape deck inside the camera pulls the tape across the head. I've heard from lots of people who said this virtually eliminated dropouts.

Hope that helps.

Ben

Jason Dunn
01-07-2006, 08:31 AM
Thanks for the tips Ben, that was a great first post on the site. I hope to see more from you. ;-)

Jason Dunn
02-21-2006, 07:56 PM
Also, try what's known as "packing" the tape. That is, buy a $20 MiniDV cassette rewinder (you should have one anyway, tsk tsk!) and fast forward a new tape all the way. Then, rewind it all the way. This puts the tension in the tape on the opposing spool when the tape deck inside the camera pulls the tape across the head. I've heard from lots of people who said this virtually eliminated dropouts.

I'd like to give you a very big THANK YOU Ben - it worked! I picked up a tape rewinder on eBay about a month ago, and a week ago I gave it a try. It didn't have a fast-forward option, so I used my GL2 to fast-forward the tapes to the end, then used this rewinder to rewind them. Upon re-capturing, I was DELIGHTED to see that there are ZERO problems with the footage now! :D

I have a feeling the drop outs were a combination of the dirty heads in my camera and the un-packed tape, but regardless, I'm thrilled that with your suggestion I was able to rescue this footage and create the project I wanted to from the beginning... 8)

Pony99CA
02-21-2006, 11:30 PM
I have a feeling the drop outs were a combination of the dirty heads in my camera and the un-packed tape, but regardless, I'm thrilled that with your suggestion I was able to rescue this footage and create the project I wanted to from the beginning... 8)

So the dropouts weren't actually recorded on the tape, but only occurred during playback of an unpacked tape? That's kind of surprising, because the typical videographer rewinds the tape after shooting, I assume, which should pack the tape pretty well. (I'd be surprised if fast forwarding was really necessary; it just helps to get to the rewinding process faster.)

By the way, the process I suggested of recording on any new tapes not only helps eliminate dropouts caused by flaking (which would be permanent) but also packs the tape prior to recording. :)

Steve

Jason Dunn
02-22-2006, 12:05 AM
I'd be surprised if fast forwarding was really necessary; it just helps to get to the rewinding process faster.

Pray tell, how would you suggest I use the tape rewinder to rewind a tape if that tape is already rewound? As I understand the concept of packing, the idea is to tighten up the tape spool so on playback you get no dropouts. In order to pack it don't you need to go from one end of the tape to the other?

Pony99CA
02-22-2006, 12:45 AM
I'd be surprised if fast forwarding was really necessary; it just helps to get to the rewinding process faster.
Pray tell, how would you suggest I use the tape rewinder to rewind a tape if that tape is already rewound? As I understand the concept of packing, the idea is to tighten up the tape spool so on playback you get no dropouts. In order to pack it don't you need to go from one end of the tape to the other?
Actually, I was speaking in general about fast forwarding not being necessary. In your case, if your tape had been sitting around for a while and didn't need to be watched, fast forwarding may make sense.

However, if the videographer doesn't rewind until just before editing, that should pack the tape. If he did rewind, but needs to review the footage, rewinding after playing the tape should also pack the tape. It's the rewinding that really packs the tape, not the fast forwarding. Fast forwarding is just a quicker means to get to the end of the tape if it's been sitting around for a while and doesn't need to watched. (Tapes can get slack in them sitting around for a while, especially if they're moved.)

Another reason packing helps is that it provides uniform tension on the tape. Without proper tension, the tape could slip during playback, which could appear like a dropout. In fact, I'm not sure packing has any effect on real dropouts, which I think are recorded on the tape. (Here's the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dropout#Telecommunication) definition of dropout.)

I would recommend against cheap rewinders, though. They may not slow the rewind speed down as the tape approaches the end, putting extra stress on the tape as it jerks to a stop. That's one reason some people caution against recording on the initial part of the tape.

I would also recommend against doing the packing in camera (at least on a regular basis). Rewinding and fast forwarding in the camera puts additional wear and tear on the tape handling mechanism. It's cheaper to buy a new rewinder than to service your camera.

Steve