Why are some tickle clips crystal clear quality, while others grainy?

[mabus]

Technical question for all you producers, tech heads, video guys:

Why are some tickle clips crystal clear quality, while others grainy?

I'll name companies: if you look at a place like Tickle Abuse, UK Tickling, etc. their clips are crystal clear.

A place like Simply Tickling, which features the jaw dropping Savannah, and Tickle Addiction, they got a bit of grain, and aren't as SHARP as the above.

A place like Tickle Torture, which has really fun clips, lots of wonderful pantyhose, even more grain and not as sharp as those two categories above.

Are there steps these guys who make the less sharp and clear clips can take to get better quality?

This isn't in ANY way critical of their work, because I own several clips from all these mentioned above, so they got my money!

But in my example in an earlier thread - it's like having early Picasso (before he got all weird and shit) and giving him some tempera paint instead of oil paint -
Yeah, he could still make a damn good picture, ...but with his talent, the man needs the finest oil paints.
Michelangelo could probably make some good stuff with Plaster of Paris....but you should really give him stone.....

 

[Comfort Eagle]

The cameras. Some producers have access to $2000 HD cameras, others have to work with a $500 set up.

I think everyone involved would like access to the absolute best equipment, but that's not how life works.

 

[turtleboy]

You don't need a $2000 camera to produce sharp footage...the ones I use for shooting my clips certainly don't cost that much and all modern cameras are capable of outputting clean images nowadays.

The issue that causes grain in video (and still images) is nearly always poor lighting - a high gain setting on the camera (equivalent to a high ISO on a still camera) produces noise as it forces the image sensor to max out. The higher the gain setting, the lighter the image but the more noise/grain in the image. As many people use full auto settings on the camera, any time there is not enough light the camera's gain will go right up to compensate - hence you get a grainy image. Even a high-end camera (i.e. $10,000) will produce some noise if you shoot at night with poor lighting - a tiny overhead bulb won't do it.

This problem is made worse if you shoot with an older camera, a budget camcorder or iPhone etc as the image sensors are smaller and so will produce even more noise in poor lighting. Basic video lighting is really not expensive though.

The other problem I've noticed is that some people encode their videos at very low quality settings, which means even if the source footage is clean and sharp it can still come out looking crappy - especially at 720p and 1080 resolution. Again, there's no cost issue there it's just how you film and output your clips

 

[mabus]

The other problem I've noticed is that some people encode their videos at very low quality settings, which means even if the source footage is clean and sharp it can still come out looking crappy - especially at 720p and 1080 resolution. Again, there's no cost issue there it's just how you film and output your clips

Thank you so much for the reply, proving once again why you're one of my favorite tickling producers! (me...and everyone else!)

The above quote seems to be the issue - I use a $1,000 camcorder, (now worth about $300!) and have seen footage from cheaper kinds on Youtube, and other smaller
producers here that is really sharp and clear.

It's not so much film grain from a dark image - that DOES factor in when shooting in a poorly lit room.

It's the processing and rendering, and maybe shooting if they are perhaps using a lower recording setting, thus getting less visual information on their chip.
(I use tape so there's no compression.)

It seems to be a compression issue, perhaps.

The three stores I mentioned, Simply Tickling, Tickle Addiction, and Tickle Torture, all use lights, in well lit areas, and their sets are light colored, which helps
a good bit. (Shooting in darkly colored rooms sucks, because grain is introduced....one time I shot a video in a darkly lit room with a girl in pantyhose...crappy footage, dammit!)

But maybe it's the compression or rendering that's the problem.

I render my final files in 1080 HDV, 8 mbps, and even in WMV, my final files come out clear.

I wish I knew more to help those guys out, because as I said, all three of those stores, plus ones I haven't mentioned, but those three, all produce really good, FUN videos
that are worth the money when you get a model with a cute laugh.

 

[marcusb]

Couple of reasons:

- Some producers are still shooting with SD cameras.
- As turtleboy mentioned, poor lighting.
- And, of course the video bitrate they render the video to. And, if using .wmv, if they are using 1 or 2 pass encoding. 2 pass is much cleaner but adds a lot of processing time. Low bitrate HD looks pretty rough.

 

[FeatherEndeavor]

You don't need a $2000 camera to produce sharp footage...the ones I use for shooting my clips certainly don't cost that much and all modern cameras are capable of outputting clean images nowadays.

The issue that causes grain in video (and still images) is nearly always poor lighting - a high gain setting on the camera (equivalent to a high ISO on a still camera) produces noise as it forces the image sensor to max out. The higher the gain setting, the lighter the image but the more noise/grain in the image. As many people use full auto settings on the camera, any time there is not enough light the camera's gain will go right up to compensate - hence you get a grainy image. Even a high-end camera (i.e. $10,000) will produce some noise if you shoot at night with poor lighting - a tiny overhead bulb won't do it.

This problem is made worse if you shoot with an older camera, a budget camcorder or iPhone etc as the image sensors are smaller and so will produce even more noise in poor lighting. Basic video lighting is really not expensive though.

The other problem I've noticed is that some people encode their videos at very low quality settings, which means even if the source footage is clean and sharp it can still come out looking crappy - especially at 720p and 1080 resolution. Again, there's no cost issue there it's just how you film and output your clips

Makes sense. But what if a producer is shooting a cos play or custom video in which the story line calls for low lighting in some of the scenes? You can't add light because the customer specifically requested a dark room. I'm not a producer myself but for the producers on here what can they do to overcompensate?

 

[turtleboy]

But maybe it's the compression or rendering that's the problem.

I render my final files in 1080 HDV, 8 mbps, and even in WMV, my final files come out clear.

I wish I knew more to help those guys out, because as I said, all three of those stores, plus ones I haven't mentioned, but those three, all produce really good, FUN videos
that are worth the money when you get a model with a cute laugh.

Yes you're probably right about compression/quality. Sometimes people render clips with the wrong settings, which can distort the image if the aspect ratio is wrong, for example. Sometimes they use too much compression for the format/size of clip which can lead to a loss of quality overall. Some of the more basic editing programs don't offer much control over settings when rendering clips and they often provide default templates which might not be the best (i.e. optimised for speed rather than quality) As Marcus said, 2 pass rendering generally provides better results - although I don't use it for my clips!

As you mentioned, people may use lower quality settings on the camera itself (which always seems to be a waste!) sometimes to save recording space, but also because a lot of new consumer cams offer lower quality mp4 recording modes (for putting your clips straight onto youtube etc), which are more appealing to work with than the AVCHD formats used in most HD recording nowadays (AVCHD can be hard to work with in some editors and uses a lot of processing power)

 

[marcusb]

You meter on the subject and lock the exposure and the rest will be dark. Since you've locked the exposure the camera will not try to compensate. The video gets "noisy" when the camera goes to a higher ISO to compensate--that's when you get grain from the sensor. You need a camera that has good low light performance.

Makes sense. But what if a producer is shooting a cos play or custom video in which the story line calls for low lighting in some of the scenes? You can't add light because the customer specifically requested a dark room. I'm not a producer myself but for the producers on here what can they do to overcompensate?

 

[turtleboy]

Makes sense. But what if a producer is shooting a cos play or custom video in which the story line calls for low lighting in some of the scenes? You can't add light because the customer specifically requested a dark room. I'm not a producer myself but for the producers on here what can they do to overcompensate?

It depends whether you want the scene to actually look completely dark or not? If you want the scene (and the subject) to look dark, a cheaper camera might be fine if you use it on manual and turn down the gain/exposure so that it doesn't create noise (on an auto setting it would still try to compensate and create lots of noise)

If you wanted to get clear footage in low light and expose the subect clearly though you'd need to use a decent quality camcorder or a DSLR, which can handle low light better - as a general rule, shooting in the dark is never really going to work. Even dark scenes in movies and expensive TV dramas use artificial lighting to some degree...it just has to be the right kind of directional lighting, positioned carefully to pick the subject out from the background, create shadows where needed etc. Side lighting creates more shadow than overhead lighting etc, etc.

In your example, smaller soft lights could be used just on the characters themselves, and you would probably position the action away from the walls etc so that less of the light spills across the room

 

[SoleMates]

My videos are usually all over the place with regards to grain. And yeah, it's basically a lighting issue. Lighting is one of the toughest things for photographers to get right. I just read a book on it and the kind of things that are happening off-camera to rectify a shitty lighting sitch are pretty mind-blowing. A lot of them are out of the question for a typical tickle video because they involve assistants holding reflectors and what-not.

One thing I experimented with is a denoise filter. It worked beautifully for cleaning up the footage but the clip I used it on ("Let's Tickle Lolly's Feet Some More!", I think) took six hours to render as a result and it's not like anyone got back to me and said "wow, that clip is so clear!", so whatevs.

Another thing I noticed is that some DSLR cameras that do video don't have the same kind of control over video that they do over stills, so you can't adjust your ISO or do many of the other things that would rectify a low-light situation.

Makes sense. But what if a producer is shooting a cos play or custom video in which the story line calls for low lighting in some of the scenes? You can't add light because the customer specifically requested a dark room. I'm not a producer myself but for the producers on here what can they do to overcompensate?

A lot of time, at least according to a friend of mine who shoots cosplay and fashion models for a living, it's all about the flash. You don't light the whole scene, but you do need a flash and/or diffuser to bounce enough off of the model for the camera to pick up.

AVCHD can be hard to work with in some editors

That's assuming your editor even supports it. Most of the free ones for Windows, like Windows Movie Maker, don't (at least it didn't last I checked, the newer versions might) and iMovie did, but had issues. I remember when I first started out, the only software I could find under $200 that even recognized the format was AVS4YOU, so that's what I got. Now I have HitFilm 3 Pro, which is all sorts of wonderful but I'm not sure if I want to bother using it for tickling videos. It's a bit of overkill. Of course, Hitfilm 3 Express is free now and supports it as well, but basically unless you know it exists it's going to be hard to Google. Most people, vendors included I'd wager, who don't already work in high-end video won't even know this software is out there (except for After Effects, which is still kinda expensive even with a subscription model).

 

[turtleboy]

Another thing I noticed is that some DSLR cameras that do video don't have the same kind of control over video that they do over stills, so you can't adjust your ISO or do many of the other things that would rectify a low-light situation.

All DSLRs should have full manual control over ISO, shutter speed and aperture - even in 'live' or video modes...perhaps the newer or budget DSLRs don't give you control in video mode? Honestly, I'd be surprised if they didn't though as you'd have no control at all otherwise and they're not really built to have the same auto-exposure functioning that camcorders have.

A lot of time, at least according to a friend of mine who shoots cosplay and fashion models for a living, it's all about the flash. You don't light the whole scene, but you do need a flash and/or diffuser to bounce enough off of the model for the camera to pick up.

This would only apply to still images though - I think FE was talking about shooting custom clips

 

[SoleMates]

All DSLRs should have full manual control over ISO, shutter speed and aperture - even in 'live' or video modes...perhaps the newer or budget DSLRs don't give you control in video mode? Honestly, I'd be surprised if they didn't though as you'd have no control at all otherwise and they're not really built to have the same auto-exposure functioning that camcorders have.

I'd imagine the key word there is "budget". I can double-check my manual but I do recall being surprised at that revelation myself. I do hope I'm wrong, because it's the one thing that's kept me from using my DSLR for shooting video. Well, that and the fact that it doesn't store as much footage as my video camera.

This would only apply to still images though - I think FE was talking about shooting custom clips

Yup. But again, the point is that you can't shoot without sufficient light. Even "dark" sets are lit such that the subject has light bouncing off of them.

And in certain circumstances (I just remembered this) out in the "real world", "dark" or "night" footage is actually shot during the day, and the darkness added in post production. It's why there's such a thing called "movie darkness" where the footage basically looks blue with the contrast turned way up. Watch a low-budget horror movie (especially old ones) and notice how you usually can't see a damn thing during the dark scenes; it's because they actually shoot in the dark, or just stick a black filter over the lens.

 

[mabus]

I wanted to add for all reading and lurking, as I did in the Simply Tickling thread....Do NOT let this discussion dissuade you from buying these clips.

These stores I mentioned each have some REALLY good, fun, inventive clips. That's why I want them to be the best quality, which recent clips
from Tickle Torture have upped the sharpness, for example.

Hearing an office worker asking someone to tickle her pantyhose feet, or a big boobied lady of the house tickling all her house guests, etc. ...DAMN. That's hot.

These guys and gals work hard and are producing some great clips, so if you think they look good...BUY THEM.