The video, which can be seen above was shot with 2 cameras, for the most part allowing coverage from both sides of the stage and in the event that one camera goes awry for whatever reason there is always a usable shot to cut to. However, anyone who has done this will know that invariably there are times when both cameras are out of focus or re-positioning etc and another shot needs to be found to fill the gap. Standard practise.
The other issue with only having 2 cameras ( I usually like to cover with at least three, one being a locked off wide master) is a lack of variety in the edit which can lead to a dull and repetitive video.
Shooting in 4K for a HD deliverable has given me the flexibility to make the video look as if there was much more coverage, by cropping and re-framing the 4K to create new shots and the appearance of additional camera positions making the final result much more interesting, as well as simply shrinking down the full frame for wider shots.
This has also impacted on how the video looks in terms of picture quality. I have done very little in terms of colour grading, just a little to match the cameras and remove some of the banding from the highlights, as I wanted to retain as much of a grimy aesthetic as possible, however some shots are much more noisy than others.
The environment was obviously a very low-light scenario so we has to use an ISO in the region of 2000. The 2nd camera (the 5DMkIII) coped very well, largely down to its full frame sensor, although the DVX200 did produce some noise. In the shots where the footage has been shrunk to HD this has virtually disappeared, one of the huge benefits of using this method. You can tell the difference in comparative shots where the 4K has simply been reframed at full size. I could of added some noise reduction but as mentioned deliberately chose not to, although on shoots where a more pristine look is required it would be an essential part of the edit and would need to be factored in.
One down, one to go...for now!