HVX noise

[fed]

I noticed that 1080p recording has much more noise than 1080i. Why is this?

[Chris Santucci]

I noticed that 1080p recording has much more noise than 1080i. Why is this?


I'll guess that it appears noisier because you're seeing frames as pairs of fields with the interlaced video as opposed to progressive frames and that the noise is shifting in each field.

.

[reel film]

iam just wonderin if the hvx has this so called "noise" issue, then why is it being used on feature films. i think the talk of noise all the time is making the hvx look bad

[Erik Olson]

Watch any feature film in the theater which has originated on negative film and keep your eyes on the mids. You will undoubtedly notice that the release prints are swimming with grain despite today's ultra-fine tabular 500 and 200 ASA stocks.

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/4021/1200719258.jpg

Now look at the HVX in the mids (http://www.overlandfilms.com/public_video/HVX200_noisetesthd.mov) (right-click, save as). I've found that -5 to -7 on the master pedestal mimics 500 speed film grain nicely. Not grain, but noise. I've never had a filmout client turn away the HVX due to noise. Then, there's the HPX, which exhibits even less noise.

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/4021/1200720135.jpg

e

[Barry_Green]

Exactly.

It is not noiseless, but then again neither's film.

[reel film]

and this proves the point, maybe grain sounds better than noise.

[Arson]

iam just wonderin if the hvx has this so called "noise" issue, then why is it being used on feature films. i think the talk of noise all the time is making the hvx look bad

Thats the point of the canon/sony fan bois who post single posts here about the noise in hope that people see large numbers of posts about noise and the hvx when they do a google search and assume it is true.

The HVX has less noise and more color depth than any HDV camera. And no compression blocking like the HV20 or EX1. Cramming HDV into 50bps is half the possible information of the HVX's 100bps.

HDV cameras are wonderful if you have a web delivery since you can hide the HV20 or EX1's HDV noise in the DIVX web compression.

[ulisses]

What makes me sad is the HVX mosquitto fine noise... looks like DB noise.

Ulisses

[Barry_Green]

The HVX has less noise and more color depth than any HDV camera.
Well, that part's not true -- the FX1/Z1 have a lot less noise than the HVX does. The HVX is about the same noise level as the rest of the HDV cams, but the Sonys are noticeably cleaner.


And no compression blocking like the HV20 or EX1
No long-GOP compression blocking, that's true. It can happen on HDV, it remains to be seen whether it happens on the EX1 or not.


Cramming HDV into 50bps is half the possible information of the HVX's 100bps.
HDV is 25mbps, not 50. It's 1/4 the data rate of the HVX. But the bandwidth is used differently -- sometimes HDV looks fantastic. Sometimes it falls apart. You can't just make an arbitrary judgement based on the bandwidth (100 vs. 25) because they're not used the same way.

[Barry_Green]

What makes me sad is the HVX mosquitto fine noise... looks like DB noise.

Ulisses
It's possible to get some mosquito noise in 720, but you should find that it basically disappears in 1080.

[ulisses]

It's possible to get some mosquito noise in 720, but you should find that it basically disappears in 1080.

I thought that was my impression, any tech reason for 720 noise worst that 1080 ?

Thanks Barry,
Ulisses

[fed]

Great info. Thanks.

But why would 1080/60i have less noise (grain) than 1080/60p?

[Barry_Green]

There is no 1080/60p.

1080/60i and 1080/30p should have identical noise levels. It may seem that 30p has more, but it shouldn't have. Perhaps it's just that 60i updates the frame twice as fast, and so the noise moves around faster, thus making it less noticeable?

[ulisses]

makes sense, but when you record 24p in 1080i, the frames are full right ?

[fed]

You're right Barry, it is 1080/30p. Sorry.

Your explanation makes sense, thanks.

Is there any way to reduce this noise?

[ulisses]

After some Barry advices, I tested gamma B. Press and matrix Normal, nice settings to avoid noise. Barry is right again, 1080 has a lot less mosquito noise than 720.
In HVX200, progressive modes generate more noise than interlaced, maybe is the internal frequency change to get progressive that is generating noise

Uli

[fed]

What are the best scene settings for minimal noise? How about
Detail level -7
V Detail -7
Detail Coring +7

Any more setting?

Also, what are the best settings for RAW footage. I usually prefer to make all the changes in post.

[ulisses]

details at -7 looks so soft in my opinion, yesterday I just saw some EX1 footage with low light and noise level is a lot better than HVX, although the footage looked more like standard video (probably was shot at default cam setup).
Looking HVX footage in a HD monitor, the noise is too big my opinion. I'm curious to see a HVX footage in the big screen.

Ulisses

[Ted Spencer]

I'm curious to see a HVX footage in the big screen.

Ulisses

Go see "Cloverfield". The opening party scene (as well as many other interiors and non-CGI scenes) was mostly shot on an HVX200. I saw it myself on a *very* large screen here in NYC, sitting pretty darn close, and it looked excellent. That put my fears of HVX filmout "issues" to rest permanently, at least aside from what 35mm adapters might take away resolution-wise.

Be prepared for a potentially nauseating "ShakyCam" experience with the film otherwise though. If it hadn't been for my rapt curiosity about the HVX's contribution (not to mention the $11.75 I spent) I would have left far earlier.

I *hate* ShakyCam...

[Barry_Green]

And keep in mind, Cloverfield wasn't exactly optimized for ultimate quality either. I've seen HVX footage on the big screen look a lot better than that.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Yeah and they wanted it to look consumery, so it should provide a worst case scenario for HVX on the big screen given a film transfer of similar quality.

[Barry_Green]

Exactly.

[ulisses]

well, I guess it's hard to see noise in a very shaky cam.
maybe film transfer has a process to reduce noise ?

Ulisses

[Barry_Green]

Or maybe there just isn't that much noise to begin with? And film transfer would hide the noise under grain anyway.

I saw it on digital projection (no film transfer involved) and certainly wasn't distracted by noise.

[TimurCivan]

light your senes properly, get your contrast in camera, not in post and you find that the DSP has alot more information to work with and will produce a clean signal.

Garbage in garbage out people........ 35mm film will look like trash if you dont optomise the scene to be shot for the medium.

[Phil Maker]

I have very little problem squashing the noise in low or available light situations by using Barry's methods.

The other night I shot a night scene under just street lights and got very little noise. Here are the settings I used:

- 1080i 24pA
- shutter: 1/24
- detail: +1
- V detail: +5
- detail coring: +5
- master ped: -6
- gamma: B press
- matrix: norm

Yeah there's a bit of motion blur and these are not the most "filmic" settings, but the picture was exposed and looked damn good with very little noise, and in that situation, which isn't the most ideal, I'll take we we got over a noisy underexposed picture any day.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

... get your contrast in camera, not in post ...

I agree wholeheartedly except perhaps for the one statement above which I would disagree with slightly, IMHO ... jamming the master ped down can reduce noise in camera but it gives everything less info to work with.

And I've seen great results in the final product both in terms of noise and aesthetics when shooting everything flat, and with the master ped down a bit and waaaay down.

Mac for example, always shoots flat. I shot all my stuff with the master ped cranked down going back to Shed on the DVX through Rekindled on the HVX, then started shooting more flat with Schittekatter.

VFX people, regardles of the camera, generally want the most latitude, which is not likely going to be the most contrasty setting.

You can always bring blacks down in post without adding noise. You cannot do the opposite.

YES it does reduce noise for raw footage. But not in a way that I've found can't be replicated in post.

[TimurCivan]

Im not talking about lowering master pedestal. m talking about utilising a 4:1 light contrast ratio that fits nicely in the hvx200's 5-6 useable stops of dynamic range.

[Erik Olson]

Im not talking about lowering master pedestal. m talking about utilising a 4:1 light contrast ratio that fits nicely in the hvx200's 5-6 useable stops of dynamic range.

Yes.

e

[ulisses]

a little offtopic, but could the Finalcut import be affecting the image quality ? I think it convert to mov all the mxf footage right ?

I'll get a 100% crop from a shot experience I had and post it here for your opinion.

Thanks,
Ulisses

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Im not talking about lowering master pedestal. m talking about utilising a 4:1 light contrast ratio that fits nicely in the hvx200's 5-6 useable stops of dynamic range.

Timur make Jack head go:
http://www.bohemianscientist.org/images/blog06/headexplode.jpg

4 -1 wha? How do you do this 4 - 1 thing?

[TimurCivan]

a Mod of leisure wouldnt understand....... ;)

[electricpig]

we're sneaking into zone systems here, aka Mr A. Adams...

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

a Mod of leisure wouldnt understand....... ;)
???

too busy throwing B Press Krew signs for a helpful answer?
:grin:


Erik ... anyone? Seriously.

[Noel Evans]

Well usually different film stocks have different recommended shooting contrast ratio, I assume timur is talking about whats most appropriate for the HVX based on its ASA.

When I have been forced to shoot HVX one thing I try to do is keep my exposure levels a little under, this tends to lend more in post.

[AshG]

And keep in mind, Cloverfield wasn't exactly optimized for ultimate quality either. I've seen HVX footage on the big screen look a lot better than that.



Correct, it looks like crap on purpose, take off the fanboy glasses people! HVX, heck even DVX, can look much better than Cloverfield. Baffling reactions...

On the noise issue, it is a 1/3" CCD thing combined with the Panny color. Even Varicams have some noise. Shooting in 1080 and softening makes no sense though. My preference is noisy situations is black press, MP -5 to -7, detail coring +4. That will hold detail and mask noise.


ash =o)