ex1 SD solutions and HD delivery options questions

[mjdorris]

Hi All,

I currently use a borrowed DVX100b for shoots. I'm considering stepping up my game and purchasing an HD camera. Originally I was attracted to the HVX for it's SD and HD capabilities, and the option to work with tape and solid state. As far as I can tell the EX1 doesn't shoot SD. Does anyone having any experience using the Ex1 and down converting for SD delivery? Is it a reasonable idea to shoot in 720p or 1080 and downconvert? I still have clients that ask for SD, but more and more are asking for HD.

Another quick question--what is the typical way that people are delivering HD product? Create a master dvd folder and then take it to a blue ray capable duplicating house? Excuse the noobishness.

Thanks,
Matt

[ffaf07]

The EX1 does not shoot in SD. 720p and 1080p.

It has an SDI-out capability, which would allow you to downconvert to SD. You could always downcovert it in post as well.

Get the HVX. Definitely. It will save you a WORLD of trouble. You can shoot in DVCPRO 50, which is SD but has twice the color information (a true 422 codec.) It shoots to P2 and since it's half the space of DVCPRO HD you could record for twice as long. The HVX shines in HD as well, and seeing that this is not your first prosumer camera...you'll know what you're doing when you film. I think you could make DVCPRO 50 shine.

[gaffney film]

[QUOTE=ffaf07;1167712]Get the HVX. Definitely. It will save you a WORLD of trouble. You can shoot in DVCPRO 50, which is SD but has twice the color information (a true 422 codec.)

Please describe all the trouble as I have had none with my EX1.


Shooting in 1080i and outputting via sdi either downconverted in the camera or on capture looks great.

I capture 10 bit uncompressed into FCS downconverted with my kona card on ingest and it looks really awesome. it takes very aggressive color correction and holds up fine.



vince

[Stephen Mick]

Vince,

Not trying to answer for ffa, but for those who have been shooting with a DVX, going to an HVX is very comfortable. Going to an EX1 may involve more of a learning curve. Also, while you might have a Kona card at the ready for downconversion on ingest, the OP may not. So, in this case, the HVX's in-camera SD capabilities might be a big plus.

--SM

[ffaf07]

Please describe all the trouble as I have had none with my EX1.


Shooting in 1080i and outputting via sdi either downconverted in the camera or on capture looks great.

I capture 10 bit uncompressed into FCS downconverted with my kona card on ingest and it looks really awesome. it takes very aggressive color correction and holds up fine.



vince

I am in no way trying to make this into another EX1 vs. HVX page. Maybe he won't be saving himself a "world" of trouble, but he could shoot directly to a 422 SD codec, and it's a great looking codec. It seems like it would make the workflow easier rather than shooting in 420 and then exporting via SDI.

I'm not really speaking for the buyer though. Just voicing what I thought was a good choice. I hope that in any situation, I never convince someone to buy a product solely based on my post.

Also, moving from a DVX to an HVX would be pretty comfortable, not that he couldn't handle an EX1.



All in all, I don't want to stray from the point to my post --whichever camera he decides on, for whatever technical reasons, it sounds like he knows what he's doing creatively. That's what's important, and I think he'll deliver in that aspect, regardless of his camera choice.

[gaffney film]

i get all that, i just wanted to point out that there's always another way to get what you're after - and maybe future proof yourself for about a month.

v

[mjdorris]

thanks for the many responses! i was hoping to save money and not get a high end card, although i was considering the Matrox MXO. Stepping up to solid state is really taxing because of all the extras that go into it. i'm torn because i love the look that the hvx can produce, but in order to recoup the money i'm spending on this camera i'll need it to perform really well in lowlight. My main concerns are:

a) lowlight performance. i shoot a fair amount of lowlight (weddings, receptions, plays). The HVX is obviously a stellar camera--my concern is that I would be able to rock that on a set, or outdoors, but someplace that i can't control the light is a concern for me.

b) if i don't buy a capture card, and say spend it on a 16gig card, would i encounter any real problems down converting via FCP studio 2? I'm not aware of the on-camera conversion options.

c) unrelated, but do most of you have a blu-ray or hd dvd burner? or do you outsource that stuff?

Thanks again for the replies.

[LuckyStudio 13]

I believe there would have to be 2 critical mass for HD to be standardized.

a) In 2009, all broadcasting will be converted to HD, no more SD programming will be transmitted. I also believe by this year Black Friday, consumer will be bombarded by tons of cheap HD tv.

b) Availability/standardization of cheap HD burner on Personal Computers. Now that Blue Ray is staring to emerged as the winner in HD format war, we hope that the next gen computers will come standard with hd burner and dvd burner.

Finally, When the above (2) happens, cheap HD blueray dvd player will surfaced thus completing the cycle. By then, majority of your customers would want HD.

For your original question, if you get the XDCAM EX, you can either down convert via SDI or you can just down convert HD to SD in post.

Search the forum for the rest of the EX1 vs HVX specs like 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2, TRUE full 1k HD resolution vs pixel shift, CMOS vs CCD .....etc.

[gaffney film]

A little clarification on this HD mandate is in order. Beginning on 2/17/09 analog broadcast must end and be replaced with digital broadcasts. Within the ATSC standards are a bunch of formats. Including 720 x 480 interlaced. It's a broadcast mandate, not a format mandate.

Vince

[Lenilenapi]

I had the same question re: what are the methods for downconverting because I still have plenty of clients who will stay in SD.
SDI is not much of an option for me generally because it ties up the camera. Is there even any way to get an SDI signal into a laptop without something bulky & expensive like a an AJA I/O box?

Does that only leave downconverting in post as the only option?
Would the footage need to be imported into FCP first as HD then downconverted, or is it possible to do the downconvert while capturing or importing? Also how long a process is the downconvert.

My question really is - how much of a pain in the butt will this process be to a client? Is it worth trying to sell them on the EX for SD?

Will they still get any advantages form the EX's image quality or will it be the same or worse than shooting say HVX @ DVCPro50 or HVX/DVX @ DV quality?

Thanks

Lenny Levy

[Barry_Green]

a) In 2009, all broadcasting will be converted to HD, no more SD programming will be transmitted.
Persistent and inaccurate myth. As gaffney points out, the switch will be from analog to digital, but it has nothing to do with HD. Broadcasters are free to broadcast SD digitally, there is no mandate to go to HD in the USA, now or ever.

[Steve Shovlar]

thanks for the many responses! i was hoping to save money and not get a high end card, although i was considering the Matrox MXO. Stepping up to solid state is really taxing because of all the extras that go into it. i'm torn because i love the look that the hvx can produce, but in order to recoup the money i'm spending on this camera i'll need it to perform really well in lowlight. My main concerns are:

a) lowlight performance. i shoot a fair amount of lowlight (weddings, receptions, plays). The HVX is obviously a stellar camera--my concern is that I would be able to rock that on a set, or outdoors, but someplace that i can't control the light is a concern for me.

b) if i don't buy a capture card, and say spend it on a 16gig card, would i encounter any real problems down converting via FCP studio 2? I'm not aware of the on-camera conversion options.

c) unrelated, but do most of you have a blu-ray or hd dvd burner? or do you outsource that stuff?

Thanks again for the replies.


I feel I can answer a couple of these questions. I shoot a lot of weddings. last year I shot 18 throughout the summer in the UK. Not all of them were in dark 15th century churches but quite a few were. And I struggled BIG TIME with the HVX200. So much so that I got rid. And got an EX1. The difference is massive. Huge, vast.

If you are shooting weddings, the chances are the vicar won' allow you to bring in extra lighting, and to be honest you really don't want to anyway, as a wedding videographer you need to be on your feet and away from the church as quickly as possible to catch up with the couple at the reception. You will no doubt use the ambient light. And in old churches that comes at a premium.

The trouble with the HVX is such conditions is that it fails in its low light capabilities. You need to put the gain up, which makes more grain and makes the image even worse. You get blocking in the dark areas and thequality of the picture can drop below your expectations. In situations where there is plenty of light the HVX200 shines. But not in dim churches.

So I purchased the EX1. I haven't shot a wedding on it yet, but I have taken it into my local 12th century church to test it out and all I can say is the difference between the EX1 and the HVX200 in the same lighting situation ( ambient light) is chalk and cheese. The EX1 makes light! There is no grain. The image is fantastic. And that's with the gain off. The half inch chips of the EX1 really suck the light in and if you are considering buying the camera for weddings, then buy the EX1, and don't consider the HVX200.

Yes, its easy to use the HVX200 after the DVX100. But it's not difficult to learn the EX1 either. In fact I am still learning it but am comfortable now with it in my hands.

OK onto the other point.

It only caprures in HD. But you don't need a high end card to downconvert. Just bring the footage into FCP ( simple proceedure like P2) edit in HD, then output via compressor to SD and into DVDSP.

Couldn't be simpler.

If you are doing weddings, don't buy the 8 Gb cards. Get the 16Gb and pay the difference. A 16Gb card is treated like a dv tape. It lasts 70 mins. If you have two of them you can be constantly filming. I shoot about 5 hours at a typical wedding, but until the SxS cards drop in proce I will make do with 2 and dump to my laptop, format, then reuse. (after checking the footage has gone across OK!)

Then at home I just network the footage over to the Apple and start editing.

And the last point and one I have spent the last week researching. How do you get from DVDSP to Blu-ray? You don't. Because at the moment Blu-ray is not supported on a mac. This is a real big pain in the ass. In fact it is stupid. Apple herald FCP as HD ready, yet fail miserably when it comes to getting all this lovely HD footage onto a disk.

Toast 8 can burn Blu-ray, but you won't have any menues etc. And also, the blue-ray burners out there don't seem to have mac drivers. Whether or not they would run on a generic mac driver I have no idea.

But it doesn't get much better on a PC. Again I have found no way of making a HD dvd going the Sony Vegas route. Sony shout about Blu-ray, yet they haven't come up with a way of burning blu-ray dvd through their own software, Dvd Architect!

Anyway hope that helps.

[Noel Evans]

mjdorris heres yet another take.

HVX performance in lowlight isnt great.

You need to shoot longform weddings yet it seems the extra $ to buy 2 16gb cards for either cam may be a stretch.

Right now you are geared up for a tape workflow, as you use it for DVX.

Then seriously my recommendation to you is this.

Get yourself a Canon XHA1 - pretty workable in lowlight, shoots HD to tape using the HDV codec, excellent resolution, a price thats simply great. Just like any tape based camera a drop out is a concern, however, look after it, use the same brand tapes (I prefer pana) and you wont have an issue. Point - you wont get variable frame rates that the ex1 and HVX offer. Is this important to you?

Id take the extra $ left over and get yourself some solid audio to go with the great images. Pro lav set up etc.

And as per above response shoot everything in HD and edit in HD, just output to SD when required. Compressor does an excellent job.

Check out the Canon A1 forum for clips.

[rawfa]

mjdorris, do one better and check out Steven Dempsey's comparison Xh-A1 vs Hvx200 at at dvinfo and you'll see for your self if it's worth the difference or not. You may be surprised.

[LuckyStudio 13]

I know you could just buy a digital setup box and attach it to your SD TV and still get quality SD tv over the air with your rabbit ear antenna.

The main point is to get HD TV to the consumer's hand so that your customer is able to enjoy HD and perceived your product is of higher wuality and value. Who cares what my local channel 9 is going to transmit their news on.


Persistent and inaccurate myth. As gaffney points out, the switch will be from analog to digital, but it has nothing to do with HD. Broadcasters are free to broadcast SD digitally, there is no mandate to go to HD in the USA, now or ever.

[mjdorris]

thanks again for all the responses. this is very helpful.

i have been looking at the canon cams, but my goal here is to get a camera that i can shoot short films on (get a nice film-like 24p look) and be able to pay for it with one off videographer gigs.

I'll check out those comparison vids. Thanks!

[rawfa]

Then you should check out the Xh-A1 for sure. It has a great film look (amazing dof and bokeh).

[Stevet]

I agree, the A1 is a great buy, especially for this type of event work.

If you need the overcrank and other goodies, it's the HVX200 or the EX1.
The HVX200 does offer 4:2:2 DVCPRO 50 SD.

[LuckyStudio 13]

If you go with the Canon A1, plan to spend another $1k on the canon hv20 or hv30 to use as a transfer deck (if you shoot 24p). Unless, you want to use your A1 as a deck and wear out the head.

[mjdorris]

is there a firestore type of device for the EX1? To get 4:2:2 off the Ex1 you'd have to feed right into FCP, correct?

[LuckyStudio 13]

To get 4:2:2 you have to use HD-SDI which demand a lot of extra computing 'hardware'. I wouldn't bother going to 4:2:2 unless I plan to do a lot of extensive green screen, compositing and other CG work.

There is also a product development that would allow 4:2:2 recording into a small portable device, but it is not a cheap solution. The best thing that you can do to decide is either to

a) rent the cameras that you are interested in.
b) go watch some sample clips from the A1, HVX, EX1 ....etc.

[Lenilenapi]

In post, why are you downconverting after editing? To preserve quality? Would it be equally possible to downconvert first then be able to editing with a smaller file that should be less stress on you machine and thus faster to work with?
Is the downconvert a slow process that you wouldn't want to do with all your footage?

My questions more to how I sell this workflow to SD clients than to my own use.

- Lenny

[LuckyStudio 13]

Lenny,
Yes you got the concept right. You can either down-convert before or after post depending on their hardware. It is a little lighter work to the machine to edit SD vs HD regardless of the codec (DVCPROHD, HDV, XDCAM EX ...etc).

Selling to the client is easy. Tell them that you can give them the master in HD also. I am sure everyone want s to see their events(wedding,bdays ...etc.) in all its HD glory in the future.

[Steve Shovlar]

Personally I have found that working in HD then down converting in compressor gives a better final project tha downconverting first and editing in SD. Plus, if a client wants a HD copy further down the line, its a piece of cake.

[booth]

Personally I have found that working in HD then down converting in compressor gives a better final project tha downconverting first and editing in SD. Plus, if a client wants a HD copy further down the line, its a piece of cake.

Absolutely! Not once have I used DVCPro50 on our HVX. When we got it I thought we'd use DVCProHD for filmmaking and DVCPro50 for corporates. Like I say haven't used DVCPro50 at all, if we're doing a corporate we shoot 720pn for max recording time on a P2 card. For filmmaking 1080p. Even though DVCPro50 is a good codec, it's a bit redundant. Shoot the highest rez possible and it gives compressor more to work with to create a SD mpeg2, and in my tests it looks better than shooting SD and compressing to SD.

For low light filming, the HVX is downright terrible due to the image noise in the darker areas of frame. Especially if you stick a 35mm adaptor on the front of it, and a 35mm lens.

I'm considering getting an EX1 as soon as we're finished on current projects.

[Noel Evans]

If you go with the Canon A1, plan to spend another $1k on the canon hv20 or hv30 to use as a transfer deck (if you shoot 24p). Unless, you want to use your A1 as a deck and wear out the head.

It is true that running the cam as a deck adds extra wear to the heads. It is also true that these heads are designed to run for a very long time. Way more than the hours youre likely to bput on the cam. Once every 20 hours I run the head cleaner for 5 seconds. And get a proper clean once a year.


Personally I have found that working in HD then down converting in compressor gives a better final project tha downconverting first and editing in SD. Plus, if a client wants a HD copy further down the line, its a piece of cake.

Absolutely, there is simply no need to do it any other way for the final output. Its just the most simple method. No need to complicate things further. The latest compressor does a great job IMO. The output process takes awhile but the results are worth it.

[mjdorris]

I have just a few more questions. I'm pretty sold on this camera but workflow wise:

1) does it seamlessly go between one card to another when filming? for example if i fill up card 1 while still filming, will it switch to card 2 without losing a frame? If so can you pop out card 1, put in another card, and just keep going that way?

2) I have an old MacBook Pro (not intel). Will I be able to use the card slot on this computer to pull files off a card during a shoot? Is it just drag and drop, or do i need to use the Sony File Manager prog, and if so does that require an intel Mac?

Thanks once again for all the help.

[LuckyStudio 13]

1) Yes, the process is seamless and you can do your card rotation like that.

2) The SXS card will appear as a drive letter and you can just copy and paste everything to a folder on your laptop or an external HD. If you want to view the clip though, you need the Sony transfer software. I am 98.99% sure the sony transfer software works with mac intel only.


I have just a few more questions. I'm pretty sold on this camera but workflow wise:

1) does it seamlessly go between one card to another when filming? for example if i fill up card 1 while still filming, will it switch to card 2 without losing a frame? If so can you pop out card 1, put in another card, and just keep going that way?

2) I have an old MacBook Pro (not intel). Will I be able to use the card slot on this computer to pull files off a card during a shoot? Is it just drag and drop, or do i need to use the Sony File Manager prog, and if so does that require an intel Mac?

Thanks once again for all the help.

[mjdorris]

hearts you Dxmetal, thanks. i think this is the camera i've been looking for.

[matthew77]

Dxmetal,

1.01% wins. The XDCAM Transfer app works fine on my G5 and my Intel.

[LuckyStudio 13]

Wow, thats even better ! yeah, just confirmed 100% that Sony xdcam transfer program is indeed powerpc and intel mac friendly !

Your laptop should be fine as a "dumping machine" as well as viewing the clips. I dont remember if the powerbook has express card slots or not. However if you have or can get an express card adapter that is even better. You can buy 1 more SXS card and have the following workflow/rotation.

i) Shoot with 2 SxS cards. When one is full, hand in the "full" card to the assistant.

ii) Get the 3rd card (blank SXS) from the assistant and continue shooting.

While you are shooting.... the assistant could

i) download the footage to the laptop or straight to 2 external HD for backup & extra security.
ii) erase the card's content
iii) have the card ready for the next rotation.

Enjoy the XDCAM EX1 and post some footage to share. If you want a full HD resolution camera from Panasonic, the cheapest one would be the hpx3000 $48k without lens.

[mjdorris]

Ok, so I'm about to purchase this camera. Was just getting my finances in order. I have a new 2.8ghz dual core IMAC. I would assume that with a 35mbps datastream that it would easy handle the edits. Or would I want to spend the cash on a Mac Pro? I would just imagine that this would speed things up in after effects and motion, but I'm not going to suffer horribly on the IMAC am I?

Thanks

[Barry_Green]

It's not the megabits that cause the problem, it's the type of compression. DVCPRO-HD is 100 megabits, yet a 2.8ghz imac could probably handle three or even four streams in realtime.

XDCAM-EX is long-GOP, which is much more processor-intensive. Even so you should be able to get at least one stream in realtime on that iMac, I would guess. The real delay would come when you finish your edit and you go to conform, that can take a long time.

[doondoon]

Hi All,

I currently use a borrowed DVX100b for shoots. I'm considering stepping up my game and purchasing an HD camera. Originally I was attracted to the HVX for it's SD and HD capabilities, and the option to work with tape and solid state. As far as I can tell the EX1 doesn't shoot SD. Does anyone having any experience using the Ex1 and down converting for SD delivery? Is it a reasonable idea to shoot in 720p or 1080 and downconvert? I still have clients that ask for SD, but more and more are asking for HD.

Another quick question--what is the typical way that people are delivering HD product? Create a master dvd folder and then take it to a blue ray capable duplicating house? Excuse the noobishness.

Thanks,
Matt

it's NOT A PROBLEM to go from HD to SD. A very large percentage of the content that you see on standard definition NTSC broadcast television originated on a higher resolution format (like HD or Film).

OVERSAMPLING IS GOOD :grin:

Lots of data made small isn't an issue. Not lots of data made big IS an issue.

I think it's not so much about the resolution as it is about the shape. 16:9 vs. 4:3.

[mjdorris]

It's not the megabits that cause the problem, it's the type of compression. DVCPRO-HD is 100 megabits, yet a 2.8ghz imac could probably handle three or even four streams in realtime.

XDCAM-EX is long-GOP, which is much more processor-intensive. Even so you should be able to get at least one stream in realtime on that iMac, I would guess. The real delay would come when you finish your edit and you go to conform, that can take a long time.


Thanks for the info Barry. I did some research into what long GOP was, but couldn't turn up many results. Does long GOP just mean there are more frames packed in than normal GOP?

I was hoping to get through this without buying a new computer too, but then again, the new Mac Pros are pretty exciting.

[Barry_Green]

Well, there's intraframe compression and there's interframe compression (which uses a GOP).

Intraframe compression means that all frames are treated discretely and individually. This is the type of system that every professional recording system has traditionally ever been, from DigiBeta to MPEG-IMX to HDCAM to DVCPRO-HD to DVCPRO50, including DVCAM and DVCPRO, and also as used by the highest-quality recording/mastering formats around, HDCAM SR and D5-HD and AVC-Intra.

Then there's a new development called interframe, which was developed to try to cram more footage into a tinier bandwidth. Interframe was developed for low-bandwidth delivery systems like DVD and ATSC broadcast television. It has been added in camcorders primarily because the HDV tape and XDCAM disc had very limited bandwidth transfer rates, and using long-GOP compression was the only way they could fit a high-def recording onto limited-bandwidth media.

The idea of long-GOP means that it's using a long Group Of Pictures as one compressed entity. There's also short-GOP, as used by CineForm (IIRC, CineForm uses a two-frame GOP) and JVC uses a medium-length GOP of six frames in their HDV 24P. The general idea is that they don't encode each frame individually, instead they only track the changes between frames and encode those. That way, if something remained unchanged from frame to frame it would be simply copied over, rather than re-encoded (as would happen in an intraframe codec).

In theory long-GOP is a great idea, in practice it works very well on static scenes and can be impacted (or even severely hampered) by scenes where a lot changes from frame to frame. This isn't necessarily a fault of long-GOP itself, but moreso with the tiny bitrates that have been allocated to existing long-GOP systems. Long-GOP with 100 megabits would probably be just wonderful, long-GOP at 19 megabits leaves a lot to be desired!

When going to editing, long-GOP is much more processor intensive, around 7x as processor-demanding as intraframe would be. With intraframe the NLE can select any frame and access it directly. With long-GOP, that's not possible because frames do not exist in their entirety. You have to uncompress a series of frames, applying the changes from frame to frame, to get to the one you want.

As computers get faster and faster, this becomes less of an issue.