PDA

View Full Version : HMC150 questions answered...



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 11:48 AM
Okay, I'm officially allowed to talk about my experiences with the HMC150. I've been using one for the last several days and I think I can pretty much answer all your questions now, so -- ask away! :)

kurtmo
08-19-2008, 11:54 AM
Does Vegas puke with HMC150 MTS files?

Mark Williams
08-19-2008, 11:55 AM
The videomaker podcast seemed to gloss over the quality of the 21-24 high setting. Does it equal or surpass HDV or is this just too subjective of a question.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:03 PM
Does Vegas puke with HMC150 MTS files?
Of course. I don't hold out a lot of hope for Sony Vegas ever going out of their way to be pro-active in supporting competitors' products. I would think that Vegas is likely to be the last editor to have proper AVC-HD support across the board.

Until then, I'd recommend looking at CineForm if you want to use Vegas.

EDIUS has a conversion utility that supports all HMC150 modes right now, including 720/24, 720/30, and 720/60, plus all the 1080 PH modes.

ecking
08-19-2008, 12:03 PM
I log and transfered the footage into fcp and unless I did something long the footage they posted up is really grainy, even the broad daylight clips.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:05 PM
The videomaker podcast seemed to gloss over the quality of the 21-24 high setting. Does it equal or surpass HDV
Beats the hell out of it. The 720p mode is extremely robust, the only way you would ever stand a chance of getting even the minorest of codec degradation would be to push it to 720/60p and shoot something extremely complex (like surfing, which I did... and it looks totally solid). I would think 1080/60i mode is going to be the most challenging for the codec to deal with, but even then it's much more robust than HDV.

I wouldn't put the 6mbps mode up against HDV; the 13mbps mode is about equivalent to HDV. The 17mbps is better, and the 21mbps looks practically uncompressed when working with 720/24p footage.

Jason Adams
08-19-2008, 12:06 PM
1.) Does AVC HD support any meta data like p2?
2.) What if any focus assist is on the camera?
3.) What formats and frame rates?
4.) Any NLE natively support this yet?

Have you matched footage against HVX200 do the images play well together. Could this be a B camera on set with a HVX ???

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:07 PM
I log and transfered the footage into fcp and unless I did something long the footage they posted up is really grainy, even the broad daylight clips.
I haven't seen their footage and I don't know how they shot, but I've got plenty of footage here that is cleaner than Howard Hughes' fingernails. I shot stuff at the beach, at a lake, at a marina, and I would defy anyone to find a spec of grain or noise. It's incredibly clean.

Under torture conditions in pitch black scenarios, yeah you might see some noise. But in what I was shooting I think it's really clean. I'll see if I can post some footage.

kurtmo
08-19-2008, 12:10 PM
I'll see if I can post some footage.

Please do!

BobDiaz
08-19-2008, 12:12 PM
(1) On the Apple, how does it work with FCP and FCE? (Were there any problems getting it to edit, other than transcoding..)

(2) When shooting 720/30p (or 720/24p) is the data rate at maximum still around the 21 Mbps speed or does the camera drop down to a much lower rate?

(3) I know that still shots never tell the full story, but could you please post still frame grabs.


Bob Diaz

R.Lang
08-19-2008, 12:12 PM
I haven't seen their footage and I don't know how they shot, but I've got plenty of footage here that is cleaner than Howard Hughes' fingernails. I shot stuff at the beach, at a lake, at a marina, and I would defy anyone to find a spec of grain or noise. It's incredibly clean.

Under torture conditions in pitch black scenarios, yeah you might see some noise. But in what I was shooting I think it's really clean. I'll see if I can post some footage.

yeah, I'd like to see some. Especially surfing.

Jim Wiseman
08-19-2008, 12:14 PM
What's the best way to get the Videomaker footage into FCP 6.04?

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:14 PM
(1) On the Apple, how does it work with FCP and FCE? (Were there any problems getting it to edit, other than transcoding..)
I don't use the Apple so I can't answer that. The EDIUS transcode is effortless, if slower than I would like -- it takes about 40 seconds to transcode a minute of 720p footage, and about 60 seconds to transcode a minute of 1080 footage.

Pinnacle Studio + is supposed to have native support right out of the box. EDIUS 4.6 doesn't yet support PH mode footage but I expect that it (and EDIUS NEO) will be the first to have proper drag 'n' drop native support.


(2) When shooting 720/30p (or 720/24p) is the data rate at maximum still around the 21 Mbps speed or does the camera drop down to a much lower rate?
All PH mode footage is the same data rate, whether you're shooting 1080/60i or 720/24p. So the net effect is the 720/24p footage gets 2.5x as much bandwidth applied to it per pixel. The result is that it's smokin' clean and nearly visually uncompressed.


(3) I know that still shots never tell the full story, but could you please post still frame grabs.
I'm sure I can, but let me verify before doing so.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:16 PM
yeah, I'd like to see some. Especially surfing.
I could post the raw MTS file maybe, but I can't guarantee that you'll be able to see it, that depends on your editor.

shrigg
08-19-2008, 12:22 PM
I could post the raw MTS file maybe, but I can't guarantee that you'll be able to see it, that depends on your editor.

Please post! Please post!

I'm very interested in killer quality slow-mo by dropping 720p60 footage onto a 720p24 or p30 timeline. Barry, did you play around with this with your surfing footage?

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:26 PM
Note, these frame grabs have been processed through the EDIUS file converter, and then also converted to JPG.
http://www.isarapix.org/pix37/1219173905.jpg

http://www.isarapix.org/pix92/1219173948.jpg

http://www.isarapix.org/pix17/1219173990.jpg

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:27 PM
Please post! Please post!
I'll find a place to host one of the surfing clips.


I'm very interested in killer quality slow-mo by dropping 720p60 footage onto a 720p24 or p30 timeline. Barry, did you play around with this with your surfing footage?
Yep, looks just like HVX overcranked footage as far as the motion goes.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:31 PM
I've got a 61mb surfing file I could post up... let me sort out the hosting thing...

shrigg
08-19-2008, 12:37 PM
Okay, I'm officially allowed to talk about my experiences with the HMC150. I've been using one for the last several days and I think I can pretty much answer all your questions now, so -- ask away! :)

Okay, bottom line: What's your official take on how the HMC compares to the HPX170/HVX200A? Close to as good visually but saddled with the AVCHD editing hassles?

drdimento
08-19-2008, 12:45 PM
How about some frame grabs off some dark stuff? You know the stuff where grain appears?

shrigg
08-19-2008, 12:49 PM
I don't use the Apple so I can't answer that. The EDIUS transcode is effortless, if slower than I would like -- it takes about 40 seconds to transcode a minute of 720p footage, and about 60 seconds to transcode a minute of 1080 footage.

Those transcode times sound VERY similar to transcoding to Pro Res in FCP's Log and Transfer. Maybe EDIUS isn't a quicker workflow than FCP after all....

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:50 PM
Okay, bottom line: What's your official take on how the HMC compares to the HPX170/HVX200A? Close to as good visually but saddled with the AVCHD editing hassles?
The core image is basically the same. The operation is basically the same. There are lots of features the 200A/170 have that the 150 doesn't (like standard-def, or time lapse, or variable frame rates, things like that.

To a lot of folks, that'll matter. But I think a whole lot more people will look at the $3495 street price, and the dirt-cheap memory recording times, and say "that's all I need."

AVC-HD right now is a lot more work than P2 is to work with in post. For broadcasters and people making their living with the camera (other than longform event shooters), it's HPX170 all the way. For indie guys who can't afford $900 for a P2 card and $5200 for the camera, and who have more time than money so transcoding in post is no hassle to them, well then: the HMC150 comes about 80% of the HVX200 for thousands less. And it looks like it'd make an excellent "B" camera to a 170 as well.

Let me put it this way: when Panasonic put out the DVX, they also put out a lower-cost DVC80 which had the same imaging chips, same lens, same body, they just took out a few features to lower the price -- they took out 24p and cinegamma! Totally wrong move, and the DVC80 flopped. Well, with the 150 they took the 170 and took out a few features to lower the price. I'd say that probably 90% of our DVXUser members are going to be thrilled with what they left in, and won't miss what was taken out.

Everts
08-19-2008, 12:50 PM
[quote=Barry_Green;1377699] I would think 1080/60i mode is going to be the most challenging for the codec to deal with, but even then it's much more robust than HDV.

Love the umbrella..
Would you say that 1080/60i avc hd footage @21 mbps is better or worse then HDV 1080/60i ?

Alex.Mitchell
08-19-2008, 12:50 PM
I'm really interested to see how it holds up in comparison to DVCPro HD, both at 720 and 1080.

[Edit] Oh, well I guess that answered my questions. Thanks Barry!

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:52 PM
Those transcode times sound VERY similar to transcoding to Pro Res in FCP's Log and Transfer. Maybe EDIUS isn't a quicker workflow than FCP after all....
Depends on your system too. I'm talking about a single Core 2 Duo laptop at 2.4GHz; I'm sure an OctoMac would cut the times down to practically instantaneous.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:53 PM
Would you say that 1080/60i avc hd footage @21 mbps is better or worse then HDV 1080/60i ?
Way better, but in some ways it depends on the codec. I'd have to go to Vegas to do the ultimate torture test but right now, from what I've seen, I wouldn't be surprised if 1080/60i 21mbps AVC-HD was every bit as robust as 35mbps XDCAM EX.

I sure couldn't break it in all the things I tried. But the ultimate torture test would have to wait for next time I'm in Vegas.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 12:55 PM
I'm really interested to see how it holds up in comparison to DVCPro HD, both at 720 and 1080.

[Edit] Oh, well I guess that answered my questions. Thanks Barry!
In 1080 mode, DVCPRO-HD is probably going to be superior from these cameras.

In 720/24 mode, I'd put AVC-HD up against DVCPRO-HD and I think it's probable that the AVC-HD PH mode would even look better.

In 720/60p mode, I'm not sure yet. AVC-HD looks great, but it's still long-GOP, and the further you press it the more likely it might encounter the limits of compression efficiency, whereas DVCPRO-HD (being intraframe) will never encounter such limits.

Everts
08-19-2008, 12:57 PM
From earlier posts I had the feeling you had the cam with you.
So is there a book coming out after the release of HMC 150 ?
Or a dvd:)

drdimento
08-19-2008, 12:58 PM
Barry, the frame grabs . . . that was ~21mbs stuff?

And, in your own opinion are you comfortable that the image you see so far is:

Equal to?
Markedly better?

. . than HDV?

Mark Williams
08-19-2008, 12:59 PM
Barry, Thanks, the frame grabs look really good. I appreciate the comment about the 720/60p mode. This looks like it might be the camera' s sweet spot.

gmoe
08-19-2008, 01:06 PM
Hey Barry-

On your tests, did you use any DOF adapters?

I'm going to pair this up with the Ultimate. Did you perhaps shoot with the Extreme or Ultimate? Any impressions using the HMC150 with a DOF adapter would be great?

For example, do you think a DOF adapter will help smooth out any "macroblocking" when using the camera on the higher 1080 PH modes on shots with lots of movement?

Thanks!

Gmoe

R.Lang
08-19-2008, 01:09 PM
Barry, the frame grabs . . . that was ~21mbs stuff?

And, in your own opinion are you comfortable that the image you see so far is:

Equal to?
Markedly better?

. . than HDV?

I think he's been pretty clear that it spanks HDV.

ullanta
08-19-2008, 01:11 PM
Hey Barry - one thing I've been wondering:

Can you take a stab at answering how good the 6mbps mode is when the end product will be downrezzed web video? Does it seem like the types of artifacts seen will be mitigated by downrezzing?

R.Lang
08-19-2008, 01:13 PM
How does the 21-24mb handle quick moving objects or pans? Is the AVC HD compression noticable? as compared to a 200a (really what I want to know)?

I don't mind converting files before editting, so this is my main concern.

drdimento
08-19-2008, 01:15 PM
I think he's been pretty clear that it spanks HDV.

R. Lang, do you feel those grabs are better than HDV?

ullanta
08-19-2008, 01:17 PM
And just to be perfectly clear - there's no "over 60" progressive option in any of the "Hx" modes? Can a sorta 30p be faked with a slow shutter?

R.Lang
08-19-2008, 01:28 PM
R. Lang, do you feel those grabs are better than HDV?

they're stills, I'm not even going to guess. Hopefully he's uploading some footy right now.

Everts
08-19-2008, 01:44 PM
Or he is in the shower.
Anyboy tried downloading the avchd converter.
I cant seem to log in.It keeps telling me the password is in correct.

Nevermind it worked.:)

Jim Wiseman
08-19-2008, 01:59 PM
What is the URL for the converter?

Everts
08-19-2008, 02:02 PM
http://www.panasonic.com/business/provideo/support/software_downloads.asp

You will have to sign up.

Jim Wiseman
08-19-2008, 02:03 PM
Also, does the converter work on a Mac?

shrigg
08-19-2008, 02:08 PM
Also, does the converter work on a Mac?

No Mac version yet... *sigh*

kurtmo
08-19-2008, 02:22 PM
Does Panasonic provide a native MTS viewer too? I know there is supposedly an DVCPRO HD viewer.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 02:22 PM
Barry, the frame grabs . . . that was ~21mbs stuff?

And, in your own opinion are you comfortable that the image you see so far is:

Equal to?
Markedly better?

. . than HDV?
I'll try to get out and do some side-by-sides.

Aroon_Narayanan
08-19-2008, 02:23 PM
Barry,
How do the sharpness and overall picture quality compare to the XH A1? Picture aside, which aspects of the 150 are better or worse than the A1?

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 02:23 PM
From earlier posts I had the feeling you had the cam with you.
So is there a book coming out after the release of HMC 150 ?
Or a dvd:)
I'm looking at doing a book on it, since it's very similar to the 170 it shouldn't take long. Undecided on a DVD yet.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 02:24 PM
On your tests, did you use any DOF adapters?
Not yet, but planning to.


For example, do you think a DOF adapter will help smooth out any "macroblocking" when using the camera on the higher 1080 PH modes on shots with lots of movement?
So far there is no macroblocking.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 02:25 PM
Can you take a stab at answering how good the 6mbps mode is when the end product will be downrezzed web video? Does it seem like the types of artifacts seen will be mitigated by downrezzing?
It all depends on the shot, and on what size you're planning to downrez to. Give me some specifics and I'll see if I can give you some files.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 02:27 PM
How does the 21-24mb handle quick moving objects or pans? Is the AVC HD compression noticable? as compared to a 200a (really what I want to know)?
In 720p/24 it looks basically uncompressed. The higher up the scale you go the more you run into the *potential* that the GOP could become overloaded, just like with HDV. But even when it gets to its worst, it never ever looks anything like as bad as HDV can. If you remember the ship stuff from the Pirates of the Caribbean on the Sony and JVC HDV cameras, it was hideously mega-macro-blocky. The worst I've ever been able to extract from AVC-HD is a little bit of sparkly blocking at about a 2-pixel level, vs. the huge lego-sized bricks that can hit HDV.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 02:29 PM
And just to be perfectly clear - there's no "over 60" progressive option in any of the "Hx" modes? Can a sorta 30p be faked with a slow shutter?
In the "Hx" modes you can use 1/15 and 1/30 shutters, to simulate 15P and 30P.

john deaver
08-19-2008, 02:30 PM
No Mac version yet... *sigh*

You shouldn't need any additional software for the mac if using final cut 6

use the log and transfer functions and the icon in the upper left of the window to point to a folder containing the files and folders that would be present on the SD card. The computer will then give you thumbnails to look at and allow you to transcode into AIC or Prores 422.

works perfectly on the three files available from videomaker live

past that their is probably a way to get imove to do the same thing

shrigg
08-19-2008, 02:35 PM
You shouldn't need any additional software for the mac if using final cut 6

use the log and transfer functions and the icon in the upper left of the window to point to a folder containing the files and folders that would be present on the SD card. The computer will then give you thumbnails to look at and allow you to transcode into AIC or Prores 422.

works perfectly on the three files available from videomaker live

past that their is probably a way to get imove to do the same thing

True but I was hoping for a faster way to transcode.........

ullanta
08-19-2008, 02:43 PM
It all depends on the shot, and on what size you're planning to downrez to. Give me some specifics and I'll see if I can give you some files.



For my immediate needs, I'm thinking of classical recitals - from soloists to orchestras - on wood stages with a fair amount of grain/detailing. No super-fast camerawork, but likely some slow panning across very-high-detail scenes (i.e., orchestras), and some zooming (to closeups of performers' hands, etc.). We'd want fairly good detail of performers' actions, of course... lighting is ample, tending towards the high-contrast.

Also, if you'r really bored, and have a chance to line-in some high-dynamic-range classical music, with a decent amount of headroom, I'd love to check out the resulting audio!



Thanks,
Barry

john deaver
08-19-2008, 02:53 PM
i like the prospect of loading all my sd cards up onto the computer in thiere own little folders and telling final cut to transcode them all at once and walking away from it while it does it's thing.

this will be a whole lot better than babysitting a machine and having to swap out tapes all day. I shoot mostly weddings and if i come home with 8 tapes (very easy to do on a multi-cam shoot) its another days work just to load the dang tapes. this will let me come home from a wedding, copy over my sd cards and set it up to transcode, and go to bed. How sweet

o... and save me about 5 grand a year

Bucknfl
08-19-2008, 03:01 PM
Barry,

If you were shooting well lit scenes with slow to medium camera movement in PH mode would you get better results in 720 24p or 1080 24p? Would it look as good as an HVX 200a in 1080 24p?

Mucho Thanks

ecking
08-19-2008, 03:10 PM
The core image is basically the same. The operation is basically the same. There are lots of features the 200A/170 have that the 150 doesn't (like standard-def, or time lapse, or variable frame rates, things like that.

To a lot of folks, that'll matter. But I think a whole lot more people will look at the $3495 street price, and the dirt-cheap memory recording times, and say "that's all I need."

AVC-HD right now is a lot more work than P2 is to work with in post. For broadcasters and people making their living with the camera (other than longform event shooters), it's HPX170 all the way. For indie guys who can't afford $900 for a P2 card and $5200 for the camera, and who have more time than money so transcoding in post is no hassle to them, well then: the HMC150 comes about 80% of the HVX200 for thousands less. And it looks like it'd make an excellent "B" camera to a 170 as well.

Let me put it this way: when Panasonic put out the DVX, they also put out a lower-cost DVC80 which had the same imaging chips, same lens, same body, they just took out a few features to lower the price -- they took out 24p and cinegamma! Totally wrong move, and the DVC80 flopped. Well, with the 150 they took the 170 and took out a few features to lower the price. I'd say that probably 90% of our DVXUser members are going to be thrilled with what they left in, and won't miss what was taken out.

That's awesome but is the difference in colour space apparent? I remember when hdv came out you pretty much proved it can be.

joe 1008
08-19-2008, 03:22 PM
Will there finally be any firmware upgrade to make it possible to switch between NTSC/PAL?

OSV
08-19-2008, 03:44 PM
here is a 1920x1080 bmp frame grab from one of the videomaker clips, deinterlaced by nero... i uploaded it to one of those free image hosting sites, i hope that is o.k. under forum rules?? one of those videomaker clips looks like it's way out of focus, and they all look kind of overexposed on my crt monitor:

http://c.imagehost.org/t/0021/hmc150deinterlaced1920x1080.jpg (http://c.imagehost.org/download/0021/hmc150deinterlaced1920x1080.bmp)

Aroon_Narayanan
08-19-2008, 03:47 PM
That can't be right...I hope all that blocking is only in interlaced mode...

drdimento
08-19-2008, 03:57 PM
i like the prospect of loading all my sd cards up onto the computer in thiere own little folders and telling final cut to transcode them all at once and walking away from it while it does it's thing.

this will be a whole lot better than babysitting a machine and having to swap out tapes all day. I shoot mostly weddings and if i come home with 8 tapes (very easy to do on a multi-cam shoot) its another days work just to load the dang tapes. this will let me come home from a wedding, copy over my sd cards and set it up to transcode, and go to bed. How sweet

o... and save me about 5 grand a year

John makes a valid point here and represents our thoughts too on the solid-state workflow. We love using solid-state for immediate DTE without a battery or cables to deal with and the result on our commercials with solid state delivery has actually allowed us to shoot, edit, and deliver, in the field. Most recently we shot a commercial, re-shot a bad scene, edited it again, and uploaded to the network and after visiting with the client for about an hour and then waiting for accounting to cut the check, the commercial aired on the lobby monitor. With tape only we would have spent a lot of time digesting and logging while with the Compact Flash we were transferred and edited in what would have been the digitizing time while having a tape as back up just in case. Moreover, with our plans to add one Red camera and it's use of solid state Compact Flash the media inventory will be greatly reduced financially.

Solid state without the battery and cable of external drives is THE WAY TO GO.

drdimento
08-19-2008, 04:05 PM
here is a 1920x1080 bmp frame grab from one of the videomaker clips, deinterlaced by nero . . . one of those videomaker clips looks like it's way out of focus, and they all look kind of overexposed on my crt monitor: . . PICTURE . .

We just did a bicycle race about two weeks ago and had a similiar shot on HDV in similiar lighting and are getting the CF's here tommorow and are going to look to see if the operator was running when the bikes went through and if so we'll have an almsot side by side shot to evaluate. What bothers my editor is the greenry. If you zoom even just a little it almost has that same edge look of distant SD.

Anyone else notice that? Or are we missing something? It doesn't look like a focus issue.

kurtmo
08-19-2008, 04:51 PM
Anyone else get this error trying to transcode using panny's tool?

Edit: Got it! I tried to move the files instead of transcoding right out of the stream folder.

BTW: Transcoding the lowlight files took about a half minute or less.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 04:54 PM
For my immediate needs, I'm thinking of classical recitals - from soloists to orchestras - on wood stages with a fair amount of grain/detailing. No super-fast camerawork, but likely some slow panning across very-high-detail scenes (i.e., orchestras), and some zooming (to closeups of performers' hands, etc.). We'd want fairly good detail of performers' actions, of course... lighting is ample, tending towards the high-contrast.
Do you NEED the 6mbps rate then? Zooming is one of the things that long-GOP codecs don't like. Zooming, and color changes, stuff like that. If you can get by with the 13mbps version you'll probably be better off, but ... hmmm... I can't think of any circumstance like what you're detailing that I could go out and grab right now or in the next couple of days, but... I'll think about it. My initial reaction would be that you'd probably be asking too much of 6mbps for those purposes.


Also, if you'r really bored, and have a chance to line-in some high-dynamic-range classical music, with a decent amount of headroom, I'd love to check out the resulting audio!
What, just from a CD? I don't know what I've got here, I'm sure I can scrounge up some Star Wars soundtracks or Holst's "The Planets" or something like that; tell me what you'd want to hear.

drdimento
08-19-2008, 04:57 PM
If you want to look at the AVCHD material and work with it straight out of the box (file folder) just download an Edius trial for FREE and open the Bin and just right click and say "add a file" and it will instantly see the material. The low light one is the one we are studying the closest. It is this one that will be of the most value to us.

However - - as always - - our biggest concern with the HMC150 will be the solid-state part with no back up. We did just discover something this afternoon in the Avid section that has blown us out of the water though and that is that Avid's 2D filter will extrapolate an image via resizing and for crying out loud it looks HD. How can this be? The edges are soft but it's absolutely amazing. One of the forum guys came up with it and it's pretty darn fab!

EDIT: BTW, don't be in a hurry because it will take Edius a little time to work the material so I suggest ADD a file then wait awhile, then do it again (#2) and so on. Multiclicking them in or get in a rush and ur puter just might lock up. Our 3.0 GHz dual core hyper threaded xeons x 2 don't like it but processes it and is very very very reminiscent of DVCProHD native editing type loading on our cores. No question that HDV runs through our 4 Gb ram machines with 512mb ATI cards a lot easier and we can edit while rendering but not so with AVCHD. Some might say "you just need a hotter computer" but in our book what we have is pretty darn hot that is unless one renders it out to something else like we used to do with P2 but then is that what is wanted or what has to be to make it work? And if modified into something else to work with it (i.e. DVCProHD100 rendered to an MPEG2 codec) then what's the difference in just going with an easier codec to start with? It was this decision that lead us to FCP that just renders to QT :o)

Same deal, just a different label or wrapper.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 04:59 PM
If you were shooting well lit scenes with slow to medium camera movement in PH mode would you get better results in 720 24p or 1080 24p?
Depends on what you mean by "better results". The 1080 will be a little sharper, but the 720 is going to be almost as sharp and less compressed.

The difference between 1080 and 720 isn't as much on the HMC150 as it is on the HVX200, largely because the codec on the 150 doesn't prefilter. There will be some more detail in the 1080 version than in the 720 version, but not as much difference as in the HVX. And, unlike the HVX, the codec efficiencies are more in favor of 720 mode than 1080 mode on this camera (since the bitrate is the same; encoding fewer pixels in the same bandwidth is going to make for more efficient compression).

I haven't done an exhaustive comparison between 1080 and 720 on the HMC150 but my initial impression is that 720/24p is definitely the "sweet spot" and 720/60p looks just awesome. 1080 will be sharper, and if you're in controlled circumstances it would be the better choice, but for most things I'd say you're going to get 90% of the performance from 720p mode and a more robust codec.


Would it look as good as an HVX 200a in 1080 24p?
HVX is still going to have twice the color resolution in its recording. They'll have comparable levels of detail; HVX will have about 1400x810, HMC150 will have about 1280x720, so -- really, they'll be pretty close. But the HVX200A and HPX170 are still shooting intraframe 4:2:2 so the advantage is on their side.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 05:02 PM
That's awesome but is the difference in colour space apparent? I remember when hdv came out you pretty much proved it can be.
Yes, that's not only a possibility, but when shooting 1080/60i it's going to be a definite advantage for the HVX/HPX.

60i or 50i 4:2:0 is hideous and should be outlawed. Progressive 4:2:0 is much better. Neither will match 4:2:2 no matter how you slice it. But in interlaced, 4:2:0 is the debbil.

I'll have to see if I can find time to do some comparative chroma keys in 1080 mode so you can see how much of a difference there may be between them.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 05:05 PM
Will there finally be any firmware upgrade to make it possible to switch between NTSC/PAL?
Great question, and no answer for you. I doubt it; we got it on the 170 as a factory upgrade but they've given no indication that they're even considering it for the 150. But, hey, I'll ask...

ilauzirika
08-19-2008, 05:21 PM
Two more questions......
Have you tried the hdmi out? which is your opinion on the audio side of the camera?

Thanks for all the info you'd given us.

drdimento
08-19-2008, 05:36 PM
Barry, are you using Edius 4 or Broadcast to view the AVCHD? Also, have you tried running it through ProCoder3? We tried but ProCoder3 won't see it but the small coder that came with Broadcast does. What the ???

Also, do u know if anyone tried it in PPcs3? Even our Studio 11 says "hello" to the material but we don't have the BRD on that machine and trying to figure out how to get it over to either Avid Liquid, Edius Broadcast or FCP by "file output" out of Studio. What format should we come out to do the transfer and not affect the video enhancements? .avi? or ???

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 05:42 PM
Two more questions......
Have you tried the hdmi out?
HDMI is HDMI, so it's a digital uncompressed 1920x1080 signal. Looks like an HVX's HD-SDI. I haven't tried to scope it or anything, but it sure looks good.


which is your opinion on the audio side of the camera?
Identical to the HVX and HPX170. Only difference is that it uses AC-3 compression instead of uncompressed PCM, and it's two channels instead of four. I'll try Ullanta's suggestion here hopefully soon and post some recorded AC-3 files demuxed from the MTS.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 05:44 PM
Barry, are you using Edius 4 or Broadcast to view the AVCHD?
Broadcast 4.61.


Also, have you tried running it through ProCoder3? We tried but ProCoder3 won't see it but the small coder that came with Broadcast does. What the ???
No, but once it's been converted to HQ you can use it in any of the EDIUS applications.


Also, do u know if anyone tried it in PPcs3?
PH mode doesn't work in CS3 3.1, but I'd bet a dollar that it'll work in CS4.


Even our Studio 11 says "hello" to the material but we don't have the BRD on that machine
BRD, as in blu-ray disc? You should be able to burn the raw .mts files directly onto a blu-ray disc and play them on your blu-ray player. blu-ray players support AVC-HD files.


What format should we come out to do the transfer and not affect the video enhancements? .avi? or ???
You want the highest quality conversion you can get, obviously; either uncompressed AVI (which would be HUGE) or use the Canopus converter to go to HQ if you're going to EDIUS.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 05:46 PM
Footage files are up due to the generous server donation by Jason Adams.

http://www.dreamoncreative.com/~dvxuser/

As of this moment, 00095 is still uploading and says it has a couple of hours to go, but the rest of the files should be downloadable.

dcloud
08-19-2008, 06:01 PM
how does the workflow go on worst case scenarios (no edius or canopus)?

Bucknfl
08-19-2008, 06:09 PM
As a freelance cameraman I shoot alot of formats yet I still have alot of clients that request the dvx100b because they are not comfortable with P2. Mostly I hand off a tape at the end of the day. I think I can sell them on the 150 workflow, just hand them a card.

Will using pro res in final cut be about the same amount of time as digitizing tape?

avenue
08-19-2008, 06:45 PM
So what are my option for converting on a mac? :( I can't do it in FCP studio 1 so I think I may only have the option of FCP2? Panasonic should make a converter for macs that suks on their part big time!!!!! maybe once it's released they'll will have something going for us MAC users.....

Jim Wiseman
08-19-2008, 06:47 PM
Thanks for uploading the files Barry. They don't seem to be accessible with the FCP 6.04 Log and Transfer window. They seem to want the whole directory structure of the card. I get a Warning:

"Blank (folder or file) contains an invalid directory structure. Please choose a folder whose directory structure matches supported media.

Any ideas other than uploading the cards whole directory with associated files? The Videomaker files were in that format and imported without a problem, but I would much rather see your footage!

rmmskatemedia
08-19-2008, 06:50 PM
yeah I'm wondering about the mac situation too. So let me get this straight. If I have fcp6 I'm ok???? or is that just to work with avchd. Do you think fcp will make an update for avchd??? I'm just slightly confused on the whole fcp and the hmc.

Also How much wider is the lens than say the dvx???? Is it wider than the hvx? I'm wondering this for the purpose of some century lenses I have, and whether I will get a good deal of vingetting. Also, how is it as far as the body is concerned? Yes I'm just as concerned about the codec and picture as everyone else, but my whole purpose for buying this camera would be for a secondary to my hvx, so is it worth buying for its size? as far as being more managable, and less conspicuous looking?


also, is there anywhere to preorder the cam???


Sorry for all of the questions.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 06:56 PM
how does the workflow go on worst case scenarios (no edius or canopus)?
Every major NLE manufacturer has said they're going to support AVC-HD. As to when they get around to launching proper support, that's up to them. Remember that it was 2.5 years before Avid even supported JVC's HDV entirely, and it was about 6 months before Apple and Avid supported 1080 HDV at all.

I expect that we'll have proper AVC-HD support from all the "A" companies (Avid, Apple, Adobe) in their next releases (i.e., FCS 3, Adobe CS4, and whatever Avid introduces next).

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 06:58 PM
Will using pro res in final cut be about the same amount of time as digitizing tape?
Depends on your system. On a dual-core laptop I can convert 60 seconds of footage in 40 seconds. On an Octo-Mac I would expect that you should be able to do a minute in 10 seconds, but I'm not a Mac user so I can't answer that for you.

drdimento
08-19-2008, 07:00 PM
As a freelance cameraman I shoot alot of formats yet I still have alot of clients that request the dvx100b because they are not comfortable with P2. Mostly I hand off a tape at the end of the day. . . . Will using pro res in final cut be about the same amount of time as digitizing tape?

It is this whole issue that has prevented us from getting a lot of the Pittsburgh market freelance material . . solid state only. The only projects we were able to land that we didn't deliver the finished product (we call shoot and ship) were rock videos where they don't really care if the video worked or not because it is a song only or B roll for marketing or training material that is for illustration/marketing. In other words, both scenarios are NOT critical applications.

For ALL our mission critical applications all our clients REQUIRE tape. Thus, when faced with the P2 720 @ 24pN issue and no codec for our NLE we simply evaluated our reasons for the WHY P2 at all and came up with if we could find a tape solution (even be it HDV) and our clients were satisfied, then so be it and lower our manpower requirements on location (no data transfer person running around with a laptop and hard drive) and when we rented two different HDV cameras and put the material on DVD and BRD and put the material in front of 11 of our largest clients each having at least two or more people in the viewing process the result was that only twice were they able to distinguish the HVX from the HDV cameras and even those two both said, ". . I can't really see any real difference other than just maybe and this is only maybe the one is maybe richer in color but I'm not sure."

Thus, why go to all the heartache if ya don't have too and that's when we discovered a camera that recorded to both HDV tape - - AND - - Compact Flash at the same time. To this end, we have the second of four arriving tomorrow afternoon for our second in a series of three shoots that are HD where the client said ". . . we want a tape, otherwise we'll get someone else" and that was the 8th request of this nature this year, the others we had to rent a camera.

Thus, we now have solid-state (CF) AND tape (miniDV - HDV). Thus our configs are:

SD PROJECTS: Panasonic DVX100B x 3 per unit
HD PROJECTS: Sony HVR-Z7U x 1 per unit

Thus each of our two field units at the moment will have 1 HD camera with a removable lens and Compact Flash AND tape recording PLUS 3 SD cameras that record to tape.

The HMC150 we are looking at closely but will have to be convinced that there is marked reason to go that route and the footage I've seen thus far from the D/L's isn't jumping off the walls and shouting "I'm markedly better than HDV" to me. I'm going to show it to our clients over the next two days (before Friday) but that bicycle shot looks more like the DVX100B to us and I am certain that our HDV material would look at least as good and probably more definition on the foalage in the background even with the mild pan. I know when the CF's come in from our bicycle tour shoot from two weeks ago will prove that.

So, we agree on the solid-state only and our clients prove it also by demanding some form of tape OR at the least that we deliver on HDD and that we keep two copies on hand until they have received the drive and digested it. This latter is one major hassle. HMC150 material of couse would take up a lot less space.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 07:03 PM
So what are my option for converting on a mac? :( I can't do it in FCP studio 1 so I think I may only have the option of FCP2? Panasonic should make a converter for macs that suks on their part big time!!!!! maybe once it's released they'll will have something going for us MAC users.....
Panasonic themselves didn't create the converter, MainConcept did. Panasonic's Mac support for P2 was less than stellar and, well, frankly, it's still sub-par. They have more P2 utilities on the Windows platform than they do on the Mac, and I wouldn't be surprised if that situation continued with AVCCAM. Hopefully they'll have full parity between the platforms, but that remains to be seen.

You can use the Panasonic converter under BootCamp/Windows on a Mac I guess.

Look at the AVC-HD whitepapers at their AVCCAM website for more info on working with the footage with your favorite editors.
ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/Panasonic/Drivers/PBTS/papers/AVCCAM_EditSol.pdf

Bernie Mitchell is supposed to have some whitepapers on working with each editor, but I didn't see them on the site...

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 07:07 PM
Thanks for uploading the files Barry. They don't seem to be accessible with the FCP 6.04 Log and Transfer window. They seem to want the whole directory structure of the card. I get a Warning:

"Blank (folder or file) contains an invalid directory structure. Please choose a folder whose directory structure matches supported media.

Try putting them all in a directory structure like this:
PRIVATE/AVCHD/BDMV/STREAM

Put all the files in that "stream" directory and see if it works.

Jim Wiseman
08-19-2008, 07:08 PM
FCS2 supports AVCHD if imported within the full directory structure, i.e., as if from the card itself. The Videomaker stuff came in fine and was transcoded to ProRes 422. There is also the option for Apple Intermediate codec. No ProRes 422 HQ, which I would think would be preferable. Wasn't terribly impressed with the quality of the Videomaker footage in ProRes 422, don't know if HQ would make a difference as there is not that option.

Any one have any other ideas as to how to get individual MTS files in without the camera? Obviously it could be uploaded with the whole file structure intact. I have an ioHD which would work on playback from the cam with HDMI to ProRes 422 HQ, but would love to see the quality of the cam before buying it.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 07:10 PM
Also How much wider is the lens than say the dvx????
Way.


Is it wider than the hvx?
The original? Yes, way wider.


Also, how is it as far as the body is concerned? Yes I'm just as concerned about the codec and picture as everyone else, but my whole purpose for buying this camera would be for a secondary to my hvx, so is it worth buying for its size? as far as being more managable, and less conspicuous looking?
It's about the size of a DVX, maybe just a tiny little bit larger. It's ergonomic handheld heaven compared to an HVX200. But this is not a "stealth" camera, it looks basically like a sleeker/thinner HVX.


also, is there anywhere to preorder the cam???
I'm sure all our usual sponsors will have preorder options, such as Spec-Comm and Abel and EC Pro Video.

Michael Reichmann
08-19-2008, 07:12 PM
Voltaic on the Mac seems to handle these MTS files just fine.

Michael

Jim Wiseman
08-19-2008, 07:25 PM
Barry,

Tried it using the structure you laid out above, and same error. Nothing in the folders except for STREAM. Same when I used the standard Videomaker (Panasonic) structure which was

PRIVATE/AVCHD/AVCHDTN/BDMV/CLIPINF/PLAYLIST/STREAM

The intermediate folders contained these files in the Videomaker download:
AVCHDTN: THUMB.TDT and THUMB.TID (thumbnails?)
CLIPINF: 00001.CPI 00002.CPI (clipinfo?) and INDEX.BDM and MOVIEOBJ.BDM
PLAYLIST: 0000.MPL

I emptied all those folders and put MTS files in the STREAM folder, the only folder that had any files in it. Same error as before.

Apparently FCS2 FCP 6.04 wants to see those other folders and files before it transcodes.

Everts
08-19-2008, 07:29 PM
I'm downloading Barry's footage now .I was not impress by the footage from videomaker.
The DRS function is nice though.
Converting 6 secs of footage to dvcproHD took about 2.5 sec on a dual core 2.68GHz( oc 3%) with 2 GB and a FSB of 1333MHZ.
The faster the better.
Does anyone know of a free player for avchd?
Thanks.

Barry_Green
08-19-2008, 08:11 PM
Okay, I've gone through and uploaded all the miscellaneous directories and contents. I've asked Jason to move the MTS files into the appropriate STREAM directory. For those of you Mac users who have already downloaded the MTS files, you can just download the PRIVATE directory (and all its associated subdirectories) and move the MTS files into the STREAM directory, and hopefully it'll all work.

drdimento
08-19-2008, 08:49 PM
This converter for AVCHD may help some on the Mac side:

http://www.olmosconsulting.com/hdr-sr1/

Jim Wiseman
08-19-2008, 09:33 PM
Downloaded all the files that seemed necessary (Did not get all CPI files, only ones that were represented in the STREAM (MTS) folder.) Got all others. Took a while as I had to download each file individually. Being able to download a whole folder at a time would be helpful. Put all contents into proper folders. Noticed there were no INDEX.BDM or MOVIEOBJ.BDM files in the BDMV folder. Could be the reason I got the same error from FCP. Still not working with Log and Transfer window on the Mac and FCP 6.04. Maybe it would be best to shoot a few good shots and put the whole PRIVATE folder with all files intact up where they could be downloaded in one shot as with Videomaker. Or maybe you can get all of this current stuff up in one downloadable folder with everything as it is exactly on the card.

Thanks for the effort

awelgraven
08-19-2008, 09:35 PM
I saw this has been somewhat explained, but I'd love to know for sure.

I was planning on getting an HVX until this camera came out. My main liking toward the HVX remains it's variable frame rates...however...

Is it true that shooting at 60p on this camera will yield slo-mo results if placed in a 24p/30p timeline?

Jason Adams
08-19-2008, 09:52 PM
I have moved the mts files into the stream directory.

shrigg
08-19-2008, 10:05 PM
Is it true that shooting at 60p on this camera will yield slo-mo results if placed in a 24p/30p timeline?

Barry had mentioned that around here, probably somewhere in this 100-plus page thread (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=125360). I don't know if he has specifically tried 720p60@p24 with the HMC150 but the concept seems sound.

BobDiaz
08-19-2008, 10:08 PM
I'm downloading Barry's footage now .I was not impress by the footage from videomaker.
The DRS function is nice though.
Converting 6 secs of footage to dvcproHD took about 2.5 sec on a dual core 2.68GHz( oc 3%) with 2 GB and a FSB of 1333MHZ.
The faster the better.
Does anyone know of a free player for avchd?
Thanks.


Voltaic on the Mac seems to handle these MTS files just fine.

Michael

I'm using the Voltaic to convert the files on my Apple. It works, but is very slow.

The VideoMaker Files look bad, lots of blocking artifacts, BUT Barry's files look very good. ODD... I'm not sure why the VideoMaker's files are not so great...


Bob Diaz

awelgraven
08-19-2008, 10:09 PM
Also...does his have the LCD flip feature found in the HPX170 for use with 35mm adaptors?

psts
08-19-2008, 10:15 PM
I saw this has been somewhat explained, but I'd love to know for sure.

I was planning on getting an HVX until this camera came out. My main liking toward the HVX remains it's variable frame rates...however...

Is it true that shooting at 60p on this camera will yield slo-mo results if placed in a 24p/30p timeline?

Just tried it in fcp 5. It works. I used voltaic to convert, panasonic frc didnt work so I used cinema tools to conform the files to 23.98 and imported to timeline, rendered and there you go. If you don't want to render, convert to 720 60p DVC HD first in compressor.

BobDiaz
08-19-2008, 10:36 PM
Also...does his have the LCD flip feature found in the HPX170 for use with 35mm adaptors?

According to VideoMaker, YES.


Bob Diaz

dcloud
08-20-2008, 02:11 AM
Also...does his have the LCD flip feature found in the HPX170 for use with 35mm adaptors?
According to VideoMaker, YES.
Really? 150 is starting to look good...

ullanta
08-20-2008, 02:43 AM
Do you NEED the 6mbps rate then? Zooming is one of the things that long-GOP codecs don't like. Zooming, and color changes, stuff like that. If you can get by with the 13mbps version you'll probably be better off, but ... hmmm... I can't think of any circumstance like what you're detailing that I could go out and grab right now or in the next couple of days, but... I'll think about it. My initial reaction would be that you'd probably be asking too much of 6mbps for those purposes.

Hmmm... not as positive a response as I'd hoped! I'm really hoping to squeeze an hour onto a single-layer recordable DVD, so 6mbps would work and 13mbps wouldn't. Hopefully we'll have a chance to try this out and see what we can live with. Sniff. Here's another scenario - how about a still camera, filming similar things, with the images cropped to, say, SD in post (that is - doing some "panning/zooming" in post by cropping to an SD-sized window). Better result at 6mbps than actual panning and zooming?




What, just from a CD? I don't know what I've got here, I'm sure I can scrounge up some Star Wars soundtracks or Holst's "The Planets" or something like that; tell me what you'd want to hear.

Sure, from a CD or any other good source! I'd be feeding the camera from a good audio recording system most of the time, so I'm mainly curious about what the codec will do to a good line-level signal. I'd prefer solo (piano, violin, cello?) or small ensemble, with some quiet and loud passages.

Richard J. Johnson
08-20-2008, 03:16 AM
With all of these Issues with Editing AVC-HD, A used HVX is looking real good right about now. I have an older mac (Dual G5) and FCP-HD 4.1. I don't think I could even attempt to edit AVC. Bottom line, I want a camera that is not going to force me into buying a new computer.

avenue
08-20-2008, 05:05 AM
You shouldn't need any additional software for the mac if using final cut 6

use the log and transfer functions and the icon in the upper left of the window to point to a folder containing the files and folders that would be present on the SD card. The computer will then give you thumbnails to look at and allow you to transcode into AIC or Prores 422.

works perfectly on the three files available from videomaker live

past that their is probably a way to get imove to do the same thing

You can do it in imovie but it says you "HAVE" to connect the camera? which I find wierd but whatever I guess for now thats pretty good... I need to get my paws in FCP6 now.....

john deaver
08-20-2008, 05:06 AM
not to be an idiot....

but how do you go about downloading the intire "private" directory of Barry's footage

I've tried everything i know of but it keeps giving me HTML files, not folders.

do i need to FTP all this stuff.

thanks
John

kurtmo
08-20-2008, 05:16 AM
As my father-in-law always said about desert, you don't want any, it tastes terrible. Same goes for the HMC150, you don't want this camera. Trust me. But if you do decide to get one...please, please wait until I've got mine....

Well, it took some heavy lifting, but I found a Sony Vegas workflow. This is my first interaction with HD, so I knew I'd have some adjusting to do. What follows is my saga and my reactions along the ride.

Watched the tail end of the Videomaker live then downloaded Videomaker files to my laptop (newer Intel Penryn chip running vista home premium). Oh, boy I'm on my way to HD at last. :)

Zip files won't extract with windows built in decompressor (thanks uncle Bill). Eventually, I extract just the MTS files from the stream folder. i open up sony vegas and dump the file into the timeline. Vegas hangs big time. No big deal, that was expected.

Next, I download the Panny transcoder and AVC-I decoder and install the tran. I attempt to run the transcode, but can't get the tool to recognize the file. I keep getting an error dialog. :( I suspect that somehow the standalone files are missing some metadata that says that it is from an HMC camera (i've seen some warning to that effect before downloading.)

I take a break and come back and download a better compression util. I extract everything from the directory. Suddenly the transoder is much happier and so am I:). The files transode before I have time to switch to another app. Niiiice!

I download and try to install the P2 viewer. It fails to install. Some driver is missing. :huh: I'm back to panny and eventually find the P2 drivers. I try installing them and choose the HVX200 P2 driver. Now the viewer will install:thumbup: , but I can't seem to find a way to point to the files.:-BlackEye(DBG Undaunted and unwilling to RTFM, I try my old buddy VLC. No dice there either.

I go back to the Panny viewer and play with all the menus until I find the virtual P2 or some such thing, that allows me to point to directories. After a bit of trial and error, I finally figure out what folder in the stack I need to point to.
And now (drum-roll) i get my first view of the HMC files and...the kinda stink. I see artifacting around the edges box on the low light shots and on the motion shots.:crybaby: looks like I'll be keeping my 100B for a while, which is OK, but I've been following this for a long time and I have a hard time believing that the codec could be that hosed.

By now the Olympics are in full swing on the TV, so I play with the clips and watch at the same time. It would be nice if I could complete the workflow test that I had hoped for, but I don't own Raylight (the P2-Vegas glue). Beach volleyball is over, so I check dvxuser for updates then head over to dvfilm.com and poke around a bit. I find a demo version and decide to give it a try.

I install Raylight and put it on green. I start up Vegas and import the first file. I preview the clip... Wait a minute, what happened to the artifacting? It's gone! I go to blue and try a render. Having not rendered any HD before, I try a QT file at 1080p using the photo JPEG codec. It renders pretty quickly. I open the file and have to downsize it to get to the QT controls. It's looking sweet! I try several more renders using other files and am blown away. The image is excellent; no artifacting. The colors are nice. The low light shots look fine, too.:D

This morning I pulled down some of Barry's clips. I found that as long as I replace a file with the same name in the stream folder, the transoder will transcode it. The first shot from Barry has a quick pan and it looked fine. I didn't see the codec breaking up. I plan to rename the other MTS files to replace some of the videomaker clips and try them later today.

Bottom line, the workflow seems about what I expected. Now that I've gone through the steps, getting files to my NLE should be easier than using tape and the transcode times seemed liveable. The image was as good as I expected for the price.

shrigg
08-20-2008, 05:27 AM
With all of these Issues with Editing AVC-HD, A used HVX is looking real good right about now. I have an older mac (Dual G5) and FCP-HD 4.1. I don't think I could even attempt to edit AVC. Bottom line, I want a camera that is not going to force me into buying a new computer.

The HVX is a known quantity and at the moment is easier to work with in post. Computers and software will definitely catch up to the HMC150 though. It has to be a prioirity for any serious editing app maker. As rarely as I do major camera purchases, I want to seek out the "latest greatest" and will happily wait for everyone else to catch up to me and my shiny new HMC150.

My bottom line says that no matter how cheap I find a used HVX I *stilll* can't afford enough P2 cards for my shooting needs. And hauling my primary computer to offload footage isn't wise.

avenue
08-20-2008, 07:25 AM
someone post them on vimeo I dont have FCP2 so for now I got no wa of seeing it but if I like it then I would be willing to upgrade once I buy the HMC150 so ya post it on vimeo HD or something for the people on macs with now options like me :)

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 07:31 AM
I saw this has been somewhat explained, but I'd love to know for sure.

I was planning on getting an HVX until this camera came out. My main liking toward the HVX remains it's variable frame rates...however...

Is it true that shooting at 60p on this camera will yield slo-mo results if placed in a 24p/30p timeline?
Yes. As long as you instruct your editor in how to handle the footage properly, it will yield frame-accurate slow motion that would look identical to overcranked 60fps HVX slow motion (in terms of motion, not necessarily in terms of compression efficiency etc.)

The HVX provides about 3 dozen frame rates; with the HMC150 you can get 24p, 30p, 15p and 60p.

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 07:37 AM
Also...does his have the LCD flip feature found in the HPX170 for use with 35mm adaptors?
Roger that, it definitely does.

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 07:39 AM
With all of these Issues with Editing AVC-HD, A used HVX is looking real good right about now. I have an older mac (Dual G5) and FCP-HD 4.1. I don't think I could even attempt to edit AVC. Bottom line, I want a camera that is not going to force me into buying a new computer.
No question that P2/DVCPRO-HD is definitely better supported for editing right now. There is no such thing as FCP-HD 4.1, is there? I thought it was 4.5 where they introduced HD. In any case, 4.5 can edit HVX footage but you'd have to "capture" it through firewire, just like tape. If you want to use P2 files you'd need to move up to at least 5.04.

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 07:55 AM
Noticed there were no INDEX.BDM or MOVIEOBJ.BDM files in the BDMV folder.
GAAAA! Yes, I missed those files, they've been uploaded now. Try those and see.


Maybe it would be best to shoot a few good shots and put the whole PRIVATE folder with all files intact up where they could be downloaded in one shot as with Videomaker.
I'll attempt to get a few different shots and do so.


Or maybe you can get all of this current stuff up in one downloadable folder with everything as it is exactly on the card.
Love to, but it's a full 8GB card! Full to the brim. I don't think Jason would want me posting 8GB of data, nor would you guys want to download a full 8GB... :thumbsup:

psts
08-20-2008, 08:11 AM
I wonder if it's my monitor (regular computer lcd) or maybe the transcoding in voltaic, but I'm definitely getting a mosaic type of pixeling in the sky areas on Barry's shots. The color is gorgeous though. Transcoding on my mac quad with voltaic is horribly slow. I'm hoping it's the transcoding that is causing the artifacts, because I definitely don't see this with my hvx.

smelni
08-20-2008, 08:18 AM
In 720/24 mode, I'd put AVC-HD up against DVCPRO-HD and I think it's probable that the AVC-HD PH mode would even look better.



I just want to make sure i understand this correctly - are you saying that avc-hd is actually better then dvcprohd at 720?

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 08:34 AM
"Better"? That's a loaded word. Better in what way? For editing, no. For color resolution, no. For codec resiliency, no. But in overall detail? MAYBE. It depends. See, DVCPRO-HD 720p is recorded at 960x720, whereas AVC-HD 720p is recorded at 1280x720. So you may see some more fine detail. Whereas in HDV that was usually easily trumped by the GOP issue, AVC at 720/24P is at least three times more resilient to GOP issues. So then it comes down to 33% more potential pixels horizontally, vs. 100% more chroma samples vertically. So then, it comes down to what's generating the images on the front end -- if we're talking about a VariCam HPX2700 vs. an HMC150, then unquestionably the HPX2700 is going to obliterate the HMC150, whether 960 or 1280. But HPX170 vs. HMC150, same imager to same imager, shooting strictly the same subject, recording to their relative 720/24p formats, I think it's going to be pretty hard to tell those two apart. (testing will prove whether this theory is correct, of course).

There's an inverse relationship between quality on these cams' recording formats. Whereas on the DVCPRO-HD cameras I actively advocate always using 1080P mode whenever possible, to extract the maximum performance the camera can deliver, in the HMC150 I might actually recommend the opposite. Reason being that the bandwidth is fixed, so whether you shoot 720 or 1080, 24p or 30p or 60p or 60i, the same # of bits are used to encode each second. So the fewer pixels you force the system to encode, the better the compression will perform. It's not that way with the HPX/HVX, where there's more bandwidth allocated for 1080 mode. So the HMC150 *gains* when going in 720p mode, whereas the HPX/HVX gain when going in 1080 mode.

So -- when would it be possible for AVC-HD 720p to look better than DVCPRO-HD 720p? A black & white resolution chart will undoubtedly look better. Scenes with tons of fine detail and not a lot of color information. Black & white footage. Maybe a monochromatic desert landscape... When would DVCPRO-HD 720p look better than AVC-HD 720p? Scenes awash with color, chroma keys, and any scenes where the long-GOP nature of AVC-HD might be taxed too far. I don't know if it's possible to tax AVC-HD into "breaking" in 720/24p mode, I really rather suspect that it's not possible -- but if it were, then DVCPRO-HD would excel over AVC-HD in those circumstances.

Bucknfl
08-20-2008, 08:54 AM
Have you tested the hmc150 for chroma key?

David Saraceno
08-20-2008, 09:07 AM
If I download the individual MTS files, will those be seen and imported by Edius without the hierarchal structure?

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 09:32 AM
Have you tested the hmc150 for chroma key?
Not yet.

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 09:33 AM
If I download the individual MTS files, will those be seen and imported by Edius without the hierarchal structure?
PH mode isn't supported by today's version of EDIUS Broadcast (not sure about EDIUS Neo). I used the Edius AVC-2-HQ converter to convert the files into CanopusHQ files, which are then viewable in Windows Media Player or importable to any NLE on that Windows system. And you don't need the hierarchal file structure for that converter (hence why I didn't even think to post the whole directory structure the first time...)

I'm pretty certain that in the next version of EDIUS and EDIUS Neo, they'll have the ability to directly drag the MTS files right into the timeline or bin.

David Saraceno
08-20-2008, 09:44 AM
Thank you.

Mark Williams
08-20-2008, 09:49 AM
Barry, Thanks for all your hard work on answering everyone's questions. I know you don't have to do it. I am sure you have burned up a lot of hours here when you could have been doing something else.

avenue
08-20-2008, 09:52 AM
Barry, Thanks for all your hard work on answering everyone's questions. I know you don't have to do it. I am sure you have burned up a lot of hours here when you could have been doing something else.

ya so true thanks again :dankk2:

David Saraceno
08-20-2008, 10:00 AM
I noticed a fair amount of noise in the trees with the large bird (egret?) when you zoom back -- the 95 stream.

If you shot the same footage with the 170 or the 200a, what would your thoughts be on a comparison of noise levels?

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 11:16 AM
Don't know, I'd have to try them both side by side.

Tom Shortridge
08-20-2008, 12:45 PM
(Sorry if this has been covered in previous threads, I haven't seen it answered) -

What about ergonomics? How does this baby feel in your hands? Like the DVX? HVX? EX-1?

TheDingo
08-20-2008, 12:47 PM
Barry,

Does the HMC150's zoom "feather" better than the DVX or HVX ?
( i.e. Nice smooth gradual deceleration when stopping or starting a zoom )

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 01:04 PM
What about ergonomics? How does this baby feel in your hands? Like the DVX? HVX? EX-1?
It feels like a DVX. It's 100 times better, ergonomically for long handheld use, than the HVX. And 1000 times better than the EX1. It's feather light, perfectly balanced, and the switches and buttons are mostly all there by feel. I still get a tad confused when reaching for them by feel alone because I'm so used to the HVX's positions, and some things are slightly different on the 150/170, but better. Just have to re-orient my thinking and get used to the new layout.

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 01:05 PM
Barry,

Does the HMC150's zoom "feather" better than the DVX or HVX ?
( i.e. Nice smooth gradual deceleration when stopping or starting a zoom )
No, it's basically the same as the DVX/HVX. Power zoom has never been these cameras' strong point.

BobDiaz
08-20-2008, 01:57 PM
NOTE TO MAC USERS:

I've been looking at Barry's AVCHD files using the VoltaicHD conversion program. You can download a demo copy from the APPLE WEB Pages. Just got to DOWNLOADS --> ALL DOWNLOADS --> VIDEO; you'll find it on the first page.


VoltaicHD 1.4.1
08/15/2008 AVCHD converter for Mac (PowerPC and Intel). (Shareware)The demo version limits you to 10 or 12 conversions and the file can not be bigger than 51 MB. To do more, it costs $35 (USA) to get the key to unlock the software.

The software is a bit on the slow side, because it takes around 7:1 --> 20:1 for the time. So, a 1 minute 720/24p files will take 7 minutes and a 1 minute 1080/60i file takes 20 minutes. However, the output is AIC, so one should be able to take it into iMove or FCE once converted. I have not tried it yet, I'm still busy looking at videos and converting...

Bob Diaz

tbanucci
08-20-2008, 03:09 PM
Stupid question for ya Barry. I hate losing my lens caps. Do they have a lens cap built in to the 150, like Sony does with their cameras now (fully integrated and switch operated)?

You also list that there are many pros and cons when comparing the 150 to the 170. Would you mind listing the major ones besides the difference in image quality (which has been discussed ad nauseam I think).

combatentropy
08-20-2008, 04:05 PM
Barry, please list the shutter speeds (especially, will it have slow shutter speeds, like 1/6?).

Also, please confirm: No time lapse? Didn't the DVX100 have time lapse?

David Saraceno
08-20-2008, 04:35 PM
Note that Voltaic, while a nifty little converter, does not presently support converting to prores.

It only converts to AIC.

Interestingly, the Videomaker download works lickety split in FCP 6.0.4.

But the bare files that Barry provided do not.

And Barry's files do not work in Bootcamp using the Panasonic converter, while I can access and convert the videomaker files in Bootcamp.

matt s.
08-20-2008, 04:42 PM
for anyone on an older G5 it took me about 5 min. to encode with Voltaic the 11 sec 720 60p clip of the seagulls Barry posted with a duocore 2ghz 10.4. opened in quicktime no problem and FCP as well.

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 05:00 PM
Stupid question for ya Barry. I hate losing my lens caps. Do they have a lens cap built in to the 150, like Sony does with their cameras now (fully integrated and switch operated)?
Unfortunately, no. It's a big plastic snap-in cap.


You also list that there are many pros and cons when comparing the 150 to the 170. Would you mind listing the major ones besides the difference in image quality (which has been discussed ad nauseam I think).
The 170 uses P2, has HD-SDI, has variable frame rates, records 4 channels of audio, does things like loop recording and interval recording, records SD in DV/DVCPRO/DVCPRO50 in 4:3 and 16:9, and uses intraframe 4:2:2 compression, and has the focus bar and a windowed magnified focus assist.

The 150 does none of those things.

Instead, the 150 offers HDMI, has timecode sync to any LTC timecode device through its audio output jack, and records to $20 SD memory cards (Class 2 for the lower modes, Class 4 for the highest-quality modes). It has a full-screen focus assist (it says "EXPANDED" on the side of the screen to remind you that you're in focus assist mode, but even so I got bitten a couple of times by that.)

Other than that, they're pretty much the same. Oh, and price too: the 170 is $1700 more expensive, but includes $900 worth of goodies ($900 P2 card and $90 book/CD).

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 05:01 PM
Barry, please list the shutter speeds (especially, will it have slow shutter speeds, like 1/6?).
1/15, 1/30, default, 1/100, 1/120, 1/250, 1/500, 1/1000, 1/2000.


Also, please confirm: No time lapse? Didn't the DVX100 have time lapse?
No time lapse. DVX100 and DVX100A had it, DVX100B didn't.

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 05:06 PM
I'm shooting some more stuff soon, I'll post the complete card image so everyone can access it and convert it.

psts
08-20-2008, 05:10 PM
NOTE TO MAC USERS:

I've been looking at Barry's AVCHD files using the VoltaicHD conversion program.

Bob Diaz

Bob, I used Voltaic to convert the files which took an awfully long time on a g5 quad. But besides that, did you notice any artifacts - especially in the sky ?(by the beach footage)
I'm seeing alot of artifacts there and I'm wondering if it's the transcoding program (voltaic) or my monitor or the avchd.

pointsofhonesty
08-20-2008, 05:48 PM
has anyone uploaded any videos on vimeo? I am curious to check it out especially with a 35mm adapter :-)

Ron Evans
08-20-2008, 06:25 PM
The Edius converter has two modes with very different speeds. Right click on file and select convert will use just one cpu core, dragging the file over the desktop icon will use all available cores. On my quad core Q9450 the speed change is considerable. I can transfer from my Sony SR11 to PC and convert to Canopus HQ in just over realtime. Since the transfer take about 1/3 realtime conversion is very fast. To me using AVCHD from my SR11 is about the same as capturing HDV from my FX1. Transfer from SD cards should be a lot quicker than the hard drive in the SR11. As Barry has said, once in HQ file format editing can be done in realtime on the Edius time line and Vegas or programs like TMPGenc also will work with the HQ file. The 150 looks really interesting looks like a good replacement for my FX1.

Ron Evans

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 09:20 PM
I'm seeing alot of artifacts there and I'm wondering if it's the transcoding program (voltaic) or my monitor or the avchd.
Skies look nearly grainless when played on my HDTV through HDMI.

Barry_Green
08-20-2008, 09:20 PM
has anyone uploaded any videos on vimeo? I am curious to check it out especially with a 35mm adapter :-)
How about with a Letus Ultimate? :evil:

Check back tomorrow, I may have something posted...

impressive creations
08-20-2008, 09:55 PM
Hey Barry and friends,

Thanks for all your posts.. Man, this forum is so informative. It's amazing.. I feel like I am cheating when it come to learning technology.. This by far is one of the best ways to learn.. Also, Barry's books.. Of course.. You rock!! Quick questions. I have been using a 100B for almost a year and I am ready for the HD jump. I do mostly weddings and we do same day edits as well. As you can imagine, those get pretty intense and you need to be super quick with editing. At events I'm on a Mac Book Pro.. I have two main questions.

1. From the HMC can I choose in and out points on a clip and be able to import those into FCP? or will I have to import the whole clip? Maybe some FCP guys can chime in here. I think if would be so amazing to scan though my clips and just nab the quick little pieces I need. Just the ones I need instead of having to go through a whole tape.. I did a little test with the Videomaker files and the transcoded super fast to ProRez HQ.

2. I am confused on the 1080i compared to 720P. In general, and not just from the HMC or any HD camera, how do they compare. 720P is obviously progress, which is full frames, 1080i is interlaced but the resolution is bigger. What's better? People have said the HMC is the 720p camera. So is that still nice looking HD? Will that fill the screen on a standard HDTV. or will it not? Kinda confused..

So the HMC can shoot 60p? So that means I can get better slow motion than out of my DVX 100B right? So is 60p like 120i ?

Signed, a confused but getting more unconfused DVX user..

Thanks again..

B.p.

2.

psts
08-20-2008, 10:27 PM
Skies look nearly grainless when played on my HDTV through HDMI.

Hmmm. I guess it could be the voltaic transcoding. I wouldn't be able to use voltaic anyway at the speeds I'm getting. I guess I'll have to wait and see how the "early adopters" adapt! I've been using the hvx for over 2 years now and totally relied on a 4x 4 gig p2 card + p2 store workflow, until the p2 store just expired. I am tempted by the hmc because of the increased low light performance and the cheap media- I am honestly nervous of the workflow especially with my mac quad- and fcp 5.1.4

Ed Kishel
08-21-2008, 12:02 AM
I am also weary re: the workflow. Although HDV is perfectly acceptable to my eyes, and everything cuts through it like butter- I hate capturing. Tape is dead. So AVCHD comes along onto SDHC cards, so problem solved right?

What time I save from digitizing is spent transcoding into a format I can edit in real-time. The front-page of Panny's FAQ white paper on AVCHD boldly claims- "it’s as easy as your digital camera- shoot, transfer, and edit!" There should have been allot of asterisks added after that statement :)

An hour to capture 1 hour of HDV, but how long to convert 1 hour of AVCHD to DVCPRO?

In addition, there has to be some loss in quality when converting AVCHD to something else that an NLE can handle natively. Not an issue though if the free Mainconcept app converts it to DVCPRO with ZERO loss.

Although HDV looks good (to me) and is easy to work with, I admit AVCHD is so much more efficient (in camera) and does look better. I am very intrigued in this camera- its upcoming release caused me to put the brakes on my Sony Z7U purchase. I dont want to have to buy an expensive intermediate codec or switch to FCP. If I have to wait for Vegas and PPcs3 to ingest it natively, by that time there will be a $300 rebate on the HMC150A model. Maybe thats a good thing.

Quickbrownfox
08-21-2008, 12:39 AM
This camera is not good for those who work with FCP yet. I know Panasonic and Apple so at least it will cost a year to improve their workflow. Maybe in theory the codec is better than HDV but there is still grain in the footage of Barry and videomaker. For now I don't recommended the HMC 151 too mine students.

I will be at the IBC, and ask around.

Katten.bjornen
08-21-2008, 02:04 AM
Testing Pansonic SD9 recording 25p mode AVCHD 13 Mb/s.
I found that using the Plugin for FCP 6.02-3 and FCP 6.04 at panasonic hompage for AVC-Intra that it support AVCHD too-
I found also that the best flow is to copy the whole "No Name" D card image to a HDD and using it as a source in the Log an transfer function in FDP. AS in P2 you can scroll throu the clip and select that part you want to transfer to Prores 422 ckips.
The transfer run in a 1:2 to 3 speed. If you need speed us the HDMI transfer card Blacmadic have itīs 1:1 ... I have tested it too

You gain size on the HDD by storing the source in orignal format and only tranfer that part you will use.
There have been problem with some level of dataflow in AVCHD in this transfer and it will be nice to know if this max transfer in the AVCHD spec
thar 150 use works in that flow.
As soon i get the 151 (PAL part of the world) for test
I will report it here.
I can report from testing SD 100 next week to.

ryvac
08-21-2008, 03:19 AM
what are the outputs on the HMC150 & HPX170 again?

will my Marshall V-R70P-HDA monitor still be usable ?
or do I have to upgrade to the HDSDI?

avenue
08-21-2008, 04:43 AM
Testing Pansonic SD9 recording 25p mode AVCHD 13 Mb/s.
I found that using the Plugin for FCP 6.02-3 and FCP 6.04 at panasonic hompage for AVC-Intra that it support AVCHD too-
I found also that the best flow is to copy the whole "No Name" D card image to a HDD and using it as a source in the Log an transfer function in FDP. AS in P2 you can scroll throu the clip and select that part you want to transfer to Prores 422 ckips.
The transfer run in a 1:2 to 3 speed. If you need speed us the HDMI transfer card Blacmadic have itīs 1:1 ... I have tested it too

You gain size on the HDD by storing the source in orignal format and only tranfer that part you will use.
There have been problem with some level of dataflow in AVCHD in this transfer and it will be nice to know if this max transfer in the AVCHD spec
thar 150 use works in that flow.
As soon i get the 151 (PAL part of the world) for test
I will report it here.
I can report from testing SD 100 next week to.



I found that using the Plugin for FCP 6.02-3 and FCP 6.04 at panasonic hompage for AVC-Intra that it support AVCHD too-


Well if this works then that is a great step in the right direction I think... thanks for thinking out of the box! yay upgrading to FCP 6 tonight hopefully I can test it out this weekend sometime :)

avenue
08-21-2008, 04:45 AM
This camera is not good for those who work with FCP yet. I know Panasonic and Apple so at least it will cost a year to improve their workflow. Maybe in theory the codec is better than HDV but there is still grain in the footage of Barry and videomaker. For now I don't recommended the HMC 151 too mine students.

I will be at the IBC, and ask around.

Read the posts... FCP6 works and I am sure within a year the rest of the world will catch on like wild fire it's the future

Katten.bjornen
08-21-2008, 05:09 AM
you need MacOs 10.4.11 or 10.5.4

Quickbrownfox
08-21-2008, 05:34 AM
I know it works, but its only in ProRess. Not the ProRessHQ mode. Maybe this conversion bring in the grain. Or is it only me who think there is some grain in the footage with or without this conversion.

avenue
08-21-2008, 06:28 AM
I know it works, but its only in ProRess. Not the ProRessHQ mode. Maybe this conversion bring in the grain. Or is it only me who think there is some grain in the footage with or without this conversion.

I dont know yet I ahve to try it this weekend once i upgrade my FCP5 to FCP6 then I can start experimenting.... but as of now I am just goin off what was written in prior posts I am actually pissed because all I have been able to see are screen shots.... thats why I requested vimeo yesterday but for now I guess I am screwed until I upgrade...

Everts
08-21-2008, 06:49 AM
I also notice some grain in the footage , grain in the beach sky and also on the boat where he pans.Actually it looks more like artifacting.Is this because of the AVCHD codec or is it because of the AVCHD to dvcpro converter which I used to view the files on my PC @ a screen resolution of 1440 x 900.
This is ofcourse the first time I have seen any AVCHD footage from any avchd camera.
There was no artifacing noticeable,probably none, on the waves,sand and swamp which I tought looked pretty good .The night shot of the birds is pretty clean.
The 60p footage slowed down 41.67 % on a 24p timeline is just great.
Burned the footage on a dvd, SD ofcourse and the images look pretty sharp on a SDTV set.
Love the crocs but Barry could you please post some medium shots of people ?(if they dont mind posing ofcourse.)
and I'm a bit confused , is the 920X720 the 720p version of panasonic ?



PS:
Thanks for your hardwork and if you're ever the neighbourhood I'll buy you a beer so I can get you drunk and hold you hostage and demand a couple of hpx-2000 for your exhange.:thumbsup:

drdimento
08-21-2008, 06:57 AM
Read the posts... FCP6 works and I am sure within a year the rest of the world will catch on like wild fire it's the future

We could see the material in both Edius Broadcast and FCP Studio 2 (whatever FCP version that is) and the latest Mac OS X? Just got this machine on Monday.


I also notice some grain in the footage , grain in the beach sky and also on the boat where he pans. Actually it looks more like artifacting. . . .

We saw grain too and our technical guru said it's either some kind of macro blocking or artifacting as you indicate. I just call it pixelating :o)

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 07:16 AM
1. From the HMC can I choose in and out points on a clip and be able to import those into FCP?
If you're going through Log & Transfer, yes. Someday when FCP has native file support you won't even have to import at all, you'll just plug in the SD card and have immediate access to every frame you shot. Until then, the Log & Transfer function might actually be the best way for you to go because it'll cut down on your transcoding time by letting you cherry-pick bits of clips.


2. I am confused on the 1080i compared to 720P. In general, and not just from the HMC or any HD camera, how do they compare. 720P is obviously progress, which is full frames, 1080i is interlaced but the resolution is bigger. What's better?
1080P. And the HMC150 does all three.


People have said the HMC is the 720p camera.
It excels at 720p, but it also does 1080p and 1080i.


So is that still nice looking HD? Will that fill the screen on a standard HDTV. or will it not? Kinda confused..
Do you have an HD, and have you watched broadcast HD? If you've watched the Super Bowl or Prison Break or Dancing With the Stars or American Idol or any HD broadcast on Fox or ABC, you've seen 720p. If you've watched CBS or NBC, you've seen 1080i.

I guarantee you 90% of the viewing audience could never tell the difference between 720p and 1080i. Of those who could, it'd be more due to seeing combing/edge artifacts on the 1080i broadcasts (especially annoying during something like basketball, where the painted lines on the court shimmer annoyingly; that never happens on 720p). The European Broadcast Union strongly endorsed 720p over 1080i, saying the days of interlace are past us.

But, 1080i has a "bigger number" and so people think it's "better". Oh well. Whatever. Doesn't really matter as the HMC does 1080i, 1080p, and 720p.


So the HMC can shoot 60p?
Yep.

So that means I can get better slow motion than out of my DVX 100B right?
Way better. Same fluid feel, infinitely sharper.

So is 60p like 120i ?
"p" is nothing like "i". 60i is nothing whatsoever like 30P, and 120i would be nothing like 60P.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 07:46 AM
What time I save from digitizing is spent transcoding into a format I can edit in real-time. The front-page of Panny's FAQ white paper on AVCHD boldly claims- "it’s as easy as your digital camera- shoot, transfer, and edit!" There should have been allot of asterisks added after that statement :)
Not from their fault, from the NLE's fault. You can do exactly what they describe (and even skip the "transfer" step) if you use a native AVC-HD editor like Pinnacle Studio +. I expect to see all NLEs but FCP supporting native AVC-HD editing straight from the SD card sooner rather than later. I doubt FCP will ever do it, just like they never did for P2/DVCPRO-HD, but everyone else did, and I expect them to do it for AVC-HD as well.

Which means you could shoot 12 hours of AVC-HD on a 32GB SD card, plug it in and have instant access to all 12 hours of footage within 10 seconds. No conversion, no transfer, no importing, no hassle. We're not there today yet with all editors, but Vegas and EDIUS have native AVC-HD import already, it's just slow to work with unless you have a monstrously fast computer (except with lower-end editors like Pinnacle Studio, which somehow get reasonably good performance out of less-powerful hardware!) But we'll get there. Everyone will be supporting it natively, instantly (except perhaps for FCP, if their track record is an indication of future behavior).


An hour to capture 1 hour of HDV, but how long to convert 1 hour of AVCHD to DVCPRO?
40 minutes on my laptop using the EDIUS converter to CanopusHQ. About an hour for an hour to use the MainConcept DVCPRO-HD converter.


In addition, there has to be some loss in quality when converting AVCHD to something else that an NLE can handle natively. Not an issue though if the free Mainconcept app converts it to DVCPRO with ZERO loss.
You are correct. Which is why I'm hoping the NLE companies will get on board with native editing sooner rather than later. HDV shooters went through the Cineform/AIC conversion process until EDIUS and others showed how it's done, then Vegas 7 and others got on board, and now you can edit HDV easier without transcoding. AVC-HD will get there. But it took HDV a year or so before the NLE companies had it sussed out.


I dont want to have to buy an expensive intermediate codec or switch to FCP.
If you want to edit natively, why would you switch to FCP? I don't know this for sure but I'd be willing to bet that they'll be the last NLE to support native file import. They seem to have an agenda of demanding the world convert to ProRes in a Quicktime wrapper; everyone else seems content to let you edit whatever you shoot however you shot it. Maybe they'll surprise us though, I hope so.


If I have to wait for Vegas and PPcs3 to ingest it natively, by that time there will be a $300 rebate on the HMC150A model. Maybe thats a good thing.
Vegas already supports native ingest of many AVC-HD files, but not all. They seem to only really be committed to supporting files from Sony camcorders; it seems like they don't care all that much whether Panasonic or Canon files work or not. But eventually I expect them to have full proper native AVC-HD support from all brands.

As for CS3, don't count on it. But I'd bet *heavily* that CS4 will have it. Adobe's all over the AVC-HD format, their P2 implementation is excellent and they'll probably have fantastic AVC-HD support. Realtime performance depends on your hardware though. EDIUS also has current AVC-HD support: shoot to the SD card, plug in the SD card, and drag the files right to the timeline (no "importing", no "ingesting", no "converting", just edit right off the SD card if you want). However, EDIUS doesn't yet support the "PH" mode of the 150. I doubt any NLE does, except maybe Pinnacle 11. EDIUS does support PH mode in their CanopusHQ file converter, so I expect that they'll have full native support for all modes in their next revision.

PH is important for a lot of reasons. #1, it's full-raster 1920x1080 and 1280x720. #2, it's the only mode of AVC-HD that supports 720p. But most importantly, #3, it's designed to be the most easily editable. Keep in mind that the EDIUS converter is faster than realtime in converting PH mode 720p footage into CanopusHQ -- so not only is my dual-core laptop fast enough to support faster-than-realtime decoding, it actually supports faster-than-realtime ENCODING to another codec and even writing that file out! What that means to me is, when they support it natively in EDIUS and the only job it's doing is the decode, you'll probably have enough processor power to do TWO streams of AVC-HD PH-mode footage RIGHT NOW.

The future's probably a lot closer than anyone thought.

shrigg
08-21-2008, 07:47 AM
what are the outputs on the HMC150 & HPX170 again?

will my Marshall V-R70P-HDA monitor still be usable ?
or do I have to upgrade to the HDSDI?

Yes the HMC150 will output HD component for your Marshall. It also outputs HDMI and standard RCA-style composite. No Y/C (S-Video) output.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 07:49 AM
This camera is not good for those who work with FCP yet. I know Panasonic and Apple so at least it will cost a year to improve their workflow. Maybe in theory the codec is better than HDV but there is still grain in the footage of Barry and videomaker. For now I don't recommended the HMC 151 too mine students.

I will be at the IBC, and ask around.
Have you seen the footage played in its native format on an HDTV? I don't know about the videomaker footage, but I just shot some stuff using a Letus Ultimate, at night, with wonderful rich grainless blacks. At least, that's how it looks on my LCD TV played through HDMI. Can't speak for how it'll look after Voltaic or FCP or some other conversion gets through with it, but it looks fantastic.

There will always be some grain in any video footage from any 1/3" camera. I'd put the noise level of the HMC150 squarely up against an EX1 any day. It doesn't look as noiseless as a $48,000 HPX3000, but then again neither does an EX1. But compared to an HD100, XHA1 or HVX200, it looks practically grainless. And certainly far less grainy than film.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 07:51 AM
what are the outputs on the HMC150 & HPX170 again?
Both support analog component, and RCA composite video.

150 has HDMI. 170 has HD-SDI.


will my Marshall V-R70P-HDA monitor still be usable ?
If it has component, then yes.


or do I have to upgrade to the HDSDI?
Only if you want to take advantage of the HD-SDI of the 170 (or use an HDMI->HD-SDI converter with the 150). But you could just use the component connections.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 07:56 AM
Love the crocs but Barry could you please post some medium shots of people ?(if they dont mind posing ofcourse.)
That's next, shot a little stuff with a Letus Ultimate. People are tricky because you need to get releases. I got one release, waiting for the other. I don't think I have any mediums though, mostly closeups and wide-ish... these shots were mainly done to get some high-contrast work including some night shots with strong side lighting and super-deep blacks.


and I'm a bit confused , is the 920X720 the 720p version of panasonic ?
960x720 is the frame size of Panasonic's DVCPRO-HD. If you used Panasonic's AVCHD->DVCPROHD converter, that's the size you'd end up with. But that's not the size that AVC-HD gets recorded at; it gets recorded at 1280x720 (or 1920x1080, or, if you're using the 6mbps mode, 1440x1080).


Thanks for your hardwork and if you're ever the neighbourhood I'll buy you a beer so I can get you drunk and hold you hostage and demand a couple of hpx-2000 for your exhange.:thumbsup:
Make it root beer and we'll talk. :) But, hey, hold out for the 2700, not the 2000, and I'm glad to see you're going for a couple so you can give me one as part of the deal! :thumbsup:

shrigg
08-21-2008, 08:00 AM
40 minutes on my laptop using the EDIUS converter.

To clarify: Is this converting to Edius HQ or DVCPRO HD as the OP asked?


Which means you could shoot 12 hours of AVC-HD on a 32GB SD card, plug it in and edit within 10 seconds. No conversion, no transfer, no importing, no hassle. We're not there today yet (except with lower-end editors like Pinnacle Studio) but we'll get there.

The main reason I am waiting to buy my new editing system. The current-generation Octo Mac *might* be enough computer to edit natively in FCP but we just don't know yet. Until I *do* know what works, I am willing to try other editors (EDIUS) and/or put up with the much-mentioned transcoding hell :cheesy:

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 08:16 AM
To clarify: Is this converting to Edius HQ or DVCPRO HD as the OP asked?
I went back in and edited my post to clarify. I got it wrong the first time.


The main reason I am waiting to buy my new editing system. The current-generation Octo Mac *might* be enough computer to edit natively in FCP but we just don't know yet. Until I *do* know what works, I am willing to try other editors (EDIUS) and/or put up with the much-mentioned transcoding hell :cheesy:
EDIUS may be fast enough to do it right now on a dual-core 2.4GHz laptop. The converter utility certainly seems to imply that it is. We just have to wait for the next version to know for sure.

GreekStudios
08-21-2008, 08:31 AM
Is there any loss converting to DVCpro HD?

psts
08-21-2008, 08:31 AM
Have you seen the footage played in its native format on an HDTV? I don't know about the videomaker footage, but I just shot some stuff using a Letus Ultimate, at night, with wonderful rich grainless blacks. At least, that's how it looks on my LCD TV played through HDMI. Can't speak for how it'll look after Voltaic or FCP or some other conversion gets through with it, but it looks fantastic.

There will always be some grain in any video footage from any 1/3" camera. I'd put the noise level of the HMC150 squarely up against an EX1 any day. It doesn't look as noiseless as a $48,000 HPX3000, but then again neither does an EX1. But compared to an HD100, XHA1 or HVX200, it looks practically grainless. And certainly far less grainy than film.

Barry, I trust your assesment, which is why I think it's probably the transcoding of the avchd that is causing the macroblocking. I know"grain" noise, and that isn't what I'm talking about. It's a "pixelizing" in the sky part that I'm seeing. I guess this could be overcome right now by importing directly through hdmi, not a perfect workflow, as time consuming as capturing tape, but workable if the pixelizing is avoided.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 08:34 AM
Is there any loss converting to DVCpro HD?
In 720p mode, yes you'll lose some of the high-frequency detail on the pre-filter, since DVCPRO-HD records 960x720.

In 1080 mode, I doubt you'll lose anything noticeable.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 08:36 AM
Barry, I trust your assesment, which is why I think it's probably the transcoding of the avchd that is causing the macroblocking. I know"grain" noise, and that isn't what I'm talking about. It's a "pixelizing" in the sky part that I'm seeing. I guess this could be overcome right now by importing directly through hdmi, not a perfect workflow, as time consuming as capturing tape, but workable if the pixelizing is avoided.
I can guarantee you that watching this stuff out of the HDMI, there is absolutely no pixelization at all whatsoever in any way, shape, or form. At all. Zero. None.

There is some video noise, but no compression pixelization at all. And the video noise is extremely low; an HVX or HD100 or XHA1 user would probably think there was no noise whatsoever.

Try burning the files to a blu-ray player and looking at it that way; I don't have a blu-ray player but it's my understanding that you should be able to play AVC-HD files directly on blu-ray. Or, if you have a PS3 or a Panasonic Plasma TV, you could put the files on an SD card and play them that way.

Cranky
08-21-2008, 08:37 AM
Barry,

Tried it using the structure you laid out above, and same error. Nothing in the folders except for STREAM. Same when I used the standard Videomaker (Panasonic) structure which was

PRIVATE/AVCHD/AVCHDTN/BDMV/CLIPINF/PLAYLIST/STREAM
This is wrong structure. Look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fb/AVCHD_actual_file_structure.jpg

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 08:48 AM
Is the latest structure working for people? I think the stuff on the website now should match the structure from the SD card...

Cranky
08-21-2008, 08:49 AM
* I assume that 720p comes off as true progressive whatever the frame rate, what about 1080p? Does 1080p24 come as true progressive, or is it telecined like Canon stupidly does in its AVCHD models?
* In case of 25p/30p is a true progressive or PsF-style video? Does not make any difference for editing, but requires you to remember what mode did you shoot in, instead of having software to do the job for you. Also, if it is PsF-like video, is it vertically filtered for playback on TVs or not (AFAIK, Canon cameras do not filter).
* The samples look great in terms of color, artifacting and I guess latitude seems good as well, but they are soft. I might got used to oversharpened HD, but the cheap Canon HF100 puts out a sharper and more detailed picture in 1080p30. What is your take on that? Do you think Canon oversharpens the image? But it is not just sharpening, it is sheer amount of detail. I had the HF100 and I have the SD1 now, the latter is comparable to your samples despite twice lower bitrate. Do you think that pixel-shifting 500K-chips are enough for this camera? It seems to me that these low-res chips are a limiting factor in the resolution, because I don't see more detail in your 24Mbps clips than in 1080i60/13Mbps clips from my SD1, though I admit that I see no artifacting either.
* Related to the previous question, what is your opinion on higher bitrate the HMC150 has? It seems to me that the main benefit is artifact-free image, but it does not really increase amount of detail which is limited by low-res chips.
* Do you think the chips are adequate? Would you prefer bigger chips or CMOS instead of CCD?
* First clips in the harbor are noisy. How dark was it outside? Was it full auto? Have you compared sensitivity to, say, DVX and HV20?
* What about recording time? The SD1 can record 4GB at most, than it stops and does not start a new file automatically. Also, it records in 4GB chunks, not in 2GB chunks like the Canons. Have Panasonic fixed the problem with stopping after 4GB?
* When you hot-swap cards, does it continue the numbering on a newly inserted card, or does it always start with "00001.MTS"? This drives me nuts in the SD1 and there is no option to choose other naming scheme.

Thanks!

EDIT: removed questions about 25p. BSPlayer reports 25fps, but when checked "video info" it reports 23.98 atual frame rate. Sorry for that.

Cranky
08-21-2008, 09:06 AM
Vegas 8.0b Pro opens Barry's files with no problems. It is slow on my machine, but I have a slow video card. Regular 13-17Mbps AVC is slow as well. So, this stuff works with Vegas.

David Saraceno
08-21-2008, 09:16 AM
Is the latest structure working for people? I think the stuff on the website now should match the structure from the SD card...

Barry:

is it possible to just provide a folder intact with the hierarchy from cam in zipped format so we can download just that?

Then everything would be intact.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 09:18 AM
* I assume that 720p comes off as true progressive whatever the frame rate, what about 1080p? Does 1080p24 come as true progressive, or is it telecined like Canon stupidly does in its AVCHD models?
No, it's straight-up progressive. There is no pulldown of any type in the HMC150.


* In case of 25p/30p is a true progressive or PsF-style video?
True progressive.


* The samples look great in terms of color, artifacting and I guess latitude seems good as well, but they are soft. I might got used to oversharpened HD, but the cheap Canon HF100 puts out a sharper and more detailed picture in 1080p30. What is your take on that?
I had the detail level turned down pretty low, I like soft organic film-looking images. I could try cranking the detail level up on some later shots. It's possible that the multi-megapixel canons could produce footage equally sharp or even sharper, I'd have to try.


Do you think that pixel-shifting 500K-chips are enough for this camera?
I think they're plenty enough to make gorgeous footage. If you want the ultimate in sharpness though, you might want to look at the EX1.


* Related to the previous question, what is your opinion on higher bitrate the HMC150 has? It seems to me that the main benefit is artifact-free image, but it does not really increase amount of detail which is limited by low-res chips.
I think the footage I'm seeing looks fantastic, regardless of how many pixels there are here or there. The higher bitrate would only really be a factor in compression artifacting, not in detail.


* Do you think the chips are adequate? Would you prefer bigger chips or CMOS instead of CCD?
Everyone would always prefer bigger chips whenever possible. I have no fondness for CMOS over CCD, and in bigger chips neither does anyone else (almost all expensive cameras use CCD instead of CMOS, like the F23, HPX3000, Dalsa Origin, etc). CMOS does have a decided advantage in heat, which means in a smaller-chip camera you can pack in more pixels. I'm no fan of rolling shutter complications, so to ME I'd rather have a CCD. When technology advances to the point where CMOS has no rolling-shutter artifacting, I'll revisit the question.


* First clips in the harbor are noisy. How dark was it outside? Was it full auto? Have you compared sensitivity to, say, DVX and HV20?
Auto-exposure, and there's a little tiny bit of noise but *nothing* like an HD100 or HVX200 would have produced. Sensitivity beats the HV20 by about 2.5 stops. It's about 1/4 stop slower than a DVX.


* What about recording time? The SD1 can record 4GB at most, than it stops and does not start a new file automatically. Also, it records in 4GB chunks, not in 2GB chunks like the Canons. Have Panasonic fixed the problem with stopping after 4GB?
I haven't recorded 4GB in a row yet, but it's my understanding that it can record 12 hours in one continuous recording.


* When you hot-swap cards, does it continue the numbering on a newly inserted card, or does it always start with "00001.MTS"? This drives me nuts in the SD1 and there is no option to choose other naming scheme.

There is no hot-swapping possible, there's only one card slot. You can use the metadata to program in a user clip name that will have a unique name for every file regardless of what card it's on.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 09:19 AM
Vegas 8.0b Pro opens all files with no problems. It is slow on my machine, but I have a slow video card. Regular 13-17Mbps AVC is slow as well. So, this stuff works with Vegas.
Really? Dude... I think I'm still running 8.0A. I'll go update now. That would rock if it already has support for PH mode!

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 09:19 AM
Barry:

is it possible to just provide a folder intact with the hierarchy from cam in zipped format so we can download just that?

Then everything would be intact.
Yes, that's what I'll do for the next footage upload.

drdimento
08-21-2008, 09:21 AM
Here's a question for BG and others working with this AVCHD footage . . might you expect any issues putting the material into Pinnacle Studio 11 Ultimate ($130 @ Best Buy) and then exporting to a "file" say high res .AVI and then ingesting that file into say Avid or FCP (although the latter isn't realy .AVI friendly either)? Would there be any resulting losses or would this be a cheap and fairly quick medium for the meantime. I mean, if one can get the camera, what's a buck thirty right? Heck, buy the extra battery at a major retailer instead of the pro dealer and take the difference (usually around 70 to 100 bux) and pick up Studio . . it's fun to play with anyway on family videos :o)

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 09:42 AM
Haven't tried Studio. They have Studio+ for $100, and Studio Ultimate for $130, both support AVC-HD (and they're up to version 12, so don't buy 11).

I would think you'd have an easier time just using the free Panasonic converter to convert the files into DVCPRO-HD/P2 files and then drag 'n' drop those files directly into Avid, versus using another NLE in the mix though.

Cranky
08-21-2008, 10:07 AM
There is no hot-swapping possible, there's only one card slot.
Oops, I thought that it has two slots. It's a pity, but not a dealbreaker with 32MB cards around the corner. Thanks for the answers!

In regards to "filmic" not-too-sharp look, I agree that video looks very filmic, colors are great and gradual changes in color are very smooth. It just lacks some detail. You know, you turn on evening show or news and you can feel the resolution. To me, your samples look more like quality DVD movie, but does not strike me as HD. Again, I might get used to oversharpened video, would be great to see what it looks like when you turn sharpening up.

2.5 f-stops over the HV20, this is huge! With such great sensitivity one can forgive low-res sensors.


Yes, that's [zipping a whole directory structure] what I'll do for the next footage upload.
Not sure that will be the best solution, especially if files are large. On the other hand, if bandwidth allows then why not. Vegas does not care about directory structure, it is happy with just MTS files.


Here's a question for BG and others working with this AVCHD footage . . might you expect any issues putting the material into Pinnacle Studio 11 Ultimate ($130 @ Best Buy) and then exporting to a "file" say high res .AVI and then ingesting that file into say Avid or FCP (although the latter isn't realy .AVI friendly either)? Would there be any resulting losses or would this be a cheap and fairly quick medium for the meantime.
Why quote marks around "file"? AVI is just a container. You can use a losless codec like Lagarith, or moderately lossy codec like CineForm or some other lossy codec.

drdimento
08-21-2008, 10:09 AM
Haven't tried Studio. They have Studio+ for $100, and Studio Ultimate for $130, both support AVC-HD (and they're up to version 12, so don't buy 11).

I would think you'd have an easier time just using the free Panasonic converter to convert the files into DVCPRO-HD/P2 files and then drag 'n' drop those files directly into Avid, versus using another NLE in the mix though.

We really didn't have any issues with seeing both your footage and the Videomaker material, we were just wondering for others who are seemingly having some issues, using Studio for a puesdo transcoding method (in a sense) or for that matter for simplified editing (after all pretty inexpensive solution for the moment until the other NLE's get "on board") this would be a solution in the interim; that is, unless exporting the material to an .AVI or other file would harm the digital content. Again, we don't need it just a thought for those who are indicating some complications OR maybe getting some transcoding issues and therein wondering if there would be any converting to an AVI ?

Thoughts?

drdimento
08-21-2008, 10:14 AM
. . . Why quote marks around "file"? AVI is just a container. You can use a losless codec like Lagarith, or moderately lossy codec like CineForm or some other lossy codec.

Quotes were just for highlight instead of some other disc or ?? that's all. Also ifLagarth and/or CineForm are equally as cheap as Studio for ~100 bux, then sure, why not?

David Saraceno
08-21-2008, 10:14 AM
I spent an hour reconstructing the folder hierarchy and downloading all the original files on a Mac.

I had it exactly as the videomaker PRIVATE folder, which imported into FCP 6.0.4 without issue.

Barry's individual files, even with the exact hierarchy and naming, wouldn't import.

I do note that the Videomaker PRIVATE had different icons for the thumbs, the index, the MOVIEOBJ, the CLIPINF, and the PLAYLIST.

Barry's were white, and these were a darker color, almost black.

Ed Kishel
08-21-2008, 10:30 AM
that would be sweet if Vegas opens 1920x1080 PH mode Panasonic AVCHD, I didnt try it since this is what it says at Sony...

"Added support for reading 1920x1080 AVCHD video. 1920x1080 AVCHD files created by Panasonic camcorders are not currently supported. "

I did manage to convert barry's beach clip through TMPGENC as a 1280x720 24p MPEG2 file and it looked great. No percievable loss in quality... but Im still learning TMPG and there may be some settings I could tweak to get the best reproduction (any suggestions?)

cranky- did all of barry's clips load in vegas, and were any of them PH mode?

thanks-
Ed

Cranky
08-21-2008, 10:31 AM
I spent an hour reconstructing the folder hierarchy and downloading all the original files on a Mac.
Is your network slow, or you just cannot type fast enough? :)


I do note that the Videomaker PRIVATE had different icons for the thumbs, the index, the MOVIEOBJ, the CLIPINF, and the PLAYLIST.
Icons? From a BD-player perspective, you need index.bdm and movieobj.bdm in BDMV directory and clipinf and playlist files for the whole boondogle to work. But it is hugely unreasonable from an NLE to require full directory structure. I am really surprised that you cannot load individual files.

--

I was thinking about filmic look and low-res chips, and about Canon cameras. Judging by Barry's footage and by my Panasonic SD1 footage and by footage from the HF100 that I had, it seems that Panasonic cameras have less contrast than Canon. This footage looks almost like Canon's Cinemode. Who uses Cinemode? Aspiring filmmakers and those who crave film look. Therefore, the HMC150 will work best for those who want film look, period.

If you want sharp look you need to crank up contrast, this is one of the axioms of imaging/video. But even with higher contrast the low-res chips won't produce detail from nowhere. So, low-res chips and flatter gamma naturally go hand in hand, likewise hi-res chips allow for steeper gamma. Both approaches have benefits. Panasonic approach works for those who don't need supersharp high-contrast look, but appreciate sensitivity. I think that this camera will never be able to produce high-detail look just because the chips are not up for it. On the other hand, Canon's higher-res chip allows jacking up contrast and preserving/revealing details caught by the chip.

Cranky
08-21-2008, 10:33 AM
cranky- did all of barry's clips load in vegas, and were any of them PH mode?
I tried 3 or 4 clips, 720p23, 720p59, 1080p23, what else? I did not try all of them, but those that I tried had no problem opening in Vegas.

Ed Kishel
08-21-2008, 10:41 AM
sure enough, I just caught your post #157. Maybe that quote from the Vegas 8.0b release notes is wrong... Maybe the "official" word is its not supported, but that "under the table" it works

with Vegas support (official or otherwise) and some clean conversions from TMPG, I am becomming more comfortable with a potential purchase this October....

exciting :)

kurtmo
08-21-2008, 10:44 AM
I tried one of the files in Vegas 8.0b and Vegas hung. Did you import or drag and drop?

As I noted above, I converted DVCProHD and tried Raylight and that worked well. I'll give Vegas another try with the original files. That would be cool. Can you edit the files?

Barry, I saw earlier that the Panny (Mainconcept) converter created 960x720 instead of 1280x720. Are you sure? I'm pretty sure that the files I got out of the process were 1280. I'll go back and double check that too?

BobDiaz
08-21-2008, 10:46 AM
Bob, I used Voltaic to convert the files which took an awfully long time on a g5 quad. But besides that, did you notice any artifacts - especially in the sky ?(by the beach footage)
I'm seeing alot of artifacts there and I'm wondering if it's the transcoding program (voltaic) or my monitor or the avchd.

A lot of factors come into play here:

(1) Most people are going to watch the footage on an HDTV at a typical viewing distance of 9 feet. In order to get the same viewing angle on a computer monitor, you'll have to move back about 3.5 to 5 feet. If you are sitting 2 feet from your computer monitor, you are the equivalent of sitting 3 to 5 feet from your big screen HDTV. It's easier to see the compression noise the closer you are to the screen.

(2) Some LCD monitors have a limited color range and will make a video look worse. My son's 15" LCD has only 6 bits per color and generates a lot of banding artifacts. When I show the same video on my iMac's display , it looks a lot better. An ideal display would be a CRT.

(3) In some cases, compression noise is hidden when the video is playing, but if you pause the video, the noise is easier to see. In fact, moving the video frame by frame will make the noise stand out. Still shots can be helpful, but they also make the compression noise stand out.

(4) The VoltaicHD program may be adding some noise to the video. Right now, it's the only way I have of looking at the footage, so I can't be sure of how much noise it's adding or not...


I've been looking at the VideoMaker videos and Barry's videos and have come to the following conclusions:


1080/60i: (VideoMaker: Park shots ...) If you sit back around 3.5 to 5 feet from your computer monitor, this mode looks OK. For those who sit 2 feet from the monitor, you can see the compression noise as the video is playing. Part of the problem is that the interlaced video is burning up critical bandwidth that would have been used to give us a better image.

1080/24p: (Barry: 00002.MTS, 00004.MTS) There's a major reduction in the image noise by going to progressive and a lower frame rate. If you look closely at medium solid colored objects you will catch a hint of the compression noise. (If you're not looking for it, you won't see it.) Pause the video of the harbor shot and look at the side of the boat to see some of the compression noise. Also, moving slowly frame by frame will help show it. From this mode to all other modes that follow, I'm having to work to see the noise. On an HDTV at normal viewing distances, no one is going to see any compression noise.

720/60p: (Barry: 00013.MTS, 00015.MTS, 00019.MTS, 00087.MTS, 00095.MTS) I can't be sure if this mode has more of less image noise than the 1080/24p mode. If I have the same shot of the same thing, I could tell, but I'm looking at different shots. So, if you look close, yes there is a slight amount of compression noise, BUT for normal viewing on an HDTV, you'll never see it.

720/24p: (Barry: 00025.MTS, 00032.MTS, 00074.MTS) WOW!!! It's getting VERY hard to see any noise and I have to do weird things to see it; like set the image size to 2x normal, pause the video and move frame by frame. Any video compression will have some compression noise, but there is so little compression noise here, that it's hard to find.


While I don't have any 720/30p footage to look at, I'm willing to bet that it should be about as good as the 720/24p footage.


Bob Diaz

David Jimerson
08-21-2008, 10:51 AM
Vegas 8.0b Pro opens all files with no problems. It is slow on my machine, but I have a slow video card. Regular 13-17Mbps AVC is slow as well. So, this stuff works with Vegas.

Is this Vista 64-bit?

Ed Kishel
08-21-2008, 10:58 AM
Vegas Movie Studio Platinum 9.0a running on XP32- they all open fine, they play slowly... but they all open without hanging.

If Sony can get thier consumer apps to work with it, then Vegas Pro 8 should have no issue- maybe they are waiting for Pro 9??

Cranky
08-21-2008, 11:02 AM
I tried one of the files in Vegas 8.0b and Vegas hung. Did you import or drag and drop?
I have to confess, Vegas hung on me once. I tried two times more, it worked. But it also hangs on my Vista machine with other footage, so this is not directly related to the HMC150. Other programs hang occasionally as well, even Firefox. I cannot blame Vegas until I find out why it hangs up.


I'll give Vegas another try with the original files. That would be cool. Can you edit the files?
I watched clips and browsed forward and back over timeline, but did not try to do any editing. I can edit other AVC video, including 17Mbps HF100 video.


Some LCD monitors have a limited color range and will make a video look worse. My son's 15" LCD has only 6 bits per color and generates a lot of banding artifacts. When I show the same video on my iMac's display , it looks a lot better.
Correct. DOn't watch and especially don't edit on a TN craptomonitor. Most of them (all?) are 6-bit and they have horrible viewing angles, especially from below. Get anything but TN, like IPS or PVA or MVA. These panels are more expensive and (I did not know that until I got one) use lots of power. Sitting in front of my 24-inch MVA monitor is like sitting near a fireplace :)

Cranky
08-21-2008, 11:03 AM
Is this Vista 64-bit?
Vista 32.

David Jimerson
08-21-2008, 11:18 AM
OK. Vegas 8.0b crashes for me with 150 footage in XP -- I wonder if it's a Vista driver issue or something like that. Will investigate further . . .

Cranky
08-21-2008, 11:20 AM
OK. Vegas 8.0b crashes for me with 150 footage in XP -- I wonder if it's a Vista driver issue or something like that. Will investigate further . . .
Does it crash every time? As I said, it hung once, but worked fine two other times. I have no access to my Vegas machine at this time so I cannot retry right now. Which file was that?

David Jimerson
08-21-2008, 11:41 AM
No, I mean Vista may have drivers XP doesn't, to allow Vegas to access the AVCHD.

Anyone else with Vista wanting to try?

Bassman2003
08-21-2008, 11:44 AM
Thanks for your willingness to help Barry!

My question is about the audio of the HMC-150.

The idea of starting with compressed audio then post processing seems troublesome.

Do you have any opinions about how far one can bend or work with the HMC-150 audio comapred to PCM audio?

This is the only really big prosumer-ish attribute imho.

Thanks

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 11:52 AM
Oops, I thought that it has two slots. It's a pity, but not a dealbreaker with 32MB cards around the corner.
32GB cards aren't "around the corner", they're available today. :)


Again, I might get used to oversharpened video, would be great to see what it looks like when you turn sharpening up.
I'll try some +7/+7 stuff and see if I can find anything that looks good...


2.5 f-stops over the HV20, this is huge! With such great sensitivity one can forgive low-res sensors.
The HV20 is very slow. Any perceived sensitivity from that cam is all from electronic gain. The HV20, with no gain, clocks in at about 80 ISO. It can crank up its gain to +27dB (which makes for nasty grainy images). The HMC150 is 500 ISO, 2.5 stops faster. It can then go up to +18dB of gain. +6 is okay, +9 is not bad, +18 gets pretty gnarly.

Cranky
08-21-2008, 11:55 AM
Do you have any opinions about how far one can bend or work with the HMC-150 audio comapred to PCM audio?
Right, the spec says that AC3 is possible with rates of 64 to 640 kbit/s. Is it possible to manually select audio bitrate?

David Saraceno
08-21-2008, 12:02 PM
Icons? From a BD-player perspective, you need index.bdm and movieobj.bdm in BDMV directory and clipinf and playlist files for the whole boondogle to work. But it is hugely unreasonable from an NLE to require full directory structure. I am really surprised that you cannot load individual files.

Yes, the file icons are different colors.

The hierarchy is identical and the ones I identified are placed properly.

It took a while to reconstruct the hierarchy because I used the VideoMaker hierarchy as a template for Barry's.

kurtmo
08-21-2008, 12:07 PM
My original test of Vegas 8.0B was with Vista 32bit. I don't generally have problems with apps crashing. No access to my video laptop at the moment. I'll try soon with both XP and Vista.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 12:07 PM
that would be sweet if Vegas opens 1920x1080 PH mode Panasonic AVCHD, I didnt try it since this is what it says at Sony...

"Added support for reading 1920x1080 AVCHD video. 1920x1080 AVCHD files created by Panasonic camcorders are not currently supported. "
8.0B crashes pretty hard on me. I wonder if it works for others because of Vista vs. XP? Any XP/Vegas users able to read the files?



cranky- did all of barry's clips load in vegas, and were any of them PH mode?
All my clips will always be in PH mode unless I find some compelling reason to shoot 1080/60i in some other mode. PH is the only way to get 720P and 1080P and it's just better...

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 12:08 PM
Barry, I saw earlier that the Panny (Mainconcept) converter created 960x720 instead of 1280x720. Are you sure? I'm pretty sure that the files I got out of the process were 1280. I'll go back and double check that too?
Actually I think the Panasonic tool doesn't support 720p at all. It converts to 1080 DVCPRO-HD, which is 1280x1080.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 12:11 PM
Thanks for your willingness to help Barry!

My question is about the audio of the HMC-150.

The idea of starting with compressed audio then post processing seems troublesome.

Do you have any opinions about how far one can bend or work with the HMC-150 audio comapred to PCM audio?

This is the only really big prosumer-ish attribute imho.

Thanks
Still have to run audio tests. I'm no fan of compressed audio either, I'd much rather have PCM. But at least it's AC-3 compression instead of MPEG-1 Layer II...

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 12:12 PM
Right, the spec says that AC3 is possible with rates of 64 to 640 kbit/s. Is it possible to manually select audio bitrate?
No controls for that. It's perhaps set based on what video recording mode you're using (i.e., I wouldn't expect 640kbit/sec with 6mbps video, that'd be 10% of the data stream! But maybe with 24mbps mode it's using the full 640? I don't know).

Maybe someone can demux the stream and see what it reports for the audio stream?

kurtmo
08-21-2008, 01:25 PM
Actually I think the Panasonic tool doesn't support 720p at all. It converts to 1080 DVCPRO-HD, which is 1280x1080.

Just Checked the 720p mxf files that I converted. They are 1280x720 with square pixel ratio. The mainconcept tool seems to have left all the files in the native pixel ratio of the original avchd. I haven't seen any 1440x1080, 1280x1080, or 960x720.

mcsmooth
08-21-2008, 01:30 PM
All 150 clips from Barry and videomaker have AC3 48000Hz stereo 384Kbps audio. I think it is safe to say that this is standard unless the low bitrates bring this down. (The low bitrates are completely uninteresting since they are limited to 1080i, would have been more usefull with 720p). Stereo AC3 is usually limited to 384 in this application. Higher bitrates are typically used for 5.1. Of course PCM would be nice, but you have to remember its leaving more room for video bandwidth and the differences are almost indistinguishable at 384k. If your ears can actually tell the difference, then you should be smart enough to know that you also aren't getting the best preamps in the world on a camera and can do better externally.

Thanks for all the work so far Barry. Is it true that this camera is crippled by the HVX200's characteristic to only playback clips in the resolution/mode of the current mode (as in, cannot play back 720 files in 1080). If so, is it specific to resolution, frame rate or both? I found this odd considering Pana fixed it in the other camera, but was a reported issue on the videomaker review. If so, any chance it could be a firmware feature to be fixed before/after release?

Similarly, is the HDMI output fixed to a certain resolution/frame rate, can it be changed independently of content, or does it follow the current clip (or current camera mode)? If capable of both resolutions, does it output in all available modes (1080 60i/30p/24p, 720 60p/30p/24p) or does it stick to 60 and add pullup on slower framerates? I'm going to guess it sticks with 60 since since it has more compatability and most TVs and capture cards still don't pull in 24p, rather recreate it after injestion.

I'm going to miss 1/6th shutter on the DVX, was curious to why that went away since HVX (before the frame rate hack). I guess that is a task best for a still camera, but I would hope that cameras in this class eventually allow for multiple frame rates encoded in the standard codecs at different speeds (or at least the shutter speeds for post work).

kurtmo
08-21-2008, 01:34 PM
I tried Vegas Pro 8.0b (217) with Vista 32 and XP pro. Both crashed on the mts files. I get an exception in an mt2s.dll

Cranky, what other NLEs do you have installed? I'm wondering if vegas is using a different dll.

Cranky
08-21-2008, 01:53 PM
I tried Vegas Pro 8.0b (217) with Vista 32 and XP pro. Both crashed on the mts files. I get an exception in an mt2s.dll Cranky, what other NLEs do you have installed? I'm wondering if vegas is using a different dll.
Gee, I wanted to reinstall my system, now it seems I have to stick with it :) Before I list each and every player and codec I have, try this:

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?Forum=4&MessageID=602979


If you would like to help test the pre-release HDV reader for Vegas Pro 8, please follow these exact steps:

1) Download the file "M2tsplug.zip" from this ftp site: ftp://md-ftp.sonycreativesoftware.com
username: scsdev
password: oh7e2McT
2) unzip
3) copy the file m2tsplug.dll into (default path) C:\Program Files\Sony\Vegas Pro 8.0\FileIO Plug-Ins\m2tsplug (save the old file just in case).
4) Restart Vegas> Load up any HDV files or HDV projects you have been having trouble with.
5) Please post your results back to this thread. Don't start another thread.
6) If you run into problems, please post details to
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?Forum=4


I have this beta file on my system.

From the Sony Vegas thread:


Date: 7/26/2008 9:51:31 AM

Without the beta .dll, Vegas will not even recognize the AVCHD files from the Panasonic HDC-SD9. In fact, if auto preview is checked, click on one of these files will CRASH Vegas with the shipping .dll. With the beta .dll, it works nearly flawlessly.

OTOH, with the beta .dll, Vegas will let you do anything with the Canon HF10 files, but the problem is that rendered results look awful. With the original, shipping .dll, they are nearly flawless.

BobDiaz
08-21-2008, 01:59 PM
Barry,

Thank you for all the work and the posting of the files. If possible, I'd like to see 720/30p footage and low light footage (720, +6dB Gain).


Best Wishes,

Bob Diaz

kurtmo
08-21-2008, 02:23 PM
Gee, I wanted to reinstall my system, now it seems I have to stick with it :) Before I list each and every player and codec I have, try this:

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?Forum=4&MessageID=602979


I have this beta file on my system.

Thanks for not keeping this little nugget to yourself! I got Sony Vegas 8.0b on Vista opening and editing MTS files now too!!!!!

I will try on XP next.

Everts
08-21-2008, 02:27 PM
Barry,

Thank you for all the work and the posting of the files. If possible, I'd like to see 720/30p footage and low light footage (720, +6dB Gain).


Best Wishes,

Bob Diaz


Same here , and thanks again.

kurtmo
08-21-2008, 02:32 PM
Vegas still seems to have problems with the 60p footage I tried. Still, at least there seems to be some hope.

Ed Kishel
08-21-2008, 02:36 PM
Thanks for not keeping this little nugget to yourself! I got Sony Vegas 8.0b on Vista opening and editing MTS files now too!!!!!

I will try on XP next.

Perhaps this "fix" is a beta on Vegas Pro 8 but is supported in Vegas 9 Movie Sutdio Platinum

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/7276/1219355142.jpg

drdimento
08-21-2008, 02:56 PM
Wow. More informative than the HMC150 material in this thread is the discovery that SO MANY PEOPLE are using Sony Vegas. Wow! Just when I thought FCP was taking over the whole world of NLE's :o)

David Saraceno
08-21-2008, 03:21 PM
Wow. More informative than the HMC150 material in this thread is the discovery that SO MANY PEOPLE are using Sony Vegas. Wow! Just when I thought FCP was taking over the whole world of NLE's :o)

This thread is hardly representative of NLE penetration.

Everts
08-21-2008, 03:51 PM
This thread is hardly representative of NLE penetration.

You said penetration :laugh:

David Saraceno
08-21-2008, 04:13 PM
You said penetration :laugh:

• the successful selling of a company's or country's products in a particular market or area : Japanese import penetration.

At least I didn't say "awesome."

:laugh:

avenue
08-21-2008, 05:29 PM
I found this dont mind the PooTube quality

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRWOyhAGoR0

still waiting on vimeo footage since I wont be able to test until sunday! If I ahave a
Old Dual core 2.0ghz with 4GB Ram PowerPC mac with FCP 6.0.1 I should be all good for log and capture from what I have read right? or do I need that AVC-Intra plug-in for FCP like someone else brought up worked for them? worst case senario I I pay for Voltaic converter....

VIMEO PLEASE!!!!!!

shrigg
08-21-2008, 06:21 PM
I found this dont mind the PooTube quality

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRWOyhAGoR0

That video is total crap. I saw it the day it posted and felt violated for losing 7 minutes of my life watching it. It doesn't tell us anything about what kind of footage we can expect from an HMC150. :angry:

David Saraceno
08-21-2008, 06:25 PM
That video is total crap. I saw it the day it posted and felt violated for losing 7 minutes of my life watching it. It doesn't tell us anything about what kind of footage we can expect from an HMC150. :angry:

And you watched the whole seven minutes? :)

Reminds of the line in Annie Hall:

"Not only was the food bad, but the portions were small."

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 06:30 PM
Is it true that this camera is crippled
Crippled?


by the HVX200's characteristic to only playback clips in the resolution/mode of the current mode (as in, cannot play back 720 files in 1080). If so, is it specific to resolution, frame rate or both?
It is similar to on the HVX200. You can play back in one of four modes: 1080(30p or 60i), 1080/24p, 720 (30p or 60p) and 720/24p. You have to choose one of those modes, and then the clips will become playable.

It's better than the 200 in that you can just pop up the menu and change the playback mode right then and there. On the 200 you used to have to swap back to camera mode, which was tedious. On the 170 you can change in the playback menu, or you can just hold the joystick down. On the 150 you have to change in the menu.

Overall, even though the features and menus are largely similar, the 150 is easier to operate in many ways for a new user because it has graphical descriptions of what each button will do before you have to press it, which is nice.


If so, any chance it could be a firmware feature to be fixed before/after release?
I wouldn't count on it. We only saw two firmware updates ever on the HVX200, one to add Type 2 metadata and the other to update for 16GB card compatibility. Don't expect a whole bunch of features added with firmware updates.

Besides, it is a minor inconvenience at worst. It's infinitely better than it was on the 200 because you can change the menu right then and there in the playback mode without having to swap back to camera mode.


Similarly, is the HDMI output fixed to a certain resolution/frame rate, can it be changed independently of content, or does it follow the current clip (or current camera mode)?
You can cross-convert from 720 to 1080, or downconvert to 480.


I'm going to guess it sticks with 60 since since it has more compatability and most TVs and capture cards still don't pull in 24p, rather recreate it after injestion.
Yep.

Barry_Green
08-21-2008, 06:32 PM
Barry,

Thank you for all the work and the posting of the files. If possible, I'd like to see 720/30p footage and low light footage (720, +6dB Gain).


Best Wishes,

Bob Diaz
Low light, as in "can you make sucky footage in too-dark conditions"? That kind of goes against everything I stand for. :) But the next footage I post will have proper exposure and tons of black/dark areas... no gain though, I'm an anti-gain fanatic...

kurtmo
08-21-2008, 07:08 PM
One of Barry's clips on VIMEO.

Clip1 (http://vimeo.com/1576760)


Transoded and encoded through Sony Vegas and Raylight.

bernardo
08-21-2008, 07:37 PM
I have some questions: first how adobe premiere work with the new AVCHD? have you heard about it? it is fully compatible?

I shoot with the AG-HVX200p some footage and when I check on the FCP preview appears some noise on brown color, what can I do to disappear that noise?

drdimento
08-21-2008, 07:44 PM
One of Barry's clips on VIMEO. Clip1 (http://vimeo.com/1576760) Transoded and encoded through Sony Vegas and Raylight.


nice work in the translating process kurtmo. look at the label on the boat when the pan is still. how do you feel about that . . AND ALSO . . the overall look?

shrigg
08-21-2008, 07:51 PM
And you watched the whole seven minutes? :)

Reminds of the line in Annie Hall:

"Not only was the food bad, but the portions were small."

LOL, Classic

BobDiaz
08-21-2008, 10:46 PM
Low light, as in "can you make sucky footage in too-dark conditions"? That kind of goes against everything I stand for. :) But the next footage I post will have proper exposure and tons of black/dark areas... no gain though, I'm an anti-gain fanatic...

Well, if I wanted to see bad footage, I'll play the VideoMaker clip. There's no information on what they did, but I'll bet it was +18dB of gain to get that high a noise level....

I was thinking the kind of shot of indoors or outdoors at night with a reasonable level of light. I'm sure that some users (Bob Diaz for one) are thinking about using this camera to shoot weddings and would like to see how it looks with normal room or street lighting at night.


For those who are into "let's record bad footage video", just set the gain to +18dB, use 1080/60i, and record at 6 Mbps with the sharpness set to maximum AND color set to over saturate. I'm sure that there are other additional settings that could be used for bad footage... :thumbsup: :)


Bob Diaz

BobDiaz
08-21-2008, 11:00 PM
I found this dont mind the PooTube quality

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRWOyhAGoR0

still waiting on vimeo footage since I wont be able to test until sunday! If I ahave a
Old Dual core 2.0ghz with 4GB Ram PowerPC mac with FCP 6.0.1 I should be all good for log and capture from what I have read right? or do I need that AVC-Intra plug-in for FCP like someone else brought up worked for them? worst case senario I I pay for Voltaic converter....

VIMEO PLEASE!!!!!!

From the link:


Added: August 13, 2008 (Less info (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRWOyhAGoR0#))
Footage shot at the WEVA Expo 2008 on the unreleased Panasonic AG-HMC150 AVCCAM. Camera will be available Sept 2008.
Please not that in the streaming video there is some noise and artifacting but this was NOT in the raw footage. Converting a 1920x1080 resolution video clip recorded at 24Mbps down to a 1.5Mbps video will result in some degradation. Please enjoy this sample clip.

I had a bit of a laugh, because the footage is crunched so badly by YouTube, it's impossible to be sure of anything.


Bob Diaz

Cranky
08-21-2008, 11:38 PM
Vegas still seems to have problems with the 60p footage I tried. Still, at least there seems to be some hope. I tried opening files listed below in Vegas 8.0b with the following library (beta from Sony's website): Name: m2tsplug.dll Folder: C:\Program Files\Sony\Vegas Pro 8.0\FileIO Plug-Ins\m2tsplug Format: Sony M2TS Version: Version 1.0 (Build 1236) Company: Sony Creative Software Inc.

All 23p files worked fine, both 720 and 1080, I could put them on timeline and slice and dice and edit away, but out of all 59p files only 00013.MTS worked well. All other 59p files can be previewed, but when I drag them to timeline, Vegas crashes. On the other hand, CoreAVC codec plays all files without problems.

I also noticed heavy aliases on the edges in 1080p video, but almost none on 720p video. Seems that Barry is right, this is first and foremost a 720p camera.

ullanta
08-22-2008, 12:30 AM
Hey, Barry... can you confirm that the remote-control protocol/connection is the same as the DVX/HVX?

grey-apple
08-22-2008, 03:12 AM
somebody know the date of distribution in europe (PAL version)?

joe 1008
08-22-2008, 03:22 AM
When shooting with this camera/codec 720/60p does it yield good 480/60i footage after downconversion? Or should I shoot in a different formate?

avenue
08-22-2008, 05:11 AM
Any opinions on Voltaic and speeds and conversion quality etc details...?????

avenue
08-22-2008, 06:06 AM
Sorry I am running a PowerPC mac and from what I have read even if I upgrade to final Cut 6.0 I am still screwed because I dont run intel's??? same with the Voltaic converter sofware.... is this true do I need to upgrade to a intel based mac......sigh....sigh....

Bucknfl
08-22-2008, 07:38 AM
Since Barry doesn't use final cut can someone give a run down on what you need and options to edit in final cut? Will using pro res be anymore time consuming than digitizing tape?

Thanks again to Barry

drdimento
08-22-2008, 07:49 AM
. . . Will using pro res be anymore time consuming than digitizing tape? Thanks again to Barry

We use FC Studio 2 with the latest v6 updated on a MacPro quad core and since I don't edit on that machine (yet) all I can say my observation was as you indicate, ProRes and took about the same time it would have taken to ingest a tape or maybe slightly longer?

Can't comment on the former part of your querry but if no one else responds I can get an editor to provide the workflow they came up with and the conclusions they found if you would like. We are comparing these clips both Videomaker and Barry's clips to clips we have that are similiar in conditions (lighting and environment - i.e. outdoor marina -we have a bunch of this- biking in outdoors medium light under folage, etc.) so that we can see the advantages and disadvantages for our operations as we have to buy at least three more HD cameras and be proficient with their respective use by Nov/Dec before launching our "Total HD" unit in January for the bridal shows.

psts
08-22-2008, 07:52 AM
Sorry I am running a PowerPC mac and from what I have read even if I upgrade to final Cut 6.0 I am still screwed because I dont run intel's??? same with the Voltaic converter sofware.... is this true do I need to upgrade to a intel based mac......sigh....sigh....

I'm running voltaic on a ppc g5 quad. i was able to transcode the clips but I think the voltaic conversion may introduce artifacting that may not have been there.

avenue
08-22-2008, 08:46 AM
I'm running voltaic on a ppc g5 quad. i was able to transcode the clips but I think the voltaic conversion may introduce artifacting that may not have been there.

that sucks the whole point of converting isn't to introduce more problems it just to convert into usable format and not loose quality argh this is frustrating I may have to hold on on this cam if I can't get the quality out of it you know. Or buy the cam and a ne 24" imac dual 3.06ghz intels :)......just a thought you only live once right.:beer:

Barry_Green
08-22-2008, 08:53 AM
Hey, Barry... can you confirm that the remote-control protocol/connection is the same as the DVX/HVX?
Same.

Barry_Green
08-22-2008, 08:53 AM
When shooting with this camera/codec 720/60p does it yield good 480/60i footage after downconversion? Or should I shoot in a different formate?
720/60 makes for an ideal downconversion to 480/60i.

Barry_Green
08-22-2008, 08:54 AM
that sucks the whole point of converting isn't to introduce more problems it just to convert into usable format and not loose quality argh this is frustrating I may have to hold on on this cam if I can't get the quality out of it you know. Or buy the cam and a ne 24" imac dual 3.06ghz intels :)......just a thought you only live once right.:beer:
Or just buy editing software that doesn't force you to convert. :engel017:

Bucknfl
08-22-2008, 08:58 AM
"Can't comment on the former part of your querry but if no one else responds I can get an editor to provide the workflow they came up with and the conclusions they found if you would like."

Yes that would be great. I don't edit but most of the editors I work with use final cut and mostly work with tape. If I get the HMC 150 I want to make sure in advance they can handle the footage and not hose them.

avenue
08-22-2008, 09:05 AM
Or just buy editing software that doesn't force you to convert. :engel017:

Ya but everyone keeps saying I need intel mac and FCP6.0.1 !!!! I run a PowerPC mac right now real bummer if this is so.... I am just worried about the converting seeing as how their have been such poor result of conversions on the mac end from what I have read... I guess I will just have to be patient until a solid workflow for a PowerPC mac is though off. I am still interested in the fact that the AVC-intra plug-in works on FCP6.0 to log and capture the footage..

shrigg
08-22-2008, 09:18 AM
that sucks the whole point of converting isn't to introduce more problems it just to convert into usable format and not loose quality argh this is frustrating I may have to hold on on this cam if I can't get the quality out of it you know. Or buy the cam and a ne 24" imac dual 3.06ghz intels :)......just a thought you only live once right.:beer:

It would be _much_ cheaper to install Boot Camp/Windows XP + EDIUS Neo. I don't relish the thought of running windows but I probably will try out this workflow UNLESS FCP steps up within a few weeks with an update.

I have confirmation from my supplier that my HMC150 will be arriving within two weeks, swEEEEET! ("our Panasonic rep is here today and I just got done speaking with him and he confirmed we should be seeing your order within 2 weeks.")

drdimento
08-22-2008, 09:44 AM
"Can't comment on the former part of your querry but if no one else responds I can get an editor to provide the workflow they came up with and the conclusions they found if you would like."

Yes that would be great. I don't edit but most of the editors I work with use final cut and mostly work with tape. If I get the HMC 150 I want to make sure in advance they can handle the footage and not hose them.

Have asked our editor to procedurize the process and she'll do it on Tuesday when she gets in or email it to me (our editors are off Friday through Sunday.

Here's an interesting site on this whole AVCHD thing with several posts about editing it:

http://www.brianshoff.com/tech/one-solution-for-editing-avchd.htm

According to our editor she was able to get a viewable AVCHD somehow before ingesting the material into FC. I appologize in advance that I don't have the solution in my pocket but I edit about 5 to 10% of what we do and have personally never used FC (since the G5 days and before the suite's) as we just added Mac's and Apple software in the last 60 days because of how our market is changing here (one of the Comcast groups we work with just switched to Apple/FCP this spring) plus BOTH our versions of Avid being dropped from the Avid line up (Liquid & Xpress Pro) :o(

BobDiaz
08-22-2008, 09:51 AM
I tried opening files listed below in Vegas 8.0b with the following library (beta from Sony's website): Name: m2tsplug.dll Folder: C:\Program Files\Sony\Vegas Pro 8.0\FileIO Plug-Ins\m2tsplug Format: Sony M2TS Version: Version 1.0 (Build 1236) Company: Sony Creative Software Inc.

All 23p files worked fine, both 720 and 1080, I could put them on timeline and slice and dice and edit away, but out of all 59p files only 00013.MTS worked well. All other 59p files can be previewed, but when I drag them to timeline, Vegas crashes. On the other hand, CoreAVC codec plays all files without problems.

I also noticed heavy aliases on the edges in 1080p video, but almost none on 720p video. Seems that Barry is right, this is first and foremost a 720p camera.


I did a comparison of your still clip (right side) with my still clip (left side) and see a big difference, not in the edges, but in the contrast and the noise level.

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f103/KQ6WQ/1080_Comprared.png

I'm using VoltacHD on a MAC.
It would be interesting to see other still clips of this same shot from others who are using different editing software.



Bob Diaz

BobDiaz
08-22-2008, 10:18 AM
Any opinions on Voltaic and speeds and conversion quality etc details...?????

See photo in message 241 in this thread...

The VoltaicHD software may not be prefect, but it does seem to convert everything I've tried. It does crash for no reason when I'm selecting files, but try again and it works... ODD, very odd.

Maybe there is a slight increase in the compression noise, BUT the results I'm getting are very good. Please see image below. This photo below is a crop of a 720/24p video that Barry took. It looks better with a moving image, but even the still looks great.

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f103/KQ6WQ/720_24p.png

As for conversion time, the 720/24p video takes a 7:1 conversion time. That is 1 minute of source takes 7 minutes of conversion. With 1080/24p it's 16:1 and 1080/60i is 20:1. Slow, but I can live with it. (I have an iMAC dual core 2.4 GHz.)

Until something better comes along, I'll be using the VoltaicHD software. NOTE: The VoltaicHD software converts to Apple Intermediate Codec (AIC), it does NOT convert to Apple's ProRes.


Bob Diaz

avenue
08-22-2008, 10:19 AM
I did a comparison of your still clip (right side) with my still clip (left side) and see a big difference, not in the edges, but in the contrast and the noise level.

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f103/KQ6WQ/1080_Comprared.png

I'm using VoltacHD on a MAC.
It would be interesting to see other still clips of this same shot from others who are using different editing software.

Bob Diaz

Well this is a great example of what I have been wondering. Bob Are you on a PowerPC mac or an Intel machine??? If PowerPC i think Voltaic seems pretty good what are your thoughts on this software? are you using the latest version etc.....

kurtmo
08-22-2008, 10:21 AM
Another VIMEO clip from Barry's test footage. This was created using the raw MTS files through Sony Vegas. I'm jazzed that Sony Vegas is working on the 24p and 30p footage.

Clip2 (http://vimeo.com/1576961)

Ed Kishel
08-22-2008, 10:22 AM
I also noticed heavy aliases on the edges in 1080p video, but almost none on 720p video. Seems that Barry is right, this is first and foremost a 720p camera.

Thats interesting, I wonder if any edge enhancement was turned on (but then you would see it in the 720p image as well).

My hope is that a higher resolution setting would not yield an inferior picture in the same camera (if you shot the same thing in both 1080 and 720).

BTW, I need a bit of schooling- what is meant by the term "full raster" in the case of this camera? Does it mean that it records 1920x1080 all the way through to post, instead of 1920x1080 down to 1440x1080 ala HDV?

avenue
08-22-2008, 10:23 AM
sorry I see now that you on an Intel mac :( voltaic says they don't support PowerPC!
see: http://shedworx.com/?q=volmac-home

Quoted from their site!!!!
Apple's AVCHD converter (in both iMovie'08 and Final Cut Pro) only supports Intel platforms.

kurtmo
08-22-2008, 10:23 AM
I have confirmation from my supplier that my HMC150 will be arriving within two weeks, swEEEEET! ("our Panasonic rep is here today and I just got done speaking with him and he confirmed we should be seeing your order within 2 weeks.")

Who are you buying from?

shrigg
08-22-2008, 10:23 AM
I did a comparison of your still clip (right side) with my still clip (left side) and see a big difference, not in the edges, but in the contrast and the noise level.

Wow, Voltaic looks great but is so S-L-O-W to transcode.... it is very surprising the differences workflow can make upon the image. Very informative to see the different conversions. Together we will hash out the workflow that preserves the image most efficiently. Great stuff already, especially considering this is a camera that's not even released yet!

shrigg
08-22-2008, 10:26 AM
Who are you buying from?

I special ordered right from Panasonic through my rep at Full Compass

David Saraceno
08-22-2008, 10:31 AM
I can do a conversion but I can't get Barry's sample MTS files in a structure that will import into FCP 6.0.4.