Motion and video

[Buck Forester]

Okay, I've done lots of test shots with my EX1 and LOVE it! Most of it has been family stuff and chasing my boy around, handheld. As long as I have a subject I'm chasing, the footage is gorgeous and sharp.

I'll be doing mostly nature/wilderness stuff, lots of it on dolly/track and jib. I have noticed when using a dolly and rolling it slowly, using high DOF with foreground grass or flowers and a nice scenic background, the stationary grass/flowers loose sharpness. I want everything to remain crisp as I see on high-def broadcasting channels (unless I'm just not noticing it while watching them).

Admittedly I'm ignorant with video compared to still photography and I don't have other cameras to compare motion footage as explained above. Is this just how video captures motion? Is it Long GOP, and I-Frame doesn't have this problem? If so, I'll get the Convergent Design Nano Flash. But it may just be the physics of a moving camera against stationary objects, I wish I had other cameras to compare. For instance, viewing this forum page everthing is obviously sharp, but if I grab the scroll bar and move it up or down, the sharpness falls apart. Is this just the physics of motion and thus the nature of video? Sorry for the stupid question... gracias!

[MitchLewis]

I've heard that the EX1 looks slightly better shooting 720 than 1080 because it's limited to 35mps. I'm not sure about "i" or "p" though. Heck, I don't even have an EX1 yet! :) (I'll hopefully be buying an EX3 setup this week)

Glad to hear you're not having any problems with the rolling shutter I hear so much about.

[MitchLewis]

Just went to your Flicker site. WOW! You sure can shoot still photos. Nice work Buck!

[Buck Forester]

Gracias, Mitch! You'll love your EX3... the EX1/EX3 is one heckuva camera!

[basspig]

What's your shutter speed set to when dollying back? The only way I know of to get sharp individual still images from the EX1 (or any other video camera that's progressive scan) is to set the shutter speed fast enough as compared to the speed of the camera motion. Otherwise you get motion blur from a slow shutter. I got tremendously sharp still images at a horse show when I used a 22.5º shutter setting. Just about any frame made a nice, clear, printable image.
Speed up the shutter value and you should see sharper images. Of course, stop down the lens if differential focus is part of the problem.

[basilisk]

if you are in bright light, you may be stopping your lens down too far - lenses are at their sharpest around the middle (say f5.6 or f8). Very small apertures can lead to lens diffraction (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en-us&q=lens+diffraction&btnG=Search), and loss of sharpness; different wavelengths will diffract different amounts (reds more than blues for instance).

[Stevet]

Buck, you obviously are really good with 35mm cams..

Just like your 35mm cameras and soft images, it's all about frame / shutter rate and given motion with video cameras.

For giggles, try shooting some 720 60P 1/120 shutter and experimenting with faster shutter speeds.

Also, of course interlace will offer less motion blur than progressive.

I've had the EX1 right next to other cameras. The motion blur looks the same.

[Buck Forester]

Gracias! Yes, I'm finding videography a LOT different in many regards than still photography. Obviously in still photography you're capturing a single moment in time, and exposure is in relation to shutter speed and aperture setting. 'Click' and you're done. You either got the moment or you didn't. In video you're capturing "time" itself, with all the fluid moments in a clip. Exposure is not so simple because shutter speed doesn't have anything to do with the exposure itself, it's more having to tweak the light with ND filters and iris settings. Getting a shallower or deeper DOF is not as simple as opening/closing up the aperture and having the shutter speed correspondingly changed. It's more of a balancing act with video. I don't have it nailed yet.

Focusing shallow DOF is much tougher too with video when the subject is moving... with photography you can simply click away and come out with a sharp shot even if only 1 out of 10 came out, you still got your shot. With video you can't continuously go in and out of focus and keep the clip. Much tougher. I really have a respect for skilled videographers.

With motion, I'm thinking what I'm seeing is just the physics of motion, just like scrolling this page the resolution of the text breaks up. It's still readable but it's not sharp when it's in motion. I'm not looking at "stills" from my video, I'm just looking at the footage when I do a slow horizontal dolly shot with stationary objects, not following them. They don't remain razor sharp with movement. I'll have to start watching more closely at footage on National Geo HD and Discovery HD to see if I only notice it on my own footage because I'm scrutinizing it more, ha!

This whole new world of high-def video is very exciting to work with and I can't wait to start editing and uploading some samples.

[basspig]

Buck, Here's a test you can do to verify whether it's your camera's exposure time blurring frames, or your monitor: pause the playback of the video and inspect a frame. Step through it frame by frame in areas where you noticed blurring. See if it's clear when paused. If this is the case, then it means the response time of the monitor is limiting you. If not, and paused frames are still blurred, you need to increase the shutter speed by reducing the dwell angle. For outdoor, sunlit early afternoon shooting, ND2 with 22.5º shutter gives you about f2.4, a good, sharp lens aperture. I find the lens sharpest between f1.9 and f5.6.

[Buck Forester]

Thanks, basspig! I'll try that. Perhaps my question is even more 'general' than that, though. When you scroll on this page, even slowly, does the text look as sharp as when it's static? And if not, is this just the physics of motion?

Also, in your experience if you simply move the video camera 100% horizontally across, oh, let's say a bookshelf filled with books without turning the camera, keep it straight forward as you move sideways, is the text of the books as sharp in motion as when you're locked on a tripod? I'm not talking pauses or stills, but simply watching the video on your monitor. It's not for me, but if it is for you, then obviously I just need to learn more about tweaking settings. The issue I'm talking about is not about lens sharpness because the object is razor sharp until I start the motion. It's not like the object (or text in my bookcase example) breaks apart and turns into crap, it's just not as sharp as when I'm still.

In nature shots I want to keep foreground grasses stunningly razor sharp, full HD, the Wow! effect, as I pan or dolly horizontally in a wilderness scene. In distant objects it's fine because the movement is obviously not noticeable even if the camera is moving, but if it's only a few feet away it happens, I see it on my lcd viewer and my 30" ACD... I haven't hooked up my JVC DT-V24L1D yet, but it seems clear that movement is not as sharp as non-movement. I'm assuming this is all codecs and not just Long GOP, but I'm not sure.

[basspig]

Yes, text blurs when I scroll it. That's a function of the monitor's response time at turning pixels on and off.

To achieve sharp images in a scene like you describe, the dolly move must be slow and steady, maybe no more than 2-3 inches per second, and the shutter speed must be very fast. Of course, if it's fast enough to produce sharp images, you'll notice "frame judder" on a fast-responding monitor. But the images will be sharp. If the monitor is slow (>6mS) then you'll see some blurring until you pause the video.

So I would do this for your shot:

Focus foreground
Fast shutter, 22.5º or 11.25º
Slow dolly move, <3"/sec

Long GOP has nothing to do with it, I can attest from experience shooting fast-moving horses.

[Buck Forester]

Thanks, basspig. I'm hoping to get razor sharp moving images with 'natural' movement, not juddery. I don't think I've ever turned on my shudder so I'll see what effect that does too. I'll also try your test suggestion as well. Thanks again.

As for shooting fast moving horses, I agree, I've never had any motion concerns at all when following a subject. I chase my boy around at high speeds handheld a lot and have never noticed any motion issues. I only see it when I move the camera and everything else stays still, even very s-l-o-w-l-y.

[jvfante]

Hi Buck, If your shutter switch is off, then that's your problem. Turn it on and you'll be a lot happier with the results. In the off position you get something like twice the normal amount of motion blur (360 degress, I believe, vs. 180). 180 is "normal", and if you want to cut your shutter angle narrower for more sharpness of motion as Basspig suggested, just be wary of "judder" or strobing or the picket fence effect that will occur at some point. 180 is what we are used to watching on tv and in the movies. If you see the latest Spike Lee film, they use the Saving Sgt Ryan cut shutter effect of 45 or 90 degrees to give it that hyper real effect. Fine for certain scenes, but decidedly different from what we are accustomed to seeing.

[Buck Forester]

Well I checked my shutter button and it's switched to "on" so I must've switched it on soon after I got it. Hmmmm.

I don't have time right now to do basspig's tests, but since I have my camera in hand I simply held up a piece of paper with text in front of me, well lit, and slowly moved the camera while keeping the paper still and the text loses sharpness upon movement. I can even see this in my lcd viewfinder live. This doesn't happen to you guys? The image stays razor sharp, the same as a still image, even when you move the camera and keep a subject (text on paper) stationary? I'm baffled why mine loses rez.

[PerroneFord]

I have a shoot tomorrow afternoon. I'll do some tests while I have camera and lights setup.

-P

Well I checked my shutter button and it's switched to "on" so I must've switched it on soon after I got it. Hmmmm.

I don't have time right now to do basspig's tests, but since I have my camera in hand I simply held up a piece of paper with text in front of me, well lit, and slowly moved the camera while keeping the paper still and the text loses sharpness upon movement. I can even see this in my lcd viewfinder live. This doesn't happen to you guys? The image stays razor sharp, the same as a still image, even when you move the camera and keep a subject (text on paper) stationary? I'm baffled why mine loses rez.

[SPeditor]

One thing that may help is shooting a faster frame rate. 720p60 will give you the absolute best compromise between smoothness of motion and sharpness of the image. At that speed, you can crank up the shutter speed with very little 'jutter' and get crystal clear images.

Also, one thing I've noticed using the EX-1 is that the Fujinon lens on it really likes the more open apertures. I try to keep it at f8 or below (more open, that is). If you get close to f16 it will be very difficult to keep anything in focus. Fortunately, upping the shutter speed will have the side effect of needing a more open aperture.

Another thing I would recommend would be to stay away from interlace scanning. 720p60 actually gives you more apparent vertical resolution per frame than 1080i does, at no loss in temporal resolution. That is, the smoothness of motion that the interlace scanning gives is still there at 60p but you also get the benefit of progressive scan. A progressive image will always beat an interlace scan image of the same resolution in terms of sharpness whenever there is motion. This is one reason I like shooting in 24p when I am producing a DVD. DVD's can support 24p natively, and will look much better on a standard widescreen HDTV than a DVD shot at 30i (except some of the older projection or CRT models). The only downside to 24p is that it is less forgiving in terms of motion judder. It is easy to come out with an image that looks like it is strobing if you are not careful with panning speed and precise following of subjects. That's why the 720p60 mode works so well.

As for text, there are certain scrolling speeds for a given font size that will simply not look good no matter what. Generally, you have the choice of progressive scan text or interlace scan text. At the worst, interlace scan will have a "crawling" look to it, while progressive scan once again will look "juddery". I happen to prefer the progressive look to interlaced when it comes to text, and if I am producing an interlaced scan project 30p always works nicely. Since both fields of a frame define the exact same placement of the text, the progressive image will carry over even on interlaced scan monitors, and no frame rate conversion is required.

Hope that helps :)

[Stevet]

Buck, It's all motion blur based on frame rate and shutter speed.
It's easy to test this by increasing shutter speed.

Also, do not trust what you see for motion played back via the EX LCD, and a lot of computer displays. I've noticed motion diffences even playing different sofware players on your computer.

Shoot somes tests at different frame rates and shutter speeds and burn them to Bluray or DVD and play them back on your normal home viewing system. This will give you a good idea of what to expect.

[Stevet]

Mark has really nailed it with a lot of complaints (regardless of the video camera used) on motion when viewed on your PC LCD screen. As Mark mentioned, just pause your video during playback on a scene that has motion. If that frame apears to clear up when stopped, this is due to the response time for your display.

Buck, like you mentioned regarding scrolling. For giggles, open one of your videos in VideoLan (or whatever your using). Do not fullscreen, keep it in a smaller window and have it paused. Now grab the title bar and drag it side to side. This particular laptop I'm using the video goes soft until you stop.

This is why I have been mentioning right along DO NOT trust movement on your PC, master your footage to a media such as BluRay or DVD (film if you have deep pockets! lol).

[Buck Forester]

Stevet, I haven't had time to do much thorough testing, but I did some basic tests a few minutes ago and changed shutter speeds.

I tried various settings (and my shutter is on). I tried 1080/60i/30p/24p and 720/60p/30p at the default shutter speed (such as 60 for 30p, etc.) and I tried 1080/30p at a faster shutter speed (250).

I used a row of books on a bookshelf as my test and slowly horizontally panned slowly across the book spines. The motion breaks up the sharpness noticeably. The best in my unscientific test was 720/60p, but it still wasn't good. Once I stop the camera everything is razor sharp... once I slowly pan it immediately loses sharpness. I viewed this on my 30" Apple Cinema Display... I haven't had time to determine if it's the monitor refresh rate and maybe the motion would stay sharp after going to blu-ray or whatever, but I'm not confident about that.

I'm HOPING this is Long Gop codec and NanoFlash will solve my problem. Motion on static subjects is my only concern here. I'm happy with the color and sharpness of stills (or even following a moving subject), but the visions I have in my mind of what I want to create on video defintely requires sharp rendering of motion on static foreground scenes. El periodo. It's definitely not a rolling shutter issue or anything. I have no idea if this happens on i-frame recording or not because I only see what I have. NanoFlash will give me either the option of i-frame or much higher Long Gop bit rates. I'm hoping one of these will solve it but I need to see some NanoFlash motion test footage first.

P.S. I haven't tried VideoLan (not sure what that is, but I'll Google it) or editing the footage, this is just straight out of the camera.

[DCSensui]

Buck...

Have you tried going through the material frame-by-frame to see if the image is sharp or blurred?

I saw a demo of an LCD that had a 120 Hz refresh rate. They had computer-generated crawling text on the screen going from right to left, and on the half with the 60 Hz refresh rate the text looked blurred. But when it got to the side with 120 Hz refresh rate, it looked clean.

So the original text was clean. But it displayed poorly on an LCD screen with a 60 Hz refresh rate.

it could be the monitor. The only way to know for sure is to slowly go through the material frame-by-frame and see if it's sharp or not.

Good luck!

[Stevet]

Dean is right.
Buck, if you're wondering if it's a EX issue, what you're seeing is not.
Sure, there's motion blur at 24 1/48, but 720 60P at 1/120 should sharp.

Like the three of us just mentioned, and now you proved it yourself, if you pause your footage during motion and it gets sharper, than it's all about how fast your video is written to your display.

Also, if it were a codec issue, you would see it on a paused frame. Also, XDCAM 35mbps is a decent codec. You proved the issue is a display speed by by pausing your frame during a motion scene.

[Buck Forester]

I'm not doubting at all what you guys are saying, and I probably shouldn't comment until I've done more 'real' testing other than just seeing it on my monitor. It's not sharp when I pause it either though.

Many televisions are LCD, and most monitors are LCD, and my viewfinder is LCD... if this is an LCD issue then will basically motion look bad on most everything I view it on? Maybe I'm scrutinizing my own footage too closely, but I've never really noticed motion losing sharpness on all my LCD-based viewing in the past with other things I view. Obviously I have much to learn.

[Stevet]

I'm not doubting at all what you guys are saying, and I probably shouldn't comment until I've done more 'real' testing other than just seeing it on my monitor. It's not sharp when I pause it either though.



If it's not sharp when paused, then it's just motion blur.
Shoot the same movement at 720 60P 1/120 or a faster shutter.
It should look sharper at this rate.

Here's a post from vimeo of a very slow pan shot of an HVX200.
I'm not sure what this was shot at, but on the very laptop I'm using right now it gets a tad sharper when paused during a moving frame.
Also, this is a very slow pan. The image would be softer when panned faster.
Also, the image is not as detailed as an EX would of captured; therefore there might even by a bit more difference with this slow movement.
BTW, I'm using VideoLan. It's free and works with EX1 files without extracting MXF.

HVX200 slow pan
Right Click and Download:

http://www.vimeo.com/download/video:84648974?e=1224733875&h=f28a20871e8ffb64ccb904344d66a54b

[adamr316]

I'm not doubting at all what you guys are saying, and I probably shouldn't comment until I've done more 'real' testing other than just seeing it on my monitor. It's not sharp when I pause it either though.

Many televisions are LCD, and most monitors are LCD, and my viewfinder is LCD... if this is an LCD issue then will basically motion look bad on most everything I view it on? Maybe I'm scrutinizing my own footage too closely, but I've never really noticed motion losing sharpness on all my LCD-based viewing in the past with other things I view. Obviously I have much to learn.

I've noticed this to the more I've used the EX1. And indeed you should/would notice the blurring on other sources if the refresh rate of your LCD screen(s) were the issue.

The problem is apparent more on an LCD display but even on my projection HDTV I can see blur added to the signal when panning that other cameras would not exhibit. Is it the codec? I don't think it is. The camera's electronic shutter may be the culprit because if you set it to something high like 1/1000 or 1/2000 this blur issue goes away. At 1/60 (which is what I prefer to shoot at for interlaced footage) or 1/48 for 24p stuff (180º shutter angle) it does the same thing. Although due to 24p having a higher motion blur than 60i it's not as noticeable.

Plus I'd rather have the blur than the "Saving Private Ryan" effect that high shutter speeds get you. This goes back to the Barry Green test awhile back when they were panning and saw a loss of resolution on monitors or something to that effect. I'm going to try to dig up that thread...

Update: Found this thread about debunking Barry's findings but can't find the original post yet. http://dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=121989

You're not seeing things, Buck. Something's up.

Update:

Thinking again...I wonder if what *I* was seeing was the result of image stablilization? Tomorrow I'm going to investigate this a little more.

[Stevet]

Nothing's up..
If there is...
Show me an example of the EX side-by-side to "another brand X" camera under the exact same pan movement using the same frame rate and shutter speed.

If it's there (or not there) this will end this discussion.

Someone a while back posted a rez test with movement to disprove this when it was brought up before. Do a search for it.

[adamr316]

Stevet,

I'm going to try to see if I can hook up with an HVX200 owner in my area to run tests. I want to compare the 24p cadence (if that's the word) of the EX1 vs. the HVX as well as this issue. As I posted with my latest update it could be an artififact of OIS. That's what I'm hoping anyway.

[Buck Forester]

Stevet, thanks for the Vimeo link pan. That link shows that the panning image remains reasonably sharper than what I'm seeing with my EX1. It sharpens a tad more when it stops motion, but the lettering and objects still remain acceptably sharp to my eye. When I do this same thing with my EX1 the sharpness drops much more. I absolutely love my EX1, and this motion sharpness drop is only noticeable to me when I'm not following an object, my own concern is merely panning horizontally on stationary subjects like the link showed. If this is possibly an i-frame vs. long gop issue then I feel better about the NanoFlash option, which I'll gladly take. In a few days I'll try and get some of my own similar test footage up for you to analyze because you know much more about this than me. If you're never seeing this in your own footage then obviously it's just my lack of shooting knowledge at this point, which also gives me hope, ha! Thanks again.

[Stevet]

Stevet, thanks for the Vimeo link pan. That link shows that the panning image remains reasonably sharper than what I'm seeing with my EX1. It sharpens a tad more when it stops motion, but the lettering and objects still remain acceptably sharp to my eye. When I do this same thing with my EX1 the sharpness drops much more.

Not on mine.
I see about the same drop. The only difference is the EX1 looks so much sharper to start with, this may be driving what you're seeing.

If you're PC and display were not adding to this difference, you would not see a difference pausing on the frame at all.

[Stevet]

Update: Found this thread about debunking Barry's findings but can't find the original post yet. http://dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=121989



Yes, this is where this whole thing started.

I believe it was Matthew that ran a rez test with motion and showed there was no loss.

I just found it.
Here it is:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1156481&postcount=14

[Buck Forester]

I see about the same drop. The only difference is the EX1 looks so much sharper to start with, this may be driving what you're seeing.



This has crossed my mine too... the EX1 is so incredibly sharp while still, at such a high resolution, that it may simply be magnifying my pereception of loss of sharpness with horizontal motion.

[Stevet]

This has crossed my mine too... the EX1 is so incredibly sharp while still, at such a high resolution, that it may simply be magnifying my pereception of loss of sharpness with horizontal motion.


True.

If this question were to do with a slowed response time with the EX, why would faster frame rates show less blur, as they should.

We will dig to the bottom of this, but this was brought up extensively eight months ago. What came out of it was visually there is no rez loss.
Look through ALL of the link I provided above.

A good test may be to use a JVC HD100 which offers a full raster 1280x720 and compare the EX motion at 720.
Yes, I know the JVC is HDV, but we're not talking fast pans, but moderate.
We could also use the HVX200 as Adam mentioned.

I do know both the HD100 and EX1 offer a higher detail image than the HVX200, so you may not see as great a difference. It should be close though.

[Stevet]

Buck, here's a pan from a JVC HD100.
1280x720 60P (shutter 1/60) : http://www.landhofilms.com/hd100/SD60P%20Test%20Footage.m2t


Here's the thread where this came from:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/jvc-pro-hd-acquisition-systems/117508-motion-smooth.html


Tim Dashwood also has good advice on not relying on your PC LCD for motion.

Also, man that HD100 shot must of been taken with sharpening cranked. It's way to much... very harsh.

[Buck Forester]

Hey Stevet, I still haven't had time to do exhaustive testing, but I did hook up my test shooting of the bookshelf pans directly to my HDTV, which is a non-LCD Sony 55" DLP hdtv. The results were similar in viewing. Shooting 1080 60i was the best for motion, quite smooth, the text remained sharp on the books. The next best was 720 60p, almost as good as 60i. All others were not good at all. I had my wife view it with me and she couldn't watch the tv for more than a few seconds because the slightly blurred text was hard on her eyes.

Maybe I should just stick with shooting 60i? Is 1080 60i okay for broadcast and making DVDs? I've just been shooting 1080/30p because it seems like everyone prefers progressive for some reason.

I'm SO curious if shooting 1080/30p at 100 mbps long gop with the NanoFlash and/or XDR will alleviate these motion blurs; or using it to shoot I-frame will help. What I'm seeing is definitely there on every output device I've used so far.

[Stevet]

Buck, I know you're hooking the EX to your monitor, but if you own Vegas or some other prgram that allows you to make quick BluRay on standard DVDs, try capturing and playing back for comparison.

Oddly, I can't hit it on the head why, but the EX hooked directly to my plasma verses watching the same footage from my BluRay (PS3) looks different. The Bluray looks better.

The odd thing, is my JVC HD100 did the same thing when using the component output.
The HD100 motion had more judder using the component out on the camera. I can't remember why, but it was either Barry or Adam Wilt (somebody elese?) that mentioned somenthing about the cadence when using the video out on the camera.

Here's more on this. Unfortunately Alisters comparision videos are now gone. I remembered they showed no motion differences with the EX1 compared to the the HD100 and F350.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/sony-xdcam-ex-cinealta/121905-strobing-flicker-effect-when-panning-24p-8.html

[PerroneFord]

=Maybe I should just stick with shooting 60i? Is 1080 60i okay for broadcast and making DVDs? I've just been shooting 1080/30p because it seems like everyone prefers progressive for some reason.

Buck, the broadcast HD standard (rec.709) specifies 1080i in the standard. You are shooting motion subjects for TV. Why WOULDN'T you shoot interlaced? HD broadcast now for sports is mostly interlaced. It allows for increased sharpness, as well as increased light gathering. You get back a full F-Stop shooting interlaced.

So shoot 60i, use a 180 degree shutter, and you should be AWFULLY happy with what you get.

If you aren't making movies, why are you shooting like you are?

[Buck Forester]

Buck, the broadcast HD standard (rec.709) specifies 1080i in the standard. You are shooting motion subjects for TV. Why WOULDN'T you shoot interlaced? HD broadcast now for sports is mostly interlaced. It allows for increased sharpness, as well as increased light gathering. You get back a full F-Stop shooting interlaced.

So shoot 60i, use a 180 degree shutter, and you should be AWFULLY happy with what you get.

If you aren't making movies, why are you shooting like you are?

Perrone, good question, ha! I'm not making movies nor have any plans to make movies. I reeeeally don't like 24p at all. I do like the look of 1080/30p vs 1080/60i, minus the horizontal motion. All other motion is fine for me at 1080/30p, following subjects, it's only the danged horizontal pans with a close up stationary subject. My style of shooting will require this though, because just like my still 'wilderness' photography, I like to get a low perspective with a strong foreground component (grasses, flowers, log, etc.) with a sweeping scenic vista. With video I want to do this with dolly and track and slowly move to the side to add drama, with everything razor sharp. Or make slow, cinematic jib moves. So this motion sharpness in these conditions is mandatory for me, but in other situations I'm pleased with the motion of the EX1.

But to be honest the only reason I'm shooting 1080/30p is complete ignorance of what's best for which applications. I have no idea yet. I'm just shooting. The Vortex DVD guy said he prefers 1080/30p so that's just what I've been shooting. My intended markets will be DVD/Blu-Ray, web, and broadcast. I have all the fancy editing equipment and haven't even opened FCP yet, ha! That's my next project. I'm just now getting quality time to do this stuff.

[Stevet]

Buck, do you have a PS3, or a BluRay player?

The PS3 is able to play around 30 minutes of BluRay HD on a regular DVD.
You can burn the BluRay "DVD" with Sony Vegas 8.0b or later.

If you have a PS3. I can send you three different DVDs of some freaking really boring pan tests I did today.

It was boring pan shots at different framerates and shutters rates of a cluttered kitchen table where my wife does her scrapbooking. lol..

I shot (various shutter speeds mentioned on the audio track) at: 1080 24P, 30P, 1080i and
720 60P

I just watched the 720 60P with three seperate videos at 1/60, 1/120, and 1/500.

Even the 1/60 blows away anything I've seen using my NLE system which has the DELL 2405 24" 1920x1080 monitor and my Dell laptop. There's none of the "soft pan then pause and it goes sharp" stuff that has been seen viewing the EX1 LCD and other PC LCD monitoring systems.

Even viewing the live monitor output on the EX1 via BlackMagic DVI>HDLINK HDMI to the 2405 monitor, pans look a bit soft. Also, I may be wrong, but I thought I remembered even using the component output pan looked a bit odd, even to my plama. I'd like for someone to offer a reason for this. Oddly, my JVC HD100 did the same dang thing. Now, I understand why this is happening with computer type LCD displays, but with the plasma, i'm not sure. Very odd. The odd thing is burn the videos to BluRay or DVD and the motion from the plasma is great.

But, like I've mentioned, I do not see any of these issues when mastering DVDs and BluRay or other post production formats played back on HDTV systems.

Bottom line, DO NOT TRUST motion viewing your XDCAM footage on your PC.

Buck, let me know if you want me to send you these. I know you are concerned with what you've seen, but I'm sure after watching these quasi BluRay DVDs (on your PS3), you're understand the difference.

Although, these samples are boring as hell, it will show you that there is NO additioning blurring other than motion blur when using slower frame rates and/shutter speeds.

The 720 60P is smooth as I've seen any thing on HDTV.

My 1080 60i sample disk is rendering right now, then I'll render the 1080 24P. Oddly, I believe that BluRay does not support 30P, so I won't have this available.

[Jim Arthurs]

Buck, here's my best take at trying to solve this problem. The issue in testing any blur caused by codec or motion blur is that the features in the frame that you're watching are moving across the frame, so in the ideal world we could subtract just the screen motion and thereby remove all the issues with display technology, LCD lag, etc.

So here's my test;

http://ftp.datausa.com/imageshoppe/outgoing/EX1/TARGET_24fps180shutterPIP.mov (26megs, save as).

First, I shot a slow pan across a focus target, pausing ever so often then continuing the pan. EX1 native 35Mb/sec codec, 24fps and 1/48 shutter (ie normal motion signature for feature film work).

Next I motion stabilized the focus target in After Effects. This effectively "pins" the tracked subject in screen space.

Finally, I made a final movie that has the screen target at 1:1 original size and a small reference version of the full scene. You can then keep your eye on the target and watch the reference thumbnail for cues as to when there's actual motion and when there's a pause in the pan.

My feeling after doing this is that there is no blurring beyond what normal motion blur would create. I feel that everything you're seeing is a result of the screen technology (LAG), or some strange combinations of the cameras settings. The bottom line is that you've never had access to such a sharp original video source, and the nature shows you've been watching on TV, while even in HD, are still too far away from the originals to evaluate to the same degree as you can with this camera directly hooked up to a 1080p monitor.

As to the codec, well, on the other forum on your same thread I show that the FlashXDR can reduce the effect of macroblocking and color smear significantly on fast motion, and in a situation with the shutter set so high as to create perfectly sharp images even with wild pans... this test here is more to the question of if the EX1 has some issue with image processing motion. I don't feel that it does.

My two cents, but with a bit of actual work effort to adjust for inflation and general economic chaos. :)

Regards,

Jim Arthurs

[Stevet]

Jim, what can I say... This is excellent man.
That was an excellent idea to motion stabilize the focus target and have a visual cue on when the pan starts and stops.

If this does not put this to rest, nothing will. Over the years, I can say I've learned not to trust computer displays with my videos.

Also, if you're up for it, hookup the EX1 via component, or SDI>DVI (HDMI) and let me know what you think about motion using the live outputs. Oddly, my plasma set had more motion smear than normal. But, if I render it to a BluRay or DVD and play it back from a PS3 to the plasma, the motion is excellent. Am I seeing things or what? I'm seeing a difference, that's for sure. Maybe I need to look again...??

[Sumfun]

Nice work, Jim. Thanks for showing us that the video does not blur. They should hire you on Myth Busters ;-)

Stevet mentioned in his post above that he sees some softness when watching footage directly from the camera, but not when he burns it to DVD. Any idea why this may be?

Also, what are your thoughts on the "myth" that you can't get the color on the EX1 to look like that on the Panasonic cameras?

[Jim Arthurs]

Hi Steve and Sumfun, thanks for the feedback. I know I'm in the market for a better monitoring solution than my current setup. The 24" broadcast JVC's look nice for a reasonable amount of money, but I'm sure that for some time we'll all be trying to work-around the fact we simply can't see our material as well as we'd like.

I will try and do some live tests the next time I'm hooked up to something, er, "nice", which is usually only on a shoot day.

As to the whole Panasonic vrs. Sony color issue... I suspect there's some basic differences in the way the CCD and processing on the Pany and the CMOS and processing on the Sony work that would make it difficult to match up perfectly, but I honestly have never tried.

I am very happy with the look of the Sony, running 24p at 1/48th and simply turning off detail, setting black to -4 and doing manual knee adjustments when necessary to STD gamma 3 give me what I need right now...

... that and my cheap SD memory, thanks to you all, of course... :)

Jim Arthurs

[Stevet]

Thanks Jim.

Let us know if you get a chance to check out different monitors. I've had my EX1 hooked to the JVC at one time, but at that time I was not paying attention to motion.

I have another camera operator associate that uses the JVC with his RED ONE. He paid like $4K for the monitor. I do remember we compared the overall look to the
DELL 2405 connected BM HDLINK SDI>DVI(HDMI). The JVC looked better in just about every aspect, especially color rendition. It also handled the EX1 pulldown correctly for the SDI 24P over 1080 60i. Well, now that's not an issue since the news software 1.11 offers 24PsF via SDI.

[Sumfun]

Jim,

I just went and read your post in the other forum, and I realized that you may be saying 2 different things here. Here, you are saying that the image does not degrade when you pan the camera. But on the other forum, you clearly show that the image does degrade when you pan the camera. True, the pan speed is much higher, but you showed that the 35mbps codec can be stressed, and that there is significant improvement with a 100mbps codec.

So I went back and looked more carefully at the video of the test target that you posted above, and I noticed that the image was sharper when you paused the pan. This is easy to see if you look at the "DV RACK" lettering. The letters seem to go slightly out of focus when you pan, then come back into focus when you stop panning. Can you see this, too? I don't think the blurring is caused by LCD lag or the post processing, because when I paused the video, the picture is still blurred.

So could it be that the 35mbps codec is stressed even at slow pan speeds? Your test picture is not as complex as a field of grass, so the blurring would probably be more noticeable in more "organic" scenes. So maybe there is some truth in Buck's original conjecture after all.

[Jim Arthurs]

This test was at 24fps and 1/48th sec and does show slight blurring when the camera is moving, but an amount equal to natural motion blur and not greater than that. I should have done it at the 1/2000 shutter speed as well, and maybe will if I have some time this week.

I'm trying (poorly) to say two things;

1.) The EX1 doesn't "mess" up motion by some internal processing that's not related to codec stress.

2.) On the other forum, if you apply the perfect storm of codec stress (very high detail and an insane amount of temporal change combined with sharp detail due to high shutter speed) you can break the 35Mb/sec codec far quicker than the 100Mb/sec variant used by Convergent Design.

It's a perfectly valid question to wonder at what point is the codec breaking under "natural" conditions and that's the grey area. I just don't believe that's happening at slow pan rates and "natural" shutter conditions and normal nature detail.

Jim Arthurs

[Stevet]

Yes, no doubt motion blur at 24P 1/48.

I'm looking forward to purchasing a Convergent Deisgn, or maybe the Cineform if that ever gets rolling. I'm a fan of the Cineform codec.
I wish Cineform would update us on where they are on this. It's been a long wait.

[Buck Forester]

Jim, thank you for doing this test! And Stevet, thanks for doing your own testing too. It's nice to hear from those who know what they're doing and talking about. I'm just going by what I "see", no technical specs at all.

I was watching some shows on HDNET a couple of nights ago and the footage was spectacular (technically... the Bikini Destination gals weren't too bad either, ha!). I went to their website to see what they have listed as cameras and they are shooting (mostly Sony) 2/3" CCDs. Maybe that's the 'standard' I'm used to seeing and it's sharp with motion and gorgeous. My EX1 looks just as good 'still', but throw in the movements they're doing and it's just not looking like I ultimately want it to look (on specific stationary object 'movement' shots).

I strictly go by 'feel', by 'sight'. I'm the least technical guy you'll meet. Same way with my photography, I just learn primarily through experience (not technical stuff) and know what I want and keeping testing and shooting until I can get my camera to predictably capture what my "vision" is. What I see is what I see, and if specs and charts tell me I shouldn't be seeing it, but I still am, I have to go by what I see. I know in video there's LCDs and CRTs and Plasmas and codecs and bit rates and all that crud, but I just want to produce my 'vision' which will look pretty darn good on anything you watch it on. I see stuff on my computer that looks good, and my tv, and when I hook up my 'stationary object' motion shots to these same things it doesn't look how I want/need it to look.

Maybe I'm in the wrong league of cameras and expecting way too much, maybe I'm trying to get the 'motion' look of a $100,000+, three 2/3" CCDs camera in my EX1. I don't want an artsy look, or a film cadence look, I want sharp, crisp, in your face, freakin' awesome high-def "you're there... no, you're BETTER than there!" look.

That's why I wonder if using the NanoFlash at 100 mbps will provide me this look with motion, or if using it to shoot intra-frame will help. Or if I'm simply expecting $100,000 performance from a $6,500 camera. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love my EX1 and it's the size I need and produces superbly fantastico images, even when running with it, it's beyond wonderful and I'd buy it again (and maybe another one, but I'm holding out for what Scarlet may offer), but I need to find a way to overcome what my eyes are seeing with slow pan motion on stationary objects. Maybe 1080 60i is my huckleberry, I'll be shooting some more field test stuff in that mode and see if it works for me.

[PerroneFord]

I think everyone is in agreement that the Nanoflash will make a significant visible difference to what you're seeing. But if you're comparing the EX1 to a F900, I think you're ALWAYS going to be disppointed. The EX1 would have a hard time being a B-Camera to an F900. Their lenses cost more than our cameras.

I think 1080/60i is going to get you what you need. And from what I've seen, it looks very good on our cameras.

-P



That's why I wonder if using the NanoFlash at 100 mbps will provide me this look with motion, or if using it to shoot intra-frame will help. Or if I'm simply expecting $100,000 performance from a $6,500 camera. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love my EX1 and it's the size I need and produces superbly fantastico images, even when running with it, it's beyond wonderful and I'd buy it again (and maybe another one, but I'm holding out for what Scarlet may offer), but I need to find a way to overcome what my eyes are seeing with slow pan motion on stationary objects. Maybe 1080 60i is my huckleberry, I'll be shooting some more field test stuff in that mode and see if it works for me.

[Buck Forester]

Do they make a pocket F900? :Þ

[Stevet]

Buck, I've been where you have with motion on every video camera I've owned.
If you're looking for smooth liquid motion, it's 60i, or 60P.

The 1080i stuff I've shot with the EX1 look no different than the smooth motion high quality stuff i've seen on the HD channels.

Again, you really need to judge this after you're mastered your format to something like BluRay.
If you're shooting 24P 1/48 shutter or 30P 1/60 shutter , it's going to have motion blur at
these 180 degree shutter speeds. If you shoot 1080i at high shutter speeds you can get really sharp motion, but you will need light.

High shutter speeds at 24P and 30P, will give you a stoccata look like in Gladiator (or saving private ryan). The frames will be sharper, but it will look choppy with motion due to the slower frame rate.

[PerroneFord]

Do they make a pocket F900? :Þ

Yes, it's called RED.

[Jim Arthurs]

I think everyone is in agreement that the Nanoflash will make a significant visible difference to what you're seeing. But if you're comparing the EX1 to a F900, I think you're ALWAYS going to be disppointed. The EX1 would have a hard time being a B-Camera to an F900. Their lenses cost more than our cameras.

Interestingly, by Sonys own charts, the dual codec used by the FlashXDR/NanoFlash falls between HDCAM and HDCAM SR in terms of quality.

Recording HD-SDI out of an F900 to one of these units will result in a higher quality source than the on-board tape HDCAM. Remember that HDCAM is 1440 by 1080 3:1:1 while the dual chipset MPEG2 employed by the XDR is full raster 1920 by 1080 4:2:2. There's no question which I'd want to do key work with.

One thing to remember... using the XDR/NanoFlash is basically jumping ahead two generations of Sony prosumer cameras, since Convergent Designs is exploiting the full ability of the Sony codec chipset. Expect the next Sony model beyond the EX3 to use 50Mb/sec 4:2:2 and the generation after that to use the full 100Mb/sec or 160 Mb/sec I frame recording the chips are capable of.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs

[Sumfun]

This test was at 24fps and 1/48th sec and does show slight blurring when the camera is moving, but an amount equal to natural motion blur and not greater than that. I should have done it at the 1/2000 shutter speed as well, and maybe will if I have some time this week.

I'm trying (poorly) to say two things;

1.) The EX1 doesn't "mess" up motion by some internal processing that's not related to codec stress.

2.) On the other forum, if you apply the perfect storm of codec stress (very high detail and an insane amount of temporal change combined with sharp detail due to high shutter speed) you can break the 35Mb/sec codec far quicker than the 100Mb/sec variant used by Convergent Design.

It's a perfectly valid question to wonder at what point is the codec breaking under "natural" conditions and that's the grey area. I just don't believe that's happening at slow pan rates and "natural" shutter conditions and normal nature detail.

Jim Arthurs

Jim,

Thanks for clarifying that the blurring in the sample is caused by motion blur, and not codec stress. But since you did show that the 35mbps codec can be stressed, it may be interesting to see how much the picture is affected in, say, a 7-second pan.

[Stevet]

A 7-second pan is real slow. You'd be hard press to find obvious artifacts under this condion. Although, I imagine if you blew up some footage of the seaside rippling, you'd see artifacts. High detail movement can show artifacts.

The soccer footage I posted a year ago when panning fast when following the players I could see some artifacts if I blew the image up to 200%.

Having said that, I'm sold on the Convergent Design NanoFlash. This with the EX1 is really going to be something else. From the examples on the "other" forum, everything just looks cleaner free of nasty artifacts and macroblocks under stressed movement and/or high detail.