more fx1 frame grabs

[princigalli]

I'm not the first one to post grabs, but wanted to share my FX1 experience.

http://www.zoomforce.com/cgi-bin/dvxuser/more.cgi?864

That's filming in Picture Mode 3 Interlaced, the Sony Manual describes it as : Appropriate mode to shoot people.

What it does in fact it uses a filter called Skintone DTL: To make wrinkles less noticeable by suppressing the outlines on the part of the skin color to be enhanced.

Why am I using wrinkle reduction on a baby? I was just playing around with the camera. I will post more serious tests in the days to come. I am only concerned about the fact that ALL screen grabs need to be downscaled in photoshop in order to reduce blurring that makes the frame look upscaled in the first place. What I amgoing to try to determine in the following days is if the Sony FX1 effectively produces higher resolution still frames than SD Video cameras, once its frames have been resized to look as sharp as the SD Video frames. If it doesn't, I will return the camera and get a DVX100 instead, or even an AG-DV30.

[Aejaz]

It will be great if you could also post your results here ... as they come.

[princigalli]

I am looking into it. I am looking for a web spot to place all of the frames. I might simply use one of my web sites.

My first impresstions of VX2000 vs FX1:

I think I was being a bit hard to the FX1. But that's simply because its vertical resolution is far from being really 1080. The frame grabs look their best then downsized significately. But then I compared to frames from the VX2000, which I produced only in progressive scan, and the FX1 seems to look better. I only work on progressive scan because if you want to know what the VS2000 (or any other camera as a matter of fact) look like when interlaced you just need to cut the vertical resolution by 2, resize again to the original resolution, and add some blur.

Thus, the FX1 frames look exactly that way. But still, at half the size, they look better than DV.

I played the HD video back and let the FX1 convert to DV PAL. Very sharp.

What is really interesting, is taking the raw footage which I am now shooting in Cinerame 25, and encode directly to Quicktime and Windows Media. Mpeg to Mpeg, without going through DV. And it seems to work fine.

Still, the camera is not great in poor light conditions. It really required good lighting. Having said that, my VX2000 also produced razor sharp frames outdoors in Italy in Summer months. Really so sharp that I can resize to 900 x 650 and most people can't tell it's a video still, except for the typical video camera contrasts and colors.

So the FX1 produces better results as DV, but interlaced is interlaced, and it really sucks. I prefer motion that is not as smooth as interlaced ut nice and sharp images. Also, resolution is far from being as high as real HD cameras. I would say it's about 30% to 50% higher than regular PAL, with some extra for horizontal resolution. What really makes a difference is the colors. They are really nice. And if you loke the smoother looks of film, you can easily do that with the FX1 and it will look great.

[Aejaz]

But I think for colors, Panny cams generally have an edge over the Sony cameras.

[princigalli]

I agree. I always like Panasonic colors better. I need to net you see some frame grabs. I'm still looking for a full resolution posting solution.

The fact is, there's something about the image that looks less typical of a video camera and looke more like a typical 2 Megapixel Nikon tourist camera, with images compressed in Mpeg and not DV.

I know that if Panasonic came out with an HDV camera I would probably sell mine immediately and buy the Panasonic. They are simply better in almost every respect, and I really like the way Panasonic deals with customers, support, and market demand. I really don't trust sony anymore.

[Barry_Green]

Panasonic's not going to come out with an HDV camera anytime soon.

They have announced that they intend to make a high-def prosumer camera, but theirs will be based on DVCPRO-HD instead of HDV.

What's the difference? HDV is 25-megabit, 4:2:0 color sampling, 1440x1080 with MPEG-2 compression and a long-form GOP structure, with 2 channels of compressed audio. DVCPRO-HD is 100 megabits, 4:2:2 color sampling, 1280x1080 with DVCPRO-HD discrete-frame compression, no GOP at all, with 8 channels of uncompressed audio.

In 720p you're talking about HDV's 19-megabit 4:2:0 1280x720 vs. DVCPRO-HD's 100-megabit, 4:2:2 at 960x720. Again, less luma resolution, but 5x as much bitstream, 4x as much audio, and twice as much color resolution.

So with DVCPRO-HD you get 4x to 5x as much bitrate, you get nearly complete protection from dropouts, you get twice the color information, a little less luma resolution, and 4x as much audio, which is pure uncompressed audio quality. Plus DVCPRO-HD has been around for about 3 years, it's the same format that's used in the $65,000 VariCam!

HDV can produce some nice images, but the potential for dropouts and the impact that they can have on your footage is cause for concern, and the lower-resolution-on-motion issues bother me. DVCPRO-HD looks to be superior in every conceivable way... Oh, plus FCP-HD and Avid Express already support native editing in DVCPRO-HD via Firewire; HDV can't do that yet, although Vegas (my favorite editing app) currently can support HDV streams but doesn't support DVCPRO-HD... sigh...

So, anyway, it'll be interesting to see where HDV goes, but I think Panasonic's poised to deliver a potentially far superior product with the DVCPRO-HD format. Hopefully the camera section will live up to and deliver on the promise that the recording format makes.

[Anhar_Miah]

Barry, i have a rather dumb question, regarding the DVCPRO-HD, which tapes do they accecpt regular miniDV or Large DV tapes or does it depend on the camera itself? or does it use altogther different tape size?

[Barry_Green]

All DVCPRO variants use the same basic type of tape, 6mm wide Metal Particle (most DV tape is 6mm wide but Metal Evaporated, I think).

The high-def versions have a red stripe, and aren't supposed to be used to record standard-def on them. The standard-def are yellow-stripe (DVCPRO-25) and blue-stripe (DVCPRO-50). They all come in the same large cassette shell, which is the same shell as a large DV tape. However, even though you're not supposed to interchange them, you can -- we shot a spot on the VariCam using the DVCPRO-25 tape, and it worked just fine. I don't recommend doing that, but that's what the producer ordered, so we did, and... well, it worked.

DVCPRO-HD also has a super-large cassette size (which is kind of ridiculous to say, because it's still like 1/4 the size of a VHS tape).

I don't believe there are any small (i.e., mini-DV)-sized DVCPRO-HD tapes. And with the camera Panasonic's teasing about, it wouldn't use tape at all, it would use flash memory cards (P2 cards).

[MovieSwede]

How much will the cost per minute "film" be? If you gonna store it on P2 cards?

[Ruff_Futtidge]

Barry ! - you say -
"They have announced that they intend to make a high-def prosumer camera, but theirs will be based on DVCPRO-HD instead of HDV.

What's the difference? "

Surely the difference is the fact that the Sony is here and now (and just a few cents more than the DVX) and it's low 25mbps can be handled by a 'normal' power edit station.
100Mbps would be unmanageable by us mere £1200 PC mortals (poor bank account!) even if Panasonic had managed to get it developed+working and in production today , I doubt they would sell it at a comparable price to Sony's very reasonable FX1*.
and 8 audio channels ! ?
Most of us can't even use the DVX to it's potential , let alone a 4:4:4:4 0.02 lux 9.1 surround orgasmatron of a camera !!! :D ;D :o ;)
Best Wishes for the New Year , Ruff !

[MovieSwede]

As I understand, the difference is that DVCPRO-HD gonna be a good format to make "movies" where the HDV is more of a consumer format to show great homevideos out of the box.

If you look at the DVX and Juans 4:4:4 mod. We se that the miniDV compression is the bottleneck with this cam (DVX). The same goes for HDV. No matter how good the cam will be. The compression will destroy much of the picture.

[princigalli]

If this is true about Panasonic's future intry in HD, than it will be a very attractive one. If they manage to market this piece of equipment at a reasonable price and make sure it will be smaller than the FX1, they will sign the end of the DV era. And once again they will have proved the superiority of Panasonic's approach. Sony, as always likes to make a lot of noise, stun people with design and gadget fratures, but very little content. Interlaced chips... really! And let's not talk about their TRV-950E camera... They removed progressive scan capacity and added an email client!!!!!

[Barry_Green]

Surely the difference is the fact that the Sony is here and now (and just a few cents more than the DVX) and it's low 25mbps can be handled by a 'normal' power edit station.
Well, yes, the camera is here now. As for the format, that still leaves a lot of stones unturned. You could say alternately that DVCPRO-HD is here and now, and has been for three years! And DVCPRO-HD works today, end-to-end, in FCP-HD (DVCPRO-HD was the upgrade to FCP that made it become FCP-HD). And DVCPRO-HD works in Avid Express' new product too. HDV has a camera out, but no fully-functional end-to-end edit solution yet. You can't make a file in Vegas that can be output to the camera. You can't edit in HDV codec in FCP-HD, (you actually have to transcode to DVCPRO-HD!)

So with Sony the camera's here, but the editing/post support isn't. With Panasonic the format is here, and has been for years; there just isn't a prosumer camera out yet to use it.


100Mbps would be unmanageable by us mere £1200 PC mortals (poor bank account!)
FCP-HD is here today, working today, taking DVCPRO-HD over firewire and editing and outputting in the native codec. Avid Express has been announced. Panasonic is lining up the post solutions before springing the camera on us.


even if Panasonic had managed to get it developed+working and in production today , I doubt they would sell it at a comparable price to Sony's very reasonable FX1*.
You're right -- they're talking about perhaps selling it for LESS than the FX1. They've talked about a $3,000 price point. (which remains to be seen when/if it actually comes out!)


and 8 audio channels ! ?
Most of us can't even use the DVX to it's potential , let alone a * 4:4:4:4 * 0.02 lux * 9.1 surround orgasmatron *of a camera !!! * :D ;D :o ;)
Okay, you got me there, but... I'd still want it, even if I couldn't use it to its full potential! :)


Best Wishes for the New Year , Ruff !
Right back at ya!

[Barry_Green]

If this is true about Panasonic's future intry in HD, than it will be a very attractive one.
It's what Jan has announced, and Panasonic has shown at trade shows, so I take it as credible.

If they manage to market this piece of equipment at a reasonable price and make sure it will be smaller than the FX1, they will sign the end of the DV era.
I think it'll put a big dent in HDV, but I'm not ready to write off DV yet... SD still has such an insurmountable lead over HD in consumer's homes that it'll be years before HD triumphs. However, if the new camera were to offer all the features of the DVX, and a downrezzed picture looked as good as a DVX picture, then yes, prosumer DV would be in serious trouble!

[Aejaz]

I think it'll put a big dent in HDV, but I'm not ready to write off DV yet... SD still has such an insurmountable lead over HD in consumer's homes that it'll be years before HD triumphs. *However, if the new camera were to offer all the features of the DVX, and a downrezzed picture looked as good as a DVX picture, then yes, prosumer DV would be in serious trouble!



Exactly. many FX1 users, including princiagalli are experiencing it now....i.e. having an HD camera but not an HD display...this is what I gathered from some of the threads here.

But Barry!, couldn't the same be said for DVCPRO-HD?

[Anhar_Miah]

if you really want HD right now, i guess you can always build one, i've been following the guys over at DVinfo, a SI3300 cam with USB2 connection and Streampix software will record direct to disk 1080 progessive @ 24 full frames full colour 4:4:4, thats almost Viper quailty...

[Neil Rowe]

.. barrys statement appears to make reference to all HD and SD.

i do have some reservations about additional equipment needed to process and output HD in realtime, but new horizons such as visually lossless codecs like cineforms and others will probably step up (fingers crossed)... as long as we can purchase a non pc bundled solution it should be ok.

[Barry_Green]

But Barry!, couldn't the same be said for DVCPRO-HD?

Most definitely. *Which is why I say, even if the DVCPRO-HD camera is incredible, that doesn't mean that prosumer DV is dead, not by a long shot. *As long as DVD stays the dominant, ubiquitous distribution format, standard-def DV cameras will be able to play a viable and useful role in production for years to come.

[MovieSwede]

Barry how does it work with the p2 cards?

It seems that you gonna have to use a lot of cards for your projects? Or must I store stuff on my hardrive?

[Barry_Green]

You'd offload your project onto the computer, edit it, and then archive from there to tape (if you have a DVCPRO-HD tape deck).

[satellitebunny]

Well, don't forget that Panasonic is propably going to first deliver an MPEG based HD palm camera. There is no info, whether it will be a 25 Mb/s or an 50 Mb/s solution, but as it says in the following quote from their press release, they say it is going to be "for the professional market". I hope that it means 50 Mb/s, because after all Sony says that HDV 25 Mb/s is a consumer format.
This press release suggests in my opinion:
2005: "MPEG HD" palm camera
2006: DVCPRO-HD palm camera

https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/pro-av/sales_o/news_info/ibc/093.html
----
For broadcast production, he said, “Panasonic will expand the product line of DVCPRO and DVCPRO50 compatible P2 products. You will see us introducing even more cost effective camcorders and a palm style mini-camcorder for broadcast use. Panasonic will introduce the first DVCPRO HD compatible P2 products in 2006 under a clear and consistent migration path toward HD.”

While for professional production, Panasonic will exploit P2’s open architecture, and “we will introduce a MPEG-based HD resolution, palm-style mini-camcorder using P2, for the professional market in 2005.”
----

[Ruff_Futtidge]

So with Sony the camera's here, but the editing/post support isn't. *With Panasonic the format is here, and has been for years;

- Pinnacle LE6 and Canopus both claim HDV is editable (end to end) now. Indeed , I went to a demo of Canopus HDV ( from an FX1 ) last month - very impressive , even tho' I'm a pinnacle Liquid Edition 5.5 convert ! - ( Have I got that wrong ? - was I so dazzled by the footage that I missed asking the real questions ? ! - perhaps ! )


FCP-HD is here today, working today . With Panasonic the format is here, and has been for years; there just isn't a prosumer camera out yet to use it.
- ! *! *! *! - so it's of no use to us poor guys !! Also I'd need a Mac. - more expense I can't afford ! -

. HOWEVER , you say it's gonna be LESS THAN THE FX1 ? ! ? ! ? ! -
* * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * W O W ! - I'll take two please ! :D 8)

[hvpz]

You can find some Z1 frame grabs, in this test (hum...):

http://www.repaire.net/site/tournage/hdv_sony/z1/index.php (in french)



The translation by google in english :
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.repaire.net%2Fsite%2F tournage%2Fhdv_sony%2Fz1%2Findex.php&langpair=fr%7 Cen&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools
(curiously only a part of the article is translated)

[firstcinemapicture]

Anhar_Miah, can you post a link to the webpage where they are building the SI3300 cam?

[princigalli]

after playing around a bit, I am gathering some data and I am building a working pattern. I understand many people find Cinemode 25 to have lower resolution, but to be perfectly honest, I personally can't notice with my naked eyes. Those people were working real scientific tests.
I prefer the convenience of working progressive, be it real or fake. Converting such a format between PAL and NTSC for perfect SD DVD is real easy.

As for downconverting, on Mac I haven't seen any software that does it as good as the camera itself, but my initial impression is that on PC, Canopus Procoder (version 1) does a better job and you will get a very sharp picture.

[satellitebunny]

I too can't see the difference in the resolution drop of cineframe25 when looked at stills, or the one time I was able to look at it in an 1920X1080 HD computer monitor. Ofcourse it is there, as some resolution charts show it, but I'm not too worried about it. And since some mighty people here agreed that the motion looks the same as if it was progressive, I've shot all my material with cineframe25. I'm doing so for the comfort of editing material with "film motion".
The more I try colour correcting HDV 25 Mb/s material, it starts to look scarier. If panasonic is going to put up a better format, I'm getting it, but few years with HDR-FX1 doesn't feel that bad. It gives a good picture most of the time anyway.

[scharky]

What do you mean by scarier. Scarier like "wow that is so good it is scary", or scary like, "man there is so much posterization it is scary." ?

[satellitebunny]

Scary like "there is so much posterization". With HDV it seems that you don't have that much possibilities in color correction. Ofcourse colors go into any direction, but when you try to get a dark shot to appear light and set gamma a little bit too much the posterization and mpeg stuff start to show. Ofcourse you can't tweak 8 bit DV much either, but on HDV you can do even less. I haven't tried it on a normal project, but I'd assume that normal color correction is bearable even with HDV.
But, it's not a format for post processing. I'll propably try to do as much as I can in camera, and just leave luminance and gamma correction to be just little tweaks. And ofcourse you can always go to darker blacks and that will hide things, but you can't lift the blacks.
Ok, I have to admit that I've used to doing color correction on 10bit Digibeta stuff, so my experience with DV correction is kind of limited. Although I've done couple projects on DV too, but they were usually more experimental.

[princigalli]

in my opinion, an immense gain is made by getting the light and coloring right the moment you shoot. I also work on digiral photography projects, mostly with a Nikon D100 camera, always in Jpeg modes (RAW is too slow for real life situations, unless you are shooting a stack of apples). Well those images are certainly more easy to tweak than DV or HDV, but I can assure you I hate to make changes. Any color correction or levels change, I feel there are losses, and not even that subtle.

[robroysyd]

OK, not many consummers have 1080 TVs, infact there's very few available apart from projectors that cost as much as a good car. Most "HD" TVs are only good for 720.
However more and more consummers do have 16:9 SD sets so good 16:9 is pretty important. Now with the FX1/Z1 you can shoot HDV and downsample (NOT in the camera) to 4:2:2 SD, that's broadcast standard 16:9, a huge step up for anything at this cameras pricepoint. Sure you don't get the optics you get on a broadcast camera but you get an image way better than any DV25 camera can pull.
Also the FX1 gives you component out that you can use to bypass all the issues fo HDV. We've used the camera in SD mode via a component to SDI converter into a DigiBeta deck and the results are stunning, way better than anything you can record in DV25, no DV25 artifacts at all.
There's a few thing not so good about HDV, most of the flack the FX1/Z1 is copping is due to the recording format rather than the camera, apart from no progressive scan I don't see much that Sony could have done to build a better HDV camera, they've certainly learned a lot from the the DVX100, handling the FX1 I find it hard to believe it's a Sony camera!
The Z1 adds some pretty neat tricks as well, like in camera rack focus, you can setup more complex focus shifts than I think anyone would need and tie them to aperture shifts, in fact you can setup any camera parameter to transition at different rates and curves. I'd almost rate the thing as being too flexible.
I'm not saying these cameras will suit everyone, they're not for every situation or shooting style either but I think if nothing else Sony deserves credit for raising the bar. I can't see any camera manufacturer trying to sell either a HDV or DV camera at that pricepoint with less features. So love it or hate it, we're all going to benefit from it in the long run.