Does cineframe25/30 motion look the same as 25p/30

[satellitebunny]

I've been shooting 4 hours of cineframe25 material, and it's looking good. All the discussion that has been on most of the threads, is about the resolution loss in cineframe modes. But what about the motion footprint of cineframe25/30 compared to 25p/30p material? I've shot some footage with the DVX 25p, XL2 25p and now some cineframe25 material, and I'd say the motion looks the same. Does anyone have any opinions or proof, that the motion would be different? Any enlargened still frames of comparisons in individual frame motion blur would be nice. (Do not bother to discuss the cineframe24 as it's known to be not good.)

Another question is ofcourse the differences in motion between 25p/electronical shutter versus film/mechanical shutter. Is there a difference, or is it just the overall feel of film that blinds us thinking that film motion is still better?

So, no talk about resolution, just motion and feel, in this thread, please.

[Anhar_Miah]

i watched some CF25 footage on a SD TV and the motion was very pleasing nothing wrong with it IMHO.

[Barry_Green]

I believe the motion of Cineframe 25 would be identical to that of 25P.

[LoveHD]

The electrical shutter gives you vertical smear. The Viper Filmstream Camera has mechanical shutter and Thomson guarantees no vertical smear with this technology.

[Steven_Fokkinga]

Hi satellitebunny,

Do you have some footage maybe you can post which shows the motion of CF25? Most favourably a pan. I don't have access to a FX1 so I have to rely on other people's tests...

Thanks in advance!

Steven

[princigalli]

Well, I just purchased the camera yesterday and started making a few tests. I am testing different modes in the camera, software, SD output from HDV, HDV vs VX2000 SD, HDV converted directly to DVD vs SD converted to DVD.

Of course, all of this takes time. I am looking at still frames and also moving pictures. I already came out with some interesting results.

For one thing, I only tested the Cineframe 25 mode so far. My problem with it, it looks too much like film, as far as I can see. Now, some people probably like that, but to be honest, if I wanted that I would have gone for a 16mm film camera instead (and probably save).

I want progressive frames, but I want the high contrast and sharpness I get from video. I guess everybody needs or wants something different.

By the way, I will also compare HDV cineframe output to SD PAL vs deinterlaced no-cineframe HDV output to sd PAL, and progressive scan DV from my VX2000 which produces incredibly sharp images, but 12,5fps.

Finally I will convert some footage to NTSC to see how it looks like. I don't really care about how smooth the motion will be. If I add one frame every five I'm still happy.

I am acquiring all of my video with Cineframe, which is expensive, but most practical. I also had to buy an MPEG-2 component for Quicktime. That would have been $19 in the USA, but €29 in Europe. Anyone figures why?

I would like to try deinterlacing on PC with DVFilm's deinterlacer which converts HDV to 24 frames progressive. Should be good. When I'll have time I'll do it, and also try converting to NTSC. I figure at that point it's just a matter of resizing.

I will post frames when I produce them. If you have any request, please let me know.

[marc5532]

I will post frames when I produce them. If you have any request, please let me know.
If you have a VX2000 to compare, It will be interesting to know how compare the FX1 in low light to the VX2000 (I've heard 12dB or 2 stops of difference from the NTSC models, but I'm interested to know if the PAL models have the same difference)

If you could also post a frame in low light of the FX1 at fulll aperture and 18dB of gain to see if the image is usable or not with that gain. Thank.