PDA

View Full Version : HDV Compositing Example video



stephenlnoe
09-06-2005, 01:36 PM
Hi,

Some other users were asking about compositing HDV so I gave the Example footage a small work over to see if it was better than the Z1.

DivX Example movie 2 (http://www.planetliquid.us/web_video/szn89productions/szn89hdvtitlecomposite.avi) (16MB DivX format)

The HD100 (ProHD) stills are terrific to work with for compositing. Much much better than interlaced Z1.

For the engineers in the house I used Boris Red and rendered the effect MPEG2 MP@HL (M2V) 25MB 4:2:0 using 3-pass 3 lobed Lanczos (generic, nothing special)

One question for guys that have the camera. This may sound dumb but, can you plug the camera directly into a power source (not battery)?

Barry_Green
09-06-2005, 01:53 PM
Yes you can plug the AC adapter directly into it.

Barry_Green
09-06-2005, 01:58 PM
As a side note, regarding your progressive-vs.-interlaced comment:

Yesterday I was watching the US Open tennis tournament in HD, broadcast on CBS (1080i). The white lines against the blue court background were terribly aliased, and downright annoying -- everything else was so clear, that the aliased lines really "stuck out." Then I switched over to a football game on ABC (720p) and it was a total breath of fresh air -- it looked every bit as "high def", but it was clean and pristine, no aliasing -- their white lines against grass didn't shimmer and crawl like the 1080i lines did.

Progressive is just better, in every possible way, for every possible purpose. Five of the six ATSC high-def broadcast standards are progressive, and for good reason. The EBU has nearly unanimously endorsed progressive, and for good reason.

mmm
09-06-2005, 03:00 PM
Burn the interlacing witch!

theHeadlessPuppy
09-06-2005, 06:05 PM
And do it quickly, God dammit!

Antoine_Fabi
09-06-2005, 06:48 PM
It was shot with the HD100 ?

I really like this image ! ...seems to have a much much better s/n ratio than the DVX...
Was it with the stock lense ?

stephenlnoe
09-07-2005, 12:35 PM
It was shot with the HD100 ?

I really like this image ! ...seems to have a much much better s/n ratio than the DVX...
Was it with the stock lense ?

Those shots were done as a part of a test with the HD100 and a mini35 adapter.

Click here to get to the article and downloadable shots (http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/jvcprohd/hd100mini35test2.php)

There has been quite a bit of footage offered by users. A guy by the name of Nate Weaver put up some nice stuff with the stock lens a couple of days ago. They were magic hour shots so they look dynamite (color wise). Go over to dvinfo.net and go into the HD-100 section. You'll find a lot of example m2t's to 'play' with.

Antoine_Fabi
09-08-2005, 01:08 PM
thanks !

funkydmunky
09-12-2005, 02:29 PM
"Progressive is just better, in every possible way, for every possible purpose..."

While not a fan of interlaced in the slightest, it holds a strong lead as far as low light shooting (LUX rating). Does it not?

Barry_Green
09-12-2005, 02:49 PM
Well, no, not necessarily -- you can get the same performance from progressive by using a lower shutter speed. 30P @ 1/30th gives the same light response as 60i @ 1/60th.

If low light is your quest, progressive allows the use of slower shutter speeds (while retaining full resolution) than interlaced does.

If you want to compare shutter speed against shutter speed, then yes 60i at 1/60th would be twice as bright as progressive at 1/60th, that's true. But why limit progressive to only exposing for half as long as it could?

KCFilms
09-12-2005, 02:59 PM
The downside of longer shutter speeds is the effect on motion. The look you get always reminds me of 60i video that's been deinterlaced and frame blended in After Effects.

You can see an good example of this in "Once Upon a Time in Mexico" when Johnny Depp's character walks into a kitchen and kills the cook.

obin
09-12-2005, 05:36 PM
progressive is WAY better!

stephenlnoe
09-12-2005, 08:16 PM
The downside of longer shutter speeds is the effect on motion. The look you get always reminds me of 60i video that's been deinterlaced and frame blended in After Effects.

You can see an good example of this in "Once Upon a Time in Mexico" when Johnny Depp's character walks into a kitchen and kills the cook.

I find this to be true when @ 24P/24S but with 30 shutter you can get away with a lot. I mention this over on another forum but a push in or pull out camera move (z axis) can get away with very slow shutter speeds, even 1/24. It's when there is movement across the frame horizontally or vertically (x & y axis) when problems arise with un-natural motion characteristics of objects in the scene. Try it for yourself. Set the camera on a tripod and program the camera for 1/30 shutter and then try different moves in front of the camera. Move toward the lens and then away from the lens and then across the lens and then try these moves at different speeds (ie walk slowly away and then a little faster and then faster still). You'll soon learn what you can and can't get away with in 1/30 (low light) situations and have the image movements look completely natural to the eye.

funkydmunky
09-14-2005, 01:34 PM
I use an HD10 which when in 720p30 mode it always reverts to 1/30th shutter, as opposed to 480p60 mode that always reverts to 1/60th shutter. I generally dislike the motion blur at 1/30th forcing me to lock the shutter at 1/60th in 720p30 mode. It is acceptable in very minimal motion shots, but it does impart a very distinct look on any movement sometimes making certain post FX difficult. It definitely helps with the low light end of things.