Finally got our HVX200 RAW Clips! Need a server!!!!!

[PappasArts]

Hey everyone!

Finally got around to getting our HVX200 clips shot on P2. I have 4 raw clips that my friend Barlow and I shot with Panasonic's HVX200 at DVexpo last week.* What I have are three 720P 24 and one 1080P 24 raw clips.** We shot these on a 4gig p2 card and then brought them from a powerbook laptop via the PCMCIA slot into Final Cut Pro and then burned them to CD.

BTW- Import to FCP was so easy that it was awesome. I have no problem with tape, but the P2 worked flawlessly with FCP. Thumbs Up!

The Footage is nothing fancy at all.* It's convention show floor footage on sticks with pretty bland lighting you get at any show. It's more like If I were shooting a documentary ( ala Michael Moore- frontline etc ) or run & gun film like BlairWitch etc; that's what these show conditions would resemble simply non controlled environments that we would face for that type of filmmaking or cinema verite** style.


FIRST ISSUE: Server needed........

Ok, the problem is I need someone to post these clips or mirror them.* We don't have the download bandwidth to cover a massive download.

So if your serious, and I know you from the boards. If approved, I will give a private not be publicized link to get these files.* I ask that you have these files up within one hour of getting them. * So if you have the bandwidth let me know, and if you can do this that would be wonderful.

Important:

Again, I want to stress that the conditions at the recent DVexpo and how the camera would film are more like how documentary or run and gun type filmmakers would be facing. This is real world filming, not studio filmmaking with sets and a lighting to make perfect pretty looking images.

So this footage is not like the awesome material that Barry Green,Jarred Land, Evin Grant etc filmed. Nor is it like the awesome footage that Illya Friedman's production shot*that was filmed out and screened at Laser Pacific.

It is however raw P2 clips straight from the camera to FCP and nothing done to them what's so ever. There just 720/24 and 1080/24 mode footage that people can play with and look at...

If you can host these clips Email me at : Arrfilms@hotmail.com


Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

[Mr. Blonde]

Hurry Hurry someone I wanna see! =)

[redindian]

and make it a torrent pls...! that'll help both you and the others...

[JoeNash]

!!!!!!!

[redindian]

ok np...

[PappasArts]

I'm leaving the studio for a dinner date! :-) Tomorrow I'm going to look at my emails and the offers to upload, then we will get the HVX200 clips up.

Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

[Stevet]

Thanks Michael !
Looking forward to seeing the clips.

Steve

[im.thatoneguy]

First person to download please create a torrent. It's fast and super easy. Just be sure to create a torrent file without a tracker.

http://www.bittorrent.com/guide.html

[harlan]

A date???? A DATE???? That's supposed to be an excuse for delaying a release of footage???? Come on Michael!!! You can have a dinner date anytime!! :)

[Luis Caffesse]

You can have a dinner date anytime!! :)

Yeah, reschedule for tomorrow morning.
:)

[harlan]

Yeah, reschedule for tomorrow morning.
:)


LOL... Damn straight!!

[harlan]

Luis, your avatar kills me. Everytime I respond to one of your messages I always have to laugh at talking to a wookie. :)

[Luis Caffesse]

Hmmm, don't feel bad, people have the same reaction in real life.

[im.thatoneguy]

I've always felt like it was a femenine wookie. What are your thoughts on the subject Luis? Sort of grandmotherly.

[Luis Caffesse]

I can tell you exactly who it is.
It is 'Lumpy'
And Lumpy is Chewbacca's son from the Star Wars Holiday Special, which is arguably the biggest failure to ever be aired on television.
I promise you've never seen anything like it.
As bad as you think it is, that's just the tip of the iceberg.

It's really fun to watch.
:thumbsup:

[FatBird19]

I can tell you exactly who it is.
It is 'Lumpy'
And Lumpy is Chewbacca's son from the Star Wars Holiday Special, which is arguably the biggest failure to ever be aired on television.
I promise you've never seen anything like it.
As bad as you think it is, that's just the tip of the iceberg.

It's really fun to watch.
:thumbsup:


Do you happen to have it on your computer?
I tried to download it back in the days when KaZaa was still working, but I was on dial-up then. :angry:

[Luis Caffesse]

I don't...but even if I did it's 2 excruciating hours long.
I don't think you'd want to download that.
:)

Here's some info on it though:
www.starwarsholidayspecial.com

[Neopics]

It is 'Lumpy' And Lumpy is Chewbacca's son from the Star Wars Holiday Special
LOL...thanks for the verification! I was showing it to some of the guys at work and suggested it may be Lumpy from the Star Wars special. But it's been so many years since that aired (and it will certainly never be aired again) that I wasn't 100% sure. (I've got a good memory for faces -- even wookies.)

[PappasArts]

Ok here are the clips.

My friend Barlow Elton can explain more how he imported these files into FCP from my P2 cards if you would like to know the process. Salatar has one more clip to put up. I believe it's another extreme close-up of the girl. Word of advice these clips work on some systems and not others. It will depend on your version of QT and I believe whether you have DVCPRO HD codecs in your system.

Here is the main link:

http://www.salatar.com/hvx200/


These are the direct links: One more 720 is coming too!

http://www.salatar.com/hvx200/1080iP2.mov

http://www.salatar.com/hvx200/HVX720-1.mov

http://www.salatar.com/hvx200/HVX720-2.mov


Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

[Benton]

Downloading now Michael
Thanks,
will let you know how it goes in FCP for me.

[Elton]

Hey everyone,

The process was as simple as you'd expect. Pop the P2 into the powerbook, file import into FCP5 bin. I put clips on the timeline in both 720 and 1080i (the 1080 clip is pulldown) sequence presets and did very short edits of the material. Exported the clips in "make movie self-contained" in order to not recompress the files.

That's it.

[Luis Caffesse]

Michael - THANKS!
:thumbsup:

[Antoine_Fabi]

thanks Michael !


Works fine in FCP.

Even in that less than ideal environment, it looks GREAT !

The master ped. was set a little to low, but we can see
that the HVX looks very CLEAN !

I really like the richness of the colors and also how it handles the highlights !
The lattitude seems GREAT !

If my camcorder performs like this, i will be very happy !

[soarprod]

Post stills please :) For us PC users!!!

[Luis Caffesse]

Server must be getting slammed.
My download just took a nose dive - I'm down to 10kb a second now.
Give me another hour and a half and I'll post some stills for you.
:)

[Luis Caffesse]

Thanks for the server SalaTar!
I appreciate it

[PappasArts]

Here is a direct link to the third 720p clip!


http://www.salatar.com/hvx200/HVX720-3.mov

Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

[Mr. Blonde]

Works fine with my PC and Avid :beer:

[Rich Lee]

i wish i could veiw the footage...but i only gots adobe AE and PP no avid and no mac...would like to see a tiff though of one of the shots to mess with in AE.

[mikkowilson]

Well SalaTar... I'm also pulling down the material from you to post on my mirror as we speak.

..It will be some hours for me to move all of it.

- Mikko

[Jim Arthurs]

Even with the Avid codec installed, I have no luck viewing the clips on P... the audio plays, there's proper info on frame size, but that's all.

I think you actually need the Avid NLE installed, or maybe the Edius folks are having some luck?

Jim Arthurs

[im.thatoneguy]

There should be a file in the latest bit torrent install called "maketorrent" Run it direct it to the file... give it a second and then run the file. Everyone who is done download can then also download the file to get it started, and then bandwidth will just increase from there.

[mikkowilson]

..Ok, the first of the footage and the stills are becoming available on my mirror too..

http://mikko.n3.net/hvx200/

- Mikko

[PappasArts]

Mikko, thanks for mirroring the material.

Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

[vuzz]

Thanks for the clips. FCP and QT plays them but no sound, any clues anyone.

\v

[Barra]

..Ok, the first of the footage and the stills are becoming available on my mirror too..

http://mikko.n3.net/hvx200/

- Mikko
Just took a quick look at the stills dated 18th Dec - the 1080 one is all pixelated! one of the 720 stills a CU of girl looks ok but man the others suck to hell. I know you say it's..... but what's the point when it looks so bad. Whats with the massively pixelated 1080 still? I mean you're not saying that's what records originally!:embarasse

[King Chung Huang]

I think you really have to see it in context. All the clips look great to me played back. I'm not sure why it looks so jaggy in that still of the 1080i clip.

[soarprod]

probably because it is interlaced

[mikkowilson]

I'm just hosting them! I didn't make them! :engel017:


- Mikko ..don't shoot the messenger

[Jarred Land]

Thanks Pappas and Miko for making these live.

[Jarred Land]

no your king meat SalaTar.. I thought i included you in that thanks, sorry, I was thinking about another thread.

So thanks Salatar, Pappas and Miko :)

[PappasArts]

Your welcome Jarred, my pleasure!

Sala Tar, not chopped liver, your more like chopped smoked salmon.........

MP<

[Mr. Blonde]

SalaTar, I sent you a link to some goodies :grin:

[Edelweiss]

Thanks a lot, nice samples, great hosting! Was great to see my old Mac (G4 ~1.3Ghz) play those files easily. Good job, thanks again! :-)

[holyzoo]

I downloaded all clips, and I've been manipulating them like mad in Final Cut Pro, and comparing it to XL-H1 footage. Both look gorgeous indeed. With the HVX200 looking more filmic and warm. Very killer stuff for sure. The one thing that I must say the XL-H1 has over the HVX200 as I'm seeing so far is this - pushing the DVCPROHD footage with color correction and filtering is very unforgiving and it's easy to just annihilate the quality. Whereas the HDV from the XL-H1 is more like DV25 in it's ability to handle major tweaking, resulting in graininess, sure, but not self destructing.

Examples (keep in mind this is to intentionally put it through harsh stupid tweaks)

HDV Example from XL-H1 - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/Blowout_XL-H1.jpg

DV Example from XL2 - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/Blowout_XL2.jpg

DVCPRO HD Example from HVX200 - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/Blowout_HVX200.jpg

Of course, I would be going more for something along the lines of this:

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/CC_HVX200.jpg

It's just a bit unsettling knowing what's going on underneath there. I think I can make the camera work for sure, and I still think many significant features kicks the XL-H1's ass. But gone are my feelings of HDV being a downright inferior codec for acquisition. The XL-H1 vs HVX200 is a highly neck and neck competition.

Gotta get used to treading lightly on DVCPRO HD:

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/CC2_HVX200.jpg

[mikkowilson]

Ok, my transfers are complete. All the Raw files are up on my mirror now too:

http://mikko.n3.net/hvx200/ ..go easy on it please!

- MikKo (yes that's 2 K's Jarred [once is a typo, twice is an 'oopsie']) :)

[Luis Caffesse]

Yeah, I was a bit dissapointed in the amount and level of compression artifacts on the HVX footage. But then again, I guess it shouldn't be a surprise seeing as even though it's HD, it's got a slightly higher compression rate than DV...so I suppose it's fair to expect the same amount of artifacting.

Don't get me wrong, it looks good, much better than anything I've seen for the price (so far).
But seeing this compression took a little of the wind out of my sails.
I would love to see some side by side with the XLH1.

if only the andromeda had a more convenient recording solution!
:)

Overall the 720P looked much cleaner to me (which shouldn't be a surprise I suppose).

[soarprod]

Does the footage look like 16bit color (65,000 colors) to anyone else? Doesnt look like 16.7 (24bit) / true 8bit to me. It seems like the differences in shades is very harsh - the different colors on the people's faces dont blend properly. When I pay attention to the edges of the objects/people in the pictures, it seems to be pretty good resolution but when I look at those color "steps" I worry about my pre-order.

[Jarred Land]

Does the footage look like 16bit color (65,000 colors) to anyone else? Doesnt look like 16.7 (24bit) / true 8bit to me. It seems like the differences in shades is very harsh - the different colors on the people's faces dont blend properly. When I pay attention to the edges of the objects/people in the pictures, it seems to be pretty good resolution but when I look at those color "steps" I worry about my pre-order.

I wouldnt base any purchase decisions, good or bad, on the footage being passed around here or anywhere else... besides the fact that the cameras are all pre-production units, the NLE's really arnt 100% up to snuff on the whole workflow yet.

[Luis Caffesse]

I think it's the compression you are seeing.
We see similar artifacts in DV.

DV is 5:1
DVCProHD is 6.7:1


EDITED TO ADD:
Jarred is right, obviously... I wouldn't base a buying decision on any of this footage.
I'm waiting to get the camera in my hands and check it out for myself.
I'm sure you have nothing to worry about.

[Haakon]

I'm actually really dissapointed with the amount of artifacting and visible noise present in all of these clips. It was there in the earlier stuff too (look at the shadow areas of the martial arts footage - it's littered with artifacts/compression). I'm not sure how I'm feeling overall about the HVX footage... my gut feeling is that it's a bit of a letdown. It's definitely higher-res and sharper than DV, but it feels like the sensors just can't handle everything that's being thrown at them. I'm almost embarassed to show this footage off to my friends... the same friends I've been raving about this camra for months to.

[soarprod]

Yeah, I saw the footage at DVExpo on the 42" plasma and it looked a little better but it seems as though the CCD's aren't as forgiving as my trusty DVX

[Haakon]

I think it's the compression you are seeing.
We see similar artifacts in DV.

DV is 5:1
DVCProHD is 6.7:1

That's true, but DVCPRO HD has four times the resolution. The perceived compression should be much less than DV, not more.

[Luis Caffesse]

Well I think it's unfair to draw ANY conclusions from teh martial arts footage considering we only saw H.264 clips (and WMV clips).

There is no way to tell what compression artifacts were there in the raw footage, and what was added through the second round of compression for the web.

[Luis Caffesse]

That's true, but DVCPRO HD has four times the resolution. The perceived compression should be much less than DV, not more.

That's assuming you watch them at the same size.... I assume that watching DVCProHD and DV both on a 17" monitor that the DVCProHD will of course look better.

But, DVCProHD doesn't have 4times the resolution (unless you're talking about shooting 60P). At the same frame rate 720P has twice the resolution as DV...it also has twice the frame size. So, it seems it would stand to reason that if the compression ratios are similar that you would see similar amounts of compression artifacts.

DON"T GET ME WRONG -
I'm not sitting here trying to say it looks the SAME as DV.
That would be ridiculous.
It has twice the resolution, and twice the frame size....it's obviously superior to DV.
I'm just saying that is seems to have proportionately the same amount of compression artifacts.

[Haakon]

Well I think it's unfair to draw ANY conclusions from teh martial arts footage considering we only saw H.264 clips (and WMV clips).

There is no way to tell what compression artifacts were there in the raw footage, and what was added through the second round of compression for the web.

I was talking about the raw footage that was the subject of this thread, abd it's the same kind of artifacting that was present in the .wmv and h.264 clips we saw earlier.

[Luis Caffesse]

I was talking about the raw footage that was the subject of this thread, not the .wmvs and h.264 clips we saw earlier.


(look at the shadow areas of the martial arts footage - it's littered with artifacts/compression)


Where did you see raw martial arts footage?
I missed that.

[Haakon]

You're misunderstanding. :) There are four raw clips available (that's what this thread is about), that were taken directly from the DV Expo floor. The overabundance of artifacting in these clips is identical to the clips of the martial arts footage we saw earlier - which means that it had nothing to do with the wmv/h.264 compression, but rather that's how the camera is actually outputting the footage. I saw the footage displayed on the 42" plasma screen as well, straight off the DVCPROHD tape. This weird looking noise has been present in every single application from this camera.

[Haakon]

At the same frame rate 720P has twice the resolution as DV...it also has twice the frame size. So, it seems it would stand to reason that if the compression ratios are similar that you would see similar amounts of compression artifacts.
Exactly. And I'm seeing unbelievably more artifacts than I ever did with DV. Hence the problem.

[Luis Caffesse]

You're misunderstanding. :)

I suppose I was. Then again, your first post wasn't all that clear.
You mentioned the martial arts footage right on the heals of saying the compression was bad...hence my confusion.

Either way, we're on the same page now...and I think we've had the same reaction to the footage.

It's way better than DV, that's for sure.
But that 6.7:1 compression defiintely hurts.

[Luis Caffesse]

Exactly. And I'm seeing unbelievably more artifacts than I ever did with DV. Hence the problem.


let me guess... 1.7:1 times more artifacts?
:thumbsup:

[Haakon]

I guess all I'm saying is that I think the artifacting looks incredibly WORSE than DV, not better. And I personally don't think the compression ratio has a thing to do with it. But I am more than happy to agree to disagree. :)

[Luis Caffesse]

So what do you think is to blame?


And why is no one jumping all over this footage like they did with the H.264 clips?
I figured people would be picking this stuff apart for days...seeing as it's straight out of the camera.

[Haakon]

To me, the anomalies in these clips look identical to the h.264 clips, so I'm not sure why people aren't jumping all over it. Perhaps it's because this footage has only been available for a few hours, and it's also not viewable on a PC (whereas both the .wmv and h.264 clips were). I don't think it's compression that's the problem at all... perhaps "artifacting" isn't the right word to use. I don't really know the technical problem at fault here. I would paste a screenshot to illustrate the problem up close, but alas I'm a PC user and I can't do that. I had to download the clips to a friend's Mac to see them. But I've also seen the martial arts and guitar footage in their raw form (before being compressed to .wmv and h.264) and the problem was present there, too. So I think we're off track on what the problem really is. It's something about the way it's handling different shades of color, like a previous poster mentioned. It almost looks like it's rendering at 16 bit.

[Jarred Land]

Exactly. And I'm seeing unbelievably more artifacts than I ever did with DV. Hence the problem.

ok I will say it 3 times. It seems like you missed the first 2.

prerelease. prerelease. prerelease.

This is why we cant post the footage raw from the cameras.. because these cameras are not the release version... so please.. dont bitch about artifacts or other software issues with the camera, like I have asked so many times before.

You guys all ask for footage.. and we got you some, but if you keep whining about how compression thats not finallized looks, Panasonic will be very very certain never to let us or anyone else post pre-release footage ever again.

[Luis Caffesse]

so please.. dont bitch about artifacts or other software issues with the camera, like I have asked so many times before.

You guys all ask for footage.. and we got you some, but if you keep whining about how compression thats not finallized looks, Panasonic will be very very certain never to let us or anyone else post pre-release footage ever again.

Fair enough.
I didn't mean my comments to be seen as whining or bitching, I didn't feel I was doing either.

But I can understand your concern with discussing prerelease footage.
I'll hold off on any further discussion until the production models are out.

[Haakon]

Well, they've got eleven days to figure it out. This is "version 4" of the camera, so I figure something as wicked as these artifacts should be figured out by now. But I'm willing to reserve further judgement on the footage until the final product is released. It just makes me feel a little uneasy knowing that I'm about to lay down six grand (plus media) for a camera that they still haven't figured out with two weeks before the release.

[Jarred Land]

Haakon and Luis.. thanks for understanding.

If it really worries you guys.. dont buy the camera sight unseen.. goto your local shop and play with it before you buy it and make sure you like what you are seeing.

[Mr. Blonde]

Well, they've got eleven days to figure it out. This is "version 4" of the camera, so I figure something as wicked as these artifacts should be figured out by now. But I'm willing to reserve further judgement on the footage until the final product is released. It just makes me feel a little uneasy knowing that I'm about to lay down six grand (plus media) for a camera that they still haven't figured out with two weeks before the release.
Amen Haakon :lipsrseal

[Emanuel]

Considering the today's concern, I think that all of us, we are worried about the compression artifacts. I speak, of course, specially for those who wish go to film-look even 35mm film-out.

Well, about that, we can see what Yuval said here (http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showpost.php?p=373311&postcount=18):
« (...) There were compression artifacts in mid-tones, (especially in scenes that were shut in low-light conditions and under exposed and then were brightened in post).
The image was quite sharp and I couldn't notice any pixilation (which was very impressive), and it surely looked very filmic indeed! :)».

I think that pixelization (the same than pixilation in the Yuval words that it isn't the same thing but it is what he wants to say) it's worst than any compression artifacts that you can hide in post production.

Following his interesting report:
«It seems to me that one practical lesson from this screening would be to be careful when shooting not to under-expose the image, because brightening the image up in post will increase compression artifacts to an unacceptable level.»

As matter of fact, I already had CC some kung-fu grabs and I came to the same conclusion regarding the post production.

Next page of the thread, he says: «It looked very much like a "real" movie. All of the issues I mentioned were minor, and we all noticed them just because we were very attentive to the technical aspects of the image.».

Good...but I know it's not enough! However as Jarred said, we must wait and see!

One true is for sure: I have real doubts that there is time for a real release improve in 2/3 weeks in a industrial production basis like that...

[Mr. Blonde]

I'd agree....hopefully the hvxs that were at the dv expo were post production models that had been handed around for a while just for display and preview purposes and hadn't been worked on for quite some time even before the show and the actual production models have been cooking up for a few months atleast. Damnit Jan and Panasonic you guys better get it right!
Even if that means postponing the release, DO SO AND GET IT RIGHT!

[Barra]

Hi All,
I appreciate the time consuming efforts of everyone who's putting this material up for us to see. However, it's very disturbing to see bad quality imagery posted for people who've ordered the camera already with confidence.
We know from the good footage posted that the camera is capable of really good quality recordings and that Panasonic wont release a camera that doesn't live up to the various broadcast quality modes, so why post the bad looking stuff - are you trying to give us heart attacks! I don't want to see any more bad stuff here! I think if it's not up to scratch then it shouldn't be posted here for all to see and get worried about.

[Stevet]

I'm not thrilled with the footage either.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is footage that came from the DVExpo
this month, right?

I thought those were version 4 cameras displayed at the show?

That was two weeks ago.

Granted I don't know the production/sale process, but from my standpoint it seems impossible to come up with a version 5 and be ready to send out a couple thousand cameras next month.

I do realize this was a "point and shoot" video, but I would of thought it would of looked a bit better.

Steve

[Cees Mutsaers]

Elton I s a powerbook G4 (1.67 GHz) powerful enough for FC studio or do I really need a quad?




Hey everyone,

The process was as simple as you'd expect. Pop the P2 into the powerbook, file import into FCP5 bin. I put clips on the timeline in both 720 and 1080i (the 1080 clip is pulldown) sequence presets and did very short edits of the material. Exported the clips in "make movie self-contained" in order to not recompress the files.

That's it.

[Haakon]

Elton I s a powerbook G4 (1.67 GHz) powerful enough for FC studio or do I really need a quad?
A powerbook G4 is fine. I edited a Varicam project two weeks ago with one, and it handled the DVCPRO HD footage flawlessly. Granted, you probably aren't going to be able to run multiple HD streams or any kind of heavy effects on that footage in realtime, but the 720p footage I cut natively played through entirely skip-free. It was actually a lot more smooth of a process than I was expecting. Everyone naturally wants a faster, better machine, but you don't need a quad processor to work with this stuff.


Granted I don't know the production/sale process, but from my standpoint it seems impossible to come up with a version 5 and be ready to send out a couple thousand cameras next month.
Hence the concern. ;-)

[vuzz]

You can't help but judge any footage, how about any footage shot in DVCPRO 50.

I think when it comes down to it most people are getting this cam for the 16/9 chips, P2 and DVCpro50, or at least I am.

[holyzoo]

For the record, Varicam footage can look noisy as well, especially if underexposed and brightened up in post. I'm starting to equate this with the concept of getting audio levels right. If you record too low, and you boost levels in post, you're going to bring the entire noise floor level along with it. If you record at a proper level, it will sound extremely clean, although technically that noise is still there; it's just that the "good" audio outweighs it. Same with DVCPRO HD it seems.

For example:

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/Varicam1.jpg - Looks pretty nice doesn't it?
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/Varicam2.jpg - Holy Crap!

Regarding the HVX200 and Varicam, I think it just squelches the spirit of shooting "hack style" and getting away with it. So with the complexities and power of P2/DVCPRO HD, this seems to be in line with where this camera sits which is in the borderzone of prosumer and pro. I'd say it is definitely to be in the hands of a pro now.

[holyzoo]

On a more positive note, more of what I expect to see from the HVX200. Stills from the Varicam:

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/Varicam_Example01.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/Varicam_Example02.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/Varicam_Example03.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/Varicam_Example04.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/Varicam_Example05.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/Varicam_Example06.jpg

[Haakon]

For the record, Varicam footage can look noisy as well, especially if underexposed and brightened up in post.
You're absolutely right. I noticed very similar results in my Varicam footage (and was shocked, considering the camera and lens alone cost $100,000). Had I went out and bought a Varicam, I honestly wouldn't have been too pleased. Additionally, I would have been much more apt to reserve judgement on this issue until the final production HVXs were released had this phenomenon not already be prevelant in the professional domain.

It unquestionably effects dark areas the most... take a look at your Varicam_Example02.jpg, and without any brightening/adjusting at all, you can see that visible noise/compression/artifacting/whatever it is strewn all over the black areas. That's the same kind of anomaly that's vastly present in the dark regions of the "martial arts" clip (if you never saw it before, perhaps the brightness on your monitor is low - but turn it up a little and the results are pretty scary). By contrast, I saw very little of it in the "guitar" footage - but then that stuff was shot in bright daylight and there aren't many (if any) really "black" areas. The problem is also very difficult to see if there is a lot of pattern and contrast in the shot in question, in which case it's probably still happening but it's just not really discernable due to the fact that there is so much going on. Your Varicam_Example03.jpg, for instance, is a good example of that... it looks great, but notice how much texture is in that shot. I really didn't think before that this was an issue of compression or the codec - certainly the 100mbps data stream should be more robust than HDV's lousy 25 - but seeing that this is a trend in Panasonic's cameras all the way up to their über-professional models, it does lay cause for wonder.

On another note, I saw nothing even remotely close to this problem in the footage that Jan projected at ResFest (the "candle" footage), and that's one reason I was so hyped on the camera. I've since been informed that the camera which shot that footage was "version 2" and doesn't even exist anymore. Pity. Of course, there's certainly the chance that the artifacting was indeed still present back then but the settings on the projector had crushed the blacks to the point that we couldn't see it. We'll probably never know, but this recent round of images (even the stuff shot by the professional DPs or whatnot) has been somewhat of a letdown.

I really do think that for what it offers, the HVX is an unbelievable offering. Certainly on paper, it's in a league completely on its own. That's the reason it's received so much buzz and an unprecedented record of preorders for a camera that two weeks before its release allegedly doesn't have anything "real" to show for it. I'm just always dumbfounded by new technology that takes huge steps forward in some areas while backpedaling in others. If it makes any difference, this problem was readily apparent in the "Moviola" footage that was shown at the DV Expo, too, but as far as I know, that was the footage that was blown up to 35mm and no one there really seemed to be complaining about it. To me, it's hugely distracting and unlike anything I've seen before - especially compared to weak and lossy DV. Either a few of us are seeing something that most other people aren't, or for some reason it just doesn't bother anyone (which surprises me, seeing as nit-picky as most online discussion forums can get). For better or worse, however, I'm still getting the HVX - despite this image nightmare there's absolutely nothing else in the price range that even comes close to comparing with the camera in my opinion. Panasonic has certainly carved themselves a nice little niche.

[Rodrigo]

If I got it right I understand that the DVCPROHD codec has been adapted for doing 1080P. Could it be that the new implementation could resolve better the compression artifacts? I am asking this because such artifacts were less noticeable on the 1080p footage

[holyzoo]

If I got it right I understand that the DVCPROHD codec has been adapted for doing 1080P. Could it be that the new implementation could resolve better the compression artifacts? I am asking this because such artifacts were less noticeable on the 1080p footage

It's the same level/amount of compression. What hasn't been stated at all by Michael Pappas is what settings this stuff was shot in, what amount of gain, gamma, etc. So I'd say again that there's a lot of room for shooting outstanding footage - look at the reputation of the Varicam - and there's a lot of room for coming up with not so great footage.

Nothing so far looks terrible. Everything so far looks good or awesome, and all very film like. The toughest reality check here is that the level of compression - DV, HDV, DVCPRO HD is really squashing the hell out of the image. And meanwhile, we see the quality of still digital cameras shoot into the stratosphere, and faster download speed and video compression technologies like H.264 and WMV9 allows us to see high def transfers from uncompressed telecined film on our desktop for comparison. And it's no wonder that we are not *blown away* by our cameras anymore. We work with the technology because it's what's available now. And the marketing has to occur so we can even accept what's available. So I'm glad that there's been such focus on how *great* this camera is/will be. I think this footage starts some more balanced discussion on what's great, and what sucks.

[Haakon]

If I got it right I understand that the DVCPROHD codec has been adapted for doing 1080P. Could it be that the new implementation could resolve better the compression artifacts? I am asking this because such artifacts were less noticeable on the 1080p footage
The camera is actually laying down 1080i to the cards and employing pulldown to acheive 24p (just like the DVX), so that it conforms to the DVCPROHD codec which is eclusively 1080i and 720p. I haven't noticed that the compression/artifacting is any different in the 1080 clips, but we really haven't been given much footage to play with.

[Haakon]

http://www.showchoir.com/HVX_720.jpg


Nothing so far looks terrible. Everything so far looks good or awesome, and all very film like.

Do you really think so?

(Not trying to beat this discussion to a pulp, just trying to illustrate the point a little more clearly now that I have an example to work with).

[holyzoo]

I should say that nothing so far looks terrible *by itself* without any of us tweaking with it. What you did there and what I was doing in my tests as well is like stretching the rubber band to see how far until it breaks. Unfortunately it breaks far quicker than we'd like it to. :)

[holyzoo]

I just tested something out of curiosity. H.264 encoded trailer off Apple.com treated the same way you treated the Ninja clip.

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/Ahh.jpg

Looks nice.

Now tweaked in FCP - Ooops.

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/Oops.jpg

So, if that's what's happening there, I think the raw footage of the Ninja must be markedly cleaner.

Let the insanity continue until some high quality uncompressed screen grabs or raw footage becomes available.

[Haakon]

The artifacting is not due to the compression of the .wmv or h.264 codecs; you can see identical results in the raw, native DVCPRO HD files that were posted to the front of this topic. Unfortunately for the purposes of this discussion, I'm a PC user and am unable to view/post screenshots of the abberations from the native files on this machine.

I did raise the brightness/contrast levels a little so that people could understand what's being talked about, but honestly, I hardly "stretched the rubber band to it's limit." This stuff is clearly visable (and highly distracting) just watching the clip in its unaltered state. Regardless of what you compare it to, however, the artifacting from the footage we've been getting does not look "awesome" or "very film like" to me, which was the point of the post.

[Antoine_Fabi]

This is absolutely normal...I am not worried at all about this.

Take ANY image, stretch the info (the contrast) over the limit and it will look like this...

[soarprod]

Since Panasonic asked Pappas to not post the footage, I have a feeling that the cameras at DVExpo were not the final versions - I think the final out the door cam will be a little better. Why would they ask him not to post footage if the cam is out in two weeks? Because people will get the wrong impression from a beta version camera. They will not be able to say "beta" in two weeks tho. And we will be able to judge it then with proper testing - AKA camera shootout.

[PappasArts]

To put this in the correct timeline. Panasonic's order to not show the clips came after I promised you guys/gals on DVXuer and DVinfo to see them. So I was not going to back track on my promise to you. Your my community , and you come first.

I told Panasonic it was not my responsibility to know whether anyone could film with the HVX200.* How could it be?* I have been shooting on floor footage since the late 80's.* This is first objection I have heard of like this.** There was no prior knowledge of that standing order on the floor, no signs , nothing saying " No floor footage allowed out of expo".

Who would think that anyway since footage and HVX200's were everywhere on the show floor. Again, how would I know that? As well it was shipping in 21 days. Again I'm not in the inner circle, so I used the HVX200 and no one ever said I couldn't shoot on the P2 cards. I also got to spend an hour with a HVX200 alone just filming all sorts of stuff days after the show. I like the HVX200, and think it's awesome.

I just want make sure no one thought that there was a prior agreement broken with Panasonic.

-Pappas

[Mr. Blonde]

Looking over all the footage, the thing I'm noticing is alot of grainy noise. Not much artifacting, atleast the artifacting isn't bothersome, but the noise is very noticeable.

[Stevet]

Looking over all the footage, the thing I'm noticing is alot of grainy noise. Not much artifacting, atleast the artifacting isn't bothersome, but the noise is very noticeable.

Agreed.

I thought the same thing; though, I don't see this noise in the earlier kung fu and desert footage.

Although the Kung fu stuff did appear to have some artifacts in the dark.

I guess it could be my Dell 2405 gama curve is not optimized, or possibly the master pedestal setting for the footage.

[Stevet]

BTW , thanks Michael for uploading the footage.

I hear you regarding Panasonic. They must be concerned since the footage
was from a beta camera, which seems hard to believe since Panasonic is starting to ship them in two weeks.

Steve

[evinsky]

You have to understand, version 2, which was at resfest was completed 2-3 days before we saw that footage. That was at the end of September. It only took them two months to get from a cam barely capable of an image to version 4, a basically fully functional camera. Not only that, I can tell you that all the cameras on the floor of the DV Expo were hand built! My guess is that the physical components are going to be the same in the release version but the software will be vastly different. Pany had another two months to tweak and refine right up until the bodies are assembled. This is standard for a "just in time" delivery ethos preffered by hi-tech company's.
So don't fret, this footage is very impressive, even with the issues you all bring up.

[PappasArts]

evinsky Wrote:

<<<<So don't fret, this footage is very impressive,>>>>

Hey Evin.

This was my point exactly. That's why I said it was a no thrills location with nothing to make pretty images. yet look at the wide shot and that guys yellow shirt it's crisp sharp. Look at the close up of the lady's face. Wrinkles! ( oops , sorry lady ) This is why I couldn't understand the objection after the clips were seen by Panasonic after the upload.

Evin, I wish you could have been at the Pacific Laser out to film, it was very impressive! Looked like late 80's maybe early 90's super16 bumped to 35mm.

Pappas

[Antoine_Fabi]

Michael,

thanks for the footage !

Panasonic is a little "light sensitive" heh heh...that is probably normal !

I already ordered a HVX and i believe it will be a great camcorder.
If Panasonic dont want people to show "normal" footage, then there is a reason...

why ? good or bad...nobody knows.

I think it will perform even better.

Anyway, people have GREAT hopes for this camcorder.
...and the hope comes from their advertising ( DVD ) that say that DVCProHD produces a better image than HDV.

So, until the camcorder hits the market, this is all speculation anyway.

...but they sure have A LOT of pressure, i think, just because the HVX uses their professional DVCProHD codec.

so i think it WILL perform.
I can't imagine that camcorder to perform less than a HDV camcorder...

[evinsky]

Evin, I wish you could have been at the Pacific Laser out to film, it was very impressive! Looked like late 80's maybe early 90's super16 bumped to 35mm. Pappas
Me too. that's encouraging though.

[lpcvideo1]

You have to understand, version 2, which was at resfest was completed 2-3 days before we saw that footage. That was at the end of September. It only took them two months to get from a cam barely capable of an image to version 4, a basically fully functional camera. Not only that, I can tell you that all the cameras on the floor of the DV Expo were hand built! My guess is that the physical components are going to be the same in the release version but the software will be vastly different. Pany had another two months to tweak and refine right up until the bodies are assembled. This is standard for a "just in time" delivery ethos preffered by hi-tech company's.
So don't fret, this footage is very impressive, even with the issues you all bring up.

That's my understanding of the development cycle nowadays. They should have "plenty" of time to have implemented any changes, expecially software, which is really what is concerning everyone. Even if it was version 4.

I think Pany will come through and we'll be all wiggly inside come January.

(If not, I'm not on Rush's list till February anyway! :grin: )

[stephenvv]

Since Panasonic asked Pappas to not post the footage, I have a feeling that the cameras at DVExpo were not the final versions - I think the final out the door cam will be a little better. Why would they ask him not to post footage if the cam is out in two weeks? Because people will get the wrong impression from a beta version camera. They will not be able to say "beta" in two weeks tho. And we will be able to judge it then with proper testing - AKA camera shootout.

Precisely. Much of this thread is "much ado about nothing". Compared to early footage from any previous cam from the DVX to the HD100, it looks much, much better.

Plus, reality check. It's a 1/3" DVCPro-HD cam that cost $6k. It ain't gonna be perfect, there will be artifacts and imperfections, as well as quirks. It will require some experience to find it's sweet spot.

The bottom line is a cam is just a tool - in this case it's a tool to give DVCPro-HD footage in the sub $10k range in a DVX form factor. Thus far, it looks like a complete success.

But comparing it to Varicam or uncompressed HD or whatever makes no sense and does seem like whining or at least, obsessive over-analyzing.

The images look great and a little noise/grain artifacting is not a issue for most storytellers or shooters. Serious problems (like the SSE on the HD100 or audio hiss on the PD170) we do need to find and highlight.

But unless somebody has something we have not seen or heard, so far, so good.

[Haakon]

...comparing it to Varicam or uncompressed HD or whatever makes no sense and does seem like whining or at least, obsessive over-analyzing.
Actually, the DVCPROHD codec used in the HVX and the Varicam is identical, so that comparison is actually quite a good one. I was talking with Barry about this at DV Expo West, and the only things the Varicam has over the HVX are 2/3" chips, better lenses, and the ability to ramp framerate changes during recording. Obviously those are huge variables when it comes to the overall quality of the image, but they don't affect the compression at all. The HVX actually has a bunch of stuff in its favor over the Varicam, including P2 recording (and the slew of advantageous features that come along with that), 1080i/p recording, DVCPRO50 recording, and 24pN recording (which allows for the ability to view the effects of different framerates in camera). So not only do the two cameras share the same bitrate and compression scheme, but the HVX is actually quite comparable in more ways (and even exceeds it in some) than most people give it credit for.

[stephenvv]

Actually, the DVCPROHD codec used in the HVX and the Varicam is identical, so that comparison is actually quite a good one..

The Varicam does not shoot 1080p. It has 2/3" CCDs, vastly different glass and different DSP. For me, that's very different. I'm sure Panny has tried to tune them to match well since they market the "B" cam thing, but complaining about HVX image issues vs. the Varicam seems silly to me.

[holyzoo]

Weeeeeeeeeee... fun with this footage:

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/Freak1.jpg

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/RedTweak.jpg

[PappasArts]

different DSP .

Stephen, you hit the nail on the head I believe! I said this months ago. What will be missing are the higher level DSP's and other technology that carries the HD signal thru all stages.

I mean there are reasons Varicams heads with no lens, no 2"VF, cost $60,000 dollars more than a HVX200. It's got more support technology to make the prettiest images possible in that camera. If they could make Varicams and sell them for 6K, they would and own the whole broadcast market. You can't do Varicams low cost if you want the best IC's/DSP technology along with top end design in your camera and still make profit that makes the whole venture worth it. That raises the cost to tens & tens of thousands.


>pappas

[Emanuel]

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/RedTweak.jpgVery cool holyzoo!

As I already said here (http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showpost.php?p=377348&postcount=4):
You rock, holyzoo! (...) It's just a new frontier for the screen arts...that we must carry on...or I can also say, out...carry out... :cheesy:

BTW [LINK (http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showpost.php?p=377424&postcount=5)]
...decidedly, nobody beats you for that mission...so, is it possible during the next hours? We @PC side, we beg for those clips!...

[Jan_Crittenden]

Since Panasonic asked Pappas to not post the footage, I have a feeling that the cameras at DVExpo were not the final versions - I think the final out the door cam will be a little better. Why would they ask him not to post footage if the cam is out in two weeks? .

This is the right answer. What Michael says is but they are shipping in 2 weeks, but these cameras were made 3 weeks ago, Lots' of time for additional tweaks.

That's all. Just got under the radar somehow.

Best all,

Jan

[Rodrigo]

If I recall it right you already said at the DVEXPO that these cameras were already two versions old at that time.

[holyzoo]

these cameras were made 3 weeks ago, Lots' of time for additional tweaks.

Thanks Jan. Good to know. I'm still sold. :)

[toke lahti]

Did anybody tried to remove pulldown with Cinema Tools from that 1080iP2.mov?
I couldn't find any setting that all of the shots would have been right.
Is this just a good example how not to edit 24p material in 60i mode or did I failed to find right settings?
Cinema Tools automatically detects dvx100's 24p. Is this gonna be same with hvx in the future?

[holyzoo]

Bingo! Man, the last few days have been hard to keep up with. FCP 5.0.4 was just announced today with added HVX200 support.

http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/Final_Cut_Pro_5.0_lbn_z.pdf

Previously I tested with Cinema Tools -> http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=41402

Now time to test pulldown removal inside of FCP. So I now updated to FCP 5.0.4 and checked out the pulldown removal. It has an option - "Cinema Tools Reverse Telecine" under the Tools menu. Surprise surprise. :) However, it didn't work correctly on my test on the 1080i/24p clip. Until I get more footage, I won't be able to tell where this is failing. Worst case is if Panasonic and Apple didn't communicate entirely well on this, there's always using Cinema Tools with an alternate setting. The one I found to work was this:

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/video/HVX200_Remove_Pulldown.jpg

-steev

[Jarred Land]

well good news.. that update lets me play with the MXF files from the camera, and man is it fast. and man does it look good. Thank you Apple.

[Jarred Land]

avid doesnt work yet.

[holyzoo]

that update lets me play with the MXF files from the camera, and man is it fast.

Jarred, are you able to get the Pulldown Removal to work from within FCP?

[MattC]

Jarred,

I thought you got rid of your Apple/FCP setup?? You're still with us?

Matt

[PixelMagic]

Wow, I am amazed at how Panasonic can tweak the camera right up until release. How fast can Panasonic put an HVX-200 together, say, from start to finish.

[soarprod]

By hand or by manufacture? - I would guess by hand, couple of days, by machine, 1/2 day - but simultanously with 1000+ others :)

[Mr. Blonde]

10 days till I get mine :shocked:

[Mr. Blonde]

avid doesnt work yet.
Whatcha mean? The pulldown feature?

[Stevet]

10 days till I get mine :shocked:



That's good news.

If it pans out, please upload some eye candy for us lonely soon to be HVX USERS!

:thumbsup:
Steve

[Barry_Green]

Wow, I am amazed at how Panasonic can tweak the camera right up until release. How fast can Panasonic put an HVX-200 together, say, from start to finish.
I'm sure they're 99% complete now, and the only changes would be to the controlling software. The lenses, the bodies, all that stuff is probably already manufactured. They are probably only tweaking the software, which could probably be done until a couple of days before shipping maybe.

[toke lahti]

The one I found to work was this:
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/video/HVX200_Remove_Pulldown.jpg
-steev

That did not work for me. In this 1080iP2.mov clip, sharply at 7 seconds point (short haired guy turning head in CU) there's a double nose. After that there's a lot of double frames in the zooms and head turns.
Maybe this footage is edited in 60i and cut in the middle of pulldown sequence, so it gets disturbed.
Isn't this problem bigger with 2:3:2:3?
What is the pulldown cadence of dvcprohd1080p24?
Shouldn't it be 2:3:3:2 like with dvx?

[Jarred Land]

You guys are gonna like the XML files you get along with your MXF video files.. they tell you all sorts of nice info like res/pulldown etc. 2:3:3:2 is correct... well it should be.

[skettalee]

Where do you guys get your codec from? I just downloaded Quicktime 7 and that sure didn't cut it. help!

[Jan_Crittenden]

The codec is in FCP or Avid or Canopus. Unfortunately for these clips, it is hardly worth the download time. We are working on putting some additional clips up that are native DVCPRO HD and then also the wmv, just because many do not have the codec.

Stay tuned.

Jan

[skettalee]

Well give us the codec. I own copies of Avid and Canopus as well. Plus at home I own FCP. Lol. This machine here though is the work email machine and none of that is installed on it. I guess I can install canopus if they let me. I cant download the codec on the net? I already downloaded all the video files.

[Stevet]

Thanks Jan.

[OliverM]

Well give us the codec. I own copies of Avid and Canopus as well. Plus at home I own FCP. Lol. This machine here though is the work email machine and none of that is installed on it. I guess I can install canopus if they let me. I cant download the codec on the net? I already downloaded all the video files.

Then put them on a portable HD and move them to one of the editing stations. That way you can play around a bit. DVCPRO isn't a qt or wmv kinda thing, it's a pro codec. Avid should have it on their site somewhere and FCP has it in there period.

Btw, for sh*te footage from an exhibit floor and shot with a unfinished camera I think it looks quite nice.

[holyzoo]

That did not work for me. In this 1080iP2.mov clip, sharply at 7 seconds point. Maybe this footage is edited in 60i and cut in the middle of pulldown sequence, so it gets disturbed.

Very good point - it may have been edited and output, which might account for some degradation as well. If it had been a dedicated clip, the removal should work fine. For testing, I separated the clips out to separate files, and then removed pulldown and it worked as expected. All this is just goofing around until we get more substantial footage of course.

[moebius]

Coming from DV and never having worked with anything but DV I was amazed by the footage (and by the fact that my FCP could handle it so easily, including downres for preview on a video monitor, realtime cc and all ...wow FCP)

[Elton]

The codec is in FCP or Avid or Canopus. Unfortunately for these clips, it is hardly worth the download time. We are working on putting some additional clips up that are native DVCPRO HD and then also the wmv, just because many do not have the codec.

Stay tuned.

Jan

Believe it or not Jan, I am not anti HVX--far from it. The raw files were something to see out of curiosity, because I've worked quite a bit with DVCPRO HD, and really like the format. Michael and I wanted to see what the cameras response would be at Odb in an unflattering environment. Wanted to see how the dsp/compression dealt with the challenge. I sure hope the shipping versions do a better job.

Obviously, it wasn't to get pretty pictures, and I am confident that the final cameras will do an adequate job in low light.

Everybody would like to see RAW material that really shows off what the HVX can do.

I think uncompressed stills or a RAW DVCPROHD frame or two that we can look at in Quicktime/FCP/Avid etc. would be great. Maybe even better would be to post high bit rate h.264/WMV's with an accompanying uncompressed frame, whether Tiff or actual raw DVCPRO HD. (this would show up as an individual 1 frame QT clip of DVCPROHD in the player)

[Jarred Land]

It will happen soon Elton.. as soon as we get a production model rolling we will post the raw mxf. People just got too hung up on analyzing and shooting down footage, stolen footage mind you, from a pre-production camera. If people would of been "yeah its noisy but its a pre-production camera" then im sure we would have alot more footage up, but thats not the way it worked.

We will have some more preproduction stuff up very soon though, albiet in a compressed format again. We have the best stuff coming.

[Jarred Land]

today.

[Elton]

It will happen soon Elton.. as soon as we get a production model rolling we will post the raw mxf. People just got too hung up on analyzing and shooting down footage, stolen footage mind you, from a pre-production camera. If people would of been "yeah its noisy but its a pre-production camera" then im sure we would have alot more footage up, but thats not the way it worked.

We will have some more preproduction stuff up very soon though, albiet in a compressed format again. We have the best stuff coming.

Too cool.

Honestly, I didn't think the footage was going to freak out anyone because, of course, it was a prerelease camera. It's fairly obvious that people are taking it with a grain of salt, which is as it should be. I'm sure the final tweaks are underway or finished. Everybody wants this camera to live up to the hype, and that maybe a tall order given the marketing blitz currently underway.

Thanks for letting the thread go where it may, because I think most folks are interested in a balanced discussion.

Really looking forward to more stuff! Give the prepro clips as high a bit rate as you can!

[Alvise Tedesco]

By chance I had "luma range check" switched on into the viewer (fcp), and none of those clips had luma exceeding. Has this been corrected before publishing? If I was shooting run and gun like that footage is, with a dvx or similar, lights on the roof should were over. Sorry for my english (something it's wrong, I know, but I don't understand were..).
Alvise

[Stevet]

Thanks Jarred.

I'm looking forward to seeing the clips!

Agreed, a lot of us got hung up with the preproduction clips, including myself.

I did happen to think the first round of stuff you uploaded was decent.

Steve

[Jarred Land]

This next clip is my favorite.. sorry for the delay I had to take a quick to the US and just got back.

[soarprod]

Show Us Clip!

[Jarred Land]

working on it.. H264 really does a crappy job, so im trying a few different codecs. Gotta get this 450mb 30 second clip down to something you all can download.

[Jarred Land]

ok im just gonna give you guys a quick couple seconds of native 720p DVCpro HD stuff untill i can get the rest up.

right click and save as then remove the X.

http://www.dvxuser3.com/hvx3/720-DVCPRO-ball.Xmov

mirrors feel free to update.

[Stevet]

Thanks Jarred. Was that shot in 60P?

Nice. It appears to have decent latitude.

Is it possible to get some longer wmv samples?

Thanks, Steve

[Barry_Green]

Doesn't work on a PC. Only works on a Mac.

[PappasArts]

Thanks Jarred!

PS: There's cheerleaders in that clip... Ahhhhhhhhhhhh! Bottom right corner! Good Man!

>Pappas.

[PappasArts]

Hey Barry,

why does this not work on my PC, but only on my Mac. Do you know?

>pappas

[Luis Caffesse]

Holy crap.
I can see why this is your favorite clip.
Looks nice!

[holyzoo]

Oh... my.. god... that looks STUNNING! :D

[Jarred Land]

cheerleaders is next.. :)

and wait till you see the 60p stuff.

[stephenvv]

I can confirm it does NOT play on PC.

[D_and_G]

I'm on a Mac and it says I need some plugins...IPix?, any clue which one ?

cheers.

[holyzoo]

I'm on a Mac and it says I need some plugins, any clue which one ?

You need Final Cut Pro installed so as to have the DVCPRO HD QuickTime component installed.

[Jarred Land]

right click save as:

http://www.dvxuser3.com/hvx3/720-60cheer.mov

and sorry for the PC guys.. this is DVCproHD codec off the Mac, I am uploading a half rez mp4 clip right now for you guys to play around with.

[Barry_Green]

Yeah, there's something missing in QuickTime on the PC. I have the Avid DVCPRO-HD codec installed, but Quicktime still isn't seeing it and putting two and two together. So as long as Jarred renders those clips off a Mac, we PC users won't be able to see them.

[AppliedVisual]

Figures...

Well, I'm probably going to be buying Avid anyway since it looks like DVCPRO isn't very high on Sony's priority list for Vegas. I tried the Edius demo and I wasn't all that impressed -- lacking too much vs. Avid and Vegas and Avid is only about $300 more than the new Edius Broadcast package. ...Didn't care for Edius' interface either, I guess Avid is more intuitive for me. I think the only advantage to Edius is that it has the most complete MXF support of any NLE in this price ragnge, but I suppose Avid will improve this over time. It seems that full MXF support is part of the Adrenaline and Media Composer suites.

Now since this doesn't solve the issue of viewing these QT DVCPROHD clips, what's a PC guy supposed to do? Any chance of posting some of the native MXF files right off a P2 card? I don't mind the download, my connection is plenty fast if there's a server that can handle it out there. I can host clips too, but I do have bandwidth limits on my server.

Sorry I'm rambling on... I guess I'm just anxious and a little desperate to see 720p60 cheerleaders. Heh.

[Jarred Land]

Here is a half-rez MP4 clip for you guys on the PC side.

http://www.stickypod.com/stickypod_upload/uploads/720p-bball-half.mp4

Thank you stickypod for hosting this file.

[D_and_G]

You need Final Cut Pro installed so as to have the DVCPRO HD QuickTime component installed.

Ok. Thanks. I don't have that. I'll wait for a compatible clip. :beer:

Cheers.

Edit - Just watched the bball. One word : "chuffed"
Da'yum. Made my night. :)

[Jarred Land]

I was going to go with Avid as well.. until I experienced their support. As soon as I said AMD they pretty much hung up the phone.

Also, there are no solutions for monitoring HVX footage to a monitor from AVID express.. except for a low res SD proxy if you use the MOJO. that was the main kicker for me... you cant use a blackmagic card, and so far as far as we know the HVX does not do loop back.

So, I went back to FCP.

[Luis Caffesse]

Here is a half-rez MP4 clip for you guys on the PC side.

I knew there was a reason I got a Mac.
:thumbsup:


I was going to go with Avid as well.. until I experienced their support. As soon as I said AMD they pretty much hung up the phone.

That's odd.
The only time I've ever had to deal with Avid support they were fantastic (and I also had to say the letters, A M D).
A lot better than the Apple support I've gotten.

Then again, that was a few years ago. I haven't had any Avid problems since, so maybe their support has gone downhill in the meantime.

[holyzoo]

So, I went back to FCP.

Welcome back!! :)

[holyzoo]

http://www.dvxuser3.com/hvx3/720-60cheer.mov


I must say, "Loop Back and Forth" in QuickTime Player is a requirement with this clip. ;)

[Jarred Land]

I knew there was a reason I got a Mac.
:thumbsup:



That's odd.
The only time I've ever had to deal with Avid support they were fantastic (and I also had to say the letters, A M D).
A lot better than the Apple support I've gotten.

Then again, that was a few years ago. I haven't had any Avid problems since, so maybe their support has gone downhill in the meantime.

yeah I was specific, trying to find where i was going to go, and in that process i wanted to make sure my system was capable... The dont support AMD, nor my Geforce 7800gfx. It should work, but if i ever had a problem they wouldnt support me.

[Mr. Blonde]

Figures...

Well, I'm probably going to be buying Avid anyway since it looks like DVCPRO isn't very high on Sony's priority list for Vegas. I tried the Edius demo and I wasn't all that impressed -- lacking too much vs. Avid and Vegas and Avid is only about $300 more than the new Edius Broadcast package. ...Didn't care for Edius' interface either, I guess Avid is more intuitive for me. I think the only advantage to Edius is that it has the most complete MXF support of any NLE in this price ragnge, but I suppose Avid will improve this over time. It seems that full MXF support is part of the Adrenaline and Media Composer suites.

Now since this doesn't solve the issue of viewing these QT DVCPROHD clips, what's a PC guy supposed to do? Any chance of posting some of the native MXF files right off a P2 card? I don't mind the download, my connection is plenty fast if there's a server that can handle it out there. I can host clips too, but I do have bandwidth limits on my server.

Sorry I'm rambling on... I guess I'm just anxious and a little desperate to see 720p60 cheerleaders. Heh.
I've got Avid Xpress Pro HD and the QT DVCPRO HD clips run fine with that, so don't worry about it. Not to mention Avid is the most widely accepted NLE amongst professionals.

[Mr. Blonde]

yeah I was specific, trying to find where i was going to go, and in that process i wanted to make sure my system was capable... The dont support AMD, nor my Geforce 7800gfx. It should work, but if i ever had a problem they wouldnt support me.
Actually Jarred, I'm running a AMD 64 3500 with a Radeon X850 and Avid runs just fine on my system, real smooth.

[Jarred Land]

lets not make this a NLE battle... or we will get off track really quick.

But im glad it does work with the AVID codec, i assumed it would. Was there a recent avid express pro update?

[PappasArts]

Jarred, I'm using my magnify glass to examine the footage right now . Hmmm, Nope, looks ""GOOD"" from here...hhhmmmm. Niceeeeeeee....Very niceeeeeeee. Indeed!

:-)................................................. .................................................. ........



PS: This is the stuff you an Evin shot right?

[AppliedVisual]

I was going to go with Avid as well.. until I experienced their support. As soon as I said AMD they pretty much hung up the phone.

Also, there are no solutions for monitoring HVX footage to a monitor from AVID express.. except for a low res SD proxy if you use the MOJO. that was the main kicker for me... you cant use a blackmagic card, and so far as far as we know the HVX does not do loop back.

So, I went back to FCP.


I've talked to Avid support and I had an OK experience. I'm on AMD hardware here too and it seems that while they don't have any AMD systems on their approved systems list, I did get a support guy to admit that they have some Opteron systems from HP and Alienware that are testing just fine. I build all my own systems, but considering this news as well as some reports in the Avid user forums from others running on AMD64 hardware, I'm not too concerned. I don't want to build/buy a new box just for Avid... If it comes to that, I'll just buy a new Mac with FCP as it would be about the same price. Although, if I do that, I'd probably also spring for a Kona card too.

As for monitoring, with dual-DVI Quadro and GeForce cards, we can monitor right from a secondary DVI/HDMI display and video output can be set to conform to PC DVI, NTSC or ATSC-HD color space via the color profiles in the nVidia software. The question here is do I go with a 32~37 inch consumer HDTV with native 1080p resolution like the Westinghouse or the new Mitsubishi panels? Or do I spend more money and get an actual HD studio monitor with SDI and DVI input?

And while not really on topic, I have to say that MOJO is a joke. Cool a couple years ago when it was released ( I guess ), but I played with MOJO at a local dealer last week and was not impressed. On newer, more powerful workstations, MOJO is actually a bottleneck in terms of an "accelerator" and is in dire need of an update to support higher bandwidth, more video streams and HD codecs. This local dealer also said I could bring in a system of mine and they will let me install Xpress and see if it works on my hardware before I buy. Seeing how Avid doesn't make any form of demo available except their "Free DV" thing. I ordered the Xpress Family CD, but don't know what's on it exactly, but have been told by others that theres no actual demo software. :(

I may just suck it up and buy a Mac for my edit system... Not that I need yet another computer, especially one that doesn't run any of my other software, but it still may be the best solution in the immediate future until Vegas gets back on track, assuming it ever will. I'd wait and see how this all plays out, but I really need to step up to HD and if I don't get my HVX by the end of January, I'll probably have to buy an XLH1. Which I thought would be more expensive, but now with the prospect of buying a Mac or more expensive NLE solution just to use the HVX, it's about a wash since I can just keep using Vegas with the XLH1 and I'll be able to use up all those DV tapes I have too.

There I go, rambling on again...

[Mr. Blonde]

Like I said, Avid works just fine with an AMD 64 appliedvisual, no need to build a new system or a mac, Avid and FCP are just as good as one another in my eyes, just on different platforms that's all.

Jarred - Avid 5.2.1 just came out and it supports it. :thumbup:

[Jarred Land]

Jarred,

PS: This is the stuff you an Evin shot right?

Yes.. this is from the UCLA vs. Coppin state Basketball game that Rick Albert got us into.

[D_and_G]

As for monitoring, with dual-DVI Quadro and GeForce cards, we can monitor right from a secondary DVI/HDMI display and video output can be set to conform to PC DVI, NTSC or ATSC-HD color space via the color profiles in the nVidia software. The question here is do I go with a 32~37 inch consumer HDTV with native 1080p resolution like the Westinghouse or the new Mitsubishi panels? Or do I spend more money and get an actual HD studio monitor with SDI and DVI input? Just a quick note. I've talked to a lot of editors, and an Avid rep said this, " Client preview or colour correction with ANY Xpress Pro HD projects will be limited to "downconverted" SD." The Avid output through the DVI is only 1/2 the native resolution (the proxie is not a mastering or cc quality). So how someone can accurately monitor and colour correct off of that is beyond me. If you can monitor and colour correct the full 1080 resolution through the DVI of the video card, than I would truly love to know (despite the fact of finding a HD affordable monitor with DVI inputs). I've looked at blackmagic cards, the decklink, the multibridge extreme, and there is no way to monitor and cc FULL 1080p footage in XpressProHD, as far as I know. :beer:



Sorry if that was a tangent... Truly nice footage Jared. I can't wait to see what people post with the wide-release models. :)


Cheers.

[Jarred Land]

yes D and G.. that is why at the last minute i flipped from AVID to FCP.. but, lets end the NLE stuff for now :)

[Elton]

Thanks for the clip Jarred! Now that's promising! So I take it that wasn't 24N mode, as there seem to be repeat frames when stepping through it.

That's definitely more like what I thought 720p would look like from this cam. Higher detail, but a pleasing, filmic feel.

One very nice thing about the format is how easy it is to scrub.

Interesting, the data rate QT reports is actually 117 mbs. Insane! Anyone care to make a pulldown extraction of this clip in Cinema Tools?

Cool stuff, Jarred.