HVX footage (raw files) from Sundance

[cre8tive]

Hey guys,

I've offered some of the fine posters from this community the opportunity to host some raw files I shot with the HVX200 at Sundance the past two weeks.

No takers.

So I thought I would open it up to the list and see if there are any dvxusers out there who would want to host a few (?) raw MXF files shot in 720 and 1080 with the new camera, and share it with the community.

Nothing groundbreaking with the cinematography, just handheld whenever I had a few minutes several of the days of the show.

I have a shoot tomorrow, so if I don't hear from anyone tonight, it will be Wednesday night or Thursday before I can upload them.

Hope some with the group find these files useful.

Regards,

Cre8tive

[mochouinard]

I can host them on hvx200.moctel.com I can set you a FTP account to upload the files
email mochouinard@m0c.com

[Stevet]

Someone please host these files!

[mochouinard]

Someone please host these files!

I just said that I will host the file ;)

[Mr. Blonde]

Let's see the goods =)

[Justin_Kirch]

once someone gets the raw junk, please put it in h.264 or wmp HD

[cre8tive]

Okay,

Thanks to our good friend mochouinard, I have posted some raw MXF clips from Sundance on his FTP site. More to follow, if you like.

mochouinard, can you please tell everyone how you would like them to access your site?

Regards,

Cre8tive

[mochouinard]

You can access the content by going at :
http://hvx200.moctel.com/ And go into the Sundance HVX MXF files folder for the content uploaded by cre8tive

Thanks for submiting cre8tive

[Emanuel]

Is it possible any PC side conversion for regular notebooks, please?

Thanks in advance!

[cre8tive]

These are raw files, and I can edit them with my Avid Xpress Pro HD software on PC.

But for you, I will make a .wmv soon of a few clips and post those as well.

My first priority is to get the raw files in the hands of shooters/editors who can evaluate the raw and comment on them.

Regards,

Cre8tive

[Emanuel]

But for you, I will make a .wmv soon of a few clips and post those as well.Thanks for your concern and care.

[mochouinard]

I was gonna say the samething cre8tive, Also can you do more dynamic shoot. Walking, going from wide to full tele, doing a slow and a quick 360 ;) A bunch of different dynamic stuff.

[Danilo Del Tufo]

If someone could give us that damned P2 Viewer :)
Guys, anyone could upload the freeware software, because we need the serial number to download P2 reader, and here in Pal LAND still don't have the camera.

Thanks

p.s.: MXF files (made with Hvx200) works ONLY with P2 Viewer, also if you have installed MXF drivers (As me) it doesn't work. You need to install first the drivers then use P2 Viewer on Pc.

[Jim Arthurs]

Cre8tive, thanks for making these available and for mochouinard posting them! Single biggest group of raw MXF's we've yet seen, great for testing Raylight, which still has some blocking issues.

Had some fun, reducing the 1080 (shot with standard 3:2 pulldown) shots down to 720p and could NOT see a resolution advantage of the 1080... Overall, I'm dissapointed with the 1080 performance of this camera and would be hard pressed to use it over 720p unless a client needed interlaced 1080i.

Then took all clips down to 480 and straight into my Velocity NLE to examine the quality of a software downconvert output component to my Sony CRT. That looked amazing, a notch better than the pure DVCPRO50 to my eyes.

Thanks again, will re-test when Raylight has a bug-fix issued for the blocky problem...

Jim Arthurs

[angrynerdrock07]

So what do I need on my mac to run these raw files? I tried to get it to run in Final Cut Pro 5. Am I missing something?

[PappasArts]

I am still at FCP 4.5 So I was trying to see if I can play it on my XPpro box. If there is a way to play it on my mac other than FCP that would be good....

[thefilmaddict]

I downloaded all of MFX files. I tried to import them into Final Cut Pro HD using the P2 import option. That did not work.

I then searched the web for a MFX player. I found something called flip 4 mac (I downloaded the trial version). It gave me another import option in Final Cut Pro called MFX import. It started working and then I got an error. What Am I doing wrong? Should I view the files some other way?

Thanks!!!

[mochouinard]

I have moved the content to : http://hvx200.moctel.com/Users/cre8tive/
so cre8tive can upload his own content as he wish

[spadrille]

I have trhe same problem. Can't import the MXF file in Final cut. What am i doing wrong?

[eloi]

hello,
somebody can explain to me why archives MXF of Sundance HVX do not
work in Avid Xpress pdo HD 5.2.1. Other archives MFX if
they go... why these no?
Some user of Avid can help me, please.

Thanks

[jjb]

I've downloaded the 0024N3.MXF File and tried to import it into EDIUS Broadcast. That didn't work. MXF files from other sources (e.g. HVXvlmcntnts, rezchartraw) could be read without any problems.

[eloi]

I do not understand as other MXF files work in
Avid and these no?
I do not have Edius Brodcast, I cannot
comment to you.

[Stevet]

These MXF files locked up AVID 5.2.1 (PC) when trying to load.

What's up with this?

Hmm, maybe HDV is not that bad of an idea after all.
:(

[jjb]

Avid, FCP and Edius didn't work so I would assume that these files are corrupted.

[eloi]

thanks jjb :)

[eloi]

In agreement with you Stevet, Avid blocked for MXF files Soundance.

[Erik Olson]

DVFilms Raylight converted these files nicely for editing in Vegas and playback in WMP. Thanks for sharing these images.

e

[Rodrigo]

I must admit that am pretty much disappointed by the resolution and overall quality of the 1080p files....

[Jim Arthurs]

I must admit that am pretty much disappointed by the resolution and overall quality of the 1080p files....

Yes, I don't see much resolution advantage over 720p. I don't think much testing lately has focused on this, but it's time for someone to shoot the same detailed static subject with a locked off camera in 1080 and 720, pull frames from each and upload them so we can do difference test to see how much more info is really in the 1080 material.

When I downsample the 1080 to 720 and intercut with other 720 I can't visually see any difference at all. You should have some advantage, resolution wise, doing this, as you at least have the possiblility of filling the 1280 by 720 raster more than an original 720p recording of 960 by 720. Elsewhere, Limo mentioned that 1080 will give you a bit more chroma resolution to work with, but that to me seems about the only benefit of the 1080 implementation.

I never had much faith in the 1080 aspect of the camera, so I don't feel as dissapointed now as some might, but the resolution gains seem even less dramatic than I would have predicted a couple months ago.

As time goes on, I refine my definition of the HVX, so I know what I can offer clients without exaggeration. High resolution in 1080 is NOT one of the benefits of the HVX. It's a good 720p camera and an excellent SD one. I'd go so far as to call it a "Medium Def" camera. I was hoping that it could fill the DVCPRO HD codecs with every bit of resolution the codecs could handle, both in 1080 and 720p. It can not.

Only the Canon of the 1/3" cameras gives you that jaw-dropping "wow" factor on every clip I've seen. I'm not buying the Canon for a number of reasons that the HVX fills better... better colorspace with the on-board recording, great stop motion/interval abilities, better SD options, etc. But the Canon, even in the 24f mode FEELS like real HD all the time. If it sold body only, and there was a firestore like small portable device that could record from the HD-SDI to, say, Cineform in the field...

The HVX in HD is for me is a stop-gap to the real-deal HD promise of Red. I doubt I'll sell the HVX even when Red comes along (big assumption that some model of Red will be affordable, but...) as I'll still need an SD camera and the HVX is top-notch in that area.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs

[cre8tive]

There will be some side by side comparisons of 720 and 1080 in the Sundance footage (terribly slow upload times coming from my DSL to mouchinard's site), although it is handheld and not tripod nor locked-off.

As far as not getting them to play with Avid, that's precisely how I am playing them. Avid Xpress Pro HD 5.2.2 on an HP workstation and an HP laptop. I just copy the MXF files into the Avid MediaFiles/MXF folder, and, when I create a new HD project, I open media tool and let Avid find the files. From there, drop them into a bin and onto the timeline.

There are plenty more clips if everyone still wants to see more. I wish I had a quicker upload method.....

Regards,

Cre8tive

[Jim Arthurs]

There are plenty more clips if everyone still wants to see more. I wish I had a quicker upload method.....

Thank you, your efforts to upload raw clips is greatly appreciated. I enjoyed comparing the 1080 24p clips to the 720 ones and more of both to examine is wonderful.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs

[Nomo]

Tried converting them with FCP and Flip4Mac MXF Import, but no such luck, I always get the Error ID "-19443". Could somebody convert them to quicktime containers and host them in that form? Thanks! :-)

[spadrille]

Yes, a quicktime conversion will be very welcome. Apparently a lot of persons have problems importing MXF files in FCP, Avid or Canopus. There is something wrong somewhere.

[andyfedak]

I think for the FCP people we need the p2 wrapper directory that contains the "lastclip.txt" file and the .xml files. That's the only way I've been able to get MXF files into FCP. -a

[Benton]

I'd go so far as to call it a "Medium Def" camera. I was hoping that it could fill the DVCPRO HD codecs with every bit of resolution the codecs could handle, both in 1080 and 720p. It can not.


Medium Def
That's great Jim,
it's exactly what it feels like -
beautiful none the less and I will purchase it as well,
unless Andromeda convinces me otherwise...

cheers,
J

[Jim Arthurs]

I mean, think about it from this perspective... it's not recorded as 1280 x 720, it's 960 x 720 with a heavy pixel aspect ratio. So...

...Flip that image on its side and you have 720 by 960. Now slice it across the midde and you have two 720 by 480 size images stacked on top of each other. That's just twice SD surface area. Where 720p would compete with 1080 is when you factor in the temporal frame rate of 60fps progressive. Strip that rate back down to 24fps and you have something... else.

The term Extended Def is taken in the consumer world. That's just 480 progressive, so Medium Def it is for these cameras, IMO.

Last year I was arguing for the Z1 and using CF25. CF25 is just one field (540 lines) stretched up to full height. I said that it "whipped every SD camera with one field tied behind its back.". I also made pretty good 720 by taking that CF25 and scaling it to 1280 by 720p. Dealing with that and the 25fps thing was too much complication for day to day workflow. That was one of the reasons I dumped it in favor the the promise of HVX. Now we see that the rez of the HVX isn't much past that CF25, at least with current test results. Ironic.

Benton, you're right, the HVX makes a pretty picture. Good enough to use for any application, including far richer film blowup and general future proofing. A simple workflow for true 24fps. Nifty color space. Superb SD similar to DigiBeta for keying.

But raw resolution? I mean, part of the attraction of HD is, well, duh, high definition! We can feel a little let down here with good reason, and still find room to accept it for what it is and all the other things it brings to the table.

Jim Arthurs

[mochouinard]

cre8tive, is the upload slow because of the DSL ? or you should normaly do faster upload speed ? If you should upload faster, you can try to open multiple FTP connections and try like that.

[Benton]

Jim ,
Very well said.
I feel the same...a little let down in terms of "High Res"
but there are some beautiful 35mm adapter + HVX Files floating around
and I stopped caring about all the noise for a moment...
...and there is also a slim chance that there could be some type of Andromeda solution in the future...?
cheers,



I mean, think about it from this perspective... it's not recorded as 1280 x 720, it's 960 x 720 with a heavy pixel aspect ratio. So...

...Flip that image on its side and you have 720 by 960. Now slice it across the midde and you have two 720 by 480 size images stacked on top of each other. That's just twice SD surface area. Where 720p would compete with 1080 is when you factor in the temporal frame rate of 60fps progressive. Strip that rate back down to 24fps and you have something... else.

The term Extended Def is taken in the consumer world. That's just 480 progressive, so Medium Def it is for these cameras, IMO.

Last year I was arguing for the Z1 and using CF25. CF25 is just one field (540 lines) stretched up to full height. I said that it "whipped every SD camera with one field tied behind its back.". I also made pretty good 720 by taking that CF25 and scaling it to 1280 by 720p. Dealing with that and the 25fps thing was too much complication for day to day workflow. That was one of the reasons I dumped it in favor the the promise of HVX. Now we see that the rez of the HVX isn't much past that CF25, at least with current test results. Ironic.

Benton, you're right, the HVX makes a pretty picture. Good enough to use for any application, including far richer film blowup and general future proofing. A simple workflow for true 24fps. Nifty color space. Superb SD similar to DigiBeta for keying.

But raw resolution? I mean, part of the attraction of HD is, well, duh, high definition! We can feel a little let down here with good reason, and still find room to accept it for what it is and all the other things it brings to the table.

Jim Arthurs

[cre8tive]

Okay, kids, I have a few more clips up now.

17 in all. I have taken the liberty of renaming them for ease of identification when you go to compare and contrast.

I have a slew more that I downloaded to a friend's hard drive (and forgot to offload to mine). Those should make it to me at the end of the week, if anyone cares to see them.

Use the same path that our friend mochouinard has provided us for downloading. Thanks again for hosting these, mochouinard!

Looking forward to the discussion surrounding these clips. All were shot at preset levels except for detail, which i dialed in at -5.

Regards,

Cre8tive

[mochouinard]

For avid HD User here is there I put the file in :
C:\Avid MediaFiles\1\
It work number one for me.

[spadrille]

A big thank you for all these clips but i still can't read them. It's impossible to import it in FCP. How can i do it? Is there another way to view these clips on a mac?

[PappasArts]

Hey jim,

Here's what SCOTT BILLUPS thinks of the XLH1. He talks about using the cineform codec as you mentioned, as well what he thinks of the lens.

LINK: http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=45971




Yes,.

Only the Canon of the 1/3" cameras gives you that jaw-dropping "wow" factor on every clip I've seen. I'm not buying the Canon for a number of reasons that the HVX fills better... better colorspace with the on-board recording, great stop motion/interval abilities, better SD options, etc. But the Canon, even in the 24f mode FEELS like real HD all the time. If it sold body only, and there was a firestore like small portable device that could record from the HD-SDI to, say, Cineform in the field...

Regards,

Jim Arthurs

[Mr. Blonde]

Medium def. camera, you've got to be kidding me...... :huh:

[Emanuel]

Unfortunately, he's not the only one that is thinking the same...

[Jim Arthurs]

I met Scott Billups at NAB two years ago, seems like a nice guy. He's always out there with interesting and unique approaches to HD. Recording to disk or deck is where the Canon shines, as it avoids the whole HDV mess. Yet I see no "easy" way to do this without cumbersome decks, drives, etc. I wouldn't want to haul that load out into the field and record, any more than I'd want to experiment with the Andromedia.

As to my "Medium Def" comment, I'm sticking by it. It's a term I'll apply to any of these little cameras that don't saturate their codec with enough detail for whatever reason. When I got the Z1 last year, I could tell after a side by side test with the 700a that it wasn't in the same game. The HVX is off the charts good for SD, damn fine for 720p, and extremely lackluster in 1080. I've yet to see one 1080 clip that looks much better than a simple blow up from 720 to 1080. This is purely subjective, your milage may vary, etc.

What I'd like to see is a rez chart comparison between 1080p and 720p for the HVX. As of yet, no one has done so, or at least shared the info. This would help tell us if 1080 brings anything to the table besides instant format compatibilty with other 1080 recordings. Is it 35% better, or less? Is it worth the bandwidth difference to shoot it? I don't think so, as of yet. Downsampled and cut side by side with the 720 clips in this thread, I see NO difference.

But understand, and this is key, I'm buying the HVX for all the endless reasons I've mentioned, that Barry has elaborated on, and so on. While others were lamenting the resolution results of the first test shootout, I was gathering accessories, drives, support gear galore, asking usage questions, and eagerly wait the call from Rush.

You see, I had to make a choice as to how to position this camera to my clients, and what kind of projects can be done with it. This "mission statement" has changed and evolved as the camera went from unreleased specs, to proto-type, to shipping camera reality. It is what it is, a swiss army knife of a camera, but one I would not feel comfortable bringing it to a 1080 job, yet would market in any other video application, and that covers a LOT of territory.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs

[SalaTar]

Jim do you have a H1 on order also?

I fugure you would with the SDI out

[Emanuel]

What I'd like to see is a rez chart comparison between 1080p and 720p for the HVX. As of yet, no one has done so, or at least shared the info. This would help tell us if 1080 brings anything to the table besides instant format compatibilty with other 1080 recordings. Is it 35% better, or less? Is it worth the bandwidth difference to shoot it? I don't think so, as of yet. Downsampled and cut side by side with the 720 clips in this thread, I see NO difference.I'd like to see a rez chart comparision too...is the HVX a 720p HD camera or also a 1080 one?


(...) I would not feel comfortable bringing it to a 1080 jobSo why not a XL-H1 option, Jim? EDIT -- As you see, SalaTar is asking the same...

[Benton]

A big thank you for all these clips but i still can't read them. It's impossible to import it in FCP. How can i do it? Is there another way to view these clips on a mac?


I am wondering the same myself

[mochouinard]

FCP doesn't really support MXF file. You have to convert them to Quicktime !!!

On PC with avid, you just put into 1 folder and avid see them correctly.

I can't help on how to convert those on the Mac. Let just say I am a permanent non-mac user (Current windows but could change)

[Jim Arthurs]

Jim do you have a H1 on order also? I fugure you would with the SDI out

Hi SalaTar, and Emanuel.

No, the Canon in not in my future. I did have a couple moments during the last few weeks when I considered it, but came back to the HVX.

What I did was line up all the potential money-making shoots and all the personal work I wanted to do and compared which would handle the work the best, or be most flexible. My personal mix would be different than the next guys, but I'll give you some random examples;

1.) Upcoming greenscreen shoot for a multimedia CD. For the past three projects they've shot BetaSP with a 400a, and I've watched the guys doing the compositing grumple about the keys, and the fact that since the footage is interlaced, the largest size they can make the movies is 320 by 240.

Shooting progressive on DVCPRO 50 will make everybody happy... the FCP editor, the compositing guys and the compression expert. This will be a win/win for everyone. Score one for the HVX.

2.) Childrens video series of storybook comes to life segments. Green screen again, but these folks want HD, but 720p is just fine. Again, easy win for the HVX.

3.) All the short film ideas I'd like to do... 720p just fine, again.

4.) VFX insert stuff. Back in November was bidding on some quick turn-around shots of bullet hits and muzzle fire for UnderWorld 2 through CafeFX, and the production had provided marginal green screen blood splats and gore plates... all of lesser quality than I could have done with the HVX in slow mo.

Now, for the cases where the Canon would provide better resolution than the HVX, I've got rental access to a 700a for a reduced day rate. It ain't cheap, but it ain't expensive. And it's a level of quality better than the Canon.

Jim Arthurs

[Benton]

FCP doesn't really support MXF file. You have to convert them to Quicktime !!!



Alas,
How does one play all these MXF files on a mac ?
I have heard you need there accompanying Txt files?

Whazzup?
J

[angrynerdrock07]

Is anyone going to convert these to Quicktime files? I'd still like to see them.

[thefilmaddict]

I have a mac and can't watch the file. I would love to see a quicktime movie. Is that possible?

[Benton]

Alright so one needs the Whole CONTENTS folder from the P2 card
and then you just Import >P2 and point to folder.

[cre8tive]

To provide some assistance to the folks who haven't been able to view the MXF files, I have converted some of the clips as .mov and .wmv files. I have three files called "Sundance Street Scenes" 01, 02 and 03.

They are available on the site mochouinard graciously has provided.

I don't know all of the settings to use, but I am open to suggestions on how to go about this in the future. For these you see now, here's what I did:

For the .mov, I exported a QT file from Avid Xpress Pro HD. Nothing else.

I tried exporting a QT reference file into Sorenson Squeeze 4.3, but the program refused to read the file.

For the .wmv, I took the resulting QT file into Sorenson (which read it fine) and made the resulting .wmv file from there. Let me know what you think.

Regards,
Cre8tive

[cre8tive]

Just a reminder, you can download the MXF files, .mov files and .wmv files at

http://hvx200.moctel.com/Users/cre8tive/Sundance%20HVX%20MXF%20files/

And thanks again to mochouinard for hosting these files.

Regards,

Cre8tive

[Emanuel]

For the .mov, I exported a QT file from Avid Xpress Pro HD. Nothing else.So, at PC side, right?

[cre8tive]

Yes. Avid Xpress Pro HD is not out for Mac yet.

Soooooooooon!!!


Cre8tive

[syberfilm]

I downloaded the files and converted them to a WMV file.. I think the conversion was incredible... I think the 720 24P footage looks great... I played with the color like crazy and it never fell apart like it does with DV video.
I used Raymaker from DVfilm and opened them in Vegas 6.0..

I don't know why everyone is crying about resolution charts.. True we now know the camera is not True 1080 24P.. But 720 24P is awesome... Miles ahead of DV video..

This is also geared at prosumer market being a sub 10,000.00 camera... Yes the P2 cards are expensive. but coming down in price each month. New technologies cost more money.. We have to pay for all the R&D that went into developing these new technologies...

So just enjoy the fact that we finally have a camera that the average person doing low budget film can buy and shoot near movie qualtiy footage that could transfer well to 35mm film..

There will always be problems with a prosumer camcorder.. But tradeoffs have always been a part of low budget film making. I am going to buy one.. The only thing I am waiting for is the Focus HD100 hard drive capture device..

Raymaker needs a little work... But lets anyone with a decent computer edit MXF files in real time... I had no problem editing the footage on my AMD 3500+ computer..

I think we are heading into a new era of digital filmmakeing.. We are all benefitting by this incredible technology.....

I really appreciate the fact you posted so much usable MXF files......... Thanks a million

[cre8tive]

You're welcome. Did you not just download the .wmv files that were there as well, or were you experimenting using another method?

Cre8tive