HD100 vs. HVX on the Las Vegas Strip

[stephenlnoe]

I ll do what is needed or shoot me a dvd and Ill put it up

Thanks SalaTar.

Barry, can we see the raw stuff please. Thanks....

 

[toke lahti]

Which should forever put to rest the myth that the HVX isn't a real 4:2:2.

I think that's still debatable in academic sense, but your examples really showed which one is better in real world. Best example IMHO was siren10's, which really showed what hdv is all about: too much movement in the frame and it's full of macroblocks. It can always be argued that "average Joe" can't notice those blocks in real time motion, but I don't think so.

About 4:2:2, pixel shifting is great in usual situations, but not when you have only one primary color in the frame. Then you get only one chip's rez, which is 960x540. This is then scaled to 960x1080 (assuming ad-converter uses 4:2:2), which is further scaled to 640x1080 or 480x720. Regarding the resolution achieved originally from only one chip (only one primary color in this example) and that resolution will always decrease in scaling, you get something like less than 600x500 or 450x700.
Are these number HD? Depends on what we call hd...
If we compare it to 1080p4:4:4, the numbers are significantly lower, but if we compare it to 720p4:2:0, the numbers are quite fine.

 

[js33]

My post was in responce to js33's. Saying it is "insane" to buy the JVC after looking at a couple of screen grabs isn't a good way to judge a camera.

OK maybe not "insane" but to me it's all about the image. It's not just the screen grabs, I have been looking at every clip available and the moving images are even nicer. The color fidelity of the HVX and the filmic look of the footage is to me the most important quality.

 

[js33]

About 4:2:2, pixel shifting is great in usual situations, but not when you have only one primary color in the frame.

In what real world shooting situation would you ever have only one primary color in the scene. I doubt anyone is going to shoot a blue wall and call that video? If you need a solid color for a bkdg you would probably use a graphic. Maybe a sky but it would be a gradient and probably have clouds. Or if you are doing greensceen but then you would have a subject in front of the greenscreen.

 

[mmm]

OK maybe not "insane" but to me it's all about the image. It's not just the screen grabs, I have been looking at every clip available and the moving images are even nicer. The color fidelity of the HVX and the filmic look of the footage is to me the most important quality.

The HVX is a great camera and produces great footage, but so is the HD100. I am getting great footage out of mine as are many other people. From what I have seen and tested, it would be splitting hairs to say one gives a better image than the other. In this test, I admit that the HVX looks better. In other tests, the HD100 edges ahead.

I was worried that you had taken one test as gospel. I am glad that is not the case. Whichever camera you get, I don't think that you will be disappointed - They are both very sane choices rogar-BigGrin(DBG)

 

[booth]

About 4:2:2, pixel shifting is great in usual situations, but not when you have only one primary color in the frame.

In what real world shooting situation would you ever have only one primary color in the scene. I doubt anyone is going to shoot a blue wall and call that video? If you need a solid color for a bkdg you would probably use a graphic. Maybe a sky but it would be a gradient and probably have clouds. Or if you are doing greensceen but then you would have a subject in front of the greenscreen.

If we were going to shoot something in one primary colour we'd probably shoot/light it for maximum image clarity and then change it/dirty it up in post with the Davinci.

 

[js33]

The HVX is a great camera and produces great footage, but so is the HD100. I am getting great footage out of mine as are many other people. From what I have seen and tested, it would be splitting hairs to say one gives a better image than the other. In this test, I admit that the HVX looks better. In other tests, the HD100 edges ahead.

I was worried that you had taken one test as gospel. I am glad that is not the case. Whichever camera you get, I don't think that you will be disappointed - They are both very sane choices rogar-BigGrin(DBG)

I'm not bashing the other cameras. I'm just stoked over the film like footage the HVX can produce and the variable framerates. For me it is the best choice due to the options it allows.

 

[Barry_Green]

In what real world shooting situation would you ever have only one primary color in the scene.

Actually this does come up mildly frequently in a certain environment: concerts and stage productions. Stage lighting guys will frequently use a red wash or a blue wash across the whole screen, and it really plays havoc with 4:1:1 DV -- your entire image just goes fuzzy. So while in "real world" scenarios or dramatic narrative it's not that likely to happen, in live event shooting it's not unheard of.

 

[booth]

I didn't think of that, but last week I had to shoot an event and the stage lighting was blue and purple. Very dark. The DVX100 coped quite well with it, and watching it back on a standard definition television it does look quite filmic and that's PAL DV25 4:2:0 - note it doesn't look perfect, but it looks perfectly acceptable. So I can only wonder what DVCPro50 or DVCProHD with PAL 4:2:2 will do with a scene like that.

 

[presario]

Thanks for the comparison Barry. I'm very impressed with the results you got with the HVX. Now if Panasonic would give us a firmware upgrade that will allow us to have variable frame rate 1080

 

[Barry_Green]

I doubt Panasonic will do that, but I'm lobbying hard for Juan Pertierra of reel-stream to andromedize the HVX because then, yes, we'd have variable-frame-rate 1080! Not only that, you'd have 1080/60P! It's possible, I just know it... it's ... so... close...

 

[presario]

I doubt Panasonic will do that, but I'm lobbying hard for Juan Pertierra of reel-stream to andromedize the HVX because then, yes, we'd have variable-frame-rate 1080! Not only that, you'd have 1080/60P! It's possible, I just know it... it's ... so... close...

Man on man, if you need any of us to do anything to help, let us know. Maybe we can start an online petition or something, lol. Thanks again Barry.

 

[berni]

With regards to stage lighting for video... and this also goes for the vegas stuff...

... performance stage lighting is simply not suitable for TV... too much use of primaries and chroma in general, and out of range colors eg: a lot of stage lighting has UV mixed with it that video cameras simply re-produce as blue like the Hd100 did in vegas.

tech note: Our visual system turns a two dimesional physical system (electromagnetic frequency vs photon count) into a three dimensional construct (red green and blue). UV looks purple to us humans because the red cones on our retina have a vestige response in the UV region (covered by the blue) giving the illusion of purple (a little bit of blue response in that region mixed with a little red)... that is also why when the "red" in UV "breaks thru" it is misregistered (differential diffraction in our eyes) against the blue... this is how you can tell the difference between purple that is mixed by adding blue and red, and true UV. Stagies love their UV and its emotional effect, but it's wasted on a camera that can't see it... which is all cameras!

Not many LD's know this (some exceptions: LD's for Metallica, White Stripes, Foo Fighters, Iggy Pop)... they tend to be the LD's who are the top guys because their pictures also look good on the screen.

That Vegas footage had the chroma distortions associated with a: excessive color and b: the prescence of UV and c: single frequency quantum light sources (LED's on big screen)... so I really can't take the footage seriously... well, for a detailed assessment that is, which appears to be what this forum purports to be about.

We paint with light, shoot with pixels, and deliver with compression (even hd sdi is 10bit compressed)... and all of these are detailed subjects on their own.

I would love to see some ordinary classicly lit (lit with heated elements, not flouro's. LED's, lasers or other quantum-generated light sources) scenes for comparison.

But full marks for going to this much trouble.

 

[PappasArts]

Good testing Barry. Thanks for taking the time to do so!



Barry, For the record, when your ready to test a side by side of the XLH1, I will fly myself and a crew to Vegas on my expense so we can see how a fully tweaked and adjusted for prime-time Canon XLH1 stands up to this pirate and LV strip testing. I am very curious to see how this will do.



I have said it before and I'll say it again the HVX is an amazing camera for the money. I saw the 35mm film-out- and it was sweet. What I like about the HD100 is it's rich color. The HVX has this too! They are all great cameras, everyone of them- end of story!


Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }
XLH1 and HVX200 frame grabs and news here:
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

 

[FullRez]

Sorry I'm late for this party but being an HD100 owner I'll chime in a bit. (Hopefully my difference of opinion and experience as a DP won't get me banned).

For those of you who are trying to decide on a camera, do your own tests and if you want to use tests done by others as your decision maker then take everything with a grain of salt.

I could go out and shoot footage with both cameras and pick out stills that do one camera better justice than the other. I'm not saying that Barry is not an honest guy, in fact he is a great asset to the community. However, it's no secret that he is a huge proponent of the HVX. To no fault of his own, when we are partial to something we tend to see things a certain way.

If you look at some of the tests done by real working DP's that have no personal preference (other than 35MM Film) and are evaluating HD for future products you will see that the HD100 wins. Look at the 24 tests. Look at the indepenedent tests done by Barry and the Gang early on.

They are both great cameras. Don't under estimate how important detachable lenses are. Ask yourself why Panavision, Arri, Aanton, Moviecam, all pro video cameras, etc. all have detachable lenses. I mean we all keep saying we want our HD cameras to act like film cameras. Fixed lens?

I'm no HVX hater. I still have one on order, but I can't tell you how much this HD100 has suprised me. It really is a nice camera.

 

[Barry_Green]

Well that would be sweet. How about NAB? I'm sure you're planning on being here anyway, right? Obviously we can do it sooner if you want, but if you're going to be here during NAB then it'll just save some expense.

I'd really like to see how the Canon codec holds up to this "torture test" -- I was very impressed by how robust it appeared at DV Expo, and with it recording only the 24 frames, it should be very robust indeed.

 

[berni]

Detachable lens is a biggie... especially of you want to do the nicest stuff you can, which means you'll probably want to go to a prime lens (not zoom).

Wish I had a detachable penis... ohh well.

 

[brianluce]

I could go out and shoot footage with both cameras and pick out stills that do one camera better justice than the other. I'm not saying that Barry is not an honest guy, in fact he is a great asset to the community. However, it's no secret that he is a huge proponent of the HVX. To no fault of his own, when we are partial to something we tend to see things a certain way.

.

While it's true there's a conflict of interest when barry evaluates cameras (since he materially benefits from robust sales of the hvx vis-a-vis book sales) unless someone has evidence of test rigging, I'd vote innocent on all counts. If someone were to reproduce the test with different results that's another story, failing that, the results should be accepted on their own merit.

the question of using stills to evaluate PQ of full motion video is a legitimate debate but I don't recall anyone raising the question until this two cam shootout was posted.

Also, as i recall, immediately after the 6 cam shootout, Barry said in essence that the JVC HD100 was the surprise hit of the shootout. Those aren't the words a Panny mouthpiece would use. That shootout also resulted in some nasty and according to Adam Wilt, patently untrue rhetoric from a certain Shannon "Tell it like it ain't" Rawls. I feel like there's been fall out from that guy's review of Bary Green and it's unfair.

 

[brianluce]

Wish I had a detachable penis... ohh well.

what on earth for? Oh I get it, just like with lenses, you could go to EVS and rent various other sizes for different applications. Yeah, I think you may be on to something there....

 

[J.R. Hudson]

(Hopefully my difference of opinion and experience as a DP won't get me banned).

That's not what is going to get you banned.

I could go out and shoot footage with both cameras and pick out stills that do one camera better justice than the other. I'm not saying that Barry is not an honest guy, in fact he is a great asset to the community. However, it's no secret that he is a huge proponent of the HVX. To no fault of his own, when we are partial to something we tend to see things a certain way.

I am insulted for Mr Green. Insinuating his bias or his book sales would have influence on his tests (something he has kindly taken the time to do for us) has tainted his judgment will get you banned.

I'm just stating the obvious

Careful what you imply.

This isn't opinion you are stating this is borderline character assasination.

You're not attacking Mr Green; well, yeah but you are.