HVX200 noisy grainy images

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

richriehl

New member
I test drove the HVX200 today on a rainy day inside Birns and Sawyer in Hollywood. I was very bummed out with the images, as they were crawling with video noise. I was shooting at low gain, at about F2.8 and the picture quality was degraded to the point of being unwatchable.

Shooting out the window into overcast daylight, the images looked fine.

I understand that technically, fitting HD pixels on a 1/3rd" chip means the pixels are very small and do not work well in low light. That is the reason Panasonic actually put less pixels in the CCD's and then uprezes to 720p... to deal will bad performance in low light.

I would like feedback on this issue, as I have anxiously awaited the release of this camera, and wonder if I am missing something here. We viewed the image directly off the component output, (not recorded) on a Panasonic HD monitor. We even switched monitors and it still looked bad.

Birns and Sawyer commented that they were hearing complaints about this in the field also.

Most demos on all these 1/3rd CCD's, for the HDV stuff all seem to be well lit exteriors, as they don't want us to see the limitation/

I welcome more information, as I am still a fan of this camera and the DVCPro HD format beats the snot out of HDV.
 
I hope someone more knowledgeable like Barry will touch upon this thread, but I'll give it a shot.
I'm assuming you correctly white and black balanced the camera for the indoor shoot, and adjusted the shutter speed accordingly?
It helps to drop the master pedestal to around -4 for indoor stuff, but not too much or you'll have too much black when you look at it in post (plus, you can always crush the blacks later).
The noise, as has been said many times before in other threads, is comparable to 16mm film grain. In outside light, I'd say it looks much better than 16mm film.

Also, I don't think uprezzing is the correct phrase. I believe the Panasonic uses 'Pixel shifting', which is combining the information collected from pixels to create more image information than just the pixels themselves collect by themselves. Again, I hope Barry or someone else can help you out here, or look around this board cause there's lots of information to digest.

Uprezzing is simply multiplying the existing information of pixels to create more pixels, like dividing a pixel into more pieces. I don't believe the HVX does this, hopefully someone else can elaborate.

So basically, I love my HVX. My workflow is similar to film, I don't do live events, just planned shoots for short films, music videos, commercials, whatever. The HVX is perfect for me. Think of it as a digital 16mm movie camera, similar workflow, similar look (except Depth of Field), except no film. It's not 35mm quality, but if you need 35mm quality, then I don't think you'd be considering a 5000 dollar camera, and would probably be renting a package instead.....

with good lighting (you can bring the blacks down in post), this camera is great.

hope this helps!
david
 
Try to shoot 16mm 200asa @ 2.8 under those same circumstances and see what you would get.

The camera has limitations just like any other. In order to craft a beautiful image you will need to do more than just open the box turn it on and push record.

I agree, the camera doesn't perform well under lowlight. No camera performs well under a certain amount of low light. I was trying to shoot an exterior bar scene with no lights, shooting with sdx900, and it ended up looking like crap. The sdx is much more sensitive than the HVX. I then realized that it wasn't the camera, it was the dp at fault. It is my responsibility to know how to get the best image possible in order to support the story at hand.

My point is you need to test a camera in order to find out it's optimum performance levels and use them to your advantage. When I shoot with the hvx, I rate it @ 200-250asa on my light meter. I determine this by getting a grey card, color balancing and hitting auto exposure on the camera. I then take a reflective reading with my light meter and scroll my iso untill the f-stop on my meter matches that on my camera.

Upon further test, I have determined with a waveform monitor and hd monitor (not a componet tv, computer monitor or the likes)that the auto-exposure preset in the camera isn't of my liking and should be opened up another 1/2 to full stop. The image looks better at a half stop to a full stop open. As long as I'm not peaking above 100ire, I'm fine.
(720pn 24fps 180.0 d) shutter depending on my settings. So, with that in mind I need to be prepared if I'm shooting indoors with low-light. The 200asa/iso is in by no means a concrete accurate iso for the camera, it changes upon many variables, such as 1080,720,dv, gamma, knee, pedastal, iris, and many others.

These tests have helped me to determine how to get a suitable image that I like. The key word there is I. You should be creating images that make you and the director happy. These are just the settings that I prefer to use as a basis.
Everyone is different and it is your choice to like what ever you want, but you should know how to create that look. I recommend test, test, test, prep, prep, prep and then test some more. That is the only way you will know the capabilities of your camera and the images you can create. After that it is all movie magic.

BTW, I love my HVX
 
Last edited:
:thumbsup: OK since the Bootcamp is today I can reveal this... The HVX is actually cleaner than the Thompson Viper! :eek: No kidding, I did a side by side comparison and it's obvious how noisy the Viper is. Very sharp and great DR but noisy, even in daylight. Noise is a real part of all filmmaking. And the HVX has amazing noise charachteristics for it's size and price. It is only slightly noisier than it's big brother the Varicam. And you can easily intercut them, even for large screen projection. Don't worry, once you get used to the idea that the texture is natural you won't even see it anymore.:thumbsup:
 
well

well

From time to time I feel I need to bring things in perspective, this is so moment...

The Viper has three FT high resolution CCD (9.2 million pixels) chips, the signal from CCD gets its way without any filtering or pre-processing direct into a 12-bits digital signal. The Hvx200 has a signal with low resolution chips, heavy filtering and greenshift. If you put the Viper in filmstream mode with a little filtering, all the noise disappears.
 
evinsky said:
: Noise is a real part of all filmmaking. And the HVX has amazing noise charachteristics for it's size and price.
Click to expand...

Noise has nothing to do with filmmaking, grain is what you see in film, and grain is what makes the film, the film image is grain.

There is no relationship between size and noise or between price and noise.
What has size to do with noise? tell me.
 
:nads: Small sizde form factor = small chip, IE 1/3" Vs. 2/3".
And the Viper was in filmstream mode and was being filterd through a Scratch CC system. I was comparing FINAL images. And there is a very 35mm film grain feel to the Viper, but it is noisier/grainier. BTW Xray film grain is just analog noise.
If you don't believe me just come to the next Bootcamp, I'm projecting the side by side in HD 10' across for everyone to see.:nads:
 
For looking at the Viper I need to walk 3 minutes. Its a long road to the bootcamp. ( I am in the Netherlands) but your answer did not bring me or you anything.
 
evinsky said:
Small sizde form factor = small chip, IE 1/3" Vs. 2/3".
Click to expand...
Sony FX1 or Z1 has 1/3 " chip but no noise.

evinsky said:
And the Viper was in filmstream mode and was being filterd through a Scratch CC system. I was comparing FINAL images. And there is a very 35mm film grain feel to the Viper, but it is noisier/grainier.
Click to expand...

Is has a 35mm look (the Viper yes) are you suggesting that the HVX is looking better than that? IE 35mm?


evinsky said:
BTW Xray film grain is just analog noise.
Click to expand...
No, noise is a byproduct from amplifying, grain is the basics from film. Need to fresh up? http://www.imx.nl/photosite/technical/Filmbasics/filmbasics.htmll

BTW you like playing with puppets? .:nads:
 
The FX1 or Z1 are said to be much slower - and that being interlaced cams! That´s why they have less noise.

BTW nice storyboard: :nads:go ahead...
 
xray said:
Noise has nothing to do with filmmaking.

There is no relationship between size and noise or between price and noise.
Click to expand...

Size does matter huh?
 
the more i look at these boards the more im convinced that 90% of the people have no idea what there talking about.
 
Neil Burner said:
the more i look at these boards the more im convinced that 90% of the people have no idea what there talking about.
Click to expand...


Do you own an HVX200?
 
No, I don't like what panasonic did with the HVX. I think the amount of noise the camera produces is ridiculous and looks nothing like film grain. I'm not looking for grain when I shoot film why would I want it in my video? My previous comment was more towards the constant bickering on every thread and how everyone's an expert. Its just getting old if you ask me.
 
Neil, i didnt understand your position, now i do. I agree.

I love my HVX for all other matters. 4:2:2 and variable frame rates is probably the biggest plus. But when i see my image crawling with noise in dark/grey areas (in broad daylight), i think back to all these threads.

I hope panasonic addresses this issue with the next product release. For the moment i am very happy with my HVX, there are so many great features of the camera, but if Panasonic wants to keep me a customer i hope they show some sort of 'fixing' or improvment to such an issue in the future.
 
Last edited:
xray said:
Noise has nothing to do with filmmaking, grain is what you see in film, and grain is what makes the film, the film image is grain.

There is no relationship between size and noise or between price and noise.
What has size to do with noise? tell me.
Click to expand...

Noise has everything to do with filmmaking and filmstock. They call it grain and in film it is noise.

Are you purposefully trying to be difficult xray ?

Noise is to Video is to Grain is to Film and there is no need to split hairs over this.

-

One is a chemical organic process and the other is a byproduct of the electronic video signal but most importantly it is a product of each format. Deal with it.

-

Peoplem, the camera may not be right for you and if it is not, please go somewhere else instead of sitting around here focusing on the perceived negativity of noise, especially from some run and gun 1st poster who looked at it in a store for 20 minutes.

-

Let's not ask this again; please start accepting the cameras limitations (Any camera for that matter) and either embrace it or use another product. All you are doing are bringing negative energy to an otherwise productive atmosphere and this noise issue has been discussed to death redux.

So do us all a favor ? Pretty please, with sugar and find another forum to pollute.


Thanks

MGNT
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top