Screenshots: 1080i vs 720p

Oops, I'll have to add that into the PDF. The Time line setting you'll need to edit in is:
HD (1280x1080)(16:9). Pixel Aspect ratio: HD (1280x1080). Timebase: 23.98. Compressor: DVCPRO HD 1080i60. Quality 100%.
 
You rock! Thanks alot, im gunna try this out later tonight!

Maybe if you could add something about why 1080pA, and maybe a quick short summary to its definition. Idunno, but thanks alot, that was the easiest and most informative posting on 1080 24p ive seen.
 
Thanks for the suggestions, I'll add them in to the article- and I'm glad you liked the how-to.

The short quick answer is: p = 2:3 and pa =2:3:3:2. The pa sequence is a little cleaner, and slightly more "true" progressive. Could you tell the difference when watching the footage? No. So whay use it? As long as you can pull a slightly better image, why not? (I'm keeping things short, and have simplified the answer.)
 
I couldn't see a difference, negligible or otherwise, in the watch shot.

But all-the-way-zoomed-in close-ups look so gorgeous on the HVX in general that I wouldn't be surprised if an HVX 720 vs. HVX 1080 vs. Varicam showed little difference in that particular test. (And if one did have more sharpness than the others, with a close-up of, say, a face, that sharper shot might not even be the most attractive version.) I never have a problem at zoom 55 on the HVX. It's a great close-up camera.

But wider shots are a different matter, and that's where I'm discovering the 1080 boost makes the most noticeable difference. On the 720 vs. 1080 comparison I did, I noticed the biggest difference with the zoom at around 10 or 20, with a shot that had a lot of sharp edges and contrast. Leaves, signage and painted stripes on the street esp. revealed the extra sharpness of the 1080. Of course, I was looking for a shot that would be most likely to reveal the difference, as that was the purpose of the test.

But I do think that "sweet spot" where the 1080 difference is most likely to occur includes some pretty common types of shots. Since I got the camera, I've been on a quest to shoot a daytime exterior with the HVX at zoom 4.2 that actually looks good. Haven't succeeded yet. But the extra sharpness of 1080 can't hurt. It's not much, but under the right conditions, it is there.
 
Excellent, something simple and too the point is i think what is lacking here, most stickies are even really long winded. I was , when i downloaded the PDF, prepared to strap in and take notes, but when i saw it was 4 pages, i was pretty happy!

If you could also add how to make a nice bundt cake, thatd be cool. j/k

Thanks again, im heading out of the office, be back online later tonight hopefully with some test shots, unless i decide to actually pretend to have a life outside of my apartment and the office.

thanks again!
 
BrianF said:
It seems that the interlacing artifacts I froze in the FCP timeline would not actually be there in a final output at 24p, as those frames would be thrown out. Right?
Click to expand...
The problem is not with the footage, it's with FCP. FCP doesn't support 1080/24p allowing pulldown removal, AFAIK.

Try 1080/24pA instead. It's better supported, and FCP allows the pulldown frames to be stripped out when you import the footage so you end up with genuine 1080p/24p.

720p24pN - no artifacts
720p24p - no artifacts
1080i/24p - artifacts
Click to expand...
This is a result of you using the wrong frame from the sequence (you'll find there are three "pure 24p frames" and two "split frames" in each five-frame sequence; don't use the "split frames" for your tests!) Again, ditch the 1080/24p setting and use 1080/24pA instead, and when you make your split-screen comparison be sure to use a pure progressive frame.

1080 - Quality gain, less efficient P2 usage and workflow
720 - Quality loss, more efficent P2 usage and workflow
Click to expand...
Correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top