The great 720p vs 720pn question

M

manvsbear

Member
So I will be editing a feature film on FCP 6 in about a month that will be shot on an HVX200 with a Redrock 35 adapter and Cooke lens package. The film will be transfered to 35mm for distribution.

The director, DP and I are trying to hash out the best workflow. My questions are as follows.

Which is better for 35 transfer?

Which has the smallest file size on my hard drive after FCP imort?

Does the image quality differ?

Which mode works better with the Cooke lenses?
 
both are absolutely identical in terms of data captured - one is true progressive frames (pn) and one is true progressive frame encoded in an interlaced stream. Native is better if you can use it because it takes up much less space on disc since it captures only the actual frames
 
720p is never interlaced. If you don't use the native mode, it's recorded in a 60p stream. All progressive.
 
The best image is going to come from 1080/24pA.

For 24p, 720pN and 720p mode will deliver identical quality, but for an FCP edit you'd want to use 720pN mode as much as possible. That'll leave the smallest files on your drives.

But if you're concerned about quality and about it holding up on the big screen, 720p is fine, 1080/24pA will be better.
 
If you already know and have budget for a 35mm bump... why not upgrade to at least a 2/3" CCD camera if not a higher end HD cam?


ash =o)
 
Barry_Green said:
For 24p, 720pN and 720p mode will deliver identical quality, but for an FCP edit you'd want to use 720pN mode as much as possible. That'll leave the smallest files on your drives.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm not sure this is true - is it? On direct capture FCP removes the extra frames, so the file size is the same; I've only used 24pN with P2 cards, but I assumed the P2 ingest would remove it as well?
 
AshG said:
If you already know and have budget for a 35mm bump... why not upgrade to at least a 2/3" CCD camera if not a higher end HD cam?
Click to expand...
Much wisdom. If you know you're going to be spending $50,000 to make a film print and have budgeted for that... surely the overall project budget could afford more than a 1/3" camcorder?
 
yea you sould probably rent a HPX500, 2/3" chips. get some ND filters, and you can leave it wide open, and you can certinaly get some Shallow Dof. The over all picture quality will be VASTLY better.
 
Thanks for all the info guys.

So, what would be the difference in file size from 720pn to 1080pa?



The 35mm prints are paid for by the distributor, it's not included in our budget.
 
720pn is 40Mbps. 108024pA is 100Mbps. So one minute of 1080 is 1 gig. 2 1/2 minutes of 24p720pn is 1 gig.
 
I am planning a 1080 PN project using DV Rack HD in conjunction with a laptop and 7 500GB USB drives. It should record around 800 mb / minute as it will remove the one interlaced frame from the four progressive ones during recording. I'll make a batch file that will wake every five minutes and move any 'ejected' footage from the laptop's local 7200 rpm C drive to the slower USB drive. In the evenings I will then offload the USB drive to my Avid workstation, which will have an 8 disk 3.5 TB array using a dedicated adaptec controller. The tools that DV rack gives you are well worth teathering a laptop and skipping the P2. Removing the 2:3:3:2 pulldown is just icing on the cake.

In terms of the size of the CCD it becomes irrelevant if you use a ground glass lens adapter. The only thing that is relevant is the actual image quality produced. If I had an extra ~$8000 (and time) I would have the camera Hydra
modified and buy more disk to support the additional data. 1080P footage from a properly set up HVX / M2 combo looks wonderful.

The major benefits to 720 are the ability to overcrank/undercrank and the size on P2 and disk of shooting 720pn. I'm still trying to figure out how to do a few slow-mo scenes that my script calls for, intercutting 720 will most likely be my solution but i'm not sure at what tier I want to do the blowup.

Bob
 
DV Rack doesn't remove 1080pA pulldown. Raylight does, but DV Rack doesn't, so don't count on that 20% space savings. (unless I'm wrong, but I don't think I am).

Avid doesn't support 1080/24pA editing as 24p yet, does it? Did they add that to 5.7?

Last I knew, you'd be better off using 720/24pN if you're planning to edit with Avid.
 
Bob Gruen said:
In terms of the size of the CCD it becomes irrelevant if you use a ground glass lens adapter. The only thing that is relevant is the actual image quality produced. If I had an extra ~$8000 (and time) I would have the camera Hydra
modified and buy more disk to support the additional data. 1080P footage from a properly set up HVX / M2 combo looks wonderful.
Bob
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say irrelevant. A larger CCD will shoot better in low light with less noise.
 
Bob Gruen said:
The only thing that is relevant is the actual image quality produced. If I had an extra ~$8000 (and time) I would have the camera Hydra
modified and buy more disk to support the additional data. 1080P footage from a properly set up HVX / M2 combo looks wonderful.
Click to expand...


Not really true, when you talk about a 35mm bump, I actually would argue that an SDX-900 at 480p and uprezzed looks better than the HVX at 1080p (I have seen both projected). I dont think anyone would argue that a Vari, F900, etc. etc. etc. would look much better than an HVX.

The Varicam is a wonderful cam to shoot with. Fun frame rates, GORGEOUS colors and cinegamma options, countless ways to tweak the image, etc. but it is getting left in the dust for a lot of HD work and MOST film work because the Sony F series and cinealtas produce a sharper image for film out. This is in spite of the fact that many of us dont care for the pastel-ish flat Sony image...

Bottom line, if you KNOW you are going for a film out, I think the lowest end should be a 2/3" 1080p camera. What kind of deal do you have that a distributor is already on board, paying for a film out, but you have no budget? If you got P&A committed you should be able to raise budget very easily.




ash =o)
 
AshG said:
Bottom line, if you KNOW you are going for a film out, I think the lowest end should be a 2/3" 1080p camera. What kind of deal do you have that a distributor is already on board, paying for a film out, but you have no budget? If you got P&A committed you should be able to raise budget very easily.
Click to expand...
I am not sure of the details of the deal...

I do know that the reason a distributor is on board is because of the cast. But this is a moot point, we are shooting on the HVX no matter what and I am trying to ensure that we make the best decisions.

One thing I am interested in 720p footage intercut with 1080p footage. Anyone have any notes/tips on that?
 
But if you're concerned about quality and about it holding up on the big screen, 720p is fine, 1080/24pA will be better.
Click to expand...

Why would this be if the camera does not have full 1080 res ccd's and does an upres in camera? wouldn't it be perhaps better to upress to full hd resolution at a good facility before film transfer?
 
lalune said:
Why would this be if the camera does not have full 1080 res ccd's and does an upres in camera?
Click to expand...
Because that's an incorrect assumption, that's why. :thumbsup:

wouldn't it be perhaps better to upress to full hd resolution at a good facility before film transfer?
Click to expand...
You can have them process the 1080p files if you want, but it's better to start with the highest-quality source you can get, and on the HVX 1080/24p is unquestionably better than 720/24p.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top