Are panasonic redefining 'Progressive'?

C

Chimpan-A

Member
The Quote below is from High Definition Magazine, a UK publication. On page 8 of the january issue they say...


"...Up until now the term 'progressive' indicated a kind of image capture at the chip that replicated the motion portrayal of film capture. The 'juddery look'. There was only one way to achieve this using what has been called for the past five years a progressive CCD.
There weren't too many black holes to fall down in looking at specifications of a camera that does both interlace and progressive as the spec was similar.
All of that has changed. Low cost cameras XDCAM HD and HVX 200 use an interlace chip to capture the image. If progressive mode is selected then onboard processing creates a progressive frame. The on-board processing degrades resolution and causes a delay in the viewfinder... [SNIP] ...Sony in a remarkable sign of restraint are promoting the interlace XDCAM HD f350 as a progressive recording camera, rather than as a 'progressive camcorder'.
However Panasonic are calling the interlace CCD '200' a progressive camcorder.
They are redefining the term progressive.
So now one needs to ask if the camera they are using is a 'true progressive scanning camera'. "


They seem pretty confident about all this. Is it true? Do you agree Panny are redefining 'Progressive'? and is the chip really an interlaced one?

Hoping for good natured discussion,
-Chimpan A
 
According to all the specs i've seen the chip is native progressive 60P. It's very easy to get 60I from that too.
 
Jan has stated that it's a true progressive chip. That being said, all of these camereas are complex beasts with a lot of sophisticated digital signal processing. The only thing that really matters is what the final footage looks like. Getting too hung up on the specs is more philosophy than cinematography.
 
Interesting... it sure LOOKS progressive. I know that similar magazines are often full of wrong information.

However, though not wanting to spread FUD, didn't the ReelStream post some channel extractions or something that they claimed showed interlace artifacts?

But really... With all the deep scrutiny of noise, resolution, and everythingelse about the HVX image, if it was not at least completely indistinguishable from progressive, then we'd have heard about it in an all-caps thread title.

Is the article on-line?
 
Interlace or Progressive , I am one of a very few who got to see the HVX200 on the big screen. It didn't one tiny micro bit look like an interlace ccd made into a progressive image.

That being said, if the HVX200 was interlace, I could care less. Because if that is how well a 1/3 ccd ( around 6mm in size image - take that into a account ) Blown up to a 33 foot screen and looked absolutely stunning with gorgeous colors can look, then it does not matter if the HVX200 uses rat eyeball's for sensors to me.

Image is Paramount... I could care less how it's derived in the HVX200.

The facts are simple.

The HVX200 works! It delivers one hell of an image, it's been proven, and I saw it with my own eyes blown up 33 feet wide!


Michael Pappas




Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
 
Yeah, they're dead wrong. The Panasonic HVX is a progressive-only camera. It creates its interlaced signal by slicing up two progressive-capture frames.
 
... However Panasonic are calling the interlace CCD '200' a progressive camcorder.
They are redefining the term progressive.
So now one needs to ask if the camera they are using is a 'true progressive scanning camera'.
Click to expand...

It appears that the Magazine writer is assuming that because Sony uses a 960x540 interlaced CCD, Panasonic must be using the same CCD. This is just not true. JVC is using a progressive CCD and it's 1280x720. Panasonic has made it clear that they are NOT using Sony's Z1 CCD and that their CCD is a true progressive.


Bob Diaz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top