Barry_Green
Moderator
Yes, that's about the same, and the side-by-side pics bear it out.
Breaking News: Sony HVR V1U (USA model) progressive mode is also affected!
- Thread starter digiteye
- Start date
Jason Rodriguez
Well-known member
I'm looking at those pics, and while I can't say for certain what the issue is, it seems to me that the progressive images (at least in the case of the workshop images that were posted) have a lot more fine detail that is being mushed by the MPEG encoder, where-as the interlaced images are naturally softer, so there's less detail to deal with, and the MPEG encoder is not exhibiting mosquito noise, etc.
Of course did someone say that even the HDMI output are exhibiting the same issues? If so, then I guess this isn't the same thing that I'm thinking about.
But to me this "paint" effect, at least on the edges, looks like noise reduction on mosquito noise that an MPEG encoder (or any DCT algorithm) would exhibit on hard-to-encode areas, not sensor-noise from the CMOS itself. Also there could be some interpolation issues in creating a normal image from the diagonal pixel pattern of the sensors that is creating false detail patterns that are creating too much pixel-to-pixel variations which again would "break" the MPEG encoder, or at least cause excessive mosquito noise issues (and the DSP might be trying to run noise reduction on that stuff).
I'm not sure if I would call that a "defect" per-se, just might be a limitation of the way they implemented the technology in the camera. In this case their diagonal interpolation scheme might be creating fine pixel-to-pixel variations in edges and other high-detail areas that is creating to much "detail" for the MPEG encoder to handle, or is creating false noise patterns that is causing the DSP to run noise reduction on those areas when it doesn't need to.
Of course did someone say that even the HDMI output are exhibiting the same issues? If so, then I guess this isn't the same thing that I'm thinking about.
But to me this "paint" effect, at least on the edges, looks like noise reduction on mosquito noise that an MPEG encoder (or any DCT algorithm) would exhibit on hard-to-encode areas, not sensor-noise from the CMOS itself. Also there could be some interpolation issues in creating a normal image from the diagonal pixel pattern of the sensors that is creating false detail patterns that are creating too much pixel-to-pixel variations which again would "break" the MPEG encoder, or at least cause excessive mosquito noise issues (and the DSP might be trying to run noise reduction on that stuff).
I'm not sure if I would call that a "defect" per-se, just might be a limitation of the way they implemented the technology in the camera. In this case their diagonal interpolation scheme might be creating fine pixel-to-pixel variations in edges and other high-detail areas that is creating to much "detail" for the MPEG encoder to handle, or is creating false noise patterns that is causing the DSP to run noise reduction on those areas when it doesn't need to.
Jason Rodriguez
Well-known member
Actually, to see if the above is true, I would try to defocus an image and see if you still see the same artifacting, or if the artifacting is only in areas of high frequency detail or edges.
In other words, shoot a scene out of focus, and slowly roll it into focus . . . check and see at what point the "paint" affect starts and on what type of detail it starts showing first. Maybe even shoot a scene that would have one item in focus at one point and another item out of focus (so rack focus), so you can see if the "paint" effect is removed from an object as it gets softer.
Just some ideas to see if the above theory about too much false high frequency detail from either interpolation or the MPEG encoder getting overloaded is true.
In other words, shoot a scene out of focus, and slowly roll it into focus . . . check and see at what point the "paint" affect starts and on what type of detail it starts showing first. Maybe even shoot a scene that would have one item in focus at one point and another item out of focus (so rack focus), so you can see if the "paint" effect is removed from an object as it gets softer.
Just some ideas to see if the above theory about too much false high frequency detail from either interpolation or the MPEG encoder getting overloaded is true.
xray
Well-known member
John Trent said:
Tom Roper spend some more hours doing tests, and these are the results:
Updated Tests: (01/01/2007) XHA1, 60i and 30F
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
XH-A1 60i: (01/01/2007)
824.3 Lines Horizontal (MTF50); 810 Lines Horizontal = Limit@Nyquist
674.8 Lines Vertical (MTF50)
XH-A1 30F: (01/01/2007)
823.6 Lines Horizontal (MTF50); 810 Lines Horizontal = Limit@Nyquist
592.2 Lines Vertical (MTF50)
Previous Reported Result for XH-A1 24F:
810 Lines Horizontal (Limit@Nyquist)
590.4 Lines Vertical (MTF50)
Last edited:
Simon Wyndham
Well-known member
It did surprise me actually that the US V1 was said not to suffer from the issue. When I originally discovered the problem a lot of people couldn't see the problem, Steve Mullen included, until it was really pointed out as being rather more than just being 'a bit softer'. I was assured that the issue had been taken care of. I can tell you that Sony did take the issue very seriously. But perhaps the problem is too far entrenched in the hardware that it is unfixable. This would be a great shame as it is a fantastic little camera in all other respects.