Comparison footage of four cams

sani, i don´t want to be a smart ass, but i also have pre-orders for HD hotelvideos (and those are very small hotels). nobody orders SD anymore. not even in austria, where the ORF officially stated they won´t broadcast HD before 2015 earliest. they don´t want a 250.000 HDCam production, but if i can give them a HD-film for the same budget than they needed for a DigiBeta production then nobody will want SD anymore. of course you will distribute at SD first, but things will change. and even if they don´t want HD i can give then 4:2:2 DVCpro50 with the HVX. something HDV can´t do. 4:2:2 definitely shows even in 1/3´´ cams.

I also have to stress more than Jan did: you can not create the same variable framerates in post. yes Liquid and FCP and several plugins like Twixtor in AFX and others in Fusion etc can create stunning slomos and fastmotions. but it will never look as smooth and it loses resolution and that doesn´t even account for the time needed to create it, mask off the background etc.

Jan sounds very confident about the superiority of DVCProHD and from what i read in the web (not only here) about HDV she has all reason to be. if the HVX will deliver is one question, but HDV absolutely is not versatile and robust enough to be used professionally IMO. but it would be good enough for a hotelvideo (as long as i don´t film into the pool´s ripples or a closeup of food in a wok being stirred).
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
SJUSER wrote: to get professional "variable framerates" you start with Varicam and finish with Arri D20.
HVX200 needs advertising that's the reason that you get leftovers of "variable framerates".

Ahh, but the variable frame rates that you get with the HVX are actually the ones that are used most often on the Varicam, 12,18,22,26,30,32,36,48,60. And in watching the footage that Barry and Jay Nemeth shot, doggone convincing.

>All you can get also with other low HD cams in post.

This is where you are totally mislead. Not to be confrontational but rather to clarify. The primary differenence between the HVX and the others is that this one is based on DVCPRO HD which is a frame independent resolution algorithm and the others are based on HDV. DVCPRO HD was designed for HD production. HDV was initially designed as a broadcast transport stream and then moved into a consumer camera. Completely different set of expectations. Withe DVCPRO what you see through the viewfinder is what you get on the recording. Not so with HDV, especially if there is a lot of motion and detail.

>Everything is about the money, if I would like to spent 10 000 to 15 000 €/$ for the cam than I will go in the next class of 2/3" inch cams like AJ-HDX400.

Well the HDX400 in the US is $32,000, so while it is a next class up, it is a significant budget class up.

>Don't forget that are all 1/3" cams and all limitation of that, fast movement, less sensitivity, a low dynamic range od CCDs etc...

Then you really didn't play with the HVX, the dynamic range is better than the DVX, fast motion doesn't bother it or the algorithm at all and the minimum illumination is 3 lux, all of this is a class above the HDV cameras.

Best regards,

Jan
Click to expand...
Jan,
I would have the two important questions for Panasonic about HVX200:

1. What is a size of HVX200 CCD(s) or technicaly give us Active sensor pixels size of HVX200? Please in answer not a story about 1080P etc...

2. The speed footage by Patrick Kerby, Barry and Co. is 59.94, I confirmed to 24 FPS in Cinema Tools, than I have got a stutter slow motion. Why?

Variable frame rate and I am screwed/limited in the post?

Sorry I must clear some things about the cam before my purchase decision. That should be normal way.

Regards

SJUSER
---------------
http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
Nullpoint exception error is a Java programming error. Try a different client... such as BitTorrent propper, or BitTornado
 
SJUSER said:
2. The speed footage by Patrick Kerby, Barry and Co. is 59.94, I confirmed to 24 FPS in Cinema Tools, than I have got a stutter slow motion. Why?
Click to expand...

I also tried that - conformed to 24P in CinemaTools and it got a stutter.

I checked the original footage (kung fu) and noticed it doesn't have 60 unique frames in a second, it just has double or triple frames.

So I guess it's 720/24P over 60, not variable-frame-rated ??

Barry, can you clarify?
 
saru said:
I also tried that - conformed to 24P in CinemaTools and it got a stutter.

I checked the original footage (kung fu) and noticed it doesn't have 60 unique frames in a second, it just has double or triple frames.

So I guess it's 720/24P over 60, not variable-frame-rated ??

Barry, can you clarify?
Click to expand...

Unless my memory doesn't serve me correctly, if you don't capture correctly (use the correct pull down) you won't get the correct frame-rate. For instance 24Padvanced useses 2:3:3:2 I think or the other way around to pull from a 60 source. Either way, I know DV, and I'm pretty sure DV CAM both only record at 60, and then any variable frame-rate is taken from that. So as long as you use the pull-down correct for your frame-rate, I don't see how that makes it any less variable, it's just buffered by extra frames here and there for the purposes of encoding.
 
alpi69 said:
sani, i don´t want to be a smart ass, but i also have pre-orders for HD hotelvideos (and those are very small hotels). nobody orders SD anymore. not even in austria, where the ORF officially stated they won´t broadcast HD before 2015 earliest. they don´t want a 250.000 HDCam production, but if i can give them a HD-film for the same budget than they needed for a DigiBeta production then nobody will want SD anymore. of course you will distribute at SD first, but things will change. and even if they don´t want HD i can give then 4:2:2 DVCpro50 with the HVX. something HDV can´t do. 4:2:2 definitely shows even in 1/3´´ cams.

I also have to stress more than Jan did: you can not create the same variable framerates in post. yes Liquid and FCP and several plugins like Twixtor in AFX and others in Fusion etc can create stunning slomos and fastmotions. but it will never look as smooth and it loses resolution and that doesn´t even account for the time needed to create it, mask off the background etc.

Jan sounds very confident about the superiority of DVCProHD and from what i read in the web (not only here) about HDV she has all reason to be. if the HVX will deliver is one question, but HDV absolutely is not versatile and robust enough to be used professionally IMO. but it would be good enough for a hotelvideo (as long as i don´t film into the pool´s ripples or a closeup of food in a wok being stirred).
Click to expand...
alpi69

Common people are still confusing and mixing 16:9 with HD.
Austia is in some parts fast but in another is very slow as you mentioned ORF etc.
HDV vs DVCPRO HD I am not so sure about superiority of HVDCPRO... Sony XDCAM, JVC and Thompson already announced and making 2/3" inch cams using MPEG 2 compression but with a higher rates from like from 30, 40 or 50Mbps to up.

Actually the two main competitors Sony and Panasonic want to establish the next two alternatives to tape XDCAM and P2. So it's up to you which "mythology" you like, trust and follow. For example I want to have a low budget camcorder that cost not more than 5000 €/$. The rest of the money I am spending on camera accessories. I do not need format "mythology". If I would care about that I am going to loook for ARRI D20, easy of use, to trust and great performance, top high end HD and more quality. Should be available next year for sale.

SJUSER
------------
http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
SJUSER said:
2. The speed footage by Patrick Kerby, Barry and Co. is 59.94, I confirmed to 24 FPS in Cinema Tools, than I have got a stutter slow motion. Why?
Click to expand...

The original camera footage was 24fps recorded over 60 (59.94), meaning there are only 24 unique frames out of the 60 frames... the rest are padding. At the time of original capture that information is available in the clips via "flagged frames"'; info on which frames are unique. You COULD choose to edit the footage on a 23.98 timeline, and the padded duplicate frames would be discarded. However...

...The footage was posted and output on a 59.94 timeline most likely, with no attempt to remove the duplicate frames. The output was a QT movie that retains no information about what frames are unique. There is now no automatic way to remove the duplicate frames.

Having said that, the failure of Cinema Tools is that CT is expecting some sort of conventional 3:2 pulldown on 29.97 footage and it simply isn't there.

I hope that helps, and Jarred/Barry, if I've mis-represented the workflow please correct, as I'm not a FC guy.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs
 
saru said:
I also tried that - conformed to 24P in CinemaTools and it got a stutter.

I checked the original footage (kung fu) and noticed it doesn't have 60 unique frames in a second, it just has double or triple frames.

So I guess it's 720/24P over 60, not variable-frame-rated ??

Barry, can you clarify?
Click to expand...
I don't know how that H264 was created. I would say this: JUDGE NOTHING BASED ON THE H264! The footage here is pristine and gorgeous and stunning. It works exactly like you'd expect it to. It works the way you want it to.

The footage we edited was on a 24p timeline, and playback is done at a 24p frame rate. How that got translated into a 60p H264 is a wild question mark; I didn't do the output on that. Maybe next week when I get back I can try to piece together something from the raw footage, but I'm handicapped on that in that Vegas may or may not let me access the footage reliably; I'll have to see if the DVFilm Maker software will do the extraction or not.

But seriously, let's not have a round of FUD here -- the HVX's variable frame rates are the real deal and they work exactly how you'd expect, and exactly how you'd want.
 
Jim Arthurs said:
...The footage was posted and output on a 59.94 timeline most likely
Click to expand...
The footage was posted on a 24p timeline. I guess he output it as a 59.94 file, which means that it's the H264 process that introduced the duplicate frames. That would have been a mistake. It should have been posted as a 24fps .MOV.

So any oddness you guys are seeing is due to posting the file incorrectly, not to do with how the footage was shot or edited -- the tape output looks brilliant.
 
Barry_Green said:
The footage was posted on a 24p timeline. I guess he output it as a 59.94 file, which means that it's the H264 process that introduced the duplicate frames. That would have been a mistake. It should have been posted as a 24fps .MOV.

So any oddness you guys are seeing is due to posting the file incorrectly, not to do with how the footage was shot or edited -- the tape output looks brilliant.
Click to expand...
I did correction in FCP 5 timeline about my 720p_test_24FPS and to exchange HVX200 file with two "original" H264 (24p or 59.94???). So I exported and now HVX200 should look much better but not a perfect. I still think that people will have a big mess with all that variable frame rates in their post or to choose a right workflow. Panasonic should give explaination about working with every main NLE carefully. By may point of view the picture quality is still below Canon XL H1. Sony is in third place behind Panasonic and JVC is still the last and worst, chromatic aberration and 720/24p NLE workflow mess. Hopefully Panasonic should avoid this kind of workflow mess with the variable frame rates as we discovered here by the chance.

Download at

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_3Cams_1080p.html


SJUSER
-----------
http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
I can't comment on the variable frame-rates (without playing with footage myself), but i have used varicam a lot and it generally comes down to the way the footage is captured (usually we have used a dedicated HD that captures native frame rate and outputs to whatever). With the advent of firewire transfers in these new HD cameras, I'm guessing things will be far simpler (and just an issue of how your NLE is set up). If the HVX is running the same variable frame rate system as varicam (obviously reduced presets), then the slowmo's should be very very nice. The great thing about shooting in 60fps progressive, is that you can then twixtor your footage to get the equivalent of shooting at 120fps (and it looks a million times better than similar stuff shot at 24, 25 or 30 fps and twixtored, as you've got more REAL frames to start with).

Biggest comment I want to make, coming from a VFX point of view, .....HDV is NASTY!!! ...you only have to try keying it or doing some serious colour correction with HDV to see how it falls apart. It lgenerally looks good out of the camera, but yeah, once you start to mess with it, ...man, its horrible, ...I spent the first half of this year working on a BBC co-pro that was shot on Varicams using DVCPRO HD, it was a solid format and worked well with our FX and editing workflow (it was a heavy fx laden show with a very punishing turn-around). Basically there is no comparison when you look at those two formats, DVCPRO HD is hands down better than HDV, and I can tell you that from personal experience, ....also a quick search of the net should make that obvious. Thats not saying that there aren't some really nice HDV cameras being made, ....some of them have some great features and handle really nicely, ....but the bottom line is whats the point in having great optics if you're recording medium is rubbish (....no point in having fujinon lenses if you're recording vhs really is there?). Sorry, am passionately opposed to HDV from the pain of past experiences in post.
 
cavekid said:
I can't comment on the variable frame-rates (without playing with footage myself), but i have used varicam a lot and it generally comes down to the way the footage is captured (usually we have used a dedicated HD that captures native frame rate and outputs to whatever). With the advent of firewire transfers in these new HD cameras, I'm guessing things will be far simpler (and just an issue of how your NLE is set up). If the HVX is running the same variable frame rate system as varicam (obviously reduced presets), then the slowmo's should be very very nice. The great thing about shooting in 60fps progressive, is that you can then twixtor your footage to get the equivalent of shooting at 120fps (and it looks a million times better than similar stuff shot at 24, 25 or 30 fps and twixtored, as you've got more REAL frames to start with).

Biggest comment I want to make, coming from a VFX point of view, .....HDV is NASTY!!! ...you only have to try keying it or doing some serious colour correction with HDV to see how it falls apart. It lgenerally looks good out of the camera, but yeah, once you start to mess with it, ...man, its horrible, ...I spent the first half of this year working on a BBC co-pro that was shot on Varicams using DVCPRO HD, it was a solid format and worked well with our FX and editing workflow (it was a heavy fx laden show with a very punishing turn-around). Basically there is no comparison when you look at those two formats, DVCPRO HD is hands down better than HDV, and I can tell you that from personal experience, ....also a quick search of the net should make that obvious. Thats not saying that there aren't some really nice HDV cameras being made, ....some of them have some great features and handle really nicely, ....but the bottom line is whats the point in having great optics if you're recording medium is rubbish (....no point in having fujinon lenses if you're recording vhs really is there?). Sorry, am passionately opposed to HDV from the pain of past experiences in post.
Click to expand...
To get the best from all these cams is to skip cam native compression format. I know HDV is horrible because is only 4:2:0 color sampling that from the tape but when you capture like uncompressed directly like RAW image using for example Sony FX1/Z1 component out connected to AJA HD10 A/D converter HD-SDi or Canon has already built in HD-SDI ouput you get 8 bit 4:2:2 uncompressed that is as we all know much better than DVCPRO HD. So with that ouput you feed for example your hired Sony HDWS280 HDCAM Half-Rack Recorder for mobile and field applications. Now you are in HDCAM compression that is a big step. Also to edit you can rent Sony HDWF500 HDCAM Studio VTR or Sony SRW5500 HDCAM SR/HDCAM dual format recorder deck. You are almost in Hollywood digital quality. George Lucas started Star Wars with HDCAM. By the way about Sony Z/1 and HDCAM watch and listen Emmy Awarded Jody Eldred at
http://www.cyndigreening.com/more/SonyHVRZ1-LG.mov

But also HVX200 has a big chance to improve that kind of high end HD workflow. We wait and see.

SJUSER
_____________

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
SJUSER said:
Jan,
I would have the two important questions for Panasonic about HVX200:

1. What is a size of HVX200 CCD(s) or technicaly give us Active sensor pixels size of HVX200? Please in answer not a story about 1080P etc...

2. The speed footage by Patrick Kerby, Barry and Co. is 59.94, I confirmed to 24 FPS in Cinema Tools, than I have got a stutter slow motion. Why?

Variable frame rate and I am screwed/limited in the post?

Sorry I must clear some things about the cam before my purchase decision. That should be normal way.

Regards

SJUSER
---------------
http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
Click to expand...
Jan,

I am not sure that I will get the answer on my question to Panasonic that was
"1. What is a size of HVX200 CCD(s) or technically give us 'Active sensor pixels'** of HVX200?".

**The formulation 'Active sensor pixels' I found at ARRI D20 site (http://www.arri.de/prod/cam/d_20/tech_spec.htm)
that is written from the honest German's engineers and like a camera makers I trust them the most. It's about the World famous German engineering quality. No bluffing the customers.

Why no any Panasonic answer on that question? I don't know?

Is Panasonic HIDING that from the customers?

I am not only one who asked for that.

Let me quote also from "Reader Reports from DV Expo West" a guy Brian W. whom I found report at Mike Curtis"s HD for Indies:
"I asked two reps what the true native resolution was (960X1080? 1280X1080? 1440X1080?) and they both said 'I don't know.' "
Reader Reports from DV Expo West at

http://www.hdforindies.com/

Also I collected Jan's discussion about the similar topic from another forum and you can find the excerpts at

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_1080pCCD.html

Or I could conclude like Graeme Nattress that "Native CCD resolution is irrelevant."!!!

I am sure that picture quality of HVX200 is very good or even excellent but me like one of the future HVX200 customers would like to know everything before I buy the cam. Naturally.
At the end I would like to add that I am not against Panasonic and that I owe a beautiful Panasonic plasma display TH-42PWD6, two DVD players that one is a combo that dubbing VHS to DVD (DMR-E75V) and I just ordered Panasonic 7" inch wide LCD color monitor TC-7WMS1 that I am going to use with Micro 35mm lens adapter to control focus and flip picture upside down. Hopefully this lens adapter kit that consists Vocas Matte Box, Chroziel Follow Focus, set of Nikon Prime Lenses, Panasonic 7" cam LCD will finished attached on HVX200 sometimes next year.

Regards


P.S. 25 people downloaded the huge and renewed (232 MB) camcorder's comparison file until today at
ftp://84.112.86.213/Library/FTPServer/FTPRoot/Movies/720p_test_24FPS.mov

SJUSER
------------------
http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
SJUSER said:
Canon has already built in HD-SDI ouput you get 8 bit 4:2:2 uncompressed that is as we all know much better than DVCPRO HD.
Click to expand...
This is a mixed-metaphor statement. HD-SDI is not a recording format, so comparing it to DVCPRO-HD is completely illogical. You'll still need to record that HD-SDI on something; when Canon was shooting their big-bucks "watchmaker" footage, what did they choose to record it on? DVCPRO-HD.

Kind of silly, actually, to use a $9,000 camera to pipe a signal to a $30,000 deck to end up with the same format they could have gotten from a $6,000 camera and a $650 card... and around two more stops of latitude and a bit less noise, while they were at it... :thumbsup:
 
SJUSER said:
Jan,

I am not sure that I will get the answer on my question to Panasonic that was
"1. What is a size of HVX200 CCD(s) or technically give us 'Active sensor pixels'** of HVX200?".
Click to expand...
You will not get that answer. Panasonic has made a conscious decision to keep their proprietary information proprietary. You might as well go ask Canon how they're creating their "24f" footage -- you'll get the same answer, which is "we're not saying."
 
Barry_Green said:
This is a mixed-metaphor statement. HD-SDI is not a recording format, so comparing it to DVCPRO-HD is completely illogical. You'll still need to record that HD-SDI on something; when Canon was shooting their big-bucks "watchmaker" footage, what did they choose to record it on? DVCPRO-HD.

Kind of silly, actually, to use a $9,000 camera to pipe a signal to a $30,000 deck to end up with the same format they could have gotten from a $6,000 camera and a $650 card... and around two more stops of latitude and a bit less noise, while they were at it... :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
Barry,

I did not say that HD-SDI is recording format anywhere, I wrote that 8 bit 4:2:2 uncompressed is logically better than DVCPRO HD just it is UNCOMPRESSED format. That is also one of the reason why HVX200 has component out that if somebody would like that option or to convert digital to analog and than again analog to digital. That's the ONLY way if somebody would like to achieve the best picture quality from the cam.
By the way of proven HDV to HDCAM WORKFLOW read this article at (and of course from Sony site)
"Van Cliburn Piano Competition hits the right production notes with combination of Sony HDV and HDCAM technology" at
http://pro.sony.com.hk/news_showlist.php?id=3881

SJUSER
--------------
http://www.sanjinjukic.com/index_panasonicHD_P2.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top