First shoot with HVX?

stephenlnoe said:
Way back 10 pages ago this: http://toshpit.blogs.com/images/Car_headlights.tif was posted. Take a look at the files size of the frame grab. A measly 1.95 MB for an frame grab? All this conversation is about a screencap that isn't raw off the camera.

For example, here are two screencaps from a 720p timeline:
Uncompressed raw 720p
Uncompressed composite 720p

Either way the image file size size is 2.7 MB uncompressed per frame. The screencaps are sourced from a JVC HD-100. It makes me wonder what the source of the provided tiff image came from? It would be nice to have more info about how the editor captured the frame.

BTW: I invite you to zoom in on the screen caps down to the nitty gritty. They are VERY clean. A lot of people hack on HDV around here but you can't argue with results. JVC pulled a rabbit out of their hat with the ProHD codec.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you're talking about. The 16:9 corrected grab of the car is 2.78 MB, the same as your screen grab. You probably mean the uncorrected one. Well no wonder. The resolution is lower.
And obviously it's not raw from the camera. It's a composite! It still puzzles me why they didn't upload some raw grabs.
 
Look like your right Isaac. Looks like someones done a proper keying job this time. I still think the first pic looks pretty darn good!
 
Dmitry Kichenko said:
I have no idea what you're talking about. The 16:9 corrected grab of the car is 2.78 MB, the same as your screen grab. You probably mean the uncorrected one. Well no wonder. The resolution is lower.
And obviously it's not raw from the camera. It's a composite! It still puzzles me why they didn't upload some raw grabs.
Click to expand...

Clarification: The comment was on the original tif posted.

I'm wondering why they wouldn't link to some uncomposited screen grabs too.
 
All right. Now all we need to do is unite our efforts and post a lot of angry comments about the absence of raw screen grabs. :)

By the way, the girl's face looks kind of stupid now. Couldn't they pick a better frame to post? Doesn't exactly do actress justice.:)
I did save the original TIFF on the hard drive though. And it is 2.7 MB, 1280x720, 8bit. This one is of a lower resolution.

EDIT: This is kind of an odd shot now that I think about it.. Where exactly does the lighting come from that makes their faces so bright? The dashboard? I have checked the original TIFF file and that one looks correct in terms of lighting.
Yes, indeed, people are critical of others' work :). But I am just curious here.

YAEDIT: In case you need the original TIFF file for some reason and just to not let the original poster hide the original HD image in all its artifactful glory, here is the link:
http://rapidshare.de/files/8062604/Car_headlights_16x9.tif.html
 
<<This is kind of an odd shot now that I think about it.. Where exactly does the lighting come from that makes their faces so bright?The dashboard? >>

If you're hung up on motivational lighting it could come from oncoming headights or the more common dashboard lighting. The side light would make sense as moonlight.

On the other hand it can simply be seen as base light - the lack of which would make for a pretty lousy shot, therefore it simply is.

<<I have checked the original TIFF file and that one looks correct in terms of lighting.
Yes, indeed, people are critical of others' work :). But I am just curious here.>>

There is no such thing as "correct in terms of lighting", just like there is no such thing as correct in terms of which notes you use in music or which words you use in a script.

That's the great thing about creative..there are no rules or laws.
There was enough correct and incorrect in school.

Embrace the freedom
 
This image looks good to me. Dang, if it holds that quality with movement, I'll be happy. It is getting close to the Sin City thing they're shooting for. Also noted that the image looks dang clean. I wish they would include what processes were involved in this frame.

On a different note, I do agree it would be nice to see a raw non keyed image, or footage for that matter!



Steve
 
It absolutely, positively, unquestionably, now and forever and until the end of all time, without a doubt, in the first version, in every version ever made thereafter, WILL have 1080/24p and 1080/30p in the US version, and 1080/25p in the European/Australian version.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, but are you sure? He he.
 
Here's the HVX200's LCD showing it's selectable HD formats:

hvx200.18.jpg



Steve
 
Barry_Green said:
Yeah, anyone want to take a bet on how soon we get to see another frame grab? Sheesh.
Click to expand...

Now, imagine if it turned out that there were more orders than cameras available in the first round, anyone care to take a bet on who might be getting pushed to the bottom of that list?

If I were in their position, I might be more than a little interested in who gets the first of the newest product.
 
Hey, congrats on your new title! Well-deserved!

And, SteveT, thank you so much for posting that "Janglish" menu picture. Hopefully that will once and for all forever squash the "yeah, but will it *really* have 1080p" question! :)
 
Thanks Barry!

I've got my fingers crossed, but I believe I'm in the 70s on Rush's preorder HVX list.
As long as you get one first, I'll be happy!

Steve
 
khmuse said:
Now, imagine if it turned out that there were more orders than cameras available in the first round, anyone care to take a bet on who might be getting pushed to the bottom of that list?
Click to expand...

Hah! Well, I did recently e-mail Rush to see what position I held on the EVS list, as I joined up for the pre-order on the 2nd of August. If he comes back with # 8,834,332 or so I'll buy into your theory. :)

I strongly suspect that cash on hand matters more to the dealers than some strong opinions in a forum.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs
 
Jim Arthurs said:
I strongly suspect that cash on hand matters more to the dealers than some strong opinions in a forum.
Click to expand...

Which makes me wonder how the preorder list will be handled?

Do they make a phone call, no answer, maybe only answering machine.
Do they go to the next person in the list or give that person they called at least ONE day to respond to the message... hmmm. I'm not sure how one would handle this?

What happens if that person says "Hey bro, I can pay you next Tuesday!".

I'm with Jim on this, "money talks"

Thank you,
Steve
 
Barry_Green said:
Yeah, anyone want to take a bet on how soon we get to see another frame grab? Sheesh.
Click to expand...

Well, because of the debate, whenever the next still comes, I bet it will be a useful example of some HVX function or quality, and well thought out in the selection.

I'm not hurting the feelings of friends here, but trying to make some judgements on an impending non-trivial purchase that up until yesterday was completely sight-unseen in its abilities to the masses (i.e. those not able to attend a "RezFest").

Barry, did you think that was a great first selection for the flagship on-line image from the HVX? Or second, third or fourth choice?

Okay, I'm letting it go, won't touch the thread again... breathing deep, in, out...

Regards,

Jim Arthurs
 
Barry_Green said:
...Hopefully that will once and for all forever squash the "yeah, but will it *really* have 1080p" question! :)
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it's not 1080p and it is 1080i 30P in the same way the DVC30 gives you progressive (Frame mode). The computer will understand it as progressive but it uses the frame mode with an interlaced origin.

Let's wait and see, but that is my understanding of the 1080i 30p mode.
 
Jim Arthurs said:
Barry, did you think that was a great first selection for the flagship on-line image from the HVX? Or second, third or fourth choice?
Click to expand...
This is not the image I would have released if I was in charge of it, no. That's not to say it's good or bad, but it just isn't the type of thing I would have done. I would set up some 35mm movie-looking set, if at all possible, and shoot in 1080p, and I would release unmodified/untouched footage. That's what we did with the HD100/mini35 shoot (which was not my shoot, it was Charles Papert's and Nate Weaver's primarily) but that's the way I would have done it if I'd been the guy shooting the first footage. And that's exactly what I will do with it when I first get it.

I don't really get the fascination with screen grabs anyway. If it was a digital still camera, then sure. But since it's a motion picture camera, I want to see some clips in motion! With the JVC, we put unmodified raw .m2t transport streams up on the web. With the HVX I'm not sure exactly what will make sense, as its files will be 5x as big(!), but I'd post at least a high-quality WMV-HD file.
 
stephenlnoe said:
I'm pretty sure it's not 1080p and it is 1080i 30P in the same way the DVC30 gives you progressive (Frame mode). The computer will understand it as progressive but it uses the frame mode with an interlaced origin.

Let's wait and see, but that is my understanding of the 1080i 30p mode.
Click to expand...
Absolutely not. The chip is pure straight raw progressive, that's one thing they've definitely confirmed. Frame Mode is a pseudo progressive that's created from an interlaced chip.

The reason it says "1080i/30p" is because the recording is an interlaced stream, but it's recording pure genuine progressive within that stream.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top