First shoot with HVX?

Barry_Green said:
Where are you seeing "1080i/25" as proper terminology? All the manufacturers are using 1080/50i as far as I know...
Click to expand...
That (1080i/25) is as now defined by the EBU, and I'd understood the American Standards bodies were going the same way - the reasoning being that the second number then ALWAYS refers to the frame rate, rather than frame rate if progressive, field rate if interlace. I've increasingly seen the notation being used by many manufacturers, certainly not just Avid.

See http://www.ebu.ch/en/technical/trev/trev_home.html , then follow the link to "HDTV in Europe", then "Editorial: HDTV format wars - Philip Laven". (There's a lot of interesting stuff in the other articles there, albeit from a European perspective.)

Quote: "N.B. The convention used to describe TV formats is the “number of active lines per frame” + the "scanning algorithm” [interlace(i) or progressive (p)] / the “frame rate”. Current and near-future scanning formats include 576i/25, 720p/50, 1080i/25, 1080p/25 and 1080p/50."
 
It may not have been so important when all there was to worry about was "i" or "p", and field for "i", frame for "p" was not too difficult. But the importance of "psf" as a third reference meant that the frame/field ambiguity needed clarifying and hence the decision to standardise on the second number always referring to frames, never fields.
 
Wild. That's new I guess. All the manufacturers' spec sheets that I've seen specifically use 50i or 60i. Confusion appears inevitable. Hopefully interlaced will be exterminated soon and the whole issue will fade away! :)
 
I had this really stupid idea that when HD came out we would just worry about two numbers, 1080 and 720. And they should all be progressive. Im dumb though, i don't understand why we still need interlaced video anyways.
 
Your thoughts exactly mirror the EBU's. Unfortunately they can only advise as to what should be, they cannot enforce uniform standards.
 
There's fair unanimity (in Europe) that 1080p/50 is the ultimate goal when technology permits. That's likely to be relatively sooner for production than transmission for bandwidth reasons, and whether it may ever be TRANSMITTED I don't know - even when all production becomes 1080p/50.

The argument then is how best to get there. 1080p/25 (transmitted psf) is a good start for such as drama where the "flicker motion" is almost perceived as a good thing. Sport etc is where the debate is - 720p/50 or 1080i/25?

A progressive system is better in many ways, but given the eventual desire to move PRODUCTION to 1080p/50 there is an argument to standardise TRANSMISSION at 1080, period. For the foreseeable future that is likely to mean 1080i/25 for sport etc and 1080psf/25 for drama. The argument is given weight by manufacturers intentions to eventually move up to 1080 native resolution for screens.

If the choice was a simple 720p/50 or 1080i/25 one then I suspect 720 has a lot going for it. With 1080p/50 on the horizon, 1080i/25 in the meantime may make more sense - at least for sport etc.

At least over here we only have to worry about two frame rate numbers (25 and 50) rather than three (24, 30, 60)!
 
I think 720 should just be dropped, It seems like a middle ground that isn't needed. We could then have 1080, in 24p 25p, 50p and 60p. I think for sports 60p would be well suited dont you? I think 30p is also useless, but what do I know.

Actually now to think of it, everyone should just use either 25p or 24p. get rid of the europe/america thing. Maybe while we are at it, both of us can pick one side of the road to drive on and standardize that. Oh, and i think its time we finally give up the Imperial garbage and go metric.
 
puredv said:
I think for sports 60p would be well suited dont you?
Click to expand...
1080p/60 would be fantastic for sports, and well proofed for the future with higher res screens forecast. Unfortunately the kit barely exists to originate it (yet), and the bandwidth is barely there to distribute lower resolutions - hence the "which is the best PRACTICAL compromise" debates.

Nobody disputes the "progressive is better" view, and 1080 is better than 720 - unfortunately 1080p is currently unrealistic, except at 25/30 fps. Which aren't good for such as sport.
 
puredv said:
I think 30p is also useless, but what do I know.
Click to expand...

I use 30p quite a bit... from broadcast stuff that doesn't need to be fielded, to raw material for multimedia that will end up as QT's bigger than 320 by 480 (the best you can do with non-blended fields) to dome show venues (planetariums) that run multiple projector video on their domes at 30fps.

In fact, some of the better domes are equipped to handle true 60fps (a couple up to 90fps), and at resolutions far beyond HD. I just finished 4 minutes of animation for the upcoming 20min long "Black Holes: The Other Side of Infinity", narrated by Liam Neeson and produced by Tom Lucas Productions. All my work was required to be at 4k by 4k.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs
 
Of course you can google me Jan!:) Just type in my name..Gary Coleman. Thanks for clarifying everything..I feel much better now!
 
Need HVX camera operators late spring and summer

Need HVX camera operators late spring and summer

We are in pre-production on an indie feature action Western we will shoot at a replica frontier fort in Texas in late spring and at a remote Idaho ranch in late summer. We have been planning to use the new HVX200 camera for some time.

We are interested in employing those with early experience with the HVX200 camera. Our plan is to use two cameras for many shots and as many as four for master shots of a LIVE massive mounted attack of hundreds of Lakota warriors against a small force of defenders in a hayfield corral set in a frontier location.

We are looking for an experienced DP and other experienced operators.

Please let me know if you might have interest in this project.

You may send me a private message or use the e-mail forwarding.

Thanks,

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