Full Res Andromeda Frame Grabs

cardmaverick

cardmaverick

Well-known member
Hi,

I recently bought an Andromeda DVX100. Here are two frame grabs from my first studio shoot using the camera. I'm extremely pleased with the cameras performance:Drogar-Evil(DBG):

I'm not posting this particular clip because I didn't have a nice fluid head tripod, so the shot is a bit on the "light weight" shaky side if you know what I mean. It just didn't have the heavy camera movement feel I wanted, so I re-shot it using a nice Vinten I had on loan. I'm working on exporting those clips.

Enjoy.

EDIT:

OK.... here it is. This is the original clip, I need a better tripod though, all I had was this lightweight Bogen that is actually meant for SLR's, so no tension controls, but all in all, its still a very nice demo. NOTE: I cropped the original frame using a letterbox, its actually 16:9 and it's not the highest resolution the camera can have at 10 bit either.

Here it is, 20 MB

http://www.chrisnuzzaco.com/special_uploads/nautica1.mov

Enjoy!

nautica1.jpg


nautica2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Looking nice Chris! How do you find the andromeda, what about compared to the HVX200, the res and dynamic range. How are you finding the workflow of the andromeda?
 
tatsuo said:
Looking nice Chris! How do you find the andromeda, what about compared to the HVX200, the res and dynamic range. How are you finding the workflow of the andromeda?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the compliment. I think it kills the HVX200 all across the board, and I've worked a lot with that camera. I also think it kills the Varicam, just the sheer amount of data being pumped out, it makes up for the lens. The workflow I'm still learning, very much like film though.
 
By the way, I'll be giving a lecture in Baltimore June 28th at the Cinema Lounge, I might discuss the lighting used for this shot, as well as a VERY complex hallway shot I did for a pilot TV show. Hope to see you there!

For more info on Cinema Lounge:

http://www.myspace.com/cinemalounge
 
tatsuo said:
Hey how much did you pay for your Andromeda?
Click to expand...

Thats a somewhat complex question, depends on what you get for recording. I got a used unit for $3600 but also payed about $1000 for the mini, $300 for the touchscreen, and I still need to get a firewire powered drive, plus some other things like Anton Bauer batteries, as I'm constructing a dock able hand held camera, so it's looking like about 6K or so, but it all depends on how you approach it too.
 
Chris,

We should get together and talk. I'm looking at the Hydra for my HVX, and would LOVE to have it mobile like that.

Nice images.
 
Andromeda captures close to the 720p file size. How are you approaching dealing with uprez to 1080p for mastering (if requested by say a client)? There are many options available with varying results. I am curious of your view, observing that you analyse post very thoroughly.

Very inspiring images, as usual Chris. :thumbup:
 
Christopher Barry said:
Andromeda captures close to the 720p file size. How are you approaching dealing with uprez to 1080p for mastering (if requested by say a client)? There are many options available with varying results. I am curious of your view, observing that you analyse post very thoroughly.

Very inspiring images, as usual Chris. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

Thanks,

On the topic of upresing, well its a trick thats for sure.

I just upres in After Effects. The results look good to me. One thing you need to keep in mind when upressing footage isn't necessarily the original resolution of the footage, but rather the current quality of the footage. If you shoot with the best andromeda settings, you basically have a grain free image (depending on how extreme you go on the post processing of course). Since you're not dealing with compression like DV or DVCPROHD, you quickly find that the footage DOESN'T macro block. It's more like a very fine grain, so when you upres, its much more easily handled, as opposed to the ever growing macro blocks of DV...

As for the 720p file size, thats not quite right..

It's actually closer to 1080, I choose to render my footage out at 720p using square pixels. You can get like 980 some odd lines with NTSC pixels, but I just choose to go 1k, as this is only hitting the web, so gigantic frame sizes aren't always feasible for lots of users, most of America is still on dial up if I remember right...

Ok, Matthew Bennet shot this, at only 8 bit if I remember correctly:

http://www.chrisnuzzaco.com/special_uploads/eye.jpg

Here it is upresed to 1080 in AE, not that the aspect changed, this is because I decided to fill out the edges, the original file is not 16:9

http://www.chrisnuzzaco.com/special_uploads/upreseye.jpg

Now thats pretty good! Better than HVX at 1080 in my opinion.

As for clients, well, I'm not gonna lie, I'm going to actually show them what it looks like, if they wanna fork out the extra money for a Red One rental, I'll be more than happy to shoot with that instead :Drogar-Evil(DBG):

Hope that helps!
 
Thanks for the correction Chris. I was under the misconception that Andromeda output was just a little larger than 720p on acquisition. I will have to look into the exact maximum frame dimensions Andromeda extracts.

I agree about the uprez of clean footage compared to compressed, and indeed, I would prefer the Andromeda footage over the HVX 1080p, especially the low light footage I am wanting to shoot under the 30-40 IRE range, macroblocking, though not as bad as HVX 720p. That Andromeda 720p to 1080p uprez looks fine to me.

Adaptation to a portable rig setup is something to work out, as you are, and I have found that I want to go from HVX/DV Rack to HVX/BT-LH80 monitor (when released)/16gig cards. Studio wise, DV Rack can work, out and about, I find too much equipment, slows me down as a one man band.

I note in another thread, if I understood correctly, you had a theory that the DVX Andromeda may possibly end up yielding a better image than a HVX Hydra, based on some observation you had regarding the different sensor size/design of the DVX and HVX chips? Whilst we have to wait and see some Hydra sample frames and footage, I would be pleased if your would briefly explain further your theory and observations regarding design specifications you researched?

Looks like you and Matthew have a nice cost effective Viper-mini happening.
 
Christopher Barry said:
Thanks for the correction Chris. I was under the misconception that Andromeda output was just a little larger than 720p on acquisition. I will have to look into the exact maximum frame dimensions Andromeda extracts.

I agree about the uprez of clean footage compared to compressed, and indeed, I would prefer the Andromeda footage over the HVX 1080p, especially the low light footage I am wanting to shoot under the 30-40 IRE range, macroblocking, though not as bad as HVX 720p. That Andromeda 720p to 1080p uprez looks fine to me.

Adaptation to a portable rig setup is something to work out, as you are, and I have found that I want to go from HVX/DV Rack to HVX/BT-LH80 monitor (when released)/16gig cards. Studio wise, DV Rack can work, out and about, I find too much equipment, slows me down as a one man band.

I note in another thread, if I understood correctly, you had a theory that the DVX Andromeda may possibly end up yielding a better image than a HVX Hydra, based on some observation you had regarding the different sensor size/design of the DVX and HVX chips? Whilst we have to wait and see some Hydra sample frames and footage, I would be pleased if your would briefly explain further your theory and observations regarding design specifications you researched?

Looks like you and Matthew have a nice cost effective Viper-mini happening.
Click to expand...

A very important thing I should mention, the LUT I use comes in around ISO 160 if you peg 18% gray at around 50 IRE. Now, the DVX 100 going to tape, is usually rated at ISO 320 putting 18% gray at around 50 IRE. I think the DVX is noisy because there defiantly seems to be some sort of brightening of the image after the data leaves the A/D converters, its always way overexposed compared to my Andromeda feed.

Now, having said that, yes the camera requires lots of light if you want the kind of silky smooth, super clean images I produced. You also need to "expose to the right", and post process. You can use brighter LUTs if you want, the brightest one actually matches the DVX very closely.

On the topic of the sensors in the HVX and DVX, they are using the same size chips. The HVX has more pixels in the same area, so that means they need to be smaller. The small pixels is the big issue here. The smaller those pixels, the less capable they become at gathering up a nice clean, robust signal. Think of it this way, its like trying to catch a baseball with a big glove versus trying to catch it using a Dixie cup. The DVX has 12 bit sensors, the HVX on the other hand has 14 bit, so yes, it does have more bit depth.

Why do you think it has more bit depth?

Well, simply put, it's probably all in the name of trying to make up for less capable pixels...

Thats basically it really. Pixel size also affects your dynamic range too. Last but not least, if you poke around Reel-Stream's site, you can see that they freely admit Andromeda will most likely yield the best over image.

Hope that helps!
 
Excellent info Chris. Thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge and observations.

You mentioned a while ago, making a new website and have some more info on camera setups and AE post. How is that going? Now that Andromeda is in you life, have you varied the workflow substantially? No more macroblocks/compression artifacts must overcome a lot of the problems discussed in your other threads.
 
Christopher Barry said:
Excellent info Chris. Thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge and observations.

You mentioned a while ago, making a new website and have some more info on camera setups and AE post. How is that going? Now that Andromeda is in you life, have you varied the workflow substantially? No more macroblocks/compression artifacts must overcome a lot of the problems discussed in your other threads.
Click to expand...

The site is a little on the back burner due to being busy with 3 big projects at the same time...

I envision it being an all encompassing kind of site that takes a "know nothing" beginner up to the level of a pro, so its a big goal of mine.

As for work flow, I still shoot the same, I just use bigger ratios now that I have a good 8-9 stops of latitude for capture, which results in about 6-7 stops after color correction. This is a HUGE leap from HVX200, which only has about 6 stops max for capture, leaving me with about 4-5 after color correction.

My work flow actually works its best with RAW cameras, as you go down the line to mere DV, it becomes more limiting. You really need to be careful, I still raise the pedestal, but just a little bit. Someone once said I was throwing away data doing that and that keeping the pedestal down wasn't. I totally disagree really. When you crush in camera, you toss away image information by basically turning it all black, its basically the opposite of blowing out your highlights. Now thats tossing away information, at least by raising the pedestal, you can still see stuff. Another thing I found is that in camera crush, when played back off the tape, looks noisy. The HVX200 pedestal at like -7 is horrible looking, -15 is unbearable. Can my workflow produce noise in compressed formats? Sure, but it all depends on how you light, expose, and process. Extreme color correction will reveal noise even in the finest grain 35mm film stocks, as well as Andromeda.

One more note on Andromeda, I work at the highest bit depth, always. I only shoot 10 bit and only export to 16 bit TIFF image sequences right now. I tried 8 bit for the higher res, and I found that after shooting a test chart, the 10 bit was much sharper. Doesn't really surprise me though...
 
cardmaverick said:
... Can my workflow produce noise in compressed formats? Sure, but it all depends on how you light, expose, and process...

One more note on Andromeda, I work at the highest bit depth, always. I only shoot 10 bit and only export to 16 bit TIFF image sequences right now. I tried 8 bit for the higher res, and I found that after shooting a test chart, the 10 bit was much sharper. Doesn't really surprise me though...
Click to expand...

Three projects, busy.

Being able to record 10 bit log is something I will have to wait for with Hydra. I use CineForm Prospect 2k during post which I understand will give me (10 bit log or 12 bit), perhaps similar results to TIFF, with a smaller file size. You may be getting better file size economy with uncompressed TIFF by applying LZW compression upon encoding. My point, when aiming to do a Feature film 90+ minutes in duration, data management needs to be within my production budget. Until we commit to a shoot later in the year, I keep holding off building the on-line edit suite.

As for your camera settings and post process, mentioned above, this is something I would pay for, if it was presented/documented in a way that thoroughly explained the process, to ensure I preformed each stage correctly to maximise output quality of the final product. One thing you can't buy is colour correction/grading experience, so I just have to keep practicing, although a guide for certain techniques (various scope readings for comfirmation) would help me. Building the edit suite will help a lot, being able to output via HD-SDI to a calibrated broadcast monitor.

I look forward to seeing your next Andromeda shots. :thumbsup:
 
OK.... here it is. This is the original clip, I need a better tripod though, all I had was this lightweight Bogen that is actually meant for SLR's, so no tension controls, but all in all, its still a very nice demo. NOTE: I cropped the original frame using a letterbox, its actually 16:9 and it's not the highest resolution the camera can have at 10 bit either. Original post now has the link too...

Here it is, 20 MB

http://www.chrisnuzzaco.com/special_uploads/nautica1.mov

Enjoy!
 
wow, no banding. Very clean looking footage, even after compressing. Chris, thanks for sharing.

I would like to see some low light tests one day. If you every happen to do one in the future, like your "card maverick" display, please post a frame or short duration clip.
 
Bezakor said:
i hate u!
Click to expand...

I hope thats a compliment :) LOL

Ok, as far as low light, I'm not sure I should tread there! Digital cameras don't like lower light levels, even really nice ones, but I'll poke around on the darkside and see what happens anyways. I'm still in a testing / getting to know the Andromeda phase LOL. I'm planning on doing some extensive testing using all the LUTs (ISO rating at various IRE levels for 18% gray, checking out noise, ect.) Right now I think I have nailed the cameras sweet spot though.

I have some other stuff I'm working on that I hope to post soon too, full res, no crop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top