gh1 vs hdv?

[robfilms]

gh1 vs hdv?

i've been sitting on the sidelines reading the various thoughts about the gh1.

i do lots of talking heads, usually in a studio sometimes at an indoor location, rarely outdoors.

i'm interested in the gh1 for the possibilities of a small unobtrusive camera, a shallow dof using various primes and with those primes a f4-ish resulting in a simple light kit.

i'm willing to do double system for my sound needs. (something like a 4 channel recorder: chan1-boom/ chan2-lav for interviewee + chan3-lav for interviewer + chan4-as knockdown levels to insure against clipping)

this set-up would be used as either a one person band, or me and a pa.

i have used something like this set-up with various cameras:
1/2" 3chip sd eng jvc dv500,
2/3"chip sd eng sony dsr500/570,
1/3" 3chip sd pannie dvx100,
1/3" 3chip hdv sony 1zu,
1/2" 3chip hd pannie hpx500.

of all these cameras, i'm imagining the gh1 shooting in 720p30 would look most like the sony hdv.

would any gh1 user agree?

if not, could u possibly compare the 720p from the gh1 to any of the above listed cameras?

i still deliver to most clients a sd dvd 16x9.

thanks in advance for any info u care to share.

be well

rob

 

[Nitsuj]

I would think for the talking heads it would be best to use the FHD 1080p mode. I myself used 1080p through my entire short I just finished and didn't see any problems. However I stayed away from fast moving shots in the woods and most of it was lit scenes of actors. I'm not sure why so many are afraid of the FHD mode because it seems just fine, especially in a talking head scenario.

 

[ROCKMORE]

I would think for the talking heads it would be best to use the FHD 1080p mode. I myself used 1080p through my entire short I just finished and didn't see any problems. However I stayed away from fast moving shots in the woods and most of it was lit scenes of actors. I'm not sure why so many are afraid of the FHD mode because it seems just fine, especially in a talking head scenario.

I was curious about the comments I read on the 720p and 1080p modes. Some prefer the 720p and claim it's cleaner with less artifacts, while the chart tests Barry did show that 1080p has better resolution and sharper. I agree that with less movement the compression can handle the higher data easier being that's way it's designed. Do you think the problems only limited to movement?

I just downloaded the two chart tests 720p / 1080p and put them side by side. The 1080p is twice as sharp and contrasty. The 720p actually looks pretty soft.

 

[Barry_Green]

The GH1's 720p is undoubtedly more "robust" than the 1080p. The 1080p is undoubtedly sharper. Excess movement and detail will cause the codec to show artifacting sooner and more severely in 1080p mode than it will in 720p mode.

That said, if you're executing typical smooth controlled cinematic moves, 1080p does just fine. It's when you get to blair witch stuff for movement, or incredible detail overload (such as a pine forest in broad daylight with sunlight glinting through the branches) that 1080p can suffer.

 

[ROCKMORE]

The GH1's 720p is undoubtedly more "robust" than the 1080p. The 1080p is undoubtedly sharper. Excess movement and detail will cause the codec to show artifacting sooner and more severely in 1080p mode than it will in 720p mode.

That said, if you're executing typical smooth controlled cinematic moves, 1080p does just fine. It's when you get to blair witch stuff for movement, or incredible detail overload (such as a pine forest in broad daylight with sunlight glinting through the branches) that 1080p can suffer.

I usually shoot with a jib and dolly. I do shoot hand held work, but usually with combination of shoulder mounts and mono-pods to keep things smooth.
I don't have any of these DSLRs yet and have just been watching, waiting and getting a good education on them. The pictures I've seen are amazing, but the problem with some of these firsts units are very scary.
The GH1 is clearly in the lead with a relatively few aliasing flaws and better behaved image.
I hope Canon get's it straight soon. For a company like canon that has 39% of the DSLR global market share, and the money invested, there is no excuse for these flaws to be sent out and sold to cash strapped indi-film makers to endure.
Thanks for the heads up Barry. The truth doesn't hurt as long as you still have your money in your pocket.

 

[AdrianF]

of all these cameras, i'm imagining the gh1 shooting in 720p30 would look most like the sony hdv.

The GH1 should be fine for talking heads, where you want to be quite low key or travel lightweight and picture wise should easily match the sony's. If you are going to shoot 720 30p that's PJPEG and your record time is limited to about 8min takes. I would say in most situations 1080 would be great for interviews, providing it's not run n gun type interviewing.

 

[robfilms]

The GH1 should be fine for talking heads, where you want to be quite low key or travel lightweight and picture wise should easily match the sony's. If you are going to shoot 720 30p that's PJPEG and your record time is limited to about 8min takes. I would say in most situations 1080 would be great for interviews, providing it's not run n gun type interviewing.

thanks all for posting your thoughts.

i remain encouraged about using this acquisition tool for these types of projects.

adrian-u brought up an interesting possible issue-continuous recording length.

many of these talking heads go for 60-90min at a sitting.

will that record length be possible with the gh1?

tia

be well

rob

 

[Nitsuj]

thanks all for posting your thoughts.

i remain encouraged about using this acquisition tool for these types of projects.

adrian-u brought up an interesting possible issue-continuous recording length.

many of these talking heads go for 60-90min at a sitting.

will that record length be possible with the gh1?

tia

be well

rob

Using AVCHD modes 1080p/720p you can record as long as your SD card allows. The 720p mjpg mode only allows a file to be created in 2GB sizes. But that is the mjpg format and not the camera. Somebody sitting and talking could easily use the 1080p mode and look great especially with some good lenses. I'm not scared of the 1080p mode myself. The camera gives you solutions to different situations. Slow cinematic movements and even hand held stuff indoors is okay if you have a real steady hand for 1080p. 720p for movement outdoors with foilage, woods, high detail and most of your hand held shots. And then there is 720 30p mjpg for your running through the woods like a mad man or panning the crowd in a football stadium like a mad man. I think most of the people that say 1080p is a no-no probably don't have the camera and are passing it through the grapevine or only shoot with quick movements and hand held.

 

[noirist]

I also think 1080p24 AVCHD looks great for close ups. My impression is that most people who use 720p60 are using it because (a) they intend to publish their work in 720p (eg., vimeo) or (b) they want to use slow motion by retiming the 720p60 to 720p24.

Another thing to think about is that 1080p24 is more difficult to work with than 720p60 -- it's more compute intensive and trickier to play. Most (all?) playback devices will play the 720p60 back correctly with progressive frames but many playback devices will incorrectly play the 1080p24 with interlaced frames which doesn't look good. For example, my Panasonic DMP-BD35 is capable of playing blu rays at 1080p24 native but it will incorrectly play the AVCHD clips on my SD card with interlaced frames. If I play the 1080p24 clips on an older computer, it will skip frames which looks even worse. And you have to reverse telecine the 1080p24 clips before you edit them, which involves time, hassle, and expense that you don't encounter with the 720p60 clips.

 

[ROCKMORE]

Using AVCHD modes 1080p/720p you can record as long as your SD card allows. The 720p mjpg mode only allows a file to be created in 2GB sizes. But that is the mjpg format and not the camera. Somebody sitting and talking could easily use the 1080p mode and look great especially with some good lenses. I'm not scared of the 1080p mode myself. The camera gives you solutions to different situations. Slow cinematic movements and even hand held stuff indoors is okay if you have a real steady hand for 1080p. 720p for movement outdoors with foilage, woods, high detail and most of your hand held shots. And then there is 720 30p mjpg for your running through the woods like a mad man or panning the crowd in a football stadium like a mad man. I think most of the people that say 1080p is a no-no probably don't have the camera and are passing it through the grapevine or only shoot with quick movements and hand held.

How well does the mjpeg 30p footage cut together with the AVCHD files. I did some tests with a little TZ7 and on my computer the two files had a very different look. The AVCHD had very saturated color while the mjpeg seemed kind of flat and more muted color. Have you cut the two file types together in one scene?

 

[Nitsuj]

How well does the mjpeg 30p footage cut together with the AVCHD files. I did some tests with a little TZ7 and on my computer the two files had a very different look. The AVCHD had very saturated color while the mjpeg seemed kind of flat and more muted color. Have you cut the two file types together in one scene?

I haven't yet because I have only used 1080p or 720p AVCHD. I assume you would just have to match up the tones in post. Really I would only use the mjpg for very fast pans and would be very short in length. I would then just do a trick of editing to blend in the shot using a quick dissolve transition if the quick pan was necessary that is.

 

[robfilms]

I also think 1080p24 AVCHD looks great for close ups. My impression is that most people who use 720p60 are using it because (a) they intend to publish their work in 720p (eg., vimeo) or (b) they want to use slow motion by retiming the 720p60 to 720p24.

Another thing to think about is that 1080p24 is more difficult to work with than 720p60 -- it's more compute intensive and trickier to play. Most (all?) playback devices will play the 720p60 back correctly with progressive frames but many playback devices will incorrectly play the 1080p24 with interlaced frames which doesn't look good. For example, my Panasonic DMP-BD35 is capable of playing blu rays at 1080p24 native but it will incorrectly play the AVCHD clips on my SD card with interlaced frames. If I play the 1080p24 clips on an older computer, it will skip frames which looks even worse. And you have to reverse telecine the 1080p24 clips before you edit them, which involves time, hassle, and expense that you don't encounter with the 720p60 clips.

noirist-

thank u for the thoughtful post.

so with an indoor talking head, a gh1 shooting 1080p24/double system audio might be a good acquisition tool.

but the issues u raise about edit workflow seem a bit daunting.

i'm cutting w/fcp6 on a mac pro 2.8 8 core. is that rig horsepower enough? i will probably deliver in sd dvd 16x9 and post on the web.

is a more detailed explanation of the gh1 edit workflow possible?

(additionally, i'll start using the dvxuser search tools for supplemental info)

tia

be well

rob

 

[AdrianF]

Originally Posted by ROCKMORE
How well does the mjpeg 30p footage cut together with the AVCHD files.

I've only done this a couple of times, but would say there isn't a great deal of difference between 720 AVCHD and the PJPEG colour wise. There is definitely an over sharpened look to some of the PJPEG footage to my eye, which might not be to everyone's taste.

 

[robfilms]

i just starting reading some of the threads on editing the gh1 1080/24p footage.

oh my, i feel like my head is going to explode!

i've got a long way to go...

be well

rob