HDX 1080 not a native resolution?

E

euge04

Active member
Has there been anymore information on the CCDs inside the HDX? I read on the HD for Indies blog that the chip might have a native resolution of 960*720? So then the 1280 * 1080 resolution is an uprez? Then that isn't even fully HD.

I guess we will have to wait and see what happens when the camera first hits the market. It sounded fantastic at first and I would have bought one on day one but now I think I will have to wait. Oh well. I guess hi resolution HD isn't going to be an easy transition to us prosumers.
 
HD1080 would be more than 1900 pixels wide and the chip definitely won´t be that.
but to me it will matter how it looks and not how panasonic gets to that look.....
 
euge04 said:
Has there been anymore information on the CCDs inside the HDX?
Click to expand...
Not yet.

I read on the HD for Indies blog that the chip might have a native resolution of 960*720? So then the 1280 * 1080 resolution is an uprez? Then that isn't even fully HD.
Click to expand...
Since when is 960x720 not HD? Just because it isn't 1280x1080 doesn't make it not HD.
I guess we will have to wait and see what happens when the camera first hits the market.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
euge04 said:
Has there been anymore information on the CCDs inside the HDX? I read on the HD for Indies blog that the chip might have a native resolution of 960*720? So then the 1280 * 1080 resolution is an uprez? Then that isn't even fully HD.

I guess we will have to wait and see what happens when the camera first hits the market. It sounded fantastic at first and I would have bought one on day one but now I think I will have to wait. Oh well. I guess hi resolution HD isn't going to be an easy transition to us prosumers.
Click to expand...

There are several other threads which bash out this topic, you'd probably find them interesting. Use the search function to find them.

The general point is wait and judge the picture that the camera produces and don't be led by the numbers - what it looks like is all that matters. Having said that, a lot of us want to know the specs out of general, geeky interest.
 
I think it would have been so much easier if the guys who make CCDs hadn't called the elements on 'em "pixels", because now people expect that there's a 1:1 relationship between CCD pixels, frame pixels, and final displayed format pixels. And there simply isn't.

Up-rezzing is a totally bogus term and doesn't apply to what's happening with a CCD. A CCD is an analog device. It is not digital, and there is no digital access to the CCD pixels. I'm trying to think of a way to describe this, and about all I can think of is like in audio -- the CCD is basically like a video version of a microphone. The microphone senses the air pressure of a sound wave and turns it into voltage. Well, a CCD senses the light values in an image and turns it into voltage. Not pixels, because a CCD doesn't output pixels. It outputs an analog signal, a voltage signal, sort of like how a microphone doesn't output an audio sample, instead it outputs voltage.

People seem to understand the concept that a music system "samples" the audio, at maybe 48,000 times per second or maybe 32,000 times per second, at maybe 24 bits or maybe 16 bits or maybe 12 bits. But for some reason they don't make the same connection with CCDs. It works in basically the same way: an A-to-D circuit samples the CCD output. It samples it at maybe 1440x1080 at 8 bits, or maybe at 1280x720 at 10 bits, or maybe 720x480 at 10 bits, whatever. But the CCD doesn't output pixels, it outputs voltage. That voltage gets sampled into pixels. They are not the same. There is not a 1:1 relationship between them.

Nobody ever asks if a microphone is 16-bit, do they? Of course not. But that microphone will get sampled into 48khz/16-bit audio, right? Yet a microphone doesn't have "bits", right? So is this a problem? Of course not. So why such a hangup on CCD pixels? I can assume that it's only due to the misconception that CCD pixels are the same (or somehow related to) the frame pixels, and they're not.
 
All this time you've been fending off CCD bashers and now you finally drop the bomb. Barry, I think you're at wit's end. What an excellent explanation as to why you shouldn't directly correlate CCD size and pixels. How can you argue with that?
 
I just returned from a Panny show at Roscor in Detroit. They had the 200 there and put on a decent explanation of P2 and the cameras. They still had no demo footage from the camera to show us. I asked about trhe chips specs and I got a "I don't know" from the rep. And this was right after he announced that he saw a pallete full of the final production 200 cameras ready to ship for the December 5 showing in LA to officailly release the camera.

It seems strange they have the final cameras ready to ship and still have no demo footage or the specs on the chips. Someone has to know those specs. So why are they still keeping secrets? Are they not proud of what the camera is made out of? I know some have said they don't care and only care on how the final picture looks. That's fine for them. But many of us would stilll like a simple answer to a simple question that they obviuosly know if the product is packaged and ready to ship. I don't like this "hiding" of specific details. This could backfire on Panny. I do hope that it does meet up to expectations, but I also feel there should be no secrets about what is inside.

GG
 
GGman said:
So why are they still keeping secrets? Are they not proud of what the camera is made out of? I know some have said they don't care and only care on how the final picture looks. That's fine for them. But many of us would stilll like a simple answer to a simple question that they obviuosly know if the product is packaged and ready to ship. I don't like this "hiding" of specific details.
Click to expand...


I'm going out on a limb here but it seems like there is a slight chance of people trying to take whatever chip information they release and analyzing it to death, extrapolating false conclusions and thus dismissing or praising the camera without ever having seen it or it's footage.

But that couldn't happen.... nah.

Seriously, they probably want to release the cam, show off what it can do, and release all the tech info at once.

Honestly, how is the chip info going to help you today?
Simple deduction gives you a range of where the chip must be in terms of "pixels"
(quotes thanks to Barry's post above).

What are you going to get from specific numbers released today with no camera and no footage? How can you use that information in some practical way?
You can't.

Everyone keeps demanding that Panasonic needs to stop "hiding" these specs.
I would like to know why on earth they should release them before the camera.
 
So many speculations about this camera. Wait a month and we will get the facts :thumbsup:
 
"What are you going to get from specific numbers released today with no camera and no footage?" Belief in a salesman and his company. And an answer to a simple question that I want. Just because you feel satisfied with things as they are does not mean evryone should be like you. .

You miss the point. it's not about what the actual info is. It's about how they are not revealing the truth. Politicians are great at this. Never answer a simple question and spin the conversation off the topic. Whether anyone misinterprets the info now or later doesn't matter. I would be proud of my product and not hide information. I also don't play shell games. :-) Wanna buy a car? I am not going to tell you what's under the hood so I can get as many sales before shipment. :-)

I can understand keeping secrets around NAB time so competition does not know what you have, but this is different.

GG
 
There are no 'secrets'
The camera has not been officially released so we should consider ourselves lucky to have the vast amount of information that we do, instead of focusing on the one piece of information that we don't.
 
GGman said:
Wanna buy a car? I am not going to tell you what's under the hood so I can get as many preorders before shipment. :-)
Click to expand...

Would you preorder a car before you drive it?
I think it's safe for me to assume the answer is no.
I know I wouldn't.

So why does it matter if you find out what's under the hood before you have the chance to drive it?

People will always be upset about the way manufacturers release cameras.
If they say nothing, like Canon, people get upset (XL2)
If they say everything, like Sony, people call it 'vapor ware' because they have to wait for it (FX1)
If they say some but not everything, like Panasonic, people say they're hiding something (HVX)

You can't win in the world of marketing.
You've got a few weeks, it's not that big a deal.
 
GGman said:
Someone has to know those specs. So why are they still keeping secrets? Are they not proud of what the camera is made out of?
Click to expand...
Strange - and not good - indeed!

GGman said:
I know some have said they don't care and only care on how the final picture looks. That's fine for them. But many of us would stilll like a simple answer to a simple question that they obviuosly know if the product is packaged and ready to ship. I don't like this "hiding" of specific details. This could backfire on Panny. I do hope that it does meet up to expectations, but I also feel there should be no secrets about what is inside.
Click to expand...
You are 50% right, at least for me.

Luis Caffesse said:
Honestly, how is the chip info going to help you today?
Simple deduction gives you a range of where the chip must be in terms of "pixels"
(quotes thanks to Barry's post above).

What are you going to get from specific numbers released today with no camera and no footage? How can you use that information in some practical way?
You can't.

Everyone keeps demanding that Panasonic needs to stop "hiding" these specs.
I would like to know why on earth they should release them before the camera.
Click to expand...
Ok!...maybe you're also 50% right but also GGman. Who will be 51%?

phd said:
So many speculations about this camera. Wait a month and we will get the facts :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
Have you, phd?

In one point, you're 100% right, wait a month and we will get the results for this democracy's opinion poll.
 
GGman said:
<snip>
It seems strange they have the final cameras ready to ship and still have no demo footage or the specs on the chips. Someone has to know those specs. So why are they still keeping secrets?
<snip>
Click to expand...

Ok, in fairness to Panasonic, there's nothing strange about them not having footage available yet. Manufacturers actually almost NEVER release footage from cameras. The first footage we usually see from cameras is not from the manufacturer, but from a few individuals that might get the camera early or are able to test it at a show or something. Sometimes the first useful footage might come from actual owners after shipment begins. To be honest, the fact that Panasonic apparently plans to release footage at all is what's strange.

As for the "secret" CCD specs, well, I can only assume we'll know soon enough. Kind of reminds me of how Rolls Royce used to (still does?) list horsepower figures as "ample".

This isn't directed at GGman at all, but generally speaking I have to wonder: How many of the people that are clamoring for CCD specs actually have 6 grand available to purchase this camcorder. And of the ones that have the money, how many aren't going to buy it if the footage looks fantastic but the CCD specs are "low"?

There are clearly enough early adopters for this camera that the first batch is probably sold out before it gets to dealers. I'm pretty sure that everyone that didn't already pre-order one will have a chance to see tons of footage before the camera becomes readily available. I'm hoping to get my hands on one in Feb/March of next year (not my own of course). and honestly I don't care if Panasonic used Tasty Kake Krum Cake CCD technology as long as the 1080P image looks good.

Wow, the buildup to this cam really is amazing. At this rate I hope Panasonic releases some footage and those "secret" CCD specs just to keep people from spontaneously combusting from the tension :)

Philip Williams
www.philipwilliams.com (yeah, down again)
 
"Ok, in fairness to Panasonic, there's nothing strange about them not having footage available yet. Manufacturers actually almost NEVER release footage from cameras."

Canon did to a typical customer. And it looked pretty good and made a lot of people pretty happy about the cam.

I just want to say once more my thoughts and I will leave the topic as is. It's not about the actual specs, but the fact they are being evasive where I would expect them to be proud and to the point. Logic tells me they are not what one would expect and probably for econnomic reasons and strategic planning of all their products they intend to sell. I can't believe no one shot any footage before packing a palllete. If the camera is so great, then shoot something for 10 minutes and show it to the world. Or maybe no one there knows how to shoot with a camera? :-)

GG
 
GGman said:
"Ok, in fairness to Panasonic, there's nothing strange about them not having footage available yet. Manufacturers actually almost NEVER release footage from cameras."

Canon did to a typical customer. And it looked pretty good and made a lot of people pretty happy about the cam.

GG
Click to expand...

Are you referring to the XLH1? If so, the initial footage wasn't from Canon. I can't recall Canon ever releasing any footage whatsoever. If I'm wrong, I'm more than welcome to correction and/or a link to official Canon footage.

Philip Williams
 
philnerd said:
To be honest, the fact that Panasonic apparently plans to release footage at all is what's strange.
Click to expand...
Not so much!...and the democracy's "free-speech" press?!... :)

philnerd said:
And of the ones that have the money, how many aren't going to buy it if...
Click to expand...
...if there isn't footage...yet but we already know that the CCD specs are "low"?
My 100%.
 
Philip Williams
I said they gave the cammera to a typical customer. He shot with it for a weekend and posted on the web all his test footage... with Canon's approval I assume.

GG
 
GGman said:
Philip Williams
I said they gave the cammera to a typical customer. He shot with it for a weekend and posted on the web all his test footage... with Canon's approval I assume.

GG
Click to expand...
So, the question is...why not the same, Pana?
Or we must ask when?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top