HVX footage (raw files) from Sundance

I've downloaded the 0024N3.MXF File and tried to import it into EDIUS Broadcast. That didn't work. MXF files from other sources (e.g. HVXvlmcntnts, rezchartraw) could be read without any problems.
 
I do not understand as other MXF files work in
Avid and these no?
I do not have Edius Brodcast, I cannot
comment to you.
 
These MXF files locked up AVID 5.2.1 (PC) when trying to load.

What's up with this?

Hmm, maybe HDV is not that bad of an idea after all.
:(
 
Avid, FCP and Edius didn't work so I would assume that these files are corrupted.
 
DVFilms Raylight converted these files nicely for editing in Vegas and playback in WMP. Thanks for sharing these images.

e
 
I must admit that am pretty much disappointed by the resolution and overall quality of the 1080p files....
 
Rodrigo said:
I must admit that am pretty much disappointed by the resolution and overall quality of the 1080p files....
Click to expand...

Yes, I don't see much resolution advantage over 720p. I don't think much testing lately has focused on this, but it's time for someone to shoot the same detailed static subject with a locked off camera in 1080 and 720, pull frames from each and upload them so we can do difference test to see how much more info is really in the 1080 material.

When I downsample the 1080 to 720 and intercut with other 720 I can't visually see any difference at all. You should have some advantage, resolution wise, doing this, as you at least have the possiblility of filling the 1280 by 720 raster more than an original 720p recording of 960 by 720. Elsewhere, Limo mentioned that 1080 will give you a bit more chroma resolution to work with, but that to me seems about the only benefit of the 1080 implementation.

I never had much faith in the 1080 aspect of the camera, so I don't feel as dissapointed now as some might, but the resolution gains seem even less dramatic than I would have predicted a couple months ago.

As time goes on, I refine my definition of the HVX, so I know what I can offer clients without exaggeration. High resolution in 1080 is NOT one of the benefits of the HVX. It's a good 720p camera and an excellent SD one. I'd go so far as to call it a "Medium Def" camera. I was hoping that it could fill the DVCPRO HD codecs with every bit of resolution the codecs could handle, both in 1080 and 720p. It can not.

Only the Canon of the 1/3" cameras gives you that jaw-dropping "wow" factor on every clip I've seen. I'm not buying the Canon for a number of reasons that the HVX fills better... better colorspace with the on-board recording, great stop motion/interval abilities, better SD options, etc. But the Canon, even in the 24f mode FEELS like real HD all the time. If it sold body only, and there was a firestore like small portable device that could record from the HD-SDI to, say, Cineform in the field...

The HVX in HD is for me is a stop-gap to the real-deal HD promise of Red. I doubt I'll sell the HVX even when Red comes along (big assumption that some model of Red will be affordable, but...) as I'll still need an SD camera and the HVX is top-notch in that area.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs
 
There will be some side by side comparisons of 720 and 1080 in the Sundance footage (terribly slow upload times coming from my DSL to mouchinard's site), although it is handheld and not tripod nor locked-off.

As far as not getting them to play with Avid, that's precisely how I am playing them. Avid Xpress Pro HD 5.2.2 on an HP workstation and an HP laptop. I just copy the MXF files into the Avid MediaFiles/MXF folder, and, when I create a new HD project, I open media tool and let Avid find the files. From there, drop them into a bin and onto the timeline.

There are plenty more clips if everyone still wants to see more. I wish I had a quicker upload method.....

Regards,

Cre8tive
 
cre8tive said:
There are plenty more clips if everyone still wants to see more. I wish I had a quicker upload method.....
Click to expand...

Thank you, your efforts to upload raw clips is greatly appreciated. I enjoyed comparing the 1080 24p clips to the 720 ones and more of both to examine is wonderful.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs
 
Tried converting them with FCP and Flip4Mac MXF Import, but no such luck, I always get the Error ID "-19443". Could somebody convert them to quicktime containers and host them in that form? Thanks! :)
 
Yes, a quicktime conversion will be very welcome. Apparently a lot of persons have problems importing MXF files in FCP, Avid or Canopus. There is something wrong somewhere.
 
p2 wrapper directory

p2 wrapper directory

I think for the FCP people we need the p2 wrapper directory that contains the "lastclip.txt" file and the .xml files. That's the only way I've been able to get MXF files into FCP. -a
 
Jim Arthurs said:
I'd go so far as to call it a "Medium Def" camera. I was hoping that it could fill the DVCPRO HD codecs with every bit of resolution the codecs could handle, both in 1080 and 720p. It can not.
Click to expand...

Medium Def
That's great Jim,
it's exactly what it feels like -
beautiful none the less and I will purchase it as well,
unless Andromeda convinces me otherwise...

cheers,
J
 
I mean, think about it from this perspective... it's not recorded as 1280 x 720, it's 960 x 720 with a heavy pixel aspect ratio. So...

...Flip that image on its side and you have 720 by 960. Now slice it across the midde and you have two 720 by 480 size images stacked on top of each other. That's just twice SD surface area. Where 720p would compete with 1080 is when you factor in the temporal frame rate of 60fps progressive. Strip that rate back down to 24fps and you have something... else.

The term Extended Def is taken in the consumer world. That's just 480 progressive, so Medium Def it is for these cameras, IMO.

Last year I was arguing for the Z1 and using CF25. CF25 is just one field (540 lines) stretched up to full height. I said that it "whipped every SD camera with one field tied behind its back.". I also made pretty good 720 by taking that CF25 and scaling it to 1280 by 720p. Dealing with that and the 25fps thing was too much complication for day to day workflow. That was one of the reasons I dumped it in favor the the promise of HVX. Now we see that the rez of the HVX isn't much past that CF25, at least with current test results. Ironic.

Benton, you're right, the HVX makes a pretty picture. Good enough to use for any application, including far richer film blowup and general future proofing. A simple workflow for true 24fps. Nifty color space. Superb SD similar to DigiBeta for keying.

But raw resolution? I mean, part of the attraction of HD is, well, duh, high definition! We can feel a little let down here with good reason, and still find room to accept it for what it is and all the other things it brings to the table.

Jim Arthurs
 
cre8tive, is the upload slow because of the DSL ? or you should normaly do faster upload speed ? If you should upload faster, you can try to open multiple FTP connections and try like that.
 
Jim ,
Very well said.
I feel the same...a little let down in terms of "High Res"
but there are some beautiful 35mm adapter + HVX Files floating around
and I stopped caring about all the noise for a moment...
...and there is also a slim chance that there could be some type of Andromeda solution in the future...?
cheers,


Jim Arthurs said:
I mean, think about it from this perspective... it's not recorded as 1280 x 720, it's 960 x 720 with a heavy pixel aspect ratio. So...

...Flip that image on its side and you have 720 by 960. Now slice it across the midde and you have two 720 by 480 size images stacked on top of each other. That's just twice SD surface area. Where 720p would compete with 1080 is when you factor in the temporal frame rate of 60fps progressive. Strip that rate back down to 24fps and you have something... else.

The term Extended Def is taken in the consumer world. That's just 480 progressive, so Medium Def it is for these cameras, IMO.

Last year I was arguing for the Z1 and using CF25. CF25 is just one field (540 lines) stretched up to full height. I said that it "whipped every SD camera with one field tied behind its back.". I also made pretty good 720 by taking that CF25 and scaling it to 1280 by 720p. Dealing with that and the 25fps thing was too much complication for day to day workflow. That was one of the reasons I dumped it in favor the the promise of HVX. Now we see that the rez of the HVX isn't much past that CF25, at least with current test results. Ironic.

Benton, you're right, the HVX makes a pretty picture. Good enough to use for any application, including far richer film blowup and general future proofing. A simple workflow for true 24fps. Nifty color space. Superb SD similar to DigiBeta for keying.

But raw resolution? I mean, part of the attraction of HD is, well, duh, high definition! We can feel a little let down here with good reason, and still find room to accept it for what it is and all the other things it brings to the table.

Jim Arthurs
Click to expand...
 
Okay, kids, I have a few more clips up now.

17 in all. I have taken the liberty of renaming them for ease of identification when you go to compare and contrast.

I have a slew more that I downloaded to a friend's hard drive (and forgot to offload to mine). Those should make it to me at the end of the week, if anyone cares to see them.

Use the same path that our friend mochouinard has provided us for downloading. Thanks again for hosting these, mochouinard!

Looking forward to the discussion surrounding these clips. All were shot at preset levels except for detail, which i dialed in at -5.

Regards,

Cre8tive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top