Hvx200 At Ibc - Latest News From The Show

braw said:
I saw this too. What I'm wondering, and hopefully Jan could chime in, if a new type of memory comes along that can physically fit in a P2 housing, is it such a system that they could change the basic guts to adapt? Just put a new controller in with these new chips.
Click to expand...

You need an actual P2 "chip" in the memory module for the handshake, or else it wont work.
 
What about the external mic mount/holder. It did not feel very sturdy? Maybe it has to be like this because it will demp vibrations but it did not look like it would last long. Maybe it is still under development? Any thoughts ?
 
Onther thing I did not like about the HVX construction are the focus and zoom rings. I little to smalle and difficult to find blindfolded. Maybe thay can improve that as well for the final version.
 
SPZ said:
I agree. It shouldn't be difficult to add 24P on the Pal camera. What I don't understand is the NTSC guys defending the lack of 24P on Pal. It's not your problem, and you never had to face it. We do. Regularly. And it costs money. And it is a conversion. And you lose quality. Fact. Slowdown one frame, Panasonic. You still have 4 months and only need to add one more frame rate.

I don't see the NTSC guys complaining about not having 1080/25P. Why? Because you know very well it is useless compared to 24P.
Click to expand...

I am actually a PAL user, but don't see the lack of 24p as a big ommision. Two main points:

• Please explain how to encode 24p footage into a 1080i50 stream.

• If you are shooting on a HVX you are clearly a low budget production. How many people will view your film on the big screen anyway! I very much doubt it will be more than on the small screen. Therefore by shooting 25p, MORE of your audience will see the film as you intended!
 
• Please explain how to encode 24p footage into a 1080i50 stream.

The varicam does it. They should know the answer, I presume.

Well, yes, I'm low budget, but I'm a low budget that dreams to have a theatrical release! And Mmm, wouln't you like to have the 24P option too?

I want to shoot in 24P, because I want my short in festivals. then I can think about a possible broadcast or distribution, and a conversion to 25p. I need, however, to eat and work as a videographer. That's why I also need 1080/50i, or 50p. But for the 25/24 debate. I really would love to have both: one for my short film, and one for my "film look"tv production.
 
SPZ said:
The varicam does it. They should know the answer, I presume.
Click to expand...

The Varicam is very different. It doesn't shoot 1080i or p, only 720. However, I do not see a reason why they can't implement 720p24 on the HVX.

SPZ said:
Well, yes, I'm low budget, but I'm a low budget that dreams to have a theatrical release! And Mmm, wouln't you like to have the 24P option too?
Click to expand...

If I had teh option for free, I would take it. If they said it would cost £10, I wouldn't.

That is how unimportant I think it is. I have found a lot of festivals are projecting digitally now anyway, and that will only increase. They should be able to show your film in 25p and save you a heap of cash by not needing your film downgraded by a filmout.

Also 25p is better for your video market too :thumbsup:
 
SPZ said:
• Please explain how to encode 24p footage into a 1080i50 stream.

The varicam does it. They should know the answer, I presume..
Click to expand...
Please explain me how do you think you gonna edit your 24p footage on your Pal equipment. I guess you better move to a NTSC land or just buy NTSC equipments.
 
SergejIvanovits said:
Please explain me how do you think you gonna edit your 24p footage on your Pal equipment. I guess you better move to a NTSC land or just buy NTSC equipments.
Click to expand...

That is probably possible with a NLE workflow, if it was supported by the NLE. Could cause a few problems with output though!
 
1280x720 with good pixelshift will be fine. That's actually a very sensible compromise.

As for XDCAM, 35mbits, take off 3mbits for audio and you're not significantly better than HDV. Given that you're putting a sharper lens on the front, that could very well quickly eat up those extra megabits in trying to record the sharpness that the Z1 lacks. We're also looking at what, at least $20k + lens, and that's what, about $20k for a good enough one.... It's not even in the same league as the HVX, never mind the price of an XDCAM deck.....

Graeme
 
I don't know that any 'experts' here have asked anybody to be 'faithful' to the brand.
Click to expand...

I definitely feel that Barry has been objective and not overly brand-loyal. He recommended that I take a look at the XL2 over the DVX because I wanted more resolution at 16x9 for my indie feature. He doesn't just pimp Panasonic, but thinks about what the best tool is for a specific job, in my opinion.

Cheers,

Josh
 
If 1280X720 is a wrong spec, it looks like my crystal ball may be right after all.

Think about it: pixel shift can increase resolution by about 1.3 or 1.4 times (theoretical maximum being root 2). 960X720 times 1.3 is 1248X936, which isn't quite sufficient for dvxpro HD's 1280X1080 by I'll take it. 960X720 times root 2 is about 1360 by 1020, which is definitely good enough for 1280X1080. Sure, only 4:2:2 color space is achieveable with pixel shift, but--uhh--isn't DVCPRO HD 4:2:2? Look at the results the andromeda is getting with the dvx's ccds. Clearly, pixel shift works: it's basically an extension of bayer interpolation which works incredibly well (my digital rebel xt has proved this to me.)

Anyhow, if 1280X720 were the right resolution, then pixel shifting would be overkill in the horizontal direction, but 720 pixel-shifted will not quite reach 1080 (although it comes close enough.) So really, 960X720 should provide practically as much resolution as 1280X720, given the limitations of the dvcpro codec.

I might be totally wrong, but I honestly want fewer pixels. The signal to noise ratio of the dvx is basically the suck (sorry, Jan, but it's true), but clearly panasonic is working on this and the release of the 100b with "cleaner black areas) combined with a lower pixel count would make me feel much better about things. Then again, fine pattern grain looks much nicer than big chunky grain (even 35mm film, when recorded on dv has big chunky chroma noise due to 4:1:1 colorspace--I've seen it), so a high s/n ratio may not be the end of the world.
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
HD for Indies has a wrong spec, not a scoop.

Sorry,

Jan
Click to expand...

I think the wrong spec is that DVCPRO HD does NOT record 1080p24 at 80Mb/s but 100Mb/s.

If I am right there, then Jan said " a wrong spec" not "wrong specs" meaning only one spec was wrong... so their spec on the CCDs must be right.

There you have it, the HVX CCDs are 1280x720 :thumbsup:

That would be perfect for native 720p, which is what the HVX is really anyway, and can be nicely pixel-shifted to give 1080i/p.

Well that's my speculation and it is definitely right!!! :evil:
 
A lot of 'borrowed' news over at HD for indies...


I just arrived home from the show. Tune in tomorrow folks for my full and final report from IBC 2005.

- Mikko
 
To encode 24 fps into 50i stream you repeat 1 field every 12 frames. That's what a film-friendly NLE does when you play 24 fps timeline to a PAL monitor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top