HVX200 vs XL-H1 Highlight Blowout Post Repair Analysis

Kholi said:
Better listen to Ash. People keep comparing the footage from the H1 to the HVX, and as it's been stated many times before... it's not the best that can come from that camera.
Click to expand...

This I do know. I was taking some of the worst footage of both, or with blown highlights, and seeing what I could do to fix it. I am able to do way more with blown out highlights on the HVX200. Both cameras would look far better *to begin with* if the camera operator prevented highlight blowout in the first place.

Kholi said:
But, it's good to know that holyzoo agrees that there's not much difference between the codecs.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think there's a significant difference in how Mpeg2 handles noise and complex images and motion; most importantly to me, how it handles moving grain from a moving element 35mm imager!. I think DVCPRO HD is way more robust to handle strange image anomalies.

I ran a bunch of tests taking still digital photos and converting to DVCPRO HD and HDV, and HDV was a big let down. Of course converting an image straight off the CCDs is a lot different than me converting from digital photo jpegs.

Have a look - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/DVCPROHD_vs_HDV/

The other thing to mention is the difference in how Mpeg2 originated source fairs when distributed back after post processing to Mpeg2, say for broadcast - it's not pretty. Whereas, DVCPRO HD originated source does much better by the time it hits an Mpeg2 encode for distribution. Mpeg2+Mpeg2? Or DVCPRO HD+Mpeg2? I'm thinking I'd want to avoid the double same codec compression. What I haven't tested is the difference between HDV to H.264 vs DVCPRO HD to H.264.

So much freakin testing. I'm pretty much done. Bring on the HVX200!
 
Elton said:
a few more H1/DV100 clips for y'all.
www.homepage.mac.com/mrbarlowelton
Click to expand...

Elton, damn! Bam! That resolution is stellar. :O Man, that is what I dig so much about that cam. The XL-H1 res is such a hard thing part with going with the HVX200. :|

Like Michael Pappas said, I'd like to smash them both together into one camera with the res of the XL-H1, frame rates and P2 storage ability along with tape recording ability, detachable lenses, HD-SDI out, with the highlight handling of the HVX, and better color handling (no magenta/blue fringing that I'm seeing in the H1).

All that aside, they are both awesome cameras for sure. Between picking one over the other - tough call, real tough call.
 
Holyzoo,

The crazy thing is it's seriously sub-sampled horizontally, both in HDV and then to DV100. It pixel shifts to achieve the full 1080i spec, (or very close to it) I think.

The uncompressed SDI output really is a crisp 1920x1080. Probably some loss in 24F, but it's still got loads of rez. I'm going to try shooting into AIC or PhotJPEG at full raster sometime this week.
 
holyzoo said:
That's what I'm sayin!! :D



That's using the 3-way color correction filter in Final Cut Pro and just reducing the "Highlight" level a bit.



Indeed.

I did another test which is not perfect but still proved something important. I took a frame from raw HVX200 footage, recompressed it both to DVCPRO HD and to HDV. Then I brought those clips back into FCP to see how the CC brightness tweaking would behave. My theory was that the HVX footage encoded to Mpeg2 will lose the ability to handle highlights the way DVCPRO HD does.

And this test is showing exactly that.

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/CC_Difference_DVCPROHD_vs_HDV.mov

Use your arrow keys to toggle back and forth to check out the differences.
Click to expand...

Are you sure it was actually recompressed to DVCPROHD? Since it is DVCPROHD to DVCPROHD at same rate, it could be just copied with perhaps a header change. If no recompression was done you are comparing two generations with one. How were the rendering times? If you want a real test of two codecs, it has to be done with uncompressed input. Even starting with a third party compressed input could favour one of the two codecs.
 
If you've color-corrected in a DV100 timeline, you've recompressed the final material.

Edit: Actually, I take that back...a little. You can color correct in a DV100 timeline, change the sequence preset to uncompressed, then re-render and output. If you output to an uncompressed codec, you're golden. If you output to DV100, it's recompressed...somewhat heavily, but you can get away with it. CC in DV100 is much better than HDV IMHO.
 
Mr. Blonde said:
How could blow out be part of the mojo to anyone Ash, please do tell?
Click to expand...

I'm sure Ash can give his own opinion but I am guessing that it comes close to giving a color-reversal look. Kinda filmic in an 8mm sort of way. I know blown hilights often seem video like in this day and age but many films still go for that look and achieve it well. I do feel the DVX "blows out" more like film (more chemical or analog if you will) than most video cameras. But after using my XL2 with a "knee" setting I found the DVX blowing out so quickly was not desirable to me anymore.
 
holyzoo said:
I have been on the fence between the XL-H1 and HVX200, so I decided to revisit my highlight blow out tests. I am still amazed that the HVX200 with DVCPRO HD has highlight detail beneath apparently blown out highlights, while the XL-H1 just simply does not. Once that blow out is on HDV, it appears to be really in there.

Below are comparisons between HVX200 and XL-H1 source footage brightness reduction using FCP color correction (whites).

HVX200 Examples
Example 1 - Before and After
Example 2 - Before and After
Example 3 (My favorite) - Before and After

XL-H1 Examples
Example 1 - Before and After
Example 2 - Before and After
Example 3 - Before and After

-steev
Click to expand...

:)

I think I recognize the place example two for the H1 was shot: it looks suspiciously like Rue de la Convention in Paris' 15th arrondissement. I lived around the corner from there for about 9 years :)

Good post! Thanks!

M.
 
Just a thought: without knowing what correction you have done to the various examples, it is impossible to really judge what is going on.

The H1 pics do seem to have lost more information near the high clipping point, but that might come from a too-heavy-handed flattening of the highs in your CC. Not trying to knock your skills - just saying its hard for one to know... Particularly the last H1 example is very blownout to begin with, and the CC very aggressive... That one really needed to be better exposed when shot... the camera can't said to be at fault...

M.
 
holyzoo said:
My theory was that the HVX footage encoded to Mpeg2 will lose the ability to handle highlights the way DVCPRO HD does.
Click to expand...

That's sort of a bogus test because no one in their right mind would do post work in HDV. Everyone's going to convert to another format first. You can cut in HDV I guess, but HDV is for acquisition only. It's also a handy instant archive.

Can't wait to hear about your tests with the HVX - I like the stuff you shoot and you may pull me over to the HVX side of the fence yet. If Rush calls tomorrow and says my order is in that might do it too.
 
joelnet said:
That's sort of a bogus test because no one in their right mind would do post work in HDV.
Click to expand...

You're right nobody would, but that's not stopping anyone from *aquiring* in it!! And that's what I'm finding - upon acquisition, you're hosed in your highlights to begin with. This is NOT the case with DVCPRO HD acquired footage.

Again these are based on my findings with raw footage from both cams. Go try it out yourself. I recommend it.
 
Malcolm Wright said:
The H1 pics do seem to have lost more information near the high clipping point, but that might come from a too-heavy-handed flattening of the highs in your CC. Not trying to knock your skills - just saying its hard for one to know... Particularly the last H1 example is very blownout to begin with, and the CC very aggressive... That one really needed to be better exposed when shot... the camera can't said to be at fault...
.
Click to expand...

I've tried bringing back detail on the most subtle of shots from the H1 and it does NOT have it.

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/Blowout_XL-H1_4a.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/blowout/Blowout_XL-H1_4b.jpg

Give it a whirl. Get some footage from both and tweak away and post your findings.
 
holyzoo said:
I've tried bringing back detail on the most subtle of shots from the H1 and it does NOT have it.
Click to expand...

This test is from Mini35 setup with Canon. I dunno if has contribued to it.
I've not understand if you think that bringing back detail is a good thing or not, sorry I'm italian. You are considering an advantage or disavantage then Dvcpro codec? Maybe there's more noise that pops out doing so, so it's not good?
 
GEEEZ

AshG, please start a thread with comparison footage after compression of these two cameras.
 
Kholi said:
GEEEZAshG, please start a thread with comparison footage after compression of these two cameras.
Click to expand...

Yes, someone post something to help Kholi see what I'm seeing. ;)
 
Aaaarrrrgghhhhh!!!!!!!!!

Aaaarrrrgghhhhh!!!!!!!!!

:kali: :badputer: :Drogar-Kriz(DBG): :violent5: :angry: WTF!?!?!?! NONE OF THESE LINKS WORK DANGIT!!!!!!!!!! :furious3: :-Mark-12(DBG) :-KnockedOut(D :- #%^W%T@UY%^&@#$^&%^*#$&(#&#^
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top