Jesse Brauning
Well-known member
Scroll down to Jan's post.
http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/193/876414
http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/193/876414
In the interest of fairness...
- Thread starter Jesse Brauning
- Start date
Michael Olsen
Veteran
C'est la vie.
Every form of compression is better or worse than some other form until we can start talking about mathematically lossless RAW compression, and then it's all just gravy.
What really matters is what it costs and what can be done with the image coming out of it. And if there is a stern price limit (say $1000, $5000, or $10000) there is also going to be a pretty stern quality limit. The law of diminishing returns does, of course, apply.
:beer:
Every form of compression is better or worse than some other form until we can start talking about mathematically lossless RAW compression, and then it's all just gravy.
What really matters is what it costs and what can be done with the image coming out of it. And if there is a stern price limit (say $1000, $5000, or $10000) there is also going to be a pretty stern quality limit. The law of diminishing returns does, of course, apply.
:beer:
Steve Kahn
Well-known member
Ouch! Oh the pain...
Jan? Care to comment?
Jan? Care to comment?
Jan_Crittenden
Veteran
Sure, no problem. At the time I wrote that post i was not in charge of the AVCCAM product line and had been influenced by the previous product manager by his assessment. In September he retired and I took over the product line. So I am not one to just take something one without understanding what makes it tick, so I studied and learned. I have now been working with AVCCAM for for about a year and several months since that post.
I have learned I have seen and I have compared. It is a very cool codec and i would put it up against DVCPRO HD in many ways. I think I can match its performance by taking the 24Mbs and ingesting into a 10 bit codec. I think of the green screen we pulled on the music video with the 3D camera. We bumped it to a ProRes HQ 4:2:2 and it looked great. I look at gradients in tone and I know that DVCPRO would have issues.
There are some advantages to DVCPRO HD still as it is easier to edit natively and the metadata is further along in its development. Anyhow I am smarter today than I was a year ago.
Does that help?
Thanks,
Jan
Coco Bermudez
Well-known member
Regardless...this camera is in the right price range and gives exactly what I need
HKO
Well-known member
Go easy on her ..............it's all about price point with this camera. Certain compromises had to be made or else the current price tag would have been much more. Tha's what me thinks anyway....want better - easy solution...HD-SDI capture.Job done.....
wow super - you posted like two seconds before I did
wow super - you posted like two seconds before I did
Last edited:
Steve Kahn
Well-known member
Fair enough.
This is where AVCHD 4:2:0 fails miserably as compared to 4:2:2, Jan: doing any greenscreen work.
Is there any plans to do an updated (perhaps firmware) AVCHD-PRO with 4:2:2 color space? That really seems like a reasonable request as 4:2:2 is a prerequisite for fine keying.
Jan_Crittenden
Veteran
And in relationship to the title of the thread, In the interest of fairness, how does this relate to fairness? Do you mean that someone cannot learn and thus change their minds? Is that fair to judge them about what they didn't know so they shouldn't learn something new. What is that?
Anyhow, I have grown over the last year to be a huge AVCHD admirer. it is a very cool codec. Have seen it do stuff I would have thought would have made it totally crumple, but it stood proud and amazed me.
So what is fairness about?
Best,
jan
Anyhow, I have grown over the last year to be a huge AVCHD admirer. it is a very cool codec. Have seen it do stuff I would have thought would have made it totally crumple, but it stood proud and amazed me.
So what is fairness about?
Best,
jan
Jan_Crittenden
Veteran
Well no one walked out of our NAB theater where we showed it on a 150" plasma. It looked pretty good, better than I thought it would, which is why we included it.
Until you have tried it, don't judge it, that is where I went wrong in that post in July of 2009.
Best,
Jan
First and foremost - let us wait until we have a camera in hand and tested before we opine. The less facts we have, the more we seem to love to argue - what's up with that? It's still a couple of months away - December 27... and yes, I too can hardly wait.
Second, this freakin' camera is under $5K. Panny had a choice - stuff more specs in, hike the price and prolong the time to market, or push this out. I am 100% in support of pushing this out. I love the price point. Down the line, when the technology matures a bit more, and prices for components come down, and amortization of R&D and engineering kicks in, you'll have the 2.0 version. But I'm not waiting. I have a feature to shoot next year. I am not going to delay it waiting for the 2.0 - because all that happens is we then wait for the 3.0. If the camera does what I need, why would I wait?
And again: Let's test the camera to see what the codec does before we freak out. Seeing is believing. I have a friend who is into high-end audio. He can't - and nobody can - hear the difference between some of his $1K and $30K components, but because the $30K component has some kind of tech spec claim that's "better", he'll diss the $1K component and pay the $$ for the $30K. I'm the opposite way. Show me. If I can't see it, or can't hear it, I don't care. I don't give a rat's about specs. I'll use my eyes and ears, thank you.
Second, this freakin' camera is under $5K. Panny had a choice - stuff more specs in, hike the price and prolong the time to market, or push this out. I am 100% in support of pushing this out. I love the price point. Down the line, when the technology matures a bit more, and prices for components come down, and amortization of R&D and engineering kicks in, you'll have the 2.0 version. But I'm not waiting. I have a feature to shoot next year. I am not going to delay it waiting for the 2.0 - because all that happens is we then wait for the 3.0. If the camera does what I need, why would I wait?
And again: Let's test the camera to see what the codec does before we freak out. Seeing is believing. I have a friend who is into high-end audio. He can't - and nobody can - hear the difference between some of his $1K and $30K components, but because the $30K component has some kind of tech spec claim that's "better", he'll diss the $1K component and pay the $$ for the $30K. I'm the opposite way. Show me. If I can't see it, or can't hear it, I don't care. I don't give a rat's about specs. I'll use my eyes and ears, thank you.
Hi Jan....I don't know you, but after this thread and your response to it....I have to say that I'm a FAN! What an incredible, honest, forth-right, unapologetic response. I cringed when I saw the first post and thought that it might get deleted. I'm glad it didn't because it just showed the intelligent class act that you are. Good for Panasonic for having you on their team.
Joe Walker
Well-known member
I've posted this before, but I'll post it again, last year I shot a short film that was shot 85% on a Varicam, 8% on an HVX200, and 7% on an HMC150. After we went through a long spell of color correction and post manipulation, you would be hard pressed to tell the difference in shots. The HMC150 held up incredibly well, I was very impressed. Believe me, I have no worries the AF100 will be more than fine for most of the work that I'll be doing with it.
Taylor Rudd
Veteran
Steve, perhaps this isn't best camera for greenscreen work? Panasonic has provided a surprising amount of transparency and open communication about this product. They are interested in selling this camera at a specific price point, which will not include a 4:2:2 easter egg that will activate during the next solar eclipse.
Edit: There are reasonable requests, such as the ability to dial in a custom WB. I'm no expert, but it isn't it a little late in the game (and not possible at this price point) to kick things up to 4:2:2?
Last edited:
Steve can we please act a little bit more mature on this forum. sighh!
Thank you Jan for commenting on this issue in a mature and intelligent manner. I guess someone thought they had a "gotcha" moment but I think you explained it quite well.
The camera looks great! I can't wait to get it in a few months!
Keep up the great work and don't let the 12 year olds on this forum bother you too much.
Simon
Steve Kahn
Well-known member
Not if it's just a software issue. The GH1 was hacked to upgrade its codec. I would hazard to guess that Panasonic just hasn't written the AVCHD-422 code as of yet.
True but without a lens.
A moment of sanity. The great thing about this camera is clean video from a large sensor. That is all. The HVX200 had 4:2:2 color at the same price point AND a lens.
As I have said I'm getting one but that be said Panasonic is no Red company. That is, Jannard inspires. He breaks ground. He pushes the boundaries and is a dreamer. Sadly Panasonic is a mega-corporation that have none of what makes Red great. I find it frustrating that Panasonic says take it or leave it because they can. Because at this moment in time there is NO other choice.
I think if the Scarlet was delivered on deadline the AF100 would be a whole different camera - either $1000 cheaper to compete with the dSLRs or $1000 more expensive and better equipt.
Steve Kahn
Well-known member
To be honest I was in pain for her. I was trying to be sympathetic. We all can say things we regret at times...
Ah, okay. That makes more sense. You normally have good posts here but with the pain comment you confused me on that one.
Thanks for explaining.
Simon
Steve, I was in the same Scarlet boat for the last 2 years but it got me no where. When I first bought the HMC-150 1.5 years ago I was searching around and fell in love with the Scarlet "idea".
1.5 years later and a bit wiser I am in search of a new camera and the Scarlet is still not a reality. Yes, it is getting closer but maybe 6 months from now but maybe not. I wish it was coming out at the same time as the AF100 but it is not.
AF100 is coming out in a few months and it is a sweet camera. No, it is not perfect but at least with Panasonic I know the camera will come out when they say it will come out. With RED lately all you get are delays after delays after delays.
Simon
LoganMackay
Well-known member
The 200 also only has 1/3" sensors, which allow it to have such a lens in the first place...
Which of these companies ships cameras on time and with the promised features at release? Jannard can dream and inspire all he wants, but as of now they have only shipped one actual camera. Panasonic may not be the same as Red, but I am glad. They listened to their audience and tailor made a camera for us. Sure it may not have 422 or 10bit, but you can at least get around the 422 issue with Ninja/ki mini/etc.