IR Problem Costs Thousands

Status
Not open for further replies.
It has been pointed out several times to asafb that this IR problem is not unique to Sony or the EX1/EX3. He doesn't care. He's just really really really really pissed about it and he just happened to be using a Sony camera at the time. I knew absolutely nothing about video cameras a year ago, and I knew about the IR problem within 2 weeks of learning this business. And I'm not even shooting under conditions where this problem exists. Sure, I felt bad for him at first simply because I could understand being ignorant and having a shoot ruined. That would suck. But now he's being ridiculous. A class action lawsuit over the industry-known IR issue is baseless and completely absurd.

If you're getting paid for a shoot, it's the job of the "pro" to know his/her camera, it's limitations and advantages, do research on the camera, the lens, the lighting situations to be encountered, where/how to set up the shots, the audio, the white balance, the focusing, the media it uses, ideas on your final edit, etc., etc. There is no perfect camera and rarely does everything go perfectly as planned, no matter what the budget. But you can eliminate complete suprises that are within your control by doing researching and knowing your camera and subject.
 
my confusion over this thread stems from the fact that the o.p. is discussing his current predicament as though it was very recent as of the time of posting and that the "correction process" has been ongoing since then.

But, when I look at your past posts, I see threads that you have started on the same issue going back to mid December....

Which, of course makes me wonder how this was any kind of shock to you on your (seemingly) recent shoot.

Begins to make me wonder the motives of this thread...

Almost every post you have made on this forum has had to do with this issue, and you have started at least 4 threads on the same issue, again... going all the way back to December.

In otherwords, I am beginning to draw conclusions as to the motive of this thread...

Later,
Jason
 
Jason Ramsey said:
Almost every post you have made on this forum has had to do with this issue, and you have started at least 4 threads on the same issue, again... going all the way back to December.

In otherwords, I am beginning to draw conclusions as to the motive of this thread...

Later,
Jason
Click to expand...

Maybe he worked on the HPX300 and didn't like the first "un-scientific" rolling shutter comparison between the EX1 & the HPX 300. (The Zacuto video that was online for about 0.5sec after Panasonic saw their loaner preproduction HPX300 look horrible next to the Sony).

He didn't like all the bad comments about the HPX300, so he traveled back in time a few months to start bad mouthing the EX1.

Of course he didn't realize that he could have just waited a little while for more tests to show that the HPX300 rolling shutter holds up pretty well.
 
Jason Ramsey said:
my confusion over this thread stems from the fact that the o.p. is discussing his current predicament as though it was very recent as of the time of posting and that the "correction process" has been ongoing since then.

But, when I look at your past posts, I see threads that you have started on the same issue going back to mid December....

Which, of course makes me wonder how this was any kind of shock to you on your (seemingly) recent shoot.

Begins to make me wonder the motives of this thread...

Almost every post you have made on this forum has had to do with this issue, and you have started at least 4 threads on the same issue, again... going all the way back to December.

In otherwords, I am beginning to draw conclusions as to the motive of this thread...

Later,
Jason
Click to expand...

Yayyy Jason,

Glad you noticed this. Since December. Had a feeling it was one of those living under the bridge people. Close this. Whats been said has been said.
 
Thanks everyone for all your posts, but before making judgment calls here, you should know the facts! :) My shoot was actually December of 2008, and so that's why you started hearing from me regarding the IR issue from the very beginning. At this point in time my client is not making any steps in this lawsuit due to a lack of time and resources. Filing a CAL takes a lot of work as I'm sure most of you know! :)

Moving forward, I do hope Sony fixes this problem for good on their next EX-series cameras. I'm not bad-mouthing the EX1/EX3, just point out a DEFECT THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSES BY THE MANUFACTER. This was shot on an EX3 by the way. Simply put, I cannot use this camera for any of the work I do. All my films are classical music videos with these specific indoor-type of situations.

For our next shoot we will use the Canon XL-H1 since we've shot with this camera before and it properly rendered blacks. The reason we went with the EX3 was at the time the cameras were not available from the rental company.

Anyways, it's time to move on.
ab
 
I have two EX1s and one Sony V1U (the prosumer, 3 chip CMOS HDV format camcorder).
I shoot classical concerts and the musicians wear black. The women often wear a velvet type fabric. My V1U accurately captures the blacks, but the EX1s show their blacks as burgundy red or maroon.

Now, if Sony is listening, why is it that a prosumer cam can capture color accurately, but a more expensive CineAlta professional cam has this problem? It seems to me that Sony overlooked a basic engineering issue with the EX1.
 
Oh god. Why this why that. Hasn't this been repeated ad nauseam? Why does a $100,000 varicam have this issue why does a 20,000 Red camera have this issue? This isn't a sony issue.

Does your V1U have a picture profile adjustments like the EX1, or raw adjustment like red or color adjustments in a varicam . No.

Stop comparing these limited small cameras to others that are highly adjustable.

Get a filter or stop using Hi Sat and tweak to get the colors right or try and get over it already.
 
So BASS how do you fix this brown issue ...(NPI)

Seeing as you have the problem.....whats the best fix rather than wasting time in post?
 
Mico, whether it be a $4800 camera or a $100,000 camera, CMOS is CMOS. If they can put a proper filter on a $4,800 camera, they should know how to do it for a $6,500 camera. I'm frankly surprised that Sony doesn't share some of the wisdom of their consumer division with their pro division. And yes, the V1U does have some limited picture profile setups.


EIREHotspur, I haven't tried to fix it in post. Fortunately, the orchestras haven't said anything about it, yet.. I reckon certain picture profile settings can be tweaked to minimize, but not eliminate it. Of course, you could shoot in B&W. ;-)
 
The Varicam is CCD not Cmos. It has the same problem.I will take that as a Freudian slip: you've got a thing about cmos.

Yeah the V1 has a "some limited picture profile setups" The fact that its limited... oh forget it.
 
mico said:
The Varicam is CCD not Cmos. It has the same problem.I will take that as a Freudian slip: you've got a thing about cmos.

Yeah the V1 has a "some limited picture profile setups" The fact that its limited... oh forget it.
Click to expand...


CCD, CMOS, whatever the imager technology, the laws of physics are the same. If a cheap camera can have a filter to keep IR off the imager, then why can't a higher end camera have one as well? Is there some sort of physical law that states that an imager over 1/4" can't have an IR filter, or some other reason?
Yes, the V1U is limited, terribly so in many areas, but it records blacks correctly, while my EX1 does not.
And it sounds to me like you have a personal problem with this. What's your beef?
 
Jason I will play nice.

I'll just say that my beef is your igno... no wait I promised.

I'll just humbly say you are mistaken regarding there being no IR filter in the EX series of cameras. There is one. Making it stronger creates alot of other issues. Its a compromise. But you have the three solutions I mentioned previously. It you're still not happy use the V1 to shoot your concerts. Hey thats a fourth option.

Hugs and kisses to you pig.
 
mico said:
Jason I will play nice.

I'll just say that my beef is your igno... no wait I promised.

I'll just humbly say you are mistaken regarding there being no IR filter in the EX series of cameras. There is one. Making it stronger creates alot of other issues. Its a compromise. But you have the three solutions I mentioned previously. It you're still not happy use the V1 to shoot your concerts. Hey thats a fourth option.

Hugs and kisses to you pig.
Click to expand...


What other issues? Why don't these show up in the V1U? Apparently Sony had just the right filter bandwidth on the V1U, but what happened with the EX1?

Don't think for a moment that I'm bashing the EX1. Despite this IR contamination issue, I find the camera unbeatable at this price. It just frustrates me (and others) that Sony can get one thing right on a lower end cam and not right on a higher end cam.

Eh, that's MISTER PIG to you, fella'! :D
 
You know the problems with these kinds of problems lads?
They go on and on and go into 79 page threads and nobody gets a definitive answer and makes it a sticky like >>Here Is The Answer<<

Having said that there is another huge thread on the "other" forum where I would have to take hours to troll through to try and find answers to as well.

Long and the short of this it seems is it is a computer like problem that we need a hack to find the solution that works for us.
 
Mr. Pig,

All ccd's and cmos chips have an IR blocking filter on the chip.

Each manufacturer designs this IR blocking filter for the specific chips they have and chips change constantly now.

Issues for the manufacturers implementing a more or less aggressive IR blocking filter are sensitivity and color shifts because IR changes depending on lighting used or, in exterior situations, the time of day.

In the DSLR market the trend has been towards more aggressive IR blocking Photographers in the DSLr world hold on to older cameras because older cams had less aggressive IR blocking offering better exposure times.

I suggest that those with an obsession with Hi Sat, which was suggested very early on with the EX release and which still has a hold on most all PP profile threads on every forum, to try something different in the very tweakable EX cams.
 
I think Mico is right on here.

This issue involves camera design which unless you are a Sony or Pana engineer, you/we know little to nothing beyond speculation.

These cameras are complicated and get more complicated to produce better images.

So this is our tradeoff. Want better images or simpler cameras.

The market wants better images AND better performance.

Keep in mind from my earlier post that the HPX-500 right next to the EX-1 shows the same behavior.

Bottom line, it is what it is... we have to deal with it.
 
Last edited:
Fellas, I understand your points, though I think mine may not have been clear enough. I know that there are specific issues with each model's engineering development, but unless Sony decided to accept the IR problem in return for a couple extra stops of light sensitivity, I am having a difficult time imagining their justification for going weak on the IR filtering.
Perhaps it's not entirely the falt of the 1/4" chips on the V1U causing the poor light sensitivity, maybe it's the strong IR filter? But if any camera would need to compromise in that area is WOULD be the V1U. But alas, the blacks are black with that cam. Too bad the HDV artifacts and the interlacing ruin the pictures..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top