MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Does the XL2 always have the black line at the top, like the original DVX has on the right side?

Interesting how the 24p from the XL2 still has a distinct “video” quality to it that even the CF24 seems to soften. And what’s up with the color rendering? Does the XL2 favor the greens like the DVX favors the reds?

This is very interesting to me
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

All right, here's another one.  This time we shot with each camera towards its best advantage, so the DVX is 24P/thin/anamorphic, the FX1 is HDV/60i, and the XL2 is 24P/thin/16:9.

DVX-FX1-XL2-tunnel.jpg


Now, in this shot, I'm not seeing a whole lot of detail difference between them -- other than the harsher contrast of the FX1 vs. the softer contrast of CineGamma, but the actual raw detail looks about the same.  The XL2 was unfortunately overexposed by about a half-stop (the DVX was at f/6.8, the other cameras at f/4.0, which puts the DVX a full 1.5 stops faster than the FX1 even when in progressive mode!)  The XL2 should probably have been at f/4.8, but without an A/B monitor it's hard to get all that completely accurate in the field.

Here the FX1 acquits itself well, but again, this is a still shot -- you have to keep in mind that while you're watching the DVD, the FX1 looks like a VIDEO camera (because of 60i) whereas the XL2 and FX1 in this shot look like movie cameras.  Very different look.
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

[quote author=David Jimerson link=board=sony;num=1103104690;start=15#20 date=12/16/04 at 12:48:30]Does the XL2 always have the black line at the top, like the original DVX has on the right side?[/quote]
Looks like it...


Does the XL2 favor the greens like the DVX favors the reds?
Click to expand...
In that one particular shot it shows, but again, I think the color rendering is one of the least important factors to focus on because all these cameras offer a rich palette of color customization options -- you can make any of them render color just about however you'd want.
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Well, I didn't mean it as a criticism (the greens). I just found it interesting that it would favor the middle color on the spectrum.
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

It would be interesting to see how the text on the reader-board looks on the FX1.
Click to expand...
Here's a DVD-version extraction:
FX1GCTText.jpg


And, to give the HDV its props, here's the text as an extraction from the full raw HDV frame:
HDVFullResGCT.jpg
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

[quote author=David Jimerson link=board=sony;num=1103104690;start=15#23 date=12/16/04 at 12:58:01]Well, I didn't mean it as a criticism (the greens).  I just found it interesting that it would favor the middle color on the spectrum.[/quote]
Sorry, didn't mean to make you feel like that.  I was reacting to something else that people usually say, where they get hung up on "natural color reproduction", because like I say, any of these cameras can deliver such a wide variety of looks that you can get almost any look you want.

Now that I think about it though, you do raise quite an interesting point: usually the shift has been on the color temperature axis, with Canons/Panasonics looking warmer/redder and Sony's looking cooler/bluer.  But with the XL2 accentuating green, that's a totally different axis!

However, if we were to have used CineLike matrix, the greens on the DVX may have matched.  We were trying to use all the same settings wherever possible, the only variation was whether we used cinegamma/cinematone gamma or not... but if we'd tweaked with the master pedestal, or the XL2's black stretch, or any of those other wonderful toys, we could have made these comparison shots look very different. The settings we used made the DVX look the "flattest" it can be, what with the soft-contrast CineGamma, the neutral master pedestal and the low-saturation Normal color matrix. In B.Press Gamma with a -6 to -10 MP and CineLike color matrix, the DVX would be vibrant and punchy and sharp.

I guess in summary, for DVD they all look fine, and there's certainly no knockout blow for one over the others, but I do think the DVX provides the most information simply from the fact that it's 1.5 to 2.5 stops faster than the FX1 and 1 to 1.5 stops faster than the XL2.  It sees more in the dark, and sees deeper into the shadows.  And the FX1 loses resolution to get its film look, whereas the DVX and XL2 gain resolution to produce their film look.  That's why I say, for DVD production, the DVX is the best with the XL2 very close second, and the FX1 just isn't as suitable (unless your goal is to make 60i DVD's under bright lighting conditions, in which case it'll look about as good as the other two).  For HD interlaced production it's no contest, the FX1 delivers the goods.  But for DVD release... I'm not seeing any advantage to the FX1 (other than a lower-noise signal), and I'd hate to give up real manual lens control, 7 gamma curves, 4 color matrices, real audio support, true 24P, true SMPTE time code, and all the other things the DVX does, just to get... what, a more expensive camera with worse low-light performance and lower latitude?  Doesn't make sense for DVD production.

At least, that's my take, until someone proves otherwise.
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

day and night...really...

The biggest difference i see is that the DVX and the XL2 have much more lattitude.
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

(Wow, thanks for the extra work, Barry.) Actually, I was thinking about the readerboard on the right of the arch (you don't need to make another post.)

No doubt, each camera has its advantages.  It will be interesting to see if Sony rushed the FX1 and the Z1 through production to steal the thunder of another camera rumored to be unveiled at NAB.  :o
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qualit

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qualit

quote
'but I do think the DVX provides the most information simply from the fact that it's 1.5 to 2.5 stops faster than the FX1 and 1 to 1.5 stops faster than the XL2. '

Thanks for the work Barry.
DVX is a stop faster then the XL2 but the latest has a bigger reach. That will cost you a stop, but you clearly can see the XL2 has more information in its image. Easy to give it a 'warmth' feeling too. And if we are talking about 'film' we talk at least about 16x9 ratio.
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qualit

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qualit

more information at what point? The XL2 initially captures more yes, but then it is scaled down, on the fly at which point there is just as much data as any other DV camera.

Barry, thanks for these! Very interesting!
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

[quote author=Kenn_Christenson link=board=sony;num=1103104690;start=15#27 date=12/16/04 at 13:26:36](Wow, thanks for the extra work, Barry.) Actually, I was thinking about the readerboard on the right of the arch (you don't need to make another post.)[/quote]
Oh, duh -- sorry, didn't get that, but now I know what you mean. Unfortunately, I don't really have that shot without motion. The way the three cameras were set up, the FX1 was on the right, the DVX in the center and the XL2 on the left. So the way the parallax works, the FX1 is pointed more to the left, whereas the DVX gets the sign straight on, and the XL2 is pointing to its right, so it gets more of the sign. (the framing was meant to be on a person about 10' away from the cameras). So I can show you a still of that sign from the FX1's perspective but only as the camera is panning, which means it's totally illegible due to the interlace issue.

I do have a shot where we quit panning but it's not framed the same way, but here's an HDV extraction of that board:
FX1GCTText2.jpg


and here's a DVD version of that frame:
FX1GCTText2DVD.jpg
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

(Wow, again!) Thanks for all your efforts to help us understand the differences between these cameras. :)
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qu

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qu

If I would make a test like this I would try to get the best out of each camcorder. I guess you can make a much better picture with your DVX and others using fx1 and xl2 deliver a much better picture.

Think I make a test with a Millennium XL2 Panaflex in my kitchen. The result wouldn't be any good because my kitchenlight isn't good enough to make a test like this.
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qu

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qu

[quote author=LoveHD link=board=sony;num=1103104690;start=30#32 date=12/16/04 at 15:14:32]If I would make a test like this I would try to get the best out of each camcorder. I guess you can make a much better picture with your DVX and others using fx1 and xl2 deliver a much better picture.

Think I make a test with a Millennium XL2 Panaflex in my kitchen. The result wouldn't be any good because my kitchenlight isn't good enough to make a test like this. [/quote]


Are you saying Barry didn't try to do this?
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

We set out to capture what we could get with these cameras, but it was extremely difficult to keep all the variables straight. For this shot we wanted a low-light shot, with a lot of motion. That's exactly what this place delivered. We also did brightly lit shots, still lifes, all sorts of things. We intended to do a set-up living-room headshot type of thing, but just ran out of time.

Jarred knows the XL2 inside and out, and I spent a lot of time with the FX1 to become completely informed about it, read through the manual twice, and used it off and on for a week before going out for this test. And Jarred and I both know a thing or two about the DVX. The goal wasn't to make any camera stand out or play to the camera's strengths, it was to put them in a variety of environments and see how they responded.

Hey, we did what we could. Anyone else who wants to do a comparison test is certainly welcome to, and I'd love to see those results as well.
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Most open minded people are fully aware that the tests are not only unbiased but done by two knowledgeable and highly skilled folks.

Thanks to both Barry and Jarred for taking the time to do this for everyone and sharing the knowledge needed to pull it off! :D :D :D - Few people could or even would do such a thing and it pisses me off when anyone accuses either of them of being single minded or biased. >:(

Again, THANX!
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Hey, thanks for saying so, and I hope it's of some value to people. There's a long article that goes with it, I'm waiting for Jarred to piece together the millions of pictures and screen shots that we took. I only really posted these shots because people kept asking, and the full article/review is close but isn't done yet.

One reason we decided to do this shootout together was because of the overwhelming amount of work involved -- it really helped to have two heads rather than one, even if we spent most of the time butting them against each other (which meant I had to stand on something, usually... that dude's tall!) ;D
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Outstanding stuff Barry!  Thanks for all your efforts.  Rather than the mindless fanboy "scraping the bottom of the barrel" type comments, your observations and feedback are consistently well thought out (with supporting examples) and without bias.  Each camera brings with it its own set of advantages and disadvantages, as such, one must choose what features is important to them and select the camera that best fits their needs.  Your input allows us buyers more ammunition at our disposal to make an informed decision. Looking forward to viewing the final product that you and Jarred are working on.

Mahalo!

Paul
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD quality

Thank you Barry and Jarred for this information and I think it was a good idea to use these cameras at their most nuetral settings. Great job.

I love my DVX. :D
 
Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qualit

Re: MPEG2 HD v.s.  DV SD and Final DVD qualit

[quote author=Shaw link=board=sony;num=1103104690;start=15#29 date=12/16/04 at 14:23:07]more information at what point? The XL2 initially captures more yes, but then it is scaled down, on the fly at which point there is just as much data as any other DV camera.[/quote]

More detail more sharpness. A better lens or an highres basicsignal (lower noise) gives you better end result. Try this out with photoshop,scaling down a high res optical scan (600 dpi--> 75 dpi) compared with a low res 75dpi scan. In the process of throwing things away software can take a look at a neighbour pixel, the CLUT or another scheme to render new information.

It is in basic what a compression scheme does (DYUV) when it compresses data, and it looks at lumi differences and the same principle with the interframe comparing technique.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top