Musings on Detail Level

B

Barry_Green

Moderator
Played around with the detail level quite a bit tonight. Interesting that even at absolute maximum, it's not all *that* edge-enhanced when in high-def mode. In standard-def, +7 = holey moley it's edge-enhanced, but in high-def, it really doesn't add that much edge enhancement. But it sure does make the picture "look" sharper.

So then I tried it against the JVC. I rigged up a homebrew switchbox and was able to A/B on my Dell 2405 (not the best monitor for this, but hey, it's what I had).

The HVX goes from -7 to +7, with a default at zero.

The HD100 goes from OFF to MIN to -9 to +9 to MAX, with the default at "normal", or zero. OFF looks like it's truly OFF, and MIN is still showing edge enhancement.

Here's where it gets interesting: I had to set the HVX to +7, and the JVC to -6, to get equivalent edge enhancement! Even with the HVX at zero (normal), it's equivalent to the JVC at MIN.

It'd be interesting to hear what JVC users are using for their detail level. If they're using anywhere from MAX on down to -6, that means they're using more edge enhancement than the HVX is even capable of. Which means, fellow HVXers, if they're satisfied with what they're getting, then there really isn't a whole lot of justification for holding the HVX back. Crank that detail level up as high as you like and see if you like what you get -- even if you go to +7, you're only approaching -6 on the JVC, and I'd bet most JVC HD100 users are at -6 or higher.

It'd be interesting to hear some test reports back.
 
i'm just a lowly dvx owner, but this was an interesting read...do you see this as a weakness in the hvx or simply a difference? perhaps a weakness in the JVC somehow?
 
Many here have complained that the JVC does not offer any settings between Min and Off. So I would say it's an advantage. But very few JVC user complain about how the image looks so I'm sure it's not a handycap. Personallly I set my HVX at 0 and leave it there.
 
Interesting. Dare I say it, Barry... any musings on cranking up detail vs. macroblocking? Seems like it would help. But maybe I should keep my fingers shut.
 
Detail Level and the M2

Detail Level and the M2

I just got my M2 adapter working last night and was playing with it today. I think it
( the M2) is great, but I thought it a looked a little soft whan compared to the HVX lens alone.
However, I really did love the shallower depth of field. Well, I thought, why don't I crank up the detail level? I mean, I'm not nearly as worried about noise as some ( I think it looks like film grain) , so why not give it a shot.

I ended up cranking it up to +7 and dropping the master pedestal way down. I also made adjustments to the M2 and I was stunned by the results. I mean the richness and depth of the picture just popped out. I gotta tell ya, this camera may not be perfect, but it is awfully damn good, and if I get a little noise I don't care. I felt like I was watching a 35mm film. Being a dyed -in-the-wool filmshooter, I never thought I'd shoot video for anything serious. Now I can't wait to start a feature with the HVX.
Seamus McFlannel+
 
P.s.

P.s.

P.S. - I didn't mean to imply in the previous post that my picture got grainier. In fact, I thought it looked even cleaner. I was just saying that I didn't care if it did get grainier, I wanted a lttle more sharpness in the picture with the M2. I was confirming Barry's original post that cranking the sharpness up was not necessarily crazy, and that it even has it's uses.
Seamus+
 
Seamus,
What lenses did you get with it and do you think the lens quality will make a big difference with the M2?
 
Barry, were you using just the "DETAIL LEVEL" or were you using the "VERTICAL DETAIL LEVEL" as well?

What is your preferred detail level?
 
Been fiddling with 'em both. But for the comparison agains the JVC I was just using the regular. The Vertical has very little impact on the picture, it's maybe 10% as strong of an effect as Detail Level is.

Preferred? Depends on the shot. Depends on what's in the shot, and it depends on what gamma curve I'm using. But I will say this -- prior to really putting it side-by-side, I'd shied away from the + detail levels, usually sticking between -5 and -3. Now? Now I have no qualms with running it up right to +7. It really makes the sharpness "pop" and it's no more enhanced than the JVC at -6, which seems to be about the range where HD100 owners like to run their camera at (did a poll over on DVInfo).

It does make the image a bit "grittier", but overall I like it. I used to hang out in the - range (usually -5 to -3) because I was predisposed to that based on my experience with the DVX, but the HVX is a different animal. The HVX LIKES detail. Now I'll only go negative if I'm looking to hide noise or something like that.

Note: this ain't for standard-def! In standard-def, detail +7 draws a huge white outline around all your black objects (and vice versa). But in high-def it's much more subtle. Don't go running +7 on DVCPRO50 mode, or on a DVX, unless you really like edge enhancement! But in HD, I think it's not too bad at all. I doubt I'll go below zero again unless I'm looking for a noiseless picture, but if I'm looking for that HD "snap", I'll look at +1 to +7. Again, this was testing off the Dell, which is not exactly the premium high-def monitor to be using(!) so I look forward to hearing other experimentation reports!
 
Good test Barry.

You're right about the detail settings on the HD100.

I also hooked it up to my Dell 2405 (Dell sharpness setting at 1),
The JVC "min" setting does still have some edge enhancement.

I recently found the "min" setting to be a good compromise.
 
Barry,
When you crank up the detail have you tried compensating with coring for noise?

As a general all purpose detail setting for HD are you going with 0 or higher now?

Any difference between 720 & 1080?

What are you using for DVCPro50 & DV?

Got to test this on my buddies Panasonic 17" now.
 
I set coring to -2. Noise isn't an issue, really. Looks fine, just a tiny tad grainy. Coring would help mask some of that grain though.

I'm gonna test more, but right now I really don't see much reason to go below 0, and I'm gonna do some test shots at +7 just to see.

As far as 720 vs. 1080, 1080 beats 720 in every way I can find to test it. I really don't understand these people who say that 720 is better (in *any* way). 1080 has more retained resolution and better color recording and lower noise. 720's fine, of course, but 1080 is just better. When viewed at the same size screen, 1080 has lower noise (because to get to the same screen size, 720 has to be blown up, and that magnifies the noise along with everything else).

1080's just better (like it should be). If someone has a demonstratable example where 720 is better I'd love to see it. (obviously 720 does variable frame rates, we know that). Right now I'd shoot 1080 in every circumstance except when needing maximum recording time on the cards... if it wasn't for FCP not supporting 1080/24p, I can't really see why someone would prefer to shoot in 720.

For DVCPRO50, you still need to keep the edge enhancement under control. I normally run around -2 to -3 on DV50.
 
Barry_Green said:
Note: this ain't for standard-def! In standard-def, detail +7 draws a huge white outline around all your black objects (and vice versa). But in high-def it's much more subtle. Don't go running +7 on DVCPRO50 mode, or on a DVX, unless you really like edge enhancement! But in HD, I think it's not too bad at all.
Click to expand...

How does running high edge enhancement look when shooting HD downsized for SD/DVD? Presumably it's not bad, but just curious.
 
Interlaced vs. Progressive

Interlaced vs. Progressive

Barry_Green said:
As far as 720 vs. 1080, 1080 beats 720 in every way I can find to test it. I really don't understand these people who say that 720 is better (in *any* way). 1080 has more retained resolution and better color recording and lower noise. 720's fine, of course, but 1080 is just better.
Click to expand...

Barry,
At the recent Moviola event, Michael Cioni, the Post Production Supervisor at Plaster City Digital Post, voiced a strong opinion against shooting interlaced for potential filmout. He has some hands-on experience dealing with HVX200 footage-- it was Plaster City that did the color timing on Director Ben Rock/Producer Illya Friedman's test footage, which was shot 720pn and looked amazing on Plaster City's 2K projector. It was his opinion that shooting 1080 interlaced is much less desirable than shooting 720 progressive. I wish you and he could exchange notes.
I'm PMing you his contact info.
 
Barry_Green said:
I set coring to -2. Noise isn't an issue, really. Looks fine, just a tiny tad grainy. Coring would help mask some of that grain though.

I'm gonna test more, but right now I really don't see much reason to go below 0, and I'm gonna do some test shots at +7 just to see.

As far as 720 vs. 1080, 1080 beats 720 in every way I can find to test it. I really don't understand these people who say that 720 is better (in *any* way). 1080 has more retained resolution and better color recording and lower noise. 720's fine, of course, but 1080 is just better. When viewed at the same size screen, 1080 has lower noise (because to get to the same screen size, 720 has to be blown up, and that magnifies the noise along with everything else).

1080's just better (like it should be). If someone has a demonstratable example where 720 is better I'd love to see it. (obviously 720 does variable frame rates, we know that). Right now I'd shoot 1080 in every circumstance except when needing maximum recording time on the cards... if it wasn't for FCP not supporting 1080/24p, I can't really see why someone would prefer to shoot in 720.

For DVCPRO50, you still need to keep the edge enhancement under control. I normally run around -2 to -3 on DV50.
Click to expand...

This is what I thought and have asked about many times. Everyone was saying shoot 720p 24pN and forget about 1080.????
1080p is much cleaner. Now if FCP could deal with the 1080i 24p 24pA modes I would be much happier. What about DV Filmaker?? I have questions into them but no response yet.
 
R Gale said:
Barry,
At the recent Moviola event, Michael Cioni, the Post Production Supervisor at Plaster City Digital Post, voiced a strong opinion against shooting interlaced for potential filmout. He has some hands-on experience dealing with HVX200 footage-- it was Plaster City that did the color timing on Director Ben Rock/Producer Illya Friedman's test footage, which was shot 720pn and looked amazing on Plaster City's 2K projector. It was his opinion that shooting 1080 interlaced is much less desirable than shooting 720 progressive. I wish you and he could exchange notes.
I'm PMing you his contact info.
Click to expand...

The HVX will do 30p. Of course you are not editing at 23.976
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top