Official: HDMI 1080 IS INTERLACED ONLY

eteam said:
Amazingly, there are some folks posting in this forum who do not share your understanding.
-- Bob Elkind
Click to expand...
What's your problem, Bob? I welcome your input as an electrical engineer whose worked with HDMI, but I do not welcome your attitude. I really don't care if I'm wrong about that. In fact, it will make my life easier. A lot easier. I'm just trying to figure out how to best use this camera.
 
eteam said:
But in the case of 1080p24, conversion to 1080i 60 involves forward and reverse 3:2 pulldown, which introduces artifacts and compromises editing flexibility. If the D4 and D800 do not support 1080p24 output, then folks using this format will be the ones who will be 'rear-ended'.
Click to expand...

What type of artifacts are you referring to? Adding and removing pulldown has been done in post for ages now without any problems, if done right.
 
md673 said:
What's your problem, Bob? I welcome your input as an electrical engineer whose worked with HDMI, but I do not welcome your attitude. I really don't care if I'm wrong about that. In fact, it will make my life easier. A lot easier. I'm just trying to figure out how to best use this camera.
Click to expand...

Despite all appearances to the contrary, I'm not trying to insult and annoy as many people as possible in my first 24 hours in these forums.

There were two posts in this forum which flat-out stated that HDMI does not support 1080p,
I responded to both posts. One was yours, md673, and the other post belongs to dfreerider.

Well, dfreerider replies in post #17 in this thread that "it should been pretty obvious that I was talking about the way video cameras transfer 1080 HDMI" [rather than talking about the HDMI interface itself].

So I point to your post to illustrate that it is premature to assume that everyone knows that HDMI interfaces support 1080p signal formats. I figured that since dfreerider applied some presumption ("it should been pretty obvious") in his reply, I would counter with some clever hyperbole of my own ("Amazingly").

Believe me, I make as many mistakes as the next guy (if not more). You will have ample opportunity to point out my foolishness and over-reach, and I will deserve every bit of (hopefully good-natured) abuse and ridicule. My expertise is in electronics design, video interfaces, video displays, and still photography -- and not dSLR videography (e.g. using dSLRs to shoot video, editing video, producing video, etc.).

I don't know how to dig myself out of this hole, except to apologise for my bad manners. Please accept my apology, and I will try to be less careless and more respectful in future posts.

-- Bob Elkind
 
md673 said:
What type of artifacts are you referring to? Adding and removing pulldown has been done in post for ages now without any problems, if done right.
Click to expand...

First, 3:2 pulldown represents a temporal distortion artifact which can be quite noticeable in the form of smooth motion which appears to lurch.

Second, every 5 frames of 1080i60 video produced from 4 frames of 1080p24 video will include 2 interlaced frames which are each composed from 2 different source frames. These are not optimal frames for starting or ending a clip or splice.

Third, unless the interlaced material is tagged on a frame-by-frame basis, there is no error free means for reversing the 3:2 pulldown to reconstruct the source 24FPS material.

Is my understanding correct? If not, I would appreciate any correction (or informative links) you might offer. It's my turn to be the student.

Thanks,

-- Bob Elkind
 
I'm not exactly sure about the pulldown added when turning 24p into 60i, but I know that it can be done for footage shot on film and telecined to NTSC(24->29.97) without problems. That's if you do it right(which isn't always easy).
 
Please let's stop with this ping pong guys and focus on what matters.

Your knowledge is truly welcome, Bob!

Thanks,

E :-)

EDIT -- OK, it looks like I am already being listened even before posting, nice ;)
 
What am I missing here?: Nikon USA said, in response to my question, that the "D800 HDMI output is progressive at lower resolutions only (720p), and interlaced only at 1080".


Now, as far as the nature of the HDMI output: Would Nikon employ a "display/ playback quality output" through HDMI and vigorously advertise/defend it as an "uncompressed" data signal that provides superior means of acquisition? Does Nikon really not understand what it is offering? Or are they knowingly deceiving... ? Is the HDMI signal not at all times uncompressed? What is this "playback output" HDMI ?
 
I think see what you are getting at, Bob. Thanks. The confusion seems to lie within the D800's HDMI specs for viewing Vs its specs for data capture.
 
Bob, is this what you are getting at regarding the D800 HDMI:
Even though the manual states (on page 257) that the HDMI output is 1080i, this is reffering only to image review and playback - and the Movie settings on page 70 will determine the HDMI output quality? So, after one chooses, say, 1920X1080;24fps: that is what will be fed to the recorder, bypassing the in camera compression?
 
Yes we'll have to check by ourself :
"To activate 1080p HDMI at 8bit 4-2-2 you have to remove both cards from the camera. No simultaneous recording.
Nikon say that with cards inserted “HDMI is only suitable for monitoring purposes” – so no full HD 4-2-2 for monitoring?"

But if it's uncompressed 4:2:2 1080i the only thing we got to do is remove the pulldown, wich is not that much annoying.
 
A very interesting thread. I've been interested in the D800 (and D4) ever since it was announced that it offered clean HDMI out.

If Nikon only supports 1080i out, can a simple firmware update give us 1080p output? The interface supports it. It's just the camera software that doesn't allow it.
 
I've been capturing for some time via HD-SDI with progressive settings on cameras.. ALL SDI streams uses interlace for the carrier. No big deal. Your NLE can easily revert to your progressive video files. So, I don't see a problem with HDMI interlace.
 
Stuart U said:
Bob, is this what you are getting at regarding the D800 HDMI:
Even though the manual states (on page 257) that the HDMI output is 1080i, this is referring only to image review and playback - and the Movie settings on page 70 will determine the HDMI output quality? So, after one chooses, say, 1920X1080;24fps: that is what will be fed to the recorder, bypassing the in camera compression?
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly. Only you said the same thing in much fewer words.

We are a skeptical and disbelieving lot, tempted by conspiracy theories, jaded by unfulfilled hopes and promises not kept.
This mystery will make a great novel for our times. The book title will be: The DaNikon Code (or something like that). :smile:

-- Bob Elkind
 
eteam said:
We are a skeptical and disbelieving lot, tempted by conspiracy theories, jaded by unfulfilled hopes and promises not kept.
This mystery will make a great novel for our times. The book title will be: The DaNikon Code (or something like that). :smile:

-- Bob Elkind
Click to expand...
may I 'Share' that cool line with my local Nikon buddies?

I know you were kidding, but some kids really believe the camera cos conspire to hobble their own gear! Preposterous ;) !
 
eteam said:
As a design engineer, there is no added hardware cost in adding 1080p30/25/24 output support to 1080i 60/50. If anything, the implementation logic is a bit simpler for the progressive formats than for the interlaced formats. It makes little sense to provide one (or some), but not all, of these progressive signal output formats.
Click to expand...

sure, from your lips to The Manufacturers' ears. that a feature costing little more to implement but offering considerably more functionality might not make it into the final package... why, that's just crazy talk.
 
I hate to think that the output is not 1080p, but what makes me more scary is what I've red here and there that the output is not so great to carry the "name" uncompressed. Uncompressed gives me the impression that I will get very sharp pictures; at least as the Canon C300. If that is true - like the C300 -, Nikon has really done it. If not, they can kiss my ....
I just have cancelled my order for the D800 and the Samurai. I think I will wait a few more months before I order again, if I order again. With this new view of the video capabilities I think it is wise to wait or even consider the Canon 5DMK3.

Bob Elkind, it is very appreciable what you write and imo you don't have to apologize for what you write - thank you very much indeed.
 
Im new here and as a indie- filmmaker I followed the above discussion with great interest.
To my understanding , the D800 will be the first and only Dslr so far, to record via Hdmi in 1080p ( via Atomos ninja) and will give us a 10 bit 422 signal. That is what counts.
It could be a Red scarlet Killer as well, on the 2 K level, for the fraction of the price.
Also via ssd / Hdd in the ninjy, you might record for hours ! ( try to do this with the Scarlet without a bunch of expensive Red-batteries and their even more expensive ssds)
With 10 bit 422 you can do excellent color correction and compositing in post, which no Dslr ca do. Also Atomos announced avid dnhd support in another releas coming soon, excellent for me as an Avid user.
You will have DOF , excellent nikon lenses ( i can use my old nikon F lenses)
and all this easy to wear, and all this looking like picture taking on the road , not Filmmaking !
I guess it will let the Canon c 300 look old.

To my view, nothing speaks against this amazing new tool.
Why can nikon do this? My guess is, they do not offer camcorders, which all the other companies like Canon and Panasonic do: they want to sell their 420 camcorders ....
I would love to see and hear experiences and footage from the nikon d800 / atomos Ninja.
Please post it to make my decision for a buy easy.

thanks
 
Welcome, nice to have you here!

The HDMI out means we can bypass the codec encoding part of the DSLR, but the camera still has to do the downsampling from a 36mp sensor to a 2K signal. If Nikon has done a good job at that then the HDMI signal could be great. If they have not, and is doing a lot of line skipping to downscale the signal, then the HDMI could still have a lot of problems with moire and aliasing. I fear the latter, but hope for the best.

People have started getting their cameras so hopefully it is not gone be to long until some real tests focusing on the video appear.
 
Yeah, we need a technical evaluation of the image that comes out of the HDMI-port.
Indeed there a lot of questions unanswered by Nikon and that is bad. It means they don't want to talk about it because it isn't that good. Time will tell, but I have my doubts; hopefully I am wrong!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top