slow motion shots in720p used in 1080p ?

M

mico

Veteran
If you can only shoot the variable rates in 720p but want to shoot the majority of your project in1080p to get the best quality, which I think Barry has said both looked similar on a monitor but 1080p might have more rez recorded, how can you incorporate variable frame rate footage shot in 720p when the majority of other footage for the same project was shot in 1080p.
I know very few have the camera but if anyone has a workflow scenario in mind I would greatly appreciate it. I am using FCP.

Thanks, mico
 
Micro,

I asked a similar question a while back and Barry suggested shooting only those variable speeds in 720 and then converting them in post to 1080 to match the other footage. I think this will be a good workflo and would be easy to keep your slowmo shots seperate until the final assembly.
 
Thanks Justyn. Can you explain the best way to convert them in post and will there , in your opinion or Barrys, be a noticeable difference in image quality.

mico
 
That should work. Seems the rez isn't that much higher in 1080 mode. So, actually, that's good news. :)

I'm bad, I know.
No seriously, the motion effect wiil shift attention away from possible noticable rez differences.
 
I will be planning on doing the same thing with my projects. But I still have the same question that Mico had but hasn't been answered. What is the best way to do this? Simply scale the 720 up in the 1080 FCP timeline? Is there a better way to uprez 720 to 1080?
 
I think recompressing it might be the way to go. Using the media manager perhaps? You could try that vs upscaling and compare the results...
 
OliverM said:
That should work. Seems the rez isn't that much higher in 1080 mode. So, actually, that's good news. :)
Click to expand...

it is there though, even though it is slight. And also, the compression artifacts on 1080 will appear smaller since the resolution doubles. Not to mention, you get a slightly more effective color space to work with for the same reason. Even though the overall image resolution isn't much diffrerent, you do get more color rez to play with; 4:2:2 at 1080 is going to be better to work with than 4:2:2 at 720.
 
I was horsing around a bit. Sorry...
But if you recompress those sequences to 1080 that should be workable, right? I mean there is going to be a bit of difference, but as I said. The motion effect will be the main focus for the audience.
 
Huge Difference Between 720 and 1080

Huge Difference Between 720 and 1080

I don't know why Barry and others mimimize what is actually being recorded between 720 and 1080. The amount of information stored is huge...

HD source formats are almost always either 1920 x 1080 resolution or 1280 x 720 resolution. Note that a substantial difference exists between the 1080 and 720 standards. The 1920 x 1080 resolution contains 2.25 times more pixels than 1280 x 720 resolution at the same frame rate. This difference substantially increases requirements for processing 1080 content in terms of encoding time, decoding speed, and storage.

See the following link ...
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/howto/articles/UnderstandingHDFormats.aspx#videoinhd
 
I don't know why Barry and others mimimize what is actually being recorded between 720 and 1080. The amount of information stored is huge...

HD source formats are almost always either 1920 x 1080 resolution or 1280 x 720 resolution. Note that a substantial difference exists between the 1080 and 720 standards. The 1920 x 1080 resolution contains 2.25 times more pixels than 1280 x 720 resolution at the same frame rate. This difference substantially increases requirements for processing 1080 content in terms of encoding time, decoding speed, and storage.

See the following link ...
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/howto/articles/UnderstandingHDFormats.aspx#videoinhd
 
The difference in pixels is double, yes. The difference in resolved definition is nowhere near double.

Just because you have a 1920x1080 frame, that doesn't mean you have 1920x1080's worth of information in that frame. You can dub VHS onto HDCAM-SR, but you won't end up with 1920x1080's worth of resolution, it'll still only resolve around 320x240!

The difference between recorded 1080 and recorded 720 on the HVX looks to me to be around 25%.

Working with 1080 does require more horsepower, and more storage space at an equivalent frame rate -- the frames are twice the size (in DVCPRO-HD) as the frames in 720 are. But there's nowhere near twice as much resolution in those 1080 frames, at least as comes off the camera head.
 
So Barry if you have a second. How would you convert 720p variable frame rate footage to work in a 1080p timeline. And would that conversion footage be considerably noticeable from 1080p. Just your thoughts.
Thanks, mico
 
I don't think it would be too noticeably different, no, but that's speculation. I'll eventually give that a try; I'd be inclined to try to just use Vegas or FCP for scaling.
 
I have a Panasonic LC1 still camera (the Leica DIgilux 2 Clone). Its merely 5 megapixels, but it beats the crap out of any other non slr camera out there (I think its even better than 6 mp slrs...). Why? Because of the lens, the funcionality and the beautiful color rendition. I believe this can be the same with the HVX. The DVXa, not the original dvx, certainly had noise issues. If the Noise level of the HVX is, in cinegamma mode, at the same level as the original DVX, than I'm sold: Better color, enough resolution and excelent lens. Than I just let my imagination and creativity do the rest.
 
That has been my thinking too. Is 1080 worth all the extra work on set dealing with backing up.. and then in post, graphics and storage. I remember Barry saying there was 25 to 30 percent more Rez... but that's on a chart or such. I wonder if the majority will notice that much of a difference... especially since most people don't have true 1080 monitors. I've found that most of them don't handle that. I was even kind of bummed that the much coveted Panasonic LCD doesn't do 1080 natively.

I think it will come down to preference and if it's worth all of the extra time and efforts. Like, doing 720 allows us to get a cheaper LCD monitor as well as 2.5 times the storage time.


I do think that since the slow-mo is exactly that.. a real effect.. any difference would just be accepted as part of the effect. I wouldn't worry about it too much. I've upconverted some 720 footage and it was easy to do.
 
I do think that since the slow-mo is exactly that.. a real effect.. any difference would just be accepted as part of the effect. I wouldn't worry about it too much. I've upconverted some 720 footage and it was easy to do.
Click to expand...

How did you up convert the footage?
 
Justyn said:
That has been my thinking too. Is 1080 worth all the extra work on set dealing with backing up.. and then in post, graphics and storage. I remember Barry saying there was 25 to 30 percent more Rez... but that's on a chart or such. I wonder if the majority will notice that much of a difference...
Click to expand...

Yes, but the practical difference is that with double the image resolution(not actual resolved resolution from the CCDs mind you) the compression artifacts in the image will appear smaller and you're working with more color resolution than you would in 720(though the actual resolution change for color information should be about 25% becuase it's limited to what the lens and CCDs can capture).

Unless it becomes a storage or a issue where I need other framerates, I'm always going to work in 1080 on my HVX(when I get it) :thumbsup:
 
I used Compressor to do it... I've also done it through DVDsp and Final cut. It's just another codec shoice in FCP.


but 1080 won't give you any variable frame rate. It's split on broadcasting standards.. and most people won't be able to tell on there TVs that cant resolve 1080 anyway. I'm just about being able to shoot a project and complete a scene before having to break away and back up the footage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top