Swishy, motion blurry, harsh light codec stressing clip

W

WarrenS

Active member
For those interested, here's a handheld skateboard clip showing how the camera and codec handles:

Harsh sunlight
Low detail concrete
Fast motion progressive scan


One pleasant surprise is how details hold in blacks.

It's about 50 MB so right-click and download.

http://rvimedia.com/pics/skateboard.m2t
 
You can say, what You want, but the HD100 makes great pictures. They look much more cinelike than with the XL H1, for me. Please, JVC, make the problems go away, and then the HD100 will be a great thing.
 
Frame by frame it is excellent. Sony and Canon should eat their hearts out. I can pull any color down and the picture holds and doesn't crumble apart, even with this high motion.

Take a look at this uncompressed uprez 1080p. This is a bitmap, so no JPEG compression. This is exactly, pixel for pixel, what's on my timeline.

This screen capture is full frame motion, high motion at that. I've uprezzed it so you can see everything. JVC my hat's off to you for ProHD and the incredibly efficient codec's quality.
 
That's great, stepheninoe. Are you just importing and scaling it up in the timeline? (I'm assuming FCP). We're actually going to try to intercut this footage with some existing 1080P.

I think it will work better than I'd hoped.
 
WarrenS said:
That's great, stepheninoe. Are you just importing and scaling it up in the timeline? (I'm assuming FCP). We're actually going to try to intercut this footage with some existing 1080P.

I think it will work better than I'd hoped.
Click to expand...

I use Liquid 6 on XpPro. The proceedure is importing the raw file and then placing it on a 1080p timeline and then select "scale to fit/keep aspect" and viola. No render by the way so this is the direct upscale of the single frame mpeg2 and then screen grab. HD-100's footage is great. Put a decent hunk of glass on it and you're ready to make a movie.

The incredible thing about ProHD is it degrades into film grain looking content. My observation is neither Sony nor Canon's HDV can even come close to holding together so well. High motion Sony (for sure) and Canon (I've observed) will give macroblocks quite often. Canon's H1 blacks can not stand to be pulled down, I've observed, without falling apart. With JVC's ProHD you've got a lot of lattitude in post to work with the clips. It's simply better.

Once again JVC's ProHD is the real deal, it's great to work with.
 
Warren,

In the pursuit of solutions to our HD100 woes, I have a few questions.

What F stop were you at? Shutter speed 1/24th? (it seems extra blurry)
What detail setting were you using?
Were you full open with ND filters on?
Is this the stock lens???

I don't know about anyone else, but I watched this frame by frame and can't see any CA?
I figured I would have seen it in the fence around the 5:00 mark.

The mpeg encoder does a great job. I think it works best in 24P mode - it seems to be optimized for it. I imagine it throws as much bandwidth as possible into the 24 frames and puts much much less information into the other 36 pulldown frames. The only artifacts I found were between 7:50 and 8:15, and it was more like a ghost outline that preceded the frame. Maybe "smooth motion" was turned on and caused this.

Warren, when did you take delivery of your camera? Do you know what firmware version you have?
 
Tim,
I saw that ghost as well and then played the video back at normal speed and it is not noticeable at all. I wondered the same thing about smooth motion. You'd never notice this unless you were looking at it frame by frame.

Take a look at the supplied screen capture. You'd think there would be some CA in the high contrast areas but NO, it's impeccable. The time frame you mention has massive motion and a full frame background color change.

The ghost Tim is referring to can be seen here -----> Click here

Warren, how long ago did you pick up your camera?
 
Yep, I was at 1/24th shutter. That was actually a mistake since I meant to be on 1/48th. It was the stock lens, all camera settings at Factory default I think. I can't remember if I'd turned down detail at that point or not. I wasn't full open and was going between F4 and F8 with ND (probably F8 because of the slow shutter). I had just taken delivery and this was the first trial--September 12th. I wasn't even thinking of writing stuff down yet so I'm recalling as best I can.

The firmware is 1.15.

Edit: I forgot to mention that motion smoothing was not on.
 
Warren,

Can you please do Barry Green and me a favour and download this chart and shoot a few frames at a couple of different F stops. Try ƒ1.4, ƒ4, and ƒ8 with detail set to normal.

http://bealecorner.com/trv900/respat/EIA1956.pdf

When you print it, make sure you don't scale it or "fit to page." The distance between the + at the top and the + at the bottom should be exactly 193mm after it is printed.

Set the camera about 4 feet from the chart and then line up the top and bottom of frame with those two + symbols and make your focus as sharp as possible.

This will help Barry and I assess the sharpness of our different stock lenses.

thanks,
Tim

P.S.: This is what mine looks like at ƒ1.4, detail normal.

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/.Public/hd100_13mm_open_detail-norm.tga
 
I'll try to do this Saturday morning at the best print resolution I can get. I DO have some pretty noticeable CA at times, though.
 
Yeah, this is really bothering me. Compared to the French site, and to Tim's site, my camera here is delivering around 200 lines less resolution!

I've been looking at the footage on my HDTV and saying "yeah? so?" I mean, it looks no better than standard-def. And then that French article got posted and there was a res chart showing 800x700 and I thought -- ain't no way this camera's delivering 800x700! So I used the original BealeCorner chart -- verified that it's clean and crisp all the way well past 800 lines, and shot it. And I get maybe 550 x 550. That's no better than the DVX does! (well, it's better on vertical lines, but not on horizontal!) So I've been trading shots with Tim, and he's getting close to 800x700. There's definitely something wrong with this camera or lens, I'm assuming lens. There's nothing "high-def" about what the final output is.

So, so far, I've got extreme chromatic aberration, blurry resolution that's not really any better than standard-def, and monumental split-screen. Looks like on Monday I'll get to try out "The Perfect Experience", as JVC calls it.

(Tim: I edited your post -- the link you'd suggested was my chart's output -- we definitely don't want Warren trying to shoot that chart! I substituted in the link for the original, which is the same link Stephen provided).
 
Barry_Green said:
(Tim: I edited your post -- the link you'd suggested was my chart's output -- we definitely don't want Warren trying to shoot that chart! I substituted in the link for the original, which is the same link Stephen provided).
Click to expand...

Sorry about that, I guess I copy and pasted the wrong link from your message and didn't check it.

BTW, I think I've discovered a new piece of the puzzle for solving the split screen problem in ALL CONDITIONS! I'll share my results when I have confirmed them with an additional test.

Tim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top