The Footage from Leo's shoot...

Status
Not open for further replies.
OK...not to kill an already dead horse, but to be more specific: Did anyone use Adobe Premier CS4 to encode video? WOWSER WAS IT AWFUL!! I always had to encode on Adobe After Effects CS4 because the results were literally 10+ times better. So one day I accidentally exported a video using Adobe Premier CS5. Holy (*&^%!!! It was so much better than CS4. I don't know what they did...but I can tell you that it is MUCH improved. I tried so many different settings in Premier before....and nothing seemed to work. Now it appears that they "put a team" on this...because I just did the "default", export for YouTube upload....and it was fantastic. Anywho...
 
I use to encode for a living well after the editing part :)
And my rule was to encode with a higher bitrate then was asked of me so I never really had a problem with that in Premiere.
 
* It's been a while



Now to judge the footage I would say it looks nice, but not amazing. I noticed some soft shots, but that's something we are used to with these DSLRs and that's not a problem with me. The thing that bother me the most were the "noise" levels. Seemed really bad even at 400 iso and worst at 800. Maybe the user who converted it from their NLE did not use the highest possible settings? Regardless in my honest 100% opinion as of NOW I cannot honestly say that the "image" looks better than what I am seeing with these dslrs. I respect Barry and every professional who put this together. Image quality alone with my own 2 eyes I simply do not see it. I think what we should have is a professional colorist to properly color correct and grade the footage.

Once again thank you Barry and everyone, just because we might not agree with the image quality does not mean anything bad.

peace
 
I use to encode for a living well after the editing part
And my rule was to encode with a higher bitrate then was asked of me so I never really had a problem with that in Premiere.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a simple, logical fix. I'm sure this will be the same. Another professional is FLOORED by the low-light ability of this camera: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?230175-This-might-be-interesting-to-a-few-of-you/page7
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?230175-This-might-be-interesting-to-a-few-of-you/page8

CLEARLY this many pros aren't wrong or being "duped". Can't wait till we figure it out and move on. :)
 
As reported on the Dell 23, you can't judge or call anything as clean on that monitor. I know cause i have the 24". It's a great computer monitor but terrible video monitor. All in all I can see why Barry and others who participated are so frustrated as it's almost an affont to their knowledge especially when it comes form someone who has been on the forums for what? a month? or less.. who's posted a couple of dozen times.?

I know one thing... for 5 years now this site and Barry's advice has been somewhat of a compass to me. When he reported on how good the HMC150 was for the money, without bias to trying to push the 170, I bought it and never regretted it a single day. Same for the HVX before that.. The guy is someone that I've never met but I almost feel like I should send him a christmas card with a gift certificate to the Outback... everyone loves a steak or a blooming onion.

I know how this stuff looks on my monitors and I don't judge it on that basis.... I like to see for myself, or I like to listen to people who I respect, and that's Barry for sure. I"m completely sold on this and I'm a glutton for coming to the forums as much as I do... Maybe it's our society that is now more about opinions than facts- as evident in the news and media. What I didn't expect to see was this line of dialogue when Barry and others are doing this for free and for our benefit.

It's like pissing in the punch bowl... or showing no gratitude for the efforts of those who help us make decisions. I know Barry has other plans to do shoots and engage us, but seriously I bet he's wondering if it's worth it after repeatedly getting treated like this. Do we respect and appreciate this or do we repeatedly attack and come up with a litany of addiction comments and affronts?

It reminds me of how people criticized Verner Hertzog's take on the Red. You had first ACs and rookie filmmakers making jabs and calling HIM out... like that's not a darn crying shame. It reminds me of the coffehouse days where people sat around all in black and say," you know, I had some real problems with Scorcese's last film and I think the Coen Brother's have jumped the shark. You know, people need to get over themselves and or realize what this all is.. A ***** fest.

It's kind of an epidemic of criticsm and I deal with it with my DOE state clients. Everything is cool and then one person says something slightly negative and then 2000 people say something and then it's all about feeling righteous by having a criticsm and feeling like they are engaged and purposeful... Well not everyone is destined to be heard and valued equally. There's judgments in this and a not everyone is on the same footing artistically and technically... But maybe I'm just as bad for reading it and not spending time with my wife and kids...


Rant over, now return to your ranting... shoot or don't shoot. Buy or don't buy... or just go out and and eat some delicious flap jacks!
 
Last edited:
Bah.... There is NO question that what is going on here is gamma shifting. Snow Leopard OSX is a horrible culprit of this, not to mention FCP. My home HTPC showed some noise, but I know what I'm looking at ain't the truth, and even then, what I can see could easily be graded out.

Quit the whining and beeotching people. Comments should be, "I'm surprised at what I'm seeing, but there appears to be some noise. Anyone else have this problem?"

As opposed to, "this camera has more noise than my iPhone4 at 1.8 million ISO!"

Grow up.
 
I see noise on the dark areas which is pretty much 80% of all camcorder's behavior.

and no, those arent mid tones. those are 20-30% IRE
 
Justyn said:
It's like pissing in the punch bowl... or showing no gratitude for the efforts of those who help us make decisions. I know Barry has other plans to do shoots and engage us, but seriously I bet he's wondering if it's worth it after repeatedly getting treated like this. Do we respect and appreciate this or do we repeatedly attack and come up with a litany of addiction comments and affronts?
Click to expand...

It's surprising how personally people are taking this criticism. Nowhere in this thread has anyone de-commentated Barry or any of the other people involved with this shoot. Trust me, even though we're not agreeing with them at this time, we greatly appreciate it. We were simply stating that we found the footage to be more noisy than we would expect, especially with all the hype and "DSLR-Killer" talk. I myself expected very clean high ISO, as I see with my DSLRs, and it's simply (as of now) not there, not even at iso 400. I saw it in clip with the Japanese taxi driver and I saw it here. It's not disrespectful at all it's just our opinions. If Barry says that with a properly calibrated monitor or that on a TV it isn't noticeable... than that is even less impressive, since kids are shooting skate videos at higher ISO without and sort of monitoring or regard for compression are still getting less noise with T2i's, no matter where I watch it. It just shouldn't be this noisy, no matter what monitor I watch it on. There's no doubt that the AF-100 is a great cam... but if you expect a 3MP image to be less noisy than a image coming off of a FF 22mp sensor 4x's the size than you're just delusional, no matter how long you've been in the industry. That's just common sense. If you start with a REALLY big 22mp imager and down-sample to a measly 1920x1080 size (even sloppily) you're not going to see that much noise. Think about the physics of it. You don't need to be a sensor engineer or industry professional to understand that. Anyone who's spent a few months with photo shop should be able to grasp the concept.
 
Last edited:
It's all been said before

It's all been said before

OK my Delorean is gassed up. My Flux Capicitor has a fresh Plutonium core.

Come back with me to a simpler time when the choice was not Red, 3 Chip HD, 4/3 Sensor HD, DV, HDSLR, or ... what's that other one ... oh yeah FILM. But only between which HD or DV brand you wanted to go with.

See all of this has a very similar ring to me. I'm having Deja Vu. Part of the problem is that video has some noise. We forget about it when we are watching narrative work. And are reminded of it when scrutinizing a new cam. Various monitor settings / brands add to the problem. Which is not really a problem. We see this noise in footage we watch every day and don't notice it or actually accept it as an aesthetically pleasing part of the image.

With a lot of these new advents in video technology, some of the same arguments and tropes keep repeating themselves over and over. That's what's happening here with this noise issue.

So let's go back to 2005 when the HVX was about to come out and see if we can't see a pattern here. There were more than a few threads about the "HVX noise". Below are not nearly all of them.

It might be interesting to start with these two, which are chronologically among the first:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?34878-HVX200-low-light-noise-level....
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?35002-Res-Fest-LA-Comparison-of-HVX-Canon-JVC-and-Sony!

In the above two threads, various video professionals, yes including Barry, are pooping themselves (in a good way) over the lowlight performance of the HVX, saying it was much cleaner than anything they'd expected from a 1/3" 3 chip camera. They saw the footage at something called RES FEST on properly calibrated monitors. Across the board everyone is flipping for the footage.

Yet look at the number of threads below freaking out about the HVX noise that would follow.

One person proclaims that this will be the end of Panasonic and that major networks are buying 1 or 2 HVX's while loading up with an arsenal of JVC's because of the panasonic noise issue. We know how that claim turned out with 5 years hindsight don't we.

There is / was noise in the HVX. Digital video has *SOME* noise.

Somehow, despite all the panic below, the HVX became the most professionally used camera of its type. Probably because professionals realized that digital video has noise, knew when it didn't matter and when it did, how to shoot around or with it ... and viewed uncompressed footage on properly calibrated monitors ...

The alternative would be that all of the people that were freaking out positively about the (relative) clean image at Res Fest were on crack, that the footage was doctored, and that every one else saw the footage for what it really was - full of irregular noise that was not appropriate to / a limitation of / inherent in the tech which killed shots and made the camera unusable.

Except that 5 years later it's proven very useable and an industry corner stone.

We've been here before folks. So let's take a step back. You can read everything that's being said here and now, already said in the following threads 2 to 5 years ago.

Enjoy:



MOST RECENT

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?48508

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?136327-Reducing-noise

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?127781-HVX-Low-Light

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?128635-More-noise-in-24p-than-30p

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?111553-The-noise-is-killing-me!

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?105763-Too-much-noise-on-this-HVX202

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?108486-Still-too-noisy.-Any-clean-setting?

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?104993-Low-light-noise

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?102897-noise-with-lolight

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?44020-HVX-noise-vs.-DVX100B-noise

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?73832-VIDEO-NOISE-quick-tips-requested

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?79588-Is-the-HVX-horrible-in-low-light

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?78300-Is-there-something-wrong-with-my-hvx

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?74476-VIDEO-NOISE-in-black-and-dark-areas

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?66924-Seriously-why-does-HVX200-noise-look-like-film-grain

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?61634-Spanking-the-noise-in-F6

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?55387-Noise-in-Lock-Downed-Footage-of-Pine-Trees

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?55420-Lets-see-that-noise!

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?54171-new-shootout!-HVX200-versus....hvx200!

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?53982-My-HVX-is-giving-me-an-ulcer!-noise-low-res-Argh!

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?52799-HVX200-noisy-grainy-images

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?47522-Noise-Solution-Testing

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...an-HVX-and-has-an-opinion-on-(video)-*noise*?

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?43550-Settings-for-lowest-noise

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?44115-Noise-Noise-Noise!

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?42567-Noise

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?34878-HVX200-low-light-noise-level

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?35002-Res-Fest-LA-Comparison-of-HVX-Canon-JVC-and-Sony!

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?34878-HVX200-low-light-noise-level....

EARLIEST
 
Thanks, Jack. When it comes to these discussions (freakouts?), there really is nothing new under the sun. Everything is awesome, and no one is happy.
 
Leo, Joe, Barry
Excellent work and aesthetically pleasing as well (beside showing what this camera is capable of in the hand of pros.)
Thank you for sharing with us.

As for the whiners as usual; A character in Herzog's White Diamond had this strange one liner I couldnt figure out back then what it meant when i watched:
"Cant hear you for the thunder you are..."
 
mrmoonay said:
Anyways while I was editing my dumb little test the answer hit me... and it's so obvious. The AF-100 sensor only has a 3-4MP, if I remember correctly, which is great to reduce aliasing because not much down scaling is being done. However, the 7D and GH2 both have a HUGE mega-pixel count in comparison, 16-18MP. That means that the noise is physically being applied to smaller pixels in the first place... PLUS, it's being down-sampled further, which creates the possibility of aliasing, but decreases noise due to more pixel averaging. Therefore I actually believe it's impossible for this camera to perform BETTER than the GH2 and 7D in high ISO areas. The AF-100 image might be brighter at ISO 800 than a 7D because of bigger pixel size, but there will always be more noise because it's starting with less pixels.
Click to expand...
This supposition bears no relevance to reality though. Because first, you don't know what the AF100's pixel count is, and second, larger pixels have always resulted in less noise, not more. And I reiterate -- the GH2 cannot outperform the AF100. It just can't. So in the quest for answers, don't get distracted by a false path.
 
People are funny. In part, there may some hype about this camera here naturally. But what were people expecting in terms of noise? At 800 iso? Come on!
Most experienced DP's and myself rate the RED One at 200-250 to have a low noise floor, and even then I see some noise in the blacks if I really look carefully (often times a monitor problem).
For the money, this looks to be a great camera. What a f***ing bargain!
Lots of great detail. Can't deal with the noise? Buy an F3 or shoot it at the same ISO you would shoot a Red One.
 
The Reverend is so indeed wise. Vimeo also doesn't stream quite right on my systems.... Preach it!


TheReverend said:
Bah.... There is NO question that what is going on here is gamma shifting. Snow Leopard OSX is a horrible culprit of this, not to mention FCP. My home HTPC showed some noise, but I know what I'm looking at ain't the truth, and even then, what I can see could easily be graded out.

Quit the whining and beeotching people. Comments should be, "I'm surprised at what I'm seeing, but there appears to be some noise. Anyone else have this problem?"

As opposed to, "this camera has more noise than my iPhone4 at 1.8 million ISO!"

Grow up.
Click to expand...
 
Please get a camera or two and show us an enlightened view. I don't think this is a sound assumption but everyone likes to assume. Personally most of the techy stuff the people go on about is way beyond me and Barry is the biggest guru when it comes to this stuff so if he's disagreeing with you then I'd say you need to give us some credentials and justification for this summation... Otherwise, to quote the dude... It's just like.. your opinion man. We like that, it just might not be factual.

I think also like the idea of a super cheap camera triumphing over all others even ones more expensive...


mrmoonay said:
It's surprising how personally people are taking this criticism. Nowhere in this thread has anyone de-commentated Barry or any of the other people involved with this shoot. Trust me, even though we're not agreeing with them at this time, we greatly appreciate it. We were simply stating that we found the footage to be more noisy than we would expect, especially with all the hype and "DSLR-Killer" talk. I myself expected very clean high ISO, as I see with my DSLRs, and it's simply (as of now) not there, not even at iso 400. I saw it in clip with the Japanese taxi driver and I saw it here. It's not disrespectful at all it's just our opinions. If Barry says that with a properly calibrated monitor or that on a TV it isn't noticeable... than that is even less impressive, since kids are shooting skate videos at higher ISO without and sort of monitoring or regard for compression are still getting less noise with T2i's, no matter where I watch it. It just shouldn't be this noisy, no matter what monitor I watch it on. There's no doubt that the AF-100 is a great cam... but if you expect a 3MP image to be less noisy than a image coming off of a FF 22mp sensor 4x's the size than you're just delusional, no matter how long you've been in the industry. That's just common sense. If you start with a REALLY big 22mp imager and down-sample to a measly 1920x1080 size (even sloppily) you're not going to see that much noise. Think about the physics of it. You don't need to be a sensor engineer or industry professional to understand that. Anyone who's spent a few months with photo shop should be able to grasp the concept.
Click to expand...
 
Taylor Rudd said:
Thanks, Jack. When it comes to these discussions (freakouts?), there really is nothing new under the sun. Everything is awesome, and no one is happy.
Click to expand...


You are so right there. It's like the person who you meet who you have to win over to get their graciousness or even civility. It's the concept that being a jerk signifies strenght and importance. People like to mask things over with grandiose ideas and such. I have a friend who produces all the videos for the Black Eyed Peas among other clients and he's interested in getting this camera... Tis a pretty sound concept that he's not into picking up a piece of crap...
 
Mike@AF said:
Sorry I was speaking in relative terms to the entire frame. I shouldn't do that when I'm discussing it with people who know what they're and I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

lol i wasnt refering to your posts but whatever
but if the entire frame IS dark, it will have noise i.e. the lemon squeezing shot
i dont see any noise beyond the shadows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top