This might be interesting to a few of you

Status
Not open for further replies.
PaPa said:
i disagree. Those of us who are waiting for the cam and who don't react in a silly manner should not suffer because some pixel peepers and whiners don't know how to behave :P
Click to expand...

Where did you go to school? Don't ya know that the kids yapping in the back of the class always make it so everyone else doesn't get their graham crackers and milk?
 
lol

on another note, just watch "leo's footage" from the ftp site. I am absolutely BLOWN away. I thought the quicktime stuff looked good once imported into my NLE, but man, the original footage is absolutely F&*^ing beautiful. I am absolutely beside myself and there is no way anyone can convince me otherwise.

Those of you who aren't yet convinced are really missing out. This is jaw dropping..

Barry, please don't punish us all! :D
 
just did a minor color grade to the footage at 800 iso, first of all, not only is the noise almost invisible, you also have to take into account that it's candle light, which is in the mid 2000 K temp which is very far from the sensors native temp so anything that's more towards the tungsten side is going to be more noisy. I can just imagine shooting 800-1600 iso with daylight. This thing is going to make me drool and make every shoot very very very exciting.

mikko, rock out hard on this shoot. Im dying to see how all this talent is going to make everyone in the world want one.
 
PaPa said:
lol

on another note, just watch "leo's footage" from the ftp site. I am absolutely BLOWN away. I thought the quicktime stuff looked good once imported into my NLE, but man, the original footage is absolutely F&*^ing beautiful. I am absolutely beside myself and there is no way anyone can convince me otherwise.

Those of you who aren't yet convinced are really missing out. This is jaw dropping..

Barry, please don't punish us all! :D
Click to expand...

We aim to please ;)
 
As i thank joe for the efforts of giving me the ftp, i cannot say the footage was enough to blow me away. Im not sure why but the vegtables have so much dancing noise on my viewing in the blacks. At this point i am wishing for my xha1 redrock setup; i know sad but it had great filmic images. Im not sure the mishap in the viewing but i do hope the footage will look better. For me the footage wasnt even ex1 crisp or sharp. I dont know, from timurs findings i am still hopeful, but slightly worried.
 
danielc said:
As i thank joe for the efforts of giving me the ftp, i cannot say the footage was enough to blow me away. Im not sure why but the vegtables have so much dancing noise on my viewing in the blacks. At this point i am wishing for my xha1 redrock setup; i know sad but it had great filmic images. Im not sure the mishap in the viewing but i do hope the footage will look better. For me the footage wasnt even ex1 crisp or sharp. I dont know, from timurs findings i am still hopeful, but slightly worried.
Click to expand...

ITs worth it to invest in a video montior. Not a computer monitor. two different ways of displaying an image. even watching it through your PS3 to a calibrate TV is better than watching anything on a computer screen....
 
TimurCivan said:
ITs worth it to invest in a video montior. Not a computer monitor. two different ways of displaying an image. even watching it through your PS3 to a calibrate TV is better than watching anything on a computer screen....
Click to expand...


Ditto on the PS3 to monitor. PS3 has some of the best HD decoding money can buy (and the Air force did buy like hundreds or more for rigging together into simulation engines). Anyone know where that download FTP is for the 4:2:2 of the test?
 
I also have the ProResHQ file. We are a post production facility, specialising in finishing for broadcast. There is definitely excessive noise on that file. This does not actually prove there is anything wrong with the camera, of course but - viewed on a variety of calibrated, professional monitors (yes, including Sony grade 1 units) excessive noise is clearly visible on most shots - in the blacks. Maybe the camera wasn't black balanced properly but that's just speculation. All I know for sure is that there is unacceptable noise in the blacks visible on all our professional/broadcast monitors and on our Hamlet and Tektronix scopes. It actually looks as bad to me in places as low light max gain footage from an older generation CCD small sensor camera. There are many possible explanations for this and I don't want to get into a fight with anyone here. I am - like others - extremely grateful to the team for taking the time to produce this material and to make it available to us all - even as a ProRes file! We'd need to have an uncompressed capture from HDSDI out as well as a thorough examination of the camera's settings before pointing any fingers in any direction at all. I just wanted to chime in to say that - no matter how much one discusses RGBvs601/709 levels, CRTvsLCD, professional vs consumer vs prosumer kit and experience, there are issues with noise not only in the Vimeo encode but also on the ProResHQ file posted on the FTP site. Period.

The compression artefacts are also considerable BUT nothing surprising for material acquired on AVCHD at 24mbps. Panasonic's AVCHD implementation might be great but there really is no free lunch compressing 4:2:2 1080 footage down to 24mbps and it would be wrong to expect it to be any better. However, subjectively, and based on this material any talk of it being better than, say, XDCAM HD 422 is utter nonsense. I don't care how old Sony's MPEG2 technology is and how new Pana's AVCHD is!!! Obviously, a better external recorder (Nano or KiPro or similar) will be necessary for anyone serious about master image quality. Also, it's important to point out that all the 8-bit/10-bit discussions are really not relevant unless the AF100 has a spectacular signal to noise ratio up there with much more expensive cameras. We've ordered an AF100 and I can't wait to put it to the test!
 
Yes i agree flotsam, theres no way the imager should have that much noise. It seems kinda silly to say, heres a great image, but watch it on a professional monitor to see the true image. Granted a monitor is more helpful than my lcd hd screen, but i never expected anything to be dancing from this sensor. Ill leave my noise comments at that, this is timurs thread and i will sit quietly until there is more speculation on what we can expect the image to look like.
 
not sure what's up with your professinoal monitor, but looks absolutely stunning on mine at home ( calibrated as much as i can )

Keep checking for updates!
 
Flotsam said:
This does not actually prove there is anything wrong with the camera, of course but - viewed on a variety of calibrated, professional monitors (yes, including Sony grade 1 units) excessive noise is clearly visible on most shots - in the blacks. Maybe the camera wasn't black balanced properly but that's just speculation. All I know for sure is that there is unacceptable noise in the blacks visible on all our professional/broadcast monitors and on our Hamlet and Tektronix scopes. blah, blah, blah

The compression artefacts are also considerable BUT nothing surprising for material acquired on AVCHD at 24mbps. Panasonic's AVCHD implementation might be great but there really is no free lunch compressing 4:2:2 1080 footage down to 24mbps, blah, blah, blah...
Click to expand...

How did we end up back here again?
 
you put my fat face on the intranets?!!? i demand my payment in canned SPAM and fruit rollups. it's in my sag contract!
 
!600 ISO mixed light WOW!!! and the "Noise" is not "Dancing" on this clip so we can all breath out and relax now
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top