UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panasonic!

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Good Idea Jay.. I added a poll for you at the top of the thread, It will be interesting to see how many people are experiencing this.
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Barry--A couple of problems. First, the link you provided came up as an error page. Secondly, the video posted didn't say which shot was the DVX and which was the 16mm (although i have a good idea).
 
UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Jarred!  I would suggest to add another question on the following lines in the poll:

If YES, Can you control the problem in a way to come out with more satisfactory results?  

REason? I first voted YES, becuase I have faced this issue. But then I removed the vote and opted NO. Simply becuase now I have an ample understanding of the issue (it is the PROGERESSIVE DISPLAY not the Progressive capture) and CAN control it, effectively, on the lines suggested by Barry (Thick mode, suitable shutter speed, slow panning, planning your shots and outputs beforehand) and my own experience so far.
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Thanks for the poll, Jarred.  :D You just gave me the idea of posting another poll dedicated to my other issue: audio delay when monitoring live.

Aejaz:

"But then I removed the vote and voted NO. Simply becuase as now I have an ample understanding of the issue (PROGERESSIVE DISPLAY not the Progressive capture) and CAN control it, effectively, on the lines suggested by Barry (Thick mode, suitable shutter speed, slow panning, planning your shots and outputs beforehand)"

Even if you can get better images (but I don't think you can completely solve the problem as far as I've tried...), you still aren't able to solve the "problem". You'll still have a product that the great majority of people -with an interlaced TV- won't be able to decently see. Also, there's still the "mistery" of people saying other progressive material normally plays on interlaced monitors...so who's to blame?  :-X

And then again...I'll never get tired to say this...I find it absurd to be forced to set shutter speeds you normally woudn't use, especially if this won't really solve the problem, and I find it even more crazy having to move the camera just in a certain way....come on....Jay made a good point of this.....*Anyways*, we've seen that even the slightest movement, *on a tripod*, causes the doubling lines....  >:(

Finally...it's true you don't get to see doubling lines on a PC monitor...but there's still this strange flicker you normally don't see in movies, docs and so on... ???

Cris
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Cris

I agree there are technical limitations in this whole issue. And frankly, I do not want to sound like a Panny-rep either.

But I wonder how would u explain a hypothetical situation where suppose u have a very low speed, old computer and have installed WINDOWS XP Professional on it. Then in that case whom would u blame if it does not run smoothly?? I am saying this concerning the point of PROGRESSIVE DISPLAY ...or the general availablity of the Progressive TVs.

Someone rightly questioned above somewhere that "whether Panasonic has intoduced this technology too early". Perhaps Progressive is still a technology for high end professionals who have all the resources to resolve issues such as flickering etc in their captures. Afterall we do not expereince  any flickering in any of the movies we see on our TVs...regardless of whether they are progressive or not.

Secondly I think there are always solutions to the problems. As someone suggested an NLE based solution. I hope u are aware, Sony has intorduced a novel stuff called 'MICROMV' and it is replete with all kinds of problems. However, now some new softwares are able to address most of those MICROMV bugs quite effectively.

I am not denying the PRESENCE of an issue here. I would also like to vote YES to the poll if there is a second question asking how do I feel about the whole situation and CAN I control it?.

Finally, I think Panasonic is a big company. They should themselves have some means to respond to such concerns....if they think that CUTOMER SATISFACTION is anything.
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Aejaz, don't worry, please, I never thought you sound like a Panny-rep....On the contrary, you're a very nice guy who's trying to help us out understanding this whole issue...

I know you're not denying the presence of an issue. Sorry if you probably took my message like a sort of personal "attack". I really didn't mean anything like that.

I'm just saying that if DVX100(A) PAL progressive technology was meant for progressive displays only, then Panasonic should have clearly told us.
But then again, people like Mine have stated the doubling lines are still visible on a 30" TFT.... So this is kinda confusing.

If there's really a solution to the problem in NLE, I still find this extremely annoying. For instance, I've had many audio issues with different video capture boards in the past. Technicians weren't able to say anything more than: apply some filters, raise/lower the wave's volume....But I wonder why on earth I have to apply a filter to material coming from an at least supposed to be-(take it easy please)great camera.

If MICROMV has problems, than it's just Sony's fault, just like it was for the first faulty PD170 they sent out.
Then, if there's some way to solve the problem, great....but I think the material should be good at the base.
Just my humble opinion. :P

Cris
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

HI,


I have just purchased a 100ae, at first I was unhappy. Then I realised that I would see interlaced artifacts with the progressive mode of the DVX in my NLE until I change the codec to a none progressive codec IE quicktime mp4.

I think I'm right in saying that the DV codec is an interlaced codec. MP4 is prgressive for computer displays. The difference is like "chalk and cheese'.


Also I have found that progressive Dvx Dv codec------to Mpeg2 for DVD you keep the interlaced artifacts.

If you, convert the progressive Dvx Dv codec------to MP4--------then to Mpeg2 you loose the intelaced artifacts.

Try it, it works.
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Further to my earlier post.

Edit with the progressive DV codec then after editing, change to progressive codec to loose artifacts.
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

What is progressive DV codec ?
and could anyone tellme hwat is progessive monitor is
Thank you
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

"Someone rightly questioned above somewhere that "whether Panasonic has intoduced this technology too early". Perhaps Progressive is still a technology for high end professionals who have all the resources to resolve issues such as flickering etc in their captures"

If that's the case (it's only for high end professionals), then Panasonic shouldn't have released the camera. And even "high end professionals" (in the US at least) aren't working on progressive monitors. I work at a quarter of a million dollar multimedia center & we're doing everything on standard interlaced NTSC monitors, just like everyone else. and i haven't found any "miracle solutions" with all of that equipment to elimate the interlacing issues on pans, no matter how slow and steady (and deliberately blurring your image is not an acceptable solution. it's like saying "oh, just don't focus--you won't even notice the strobing!).

This camera was released by Panasonic with the intention that it could be used on any television. The progressive modes are by far the biggest selling point. This is a very new camera & there are bound to be some problems, but there is absolutely no reason why they should release a "DVX200" until they figure out a way to fix these issues.

veganway is absolutely right--there's no reason why we should be going around in circles trying to figure out solutions to this. it's panasonic's responsibility, and i know at least for myself, it will be their willingness to address these issues that determines whether i even consider buying a next generation DVX (it's not looking all that likely at this point). Panasonic needs to find a way to acceptably handle the pulldown, because they don't have it yet.

You should be able to shoot in 24P normal & have it play back straight from the camera or deck onto an NTSC monitor without jarring artifacts on pans--that's what it was designed to do. There's no reason why i shouldn't be able to take a tape I just shot, pop it into a machine & show a client without them saying "what the hell's wrong with this?" No other medium in the world expects you to digitize footage, remove pulldowns, add gaussian blur to the image, add pulldowns again, etc. and that doesn't even include all the shooting limitations!

Panasonic needs to do now what they should have done from the start--hire someone to build a simple application that will digitize your footage & add a proper pulldown that makes your footage look like properly telecined 16mm, minus some resolution and grain. And if it's not an issue of improper pulldown methods, find out what the problem is that's causing all the headaches. Until that happens, I think I'll go back to my Sony's--I never had to spend hours in a web forum bitching about those...
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso


I think I'll definitely found a Jay's fan club... ;D

BTW, Jay, I was wondering if you could write a couple of lines on my other thread, about audio delay...I'd like to hear your opinion. Thanks.

eyeshigher: thanks for your suggestions...but yes, what do you mean by progressive DV codec? Can you make an example? Thanks.

Cris
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Cris, Jay

Your points are well taken.

However, one thing still surprises me. ??? ::) ???   How (and why) the DVX100, which was released in 2002, never came up with this issue earlier? Though now, as we understand, the same problem is noticeable in both DVX100A and its earlier version DVX100. You would agree it is one of the MYSTERIES yet unresolved in this riddle.

Or was it a trip to discovery island by CRIS (who started all this   :-[ :D ;)  ) which made us more knowlegeable of the limitations of the camera.  

In fact I myself am new to the Pany boat....having left the Sony ride since the purchase of the DVX100AEN....and can't reslove this particular riddle by any means.
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Aejaz....

"Or was it a trip to discovery island by CRIS (who started all this ) which made us more knowlegeable of the limitations of the camera."

Wow...not bad to know you started making people "see the light".... ;D :P
But, well...we should check the dates from other forum's threads about progressive. I think French Repaire was one of the first forums where the whole situation was brought up.
Anyways, I guess you're right. I don't think that thread is 2 years old, either... ???

And actually, what surprises me even more, is the fact that only now even NTSC people confirm there's an issue....so seems like we in PAL land are not alone, anymore..... ;) :P

"You would agree it is one of the MYSTERIES yet unresolved in this riddle."

Yes, definitely... :o ???

I myself have still to solve the audio delay MISTERY, too.... >:(

Cris
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Cris
"Wow...not bad to know you started making people "see the light".... ... And actually, what surprises me even more, is the fact that only now even NTSC people confirm there's an issue....so seems like we in PAL land are not alone, anymore.....  "

In fact  your LIGHT seems to have illuminated the NTSC land more. :D ;D :D ;D
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso


Seems like I made the step from Joan of Arc to Yoda... ;) :P ;D

Cris
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

However, one thing still surprises me. How (and why) the DVX100, which was released in 2002, never came up with this issue earlier? Though now, as we understand, the same problem is noticeable in both DVX100A and its earlier version DVX100. You would agree it is one of the MYSTERIES yet unresolved in this riddle.

Trust me, this has been an issue for a LONG time for both NTSC and PAL users, not only on this site, but on the 2-pop and Creative Cow DVX forums as well. The extent of the issues among PAL users never came up as much as NTSC, which I figured was attributed to the fact that NTSC was going 24fps to 30fps on the pulldown, whereas PAL just stayed at 25fps. Seems like I underestimated that one...

also, in regards to "eyeshigher"'s post, that seems to only be in reference to playback on computer monitors, which i don't think have been the main problem here, being as they're progressive. The problems here are in regards to interlaced NTSC and PAL monitors and televisions. I don't use MPEG-4 much, but I'm pretty sure that codec isn't made for hi-rez outputs to tape for viewing on NTSC/PAL monitors.

i'll go check out the audio sync post now.....
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Jay

"Trust me, this has been an issue for a LONG time ....."

I trust you under solemn oath 8) ;
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Hi Again,

I think, Progressive Dvx100ae codec is recorded as 50i repeating two frames as it goes. The Dvx still encodes two identical fields I believe.

By encoding into a different codec like mp4 you loose the extra field or frame---- ok for computers you add, but this process removes all jagged artifacts from the file and some strobing from the pal image. This is something you cannot do with the Dv codec.

Then encode to your format choice-but not DV codec.

Ive tried this process mp4 ---to--- mpeg2 burnt a dvd, played it on a dvd player ( non progressive ) and the image quality is amazing compared to the original DVX Dv Codec progressive or not.
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

[quote author=eyeshigher link=board=Events;num=1077903628;start=50#57 date=03/04/04 at 09:20:20]I think, Progressive Dvx100ae codec is recorded as 50i repeating two frames as it goes. The Dvx still encodes two identical fields I believe.

[/quote]

No. The DVX does not encode identical fields, or repeat frames.

The DVX captures both fields IN THE SAME MOMENT IN TIME, but they are not identical. Some people are confusing this issue, thinking that the DVX duplicates fields. It does not. The contents of the fields are very different. They're just captured at the same moment in time, which is the difference between progressive and interlaced (in interlaced, they're captured at a different moment in time).
 
Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

Re: UNHAPPY *25p PAL* users: LET'S WRITE to Panaso

i don't think many people are confused about the DVX's capture method (at least not on this thread)--it's either 24 or 25 individual progressive frames per second. i think the confusion is coming in the way that the DVX puts the image to tape.

Somewhere in the process, the DVX is screwing something up in terms of achieving a proper motion rendering. My guess is it's coming in the pulldown process.

Also, I still would appreciate the info i requested regarding the 16mm/DVX side-by-side test video Barry posted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top