-
Panasonic HVX200 workflow questions (used to DVCAM).
-
iMan,
One favour you could do for me, is to report back on this forum how you get on with all this. You could give your impressions on the relative pros and cons of the two cameras in this workflow, as well as any perceived quality differences that exist – I’m sure there’d be more than a few people on this forum very interested in your results.
Go well,
Stephen Downes
-
Will do, in about a week after I’ve done tests with cams and fcp.
-
iman wrote: ” When the HVX records DVCProHD as 720p the frame size is 1280×720 which just so happens to be the same frame size as the JVC recording in HDV mode.”
Problem is that the 720p Varicam files are actually 960 X 720. The instruction set in the code tells the application that it is 1280. Not all applications look for this instruction. Specifically Final Touch. When rendering to DVCPro HD 720 in Final Touch, there is a scale that occurs and if you look at the final compared with the original (by fading between the two in FCP5) you will see that the Final Touch version has been zoomed in by about 10%. They (FT) says that the QuickTime file set has a language that is passing along this artificial size and some applications dont/cant know the artificial size and must know the native size. Also the DVCpro HD 720 Codec has a quicktime handler problem that keeps you from being able to render pixel to pixel (the 10% zoom problem) apparantly the instruction set includes outside frame video pixels and not just active video pixels. FCP has been patched to handle the problem. So if QuickTime fixes the problem, it will then be unfixed in FCP… It’s a pain in the arse!
-
Dan,
You’re right when talking about VariCam because it’s native pixel dimension is indeed 960×720, however iMan is shooting with the HVX 200 and it uses pixel shift technology so it’s 720p frames really are 1280×720.
Stephen Downes
-
“While this camera records HD video onto the recording media the optical performance of the camera is closer to the performance of an HDV than to a professional 2/3″ camera system.”
This statement by itself suggests that the optical performance of the HVX is at least better than HDV-based Cameras. Yes, it is closer to HDV than 2/3″ camera but at least it is better.
So if we construct a scale from 1 to 10 representing the difference between the optical performance of HD 2/3″ cameras and HDV Cameras, where HD 2/3″ cameras are at 10 while HDV 1/3″ Cameras are at 1, the HVX will probably be rated at most less than 5 and at least more than 1. Probably 2, maybe 3.
This makes lot of sense if we take Barry Green’s test comparing the HVX with the JVC. I have seen still images for that test and the color performance of the HVX is clearly superior.
I would say if one desires true 24P 1/3″ HD Camera, HVX is probably the best choice.
Cheers
-
[sk880user] “This statement by itself suggests that the optical performance of the HVX is at least better than HDV-based Cameras. Yes, it is closer to HDV than 2/3” camera but at least it is better.
Independent testing by Adam Wilt and co. doesn’t back you up here. Of all the third inch chip HD cameras tested, they said the HVX 200 produced the least sharp images of the lot (around 550 lines). Certainly in comparisons I’ve seen between HVX and VariCam footage, the HVX footage looked noticeably softer. But then again sharpness isn’t everything!
[sk880user] So if we construct a scale from 1 to 10 representing the difference between the optical performance of HD 2/3″ cameras and HDV Cameras, where HD 2/3″ cameras are at 10 while HDV 1/3″ Cameras are at 1, the HVX will probably be rated at most less than 5 and at least more than 1. Probably 2, maybe 3.
How on earth did you arrive at this sliding scale of quality? By empirical testing? Or perhaps it’s simply a mental exercise?
[sk880user] This makes lot of sense if we take Barry Green’s test comparing the HVX with the JVC. I have seen still images for that test and the color performance of the HVX is clearly superior.
We all know how much Barry Green enjoys his HVX 200 and tends toward being a Panasonic sycophant. You’ll have to do better than that!
[sk880user] I would say if one desires true 24P 1/3″ HD Camera, HVX is probably the best choice.”
I’d say the jury is still out on that one. Lets see some real-world user tests, not just a whole bunch of SPEC-ulation!
-
[sk880user] “This statement by itself suggests that the optical performance of the HVX is at least better than HDV-based Cameras. Yes, it is closer to HDV than 2/3” camera but at least it is better.
[Stephen reply]
Independent testing by Adam Wilt and co. doesn’t back you up here. Of all the third inch chip HD cameras tested, they said the HVX 200 produced the least sharp images of the lot (around 550 lines). Certainly in comparisons I’ve seen between HVX and VariCam footage, the HVX footage looked noticeably softer. But then again sharpness isn’t everything!My post was referring directly to your quotation:
“While this camera records HD video onto the recording media the optical performance of the camera is closer to the performance of an HDV than to a professional 2/3″ camera system.”
Remember, I did not quote this, You quoted it. I was simply commenting on it.
2) I have read the result of Adam Wilt and co, which included Barry Green by the way, and their conclusion was not the way you are putting it. The way you are putting is you are making HVX to be the worst. However, Adam Wilt testing made them all almost equal. However, most of the testers ended up choosing HVX over all.
[sk880user] So if we construct a scale from 1 to 10 representing the difference between the optical performance of HD 2/3″ cameras and HDV Cameras, where HD 2/3″ cameras are at 10 while HDV 1/3″ Cameras are at 1, the HVX will probably be rated at most less than 5 and at least more than 1. Probably 2, maybe 3.
[stephen]
How on earth did you arrive at this sliding scale of quality? By empirical testing? Or perhaps it’s simply a mental exercise?Simple: Your own quotation that you used in your post:
“While this camera records HD video onto the recording media the optical performance of the camera is closer to the performance of an HDV than to a professional 2/3″ camera system.”
So is it ok for you to use such quotation only when it serves your purpose? You need to be willing to accept ALL CONCLUSIONS and not just the ones that serve your purpose. The above quotation, which you used, demonstrate the above fact.
[sk880user] This makes lot of sense if we take Barry Green’s test comparing the HVX with the JVC. I have seen still images for that test and the color performance of the HVX is clearly superior.
[stephen]
We all know how much Barry Green enjoys his HVX 200 and tends toward being a Panasonic sycophant. You’ll have to do better than that!I have seen the images and they confirm that HVX is superior. Now, do you believe that maybe Barry intentionally took bad footage from JVC to make it look bad? Maybe he manipulated the images in post? Or maybe he did not know how to utilize the JVC correctly? I am very curious about this.
[sk880user] I would say if one desires true 24P 1/3″ HD Camera, HVX is probably the best choice.”
[stephen] I’d say the jury is still out on that one. Lets see some real-world user tests, not just a whole bunch of SPEC-ulation!
based on your quotations, Adam Wilt testing, and Barry Green testing, I would say if one desires true 24P 1/3″ HD Camera, HVX is probably the best choice
-
[sk880user] “Now, do you believe that maybe Barry intentionally took bad footage from JVC to make it look bad? Maybe he manipulated the images in post? Or maybe he did not know how to utilize the JVC correctly? I am very curious about this.”
I know quite well how to use the JVC, as I bought one of the first models in the US (which I subsequently sent back).Absolutely every aspect of the comparison was thoroughly documented and anyone, anywhere, is free to duplicate the results and they will find that there was NO post manipulation, NO attempt to make one look better or worse than the other. The methodology is out there, you can see exactly what I did, and I posted the raw original m2t file straight from the HD100.
—————–
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available on ebay and at Amazon (https://www.fiftv.com/db) -
[Stephen Downes] ” and tends toward being a Panasonic sycophant.”
I’m standing right here, Stephen. You don’t have to go calling me names behind my back, I can hear you loud and clear.
—————–
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available on ebay and at Amazon (https://www.fiftv.com/db) -
[Barry Green] “I’m standing right here, Stephen. You don’t have to go calling me names behind my back, I can hear you loud and clear.”
Barry,
All meant with the best of intentions. I thought you might even take pride in being associated with a company like Panasonic. But perhaps my language was a bit strong/colourful and if I offended you, I apologise – I was merely trying to make the point that people have their natural leanings, and what is one person’s wine is another’s vinegar. I hope you’ll hold no grudges.
Best,
Stephen Downes
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up