Workflow: 1080 60p from Panasonic HDC-TM700 camera

[Dennis Couzin]

Gary, I’m afraid you are confusing output/transmission (e.g. HDMI) where line doubling is reasonable, with recording (e.g. this Panasonic camera’s) where line doubling is insane. This Panasonic’s 1080 60p recording is compromised, but not insane.

I will do further experiments to see why FCP7 does not “log and transfer” my 1080 50p AVCHD. It is likely that FCP7 finds the AVCHD improper, because it is (not in compliance with the AVCHD standard).

I said Apple ProRes for 1080 60p uses 293 Mb/s based on the Apple ProRes White Paper dated July 2009. That paper incidentally uses the notation “Mb/s” rather than your preferred “Mbps”. The numbers you cite are almost exactly the White Paper’s numbers for 60i. We’re discussing 60p here, not 60i.

Interlaced video is a horrible relic of early television and CRT’s, a blot on digital imaging which I’m glad Panasonic has lurched forward to eliminate at the popular end of the user scale.

[Gary Adcock]

[Dennis Couzin] “Gary, I’m afraid you are confusing output/transmission (e.g. HDMI) where line doubling is reasonable, with recording (e.g. this Panasonic camera’s) where line doubling is insane.”

No I am not, you are not seeing the whole picture. I will ask you the same that I asked the original poster before you chose to call me a liar.

Have you ever worked with 1080 50P/ 60P material captured in the conventional manner using a professional camera and recording system?

As I said in the original posts cameras that have that ability are not something that is available to everyone. Hell the deck or recorder rental alone is usually more per day than the cost of this camera. Please realize that in the broadcast world this format is virtually non-exisitant and it requires a dual link or 3G connectivity to handle correctly.

” said Apple ProRes for 1080 60p uses 293 Mb/s based on the Apple ProRes White Paper dated July 2009.”

First off all 5 flavors of ProRes support 1080 @ 60fps, That number you mention is irrelevant without first defining which of the flavors of ProRes you are recording too, as that is the median average data compression level under VBR for the 4444 codec which has a maximum of 330 Mbps- whereas the ProRes Proxy codec averages about 39 Mbps but maxes at 45 Mbps.

“The numbers you cite are almost exactly the White Paper’s numbers for 60i. We’re discussing 60p here, not 60i. “

The compression level of a codec like ProRes does not change with the type of data being sent it, and there for negates that part the argument- the codec compression only scales with the type of codec-not with the content inside.

1080 60p 10bit Uncompressed runs at approx. 331 MBps (megabytes per second) and can only be captured over dual link or 3G
ProRes HQ at 1080 60p runs at about 61 MBps and can be captured over dual or single link.

None of this will work correctly unless your editor is setup to handle the content correctly.

gary adcock
Studio37

Post and Production Workflow Consultant
Production and Post Stereographer
Technology Development
Quality Assurance Assistance

Chicago, IL

https://blogs.creativecow.net/24640

[Dennis Couzin]

You ask: “Have you ever worked with 1080 50P/ 60P material captured in the conventional manner using a professional camera and recording system?”

Answer: Certainly not, and your example is irrelevant to the Panasonic HDC-TM700’s H.264 compressed 1080 60p material. Your example does not define 1080 60p. The fact that renting just a part of your example for one day costs as much as the HDC-TM700 is irrelevant to the question whether the little camera records and outputs genuine 1080 60p. Don’t you accept that there can be H.264 compressed 1080 60p?

It is amazing that after I point out your 60p/60i error concerning data rates you still object to my original simple statement:
“Apple ProRes for 1080 60p uses 293 Mb/s”.
Now you object that I didn’t specify which of the 5 flavors of ProRes was meant. Apple’s ProRes White Paper of July 2009 names the 5 flavors:
“ProRes 422 (Proxy)”
“ProRes 422 (LT)”
“ProRes 422”
“ProRes 422 (HQ)”
“ProRes 4444”
By “ProRes” I meant ProRes 422. You prefer to call this “PRSQ”.

OK then my original statement becomes:
“Apple PRSQ for 1080 60p uses 293 Mb/s”.
You believe this should be 145 Mbps. Again, you are mixing the 60p ProRes compression rates with 60i rates. They are in separate rows in the table of Target Data Rates in the White Paper, and the 60p rates are virtually double the 60i rates.

But you assert:
“The compression level of a codec like ProRes does not change with the type of data being sent it, and there for negates that part the argument- the codec compression only scales with the type of codec-not with the content inside.”

Not at all. ProRes is a frame-by-frame or a field-by-field codec depending on whether the video is 60p or 60i. If it is 1080 60p the frames have 1080 horizontal rows of pixels. If it is 1080 60i the fields have just 540 horizontal rows of pixels. Then of course the ProRes compression (of a given degree, dependent on the flavor) yields approximately twice the data rate for 60p as for 60i. (I say approximately because the ProRes codec can apportion its compression between the horizontal and the vertical a little differently in the two cases.) When transcoding from, say, H.264 video, H.264 decoding produces the 60 frames or fields to which the ProRes coding is applied.

Read the White Paper at
https://images.apple.com/br/finalcutstudio/docs/Apple_ProRes_White_Paper_July_2009.pdf ,
especially the Appendix.

[Gary Adcock]

[Dennis Couzin] “You ask: “Have you ever worked with 1080 50P/ 60P material captured in the conventional manner using a professional camera and recording system?”
Answer: Certainly not, and your example is irrelevant to the Panasonic HDC-TM700’s H.264 compressed 1080 60p material. “

No it is not. Not in my world, it is absolutely required for the kinda of clients I have and the work I do for them.

If you don’t understand how actual 1080 50/60p content is supposed to work in the professional sense, based on the real tools that were designed to handle this format- how do you know that what you are doing is accurate?
Just because some manufacturer puts something in a manual something is does not make it so, I need go no farther that P vs PsF.

I compared the camera we tested it to a known standard, using industry standard signal test equipment and from what I saw from that camera did not pass my standard for quality as compared to the “a” cameras that it needed to be matched up against.

“It is amazing that after I point out your 60p/60i error concerning data rates you still object to my original simple statement: “

Since you did not cite the Appendix in your initial reference- I mistook what you were saying.
I was trying to explain that the maximum compression in ProRes 4444 is 330Mbps per channel and averages slightly under that, since 444 and 60p Variframe (as 422) are only carried over 2 physical channels (hence the reason its called dual link)

[Dennis Couzin] “But you assert:
“The compression level of a codec like ProRes does not change with the type of data being sent it, and there for negates that part the argument- the codec compression only scales with the type of codec-not with the content inside.”
Not at all. ProRes is a frame-by-frame or a field-by-field codec depending on whether the video is 60p or 60i.”

I disagree- the frame and or field rate has absolutely nothing to do with the compression level of an individual codec, especially not when you are talking about a variable bit rate codec that is designed to never exceed the maximum allowable compression.

gary adcock
Studio37

Post and Production Workflow Consultant
Production and Post Stereographer
Technology Development
Quality Assurance Assistance

Chicago, IL

https://blogs.creativecow.net/24640

[Dennis Couzin]

[gary adcock]: “If you don’t understand how actual 1080 50/60p content is supposed to work in the professional sense, based on the real tools that were designed to handle this format- how do you know that what you are doing is accurate?”
With your notions of “actual”, “supposed to”, “professional sense”, “real tools”, and “accurate” you are cutting yourself off from an elegant little camera and from the future. The future of video is file-based rather than signal-based. How file data is transported is less and less important as buffer size increases.

[gary adcock]: “Just because some manufacturer puts something in a manual something is does not make it so, I need go no farther that P vs PsF.”
This continues your insinuation that the HDC-TM700’s 1080 60p is not really 1080 60p. How can we ever be sure that a camera is shooting and 60p rather than:
(A) shooting 60i and outputting it as 60i but with an instruction to the decoder to apply a nice (time flow) deinterlacing?
or
(B) shooting 60i and outputting it as 60p after a nice (time flow) deinterlacing?
We can eliminate possibility (A) by examining the H.264 file, but this does not eliminate possibility (B).

One way to be sure that the camera is shooting 60p is to aim it at target consisting of fine enough detail changing fast enough that either the camera sees with 1080 lines before there is change or it doesn’t. The target can be a single image illuminated by a flashlamp. Either all of its detail (down to 1/1080 of the frame height) is captured in a frame, or only half of its detail (down to 1/1080 of the frame height) is captured in a field. The “rolling shutter” effect of this camera’s CMOS sensors can be ignored since it is enough to examine a few neighboring lines to make the determination.

Since I don’t doubt Panasonic’s claim that the HDC-TM700 shoots 1080 60p (which is not just printed 50 times in the manual but also printed on the camera body beside a dedicated button) I’m not going to do the experiment. Maybe some readers have a teenager seeking a science fair project.

[gary adcock]: “Since you did not cite the Appendix in your initial reference- I mistook what you were saying.”
The only places the White Paper gives data rates are in the Appendix and in two graphs. The graphs give data rates only for 23.976 fps and for 29.97 fps. So how did you find your 60i data rates? They look like the 29.97 fps data rates, which of course they should, contrary to your final argument. For 1080×1920 for each ProRes flavor the 30p data rate equals the 60i data rate and is half the 60p data rate. This is simple and should not be obfuscated.

[Gary Adcock]

I am sorry that you do not seem understand that we are in totally different worlds.
I am glad the tool fits your needs, that was not my experience with the camera.

I keep referring to professional standards and the needs for mainstream, you bring up codecs and rolling shutter to obfuscate the issue I keep repeating.

You have never worked in a “Real” version of 60p by your own admission, so you assume what you are seeing is accurate, even though you have no accurate frame of reference to learn from.

it is as simple as you do not want to understand or accept that 1080 60p is PsF not P or that by you own admission your “60p” content will not correctly import into FCP ?

What the camera’s imager does is a wholly separate issue from how that content is captured or delivered to a display device.

gary adcock
Studio37

Post and Production Workflow Consultant
Production and Post Stereographer
Technology Development
Quality Assurance Assistance

Chicago, IL

https://blogs.creativecow.net/24640

[Chris Wiggles]

[gary adcock] ”
I am sorry that you do not seem understand that we are in totally different worlds.
I am glad the tool fits your needs, that was not my experience with the camera.

I keep referring to professional standards and the needs for mainstream, you bring up codecs and rolling shutter to obfuscate the issue I keep repeating.

You have never worked in a “Real” version of 60p by your own admission, so you assume what you are seeing is accurate, even though you have no accurate frame of reference to learn from.

it is as simple as you do not want to understand or accept that 1080 60p is PsF not P or that by you own admission your “60p” content will not correctly import into FCP ?

What the camera’s imager does is a wholly separate issue from how that content is captured or delivered to a display device.”

I’m sorry, but you are mistaken about this entirely.

This panasonic camera affirmatively DOES capture, record, AND output native 1080p60 content.

Additionally, it also captures, records, AND outputs 1080i60, and 1080p24 within a 2:3 60i wrapper (not native 24p frames in a 24p format, but functionally equivalent if properly IVT’d).

The 1080p60 mode of this camera is 1080p60. Period. It is not PsF, it is not line-doubled 60i, it is not scaled 60i, it is not some kind of “fake” 1080p60 as opposed to your insinuations about “real” 1080p60 or some other format altered to a 60p container. It is native 1080p60, from capture to output format.

FCP does not recognize the non-standard AVCHD compression method that panasonic is using internally to the camera for 60p. For this reason, Panasonic includes software for windows (only windows) to convert this to other editable formats, etc. If you’re on a mac, you have to find your own workaround, which is where clipwrap and other workflows come into play to create a proper 60p ProRes editable video file which you can then edit in 60p within FCP without any issue. And it most certainly is 1080p60. FCP isn’t confused, the file isn’t mis-tagged, or otherwise screwed up. It is 60p. Period.

The filesizes and bitrates used for 1080p60 capture in the camera are ~twice larger than 1080i60, again due to inherently twice the data rate of 1080p60 versus 1080i60.

Your claim that this camera simply doesn’t shoot 60p and that panasonic (and dozens of camera reviewers and users) is lying about that is absolutely false. Whether you had the camera properly in 60p mode and playback mode I do not know.

It is true that this is not a broadcast quality production camera. It has many many artifacts, and many obstacles if one wanted to use this in professional production. However, that is entirely unrelated to the question of whether it does, in fact: capture, record, AND output 1080p60 content, natively. It does do this, as a matter of objective, verifiable fact.

Your claims that it is simply line-doubled 60i, or 30PsF, or otherwise is not 60p is simply erroneous.

To the original poster:
“I was assuming Panasonic’s claim was correct because in the FCP browser the rewrapped footage is listed as 1080, 60fps and progressive. I must say this is all very confusing. Should I “convert” the files to what Final Cut knows to be 60i ?”

Panasonic and FCP and clipwrap and quicktime are all correct. The re-wrapped file *is* 1080p60 and should be left like that in FCP unless you need some other output format, in which case it would probably be better to leave that to compressor on output to say 1080p30 for vimeo or youtube or whatnot, or 1080i60 for a distributable format via BD, etc.

Mr. Dennis Couzin is correct in his statements on these topics.

[Chris Wiggles]

[gary adcock] ”
For the record most of the consumer HDMI specifications include line doubling to allow for the HDMI’s need for true progressive output when the incoming signal to the device is interlace, which is the case for all 1080 broadcast signal.”

Sir, I do not know what on earth you mean here.

HDMI is a single specification defined by HDMI, that changes only with generations of HDMI versions.

HDMI has no need for progressive output, and fully supports a large variety of interlaced formats. I am not sure if you are confusing pixel-repetition for 480i over HDMI with line doubling. The two operations are unrelated, and quite distinct. HDMI has a minimum bandwidth, and video formats with rates below a certain threshold do pixel-repeat to reach the minimum bandwidth for HDMI operation. This has no impact on video quality, as the sink device (the destination, presumably a display, etc) simply discards the repeated data.

All modern digital displays will generally scale incoming signals to a progressive format as none but CRTs are capable of actual interlaced display. This has absolutely nothing to do with the HDMI specification. HDMI fully supports interlaced signal transmission. And if you have an HDMI-equipped CRT display you absolutely can output and receive un-altered 1080i60 broadcast content, and display that natively at 1080i60 on the CRT. In fact, I count SEVEN different 1080i rates supported by HDMI 1.3, which to my knowledge is not changed in 1.4, and has remained stable since 1.0. Only additional higher resolution formats such as 4K have been added in subsequent specifications, no removal of existing supported resolutions/rates. That many displays will process a 1080i signal, as they do all incoming signals to generally a 1080p60 rate for display has nothing whatsoever to do with the HDMI interface or HDMI specifications which thoroughly support 1080i at various rates. And 1080i is widely an acceptable input format via HDMI, in fact I believe it is required on all HDTVs by the FCC(I may be mistaken about this for input signals, but I have installed hundreds upon hundreds of TVs, and every single HDTV has supported 1080i via an HDMI input if an HDMI input was available. Quite a few older sets did not support 720p60, however.

This is something of an aside, but I fear you’re are getting fairly confused in this discussion.

Bottom line: the panasonic TM700 camera DOES affirmatively capture, store, and output 1080p60. And there is no external reason why it couldn’t that would have anything to do with HDMI, or that it would need to ‘pad’ 1080i60 content to 1080p60 simply for spec-compliance with HDMI. That is a vastly erroneous understanding of HDMI.

[Gary Adcock]

[Chris Wiggles] “I’m sorry, but you are mistaken about this entirely.”

Mr Wiggles,

please tell us all how you determined this? I tested the camera’s output based on SMPTE standards and found that it did not match the SMPTE specifications (both 372M and 425M) for 1080p60.
How did you determine your findings?

With only 3 posts here on the Cow (all within a few hours) and 2 of them attacking my posts on one subject, please why not tell us who you are and about your knowledge base so that we can better ascertain and judge your information.

I stand by my comments and statements.

gary adcock
Studio37

Post and Production Workflow Consultant
Production and Post Stereographer
Chicago, IL

https://blogs.creativecow.net/24640

[Chris Wiggles]

[gary adcock] “Mr Wiggles,

please tell us all how you determined this? I tested the camera’s output based on SMPTE standards and found that it did not match the SMPTE specifications (both 372M and 425M) for 1080p60.”

Mr Adcock:

You stated previously that you had ‘tested’ this camera’s output, and that 1080p60 “required” HD-SDI or 3G. I’m not sure why you would state the latter, since SDI-based interfaces are simply one way of dealing with video, and surely not the only way of transmitting HD formats including 1080p60 specifically. Further, I fail to see the relevance of 372M or 425M which define HD-SDI & 3G. This camera has no SDI capabilities whatsoever, so the relevance of SDI standards evades me. Its digital output is limited to USB file transfer from internal or card-based memory, or via HDMI video output on playback. I entirely fail to understand why you keep bringing up SDI standards which are not applicable here.

Further, you did not state what you tested, or your methodology. Many users of this camera have been shooting and playing back in 1080p60, and editing 1080p60 files via their NLEs. I have primarily been shooting in 1080i60 mode for entirely non-critical work and web distribution. However 1080p60 worked just fine as well, but is a more difficult workflow because you cannot log and transfer right off the camera as you can with the complaint AVCHD 1080i60 content.

In addition, you can examine the Panasonic specifications directly on the Panasonic website, and the distinctions are extremely clear:

RECORDING & PLAYBACK
Signal System 1080 / 60p, 1080 / 60i

Video Recording Format
1080 / 60p : MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 (original format)
HA / HG / HX / HE : MPEG-4 AVC/H.264
(AVCHD standard compliant)

Recording Mode
1080 / 60p (28Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)
HA (17Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)
HG (13Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)
HX (9Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)
HE (5Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)

Playback Mode 1080 / 60p (28Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)
HA (17Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)
HG (13Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)
HX (9Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)
HE (5Mbps / VBR) , (1920 x 1080)

As you can see in the specifications above, when the camera is placed explicitly into the 1080p60 capture mode, it uses a proprietary compression mode which is why FCP can’t handle that content directly as it can with the 1080i60 modes all of which are AVCHD compliant (at various bitrates as desired). And as one would expect of course, when you record at 1080p60, your available record time is about half as much as at 1080i60, because obviously you’re using roughly twice the data rate.

You can see frame-grabs of both modes here if you wish:

https://www.genkosha.com/vs/images/pana_river_p.html
https://www.genkosha.com/vs/images/pana_river_i.html

https://www.genkosha.com/vs/images/pana_waraji.html
https://www.genkosha.com/vs/images/pana_waraji_i.jpg

The first image is progressive the latter is interlaced, respectively in each pair, as you can see on motion. The interlaced is a simple weaved-frame, which is not temporally accurate of course, but is for illustration. The images come from here:

https://www.genkosha.com/vs/report/entry/tm700108060p.html

Web playback is obviously not really indicative of actual video performance of course, but here is an entire group dedicated to various 1080p60 capable consumer cameras. You can download the raw files on several of these clips to examine them yourself and see that they are indeed 1080p60:

https://vimeo.com/groups/native1920x108060pclips

With only 3 posts here on the Cow (all within a few hours) and 2 of them attacking my posts on one subject, please why not tell us who you are and about your knowledge base so that we can better ascertain and judge your information.

Sir, I apologize if my posts appeared to be attacking, that was not my intention in any way. However, your claim that consumer cameras simply inherently cannot support 1080p60 is bizarre, particularly given that such cameras do exist and are readily purchasable. The Panasonic TM700 is one such camera which unequivocally supports 1080p60 capture and output, and not with any funny business.

Now, as I’m sure you know, the quality of a camera, including its *real* effective resolution as determined more thoroughly by MTF may be very different from the sort of pixel-counting resolution claim of the sensor, the record format, or the manufacturer. Clearly not all 1080 cameras have the same real-world resolution, and this changes too based on any changing optics as you well recognize. I don’t disagree with your criticisms of this camera that you made above in terms of its performance issues, but keep in mind it is simply a ~$1K consumer camcorder. We may agree or disagree about subjective concerns as to the look or usability of the camera, etc, but there are many objective facts that are not really up for debate. And one objective-reality observation is that this camera does in fact capture and record video natively at 1920x1080p60. I fail to see why you would argue otherwise, or what you have to gain by maintaining that opinion when it is readily answered by consulting the camera specifications or any number of articles or discussions written about this particular camera. There are indeed far cheaper cameras still that record 1080p60. Yes, it is mindboggling that so much horsepower can fit in such a small device, but imagine just five or ten years ago we would all laugh at the idea of a 1080i60 camera costing so little and being widely available to consumers, and it’s not a small stretch to get to 1080p60, particularly given the entry-level Canon T1i DSLR (out a year ago, for just several hundred dollars) shoots 1080p20 and it’s not even a video camera!

As for myself, I am rather new to video production, and I have followed the Cow for a short while in my attempt to learn more about techniques on the production side of things. But I have been involved in video engineering and color science for quite some time, and am very familiar with various video formats. It is not an enormously obscure thing to ascertain in which formats a camera actually captures and records. And in this case, it is very straightforward. It’s even a 3-chip camera, so there is no fudging of say total sensor resolution before being de-bayered as you find with RED specifications for instance. But again, as you well know, the record ‘resolution’ has no bearing on anything but that particular figure, it doesn’t really say much about the quality of the camera itself. Simply because it records at what is ostensibly a more-capable format than a 1080i60 camera has no bearing at all on the quality of that recording, particularly given the absence of any feasible 1080p60 distribution method.

But there are scores of discussions and examples online comparing the 1080p60 mode versus the 1080i60 mode of this camera. Not all, of course, are trustworthy but many are. If you have some revolutionary claim as to some other nefarious tactic deployed by Panasonic to create a fake 1080p60 format wasting twice as much space simply as a marketing ploy, I’m curious to hear it, but the claim that the camera simply doesn’t shoot 1080p60 just because you don’t believe that it can is an untenable statement absent any rigorous evidence.

Regards,
-Chris