Graeme Nattress
Forum Replies Created
-
Only the ATI cards at the moment. I think it’s some sort of driver issue or something like that. AFAIK, they’re hitting the hardware fairly hard to drive the real time.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
That’s right Gary! And that’s indeed why the x800 is on order. Also, it doesn’t take up two slots, which is important to me. I’m just starting to write plugins for Final Touch, and it’s fun – but I think a better card would make it more so, and then there’s Doom 3 to think about after work.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Shaders! That’s the word you need to know. Video graphics processing is moving to the GPU on the graphics card, with apps like Motion etc, and look at what Final Touch is doing – real time CC on 2k, HD etc, all using the GPU on the graphics card. I’ve got a ATI9800 128MB ram, and that’s too slow, so I’ve put an order in for the X800. Get the best card you can afford if you want to be on the new wave of new GPU based apps.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Decent manual lens does not equal great quality picture. The only real variable that equals the best picture is the optical nature of the lens itself.
From what others have said about the DVX which this camera improves on – it has about the best, in terms of control, manual-ness of it’s type. In terms of control, what, precisely, does the lens of the HVX not do. Is it that the focus doesn’t have hard end stops. I’m told you can still get repeatable focus on it as it works on dead-reckoning, not some crappy Sony focus, so if you want, you could fit a follow focus and get the control you want.
As has been noted the stock lens on the JVC looks “nice” from a physical aspect, but it’s cheap in terms of quality even for an SD lens, never mind an HD lens.
And yes, I have used proper broadcast removable lenses. I just can’t afford to buy a decent one that would do justice to the rest of the camera.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
And what has a highly compressed delivery codec like h.264 got to do with this??
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
I think you’re talking about a P2 Varicam. I’d like one too, but doubt I could afford it.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
What I’m wondering is what the DVCPro50 mode on the HVX200 looks like, and if that uprezzes to HD and looks better than recording in the more compressed DVCProHD mode or not?? Could be a very interesting comparison….
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
The interlaced rez of the Z1 is about 800×800, deinterlace that and you’re somewhere between 400 and 800 vertical rez depending upon movement. In the CF25 or CF30 mode, V rez will be stuck at 400, but that’s really made up of 540 lines interpolated back up to 1080. The actual rez is lower than the pixel resolution because it’s a sampled system that needs pre-filtering to stop aliassing, like all cameras. Of course, the CF24 mode is an abomination and should not be used unless you want a really cheesy film effect. (again, half vertical rez and bad motion stutter and the visual appearance of double shutter speed – ouch).
The SPX800 probably has a “thick” or “think” mode for progressive. That means that you can turn on or off the filter that is there to stop line twitter on interlaced display of the video. That’s still needed even if you put progressive video on a interlaced TV, but if you’re going out to film or to uprez to HD, you might want this filter turned off for more real rez captured.
So what’s the actual rez of the SPX800?? Probably about 500×400 or 500×450 depending upon choice of filter, and that’s in progressive mode. Also, each one of those pixels is compressed less, you’ve got a bigger CCD and probably a better lens too.
That means that if you stick the SPX800 in 24p or 30p mode, and stick the resulting video into a broadcast quality up-converter, you’ll end up with a better image than off the Z1, but you’d have paid more for that image. You’d have much superior 24p mode, if that’s what you want too. Sony were claiming that the video from their DSR570 uprezzed is better than the Z1, so I’d expect that the SPX800 or SDX900 would be better still as DVCPro50 is much better than DVCAM.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
On that page, I thought both lenses looked poor – and there was chromatic abberations on the stock ziess which were mostly absent on the fugi. However all the example shots provided had the sharpness up so high, with so much ringing artifacts that they all looked nasty – ouch. Why do you think the Z1 comes set with the sharpness up so high – because the darn thing doesn’t have much real resolution and “sharpness” makes people who don’t know better think they’re seeing HDCAM quality (on their CRT monitors that don’t have anywhere near enough resolution anyway to do a proper comparison).
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
But pixelshift, from the research I did, needs the CCDs to be able to alias (ie have too much high resolution detail on them) to be able to boost the resolution beyond that which the CCD is normally capable of. If the lens is soft, then I just don’t see how pixelshift is going to increase your resolution up above and beyond the chip resolution. If the resolution is not coming though the lens, there’s no way that a sampling device can make up for it, no matter how that sampling device is arranged. Surely, that’s just basic sampling theory???
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP