Graeme Nattress
Forum Replies Created
-
3:2 qnd 2:3:2:3 are exactly the same pulldown pattern. Are you doing the rev telecine in Cinema Tools. Is your cadence set right? Is it 24p media on tape? Tell us more about what you’re doing and then we can help better.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Advanced sounds good to me. Get it into your system and remove the advanced pulldown, edit on a 23.98fps timeline and all is well for going to 24p DVD.
Going out to DigiBeta can be an issue as FCP only adds pulldown over firewire. Two ways around this – make a DV master and dub to DigiBeta, or use my Standards Conversion plugin http://www.nattress.com to add pulldown in a render and then go out to DigiBeta over SDI from, say, a Decklink card.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Yes, on output to television. Output on a computer should be 24p without pulldown frames.
If you’re using a short programme, 24p will give you better quality as when you max out the bitrate, you’re pushing less frames per second through it, and also, the MPEG2 codec works better on progressive images than interlaced.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
With a DVD, data rate = quality. With 24p, you can compress your media less, and hence get longer playing time, or higher quality or both, depending on programme length.
The player itself will add 3:2 pulldown on output. All players do this.
Check out:
https://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/24p_in_FCP_nattress.html
Which I wrote for Ken Stone. It’s got the same answers I just gave you, but in an awful lot more detail + picture too!
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
The DVX has 410,000 pixels on it’s CCDs according to Panasonic’s web site. This would give, approximately a 784×522 pixel dimension for the chip. Even with pixelshift magic, that’s going to provide a sharper SD picture, but it’s not going to turn it into HD IMHO.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
I would think that any danger to memory cards is a couple of orders magnitude less than with tape. I’ve used the same kind of chips that are in P2 with my digital camera, and never had the slightest bit bother with them. They’re a much more reliable technology than tape will ever be. So yes, you are trading one set of problems for another, but in that trade the new problems are over 100 times less likely to happen – fair trade it would seem!
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Tape is certainly used to back up large amounts of data, but only large business use tape, Small businesses use optical disc based solutions, and as optical discs become cheaper and larger, this is the force that will drive your video backup solutions.
And sure the digital photographer might take many thousands of photos, but that’s to get the 20 or so that count, and loosing one of them is like you loosing a footage tape worth of video that has a key shot on it, surrounded by outtakes. Sure, it’s not a direct analogy, but don’t dismiss it either – to each individual there is data you cannot bare to loose, whether it be video, images or words.
To me, the weakest part of the “tape” solution is the very moment of capture to tape in camera itself, where a dropout could clog your heads for minutes and you could not be recording anything useful at all, or the tape could get scratched by a piece of dirt on a roller or part of the mechanism. I think we’ve all had something like that happen. That’s the first key point of danger with tape that P2 eliminates, and after that, backups are in your own hands, just as they are with tape.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Those were mockups. The only “product” announced is the HDX200. And that’s the only new camera I expect to see next week at Panasonic.
As for < $10,000 - I think that's got more to do with market speculation promotion than actuall price of the camera, which could be a lot less until you add in the P2 cards. Still, it should be cheaper than Z1 + Deck. Graeme - http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Peter, it’s hard to disagree with you in many ways. You’re right, that for many people, not having tape will be a deal breaker, but if they upgraded to any pro HD camera, they’re not going to get DV either. It’s only this new range of semi-pro HD cameras that are offering any kind of backwards compatibility with DV. I think we’re lucky to be getting DV record with this HDX 200 camera at all – and I’d personally have been happy with only DVCProHD. However, the DVCpro50 is a fabulous bonus for anyone still doing SD, as we’ll get real widescreen with low, low compression.
I must be ever-so-tough to even consider a camera that “does everything” in that you’ve got to think of the sales it will canibalize from your other models. I think this means, no matter what Panasonic does, it’s a brave move!!
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Thanks for joining us here, Mike!
Yes, the 1080p mode will be interesting. We all know that making good looking 1080i from 720p is very reasonable, given that all interlaced modes need line twitter filtering that lowers their effective resolution to below 720p levels vertically. I’ve got a feeling that the camera might use both horizontal and vertical pixel shift to try and push as much resolution out of the 1280×720 chips as possible, and it’s not unreasonable to expect, if the MTF of the lens allows it, that this arrangement to produce pretty close to the full 1080p resolution vertically, and certainly the equal of 1080i de-interlaced, but with the proper motion blur. It’s a compromise, but a reasonable one given the “low” expected cost.
The 960 v 1280 for 720p is interesting. You’re certainly loosing resolution doing this, but will we actually loose much in the way of actual detail and definition?? I’m happier to have a bit of sub-sampling going on, as this always seems to make for a better picture, even if the resolution is lower, if the sub-sampling allows the data that is left to be recorded more accurately due to more bits per pixel being allocated to it. Obviously, sub-sampling by making a higher resolution, larger CCD is best of all, but we can’t really afford that 🙁
Actually, it’s very interesting to see the various compromises that the 3 main camps (Sony, JVC and Panasonic) are doing.
Sony seems fixated on interlace, to the detriment of everything else, an the marketing belief that 1080i is better that 720p due to 1080 being a bigger number than 720. Their CF modes are a joke, and basically there for the marketting spec sheet.
JVC have learned their lesson and tried to produce, what looks like a camera that addresses all the issues leveled at their first HDV models. They are aiming to do a great 720p, and from the looks of it, they’ve got it. It’s very pleasing to see how they’ve fixed the mistakes of their past.
Panasonic, who’ve always done things “their way”, have decided to make a very brave move into the world of tapeless, solid state acquisition, and used that to do away with the expensive tape deck, and to bring their DVCproHD technology to the masses.
All in all, we now have choice for affordable HD, which has got to be a good thing.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP