[Karl Holt]

I dont have FCP, Im running premiere

there must be a way I can achieve this in After effects?

thanks again

Karl

[Karl Holt]

I’m not so sure the $40,000 is anywhere near the mark for a cheapo guy like me.

Currently the SI camera shoots onto 2.5″ notebook drives – Red have said they are going to use sata 2.5″ drives too (as one option). So you’re talking a few hundered dollars. If they can manage to get it fitted with canon or Nikon SLR mounts then we can all use inexpensive lenses too like my $70 50mm prime. I think – and this is assuming they pull it off, you could have a fully working kit with a host of lenses for $20,000.

[Karl Holt]

lol

quite probably….. either that or they dont have a working PAL model yet 🙂

still Id like to see the NTSC one on a plasma

[Karl Holt]

I did say that directly after my 1080 comment…..

“If you shoot 720p onto P2 you can store the native progressive frames (720p native mode, i think) “

[Karl Holt]

toke

over at dvxuser.com there is currently extensive testing going on with the cams. Barry green and 5 other people are doing a 4 way shoot out between the HVX,Canon, JVC and Sony HD cams.

The “20-30%” was from a question I asked barry green after he worked with a pre-production model. So of course, you cant judge that conclusively. However Barry did say that it simply could not record the full 1080p, and it ‘looked’ slightly higher in 1080p mode, but no scientific test until this week.

[Karl Holt]

George

“Well I heard today that the camera chip on the HVX 200 is not 1080 native. So that marketing
spoof of 1080 scanning is misleading at best”

If you search this forum you’ll see that Panasonic have not hidden this fact. There have been discussions about the HVX and pixel shift for months and months. HVX developer herself Jan adding to the discussion many times. True, they will not officially release the pixel count of the CCD’s. For good or bad – but this isnt a recent development.

In fairness to Panasonic they have stated that 1080p 1/3 sensor is too noisy and will also decrease the sensitivity and lattitude of the camera. Pixel shift is a technology that allows real world pixels to be generated – they are not interpolated or scaled up. Pixel shift works in gaining extra resolution. Search the forums for a more technical explaination of how it works. If you were taking a 4:4:4 output from the cam then pixel shift may affect the chroma res – but as the best DVCPROHD can do is 4:2:2, then pixel shift does not compromise the colour signal at all, and does gain more resolution.

As for the 1080p capture. Jan stated that the chip was not 1080p, but the image is captured at 1080p after pixel shift and DSP kick in. Then if you’re shooting SD or 720p the image is downsized from here. Maybe this is why there isnt much difference in 1080p to 720p mode. For one, trying to get light to fall onto a 1/3 sensor can only resolve so many lines – as can the lens. So from what I hear, its practically impossible to resolve 1080 lines on a 1/3 chip, even if the chip has 1080 lines. Its to do with the amount of light falling on that area and the lens. So again a 1080p chip at this size would be overkill. In addition to this, the DVCPROHD codec only stores 1280×1080 (not the full 1920×1080 raster) so at best they would need a chip they could pixel shift to get that amount of res and no more.

The initial reports are say 1080p is maybe 20-30% better than 720, but it certainly wont be the full deal.

Finally the camera does shoot true progressive but since DVCPROHD codec is used to store the information, you have to store the progressive information in an interlaced stream. This is just a way to make 24p fit into the DVCPROHD codec, its not any electronic processing altering the image at all. If you shoot 720p onto P2 you can store the native progressive frames (720p native mode, i think) this just results in a smaller file size as it only stores the recorded frame while the other mode flags the active frames for use (storing redundant frames also).

By the way Im not saying the HVX is great or that its a good that they are hiding the CCD specs, I’m just saying that it has been discussed for a long time and that practically every other piece of info about the camera Jan has been willing to discuss on here.

I dont expect this camera to perform like a varicam, just a HD version of my DVX which seems to be looking promising.

[Karl Holt]

Sorry Andrew the HVX can only shoot SD DV25 to the DV tape.

720p must be shot to either the P2 card or an external device such as the upcoming firestore or cineporter.

Also if you want to shoot DVCPRO50 (SD but twice the colour resolution as DV) this also has to be stored onto P2 or ext device.

Just to clarify, the only thing you can shoot onto mini-dv is DV SD video, everything else is P2 or firewire device.

Hope this helps

Karl

[Karl Holt]

Hi Andrew

Well there are two things to consider, the framerate and the resolution.

PAL SD is higher resolution than NTSC. Overall its a better quality signal. If you convert NTSC to PAL then you need to upres the image from 480 to 576. So in this respect PAL would be a better choice as you’d have no resoltuion loss going from PAL – NTSC (576 to 480). A higher quality signal to start with.

As for the framerate, I think PAL to NTSC looks better than NTSC to PAL (tho i could be wrong). Converting 25 to 30 just requires some frame blending to fill in the missing frames, but going 30 to 25 requires ditching 5 frames per second which I dont think looks as pleasing to the eye. I know that indie film-makers in the US used to always shoot on PAL equipment – mainly because going 30fps to 24 (for film) didnt look so good, so shooting at 25p was a better option (now of course they all use 24p). I think someone like Grahame could give a better technical explaination.

I would spend some time thinking about which country took priority. Conversion isnt something you really want to do if you can avoid it. The signal from the HVX is already compressed and you’re recompressing futher. If you are getting that much work get two cameras :-). Or if you arnt bothered by motion artifacts go for the Sony Z1 (HD HDV cam) that can do both PAL and NTSC framerates in the same camera (but you’d lose a lot of functionality compared to a HVX).

It all depends on what you want to do, will you be shooting variable frame rates for slo-mo? Will you be filming projects the require hours of footage (if so the HVX might not be the best option with it’s expensive storage medium). Do you want interchangable lens (the canon)? Unfortunatly there isnt a One camera does everything solution; certinaly not in this price range; so you have to decide what you’ll mainly use it for and go for that. If youre main use is constant switchability between NTSC and PAL in SD, then the HVX would be the wrong choice.

Karl

[Karl Holt]

Andrew

I too am in PAL land but would not buy the NTSC model. The simple reason is that with the NTSC HVX the ONLY advantage using this in Europe would be shooting 1080/24p or 720/24p. So if you KNOW you’re going to a film-out only then yes this is the camera for you.

However if your HD work is going to be shown on Eurpoean TV, or downsized to DVD to be shown on a PAL TV then you really need the PAL version.

Here’s the differences.

HVX NTSC shoots HD in 1080/60i, 1080/24p, 1080/24pA, 1080/30p, 720p (variable frame rates).In 720 mode it also shoots I think 10 different framterates up to 60p (but not PAL 25p).

IN SD it shoots 480/60i, 480/24p, 480pA, 480/30p.

HVX PAL shoots HD in 720/25p 720/50p 1080/25p 1080/50i. 720p mode also has variable framerates, but only up to 50p (so a bit less slo-mo ability, and it does not shoot 24p).

In SD it shoots 576/25p 756/50i.

Going to HD unfortunately does not standarise the world of HD production. Films at the cinema are projected at 24p, HD broadcasts in Amercia are 30p/60i, HD in europe will be 25p/50p or 50i (when it finally happens). So as you can see the HVX you decide to use needs to be linked to a terratory.

With the PAL HVX running at 25p – this translates quite well to 24p if you ever were going to do a 35mm out for cinema projection. Shooting video at 25p and converting it for projection is a well established process and has been carried out for years. it just requires a very minor slo-down which the post-house will normally do for you.

You have to decide what the camera is primarily going to be used for, and make your decision based on that. For me, its arrogant to assume that even my best work will be shown at the cinema. So shooting my shorts/features at 1080/25 gives me some flexibility in being able to show this on existing SD PAL TV’s (downsized) – it’s HD ready too, and if anyone wanted a film-out it could be done from this material with a little work.

In the future when All TV’s can display multiple framerates and cinema is 100% digitally projected; frame rates will be no problem. As it stands now you have to be careful what you buy.

Karl

[Karl Holt]

its a real shame that the framerate only goes up to 50p. I was hoping for higher for slo-mo shoots.

I wouldnt have thought it’d be so difficult to shoot 720p greater than 50fps, the CCD is capable of 60p, so i dont understand the restriction. Even if this scan was encoded to a longer 25p file structure to be complient with the codecs. I guess a lot has to do with time.

If the crystal cannot scan at 60p, cant it do 58 or 55, find it odd that 50 is the maximum on the PAL camera.