[Toke]

Just noticed, there are still some errors in the video.
Will fix them next week…

[Toke]

Check this out:
https://arkimedia.uiah.fi/designtv/Lessig-FreeCulture-040524-large-prvw.mp4

See the sharp resolution in powerpoint graphics?

[Toke]

I’m outputting 1024x560p.
And, YES!, I found a way to do it real-time!

I’m using SheerVideo’s 8b422-codec and hour long tapes (16:9 pal interlaced) from 3 cameras from
certain event:

1. Make dv sequence drag hour long clips to timeline and make primary color correction.
2. Make sequence2 with 1024x560p and SheerVideo codec.
3. Drag hour long dv clips to s2
4. Put deinterlace filter to them (I use max flicker).
5. Stretch dv clips with “Distort” to right geometry (1050×576)
6. Export them one clip at a time with 1024x560p & SheerVideo 8b422-codec.
(If you want, choose appropriate timecode to timeline and place clips in a right
place so you will keep the original timecode.)
7. Make sequence3 with 1024x560p and 8b422-codec.
8. Import those SheerVideo clips to project and place them in s3’s timeline.
(Now you have same resolution & codec clips and sequence.)
Voil

[Toke]

PhotoJPG is a good alternative to DI codec also.
Some are just better.

It’s a bit funny/sad (readers choise) that we are discussing here about decoding quality,
when the problem really is in the encoding side (in camera).

Just 2(two) bits more color info and there would be no worries with dv codec.
But no, not 10bit dv codec, even after a decade…

Maybe quality isn’t in fashion.
Hell, they wouldn’t go to the moon today, if it wouldn’t be enough economic or profitable…

[Toke]

Yep, absolutely.
And then there is this protecting 5 year old very expensive camera design not to be outdated.
Even if the digital evolution has jumped 3 generations after that and tech world is totally
different now.

I wonder which one of these manufacturers first figures out that when they make a real camera
for digital age and it costs 1/20 of the equal quality with those old dinosaur cameras,
they will sell million of them and there is no point in protecting the sail of one thousand
dinosaurs a year. It’s like Apple would have introduced iPod 5 years ago with price of $5k
and still try to sell it with that price. Well, they chose the other way…

Right now it seems that Panny is at a top of this new wave!
Jumping over one generation of storage tech (disk based) seems a bit scary though…

Who would be the first to sell 1/2″ hd camera with 1920×1080 sensor and non changeable manual lens?
With user changeable image specs and internal/external storage. Anybody interested?
Sony is quite close with HDC-X310… (but almost everything should be changed with that box…:-)

[Toke]

Try to edit let’s say one hour tv program in AE with about 500 cuts, fades and dissolves.
There is a reason why composition and editing softwares are separate.
Many times with tv programs you get titles after the primary edit has been done.
Eg. titles are made while program is in cc.

[Toke]

Graeme:”But with the first memory chip cameras with solid state recording, it isn’t going to happen.
The chips that handle the compression are set in stone for cost reasons and cannot be altered.”

They wouldn’t have to be altered much.
HVX200 will already have at least six different pipes:
pro25, pro50, proHDp24, p30, p60, i60.

So internal logistics would just have to be altered in a way that user could choose what pipe to
use at what stage.

1.frame rate (adjusting analog hardware (ccd readout)) ->
2.color depth (ad converter) ->
3.resolution (digital scaling) ->
4.color sampling (dropping some digital info away) ->
5. compression

So instead of having six straight pipes, there would have to be some matrixes between the stages.
Of course more complex, but hey, digital evlotion is growing at a scale of Moore.
Fpga’s are coming very fast.

And these things are happening with most expensive cameras already (Dalsa, Arri, Viper+Venom),
I’m just waiting for indie prices, that you cold own your tools and so use them more freely.

In still cameras you can shoot RAW with less than $500 (Canon G6)!

[Toke]

The difference is that consumer watching hdtv does not (hopefully) do any color correction.
And when I do something imprtant that can have long lifespan, it’s good to know that it will
look good also in the next generation distribution formats.

If you want to see the image, it has to be decoded no matter if it comes from tape or p2.

Simple example with dvcproHD workflow:
1) get material (from tape or p2, doesn’t matter) to hd.
2) edit with FCP (lets say (cross)fades somewhere)
3) color correction or compositing or other FX in AE
4) adding titles to final edit in FCP
5) master to dvcproHD

Alt1:
dvc codec all the way: decoding in steps 2,3,4 and encoding in steps 2,3,4.
Master quality is decreased.

Alt2:
uncompressed DI: decoding in step 2 and encoding in step 4.
Uses lots of disk space. Master quality is highest.

Alt3:
visually losless DI: decoding in step 2 and encoding in step 4.
Uses less disk space than Alt2 but master quality seems the same than Alt2.

[Toke]

With progressive picture there is of course a lot less problems with aliasing than with interlaced.
But if ccd’s are not having the same resolution that is being recorded, there will be scaling that
leads to aliasing if it’s not low-pass filtered. Same thing with pixel shift or 1-ccd de-bayer.

I’m not a camera dsp engineer either, I only use these cameras and look what I get with analytic eye.
But I also like to keep my technical understanding in a logical level to better use these tools.
So I don’t exactly now how things happen, but I know why they happen and see the result.

I still don’t think that is wise to leave low-pass filtering to lens with interchangeable lens cameras,
because then you might get into trouble if you happen to use “too good” lens.

[Toke]

How about 1080i50?