HDMI captured direct from HM100 to Cineform or similar at DVinfo.net

Trip Gould · August 11th, 2009, 02:52 PM

Wondering if anyone has seen (and has links to) footage that has been captured directly from the HM100 via HDMI to a nanoFlash or computer or whatever. Would love to compare that image to the 35MB/s XDCAM feed.

Tim Dashwood · August 11th, 2009, 03:32 PM

I've done it with the Intensity Pro. I will be posting those tests to the forum within the week.

Trip Gould · August 11th, 2009, 03:37 PM

You're awesome, Tim! What codec and bitrate?

Tim Dashwood · August 11th, 2009, 10:46 PM

I've captured with all the codecs available. I'm currently playing with the new ProRes codecs that come with Final Cut Studio 3, which work fine in Scopebox, but there is a scaling issue when using Log & Capture and the new codecs from within FCP7.

See this thread for the details.

Trip Gould · August 24th, 2009, 04:31 PM

Tim, not to be a bother, but any idea when you might be posting those samples of the HM100 through uncompressed HDMI? Or did you already do it and I somehow missed it? Thanks.

Tim Dashwood · August 24th, 2009, 05:49 PM

Thanks for reminding me.

I've attached a source .MOV from the HM100 in XDCAM EX 35mbps and a few captured live from the HM100 via HDMI and the Intensity Pro. (all are 4:2:2 in 10-bit, 8-bit Uncompressed and ProRes 4:2:2 HQ.)

These are all 1920x1080i but after my initial analysis I think I better try the same experiment on 720p & 1080p and see if there are any differences.

Trip Gould · August 24th, 2009, 06:03 PM

Thanks Tim. I'll check them out when I'm back at home computer. Did you have any thoughts on the subject having now gone through the multiple workflows? Over HDMI, how do you feel the HM100 stacks up against the competition under similar conditions?

Tim Dashwood · August 24th, 2009, 06:24 PM

There's no doubt that uncompressed (or even a "lossless" codec like ProRes 4:2:2) will retain more information than mpeg-2 compressed 4:2:0, but is it really practical for most of the purposes the HM100 was designed for? Probably not.

If you are shooting green-screen then by all means HDMI capture will have a definite advantage.

August 11th, 2009, 02:52 PM	#1
Trip Gould Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Pasadena, CA Posts: 40	HDMI captured direct from HM100 to Cineform or similar Wondering if anyone has seen (and has links to) footage that has been captured directly from the HM100 via HDMI to a nanoFlash or computer or whatever. Would love to compare that image to the 35MB/s XDCAM feed.

August 11th, 2009, 03:32 PM	#2
Tim Dashwood Wrangler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Posts: 3,637	I've done it with the Intensity Pro. I will be posting those tests to the forum within the week. __________________ Tim Dashwood

August 11th, 2009, 10:46 PM	#4
Tim Dashwood Wrangler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Posts: 3,637	I've captured with all the codecs available. I'm currently playing with the new ProRes codecs that come with Final Cut Studio 3, which work fine in Scopebox, but there is a scaling issue when using Log & Capture and the new codecs from within FCP7. See this thread for the details. __________________ Tim Dashwood

August 24th, 2009, 06:24 PM	#8
Tim Dashwood Wrangler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Posts: 3,637	There's no doubt that uncompressed (or even a "lossless" codec like ProRes 4:2:2) will retain more information than mpeg-2 compressed 4:2:0, but is it really practical for most of the purposes the HM100 was designed for? Probably not. If you are shooting green-screen then by all means HDMI capture will have a definite advantage. __________________ Tim Dashwood

August 11th, 2009, 03:37 PM	#3
Trip Gould Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Pasadena, CA Posts: 40	You're awesome, Tim! What codec and bitrate?

August 24th, 2009, 04:31 PM	#5
Trip Gould Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Pasadena, CA Posts: 40	Tim, not to be a bother, but any idea when you might be posting those samples of the HM100 through uncompressed HDMI? Or did you already do it and I somehow missed it? Thanks.

August 24th, 2009, 06:03 PM	#7
Trip Gould Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Pasadena, CA Posts: 40	Thanks Tim. I'll check them out when I'm back at home computer. Did you have any thoughts on the subject having now gone through the multiple workflows? Over HDMI, how do you feel the HM100 stacks up against the competition under similar conditions?