Just received my FX1 from B&H :)))

I ordered yesterday on the Camcorderinfo rumor that B&H would have FX1 in stock Nov 3rd.

Guess what... they shipped same day, so I received mine today.

Of course the price is higher than if I waited but... :))))

Oh, and B&H does not charge any sales tax if shipped out of NY state (we are in NJ).

NOW we can really shoot some quality indies, baby :)

No idea how to import the gootage into PC though. I would prefer *not* to use Cineform/Vegas if possible.

Premiere Pro and cineform - Ulead MSP and the HDV plugin for native editing. Cheap too ($600 I think)

DBK

Thanks Darren.

I remember a while ago we had a discussion re. processing the JVC HD10's footage, and you suggested capturing via Component.

At the time, I opposed.

However, I now think that IF Sony FX1 does provide quality Component out while in Rec mode, then there could be big advantages of capturing its analog HD output in real time.

I was thinking of building a dedicated PC with a basic Raid0 and probably one of the Blackmagic HD cards that allow for Component + audio capturing.

These capture cards also advertise the real-time editing/effects ability with their built-in acceleration. I'm not sure I like it, because this means ditching PremierePro 1.5 for yet another proprietary NLE...

Ideally, I'd like the card to just simultaneously capture the component video into 2 avi files: one low-res (say 720x540 4:1:1 highly compressed with PICVideo MJpeg codec or alike) for real-time offline editing, and one full-res 1440x1080 4:2:2 (either uncompressed or HUFFYUV-lossless-compressed.)

This will allow me to use low-res for the offline edit, while hi-res files will serve 2 purposes:
1. Special effects application
2. Final on-lining of the edit in HD resolution.

What would be your capture card recommendation based on these criteria?

<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin : Thanks Darren.

I remember a while ago we had a discussion re. processing the JVC HD10's footage, and you suggested capturing via Component.

At the time, I opposed.

However, I now think that IF Sony FX1 does provide quality Component out while in Rec mode, then there could be big advantages of capturing its analog HD output in real time.


______

It does output via component in real time incase you haven't been told that yet.

I only got the camera yesterday, and I am still playing with it. I'll know it much better later this weekend as I do the comparison DVD.

I will say it is AWESOME

DBK

I just returned from the B&H store. Not that this matters to anyone, but the employees at the oversized-pick-up counter said that they've never seen anything like the rush of FX1 purchases they're currently experiencing -- at that's just in-store. Unless there's a rush on returns in the next week, then it sounds like Sony could have a hit on their hands.

The camera rocks dude :)

Can you say "independent iris/gain/shutter controls" :)))

It's your choice which ones of those to leave on auto and which ones to program manually if you wish.

Image stabilizer: probably it's best to leave it on Soft. This way it does not interfere with panning, while still preventing slight camera shakes from unsteady handling.

Component out while recording/standby: YES, full 1080i !! (JVC HD10 can't do that. Also, you can force FX1 to downconvert to 480i over Component if you don't have a HD monitor. I do have one and 1080i picture is great. Note that my monitor is 1280x720 LCD, so I'm not even looking at the full-res signal as coming out of FX1.)

On a different note: JVC D-VHS 30000 recognized and accepted FX1's video over firewire just fine! I remember that there was some confusion in user's predictions over this, so I'm hppy to deliver the good news.

Alex, have you actually recorded the FX1's signal onto DVHS and been able to play it back ok?
This is the problem I had when I tried playing Kaku's clips through my JVC 30000. They played just fine E-to-E over firewire through the JVC's component out (without recording), but once recorded I couldn't get the picture to sync up on playback.

Sorry if this has already been answered, but when you say "quality" component output are you talking about raw, uncompressed video, straight from the CCD's ?

My understanding of the JVC camera was that you could only get HDV compressed (<25mbps) signal out of it. A limitation dictated by economics more than anything.

If the Sony can output a clean HD signal over component that could be taken in with a Blackmagic card you're looking at some seriously good video, no?

Bob: I never checked the 30000 recording as I'm not interested in it as a recording device, just FW to Component converter. You are right - it does NOT record properly, although it DOES pass the signal through from FW input to Component output just fine. What's wrong with recording: no sound and some weird, random image blockiness.

Kaspar: I have no definite info, but I'd assume that FX1's Component out is simply a result of the internal D-A conversion - thus it most likely has already been compressed before the analog conversion. HOWEVER: Visually the picture is fantastic without any visible artifacts I could detect so far, thus I consider it high enough quality for the analog capture.

Guys,

When it outputs the signal through the component out it converts it to an analog HD signal.

To capture it, you would select a capture card, an A-D converter (As all HD cards are SDI only).

The stream is uncompressed when it comes out of the camera, otherwise it could not play on your garden variety, or pro HD monitor.

I just had a DP here checking out some stuff I shot yesterday - on all automatic settings.

We viewed it from the camera's component to my 1080i Ikegami Broadcast Monitor. This puppy sells for $22,800US

He couldn't believe the sharpness, the detail, how great the shadows were and how much detail he could see in it. I asked if he had any complaints and he said no, that it was as good as any HD picture he's seen - and he's seen them all.

We thought the camera could benefit from a little tweaking on the gain, but not much. We thought the camera could use a longer lens, but from a wide standpoint it was amazing.

My JumpStart 2005 Camera Shoot Out DVD will show the quality - even compared to a cinealta.

Simply incredible!

DBK

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly : Guys,

The stream is uncompressed when it comes out of the camera, otherwise it could not play on your garden variety, or pro HD monitor.

DBK -->>>

Yes, the stream has to be analog and uncompressed coming out of the component output. BUT it wouldn't be entirely surprising, in a move to protect the higher-end market, that Sony would apply HDV compression to the signal BEFORE D/A and output.

The rest of your post indicates the image coming out is awesome so who knows....

Seems like this Canopus card is one of the options that captures *both* FireWire output from FX1 (comes with drivers), and Component video.

http://www.canopus.us/US/products/EDIUS_HDV_SP/pt_EDIUS_HDV_SP.asp

Good news: I just tested how would the existing HD Capture utility (came with JVC HD10 cam) capture m2t stream from Sony FX1. Guess what, it does capture it just fine! Audio/video in perfect synch, too.

i am sorry if i am not understanding this.

but if you capture via componet out i will get full unconpressed hd video from the FX1?

now is that catpturing from tape>componet out?

or is that capture live via sdi deck? bypassing any recoding on tape? just straight to the hard drive?

so... what's the scoop. is the component output compressed or not? If it's being used on HDTV screens, doesn't it HAVE to be mpeg-2 TS?

so... is the component output of the FX1 compressed or uncompressed? I'd be surprised if it's uncompressed. how would you play it on an HDTV if it wasn't already compressed to mpeg-2 TS?

What is the difference in quality between firewire out or component out if both are already compressed signals ???

i stayed on the phone with sony for about an hour to find out the answer to this question.

disclaimer: i had to ask the rep my question 8 times before i think he understoof.

he claims that the signal is simply sent out before any compression.

that means, straight from ccd's (never tainted my any mpeg2 compression), out to uncompressed analog.

just thought i'd share what took me so long.

also, i called (decklink) black magic rep. they don't have any HDef cards that take component input yet.

you're thinking of the SD extreme version from decklink. but wait a little while, i'm sure they'll have one out.

what i'm waiting for is dvcpro hd (100 mbs) card that takes component input. i think that's going to be a really hot codec and level of compression.

even better would be a device like firestore, that allows you to swap out regular harddrives like cassettes, and it converts your component signal into any codec bit rate you want (like selectable dv25, dvpro 50 - dvcpro hd 100).

wouldn't that be sweet!

travis
production guru

Well if this is true than it will be a big difference in quality with the analog component out.You can probably get a component to hd-sdi converter to use it with the blackmagic...

<<<-- Originally posted by Gabor Lacza : Well if this is true than it will be a big difference in quality with the analog component out.You can probably get a component to hd-sdi converter to use it with the blackmagic... -->>>


AJA and other companies make HD-Analog - HD-SDI converters now. You can use the reverse converters to play it on an analog monitor.

The hitch - They are about $2500.00 each end.

This is not an activity for the light of wallet if you will.

DBK

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly :

AJA and other companies make HD-Analog - HD-SDI converters now. You can use the reverse converters to play it on an analog monitor.

The hitch - They are about $2500.00 each end.

-->>>

Can we please think of a more simple and portable way to monitor from the FX1?

Can we get quality SD output from the camera to feed into a portable LCD monitor?

Something which costs at least 1/3 of the price of the camera should be more like it than the rather absurd options proposed here.

Framing (16:9) and contrast resolution should be more important than pixel resolution for field monitoring, I think.


Carlos

Can we please think of a more simple and portable way to monitor from the FX1?

Can we get quality SD output from the camera to feed into a portable LCD monitor?
Carlos -->>>

Of course.

It allows S video out in RT and Composit out in RT. Buy the level of LCD monitor you can afford - touch screens on ebay are about $250.00.

There are also lots of other editing solutions out these days. One that I've looked at online only is the Canopus system. It allows COmponenet HD out too.

DBK

Carlos, this is *not* about monitoring FX1's signal, but rather about CAPTURING it for further processing.

Jerry R from dv.com forums suggested this device that seems extremely lucrative:

bonsai drive by rosenthal (http://bonsaidrive.com)

It seems to accept both video (component) and audio (RCA or XLR) and record them onto HDD much the way FireStore devices do.

<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin : Carlos, this is *not* about monitoring FX1's signal, but rather about CAPTURING it for further processing.

Jerry R from dv.com forums suggested this device that seems extremely lucrative:

bonsai drive by rosenthal (http://bonsaidrive.com)

It seems to accept both video (component) and audio (RCA or XLR) and record them onto HDD much the way FireStore devices do. -->>>

Then perhaps I missed the point, because I am also looking for ways to capture the HD image for further processing.

Has Sony cut the paths to go up to real HD editing?


Carlos

<<<-- Originally posted by Carlos E. Martinez :
Has Sony cut the paths to go up to real HD editing?


Carlos -->>>

Yes, of course Carlos, that's what we're all talking about.

The camera is capable of COmponent HD out - That means you can use any HD capture card to capture the signal uncompressed and edit it uncompressed (Or you can recompress if you so desire).

The only thing you need to do is use an Analog - Digital HD converter to capture it using todays solutions (Kona, Decklink, Cinewave) Canopus and Pinnacle capture HD Analog component, they also both capture HDV from the FW connection.

Does this address your question?

DBK

Carlos,
this device you suggested seems to record ntsc and pal uncompressed only....
But I still not sure that this component out is not after mpeg2 compression...hmmm

<<<-- Originally posted by Gabor Lacza : Carlos,
this device you suggested seems to record ntsc and pal uncompressed only....
But I still not sure that this component out is not after mpeg2 compression...hmmm -->>>

It doesn't actually matter.

If you like the look of the signal out of component, then great. If you don't then it's not an option for you.

Way too much debate on this subject. From all reports the image quality coming out of the component is great. SO WHO CARES WHERE THE COMPRESSION IS?

DBK

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly :
Way too much debate on this subject. From all reports the image quality coming out of the component is great. SO WHO CARES WHERE THE COMPRESSION IS?
-->>>


Completely agreed!

The main and revolutionary idea over this new tool is that it may help us all indy creators.

The main debate should be over how to improve on the limitations and widen its horizons. And it has always been the spirit of my questions and look into the answers.


Carlos

look for a product called HD-bridge from Miranda

so then so i can understand correctly,

in order to recieve uncompressed data from the fx1 i would need to connect to component out to a hard drive like firestore. but once the information goes on minidv it will be compressed @ 25Mbs. so what would the format of the footage be once it is uncomopressed. AVI or MOV or what?

thanks

If I want to just firewire this footage into a computer as 720 x 480 in order to edit in that format from there forward, how would I do it, and how would the quality be? I'm interested in getting this w/out going all the way to HD editing right now, if the picture quality is that much better going out of the camera and into SD and taking it from there for DVD or VHS output. Are you still going to get some exceptional picture quality like that, and how would it work?

Thanks!

If you are not going to work in HD, why buy an HD camcorder?

Spend the same money on the XL2, which is a superior DV only camera (More pro controls, better- longer lens, 4 channels of Audio, switchable lens etc.)

This is a great HD camcorder, but folks should buy the tool they need for the job they are doing. HD for HD, DV for DV.

Yes this camer outptuts a DV signal, but the bells and whistles are not there for DV.

DBK

<<<-- Originally posted by Gabor Lacza : Carlos,
this device you suggested seems to record ntsc and pal uncompressed only....
But I still not sure that this component out is not after mpeg2 compression...hmmm -->>>

It doesn't actually matter.

If you like the look of the signal out of component, then great. If you don't then it's not an option for you.

Way too much debate on this subject. From all reports the image quality coming out of the component is great. SO WHO CARES WHERE THE COMPRESSION IS?

DBK

Darren,
but why the trouble going component out when you can get the same image via firewire...that is why it is important where the compression is no ???? I might be wrong.....

maybe because you can convert from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 uncompressed.?

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly : If you are not going to work in HD, why buy an HD camcorder?

Spend the same money on the XL2, which is a superior DV only camera (More pro controls, better- longer lens, 4 channels of Audio, switchable lens etc.)

This is a great HD camcorder, but folks should buy the tool they need for the job they are doing. HD for HD, DV for DV.

Yes this camer outptuts a DV signal, but the bells and whistles are not there for DV.
-->>>


Your logic is quite sound, except when you say spend the same money on an XL2. As far as I know the Canon is quite more expensive than an FX1.

In my case I am looking forward using this camera on video and film projects, so the extra resolution might be welcome.


Carlos

Hi,

I think that bypassing the Mpeg compression is important for high speed panning and fast action scenes. Exactly the kind of footage I'll have to produce in a few weeks.

So what is going to be the data rate of that capture? I assume we are talking about uncompressed HD, right?
What is the minimun computer? for Hd I asume we'll need raid 0 if the data rate is like I'm imagining.

Any comments?

Ric

<<<-- Originally posted by Ricardo Renaldi : Hi,

So what is going to be the data rate of that capture? I assume we are talking about uncompressed HD, right?
What is the minimun computer? for Hd I asume we'll need raid 0 if the data rate is like I'm imagining.

Any comments?

Ric -->>>

I personally think reording to the mini dv tape will be fine for 99.999999% of all shooting, but if you are convinced you need to record from the component out.

Buy the Fastest Mac: $3000.00
Add RAM:$1,000.00
Add a SCSI card: $500.00
Add a 10 drives SCSI RAID from Huge Systems:10,000.00

Hope it all works as it should: Priceless.

Total cost: $14,500 - and that will give you about 3 hours of recording.

Frankly, there is no one who bought this camera that needs the extremely small percentage of improvement this will give you. Remember, HDCAM records to MPEG2 compression, so does Varicam. Seems the Networks think it's OK.

If you want the best in quality, buy a Viper System. If you don't know what a Viper System is.....chances are you don't need one and can't afford one.

The Viper is what Lucas uses to do Star Wars.

This is a great camera, records a high quality picture in camera. Use it, learn to manage the controls, and learn how to light and you will be more than happy with the quality of the images.

DBK

<<<except when you say spend the same money on an XL2. As far as I know the Canon is quite more expensive than an FX1.

In my case I am looking forward using this camera on video and film projects, so the extra resolution might be welcome.


Carlos -->>>

Yes the XL2 is more expensive - about $1000 dollars more than the FX1 and , no it doesn't have the resolution nthe FX1 has.

This whole thred is ridiculas.

We have a bunch of people who spent $3600.00 on the latest toy, and are now debating the merits of trying to squeeze out the smallest amount of extra quality by recording the signal component out (live) to a capture card that will cost them atleast $1,000.00 then with an A-D converter that will run them another $2500.00 to a computer and hard drive system that will run over $14,000.00

So you spent $3600 on a camera, and you want to spend an additional $17,500.00 - which will enable you to record about 2.5 hours of uncompressed BTW - because you think the MPEG2 compression is going to screw up your world?

I own the ability to do this. I have all the HD editing and capture settings. I don't plan on EVER doing this.

Like I said in another thred. Learn how to light, learn how to mic, learn the controls and features of the camera and you will go much further with this camera than by recording the uncompressed HD off the component out.

If you want more controls - buy another camera. Something that Pro's use. And while I love the XL2 - that's not the camera I'm talking about. Pro cameras these days are running near $50K. This camera does a great job.

DBK

Darren,

First at all, tks for spending your time writing your suggestions. They are very reasonable and professional.

Still I'd like to try going this way and compare the results. My reasons are:

1-You say that HDCAM also uses Mpeg2 but as you know, the compression ratio is much higher in the FX1.And that will define the quality, right?

2-If you have drops, ( people have reported that) you loose half second of video.

3-PRICE: Still I don't know the data rate needed for capturing. If it's not too high, you could built a system for much less than U$14K. Let's say a PC clone, pentium 4 3.2 in a good motherboard, plus 1 GB ram can be bougth here for less than a grand. I sincerely do not see the advantage of an expensive mac here. We use a G5 2.0 at the ProTools suite, but for rough power, I find a clone PC to be more effective
Storage:If the stream is not enormous, a good raid card can be bought for $250. Add some 300 GB Sata drives with NCQ (almost SCSI) at U$230 each.

I already have such a system that I use every day for digitizing uncompressed SD with a Decklink card and it works just fine. Day by day. How much more in terms of horsepower do we need for capturing the FX1 output? I do not know. That's in the center of this debate.

Cheers

Ric

<<<-- Originally posted by Ricardo Renaldi : Darren,

First at all, tks for spending your time writing your suggestions. They are very reasonable and professional.

Still I'd like to try going this way and compare the results. My reasons are:

1-You say that HDCAM also uses Mpeg2 but as you know, the compression ratio is much higher in the FX1.And that will define the quality, right?

2-If you have drops, ( people have reported that) you loose half second of video.

3-PRICE: Still I don't know the data rate needed for capturing. If it's not too high, you could built a system for much less than U$14K. Let's say a PC clone, pentium 4 3.2 in a good motherboard, plus 1 GB ram can be bougth here for less than a grand. I sincerely do not see the advantage of an expensive mac here. We use a G5 2.0 at the ProTools suite, but for rough power, I find a clone PC to be more effective
Storage:If the stream is not enormous, a good raid card can be bought for $250. Add some 300 GB Sata drives with NCQ (almost SCSI) at U$230 each.

I already have such a system that I use every day for digitizing uncompressed SD with a Decklink card and it works just fine. Day by day. How much more in terms of horsepower do we need for capturing the FX1 output? I do not know. That's in the center of this debate.

Cheers

Ric -->>>

1. Yes the compression is higher on this camera.
2. Uncompressed 1080i - 60 is going to require about 160mbs - plus overhead. Unless you have a very powerful computer/RAID you will not achieve those rates. The "Drop out" will be considerably higher.

3. Starting with 160mbs plus about 25mbs of overhead, the SATA systems won't cut it. They will with empty drives, but I suspect past 50% you will experience dropped frames. No one has done it successfully yet. The SCSI cards required are 320's, the RAID must be 320's and it will require a dual 2 gig or 2.5 gig.

Trust me. I've spent the money, I own such a system. There is no way in the entire world I would want to even attempt to record to this system in the field. I wouldn't do it in my studio!

As to the PC - I don't know enough about the hardware anymore to comment. What I do know is that 95% of the world edits HD on a Mac. Must be some reason for it. The other 5% use HDV and use one of the other solutions, but for Uncompressed HD - MAC - big fast RAID - lots of Cash

So lug 40 pounds worth of computer and 10 pounds worth of LCD monitor and then 50 pounds of RAID with you to do a shoot. Bring that long poer cord with you too. Careful with the RAID, in can be damaged in transit, so can the computer.

Are you getting the point yet?

But like I said, spend the $20K and prove me wrong. Remember, you bought a $3600 camera. There are limitations to the quality. The lens alone is more of a limitation than the MPEG2. You should never have considered this camera if this is going to be a factor for you. You should have spent money on a Cinealta or a varicam if this slight - and I mean slight improvement in quality is going to matter (I am refering to the component struggle)

You will still get farther by learning how to light and shoot than you will boost the quality by recording via component out.

But go ahead.....it's not my time and money. I don't care. Prove me wrong

DBK

Ricardo, I researched this issue and it seems that we need 3 components to effectively capture the... ummm... Component output of the FX1 :)


1. Capture card. Seems that there is no Component capture cards available, but rather they capture SDI (one BNC jack). Decklink HD cards, for instance, start with $595 street price - but they do require SDI input AND dual Pentium MB with PCI-X bus as a *requirement*.

2. SDI from Component: easily done with AJA Kona converter... at the cost of $2200 street. At this point it seems a bit out of control, as the camera itself is about $3500.

3. Dual Pentium 2.8Ghz or 3.06Ghz + MB that supports PCI-X + at least 2Gb memory + case/power supply/iLink and other IO/ + hardware IDE Raid controller + Raid 0 of at least 4 IDE drives, about at least 800 Gb total (the more the better) = about $4000

So we are looking into about $7K for the system that should be able to capture Component in HD resolution. It is up to the capture card which compression to use, or whether to save uncompressed.

At this point, I think it's not a very affordable solution - because 1) it is disproportional to the cam's price AND 2) one can capture the cam's output in 2-sec-delayed real-time via its iLink (firewire) out on ANY PC without all that special power.

Of course, if you already have such system, then you may opt to use it simply because it saves a workflow step - instead of converting m2t's into avi's you get avi's in the first place.

Another plus of having such system is that you can use it with ANY device that produces either HD/SD SDI or HD/SD Component output.

I do not have such devices, so it seems that I'll opt for the following workflow:

- FX1 connected to the (regular) PC via iLink
- PC runs CapDVHS utility that saves program stream mpg files (saves a step in converting m2t's into mpg's.)
- My proprietary software then converts PS mpg's into 2 avi's: one small offline version for real-time edit, another full-rez online version for final onlining of the edit.

I use that same workflow with my JVC HD10 and it works fine, except that this last step takes quite some time depending on the length of the files to be converted to AVIs.

Currently I'm looking into the possibility of running CapDVHS as frameserver for, say, VirtualDub - to produce both offline and online AVIs on-the-fly simultaneously with firewire capture. Should save tons of time. Anyone tried frameserving it yet?

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly :

3. Starting with 160mbs plus about 25mbs of overhead,

Are you getting the point yet?

But go ahead.....it's not my time and money. I don't care. Prove me wrong

DBK -->>>

Hi Darren,

I really like the passion that you put in your arguments. Anyway, I'll try it. Not to prove you wrong or something childist like that, but because we are half way there yet.
We already have a dual Xeon motherboard, memory and a few other componenets here, originally bought to build a powerfull Avid machine. So we'll do some testing. A friend of mine have a Sata raid of 8 disks that put out 230 Mb/sec sustained. We'll see.
The way I see it is not a black and withe situation, meaning to have to choose between the tape route or the HD route. We'll tape most of the time and for really difficult material we'll use uncompressed capture. We are already doing this in our productions. We tape to Sony 170's and for difficut shots we go SD uncompressed to disk. Works very nice. We do not have the budget for a Viper or something like that (yet).

cheers

Ric

PD: I assume you say 160 megabytes (not megabits) right?

<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin : Ricardo, I researched this issue and it seems that we need 3 components to effectively capture the... ummm... Component output of the FX1 :)

So we are looking into about $7K for the system
At this point, I think it's not a very affordable solution -->>>


Have you noticed that the money you put in such a system buys you a very powerfull uncompressed HD EDITING machine also?

Think about the posibilities...


cheers

Ric

I have... but I see it mostly as a liability because we already have a very good editing PC...

maintaining 2 machines does not seem necessary

while transferring TONS of audio- and video-related stuff from the existing PC to a new one is a full-week affair that's gonna cost us by itself....

I'm not aware of any easy way to just migrate all our software/plugins/settings from the old Win XP machine to the new one...

thus I decided not to do it at this time.

And I 'd like to mention again that my main concern with the Mpeg compresion is related to bluring images with fast movement. In a thread they are already discussing this: And if this is true, the improvement to capture uncompressed is huge for us.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&postid=240919#post240919

John Jat wrote:
"My critique is not concerning the steady skills but the very obvious softening of the image. Even when down-converted to an SD stream at MP@ML quality it looks very soft to my eyes - quite possibly unusable

If you're reading this Charles Papert, please post your valued opinion on the image quality in this clip. As before my critique is with the image delivered by the camera and not Kako's stabilser skill.

My concern is also the use of the camera for 'cinematography' where a smooth camera movement may very definitely spoil the image in a popular truck and pan shot."



__________________

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly :
Like I said in another thred. Learn how to light, learn how to mic, learn the controls and features of the camera and you will go much further with this camera than by recording the uncompressed HD off the component out.

If you want more controls - buy another camera. Something that Pro's use. And while I love the XL2 - that's not the camera I'm talking about. Pro cameras these days are running near $50K. This camera does a great job.

-->>>

I do know how to light, and as long as I can get film looking results I don't mind what the camera is.

Also have all the mics I need, as I own an audio rental company.

Neither do I want more internal controls, as long as I can do a slight external adjustment using filters and then do some further processing at post.

In my mind SD video, DV video and probably HDV video have to be dealt with as you did with 16mm until 20/25 years ago. Grain and contrast were a problem, as were as other inconveniences to take that gauge to 35mm.

But my feeling about these HDV cameras, including the pro to follow, is that they may become a missing link like super-16 was. S-16 was developed in the '70s, but only in the mid '90s did it make the major steps with "Leaving Las Vegas".

This Sony HDV application seems to be a major step, and I am very happy with it. I also agree that it does a great job.

There are some minor things to cure though, then we can start using our creativity to use it at its most.

Its greatest advantage is the light weight and the affordable cost, both of the equipment and the media.

Let's get to work on it!



Carllos

Sorry to butt in,

But i know this is not conclusive but:

Why not see if you can still view a "live" video when there is no tape inside the FX1, if it does it MAY indicate that no MPEG2 compression is goining on i.e. video feed live from the CCD's.....

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly :

I personally think reording to the mini dv tape will be fine for 99.999999% of all shooting, but if you are convinced you need to record from the component out.

Frankly, there is no one who bought this camera that needs the extremely small percentage of improvement this will give you. Remember, HDCAM records to MPEG2 compression, so does Varicam. Seems the Networks think it's OK.

If you want the best in quality, buy a Viper System. If you don't know what a Viper System is.....chances are you don't need one and can't afford one.

The Viper is what Lucas uses to do Star Wars.

DBK -->>>

The topic of this thread is of interest to me, and to others here, who do serious compositing work and are interested in the possibilities of HDV as a low-cost HD acquisition medium. The fact that it is sampled at 4:2:0 obviously makes it much harder to pull a nice key, but if you factor in MPEG 2 compression, this is a not trivial addition. I gather that MPEG compression is funkier than the more DCT-based DV or HD CAM compression because it is interframe, thus decimating the footage further. Isn't it generally considered to be a delivery codec?
I have seen Varicam footage and the compression is much milder (even if it is an MPEG variant?), as well as the image being sampled at 4:2:2. This is probably the practical entry point for shooting HD against a green screen, but is much more expensive. So enquiring minds want to know if uncompressed HDV is possible and provides a big enough boost in raw quality.
Also, I believe that Lucas used the the Sony HD CAM SR cameras for the final SW movie (the 4:4:4 RGB variant of HD CAM), not the Viper cams.

Rgds

Michael

i always thought that as soon as images hit the CCD's the video is compressed. isn't that true? if so how can any footage be played out as uncompressed at a better picture quality?

please some enlight me on this, i am very interested to understand the capabilities of the HDR-FX1, i have one on order and should be here this week.


thanks


joel

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly :
If you want the best in quality, buy a Viper System. If you don't know what a Viper System is.....chances are you don't need one and can't afford one.

The Viper is what Lucas uses to do Star Wars.

-->>>


A much more impressive Viper application can be seen in Collateral.

Being the film all shot at night, it's a remarkable achievement. There's a scene in total darkness, with actual night-lit LA at the background, through glass windows, where you can see the shadows of the characters moving. I remember thinking at that moment that nothing like that could ever be achieved with video, so it was a surprise when I read of Michael Mann telling about the Viper they used.



Carlos

Okay, I am not to sure how component out works to deleiver HD, to my knowledge there are two types of component, the old yellow, red, white, and the wierd one, Yb, Yr, whatever. If you can take the HD output, uncompressed, then is there not a piece of hardware that can compress it to a diffrent format using a better codec like h.264.

For example, www.real-steam.com

I have seen several clips from the fx1, and the mpeg compression looks good in my opinon. I used vlc to view it and told it to deinterlace. It looked great. 7 sata drives could capture the HD output with know problem uncompressed, but unless I am wrong that will only give you about 3 hours of recording. I was using 400 GB drives to come up with that number. Seams like a waste of 2.4 terabytes of storage.

Is there any small portable device that can be used to convert the raw HD video into a less compressed format besides an Xraid and Xserve G5.