Does the HVR-Z1 have true 24P like their $80,000.00 cameras in HDV mode. Can the HVR-Z1 shoot 24P like the XL2 24P in non HDV. Does canon and sony both use the same method of getting 24P.

Sony uses something they call CineFrame 24 which works by dropping every fifth interlaced frame over the period of 30 frames, thereby creating 24 interlaced samples per second. Although 24 samples per second are obtained, the sampling interval is not constant with a real 24fps camera.

Would the best situation be true 24P, which canon and panasonic has. So if I was shooting regular DV the XL2 would have better picture than the new sony. If I was shooting HVD it would not be as good as the proffesional camaras. Paul

Hi Walter!! Good to see you here!

Is that what it's really doing?? Ouch. I knew it looked bad but.... I know some cheapo Sony home cameras did that. Wow. How did you find out the details as Sony seem to be keeping tight lipped... No wonder why!

Graeme

hi Graeme,

Steve Mullen said that is how they do it. It sure looks l like crap from my tests with it. As long as you are shooting dead people it looks okay.

Thanks Walter. Looks like I'll still be working on Film Effects then, adding features for HDV users.

Graeme

I've heard CineFrame24 sucks but CineFrame25 is supposed to look great. Going from 25 to 24fps is supposed to be very easy. I'm not even sure if it's necessary unless you're doing a filmout. I'm probably the single most excited person on these boards to see what people can do with CineFrame25.

<<<-- Originally posted by Walter Graff : As long as you are shooting dead people it looks okay. -->>>

It should, but in reality it doesn't -- it even looks awful on still shots! We shot some resolution charts with the camera, and in CF24 mode there's an odd weird pulsing going on -- plus field-based flicker. It looks lousy on still shots as well as on moving shots. CF24 is completely unusable.

What medium were you using to view the footage. Was it live, was it a dump to computer?

This is a conversation we have a lot. Do a search (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/search.php?s=) to find other discussions.

heath

Viewed via component output on a 1080i HD monitor.

We're talking about the Z1 or the FX1? The Z1 is supposed to be better.

Better? It has some extra features and XLRs but is the same camera with a different label.

For a detailed list of differences between the FX1 and Z1U, see my extensive Sony HDV Comparison Chart here (http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/sonyhdrfx1/compare.php).

<<<-- Originally posted by Peter Moore : We're talking about the Z1 or the FX1? The Z1 is supposed to be better. -->>>

We don't know that -- there was some speculation that maybe the Z1 handled CF24 differently than the FX1 did. Chris Hurd assures us that there is no difference in that regard, so no, the Z1 would be no better.

But, until there's a final finished product on store shelves, anything could happen. I sincerely hope (for the Z1's sake, and for the sake of all the people who spend $5000 to $6000 on it) that the CF24 mode is somehow improved on the Z1.

Let's make it clear before the rumors fly. Both cameras make the exact same picture based on the Sony white paper on their format that I saw discussed by Sony recently. The pro model has Realtime HD in and out as opposed to 2 sec delay, 2 cine gammas compared to one, smooth zoom, Auto focus assistant, A black and white /color switchable monitor, safety marks, drop and non drop time code compared to only drop, hyper-gain, rec and free run time code compared to only record run, and a few other features but the camera records exactly the same as the $1000 cheaper model.

Also about "Would the best situation be true 24P, which canon and panasonic has..."

Neither Canon nor Panasonic are TRUE 24p. That's easy to tell because they shoot 30i. The 3:2 pulldown is down in camera.

The way Panasonic does it, makes it ideal for film transfers. Not sure about the XL2 (someone here wil probably know).

But about about the Sony? Will this different method still allow good film transfers, or is shooting in 60i still the best?

But both the DVX and XL2 are true 24p. The fact that 3:2 is added is irrellevant. The fact that the shutter is 1/48th and 24 progressive frames are read from the CCD is not. They are not 30i (I think you really mean 60i though, and they're not that either in 24p mode). The FX1 is 60i in 24p mode and it does a very poor conversion to 24p.

Graeme

"But both the DVX and XL2 are true 24p."

that's not what my Pana rep says.

We are talking TRUE 24p here, not making it come out to 24p.

I think you'll find that the 24p from the DVX not only look slike 24p but is 24p. What makes you think it isn't??

Graeme

i think they are confusing 23.976 24p video with 29.97 30 frame video.

<<<-- Originally posted by Ronald Ng : "But both the DVX and XL2 are true 24p."

that's not what my Pana rep says.

We are talking TRUE 24p here, not making it come out to 24p. -->>>

It is true 24p, the whole thing with the reverse pulldown on the XL2 and DVX is so that it can be written to the tape at 60i to fit within the DV spec...the CCD's actually run at 24 progressive frames/second and the shutter can be set to 1/48th... Any decent NLE when importing this footage can remove the pulldown and leave you with the perfect (or not so perfect depending on your skill level) 24 progressive frames that the camera originally "recorded" when it was running...

When it is all said and done, the best course for filmlook using DV or HDV is going to be in post. There are quite a few software solutions that are becoming or are currently available that allow for this. Unless you want to get a Varicam or some other $50,000+ HD camera or move over to film, then software's the only solution. I think the FX-1 looks great no matter what you're shooting and it's color response is superb, shoot in 60i or 1/30 (looks a lot like the Frame mode on my GL1). Also, everyone should AVOID the Cineframe 24 mode, it's not fluid, it's stuttery as heck. If you really need 24p mode in the camera then go for whatever camera is proven to provide fluid 24p such as the DVX or XL2, both are good enough for blowing up to film, minding that you compensate for DV's issues for film transfer, and then you're set. But for these HDV cameras, it's software all the way (which is probably an easier process since you can edit, color correct, and fiddle with the footage at the same time as conversion). Well that's about it. Hope I've been helpful and accurate! ^_^

"the CCD's actually run at 24 progressive frames/second and the shutter can be set to 48Hz"

Tha'ts what I asked my Pana rep...I guess he was wrong, then he gave an opposing answer that the CCDs don't run at 24p.

Hopefully, I'll hear from my film transfer house about the FX1/Z1U/ and the XL2 by next week.

The Panasonic and the XL2 CCD's do run at 24Hz.

The Sony FX1 runs at only 60hz (or 50hz for european countries) and the Z1 can operate at either 50hz or 60hz.

This is a good discussion and begs further the question - why the hell didn't Sony do 24p on the FX1?

I know it's not part of the spec but nor was 24p in orig. DV spec and then Pana came along...

I remember when JVC GRHD-1 first came out, there was some talk about how it was hard to get 3-ccd HDV at the time... indubitably, Sony might now try to defend their position that true 24 is not readily possible with HDV...?

At least the PAL looks like a winner.

I know FCP has 25>24p "filter" - what's the best way to do this on the PC side in say Vegas? Is there a script somewhere or what should we do in our NLE to get the best result?

I guess I could search the forum here - but what else are good friends here for?

thanks!

I believe HDV wasn't originally developed for 24p, thought JVC will have a 24p version out in 2005.

heath

24P is not part of the HDV format... (and like you've said, it wasn't part of the DV format either, which didn't stop Panasonic from doing it anyway, and JVC's said they'll do it in HDV anyway).

Sony stated at the camera's introduction that now you have a choice, a clear choice: either 24P, or HD. But as far as they're concerned, not both.

JVC, Panasonic and Canon will almost certainly disagree with them... JVC's already announced, Panasonic is curiously silent (which could be seen as a good thing, meaning they have something fun up their sleeves) and Canon... well, Canon likes to be last to the party, but they sure did a pretty good job with 24P on the XL2, so I expect they'll not abandon it for their HDV offerings.

If you want 24P, HDV's not where it's at right now. If you want HD without 24P, the FX1 is here today. If you want both, together, you'll probably want to get a product from one of the other manufacturers, who will all probably do it.

Hey Barry,

<< Chris Hurd assures us that there is no difference in that regard, so no, the Z1 would be no better... But, until there's a final finished product on store shelves, anything could happen... I sincerely hope that the CF24 mode is somehow improved on the Z1. >>

Probably best to say now that the assurance relates more to the fact that Sony won't discuss the CF24 algorithm... and I too sincerely hope it's somehow improved on the Z1. They *did* say that there's no difference in CF24 between the Z1 and FX1, but perhaps something else is afoot there to create a difference in its implementation, and they're not talking about it. No denials, no confirmations either.

Intriguing. The mystery continues!

Sony doesn't want 24p because it may actually interfere with sales of their larger cameras, or so they fear?? That's a theory...

heath

Two notes:

Perhaps Sony doesn't want to pay the licensing fees for 24p to my friend Rob Farber who owns the patent.

As for specs, who ever thought that 24p was part of a formats spec. It doesn't have to be to be included in a design. It's a add-on to a spec. Remember that 24p isn't in the SD spec either but that hasn't stopped Canon and Panasonic. 24p is less a spec and more an add-on. If it wasn't for introducing 24p to professional HD cameras two years after they were introduced to the world we would have not HD today. The 24p gimmick is what sold the camera .

<<<-- Originally posted by Mark Kubat : I know FCP has 25>24p "filter" - what's the best way to do this on the PC side in say Vegas? -->>>

1. Put 25p footage on timeline.
2. Bring up Event Properties.
3. Set "Playback rate" to "0.959" (-4% / 1.001)
4. Set "Disable Resample"
5. Hit "OK". Trim event out to new length.

You (or someone) could write a Vegas script that does this to selected events. In that case, set the rate to 24/25*1000/1001.

///d@
Sony Media Software

<<<-- Originally posted by Walter Graff :
Perhaps Sony doesn't want to pay the licensing fees for 24p to my friend Rob Farber who owns the patent.
-->>>


It's a joke , right?

How can anyone own a patent to 24p? That's a norm, not a product.

Probably the ridiculous, if it wasn't serious, ways of the US patent office. Thank goodness piracy is taking over!


Carlos

Rob Farber holds a patent for the use of 24p technology in cameras. Not in software on the computer, but any camera that creates 24p is subject to his patent. He just signed a big deal with Panasonic licencing them the use of 24p, already has Sony and Thompson.

So Walter, then if these guys making these homemade cameras use 24p then they owe him a fee?

<<<--

As for specs, who ever thought that 24p was part of a formats spec. It doesn't have to be to be included in a design. It's a add-on to a spec. Remember that 24p isn't in the SD spec either but that hasn't stopped Canon and Panasonic. 24p is less a spec and more an add-on. If it wasn't for introducing 24p to professional HD cameras two years after they were introduced to the world we would have not HD today. The 24p gimmick is what sold the camera . -->>>

There is NO "TRUE TRUE 24p" DV, only 25 or 29.97. There is a pulldown in any 24p DV camera (iether 2323 or 2332) to allow an NLE to create a 24p timeline out of DV encoded MOVs or AVIs, but all DV cameras record either 25 or 29.97 to tape, even i they are scanning at 24fps at the CCD.

remember - 3fps isn't in the SD spec either but you can get it simply lowering the shutter speed on most cameras!

I would consider the XL2 and the DXV100 "Half TRUE 24P" (as is the Varicam but in a sense there is no disadvantage compared to TRUE TRUE 24P if you see what I mean). A "TRUE TRUE 24p" Cam would be the HDW900F. which scans AND records 24p (or 23.976, near as damnit).

It seems the CF24 in the FX1 AND the Z1U just drops out one frame in six for CF24 and then inserts a 2:3 pulldown, hence the jerkiness of motion. Quite were the overall shiveriness of the image comes from isn't yet as clear, it could be that the GOP structure is passing on artefacts from the pull down frame into preceeding and following frames. Therefore, even if Sony introduced 48Hz CCDs and a 2:3:3:2 cadence a la the DXV100, there would still be some issues because one frame in 5 (that's 3 frames in every GOP) would have sudden interlace artefacts, unlike the preceeding 2 and following 2 frames.

We're getting way off topic here. Let's go back to the Z1 and 24p.

heath