Go out and shoot your Z1/FX1 in CF 24 in DVCam mode.
Capture it, drop it into your NLE with a 24p timeline.
See what you get.
It'll surprise you. Sony won't comment on what we've discovered, but....
And if you happen to have a DVX100 that you can shoot with the Z1/FX1 side by side....you'll enjoy what you get, IMO.

This DVCam mode you speak of isn't available on the FX1 - is it?

EDIT: Or do you mean shoot DV-mode in CF24, as opposed to HDV in CF24?

Shoot CF 24 in SD/DV mode, not HDV mode.

Doug - please don't keep us in suspense - Steven , the cf30 on the fx-1 should be the same as the Z1. I bet you got real 24p on the timeline but in dv. In another thread before the cameras were released there was speculation about this because it said 480p in the specs. Did you capture anamorphic ? Share with your friends- please - Kurth

oops Steven , I meant the cf 24 on your fx1 is the same as the dvcam mode , just in regular dv- sorry for the correction - k

>>the cf30 on the fx-1 should be the same as the Z1<<

Yeah - I knew that. I was just confused about the "DVCam" mode - since I thought the DVCam spec (supported on the Z1) was different from the miniDV spec (on the FX1) - if only slightly.

But yeah - spill the beans! I can't handle the suspense.

Just go shoot it, and import it removing pulldown. I posted this on another forum back in January and got my ass kicked, so this time, now that I've confirmed it, I'll wait for others to confirm this too.
We're getting ready to launch a new tool at NAB, and so I've been doing a bit of research on this cam...and Vegas, Premiere, AVID, and FCP.

Douglas....doood!!! Can you give more details? Specifically, when you say "capture" - what are you talking about exactly? We capture in what codec?? Workflow please!!!!!

Was this Sony's way of circumventing the initial HDV spec and slamming the 24p Panny? If so, I'm going to bow down to SONY right now and WORSHIP them like a GOD!!!!! I'll worship you too Douglas!!

Oh wait, I re-read this thread...so shoot in DV mode?? Ok, so I'm assuming it's on par with the 24p from Panny? If so, I'm pleased! I was hoping for HDV 24p, but definately not unhappy. Not at all...I'm 100% happy. If the 24p in DV mode kicks butt - I'm going to be EXTREMELY HAPPY!

Come on guys, the suspense is killing me..What are the results??
I am looking at buying an FX1, and if it can make like the Panny DVX 100 shooting 24P.. That is a big bonus to purchase the camera now!!

Mike M.

somebody try this and let us know.

or

Doug what was the other website? We can go there and look.

Mike, it's getting dark in my neck of the woods right now. Tomorrow, I'll go out and shoot something in DV CF24 mode. The trick sounds like the pull-down..and DVCAM mode only?

Douglas, isn't there a way to capture the footage and have the pull-down applied at the same time? I'm trying to wrap my head around the workflow.

I'm now dying to see CF24 footage after pull-down. If you can email your posting on the other "forum" - I'd like to see it! Also, if this is true I'm going to have to buy your book as a thank you! Not to mention, it seems like you really know your stuff....unlike some Mellons out there.

Thanks Douglas!

Hello,

Ok thanks Chris.. i look forward to what you see!!

Mike

Hey, someone go wake-up Shannon Rawls! He said he loves the CF30, but I'm sure he'd be into the CF24 that actually worked right.

Shannon, hey brother...you there?? Speak up my fellow Z1U'er! lol

Holy smokes! This information has spread like wild fire! I've been looking on other sites for the information Douglas mentioned and no kidding...this thread has made its way all over within minutes. Why are people reading this site and posting it elsewhere and not contributing here first???

Just goes to show you - DVinfo is the source for HDV information!

Sorry if I dont see it. but ...

What is so special about with 24 Frames. Unless your going to print out to film. Is it that ?

Otherwise, why sould I return to SD with 24 Frames, when I guess, there must be one Frame interpolated or doubled to get 25 Frames (for my PAL-World) or even more complicated to get it into 30 Frames.

I just rebooted my Z1 to 60i, just to see the 24 Frames mode.
Nothing special I see about it. Not much difference to 25.

Please let me know, what makes you all that exciting about it.

Thanks!

Peter :)

My earlier post on the other forum has been deleted, the owner of the site didn't care for me posting there. I'm sure some of you have experienced the same thing.

Peter,

The answer to your question is actually everywhere on this forum. This thread here really isn't about the merit of 24 frames...we're just trying to figure out if it's possible. It seems like it might be and we're all interested in it.

Do a search for 24p via the HDV and SD forums...you'll get 100 posts about 24p. The why's and how's....we're onto the how's right here!

Douglas,

I've got so many funny things I can say about those "forums". But, I've promised Chris Hurd I'd keep my mouth shut......damn, why did I promise that!! I've been counting the people who've had problems over there and the number keeps climbing..

Christopher,

The answer to your answer is, that I didnt want to disturb your thread. Iam aware of the meaning of a progressive format. I just thought, I am missing something new about it, that makes you all so enthusiastic.

I guess its already answered of its possibility by the starting post.

Sorry if its disturbing.

Greetings

Peter :)

My stories can top your stories...:-) Just ask Chris.

I'm really thrilled with the way this is working, and even though Sony won't "officially" comment, one of their employees just emailed me a few minutes ago saying...."We suspected this, and we're verifying your tests, but so far it looks very good..." how's that for saying nothing? ;-)

One more thing ...

How can you know, that its progressive ? When cineframe25 throws away one field, why shouldn't the 24 ?

Are you seeing it from the quality compared to a deinterlaced version or something. Maybe again I did miss something :)

I'm curious as to what you're seeing as well.

I've shot CF24 on an FX1 in DV mode, side-by-side with the DVX in 24P, and the results weren't the same at all. Examining CF24 frames with pulldown makes it look like it should be telecine'd 24p footage, but it doesn't act like it.

I shot a lockdown shot, both cameras side-by-side, with a car passing in front, so the car was a constant-speed object. On the DVX, it moved approximately the same number of pixels on every frame, as you'd expect. But on the FX1/CF24, it moved about 1/3 of its total motion on one frame, then 2/3 on the next. In other words, over the course of two frames the car would move just as much as it would on two frames on the DVX, but instead of being evenly spaced, it was very uneven. The result was a distracting herky-jerky stuttery motion, not 24p-like.

And the results don't change whether you view them on a 60i timeline, or on a 24p timeline (importing the CF24 footage in Vegas, and using File Format Properties to remove 2-3 pulldown).

Are you saying you've discovered something else? Or that the Z1 works in a different way or something?

I'm moving the files from one system over to another where I can see these on a projector, then I'll be able to identify the markers that are leading me to a conclusion that I'm not willing to stake anything on.
I'll post them after I get them moved across the network.

Sorry guys, false excitement. I was testing a 4:2:2 stream from the uncompressed analog out, and found some exciting stuff, but at the end of the day, it was just me jumping the gun. It looks a lot better than the HDV version on an LCD monitor, not sure why just yet, but it was enough to get me excited.
I've put up images on the Sundance site,
http://www.sundancemediagroup.com/training/SonyHVR-Z1U_CF-24_cadence.htm
Apologies for me getting so excited. Between our new product, seeing a smoother/prettier cadence in DVCam mode, and general enthusiasm for a great day....I screwed up. Sorry.
It still looks MUCH better than HDV, but it's not the sweet look of the DVXcams.

Waaahhhhh.....(crying like a baby)...

It's the effort that counts. But, what's the deal with Sony's email??

Sony apparently knows something I don't. I've got a phone conf tomorrow with the product manager, because there is a definite difference in the way the hdv vs DVCam version of this same setup behaves. you can see in the images that the ruler clocks the distance of the pendulum, and it's a different behavior. Plus it looks a lot smoother even though on a frame by frame basis it's basically the same thing.
There is another workflow that gives very sweet 24p, but I'm not at liberty to mention it until NAB. Sorry!

Hey, no fair.....

i promised a few companies.
so, i ain't sayin' sh*t!


















*smile*










go cf24!

I'm sensing a conspiracy!!!

lol

Why does anything have to be keep quiet?

Because NDA often requires it, and in this case, that's what Shannon is referring to. VASST is creating a plug to be soon released, that works with all these features that we're talking about.

Wouldn't it simply be bad marketing for Sony NOT to announce publically any merit to CF24? It's been getting the camera so much flak, that I don't think anyone is even interested in the camera for this feature. I know a whole bunch of people that aren't interested simply because it doesn't have true 24p.

Even if DV mode did yield true 24p, I would choose higher resolution CF24 or 60i->24p workflows over it in all instances where I wasn't interested in a DV workflow. However, I didn't pay $5k (CAN) for a camera so that I would have to do N tests to figure out how it works, and I didn't read the manual so that I could later find out there were "hidden featues" not reported.

The CCDs are interlaced... So the only way CF24 could be improved motion-signature wise is by altering scan rate on the chip to 48 Hz or doing fancy interpolation in software.

Unless Sony announces a software update that provides 48i or a deinterlaced version thereof - I don't see how they could really improve CF24 significantly. I'm going to do some projectile or circular motion tests tonight on my FX1 to illustrate CF24 HDV, CF24 DV, CF30, and 60i to confirm if there's any difference... but I shouldn't have to.

That said - I maintain that CF24 is a useful shooting mode for emulating film in instances when motion is not simple and predictable.

"There is another workflow that gives very sweet 24p

"VASST is creating a plug to be soon released, that works with all these features that we're talking about."

I'm a bit confused, and skeptical, but I suppose we'll just have to wait for NAB.

But, from the sounds of it, you're simply talking about a plugin to be used in post (Like Magic Bullet, DVFilm, Twixtor, or Gramme's FCP Plugin). But no matter what, you're still starting out with interlaced footage.

I don't see how it will ever be as clean as efficient as aquiring true progressive frames from the get go.

Just a few weeks... and I guess we'll have all the answers.
I'm looking forward to it.

First, with the Z1, you're dealing with 3 full, progressive frames. Then you get a tossed field, then 3 progressive, then one tossed field. It's not unlike the DVX shoots where you've got 2 frames of full field, then 2 frames of 1 field each, then it all repeats. The Panny gives you 2, then 3 half frames, then 2, and 3 half. Are you suggesting that the Panasonic method of achieving this is the only "correct" method? The Panny CCD can run at 24k, and that's a benefit, but at the same time, it's still writing fields essentially the same way the Sony is. If anything, the Z1 is writing the same information as the Advanced mode is on the Panny, but giving 3 frames, then half, then 3 rather than 2, 3 halves, then 2.

DSE...expalining to people on the internet is a waste of finger muscles.

The proof is in the pudding.

I have since resorted to the following:

Client: "So can your camera do 24p?"
Shannon: "It sure can!"
Client: "I was thinking about using the DVX for that fim-look"
Shannon: "I have one of those too, I can bring it if you like"
Client: "Oh wow, you have both? What do you recommend?"
Shannon: "Now why on earth did you ask me that...."
Client: "OK, ok. but I really like the look of that DVX, my buddy shot a movie with one and it looked like film, are you sure I can have that in HiDef?"
Shannon: "Uhhh, yes sir, you sure can. Remember, it's how YOU direct as well. Also the lighting. There's no camera in the world that you can just flip a switch and 'instant panavision' comes out of it."
Client: "Yes, I understand, but I just want to make sure about your camera. I heard it can't do 24p"
Shannon: "From who?"
Client: "Ummmmmmmmmmmmm, i don't remember, i read it on the internet."
Shannon: "did you see it for yourself?"
Client: "Uhhh, no."
Shannon: "You've never seen footage from this sony HD camera?"
Client: "no, but I read a report that..."
Shannon: "sir...listen. I read a report that black people were hanged if they looked a white man in the eyes. Do I have to worry about you stringing me up?"
Client: "*laughs* no shannon. I hate racism, you don't have to worry about me bringing a noose to set."
Shannon: "Ok, then I promise to not worry about a modern day lynching if you promise to not beleive everything you read on the World Wide Web and start seeing for yourself."
Client: "Ok, but I just want to make sure. I don't have that kind of money to 'test' this project. I have to make it right the first time around"
Shannon: "I understand. Remember, I'm no spring-chicken when it comes to movie making. I wouldn't steer you wrong. Do you want to "WOW" your audience or do you want camera scientists and internet dwellers to pat you on the back?"
Client: "I want to "WOW" my audience of course. When I present the movie on DVD, I want people to say WOOoooOOow!"
Shannon: "Ok....then what are we waiting for?"
Client: "Ok, im going to talk to my DP about this. See what he says. He loves the DVX"
Shannon: "*sigh*"
Client: "What shannon?? *laffs* c'mon man! you gotta put yourself in my shoes"
Shannon: "I've ran 5 or 6 laps around the track in your shoes!!. Hmmmmmm, Ok, I got an idea..."
Client: "What's that?"
Shannon: "Since your skeptical, let's shoot em both side by side. Be sure to hire a second camera operator and buy a few more tapes and be ready to feed an additional crew member, then you can have the best of both worlds. I already know what footage you're going to finally use in the end, but...ummmm...if you need peace of mind, because you liked your buddies movie, and want to follow your DP's advice, who only shot 2 shorts and a wedding in his life, we can do it this way too."
Client: "ummmm, no...I trust you. Let's go with HD"


*production comes - production goes*


Client: "HOLY SH*T SHANNON...THAT LOOKS AMAZING!! It's like I am looking at the Matrix or something! and I am sure glad I hired my DP...he is so talented!!!"
Shannon: "Your DP??? lol. Umm, ok sir"
Client: "I am SO PLEASED Shannon....dude. I am so f**kin glad I went with that camera. Hey, I got this other buddy who is about to shoot a commercial with an XL2. Can I have another one of your cards to give to him. I am going to make sure he calls you!!!"
Shannon: "Noze problemz suh. Yoozah havah nice day massa suh!"
Client: "*laughs*

*SMILE*

Man....I don't even deal with the numbers and CCD specificaltions and methods of recording and bit rates and all that crap anymore. And those that come at me with them I simply say "Ok, if you're so confident.....let's go head-to-head and see what footage makes a stranger smile harder!" After I make that statement....they shut the hell up.

It's just a tool guys. Just a tool.

- ShannonRawls.com

"Are you suggesting that the Panasonic method of achieving this is the only "correct" method?"

Not at all, I was just saying that I was a bit skeptical (as I think anyone should be of anything until they see if for themselves).

I'm looking forward to seeing what you've got ready for NAB.

Shannon said it best: "The proof is in the pudding."

(although I'm also a fan of "I read a report that black people were hanged if they looked a white man in the eyes. Do I have to worry about you stringing me up?")

haha

What cadence the pulldown from 24p to 60i is being used is really utterly irrelevent. What matters is what the 24 frames look like, at what time intervals they're made etc. Talking about the DVX and the Z1 having the same pulldown pattern is leading away from the issue. The issue is that with film, the samples are 1/24th of a second apart - always, as they are with the DVX, and the motion blur is also correctly recorded. Using the "progressive" method the Z1 is using you get about half the length of motion blur you should be getting due to the fields being thrown away all over the place, and it looks it.

If CF24 is totally derived from the 60i at the camera head, then you can derive a better 24p in post from that same 60i, and you can pick from any of the algorithms available and choose the one which suits your needs. If you shoot CF24 you're locked into Sony's rather poor 24 frame mode. Even the Sony guy, Brian Young, at the Ottawa demo I attended said that CF24 isn't real 24p and it's really just for a quick and cheesy fake film look.

Graeme

I'm not sure I understand the value of using a plug in to get 24p in DV mode. DV is just about toast, frankly. Progressive is needed at the next level up, 720p or even 1080p.

Given most viewers in the world have Standard Def TV's and that the downconverts in software from the Z1 look better than shooting either DV or HDV and downconverting over firewire, I'd say there's going to be a significant number of people who find such a tool interesting, unless it relies on a quirk of actually shooting DV on the camera.

Tests here on FX1 and Z1 60i footage with Film Effects show that very nice results indeed can be produced - the end result was very 16mm film, in the best sense of 16mm.

Graeme

> The CCDs are interlaced... So the only way CF24
> could be improved motion-signature wise is by
> altering scan rate on the chip to 48 Hz or doing
> fancy interpolation in software.

I think the The CCDs operate in interlaced mode, yes... but they have roughly twice the resolution of SD video. The problem with interlaced in a camera like the PD170 is the loss of resolution when deinterlacing, like when you go down to 1/30 or 1/25. In the case of the FX1/Z1, there are twice the lines to work with, so the downsampled image might well have roughly the resolution of progressive, even though it originated from interlaced. Get the picture?

>Get the picture?<

Yes. The reason I went for the FX1 in the first place was that even at 1/2 the resolution, it was still more than 2x the resolution of true progressive SD video. My comment was on the cadence.

Here's a question though: if the FX1/Z1U CCDs can be made to operate at 50 Hz and 60 Hz, what technical reason would there be for them not operating at 48 Hz?

> what technical reason would there be for them
> not operating at 48 Hz?

Hmm --if you consider marketing a technique-- well, to keep from cannibalizing the big expensive cameras that none of us will ever buy, but others will and do buy. Sorry, couldn't resist <grin>.

I don't think there is a purely technical reason. My guess is that it was hard enough to program the firmware for both 60i and 50i, not to mention PAL and NTSC output and MPEG2 encoding and realtime transcoding to DV... so if the camera had 48Hz or 24Hz modes it might not have seen the light of day yet and many people would have gone Panny or JVC. As things are, the Z1 is sold out, Sony instantly dominated the market for below-US$10k high definition and to do that they had to work really fast. It's actually amazing that the firmware has only been known to have one glitch, the audio mode problem which some models, which has already been fixed.

It would not be crazy to assume that a future firmware fix could allow for 48Hz operation and thus better CF24. And while they are at it they could allow HDV at DVCAM track pitch. JVC is aready demonstrating that HDV can be "flavored" with other features and modes not adhereing to the strict baseline HDV standard.

I'm sure it's a bi*** to program the cam for different voltage, simply because for instance, you have to reboot each time you change the operating voltage of the cam. 50i to 60i requires a reboot. I'm sure that doing to a different frame rate would require the same, and that alone suggests cost, programming, and more. I'm not an engineer, I just like to pick at what engineers do. :-)
but I have a healthy respect for engineers that understand marketing, featuresets, and time-defined delivery dates.

Spot, Is this imminent software you're alluding to only for Vegas, or for other NLEs (FCP!) as well? Thanks!

It will be for Vegas only, unless we see enough request for other applications once it's launched. I doubt we'll ever do it for FCP though, Apple doesn't like to support anything they don't own, or so it seems.

> Apple doesn't like to support anything they
> don't own, or so it seems.

Uhh-- I don't know whether they like it or not. But FCP supports plug-ins in Premiere and After Effects formats, that is a BIG number of plug-ins from many parties, none of them Apple-owned. In the audio front it also runs AU plugs and, through an adapter, can use VST. I guess Vegas can run plug-ins made for other apps, too, right? No? I asked once here and I think nobody answered.

Vegas currently can run audio DX or VST with a DX wrapper. In terms of video effects, Vegas can only run plugs made compatible with Vegas.
To rephrase my comment, Apple isn't apparently thrilled to help with the development of anything they don't own. If someone wants to acquire their SDK and develop without access to Apple's people...then they are surely capable of building what they want. We're a small group with a broad offering, and plugins is a very small, and mostly matter of convenience, offering we have. The Sony folks are very, very enthusiastic about third-party products. Apple is great stuff, not knocking it. Just wish they'd offer a little more support to those that support them.

Couldn't agree more! Apple should realy embrace the independent developer community. They'd certainly reap the benefits.

Graeme

Client: I am sure glad I hired my DP...he is so talented!!!"
Shannon: "Your DP??? lol. Umm, ok sir"

Wow Shannon, glad to know the DP had nothing to do with acquiring quality footage. I guess I can go ahead and start searching for a new career now that anyone with a Z1 can get "Conrad Hall Footage" at the push of a button.

Just out of curiousity, does my Gaffer need to start looking for a new career as well? I guess the Z1 just hovers around by itself lighting the set while the crew eats donuts and then beeps when it's got the shot lit and perfectly framed up, right?

Maybe my Gaffer and I could buy a couple Z1's and just be a rental house from now on.

"Maybe my Gaffer and I could buy a couple Z1's and just be a rental house from now on."

Now you're talking!
It's a brave new world Jon, but I'm glad to see you're taking it well. No one said this transition would be easy.


(by the way, in case there was any question I am being sarcastic)

:)



In Shannon's defense, I'm pretty sure he was being a bit extreme in that post just to prove a point. In many other posts of his, he has hammered the point home that these camera's are no more than 'tools,' and that it is not the quality of the tool as much as the talent of the person using it that matters.

It may have come out wrong, but I seriously doubt he meant to undervalue the importance of a DP to any production.