EDIT: Steve wrote in while I was typing, so I should update it to say that that's more like what I'm talkin' about. Let's determine what's happening, acknowledge the limitations, share info on how to defeat it, and advise people as to how they can determine whether or not it will be an issue for them. For some it will be a non-issue, for others it will be a dealbreaker. It's not for us to tell them whether or not it's a dealbreaker, but it is for us to supply them with the accurate and correct information that they need so they can make that decision for themselves.

How would the reaction to this issue have been if it was a Sony camera?

I really hope they sort it out, I like the look of this camera and I was all set to get one, but as I shoot mostly doccos in available light, I'll be waiting to see what develops.This board has the best information I can find about it, so I'm glad it's still being discussed as it has a bearing on how I spend my hard earned cash!

Is this topic is closed to those who don't own the camera?This topic isn't closed at all. It is very much open. I am simply making a very basic appeal for the sake of the integrity of what usable, actual information we have here, to *please* withold comments about things one has no direct experience with. If one does not have the camera in hand and has not seen the issue, then what usable input could there possibly be?

Is there another thread to ask about the CCD circuitry design, and the affect of heat on the chips?Please, I started this site years ago specifically to get away from that kind of talk... (grin)(that was a tongue in cheek comment from having been to too many trade shows).

I'll grant that CCD circuitry design may be an interesting topic for some (and it is not an uncommon topic around here), but what can you *do* with that information? What does it accomplish? How about another thread discussing how to actually use this thing. How about discussing technique and usability, setting up scene files and sharing them, the practical applications of the camera, and even more importantly, what you're creating with it and how.

I guess there are folks to whom the guts appeal to, but my original intention for DV Info Net was for it to be a *usability* forum. Who is using it, what are you doing with it and how. To me those are conversations far more stimulating, more interesting and ultimately of far greater relevance than dissecting innards.

And when there is an important issue regarding innards:

For some it will be a non-issue, for others it will be a dealbreaker. It's not for us to tell them whether or not it's a dealbreaker, but it is for us to supply them with the accurate and correct information that they need so they can make that decision for themselves.Bingo! And that's from an HD100 owner. That's what I was looking for. Thank you, Barry!

For others, who shoot in available light (I'm thinking news, sports, events, wedding receptions, etc) it could be a dealbreaker.

There are a whole lot of types of shooters out there, a whole lot more than just "indie filmmakers".

I'm wondering why someone shooting any of the above subjects would buy a 24p/30p progressive camcorder when an FX1 for half the price would do the job -- except, of course, it too is almost 2 stops less sensitive than the PD170/VX2100.

The bulk of HD100s, I expect, will be bought by those who rent CineAlta, HDCAM, and Varicams who shoot 24p. These folks are already filmmakers who are used to working with a crew that knows how to light. And, they rent all the types of lights they need. They want perfectly exposed video. FX are done in post. Indie filmmakers, unles they are of the "run and gun" type -- will be the other buyers.

I'm sure JVC would love to sell to all the markets you have listed, and as long as these folks use light (news and sports always do), they can.

Until recently, weddings were also shot with extra light -- so if someone wants an HD wedding they need to accept more light no matter what camcorder they use. But, I can't honestly see why a wedding would be shot at anything other than 60i. There is no real reason for a 24p wedding!

There is no reason for everyone to find one camcorder ideal.

Here is a tiff image with a split screen example.

Its shot in my office and what you see is my white-painted wall.
The exposuer is set correctly at f4, all settings are at normal, no gain is used.

The light comes 90 degre from the side, so there is no light hitting directly to the lens.

Download the image (2.6mb) from here: http://www.plonk.se/splitscreen_nogain_f4.tif

f4? Well, that proves Steve's f2 theory doesn't always work then.

Until recently, weddings were also shot with extra light -- so if someone wants an HD wedding they need to accept more light no matter what camcorder they use. But, I can't honestly see why a wedding would be shot at anything other than 60i. There is no real reason for a 24p wedding!

Hang out at WEVA, on the videouniversity fora, on TheKnot, or one of several other popular wedding boards, and you'd instantly change your comment. LOTS of DVX shooters in the wedding world, lots of people that were excited about the JVC for weddings, many, many Z1/FX1 owners.

Why 24p for weddings? Aside from the fact that a lot of videographers like the cadence of 24p, it also allows them to put longer videos, higher bitrates on a single layer DVD. That's pretty important to them too. Many are using HDV, very happily so. To quote Doug Graham of EventDV magazine, "I've yet to hear of anyone buying an FX1/Z1 for weddings and taking it back due to low light problems."

Weddings are much like film productions these days, view a few of the videos that people like Glen Elliot, Tim Ryan, Ken Erhardt, Mark and Trish VonLanken, and other reasonably well-known videographers are doing. And why they're making big money doing it. Mostly in 24p at either acquisition or delivery.

In fact, I'll wager serious cash that WEVA/4Evergroup carry more influence than any other single group of camera/software buyers out there. I was just at a GPVA meeting where virtually everyone shoots weddings, and the room was packed with nearly 200 people. And a high number already own HDV.

Even though I would never consider shooting a wedding, I have tremendous respect for those that do. Some of their 60-90 minute works are incredible, given the lack of ability to control the shoot and set.

Spend a little time in the DVInfo.net wedding/event forum, you'll quickly get an "honest idea of why someone would want to shoot 24p" at a wedding.

Failed to mention that Ken Freed has been spending a lot of time presenting/talking to groups of wedding videographers, even though it's a crowd that you think wouldn't be interested in 24p

Here is a tiff image with a split screen example.

http://www.plonk.se/splitscreen_nogain_f4.tifMikael, would you mind if I added that image to our HD100 gallery here on the site?

Mikael, would you mind if I added that image to our HD100 gallery here on the site?

Not at all, of course you can.

I'll grant that CCD circuitry design may be an interesting topic for some (and it is not an uncommon topic around here), but what can you *do* with that information? What does it accomplish? How about another thread discussing how to actually use this thing. How about discussing technique and usability, setting up scene files and sharing them, the practical applications of the camera, and even more importantly, what you're creating with it and how.

I guess there are folks to whom the guts appeal to, but my original intention for DV Info Net was for it to be a *usability* forum. Who is using it, what are you doing with it and how. To me those are conversations far more stimulating, more interesting and ultimately of far greater relevance than dissecting innards.

Well, okay... I appreciate the explanation. Consider for a moment that this forum has been up and running many months prior to the camera's release. There were no users during that timeframe.

I'm just trying to be an informed buyer. This just seemed like a logical place to be.

f4? Well, that proves Steve's f2 theory doesn't always work then.

This was a PAL model and I make no claims about anything but USA Inspected HD100's.

Moreover, F4 is only a recommendation that so far has worked for me in the real-world.

This is like the famous banding from the XL1 when someone shot a blank wall. Never seemed to bother those who bought the camera.

Consider for a moment that this forum has been up and running many months prior to the camera's release. There were no users during that timeframe.You're absolutely right about that, of course. I didn't mean to sound flippant; my primary concern here is in keeping the noise level down and the information level up.

You're absolutely right about that, of course. I didn't mean to sound flippant; my primary concern here is in keeping the noise level down and the information level up.

This is ironic.... I always hate it when threads drift off topic, but here I am doing my best to do just that.

Just a word of thanks for taking the time to explain your objectives for the forum. I'm still not quite sure what to do to conform, but I will figure it out.

My apologies for the off-topic chatter. When in doubt, keep posting. Many thanks,

I really think that JVC is surprised by the split screen and their engineers must be scrambling to work out the math to fix the issue. Think about it. If their was ever any intent to mask the problem, why would they allow the camera to open past f2? Why even put gain on the camera at all?

It seems to me that the issue has taken JVC by surprise. What could they say? They must be speechless! I'm hoping they get the math figured out because their codec is the real deal.

lots of people that were excited about the JVC for weddings
Spot, that post was almost word-for-word what I would have written too.

For filmmakers, I don't see where the JVC has appeal over the HVX. For people who get hired to shoot (stringers, conventions, weddings, etc), I can see where the JVC could have significant appeal over the HVX, because of the form factor and the long record times. Wedding/event shooters like to have the big camera. Wedding/event clients like to see that they're getting what they paid for. Event shooters need to shoot a lot of footage, etc.

Plus, I thought the HD100 might do well for weddings because a *lot* of wedding videos are being edited to be entirely slow-motion. The JVC's unique 480/60p mode would probably be perfect for that, and would deliver the cleanest slow-mo of any camera in standard-def; only the HVX could compete with that 60p motion rendition.

Indie filmmakers don't, for the most part, care so much about the look of the camera. Stringers and event shooters and wedding shooters do. They make their living off their camera, and the #1 most intriguing thing the HD100 has going for it is the shoulder-mount pro-style look. Paying clients like to see that they're getting their money's worth, and an HD100 doesn't look like a handycam. I don't think I've talked to a wedding/event shooter yet who wasn't jazzed about the HD100's looks.

But, as Steve rightly points out, the shooting modes and limitations in the HD100 may make it a less desirable choice for those types of shooters. Which is a frustrating conundrum.

Let me put it this way: the things that appealed to me about the HD100 were long-form recording capability, and the shoulder-mount form factor for clients who care about that. I've made a pretty decent amount off shooting conventions; the HD100 could pay for itself in less than a week of doing that type of work, and it's easy and there's no editing(!) I've been doing it with the DVX, but I figured the HD100 might take it up a notch. It seemed perfect for the task in many ways -- broadcast form factor, high-def, and long (and cheap) recording times. However, operationally, it may turn out to be the single least-suited camera for those tasks, because of the frame rate limitations and the split-screen-under-available-light situation! What good does it do to record an hour on a $15 tape, if the entire hour has the split-screen effect?

I haven't tested for SSE in standard DV mode; if it doesn't do it in DV (or 480/60p), and if I can get standard-definition video that's at least DVX-like, then I may keep it and use it for its standard-def capabilities, recognizing that high-def would need to be used only during controlled-lighting circumstances. But if it still does SSE in standard-def, then I'm really at a loss to understand what to do with the camera. (It's like a great big tease -- "its mouth is saying 'no,' but its eyes are saying 'yes' ".)

I just want to encourage people to keep posting about their findings with the SSE. I would have owned 2 HD100s by now if I wasn't so worried about the SSE. The thing is that so much has been posted about it that I'm slightly confused.

Numerous people posted that JVC acknowledged that it is a fault and if you find the SSE at something like +12 gain or so they'll replace it? Some say 0 gain? Other people are complaining that JVC does not acknowledge it as a problem. Which is it?

Some people post that only the 100E and 101E have the problem, the 100U is mostly SSE free because of newer firmware. This is also contradicted. In fact there are posts that claim no amount of firmware will help. Then ones that claim no new firmware has been released. Which is it?

Finally there are those that say if you do A, B, and C in x, Y, and Z situations you'll never see the SSE and you should follow these rules all the time and JVC shouldn't have allowed you to shoot with A, B, and C settings and if XYZ happens to you often, don't buy the camera.

My opinion. If they are replacing the cameras officially or unofficially, I don't care as long as they are replacing them consistantly. I can see that they would not want to officially acknowledge the issue especially if they are close to releasing a version of the camera SSE free.

Everything about this camera/deck combination is right except for this SSE. It's really a dealstopper especially because it's unpredictable and it'll add hours and hours to fix on post. Not affordable with any sort of event work.

For filmmakers, I don't see where the JVC has appeal over the HVX.

Lens possibilities and cost comes to mind. If I think a little harder, I'm sure I could dig a couple more. When the HVX200 is actually released, the list may even grow a notch or two.

How did the HVX make it into this thread?

How did the HVX make it into this thread?


I didn't bring it up, I promise. :)

Numerous people posted that JVC acknowledged that it is a fault and if you find the SSE at something like +12 gain or so they'll replace it? Some say 0 gain? Other people are complaining that JVC does not acknowledge it as a problem. Which is it?

Some people post that only the 100E and 101E have the problem, the 100U is mostly SSE free because of newer firmware. This is also contradicted. In fact there are posts that claim no amount of firmware will help. Then ones that claim no new firmware has been released. Which is it?
Part of the confusion is that we are a worldwide community, so you're hearing reports from people in Australia, Italy, Canada, the US, England, etc. Yet the camera is marketed by different divisions of JVC, each which can set its own policies. So it's possible that JVC Canada may declare "any split-screen that's visible at less than 12dB is a defect worthy of replacement", yet that doesn't bind JVC USA or JVC Australia to the same conclusion. There is no blanket statement of policy coming from JVC Japan, the parent company of all the JVC divisions.

So what a JVC Canada customer gets told may only have bearing on customers in Canada, and may have no applicability to customers elsewhere.

Now, regarding US units -- the camera was released overseas a full month before it was released in the US, some people had it overseas for two months before some US customers started getting theirs. It is our (perhaps unfounded?) understanding that the US units were being delayed while an extensive quality-control check was implemented. So Steve takes the position that reports from non-US cameras are not necessarily relevant to US purchasers, and I think he does have a point. However it goes forward, though, it should be reasonable to say that what US customers are experiencing is the most up-to-date, most thoroughly quality-checked versions.

My opinion. If they are replacing the cameras officially or unofficially, I don't care as long as they are replacing them consistantly.
Well, that's part of the problem -- consistency only carries as far as the borders of the particular marketing division's territory. JVC Canada can implement a policy of "we'll replace everything", and JVC New Zealand could decide "we'll only replace it if we can recreate the situation in our lab" and JVC USA may decide to say "we don't consider it a defect". Each country is different. Each marketing division is different. And the policies and standards that they decide to adhere to are not necessarily binding on any other territory.

The only thing you can do (and the only answer that is actually relevant to you, the individual customer) is to ask your dealer what their policy is on the split-screen issue. Your particular dealer will be able to converse with their JVC sales representative and will get the straight facts on what options are available to you, the customer. Don't come to the web looking for the answer, as there are too many different answers (and each of them right for each territory, but not for others!) Ask your dealer. Tell 'em you've heard about the SSE and you want to know what the policy is regarding that. That's the only way you'll know what matters to you in your country.

How did the HVX make it into this thread?
Guilty -- sorry, didn't mean to get things off-track. Since I'm getting both, I was pointing out that they're very different and separating the two cams into what they're individually best at, and Steve made the point that "why would event shooters get this cam? It's made for filmmakers", so I was trying to say that the reasons I got it had nothing to do with filmmaking, it's not necessarily the optimal choice for that environment; instead I was saying that its unique selling points had more to do with the appeal it has (warranted or not) for event shooting. Tied in with, and taken from, Douglas' post above.

So no, no reason to go off on that tangent, and I apologize if it drags the conversation even further off tangent!

Barry and DSE are very correct. In certain market segments, your camera's formfactor will either put the client at ease, or, make them think you are just as amateur as the guy who offered to do it for free before they decided to hire a professional.

I know that's not the be-all end-all of creating good video, but it is a reality. The most common question I get with the XL2 rig is, "What tv station are you shooting for?".

As for 24P wedding videos, the better quality videos often resemble a short film.

=gb=

James Daniels (aka J.D.) District Sales Manager JVC Corporation says he'll be at Resfest Chicago with camera. Here is a nice opportunity to check out the HD-100 and talk to "the horses mouth". So bring your interest in HD as well as your questions.

This was confirmed to me via email so it is not on the Resfest agenda. If any of you would like to link up with me over at the show let me know via email.

@Barry and Douglas, Just for fun take a look at this clip Click here (http://www.planetliquid.us/web_video/szn89productions/brianmisty.wmv) to see what level weddings are cut at these days. Aaron Osborne shot and edited this. I'm not an event cutter but I admire how far the wedding crowd is taking creative shooting and editing. The time warping is very good in NLE's these days.

I'm not an event cutter but I admire how far the wedding crowd is taking creative shooting and editing. The time warping is very good in NLE's these days.
That's exactly what I'm talking about -- when I was at the WEVA expo to check out the cameras, I saw this kind of video everywhere. And I figured the wedding crowd would just eat up the HD100 -- I mean, not only for the look of it, but also if you notice, probably 90% of that video was all slow-motion... so shooting native 480/60p, and playing that back at DVD speeds of 480/24p -- I thought JVC would have a huge hit on their hands.

The available-light question is the only thing. I'm going to go try the split-screen test in SD and DV modes.

Im sorry to report that we noticed SSE in one of our footage...sad but expected!

James Daniels (aka J.D.)

@Barry and Douglas, Just for fun take a look at this clip Click here (http://www.planetliquid.us/web_video/szn89productions/brianmisty.wmv) to see what level weddings are cut at these days. Aaron Osborne shot and edited this.

Exactly what I was referring to. The scary thing is, some of this stuff is done as SDE (same day editing) although the really sweet stuff isn't done quite so fast. This is a great editing job, although the color could have stood some sweetening. These guys know how to shoot for the edit, they are assembling in their minds before they ever turn off the cam.
Impressive industry these days, it's no longer uncle ralphie.

One thing about the 24p and 30p of the cam is it also gets the footage closer to what bride/groom see themselves as, IMO. I think they wanna see themselves in images that are similar to what they're seeing from at least mid-budget films. Not just the cadence, but the treatments.

I'm going to go try the split-screen test in SD and DV modes.
SSE is just as evident in DV and SD60P modes... and under really low-light conditions, it can behave quite oddly. The two sides of the image can flash darker/lighter independent of each other, like the processors are trying to find some common ground and can't.

Adding a little light makes that all go away. But there's no doubt, this isn't a low-light camera. It's extremely noisy and split-screeny under dark conditions. Buy a Frezzi or a Pag and bolt it to the top of the camera and never take it off.

Adding a little light makes that all go away. But there's no doubt, this isn't a low-light camera. It's extremely noisy and split-screeny under dark conditions. Buy a Frezzi or a Pag and bolt it to the top of the camera and never take it off.

I'm thinking LED LitePanels would be perfect!

If my theory is roughly right and a small IRE Black Level correction factor is computed for, one or both, A/D converters -- and this value is wrong for either, or both, I think it's easy to see why light level is so critical.

Imagine the factor is 5IRE. It's a perfect match for the Left A/D, but high by 3IRE for the Right A/D.

Now imagine a low-light image that ranges from 0 to 25IRE. Suddenly that image ranges from 3 to 28IRE. You can see the difference between it and 0 to 25IRE clearly

But, once the captured image is 0 to 100IRE, the Right image is 3 to 103IRE. Thus, it should be harder to see the difference between it and 0 to 100.

When the difference it really tiny we only may see a line.

And, since we can have an error on any 1, 2, or 3 colors -- its easy to see how the big differences that some see could be produced. And, easy to see why any kind of White Balance error could increase SSE.

Sorry to go on -- but as you raise gain it's clear that color levels do NOT increase proportionately to increasing gain which causes both a loss of color saturation and increased color error.

Moreover, I've noted that the computed color temp changes by 300 degrees when you go from insufficent light (OPEN) to sufficient light (about F4). So clearly low light hursts three ways -- plus the noise that comes from adding gain. How do you compute a valid correction factor for noise???


I once wrote software that computed a heart beat from the differences in body weight that occur on each pump. It took months to fine tune the algorithm to get rid of errors. It's a very hard task!

I suspect that: (a) JVC had no idea their twin A/D would fail so badly. Either a design error or the parts being delivered are not what they requested. You have no idea how often this can occur.

And, (b) in the last few months they have been scrambling to improve the circuit and tune the firmware. The first batch were clearly lemons/betas that didn't come into the USA. Obviously, they can be "fixed."

Chris -- ideally this thread should be split because WE KNOW the PAL units a bad!

I suspect ours -- except for a few that slip through USA QC -- are "fixed" as much as they can be for now. But, I'll bet work continues -- and folks are right to keep the pressure on. Especially for a definition of failure.

This type of problem is not unique to JVC. A Sony V110 Video8 camcorder had an iris hunt that occurred whenever the sky was bright and the ground was dark. Unuseable in India! I sold it.

A Panasonic editing deck, muted the sound at every edit point. When in Japan, I made a series of phone calls and finally got to THE engineer who said -- roughly, "you are correct that it it does this -- it is a 'characteristic' of the design." Then he said, "that means it was our error, but I can't officially say that. I'm sorry it is causing you so much trouble."

JVC is segmented globally, and thus every region exists without always knowing what is happening in Japan. That said, be nice to your JVC reps and JVC dealers. Taking a defensive tone, depite your frustration, will only exxagerate the situation. Have some tact and understand the politics involved and I predict that those who purchased the camera will eventually be taken care of if and when the split screen scenerio is sorted out. Everyone who bought the HD-100 has a warranty, so be patient and again, be nice here.

I'm testing an HD-100 right now so I understand why this thread has continued. I think that this thread should continue until there is an official word from JVC Japan, rather then word from JVC subsidearies on various continents.

At the end of the day, remind yourselves that Matsushita Electric is not a 'mom 'n pop shop' based in Albany, NY. If I actually owned the HD-100, I would remind myself that Panasonic and JVC might be working on this problem together, or not, but most likely.

So confirm that your warantee is valid and just deal with the shooting parameters according to what they are NOW, and just think about Matsushita when you go to bed at night. Sweet dreams.


LA based DP

Okay, I wasent so worried about this split screen effect ar the begining.
But today I made some new testshots indoor in my apartment. I have big windows at home so the light was enough to give me a f8 at my withe wall (no direkt sunlight). And the split screen was there.

Seems like this SSE can apear in good lightning condisions as well.

I taped it, and I will give you a link to a sample later.


Seems like it has problems with withe surfaces?
I have a GY-HD100E

That's three now reporting the split even under enough light. It seems light is not the cause as some believed.

Chris -- ideally this thread should be split because WE KNOW the PAL units a bad!Steve, you're right, it should probably be split but I wouldn't know *where* to split it.

Chris -- ideally this thread should be split because WE KNOW the PAL units a bad!

It seems to me, judging by the reports, that the NTSC units are just as bad!

I'm afraid that there is no question that the split screen effect will appear under normal lighting conditions as well. I can replicate this and similarly have recorded it to tape.

It is just that you dont notice it unless you pick a flat surface with a single colour. Then you see it so clearly. It then is always lurking there undermining your confidence in the camera's performance.

You just so want to love and trust this camera. You vacillate wildly between wanting desperately to trust JVC and just not believing that it could do this to you.

Meanwhile the split screen effect is always there, waiting, just waiting to emerge ...

Rob

You just so want to love and trust this camera. You vacillate wildly between wanting desperately to trust JVC and just not believing that it could do this to you.

Meanwhile the split screen effect is always there, waiting, just waiting to emerge ...

I feel you. At the same time I´m confident that JVC will do something about this problem once they have figured it out. For now I see no reason to send my unit in until they have a cure for it...!

So Robert, your assertion is that SSE happens regardless of light levels; if you point it at a flat same-colored surface you can detect the split?

No - sorry Barry, that was not my intent.

It is not regardless of light levels.You can see from my email that I was having a bit of a rave. I hope that people experiencing this difficulty can be excused occasionally for sharing their frustrations and mixed feelings.

I suppose the main point is that I can certainly see it in an unlit room during daylight - with a big window at the end of the room acting as key light. You can see it by focusing on a flat wall with one colour. The SSE seems masked by detail in the frame. My position has always been that I could live with the difficulty if it only manifested with gain on.

Sorry for my imprecision - not wanting to fuel hysteria or anything.

Rob

[QUOTE=Robert Castiglione. You can see it by focusing on a flat wall with one colour. The SSE seems masked by detail in the frame.Rob[/QUOTE]

PLEASE -- when reporting, note which Region you are in. You are in a PAL Region.

Moreover, even an NTSC unit will do this unless you MANUALLY COLOR BALANCE.

It seems to me, judging by the reports, that the NTSC units are just as bad!

I started at page 5 and so far ALL those reporting SSE -- that is NOT eliminated by adding light -- are units not inspected in the USA. So where do you come up with this conclusion. Where are your data?

Why are folks who know their units are almost 100% likely to be bad and therefore must be replaced by JVC still reporting what we know to be the case? You might as well reporting all your TVs have a terrible flicker. Of course they do!

Where are the dozens of reports from the USA that show SSE is not eliminated by adding light and color balancing

Frankly, judging from the data -- or lack there of -- you guys are building the case for JVC USA not to have to do anything about SSE.

You'll have to come-up with something more than "you'll see it even if it isn't there" and "it's always lurking" to convince JVC USA there is a problem.

Frankly, I'm truly open to the possibility that my solutions will not always eliminate SSE, but so far I've got NO data that supports that possibility. And, if there are no data, what's going on here?

"Why are people who know almost 100 %. still reporting."

1. Because this is the appropriate forum to do so.

2. Becuase there is no official guidance acknowledgement or communication of any kind from JVC.

3. Because we are still exploring the nature and extent of the problem.

4. Because we are hoping that other people on this forum can assist in some way.

5. Because we are upset that we were not told about the problem before we purchased it.

etc etc


Rob

Frankly, judging from the data -- or lack there of -- you guys are building the case for JVC USA not to have to do anything about SSE.

You'll have to come-up with something more than "you'll see it even if it isn't there" and "it's always lurking" to convince JVC USA there is a problem.


Take a look at this screen capture (http://www.time-code-media.de/split.jpg) amigo. It can really happen in broad daylight.

Take a look at this screen capture (http://www.time-code-media.de/split.jpg) amigo. It can really happen in broad daylight.

Now that is the worst I have seen. Stephen, you need to send that baby back! 100U or E ????

Now that is the worst I have seen. Stephen, you need to send that baby back! 100U or E ????
That screencap was provided by Robert Niemann. The unit was an HD-101e. I think insinuating SSE doesn't exist doesn't help. There have been many people across the globe who report it. The camera just came out (as everyone knows) and as I wrote above, I think SSE took JVC's engineers by surprise. I don't think they'll say word one until there is a fix, even if it includes a recall of the first production runs.

"Why are people who know almost 100 %. still reporting."Rob

Many have said dozens of times that those not having a USA Inspected camcorder should RETURN IT FOR A NEW ONE. No one here can do for you, or the others, that which some seem unwilling to do -- take it back to your JVC dealer!

We know the extent of the SSE problem in PAL units! It's been documented over and over! You'll not hear from JVC here! You won't get help here because we can't fix your problem. If you are -- rightfully -- upset that you were sold a lemon, why whine? Write a grown-up letter to your appropriate JVC Country Manager.

That screencap was provided by Robert Niemann. The unit was an HD-101e. I think insinuating SSE doesn't exist doesn't help. There have been many people across the globe who report it.

Of course, it has SSE -- it is a 101E not a 100U!

Steve, frankly, you are acting as if the HD100U had no SSE. If that was the case, I would just import a NTSC version. It would be even cheaper with the weak dollar rates. But, there are Canadian users reporting the SSE. There are also US users reporting SSE. With and without enough light.
So what's your point?

Anyway Steve, I have actually found your suggestions for alleviating the problem helpful - using manual white balance (always a good idea anyway) actually does help significantly. So cheers for that.

Rob

Stephen, Chris will be cross at me, but are you deliberately being intentionally dense? And, why are you posting for Robert?

Of course, it has SSE -- it is a 101E not a 100U!
Steve,

I'm taking the m2t's as they come in from all locations and placing them on my timeline. I know what I'm seeing. I posted the Neimann screencap because it is nowhere on this thread. If Chris Hurd want's to break this thread up into NTSC and PAL then I invite that.

S.Noe

Many have said dozens of times that those not having a USA Inspected camcorder should RETURN IT FOR A NEW ONE. No one here can do for you, or the others, that which some seem unwilling to do -- take it back to your JVC dealer!Steve is absolutely right -- you guys who are affected by this issue really need to get your dealers involved. They can apply another level of pressure above and beyond the customer in order to hurry along a solution to the problem.