I was very excited about using this camera to film an annual stage musical production we do, but when I saw all of the complaints about low light performance, and this attrocious split-screen bug (which IMO is simply unforgiveable), I became concerned. Is this camera simply not an option for live event recording with variable lighting conditions (many of which being spotlights or low light)?

For reference, I used the Sony Z1 last year, and was not impressed with its low-light performance. Although I am not sure the cameras were color balanced properly, which exacerbated the problem.

When using a high definition camera in low lighting situations where bright spotlights are used there is a tendency for the cameras automatic exposure to adjust to the dark surroundings which causes too much light to enter the camera and overexposes the actors. Thus the exposure should be limited so that all the fine detail can be rendered. In opposite situations where you have normal ambient light and you are competing against windows that allow a lot of light the cameras AE may adjust to the bright windows rather than the lower light surroundings. In this case it is wise to crank up the exposure.

I use the Z1 to shoot performances. True - you absolutely must use manual controls. You'll probably also need to boost the gain (maybe a lot), but on the Z1 that works pretty well unless things are REALLY dark.

No idea about how the JVC would perform under these conditions.

Has anybody tried yet to shoot concerts with this camera?
I wonder how it behaves with moving lights etc on 720P25...
What settings work the best?
I saw the camera on an exhibition here in Belgium last week.
Since then I have been reading for hours each day the posts on this forum. Very exiting.
I shoot now with a PD-150, but I want to go in higher resolution for my recordings and to have more the film-look.
So I'm used working with 50i frames, not 25p.
It will be a new world opening for me if I'm reading all these posts.
Any tips are welcome. I'm about buying a HD100E.

Yes, I shot a concert in a low light situation in a club with the JVC. There was stage lighting only. But, I had to shoot DV though to match up with a second camera. I suppose that might make a difference.

Everyone commented on how terrific the images looked. Adjusted shutter speed for low light. I did not use any gain at all. No SSE.

Rob

Since you're from Belgium too and I'm about to have mine (in about a week now), perhaps we can test it somewhat? (you can give your email perhaps...)

Nate shot a live multicamera show for MTV2. Maybe he can provide a sample for us?

Werner, mine should arrive in two weeks. I have sent you a mail with my contact info.
Can't wait to start working with it and to be creative with all these settings you can do with the camera.
I did tests with a camera yesterday (I had it in demo for a day from the JVC dealer). Because I knew from this great forum that the camera has some Split screen problems, I did tests. Only starting at +6db I started seeing it. It had the latest firmware they told me.

To see some footage and to know the settings Nat used wood be great.

I shot numerous live events with the camera in a few different auditiriums. The issue doesn't necessairily lie in the fact that the lights are low. It's that the background is often a solid color. The low lit auditorium, combined with a solid color background makes for terrible shooting with the camera. I ended up with Close Ups for an entire event, otherwise I would have tripped off the split screen problem. On my wide shots even my corporate clients noticed the split, and in those wides the shot was held far too long to even bother beginning to try and correct a few million frames of footage. The sony does have a much more stable system, but I would not recommend shooting from the back of an auditorium or gymnasium with the lens.

With the HD100 it's as if light in the foreground with a dark solid background color sets off the split screen. It is such a bother when you can finally frame a wide shot that looks sweet, and then the split screen rears it's ugly little head. Anyhow, also be cautious as you may not initially see the split in your viewfinder or on your lcd. It really hurts when it bited you in the arse when your reviewing your footage.

Good Lord, it sounds like this camera is completely useless for a live event like this. Is this problem going to be fixed? Is it addressed in the HD101 model?

I shot a live concert for broadcast with the camera, and I was fine.

If you suspect your event will have a low-lit, flat surface as a backdrop, then you might want to be careful.

Huiy unfortunately has had bad luck with his subjects and split-screen. I don't doubt he's seen it a lot. In my projects, I've seen it seldom, and it's never made it's way into finished product.

Don't make the assumption the camera is useless for any purpose. You need to check it out for yourself. The split-screen issue is serious and it does exist, but the camera is still extremely useful.

The camera can indeed be functional-but only under the most prestine and controlled conditions. I shot outside in the daylight. No Problem. I intereviewed a subject and was able to light the subject just as I wanted. No issues. However, if you cannot control the environment, and you are shooting in low light then you will have problems. I can guarantee that.
Nate may have only seldom issues, however I suspect more often than not he is able to control the lighting conditions and environment where he is shooting at least to some extent.

Do you know if it helps turning the blacklevel down to -3 or so to avoid the SSE in very dark environments?
For most of the concerts I'm used to put down the Iris anyway to avoid over exposure of the lead singer lit by the followspot.
I will do some tests for sure in our demoroom with moving lights to see what exactly triggers the Split screen error when I receive the camera. I will post my results on the forum.

With the HD100 it's as if light in the foreground with a dark solid background color sets off the split screen.

In a NORMAL scene -- one that is EVENLY lit with an EQUAL amount of light and dark objects -- you need to see a bit of Zebra on the brightest objects (when set at 60-70).

On a waveform monitor you will see accross the width of the image points that range from 0 IRE to 60 IRE.

In reality, any range of at least 50 IRE will prevent SSE.

By definition, a stage with spotlight and background IS NOT a NORMAL situation. The vast majority of the image is likely under 10 IRE with one area at 100 IRE.

On a waveform monitor this looks like a mountain on a flat plain. THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. You are very likely to get SSE.

The only way to shoot this type of situation is to frame every shot to make it NORMAL shot.

Therefore, the bright object needs to fill AT LEAST half the area of the frame. On a waveform monitor that means a wide 100 IRE platau with a drop off on either side to 0 IRE. Now you set the Zebra for OVER100 and be sure there is Zebra ONLY on the brightest UNIMPORTANT highlights.

Alternately, set Zebra so faces are at 80-85.

ALSO you must set the camera for max latitude: KNEE at 80 and Black Streatch 3.

If you can't do this -- and keep gain to +6db or less to avoid noise in the dark areas -- then it's not a job for the camera.

Good Lord, it sounds like this camera is completely useless for a live event like this. Is this problem going to be fixed? Is it addressed in the HD101 model?

It's not going to fixed in any currently shipping model.

If you read broadcast magazines you'll see that HD camera either have problems with highlights or shadows. To shoot a live event you either relight it for broadcast or have very skilled shooters with skilled operators running the camera control units.

By definition, a stage with spotlight and background IS NOT a NORMAL situation.
Steve. A spotlight on a stage IS normal. Not only that, it could be a desired look in a motion picture. It could be a scene in noir style where everything is pitch black except for a properly exposed object in the foreground. In other words, as long as the lit area, however small or large it may be, is not overexposed, it is indeed normal, providing that's the look the DP wants. I really don't like these artificial limitations being suggested as 'the way we need to work now'. It's either fine and the camera can handle that or it's indeed the limitation of this particular camera and all that buy it need to accept it. But it doesn't deem certain lighting scenarios not normal from now on.

So, I hope that the camera CAN handle these situations, as a lot of this particular discussion is theoretical at this point anyway. Actually, it might be interesting to see a frame grab of exactly this lighting situation Anyone?.

Well you're not going to be seeing it from my event, because JVC can find someone else to use this camera. What a terrible disappointment. First the HD10 with its horrendous 1-CCD color, and now the HD100 with this SSE which no one seems to be calling a DESIGN DEFECT that should have warranted a recall and redesign.

Jiri,

I'm using NORMAL in a statistical sense -- as in a NORMAL distribution of light. That's what you use a histogram for -- to see the light distribution.

The point is that folks are going to buy the HD100. Either they are going to shoot and get SSE or they are going to learn how to use it and not get SSE.

Folks harping on SEE isn't going to make anything better. And, I really doubt they are going to convince folks not buy the camera.

As I said, "If you can't do this -- and keep gain to +6db or less to avoid noise in the dark areas -- then it's not a job for the camera."

So either don't use the camera or use it in a way that gets good results.

Peter, as an actual (very happy) user of the camera over a considerable period of time now and shooting in a wide variety of situations, I'm bound to say that your comments are not really warranted. SSE is not that much of an issue (god I hope I dont inadvertently start another thread on SSE).

Rob

There is no such thing as an "artificial" type limitation. All cameras and lenses have limitations.

Looking-up Tim's reference to ASA 200 EXR film I found an interesting quote about shooting at f/4 rather than f/2.8. You may remember the protest about the "limitation" of not being able to shoot wide open. (This was when I recommended checking the AE for an f/4 reading to avoid SSE.)

Click to: http://www.michaelbay.com/whenworldscollide001.htm

And look for this segment: "However, Schwartzman also found that it was essential to use the proper stop in anamorphic, since the poor performance of the lenses in wide-open conditions ...

... As soon as you get a T4, though, they magically transform into gems made of glass."

This is how a pro deals with a limitation. And, by the way, the same advice about shooting at f/4 still applies to the Fujinon lens. And, to avoid diffraction effects, one should keep the iris larger than f/8.

Also from this site: "Many American Cinematographer readers probably don't realize that you can't just put any lens ... Each one has its own sweet spot."

So here's another limitation professionally handled by recognizing that each lens has a sweet spot and you get the best results by shooting in it.

That means shooting from f/4 to f/5.6. How's that for a limitation? By the way, I'm not telling you you MUST follow this rule -- so take this advice as no more than a recommendation. :)

If you can't, or won't, work with the limitations of the HD100 -- JVC is quite happy to have you go elsewhere for your 24P camcorder.

Apples and oranges... interesting article, though, thanks Steve.

Apples and oranges... interesting article, though, thanks Steve.

I think I understand why you say that. If one thinks JVC had an alternative way to obtain 24P at the same cost and in the same time frame -- then SSE is a "defect" that should be fixed.

But, if one believes that the HD100 is state-of-the-art for 24P, then like every technology that isn't perfect -- it is only a serious limitation. Since I believe the latter -- I'm in the "work around it by knowledge" or don't buy/use it camp.

I don't think my comments are unwarranted. We've got a camera here that is essentially useless in certain (what JVC calls extreme) lighting conditions, that, while they may be extreme, are not too uncommon. There's a reason that everyone asks about low light performance of every camera. That's an important factor. This camera doesn't just perform poorly in low light - it actually creates an image that by all accounts sounds unusable (though I would be interested in seeing some footage). I can't imagine anyone looking at this "effect" and believing it is just poor performance and not a defect.

This camera doesn't just perform poorly in low light - it actually creates an image that by all accounts sounds unusable (though I would be interested in seeing some footage).

The people unhappiest are complaining here the most. There are happy users.

Peter, I think it is fair to say this (and you should know that initially I was indeed upset about the issue - until I actually started using the camera). It seems from what I have read that JVC encountered a technical limitation in making a true progressive scan camera in this price range. It was still worth producing the camera. It is a real gift for those trying to make dramas on low budgets. As long as there is proper disclosure and understanding of that limitation, I dont see it as a real issue.

Having said that, I stress again that I have now used this camera a lot for both doco and drama work in a variety of genres - indoors, outdoors, shooting low light in a club, a music video and never once has SSE in any of those situations manifested. (I can only produce it when I really really try in a dark room against a flat surface) That should put the extent of the problem in perspective.

Rob

The people unhappiest are complaining here the most. There are happy users.

In fact, the biggest complainsts are from those who don't even have the camera.

Yet they hang around repeating endlessly the same mantra that the camera has a this or that defect.

It's great that HD100 shooters take the time to comment on their real experiences.

I had a hell of a time finding an SSE shot for my book. Finally found one at +18dB (ND2 at F16) trying get some noise into a Preset and one in NYC at night at Columbus Circle. To make them visible for the book I had to play with the image and place red marks to direct a readers eye to where the SSE is.

The people unhappiest are complaining here the most. There are happy users.

In fact, the biggest complainsts are from those who don't even have the camera.


I bought two HD100's. Guess that makes me TWICE as happy as the usual user. :-) :-)

oh, and no sse. but i don't usually shoot in the dark...

It really isn't that hard to find. I pointed the cam at a broad daylight scene overlooking hollywood (pointing down at the town from up by the hollywood sign) at 0db and there was split-screen. Broad daylight. All you really need to get SSE is a solid color object, like the sky.

Now, with that said, this new JVC I was playing with this weekend was *way* better than the one I bought. It produced some pretty darn nice footage. Had the one I bought performed this well, I would have kept it and been happy with it. I don't know how much variance there is from unit to unit, and this one was about 8 weeks newer than mine, but it was a much better performer.

Are you getting back on the horse Barry?

I don't think my comments are unwarranted. We've got a camera here that is essentially useless in certain (what JVC calls extreme) lighting conditions, that, while they may be extreme, are not too uncommon. There's a reason that everyone asks about low light performance of every camera. That's an important factor. This camera doesn't just perform poorly in low light - it actually creates an image that by all accounts sounds unusable (though I would be interested in seeing some footage).

Hi Peter.
I gotta chime in about this. I received my HD100 recently and by any account I'm not a cinematographer, I just got into this and I'm learning by the day but I have to disagree with your statement. Just after the camera arrived I tore my left meniscus so I've been stuck at home with no mobility and definitely no way of carry around lights etc. So I shoot just what is available.
Just to become familar with the camera and the lens. I shot some low-light (two nightstands) scenes and, after setting white balance and setting iris in the best possible way I cold find, I got a decent picture and no split screen.
If fact I was not awar of the split screen deal until I read it here.
I was actually surprised of how nicely the HD100 responded to low light situations. Did I try to shoot at nighttime with only street lights available? No, but I would be surprised if any *video* camera would perform well in that scenario.

To me the HD100 is a great little camera and I can't wait to have the chance to use it in a more complex setup. Again, I'm not an expert but I believe you could shoot and independent, feature-lenght film and be rewarded with good results.

Take care.
--
Paolo

Um - I've shot 3 dance concerts with this camera. Some spotlit performances. Even when I did see SSE (which was with my first camera, an early unit) it wasn't such that it would be immediately obvious, especially in a cut video. IMO, since I've exchanged it, the new cam outperformed the 3 Sony DSR 300s I was shooting with, with deeper blacks and comparable noise levels. I shot with no gain mostly between F1.4 and F4, so focus is critical on close ups and it takes plenty of practice with the viewfinder, but once you "get it" you can follow pretty well. I pushed the colours to match the Sony's and all cams were set to 3200K preset. Colour match is really close.

I think it's premature to say this camera is not going to work in these situations. It's unreasonable to say it won't work without even trying it.

While not quite as fast as the interlaced half inch cameras (I'm guessing about 2 stops) it works and more than holds it's own (I was shooting SD). I bought this camera primarily for interview work, but am surprised how well it held up in a live situation.

Ok, well I will grant that I could be wrong cause I haven't seen some footage.

Can anyone point to footage or even stills?

Are you getting back on the horse Barry?
Not right away. The window of opportunity for what I was going to do has kind of passed. Perhaps in a few months. I will say that it certainly performed better than the last one, and that's a good sign. The codec is far more robust than the Sony! But the images were just as sharp, as long as the JVC was kept in a similar focal range.

I wish it had been like this three months ago!

Ok, well I will grant that I could be wrong cause I haven't seen some footage.

Can anyone point to footage or even stills?

Peter I'm on a really tight schedule at the moment. Perhaps when things settle down I can post some concert footage for you and label all the cameras so you can see how it cut.

Otherwise there is footage from the HD100 in various situations posted on this website - just do a search. To see what this camera is really capable of have a look at the mini35 music video Nate Weaver shot.


http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=55111

I'm specifically interested in any footage or stills showing the SSE. Is there any? Thanks.

Can no one even show us a still?

Peter I think there are stills already posted somewhere, but really if something is there for a few frames, showing a still frame isn't really doing the camera justice. You have to see the effect in moving footage to decide if it something that is going to impact on your audience/workflow.

I think Tim Dashwood posted some night footage early on that clearly showed SSE at one point. Do a search or PM Tim directly - I'm sure he'll point you inthe right direction. From memory it was lit with street lanterns and was an exterior.

Ah thanks. Is this an example of it?

http://www.mooreusa.net/sse.jpg

All these complaints about SSE, and no one can tell me whether this is it or not?

Yes that is an example. At least from what I've learned and seen from others post. I've also seen that video sequence that your jpg came from and there are a few other shots that have it as well. However the fist time I saw the video I never noticed the split screen. But remember this video was shot with available light and I think with some gain added. (+9 maybe)

Thanks. Ok I just wanted to make sure I wasn't imagining it.

I don't know, this is a close call. The unpredictability of it is the problem. Do I use the Z1, a known entity, and spend the days of computing time converting to 24p, or use this at native 24p and risk driving myself nuts with this bug?

I still say they should never have released this camera unfixed. Too late now I guess.

This is for Peter Moore and anyone else out there worried about the split-screen problem, that photo you just posted up, is from what i see not showing the SSE problem as I know it... it seems like in that photo you are just looking at the blocks of the mpeg 2 compression... (I could be wrong i have not seen the full res. shot of the small photo you just posted, and if im correct that photo is a screen shot from footage of a girl running in the street, if so and you have seen the footage where she fall down and you can see the street and the SPLIT SCREEN then YES THIS IS WHAT EVERYONS WORRIED ABOUT)

but if you are thinking that from that little photo that’s what the SSE problem is, its much worse looking than that... I have seen lots of footage with the split screen problem, some much worse than others. The split happens at exactly 50% of the screen and is noticeable when you shoot on many different darker situations. It also will happen when you shoot something like a bright light or lit object, with a very dark area in the same shot. There is a post of a shot that you can clearly see the SSE problem posted here... http://www.cineform.com/video/slomo2.wmv ... the split is right around where the wall on the left intersects with the sky on the right(the satilite dish shows the split the best). Straight down the middle you will see the shade difference. (This is also not the best example, but this does show you that it can happen in a "day time" shot.)

[EDIT]... the second half of that footage with the darker fast moving shots, you can see that there is NO SSE problem at all [END EDIT]

Now there is good news (no I’m not about to tell you how much i saved with an insurance company) this problem is completely predictable from what I’ve learned, and if you plan to take your time and setup your shots, and check your monitors, and properly light things, then you are going to be fine. I think the trick for getting low light shots with the camera is to stretch your blacks a bit (by 3) on the settings of the camera. This will help with getting some more black in the shots without having to have such a dark "set". Now i am speaking from a film maker point of view, where (most of the time) we have a certain amount of control over our shots and lighting... If this is coming from someone who will want to shoot events and other things like that its basically get in there and shoot, i have limited experience and know-how with this cameras ability in that realm.

I will say this... I was VERY worried about this cameras ability to shoot and have this split screen problem. But now with footage I’ve seen (again I don’t have the camera in my hands to test yet), and I’ve seen quite a bit of footage, you can work around this and if you setup is proper you will not run into a major problem. That said, I am willing to shoot my new film (budget around $50,000) with this camera properly set up (and a good 60% of my film calls for VERY dark shots). This camera really does an incredible job with all of the footage I’ve seen (I’m talking looks like REAL film!), and I have to say with the features, settings, and control this professional camera has, it is at the top of its game in my book... Everything else I’ve seen and used still looks like video to me... This hits the spot with the real film look in my book (granted you don’t have money for a varicam or cinealta).

It comes down to this... rent or borrow (steal from a buddy, haha) the camera and put it through its paces... use it in the situations that you know you will be using it for, and most importantly .... VIEW IT ON AN HDTV right out of the camera (remember the component output will not give you the 24p look, the component out is 60p, so don’t worry when you say 'wait this looks like "720i" ). When you look at everything in its native format on an HDTV that’s when you are sure what you shot is what you want.

Hope you have a great time with it, and good luck!

Saw that WMV. Wow, that's even worse. That's completely unacceptable.

I hear what you're saying about framing the shots predictably. We're shooting a live play though. We don't have time or even ability to be picky about our shots or adjust camera settings on the fly when the lights get dark. So while I'll rent the camera to shoot some movies, I don't think I will rent it for the live show.

yeah unfortunately it is what it is... i have a feeling jvc had this camera tailored to film shoots anyway... this would not be good for shooting uncontrolled lighting in my opinion. but if you do have the chance to rent it im sure you will get some good shots out of it regardless... now i understand that the wmv that you saw that i posted might be from the early camera (after words jvc said they "fixed" the problem on the newer ones)

so again, its really just about you getting the camera in your hands and actually seeing for yourself

[add-on] ... by the way... is this stage play lit for video? (usually means brighter lighting setups)

Yeah all sounds about right. No, it's not going to be lit for video. I could insist on it, I suppose, but I think it would be quite distracting for the audience to see such a bright stage even if the DVD will look kickass. The event is really more about the live show, with the DVD just being an archive.

yeah, oh well i guess thats all with the fun of shooting these events... one take .

Maybe I need new glasses but I really don't see anything wrong with the footage in this clip, http://www.cineform.com/video/slomo2.wmv , can someone please explain SSE to me?



but if you are thinking that from that little photo that’s what the SSE problem is, its much worse looking than that... I have seen lots of footage with the split screen problem, some much worse than others. The split happens at exactly 50% of the screen and is noticeable when you shoot on many different darker situations. It also will happen when you shoot something like a bright light or lit object, with a very dark area in the same shot. There is a post of a shot that you can clearly see the SSE problem posted here... http://www.cineform.com/video/slomo2.wmv ... the split is right around where the wall on the left intersects with the sky on the right(the satilite dish shows the split the best). Straight down the middle you will see the shade difference. (This is also not the best example, but this does show you that it can happen in a "day time" shot.)

Giuseppe & David, Please indicate your source when pointing a direct link from someone's site. This video sequence has a context un-related to the purpose you are using it. These are very early slow-motion test sequences from http://indiefilmlive.blogspot.com -- we don't mind that reference just the wasted bandwidth without any indication of its source. This is an early model camera so the artifact you are looking for is not relevant to today's units. What you should be noticing is that is a 60p over-cranked slow-motion from a camera that is supposed to do only 30p (read more here : http://indiefilmlive.blogspot.com/2005/12/new-slowmotion-capture-explained.html.)

Hi All

I got my 101 here in Western Australia back in November last year. I have used it across a wide range of situations including TVC's, corporate, news and event recording and have not had any issues with it in regards to the SSE.
In regards to the live events, to stay close to this thread, they have all been at our local entertainment centre and have been school graduations, dance school grads and concerts etc.
At all times I am using the camera in full manual mode with blacks compressed at -1, shooting 16:9.
In most cases the stage is lit for the audience so I make sure that as well as wearing headphones for audio monitoring, I also use the theatres talkback system to keep in touch with the lighting director and request when necesary for a little more foreground light...
All of my clients have commented that the quality of their productions are great, previouisly I shot with a Canon XLS1.

regards
Dean