I think I've found the fly in the ointment. According to this simulation, the loss of resolution can be attributed to the use of B+W UV filters


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/largeimages/120958.jpg


That's frickin' hilarious!

Scott, greetings Brother. I'm an RIT grad too. PPHL (photoIllustration) Class of ' 85, when did you graduate?

Who said that, Les Stoebel, or Terry Bolman?

Ash, even with the Varicam's larger chips at 720, vs H1 1/3" chips at 1080?

So, then how would the H1 stack up against an F900, or the HDX900 (is that out yet?), or another 1080 camera? Probably not better, but close enough to be good enough?



Dont get me wrong, I would generally always choose the larger chip camera, just wanted to point out that resolution-wise, the 1/3" CCD stuff can come close.

I would not buy a 2/3" CCD camera right now, I rent them as needed. I suspect you will start seeing larger CCDs in the next couple years in the $50K and under range.



ash =o)

Ash, yes, I think most folks would go with the larger cam whenever possible, but it is kind of amazing that the H1 comes so close.

I need something for the lower end jobs. Those clients can't afford to rent a larger camera, so I have to own something that will be at least adequate. All the present prosumer HD/HDV cams have one, or more flaws that make them, in my mind, a bad choice. I can't afford a larger camera at the moment, plus I think the next iteration of the Varicam will be out soon and there are some other cameras that look promising.

So in the mean time, I'm stuck.

Hey Mark

You've got to have a sense of humor to survive those Rochester winters. The city provided everyone who grew up there w/a pair of 30Y glasses so we wouldn't forget what the sun looked like. Of course up there we revolved around a big yellow box!

I loved Rochester. I really liked driving around some of outlying areas and shooting 8x10 landscapes on color neg. The good ole days. I moved from Rochester to Vermont to be a newspaper photog for ten years, I can deal with winter. I just get suicidal. No worries.

Brian, are you an alum too, or a resident of that fair city?

I'm still a Kodak Man.

I didn't go to RIT- but my brother did. Now he's an engineer for Toyota. I went the art school flunky route and decided I needed to learn a real skill and took up photo on my own. Now I'm trying to get up to speed on audio/video. Its a pretty steep curve for someone who isn't predisposed to the math side of the equation. I think I'm better at the storytelling aspect, but I figure if you don't know how to produce content, you'll just be a bystander and have no say at all.

Rochester was a great place to grow up though. Still go back to see the family every so often. I've lived in Brooklyn for 10+years now.

Well neighbor, I've been here in Queens just a little over two years.

I sucked at math, still do and there's just so much BS to wade through with video. Ugh.

Ha! Well, if you ever want to meet up for drinks at the Beer Garden, let me know.

BS

I have the feeling this one is not exposed well. There is no detail in the blacks (can not even see the buttons on his shirt). Maybe you just put the pedestal too low ?


Taken from the same studio setup as the other scene. This is where the HVX show's it's softness. Look at details on the table lenses and camera bodies and definition starts to fall off. Obviously it's not important to have fine details in this clip, but this is where distant landscape details would suffer from not being more prominent in the framing.

Cees,

If you can't see the shirt buttons (that is a black-on-black area) then your monitor definitely needs calibrating. There isn't a ton of detail in that area since the lighting was concentrated for skin tones and showing the lenses on the table, the buttons are very noticeable.

Without knowing what kind of monitor you're using (CRT, LCD etc) pr which system PC or Mac, I can't give you any guidelines for proper balancing, but I'm sure one of the forum members can give you a quick guide for proper color/contrast balancing on any setup.

A beer garden? A garden full of beer? Sounds good. I'll send you an email. Busy this upcoming weekend, but I'll be in touch.

Scott, greetings Brother. I'm an RIT grad too. PPHL (photoIllustration) Class of ' 85, when did you graduate?

Who said that, Les Stoebel, or Terry Bolman?

I started over at RIT in 76 after an abortive first year as an art student in St. Louis, took a year "off" '78-79 to finish my Gen'l Studies requirements after my AA (and do pottery...I needed a break from the intellectual remove of photography after doing it non-stop for 8 years), then finished up in '81.

Neither of the above, though I did have Les for M&P. It was one of my 2nd year teachers (whose name I've spaced out at the moment). I came through PPHL (that's what the degree is in) but majored in film and tripled up on Multi-Image (remember 16-projector slide shows?... shudder....). I'm also unusual in that I was able to arrange getting Brad Hindson as my primary faculty guy for Photo Ill, even though he was technically assigned to the Photo-Fine Art program (with Bea Nettles). Brad was the only one there who really specialized in visual-diary-with-Leica shooting (think: Horace Bristol, Mary Ellen Mark, Erwitt, Uzzle, Nick Nixon).

As for the Rochester suicidal winters....that's what Lexapro is for! It's also for those of us who sit in a dark edit suite day after day (and that's coming from personal experience!)

But I'm leading us off-topic... sorry 'bout that, folks!!!

While the H1 is obviously the resolution/color contrast king the reality of tyring to merge footage from any HDV camera into a project that is DVCPRO-HD based turns out to be much more complicated - and costly - than I had imagined.

Without getting into all the gory details, what it comes down to is this: The Canon is a 1080i camera; the HVX (as we shot it) is true 720p. Even with the KONA LHe there's no cost effective or workflow-logical method for merging the two formats without either serious image compromises or, a post-intensive 3-stage conversion workflow, neither of which makes any sense. (Thanks to the guys at AJA for pointing this out).

Robert,

I wonder what your workflow problem with the H1 is? Do you normally edit in a 720 60p timeline with 24p over 60 frames, or do you usually work in a 720 24 timeline? Have you tried taking raw .m2t's and converting through MPEG Streamclip to DVCPro HD? They can look good at both 1080 24/60i DV100 or even better as 720 24/60p.

It's easy to downres Canon 24F to 720 24 and with a Natress plug-in (Standards Converter/Map Frames) it's also pretty easy to convert 1080i to 60p. If you have a fast G5 the conversions can be very fast.

You could always get a little mini-Teranex for instant standards conversion via SDI but the MPEG Streamclip program produces amazing results for free.

Barlow,

What it amounts to is that trying to merge H1 footage with HVX means more work, no matter how you look at it. So, rather than make more work for myself on this big project I'm just going to stick with what I started with - the HVX. Trust me, I'm not lamenting not getting the H1; it was supposed to be a stop-gap for certain types of work but I'm much better off (and more comfortable) staying with true 24p and 4:2:2.

I've already put my pre-order in for the HPC2000, so between that and the HVX I'll be 100% covered for everything I shoot - with exception to those jobs that are best suited for film.

The 2 Pannys along with the new Mac Pro is just ordered (KONA drivers to be available late this month) I'll be in HD heaven - for a while at least. (^_^)

Understandable. Good for you and good luck with your project. :)

I just realized today that my previous landscape tests were bungled - I completely forgot to adjust certain settings which would have drastically altered my results - and even made the studio work even better. Crap! Oh well, this entire process has been one massive learning curve.

So, along with the 2 new tests I mentioned in the newer thread, I'll also be posting results from this new round of landscape tests with updated camera settings.

Weather permitting I'll be shooting first light tomorrow and posting later the same day or Friday.

I just realized today that my previous landscape tests were bungled - I completely forgot to adjust certain settings which would have drastically altered my results - and even made the studio work even better. Crap! Oh well, this entire process has been one massive learning curve.
Wow! I gotta ask -- what settings are you talking about? I was perhaps going to buy the HVX200 Thursday, but maybe I should wait to hear what you have to say!

Adam, Barry, and a few other folks held a camera comparison in California before the Texas shootout occurred.
Is there a website devoted to the California shootout/comparison?

Wow! I gotta ask -- what settings are you talking about? I was perhaps going to buy the HVX200 Thursday, but maybe I should wait to hear what you have to say!

Well, I can honestly say that you SHOULD get an HVX, period. Unless you need the more cumbersome and tape-based HDV workflow then the "other" HD cams will do just fine. :-D

But seriously, I went over my result notes and realized that I completely forgot to adjust some pretty important settings such as KNEE, PEDESTAL, CHROMA and RGB balance.

My initial testing plan did cover those setting adjustments however, I became distracted by some strange ND and CIR POL results I was getting and completely glossed over those extra settings. Can you say, "brain fart"? I need an assistant! (laughs)

Is there a website devoted to the California shootout/comparison?Adam Wilt's write-up is on DV.com. Register for free to read the article.

California shootout: http://www.dv.com/features/features_item.jhtml?category=Archive&articleId=177103305

Well, I can honestly say that you SHOULD get an HVX, period. Unless you need the more cumbersome and tape-based HDV workflow then the "other" HD cams will do just fine. :-D

But seriously, I went over my result notes and realized that I completely forgot to adjust some pretty important settings such as KNEE, PEDESTAL, CHROMA and RGB balance.

My initial testing plan did cover those setting adjustments however, I became distracted by some strange ND and CIR POL results I was getting and completely glossed over those extra settings. Can you say, "brain fart"? I need an assistant! (laughs)

It's good to hear that! I have been planning a lot of hardware around this camera, and I didn't want to have to re-evaluate everything, I was actually thinking about the H1 beast.

-and yes assistants are great-

My initial testing plan did cover those setting adjustments however, I became distracted by some strange ND and CIR POL results I was getting and completely glossed over those extra settings. Can you say, "brain fart"? I need an assistant! (laughs)

Well that's good to know... As I started reading through this thread, I was trying to figure out just what you were going on about. :-) I've used the XLH1 on a few occasions and I would never choose it over the HVX for anything... Not even for its interchangeable lenses. While this can be an advantage along with its added resolution (that's a whole other debate), if I need the lens options for a project, I'll go rent a camera and other gear that I need (Varicam / CineAlta). The HVX with its frame rates, 4:2:2 and true progressive CCDs has so many advantages that my not immediately present themselves. And as you pointed out -- the color reproduction on this camera - wow. Still blows me away that I can get this level of color out of a handheld < $10K camera.

As for me, it's starting to look like my next camera purchase will be either the new Silicon Image camera or RED. And between one of those and the HVX, I should be set.

I can say the same : whithout mentioning all the settings you used on the HVX when you shot landscape scenery forum members can not give you a quick guide for proper handeling the HVX.

edit : I just saw your last threads where you admitted it was just poor handeling.

Cees,

If you can't see the shirt buttons (that is a black-on-black area) then your monitor definitely needs calibrating. There isn't a ton of detail in that area since the lighting was concentrated for skin tones and showing the lenses on the table, the buttons are very noticeable.

Without knowing what kind of monitor you're using (CRT, LCD etc) pr which system PC or Mac, I can't give you any guidelines for proper balancing, but I'm sure one of the forum members can give you a quick guide for proper color/contrast balancing on any setup.

Wow, the power of words. If any of you are in doubt about the HVX....

http://www.motionzonehd.com/files/footage_upload/VIDEO_TS.zip

This is a demo that I did for my site and Panasonic is also using it.
Regional sales reps have a disc that contains the CONTENTS folder that they can copy to a P2 card. It's the same demo as the DVD. The VIDEO_TS folder can be un-zipped and burned to a DVD. It is SD but gives a good indication of what you might expect shooting HD then producing SD DVD. The footage is a mix of 720 24p, 720 30p and 1080 24p.

I'm keen to see your results Robert. I've just bought a HVX knowing (or believing I knew) full well that it can't handle background detail like the other cams. I've seen a lot of footage from the HVX, and everything pointed to the same thing. Very different to what I was seeing from the H1 (and HD100). And I'm not talking about differences due to edge enhancement, or upped detail levels.

Regardless, I bought the HVX (for its many other benefits). Keep us posted.

Did Godzilla ever apologize to the citizens of Tokyo for trashing their city? Nope, but I owe my forum members an apology!

As most of you know, I've been one of the most vocal pro-HVX voices on this forum and many of you have emailed over the months saying that the decision to purchase one was based partly on reviews and feedback that I've supplied. That's heavy. So when I started this thread saying the the HVX wouldn't work for me and, showing off some weaknesses many had a mini-heart attack.

Unfortunately it wasn't until a few days after creating this post that I realized my testing had been bungled by my own distractions, and have since recanted most of the worrysome commentary. No doubt this left many scratching their heads - and rightly so!

So I humbly apologize for making such a goof and needlessly stirring the pot with incorrect/incomplete data.

To make up for the head-spinning I'm offering to the first 10 people who say, "I want one" a free copy of my "Photos in a Flash" DVD which will be out in October. And guess what: The entire project is being shot on the HVX! So there.

So what is Photos in a Flash and why should you care? Check this out: http://www.photosinaflash.com

I'm putting together the revised color tests today and will be posting it - somewhere, not sure where yet.

Thanks Robert!

And really, I've enjoyed your thread from day one. I think that guys like you help push the manufacturers to make better products. I remember speaking with you while we were waiting for the HVX to be released and appreciated your input. I also would have read every thread you posted in the H1 forum, as it would have been interesting to see what your opinions were after having worked with both the HVX200 and H1.

For me - true 24p, 4:2:2 color, P2 and the entire workflow from shooting to editing make the HVX the camera for me (for now).

And really, thanks for apologizing, but I don't think you need to at all.

I WANT ONE

but hey if Europe is not counted into that offer I understand :)
thanks

I want one! :)

I WANT ONE

but hey if Europe is not counted into that offer I understand :)
thanks

Sorry Narayan, the International versions are probably a year or two down the road.

Robert, I want one. I agree with Derek. No apology needed. I made a decision with lot's of research and I was about to make a change. When that didn't work out, I decided to add, not delete. So everything I liked about the HVX still holds. And I will do some testing of my own in Las Vegas and the Grand Canyon the week after next. As for which camera I add, that remains to be seen.

I would like to get one.

I want one! I think my wife would really like the DVD and I'd love to see the video quality (OK, I'd probably benefit from the content as well).

www.philipwilliams.com

The HVX color test clip will be ready to go this evening. However, I can't post it here since it busts the file size limit.

I want everybody to have the ability to see the results as clean as possible, so I'm outputting it as full-res QT (1280x720 24p).

The finished QT file will be around 250-300MB when I'm done cutting it together; I don't have any hosting sites yet and the free services can't take a file this large.

Does anyone have a site that wouldn't mind hosting this?

Oh well...

Robert,
I'm just as interested in your subjective judgement about the results (which I see you have not yet revealed) than in actually looking at the files as posted on the web.
I guess I never trust web pictures - maybe that's not technically sophisticated.
So what do you think?

Leonard,

I'm not posting web images this time; the full-res QT file is being put online for downloading. You can either view in QT or import it into FCP and watch it on an external monitor.

More when the file is online.

Since this thread has digressed from the main topic I'm putting up the HVX color test clip in a separate thread. It's online now.

is it too late to ask for one of your dvd's?

Jason

is it too late to ask for one of your dvd's?

Jason

Not too late; I'll put you down on the list. Volume One is scheduled to start shipping in January. Tell all your friends; it's available now on Amazon as a pre-order.

Great! Thank you very much
Jason

Hey Robert,

Happy Holidays.....

I want one?

too late?

All the best,

Michael Schoenfeld

View my newest portfolio offerings at:

www.michaelschoenfeld.com

I want one... looks great. No prob on the mislead, btw :).

Is it too late ? Can I still say I want one?

tks~

Both Michaels and Barry; you're on the list.

I did not follow this thread for a while but what is the final outcome of how the HVX performs in landscape sceneries? Is it significantly worse than it's competitors or just very slightly after your handelings skills improved down the road?

If you dial detail coring to +7 (filter ON) , you will lose important small details.

If you dial 0 to -2 detail coring, it will look fine, not as much detail as the H1, but i'd say reasonable detail, and you'll have beautifull 4:2:2 color detail (the HVX strenght).

With detail coring set at +7, the HVX image looks evasive IMHO.

I always use 0 to -2, a lot crisper, and a much better image finesse.

My take on this has always been that in the black areas the HVX looked noisy just from images I've seen versus any particular detail issue. Some people have said Panasonic cameras are generally noisy in black areas, (not something I've experienced with the DVX100 or maybe I'm not looking hard enough). Panasonic in the beginning ran HDV through the ringer but as it turns out all of these little cams did a fine job.

The killer for me was the workflow combined with storage issues. Honestly tapeless may be the hot new thing but tapeless is also a very expensive set-up for some. I was looking at the Sony FX1 very hard but the A1 just trumps this camera easily (for my needs) but the FX1, no matter what, can still be had for about $1000 less via ebay and I've seen some great stuff shot with the Sony and A1.

But how much does all this take away from the Panny? I don't really know. They are being used right now professionally and people love them, but while Panny got all the press, most of the articles on actual production seem to have been about the Sony or the JVC. (Nothing on the A1 yet but it's still very new). I could be wrong about this but I haven't seem many articles about people using this camera on low budget shoots etc.

I think the price point for the tapeless workflow still scares many people off. The whole idea of low end HD was "price". What I mean is this: If I buy the A1 today (which I can but I don't think it would be smart right now because prices usually drop again after Christmas) I pay $3669 (or whatever the going rate is now) and then another $50 for a pack of tapes and I'm ready to shoot.

To get HD from the Panny I have to buy into their whole tapeless structure, which equals another $500 - $1000 no matter how I spin it. I just dropped $1000 on the MacBook and my still have to drop another $1000 on the small Canon to edit 24f but I don't have to do that until I'm ready because I can (do the unthinkable) use the camera as a deck. But even if I do drop the extra $1000 that camera can be used as B-roll in certain situations, not just as some kind of storage device.

As for the quality this is no suprise as several shootout have been done and the A1 (actually the H1) and JVC came out on top in terms of sharpness. I actually like the way the JVC handles skin tones. The reason I don't get one of those is because I'm a run and gun "guerilla" action shooter so the small cams are best.

I am still on the fence. Wait and get the A1 or get the FX1 from eBay at the going rate. I am leaning toward the A1 since Sony made the imagers anyway it's almost a none issue. I am suprised at how the A! has become so popular so quick. I am a fan of HDV and I think it will future proof many of us for a good while. I still want to do a 1080i horror film though and since the A1 is 1080 and 24f that works out.

-Nate

Nathan,

If you're only considering initial investment costs when comparing camera system choices then you'll be in for sticker shock later on.

The truth is, the P2 workflow and equipment investment is actually much less over time than any tape-based format. XDCAM also has similar cost-over-time benefits but the ROI factor takes much longer for XDCAM since all the equipment costs are much higher than P2.

P2 doesn't require a special deck to "capture" the footage and there are a wealth of options in exactly how to transfer from the P2 card to the NLE or storage device. HDV tape requires either using the camera heads to capture/transfer or, having a deck that talks to the HDV codec. And of course, P2 is reusable, tape is not. (of course, technically it is, but nobody in their right mind reuses tape for a serious production)

And most importantly, the HDV codec requires a great deal more horsepower from the NLE system to work with, especially when it comes to any renders.

Comparing the HVX and P2 to an HDV-based system is comparing apples to oranges. There is no perfect setup for all uses in either system, but there is a perfect system for specific needs.