I am aware of the issues with AVCHD's great editing difficulties for the time being. Is this what you meant by "certain points of the workflow"?I think from Mr. Giaggoni's point of view, workflow includes all possible uses of the video after it's been shot. Sony is thinking in broad terms of all the different ways to acquire video, all the different ways people manipulate it, and finally all the different methods people use to deliver it to the consumer. From that broad perspective, Mr. Giaggoni showed us why he though MPEG-2 was currently the best compromise between video quality and price for the V1's target market.

He was very enthusiastic about AVCHD, and was postive about it's future at Sony, but he did note that it was very new, the algorithm is much more complicated than MPEG-2, and much of the real world implementation had yet to be worked out. MPEG-2 which has been around since 1984 and is a much more mature technology. So basically it's easier and cheaper for Sony to provide professional solutions today using MPEG-2 at all the different levels of the "workflow" above.

Or as it's been said before, AVCHD is great if your doing basic editing, but if you need a professional solution, where almost anything can happen to the video at any stage of the production, HDV is a better solution.





... well,then there's always the XDCAM and CineAlta series after that.

First, it should be pointed out that NO ONE has the financial investment in AVCHD that Sony has at this point. No one. But it's their consumer division for now, that is offering AVC-HD, just as it's Panasonic's consumer division that will first ship AVC-HD.

Second, Hugo Gaggioni's points were made almost exclusively towards AVC Interframe, pointing out that such a format loses the value of what makes MPEG tick efficiently, increases bitrate requirements to ridiculous levels for zero gain in quality, and mathematically cannot resolve itself. Not to mention the decoding requirements that currently cannot be affordably met by the average Joe. All that adds up to a pretty weak picture, as displayed in the presentation. Normally you wouldn't see this sort of a scientific/technical presentation at a press release, but Sony was left no choice but to publically respond to a white paper that Panasonic recently issued that said anyone using MPEG 2 is foolish. Since the release of that white paper, Sony has announced a new camcorder and deck, Canon has announced 3 new camcorders, and JVC has done the same. Grass Valley announced their MPEG2 module, and other new MPEG 2 devices. In other words, only Panasonic thinks "MPEG 2 is dead" to exactly quote the white paper. Canon, Sony, Grass Valley, JVC, and Ikegami account for virtually all of the broadcast industry, so I'd submit that their statement is far more weighty.

AVC HD stands to eventually be the new "DV." That's a long way off, IMO.

I feel you hit the nail on the head, and I believe this is why Canon, Sony, and JVC are *all* addressing the myth of AVC-I at this point. Panasonic does not have a low-cost/high quality answer to HD, and to prevent potential buyers from purchasing the excellent offerings of all three companies, they issue what the industry calls a "take-out" statement. By confusing the market by announcing a "new" format, potential buyers of the HDV offerings might be enticed to wait for whatever is forthcoming, if anything is forthcoming. In other words, potential buyers are "taken out" of the market because they might want to wait for whatever is coming next. It might be 6 days, 6 months, 6 years or 6 decades before there ever is an AVC Interframe camera that is worthy of being called "professional." It may happen tomorrow and it may happen on the twelfth of never.

However, if you're a shooter casual or not, you live in the *now* and *now* we have HDV, we can edit with HDV, we can deliver HDV, and we can broadcast HDV. Most NLE's treat HDV just like DV, and most editors are quite comfortable with editing DV.

And with that, we're significantly off topic, and probably should split this out as a new thread to the AVCHD forum.

Good idea, Spot--put the AVCHD stuff in that forum.

heath

Excellent comments, Douglas. It does, indeed, seem to be a human failing to always be waiting for the Holy Grail of 1/3" chip camcorders. I really haven't seen that attitude much in the pro realm. Like, you need a new camera you go get the one that best fits what you do in terms of quality/price/reliability/compatibility with existing systems. It only seems to be in the "prosumer" realm that we get the Holy Grail mentality, and the manufacturers have learned to take advantage of that. Sony, for example, announces the new 1/4" chip 24p camera just in time to stop those who were ready to go with the new Canon next month and cause them to reconsider. Panasonic does it, Sony does it, everybody does it, and it will be an effective marketing technique until people quit thinking of a 1/3" chip camera as a lifestyle statement instead of a tool.

I promise next post will be shorter!

I could not have hopped for a more clear answer to my "puzzlement"! Thanks a lot for taking the time to help me understand the situation. It makes things more clear for me now as I can see much better my available choices.

BTW, the reason I was waiting for the "upcoming-small-size-solid-state-long-time-hd-recording-camera" is because the project I need it for starts in February. If it was starting now, I would have finalised my choices already! But Bill, I can see your point very well. It is indeed a characteristic of the low-to-no budget market to wait for the "perfect" camera, since the decision to invest this amount of money is not an easy one for everyone.

Thanks a lot for your input,

Thanasis

P.S. Sorry for diverting this thread!

Excellent comments, Douglas. It does, indeed, seem to be a human failing to always be waiting for the Holy Grail of 1/3" chip camcorders. I really haven't seen that attitude much in the pro realm. Like, you need a new camera you go get the one that best fits what you do in terms of quality/price/reliability/compatibility with existing systems. It only seems to be in the "prosumer" realm that we get the Holy Grail mentality, and the manufacturers have learned to take advantage of that. Sony, for example, announces the new 1/4" chip 24p camera just in time to stop those who were ready to go with the new Canon next month and cause them to reconsider. Panasonic does it, Sony does it, everybody does it, and it will be an effective marketing technique until people quit thinking of a 1/3" chip camera as a lifestyle statement instead of a tool.Bill's post above is 'Post of the Day' in my opinion.

- If you need/want a new cam, look at whats currently available and match it as close to your own requirements and make your choice cos this is The Reality Of What Is Currently Available. Of course next year will be something newer shinier and improved but thats the nature of the game.
If any company ever gave us the Perfect Camcorder, or Perfect Car, or Perfect Software.... the company would go broke cos nobody would need to upgrade/replace it!
I do think some people 'worry' that they have to have the Latest Thing or else somehow their 'status' is devalued in some way. Whatever new machine comes out, it doesn't mean your current cam suddenly performs any less capably overnight..

Well said. What I ought to do is put this in the agreement clause for all new members registering here.

Douglas Spotted Eagle may find this surprising coming from me but he does have a point about the editing factor since all of the NLEs are very good at editing RAW HDV files and it may take a while until AVCHD becomes editable and I still think AVCHD may be a good alternative in the future but at the rate things are going, you cant really tell which will be better in the long run.

At least for now, the Vlu is the best camcorder to get out of all of the HDV camcorders and I’m still hoping Panasonic shows us something before Christmas because so many people including myself will have bought either the XH-G1 or the Vlu and it will be a little too late if they waited until after Christmas.

The ¼ inch imager issue reminds me about the time I bought the HC1 in the first few days of August of last year. You had so many people saying that the HC1 will fail because it had only 1 imager and I myself have always thought 3 chips were going to always be better, but for spending some time researching about the CMOS chip I came to realize that it has the potential to have a better picture than the GS400 even in DV mode and sure enough, the HC1 became a classic.

I think there is a second point of view to the holy grail mentality, and that is 'prosumer features' such as for example, HDMI, or progressive output from a natively progressive camera, or something as simple as an external microphone jack are left off the cheaper models. While prosumers constantly feel exploited they will always dream of a product that throws in a mic jack for free and has HDMI, and can be tweaked to do 24p at no extra cost and where the extra money directly reflects the extra quality they get in the output.

If the V1e/V1u actually needed different hardware to the FX7, or implimented a true 24p encoding system there might be an argument, but all it does is enter a different sequence of fields to the existing interlaced (half a frame) encoder from the data it has allready. Moving to a true 25p or 24p encoding and storage system for the 24p sensor output would bring real improvements to the quality for a given bitrate, its how MPEG2 is designed to work.

To justify a steep price gradient the companies maintain a features gradient that often bears no relation to the extra cost. This is true with almost all technology. While consumers are at the bottom of a slope and pretty much on the flat (there is very little left to remove from a camcorder and still have it function as one) and the pros are on a totally seperate flat way up high (there simply isn't anything to add nomatter how much money you throw until the technology improves), prosumers are perpetually clinging to a cliff face where one extra feature can mean spending as much as an entire consumer camera.

While consumers are at the bottom of a slope and pretty much on the flat (there is very little left to remove from a camcorder and still have it function as one) and the pros are on a totally seperate flat way up high (there simply isn't anything to add nomatter how much money you throw until the technology improves), prosumers are perpetually clinging to a cliff face where one extra feature can mean spending as much as an entire consumer camera.

I think this is the best visual representation I have ever read for the definition of "prosumer"! I believe that there is also another factor to consider when discussing the "prosumer-awaiting-perfect-camera" issue: what is the use the "prosumer" will put this equipment to? And what is the potential return of this use? Is it an economic return? If yes, then the equation is simple: if the future projects can cover the cost of the purchase in a reasonable amount of time, then you buy. If not, then you go for a cheaper model. If there is no cheaper model that can deliver the projects (highly unlikely in the current market state), then you have what is called a "barrier to entry" in this market and you are in trouble...

But.

What if the expected return from the use of the camera is not an economic one? What if the expected return is simply... artistic expression? What if you work in the morning as a salesman and dream of shooting dramas in the evening? (if you don't work in the evenings as well...). In this case, the camera will probably never pay back it's money. Sure it will pay back a lot more, but not the money. Or if it does, you cannot count on it. And this money may well be your vacations money, or your child's school money. And, since it will not pay back, it is simply... expensive!

I write all these because I know the feeling. I have been there. Now I have the convenience to go out in the market and buy basically whatever suits my needs. But this is not where I started. And in my view, things would have been much faster for me, if prices were lower at my debut.

Now, some examples on the low end of the "curve":
Sony throws HC1 in the market. The "consumer" HDV market is not open yet. So, Sony plays it smart and throws a VERY GOOD MACHINE for it's money. But it is not just very good in image quality. It also has a mic-jack! And a focus ring! And headphones-jack! Why? Consumers don't need all these. But Sony needs to open the market and knows that consumers don't have an opinion. They rather do a quick search on the net and read the forums. "Prosumers" WRITE in forums! Therefore, consumers read what "prosumers" write. Consumers speak with a knowledgeable employee who sells cameras (probably the same fellow I was talking about before). He most probably cannot afford to buy an FX1 but he is now saving for an HC1. Easy. Give the "low-prosumers" what they want and they will advertise it to the consumers!

And what happens next? Well, next you get HC3! No mic-jack, no headphones jack, no focus ring. But hey! My cousin bought this small sony and its HD and it's awesome! I am going to buy one as well. I bought the NEXT model. So, it's better than his, no? "Low-prosumers" are not needed anymore. The market is now open. Let's charge them more, now! Say hello to HVR-A1...

Canon HV10. Same digital signal processor as H1!!! Plays back 24f!!! Does it record it? No! Of' course not. Why not? It's the same processor! Does Canon honestly believe that any serious professional would choose the HV10 over an A1? No, of' course not. But then, how could they introduce their next $2.500 - $3.000 camcorder with 24f, focus ring, mic jack, headphones jack and no xlr's? Would it be cost-prohibitive for HV10 to be this camcorder? Certainly not! Sony has proven this with HC1. So?

So, IMHO the "low-end-prosumers" are the ones to be constantly left unsatisfied. They are the only ones in the market pushed to extend beyond their budget to satisfy their needs. That's why they got into the happit of waiting. Professional event videographers (to name one $4.000 to $5.000 category) are the best ones served! They get what they need in a price they are more than willing to pay. In order for this to happen, "low-end-prosumers" have to pay! Because if they don't, then the event videographers will definitely get angry. Who likes to know that he is paying $3.000 or $4.000 more for a similar product with a different, more professional look?

I don't remember where it was but I read some time ago about the idea of being able to "custom build" your camera. Like with PC's. Order the parts that you need, pay for each part separately and assemble it. Or have it assembled for you. I thought this is a really innovative idea! It's hard to imagine how it would be possible but then, I guess Red was hard to imagine some years ago... But, if this was to become reality, then the companies would start to antagonise on the parts prices. Not a very nice scenario for them, since this would enable more players to enter the market. Smaller companies that specialise in CCDs for example, or lenses or lcds etc. This would definitely drop the prices and the truth would be revealed. (Btw, I don’t know if this would be technically possible at all. But it certainly gives a good example of what I am trying to say…)

I think after all this, a re-definition of "prosumer" is necessary. I would say that a “prosumer” is the person who needs a lot of professional features but will probably never have an economic return in his camera investment. Everybody else above him/her is a professional.

Again another long post! And this time, we are definitely in a very different topic and I really do not know what is the common practice and whether I should have posted this here or not. Please tell me if I am doing something wrong :)

Thanks for reading,

Thanasis

I’m still hoping Panasonic shows us something before Christmas because so many people including myself will have bought either the XH-G1 or the Vlu and it will be a little too late if they waited until after Christmas.

Camcorder choices are getting harder these days and obviously Panasonic is not going to release a Professional AVCHD camcorder although I still would like to see a consumer version to compete against the Sony’s SR1 camcorder this year. People are basically stuck with choosing either the Sony HVR-V1 or the Canon XH-G1 as an affordable camcorder and I’ll skip the others because it’s in a higher price range.

At least in my case I wouldn’t have to worry about editing 24 P/f since I would never use that feature on a camcorder anyway.

i have to admit my brain can't take these models with all these new camera letter names ! ( happens when you go past 50 )
i use to be able to follow sony's names ..PD150 , PD170 , 2000 , 2100 so i could just refer to them as sony -150 , 170 , 1000, 2100 ..

wouldn't a name ( and maybe a number.. cineAlta 900 ) be easier then HVR-V1U , HDR-FX7 ...
same with canon .. GL1 , GL2 , XL1, XL2 was easy to follow ... now the new ones are just too many letters ...

I brought this up in another thread about a review, but I wonder how others feel about it. Assuming there is a button access panel underneath it like the VX and FX1 I have, I am happy Sony went back to side mount of LCD. With the top mount as on FX1, you had to be over the camera to read the button decriptions. With the mounting on the side panel, you can have the camera on a high tripod, but still read and access those buttons. In addition, with my ME66 mic, I have to swing mic away to open and close the LCD.

Anybody else ?

Personally I think the handle mounted LCD screen was a great innovation of the Z1/FX1. I much prefer that location to the side screen on my VX-2000 and PDX-10. I rarely use the viewfinder on my camera, and the LCD screen seems to be in a great position to use, even with a relatively high tripod that I use to shoot performances. I don't have much problem with the buttons on top; you just have to know where they are by feel regardless of where they are... can't see them in the dark while shooting.

But aside from all this, it allows the tape door to be on the left where it belongs. I can change tapes much more quickly on my Z1, and I'm not always getting caught up with the grip strap.

But as the designer of both the Z1 and V1 explained to Michael Wisenski and me, a handle mounted LCD would have been too wide for the V1 and would have also affected the balance.

I'm just happy it's somewhat smaller and lighter. The PD150 series was a reasonable size. When I saw the FX1 at Fry's, I thought my god, this thing is huge. The HVX is also huge.

My only gripe so far is I wish the lens was wider. 37.5mm equivalent on the wide end just isn't wide enough. 32mm would have been better. 28mm would have been awesome.

My only gripe so far is I wish the lens was wider. 37.5mm equivalent on the wide end just isn't wide enough. 32mm would have been better. 28mm would have been awesome.


I think its easier and more forgiving to add a wide angle adapter, than to add at the other end. So I don't have a problem with that.

Well clearly everyone has different requirements. I don't like having to use an adapter if I can help it. They add weight (especially zoom-through wide converters) and you're adding optical elements so there has to be some lost in quality. Also, flare can be a bigger problem.

And given that the camera is targeted towards filmmakers, event videographers, and probably reality TV production, a wider lens is more useful in those genres. I notice most reality shows with ENG cameras have wide zooms from Canon or Fujinon on them. This camera already has a 20X zoom on it so a few extra millimeters on the wide end wouldn't have hurt. Oh well, I guess we just have to live with it but this camera is soooo close to meeting all my requirements.

I know this camcorder has a wonderful 1.5X digital extender for the zoom to make it 30X but I would still like to know if their will be a 1.6X/1.8X or even a 2X telephoto adapter. Just imagine the reach and clarity you would get with 60X by using a tripod.

I'd think you could use a stepdown adaptor with the 72mm Century 1.6x - or maybe they will make a new bayonet mount for the V1? The cool thing about that would be, you'd get more zoom through capability than 1.6x allows on the Z1.

OTOH, I doubt there will be a lot of demand for tele adaptors for this camera...

I seems to me that the V1 may be almost the perfect camera for low-budget cinema if you added a 35mm lens adapter. The 1/4" chips wouldn't matter then, only it's sensitivity to light. Pair this puppy up with a M2 or letus35 and you'd have an awesome compact, cheap cinema camera. What do you think?

i think the v1 could be pretty damn amazing with a lens adapter.. if it really does have a higher dynamic range then normal video and the super slow-motion feature works well, then my two major problems with digital video could be eliminated :)

..have to wait and see footage from the finished product.

I seems to me that the V1 may be almost the perfect camera for low-budget cinema if you added a 35mm lens adapter. The 1/4" chips wouldn't matter then, only it's sensitivity to light. Pair this puppy up with a M2 or letus35 and you'd have an awesome compact, cheap cinema camera. What do you think?

Chuck the 35mm adapter and shoot with zoom from across the street. Check out footage showing zoom range in footage posted by DSE:

http://www.vasst.com

My only gripe so far is I wish the lens was wider. 37.5mm equivalent on the wide end just isn't wide enough. 32mm would have been better. 28mm would have been awesome.
Yes, that is a little surprising, especially given that the 1.5x digital zoom feature is reported to be good enough for general use. Personnally, I'm very pleased with the lens range Sony have chosen, since I like to count the rivets on a locomotive's tender from 500 yards without adding a tele-converter, ( :-) ) but I realise that wide-angle is quite high on many people's priority-list.

Will the V1U have a ‘nightshot’ mode? I know this is somewhat of an esoteric feature but I’d like to capture footage of owls with an external infrared light source. If so, will the slow motion mode still work? Slow motion footage of the owls at night would be really cool.

Will the V1U have a ‘nightshot’ mode? I know this is somewhat of an esoteric feature but I’d like to capture footage of owls with an external infrared light source. If so, will the slow motion mode still work? Slow motion footage of the owls at night would be really cool.

There is indeed a hypergain mode, and yes, slo mo works in that mode.

I love this camcorder. Douglas, your footage has been amazing. I was pretty floored when I saw that zoom as well, even though I probably won't be taking advantage of it really, but it's good to know it can look that incredible!! I'll certainly be picking this up. I'm already in paradise, but obviously it'd be complete bliss if the BlackMagic HDMI enabled 4:2:2 as well. I guess time will tell. I can't wait to find out.

Also, does anyone know if the tripod that is being launched with the V1U is better or worse than the Sony 1170RM. Are those both fluid heads? I can't find many reviews of Sony tripods. No one seems to be using them. I guess I should be looking at Manfrotto and all those other manufacturers?

I have a question regarding editing. I know NLEs of today will be able to edit the footage right away as 60i. But in the future when Premiere and Vegas get updated...does anything change? Or is it still capturing as 60i. I've been trying to follow the conversation but I still don't understand this. I understand it's recorded to the tape as 60i...so what exactly is missing from NLEs? What work needs to be done to make it better? Anything? And is Vegas 7 addressing it, do you think?

Can't see why the BlackMagic won't support 4:2:2 - what I'd like to see is a locking mechanism on HDMI/FireWire/Etc cables so that they can't fall out during a camera move...

As for Sony tripods, never used one but can't believe they're all that worthwhile. It's worth spending a lot more on tripods than people do - a good one will last you the life of 5 camcorders for the price of half of one, and at the end of the day, what's the point in having a great camera if all your moves look sh*tty?!

For my tuppence worth (and I'm sure you'll get as many opinions as answers on this one) Vintons are the best bet at the lower (but still not budget) end of the range - I've got a Vision3 and it's just fantastic. Check out the "Support your camera" forum for more on our three-legged friends!

Will the V1U have a ‘nightshot’ mode?No i don't think it has that mode. Generally cams like this will definitely not have that mode. You're talking (i beleive) about the IR-illuminated mode with a physical switch to swing the internal IR-filters out of the optical path thus enabling IR light to reach the sensor(s). - It doesn't have this feature.
(Hypergain isn't the same thing).

rgards

Any thoughts on this camera working with the HVR-M25U VTR?

Dave

Any thoughts on this camera working with the HVR-M25U VTR?

Dave
I think because it does a 2:3 pulldown like the DVX100, it puts the 24p signal into a 60i stream (remove the pulldown, you get 24p). So you should be able to use the M25, M10 and M15 without any problems (60i, of course).

heath

Also, does anyone know if the tripod that is being launched with the V1U is better or worse than the Sony 1170RM.

At the press event all the V1's were on Sony tripods with remotes on the handles. I like Sony products, but those tripods appeared to be strictly consumer quality. They seemed pretty wobbly with plastic parts. Personally I wouldn't have any interest in them.

Check out our Tripod Forum here and post your questions:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?f=42

heath

Thanks again for the input. I guess I won't get a Sony tripod. Once again it has been confirmed that there are better manufacturers to go with. I have been keeping my eye on the tripod forum, I just wanted some advice from the V1U buyers :)

Quick question on resolution again if you don't mind.

It is still 1080i, yet captures progressively at 24p. It is not 1080p (even though the sensors capture as such) because it gets downsampled to 1440x1080 (still progressive though, and 24p).

So essentially, it's not 1080i even. If I shoot in 24p there is no interlacing whatsoever... I guess the resolution lies somewhere in the middle? Somewhere between 720p and 1080p?

I'm sure someone will quickly correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the HDV spec includes 1920x1080 at all, only anamorphic 1440x1080 which gets stretched on playback.

It is still 1080i, yet captures progressively at 24p.
Not exactly. It sounds like it works like the HVX does, in that it's scanning a progressive signal off the chip at all times, so it probably samples 1080/60p. Then that 60p signal gets split into fields to become 1080/60i (if your shooting mode is 1080/60i).

Then, apparently, the chip is re-clockable so that it can also scan the chip at 1080/24p and 1080/30p.

All those signals get RECORDED in a 1080/60i data stream.

It is not 1080p (even though the sensors capture as such) because it gets downsampled to 1440x1080 (still progressive though, and 24p).
Every HD format in common use does the same thing though. HDCAM, DVCPRO-HD, and HDV all downsample to 1440x1080 (or, in DV100's case, 1280x1080 in 60Hz modes) before recording.

If I shoot in 24p there is no interlacing whatsoever...
Not in the original scans, no. But in the recording, yes. The footage gets laid down on tape (or to hard disk, or HDMI or analog output) as 60 fields, not 24 frames. So it undergoes a 3:2 pulldown process, where each frame is recorded to two or three fields.

There's nothing wrong with that, the HVX does its 1080/24p mode the same way. And Canon does its 1080/24F mode the same way on HD-SDI or analog output; only difference is that Canon records to tape or firewire in straight 24p mode, not using pulldown. But for analog or HD-SDI output it has 2:3 pulldown in the signal.

Again, it's no big deal. It's the exact same thing that the DVX, XL2, SDX900, SPX800, DSR450WS, and all 24P standard-def camcorders do -- they all record 24p within a 60i data stream. The HVX 1080/24p mode and the V1U 1080/24p mode do the same thing in high-def but it's fundamentally the same process.

Your NLE will eventually (likely) be modified so it can extract the 24 frames out of the 60i sequence. Apple's updating FCP to do that for HVX footage, and there was mention of 1080/24p HDV in one of the "easy setup" listings so it may already have that capability for the Sony (or, that may instead be for the Canon, we won't likely know until 5.1.2 ships).

I'm sure someone will quickly correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the HDV spec includes 1920x1080 at all, only anamorphic 1440x1080 which gets stretched on playback.
You are correct.

Very interesting. Thanks everyone.

Yeah, I didn't feel as though there was a drawback really. I was just trying to understand how it worked and to ensure I wasn't wrong on crucial details. Just wondering though, is it any better if the NLE ends up retrieving the 24P from the 60i signal rather than just processing it at 60i? It shouldn't change the look and feel as you said, it will simply do the transfer without the pulldown.

I guess this means a slight increase in quality? I'm sure it would have to be a very slight difference.

That's interesting to know about DVCProHD and HDCAM. I thought 1440x1080 was a HDV limitation and not something that plagued the other HD formats.

So when filmmakers output to an HD master, there isn't really a resolution conversion/interpolation then? It's just a physical format that changes and maybe color spacing? Typically what format do filmmakers export their HDV projects in if they are submitting to festivals. Is it typically DVCProHD?

Most fesitvals seem to want HDCAM IF they can cope with HD at all.
No big drama, I think many post houses are equiped or soon will be to dub HDV to HDCAM.

Just wondering though, is it any better if the NLE ends up retrieving the 24P from the 60i signal rather than just processing it at 60i?
Yes, there are several advantages. The first of which is, when working with the native frames, your overall workflow will be quicker and will take up less space.

Second, any titles or graphics or transitions you render will look "right" and won't end up with any sort of split-field situation. When working in a 24p timeline your graphics and titles will be rendered as 24p and will be properly "fixed" to the frames, whereas if you're on a 60i timeline your graphics will be created and rendered at 60i, and they won't flow the same as the rest of the image does.

Third, if you're mastering out to 24p (such as for DVD) it's so much easier/cleaner/nicer to do it from a 24p source.

Fourth, it's possible to get "off-cadence" when editing 24p in a 60i timeline; i.e., there's a specific pattern of odd/even that should be observed, but if you do a cut inbetween an odd/even pair you could end up throwing the cadence off, which would make it difficult or impossible to remove the pulldown later if you decide you need it.

Fifth, a transfer to film is easier, cleaner, and higher quality if going from a 24p source than from a telecine'd version of that same source, especially if the cadence is interrupted anywhere in the program.

Sixth, a transfer to PAL will be more consistent and probably result in notably higher quality if done from a 24p source rather than from a telecine'd 60i source.

It's so much more preferable to edit 24p as 24p. There are lots of reasons why every major NLE now offers 24p timelines in SD, and some also offer it in HD. Full 1080/24p support including 2:3 pulldown removal is presumed to be coming; Apple's already shown that they'll do it, EDIUS already does it for DVCPRO-HD and if they don't have it for HDV yet I'm sure they'll have it quickly. I believe CineForm will also remove out the pulldown, since CineFrame 24 is basically a 2:3 pulldown system as it's recorded.
So when filmmakers output to an HD master, there isn't really a resolution conversion/interpolation then? It's just a physical format that changes and maybe color spacing? Typically what format do filmmakers export their HDV projects in if they are submitting to festivals. Is it typically DVCProHD?
Changing between formats involves an uncompression/recompression cycle at the bare minimum, and usually a color space conversion too. DVCPRO-HD is 4:2:2, HDCAM is 3:1:1, HDV is 4:2:0 so there'll be some color space conversion going on. And it also depends on how the transfer is done; if it's through HD-SDI it may mean an up-rez of 1440 up to 1920 for HD-SDI transfer, and then the deck will scale back to 1440 for recording.

With that said, it always looks great and is nothing to really worry about.

Great posts, Barry!

Recording a progressive frame as two fields is suboptimal. It throws away the redundancy between the fields away and pushes data up the frequency scale where it is more likely to be lost during quantization than with the encoding of a full frame. Worse picture quality for a given bitrate.

24p stored as 2:3 in 60i may or may not waste significant additional data, it depends how it is implimented.

I wouldn't say there is 'nothing' wrong with it, it can be improved. Given the encoding chipsets are probably not capable of encoding a full frame currently, this is an acceptable state of affairs.

Yes, great posts indeed. Thank you for clarifying things it all for me!

One more question. Is this 2:3 process different from 3:2 pulldown? Or is it just a different way of writing it? Or are they actually the opposite of each other.

This is the first I've seen it written as 2:3 pulldown, all though I'm sure you guys all know what you're talking to... so maybe just point me to a good guide :)

Thats a question I am shaky on answering, I think by convention one may refer to the creation of interlaced footage and other to the recreation of the original progressive frames, but I will add that it can get worse depending on the application.

Some analog recording formats are 2:2:3:3 owing to the preservation of complete frames within the stream.

There's nothing wrong with that, the HVX does its 1080/24p mode the same way.

I thought the V1U was the first camcorder at this price level to do 1080/24p...Does tghe HVX actually do 1080/24p? and if so, whats all the fuss then about the V1U?

Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I am new to all of this!

Hi Ethan, it's not a stupid question. Welcome to DV Info Net.

Yes the Panasonic HVX200 does 1080p24, but it's a different kind of HD camcorder. It records HD video in the DVCPRO HD format using flash media, not tape.

The V1U is not the first camcorder at this price level to do 1080p24. The Canon XH A1 costs about the same money and was introduced about the same time, and before that, we had the Canon XL H1, for a lot more money (and please, no pointless arguments about whether it's Frame mode or progressive -- all that counts is that the video coming out of all these camcorders is 24p).

The fuss about the V1U is that it is an amazing HDV camcorder with a highly innovative feature set (with HDMI output, for one example). But, like any other camcorder, it's just a set of tools. The real magic is, what can you build with this great set of tools. That's what all the fuss is about.

Ethan,

It's all in marketing. The V1 is a grand cheaper than the HVX 200, so hence the low price claim. The V1 does true progressive 1080 24P, so hence that claim; although, as Chris said, 24P and 24F (Canon XH series, XL-H1) are basically the same animal.

Other marketing ploys of the camera are 1080 60p scanning: You will never see this because it is quickly turned into 1080 60i (interlaced). 4:2:2 color: You can only take this live. Unless you use a solution to record either the component or HDMI outputs (not practical for field or portable use). For firewire using its hard drive and record to tape, it's all ready converted to HDV (1440 x 1080i 4:2:0 [less color information] @ 25mb/s). Thus, no matter the marketing, the camera's image is no better than other professional under 10k HD cameras, with the exception of certain characteristics like Sony's colors tend to be richer and more red than cannon cameras.

However, marketing or not, think about it...A professional camera producing high definition video for under 5K. That was unheard of a year ago. The V1 produces stunning color-rich images. The only drawbacks: no variable frame, no 720p, and, of course, the HDV codec - highly compressed video and audio.

John

Do not overlook that you can hook the V1 into the BMD Intensity card and record using the CF DI in 4:2:2. Of course this is not the only camera that can do that, any HDV camera with HDMI can do the same.

This does not gain gain you anything coming off tape, only recording live, so you'll be tethered to a PC. Still you can run HDMI a fair distance.

As said before, these are remarkably cheap options that were unheard of until recently. Probably the biggest problem now having so many choices is instead of enjoying the abundance of riches we argue over which is the best.

The HVX also upsamples in both vertical and horizontal, so the image is quite a bit softer than in it's native 720p mode. Panasonic was the first to do true 24p at 1080 in a budget camcorder, Sony was the first to do it really well. The Canon 24f isn't "true" 24p, but that's more market term than it is rational discussion; one can't tell the difference, and at the end of the day it's about the visuals, not the math.