I captured a clip where I switched from 60i 360-degree shutter and 240 216-degree. So I had two side by side frames.

Used Liquid's super HQ 2D editor to blow-up these two frames by 400%.

No difference I can see!

If someone posts how to post them -- I'll do so. But I won't say which is which.

What about 30p though?

TT

Hey Steve,

If you send the pix to me, I'll host them on my FTP space.

gints@att.net

Oh, and thanks for that Sony HDV eBook. It helped me with deciding that the Sony Z1U was the right choice for me.

Sorry, didn't see this until just now.

Steve -- when you submit a post, look below the message input block and the submit reply button and you'll see an "Additional Options" box. There should be a "Manage Attachments" button. Click that and it'll open a file / image uploading tool. When your images are posted (standard photo formats such as jpg, png etc., they'll appear as 320x240 size thumbnails which can be clicked to show the full-size versions.

Or you can go to our Image Gallery at http://www.dvinfo.net/gallery and post them there -- your choice.

Hi Chris,

Thank you -- I never scrolled down to find the obvious.

Here are four pix. We'll see if folks can tell which is which.

Obviously, these have all been JPEG compressed to meet site requirements so any attempt to judge original image quality is ruled-out. The point is simple -- can you see a rez difference.

Great to talk with you at the Atlanta seminar.

I can't see one... I'm viewing on a laptop, but even so, no visible difference to me...

Steve, are you sure that the uploader won't allow full 1920x1080 size images? I thought I had properly configured the file attachment conditionals but maybe I got them wrong... what happens when you try to attach full size shots? I'll go back and set a larger file size as well.

Likewise, it was very good to see you in Atlanta and I hope we can catch up with each other again soon.

..I would guess the photo on the right has a ever so slight higher rez, & this a subjective viewpoint , on a 17" 1280x1024 LCD monitor....

Steve, are you sure that the uploader won't allow full 1920x1080 size images? I thought I had properly configured the file attachment conditionals but maybe I got them wrong... what happens when you try to attach full size shots? I'll go back and set a larger file size as well.

Likewise, it was very good to see you in Atlanta and I hope we can catch up with each other again soon.


HI -- my photos should be 1440x1076 which is what came from Liquid. Are they smaller?

I could not upload TIFF.

#1 is interlaced
#2 is progressive

Did I get that right?

60i 360 vs 24p 216 400-percent 1.jpg looks like 60i?

Which camcorder it actually is? 24p is Cineframe?

They are talking about the V1. That's the title of this forum. So no cineframe, but 24p done by the camera.

#1 is interlaced
#2 is progressive

Did I get that right?

Are you countng left to right?

Sorry guys, I do follow when you speak about "left" or "right" - let's use the actual filenames, please...Or the numebrs 1,2,3,4 as per the order they're listed in Steve's post.

Hey Steve,
0.jpeg is interlaced and 1.jpeg is progressive (^_^) did I get it right?

Monday

my photos should be 1440x1076 which is what came from Liquid. Are they smaller?For some reason on my system, they're showing up at 767x573, and squished spaghetti western style.

is it just me or do the pictures on the left look like in bends or something, just something about it. I don't see it on the right. For whatever reason I like the two pictures on the right.

again - which is 'right' and which is 'left'?!!
What am I missing?

If you're seeing the images one below the other, then the top one is top left, next one down is top right, third one down is bottom left, and the last one is bottom right.

Sorry to be a nuissance, but I'm seeing the images one at a time, so there's no left, right, upper or bottom.

On the diagonal lines at the borders of the signs in the coffee shop frames, I see what appears to be an alternating "red-blue-red-blue" pattern. Is this an artifact of the new pixel subsampling algorithm? Is this visible at all during the moving video, or only under careful observation on the still frame?

I don't recall seeing something similar on still frames from my Z1U, but then it's not an A-B comparison.

Thanks for the frames, Steve.

Bill

How were they de-interlaced? Was this a tripod shot?

Could there be no difference because there was no difference?

What maginfication are you observing the jpegs? I blew them up in photoshop...they appear nearly identical. At the 1 picture pixel= 4 or 9 screen pixel level, there appear to be no differences in resolution or color between them.

Are you countng left to right?

I'm referring to XXXXXX...0.jpg as #1
and to XXXXXXX...1.jpg as #2

Sorry guys, I do follow when you speak about "left" or "right" - let's use the actual filenames, please...Or the numebrs 1,2,3,4 as per the order they're listed in Steve's post.

Yes -- that's what I should have said!

I see all four -- and then double-click on one to open it full size. You can open all of them up because they open in new windows.

It makes no sense to take the 400% and zoom in more in photoshop. Also, as I said, since these are JPEGs, so don't look for other artifacts!

It's a simple "can I see more clear words on the menu."

Think of it as an eye test.

I can't see any difference between any of them on my iBook.

Sorry to be a nuissance, but I'm seeing the images one at a time, so there's no left, right, upper or bottom.

Sorry again - silly me! I've just noticed I had the option to display pictures with posts switched off... Now I see what you mean by upper, left etc.

So now I guess we just have to wait for European production model to be sure "p" equals progressive. I hope Simon will test one soon. I wonder what kind of prototype they gave him for the first test. Me confused...