...and I have to say I was slightly disappointed. There was grain (mosquito sworms as I've heard it described) on internal and to a lesser extent on external shots. The footage in question used the pannamatch recipe. Gain was set to 0. It was straight from the camera with no editing or processing.

Are all HDV cameras in this price range like this?

Its just that the footage looks excellent on computer LCD's and when projected. Especially compared to SD and DV footage.


Andrew

Have you already configured your TV right? if it is a new one, you should consider that the standard settings usually have a very high colour and detail/sharpness setting. Sharpness set to a value too high, brings out small imperfections in the vicinity of the edges, musquito noise, indeed.

However, the footage from my JVC GY-HD101 looks absolutely fabulous on my JVC LCD LT32-S60. I haven't been able to spot any musquito noise, nor any considerable MPEG motion artifacts. I'm very pleased with the performance of the ProHD MPEG2 codec. That is why I suppose you might want to look at the settings of your LCD. If this HD doesn't look impressive compared to SD or DV, something is wrong...

In low light situations some grain might indeed be visible, even with gain set to 0. If you don't like that, you might want to reconsider your black settings (stretch, compress, pedestal).

I've went thru the settings of the LCD, and everything is set for the perfect picture. Digital TV and SD DVD's whilst exhibiting blockyness, do not show any mosquito noise.

Are you playing edited footage on an SD DVD or footage via component out straight from the camera?

I'm going straight from the camera via component out using expensive conponent cables.

Andrew

me too (well both, actually. And I have to say it looks best unedited straight from the camcorder). How big is your lcd? is it a 1080 or a 720 lcd? with 1080 some things could be a matter of the upscaling engine... (I like it on my lcd even better then on computer LCD's while it is the other way around for you - but my lcd is 720 natively and not that big - especially compared to american standards, perhaps that could be it?)

EDIT: Stupid of me, I just see the title of your post saying it is 32 inch as well. 1366 x 789?

FWIW, I was totally impressed with the results of playback on a Panasonic 42" plasma. Using the HDMI output on the playback VTR (our BR-HD50), I know I'm seeing the true recorded signal with no analog noise being introduced. The colors are rich and true, and the detail is absolutely incredible. I have never seen footage look better, actually. With a better lens and certain conditions, I might be fooled into thinking this was a much more expensive camera.

Everything looks dreadful on both my LCD displays - rubbish technology IMHO. They can't handle highlights or shadows and reveal all the flaws in any footage that's not perfect. HDV1 looks particularly bad on certain screens. Some LCDs are better than others, though. Personally, I'd rather watch a high-end consumer SD CRT than a Lying Cheating Display any day.

...and I have to say I was slightly disappointed. There was grain (mosquito sworms as I've heard it described) on internal and to a lesser extent on external shots. The footage in question used the pannamatch recipe. Gain was set to 0. It was straight from the camera with no editing or processing.

Are all HDV cameras in this price range like this?

Its just that the footage looks excellent on computer LCD's and when projected. Especially compared to SD and DV footage.


Andrew

Hi Drew,

Using a consumer TV to evaluate footage is not a good idea. There are all kinds of artifacts that a consumer TV may introduce into good footage. Stick with a proferssional grade monitor.

Hi Drew,

Using a consumer TV to evaluate footage is not a good idea. There are all kinds of artifacts that a consumer TV may introduce into good footage. Stick with a proferssional grade monitor.

Nevertheless, Carl... I'm sure that 99% of my clients do not have professional grade equipment. That's why I normally use a consumer TV to check my work, in order to see the client's POV.

I have played back output from my HD100 directly into the DVI input on my Sony TV. I don't remember the model, but, it's an older 32" CRT device, with HDTV 720p capable circuitry...ie, it has component and DVI inputs. The "live" images are so stunning that i would just LOVE to be able to capture that 4:2:2 info, somehow. I still haven't figured out how.

Nevertheless, Carl... I'm sure that 99% of my clients do not have professional grade equipment. That's why I normally use a consumer TV to check my work, in order to see the client's POV.

Absolutely. For finishing, I use a properly maintained and calibrated trustworthy broadcast grade 1 CRT together with a low-end CRT composite TV and - lately - a cheap LCD so that I can evaluate the footage on a proper monitor but also get a good sense of the lowest common denominator - granny's TV.

...and I have to say I was slightly disappointed. There was grain (mosquito sworms as I've heard it described) on internal and to a lesser extent on external shots. The footage in question used the pannamatch recipe. Gain was set to 0. It was straight from the camera with no editing or processing.

Are all HDV cameras in this price range like this?

Its just that the footage looks excellent on computer LCD's and when projected. Especially compared to SD and DV footage.


Andrew

I have seen the same problem with my Samsung 32" HDTV LCD, however after seeing the same footage on a $40,000 projector I'm inclinded to believe that the LCD is introducing some artifacts. I used the component analog of the HD-100 to view footage and have not used the HD50 deck with the HDMI output (the LCD is at home). It's very possible that the analog to digital conversion in the LCD is creating artifacts on top of otherwise near invisible artifacts.

OK. We all agree that a professional CRT TV, costing several thousands of dollars, would be the best way to evaluate our precious HDV images.

But what would be the options for a reasonable compromise on an LCD set?

What size, what specs?

Is there any place we can go have a look at tests they did, if possible using HD or HDV images?

The only one I know are those from PC Magazine, but they do not use the references we use. And they are not too thorough tests, that might give us an idea on what to expect.

Anyone can suggest any other place?


Carlos

William it could be your samsungs engine that's straining under the pressure, I saw it on some Lg LCD's but up against a Sharp Aquos or a Toshiba LCD there's a difference.

Thanks for the comments. It seems it is inferior LCD technology i'm using. Its and LG LCD HD ready TV, not sure which model.

I guess I am like so many HD100 owners. I wanted to see some footage on an HD TV, rather than having to down grade to SD before seeing it on a TV.

The picture is sharp, its the moving grain/mosquitos noise I see that was dissapointing. I understand that this will happen in low light, but I wasn't expecting as much in bright sunlight.

I saw and HD demo on the shop (BBC HD preview) and it was soooooo crisp and clear. I hoped I'd see something simmilar.

Carl, I'm not using the LCD for grading or CC. I was simily curious to see HD footage on an HD monitor.

I should buy a better HD tv to see the best results it seems.

By the way, I'm totally delighted with the footage I've shot so far, converted to SD DVD and played on a standard CRT TV.

Andrew

OK. We all agree that a professional CRT TV, costing several thousands of dollars, would be the best way to evaluate our precious HDV images.

But what would be the options for a reasonable compromise on an LCD set?

What size, what specs?

Is there any place we can go have a look at tests they did, if possible using HD or HDV images?

The only one I know are those from PC Magazine, but they do not use the references we use. And they are not too thorough tests, that might give us an idea on what to expect.

Anyone can suggest any other place?


Carlos



You don't have to have an expensive pro crt to see great footage from a JVC Pro HD camcorder.

If it looks bad on your LCD its your LCD causing it. There are LOADS of LCD TV's out there that are vastly inferior and produce a very poor picture. If you look at it closely, anything you watch on it will look bad including DVD's. Most of the LCD's out there in the installed base don't have enough native resolution support to even do 720P without scaling. And speaking of scaling, the internal scalers of these sets are horrible too and not worthy of judging footage from a pro grade camcorder.

I use the Dell 24" LCD to view the footage via component. This LCD has a resolution greater than 1080 and scales the image pixel for pixel. Footage from our HD100 is nothing short of breathtaking. We've done several jobs in SD and HD with the camera, none of our clients have complained, in fact clients that see the footage want to work with us and integrate the camera into their projects because it costs less than renting a betasp rig.

I saw a swarm of mosquitos on some of my footage the very first time I used the camera back in early may. I about an hour of footage at a local springtime tulip festival in bright daylight. The footage was gorgeous but mosquitos were dancing around everywhere, especially around the edges of leaves, flowers etc". surprisingly none were present while shooting in shady areas or later while the sun was setting. I was using a sony digital master tape, and my camera was set to factory defaults. For my next tryout I used JVC HD tapes and tweaked the settings a bit, lowered detail a bit and shot some more tests in bright sunny daylight this time in new york city. I did not see any more mosquitos on this or any of the subsequent footage I shot to date. I dont know if the Sony tape was the culprit or the detail setting or the camera being brand new or too much light ( although I had the ND filter on ). Since then I've stuck to JVC tapes and detail at -2 and an additional external ND filter. You should experiment a bit before buying a whole new TV. If the mosquitos are there you will see them on each and every TV. I dont have a HD TV yet but hope to pick one up in a couple a weeks time. I hope to take my HD 100 to the store and hook it up to a few TV's in my price range and play some footage , and buy the best one in my budget. You may consider this strategy as well.

I hope this was helpfull.

Jay

"I dont know if the Sony tape was the culprit or the detail setting or the camera being brand new or too much light ( although I had the ND filter on ). "

The tape only records the 1's and zero's sent to it by the camera's encoder. If you got nothing on the tape, then blaming the tape might follow, but I don't think mosquitos are a tape issue...

[QUOTE=I use the Dell 24" LCD to view the footage via component. This LCD has a resolution greater than 1080 and scales the image pixel for pixel. [/QUOTE]

Mark, does your dell have compenent jacks on it? How do you hook it up? We've been going back and forth on monitoring HD via Apple Cinema displays, Dells, or the Panasonic BT-LH series.

From what I've read it seems that the computer LCDs can't produce the correct colorometry of Pro HDTV monitors like the the BT-LH series.

I havent seen them side by side but it's tempting becuase I can buy three Apple Cinema Displays, or Dell Displays for the price of one HDTV monitor.

Mark, does your dell have compenent jacks on it? How do you hook it up? We've been going back and forth on monitoring HD via Apple Cinema displays, Dells, or the Panasonic BT-LH series.

From what I've read it seems that the computer LCDs can't produce the correct colorometry of Pro HDTV monitors like the the BT-LH series.

I havent seen them side by side but it's tempting becuase I can buy three Apple Cinema Displays, or Dell Displays for the price of one HDTV monitor.


I have hooked it up directly via component and it looked great. The dell has component, DVI / vga and the other regular analog ins.

We capture the footage in HDV, edit in fcp and display it on the Dell through a blackmagic design multibridge extreme via DVI-D. Internally it maps 1080 or 720 pixel for pixel to any Dell or Apple 24"-30" display. The image is near flawless, though a little bright, but thats what LCD's of this era do. We don't use if for color correction as the multibridge can hardware downconvert to SD in realtime to our sony pro monitor with smpte c phosphors.

anyone should be able to plug any hdv camera with component out to a 24" LCD with component in and get a decent clean image if it was shot well.
I first heard this from someone who had a Sony FX1 and HP LCD.

IMO the Dell monitors are the best because you get the performance of the apple cinema display for less dollars.

My 2 cents on this -

Here's the thing - if other things look great in standard def on your HD set (and let's say they do), say like a DVD of STAR WARS, it would stand to reason that any additional grain you see on the set from the camera is a a byproduct of the camera - a camera which in theory is putting out a superior signal than a DVD could muster.

I am using a 50 inch LG/Zenith consumer plasma set and have experienced things along these lines - a bit of noise - but that's the tradeoff.

As I've said in other threads, I think the grain structure is very similar to that of well shot/developed 16 mm film if the camera is dialed in and working properly. You shoot in broad daylight at a field, and you're not going to have that much noise. You shoot a room lit with one candle and you're going to see a lot of grain. It's a bit frustrating that the image is so close to 35 mm but not quite there - but for a $6 grand camera it's pretty dang amazing.

Consumer sets can work - It's the only practical way for me to see if I have a dead pixel, for instance. It is a way to judge how well the camera's colors compare to other things you are familar with - say shows shot/broadcast in HD - not a perfect system, granted, but it is a way "eyeball" how well the camera's performing.

I do agree that if your set is underwhelming then upgrade. But, to my mind, if other things look great on the set, and there are proper imputs on the set (I use composites), by all means use them if that's what you have. Remember, even pro sets can be off-kilter and must be calibrated...

But don't expect the camera to be noise-less. Every test I've read (including the big 4 camera shotout a ways back) and my own experience tells me that one can not expect zero grain. But a vast amount of noise doesn't ring true either - it must be the cam or your set, one or the other. Do a little bit more testing before making a final judgment and good luck!
john
evilgeniusentertainment.com

William it could be your samsungs engine that's straining under the pressure, I saw it on some Lg LCD's but up against a Sharp Aquos or a Toshiba LCD there's a difference.

Every manufacturer has a different components going into their set lines. The Samsung works great with anything coming into the HDMI inputs. My son's Xbox360 normally uses the component inputs and it looks pretty good but I haven't looked for artifacts closely. I ran an edit directly from my MacBookPro into the set thru the VGA input and I was very impressed but it wasn't the same footage as I played from the camera so I'm not sure. The only footage that had noticable artifacts was shot in a forest so that wasn't surprising.

Grain, however, I recognize and haven't been disturbed by it. A low light image with the dBs up is going to look that way.

I'm sure some LCD brands have better analog/digital conversions and some worse.

The LG set in question has a resolution of 1,366x768.

SD DVDs look great even thru composite.

I consider that the bare minumum as far as flat panel resolution.

I consider that the bare minumum as far as flat panel resolution.

So wouldn't this monitor be one of the best and most affordable options for HDV monitoring?

http://www.benq.com/products/LCD/?product=812

Even better than a Dell, that has been criticized in many forums for banding problems and else?

Price is $800 at Newegg.

You're certain your camcorder out wasn't set to 1080i? I imagine that would cause a serious drop in quality.

I've never seen that bad quality on my LCD, but I compared the screens intensively at the store to choose the best one, and it is also a JVC - I didn't have the camcorder at that time, but it gave the best image overall - it was also twice the price of some of the other brand LCD's of the same dimension (and over 1,5 times the price of the LG that my father bought, perhaps something is in the price...). Since you have the camcorder already, the nice thing is you can easily take such a compact camcorder to the store and hook it up to some screens...

On the other hand, I've recently watched my HD recordings on the LG 32" LCD that my father has (I also used a component to DVI convertorbox to connect my HD101) - and although I feel like the pictures on my JVC are better, the LCD doesn't perform all that bad. I've seen no musquito's whatsoever standing about 3 to 5 feet away...

You're certain your camcorder out wasn't set to 1080i? I imagine that would cause a serious drop in quality.

Werner
I didn't know I could do this. Is there a setting in the menus for this?

Andrew

So wouldn't this monitor be one of the best and most affordable options for HDV monitoring?

http://www.benq.com/products/LCD/?product=812

Even better than a Dell, that has been criticized in many forums for banding problems and else?

Price is $800 at Newegg.


I don't know that its better than the Dell. It seems to be pound for pound the same specs as the Dell. Its only a few bucks cheaper too.

Who is critisizing the Dell for banding? Any LCD out there is going to have banding as its an 8-bit display. It also depends on the quality of footage, you'd certainly notice it quicker from an 8-bit source as opposed to a 10-bit or higher source. A lot of what I do is 10-bit and I can't say that banding is a problem for me or my clients viewing on the Dell.

Werner
I didn't know I could do this. Is there a setting in the menus for this?

Andrew

Yep, there is, I believe it is the 'HDV PB OUTPUT'. Make sure that is set to 'native'... Perhaps that's it?

I don't know that its better than the Dell. It seems to be pound for pound the same specs as the Dell. Its only a few bucks cheaper too.

Who is critisizing the Dell for banding? Any LCD out there is going to have banding as its an 8-bit display. It also depends on the quality of footage, you'd certainly notice it quicker from an 8-bit source as opposed to a 10-bit or higher source. A lot of what I do is 10-bit and I can't say that banding is a problem for me or my clients viewing on the Dell.

I don't remember the forum, but it was one for Dell products, and the stories were hair-rising. At least for me that I can't get back anything to Dell if it's not working properly.

It's almost a question of luck to get a unit withouth banding, and lately things seem to have improved, but the problem is still there. Sometimes people seem to return several units until they get a good one. And as you know you don't really get a new unit when you get it back, but a refurbished one.

Believe me I did want a Dell, which seemed to be the better deal and I didn't want to buy an Apple monitor.

The question is still pending for me.

I don't remember the forum, but it was one for Dell products, and the stories were hair-rising. At least for me that I can't get back anything to Dell if it's not working properly.

It's almost a question of luck to get a unit withouth banding, and lately things seem to have improved, but the problem is still there. Sometimes people seem to return several units until they get a good one. And as you know you don't really get a new unit when you get it back, but a refurbished one.

Believe me I did want a Dell, which seemed to be the better deal and I didn't want to buy an Apple monitor.

The question is still pending for me.


Ah, I understand.

I had not heard of that issue before. Was it with the 24" model?

I have heard nothing but praise from anyone owning the 24" model.

We've had ours a year now and its still perfect, with no hot pixels.

Ah, I understand.

I had not heard of that issue before. Was it with the 24" model?

I have heard nothing but praise from anyone owning the 24" model.

We've had ours a year now and its still perfect, with no hot pixels.

Yes, it was the 2405FPW model.

In any case, I have been doing a research on LCD monitors that might be on the same league as the 2405 or close by in size.

There seem to be three (that I could find):

- Gateway FPD2485W
- Benk FP241W
- HP Flat Panel Monitor L2335

The Gateway seems to be the most promising of them all. Those that compared it with the 2405 thought the Gateway was much better, side by side. Maybe because of the pixel response, which is half the Dell's.

Pixel pitch is not specified for the Dell, but should be .27mm as on the other 24".

Okay, this is probably JVC territory, but I think the LCD issue is universal. I am shooting FX1.

My first LCD is a 21 inch Dell 1620x1040 (or something) monitor with DVI, S video, composite and SVga input. I thought it was doing a pretty good job of display my FX1 HDV footage through the computer system media players. But there always seemed to be background "noise". (Actually if you put you nose up on the screen it looks like a bit of grainy film overlaying the video.)

Next, I wanted to actually look at HDV over air broadcast, so I bought a cheap 32" Magnovox LCD at Best Buy. I figured I would also test footage from the camera on the component input. It has the HDV tuner, HDMI input, along with the component input. I hooked it up as a secondary monitor on my editing system using a DVI to HDMI converter cable. As with the Dell, use as a computer monitor is not that impressive. I tweaked setting, but may need more background on that. I get just decent rendition of the footage through media players.

What I have impressed with for my $700 Magnovox purchase is the broadcast quality, as well as the quality of direct from my cameras component output (BNC ??) cable. I have produced short HDV projects, loaded them back to tape, and ended up with a very nice picture. Too bad the editing systems with HDV don't have the firewire monitoring capabilities that they do with DV.....

Since every LCD display is basically a matrix of discreet pixels the results will depend on the need for the display to upsize the image in order to make it fit its native resolution. This leads to an interesting fact. If you buy an HD TV and use it to watch SD footage, a very common scenario right now, a 720p TV will deliver a better image than an 1080i or 1080p. NTSC TV is converted to digital at 480 lines. A 720p display will have a lower upsizing factor than the 1080p. At 1080 you are upscaling more than 200% the original size. If you have done any work with Photoshop you know that that is no a good idea. This is, BTW, the reason why rear projection TVs, even the ones enabled for HD, deliver a much sharper image of SD signal even when the image is projected on a 50" screen. It's the same principle that allows us to see a 35mm frame on a 40 foot screen with clarity.

If you want to use a TV to watch HD100 footage be sure that you either use a display with native resolution of 720p or that you can configure the TV to go "pixel-by-pixel" without upsampling. This will show an image that is smaller than the physical display but it will look much nicer.

But, if you upsize for the number of pixels, then downrez for screen size, don't you essentially end up with the same image?

But, if you upsize for the number of pixels, then downrez for screen size, don't you essentially end up with the same image?
Not sure I understand what you mean but basically, NO. If you upres and image you end up with a corrupted image. The only way to upsize a digital, pixel based, image is to repeat pixels based on a more or less intellignt algorythm. IN the simples case the software calculates the ratio of expansion, let's say 4 times (NTSC to 1080) and then will repeat the pixels based on that ratio. So if your original pixels were:

xy

they then becomes:

xxxxyyyy
xxxxyyyy
xxxxyyyy
xxxxyyyy

Not a pretty picture, visually and figuratively. If you then downsize that you end up with a crushed image obtained from a degraded source.
Nope. When you deal with digital you have pixel-by-pixel or crap. We just bought a professional monitor for checking the output from the cameras for "El Papel" and the monitor has a special feature called pixel-by-pixel. Because that's the only way to ensure that what you watch is the real deal.
When seeing a 720p picture in pbp mode on a 1080 monitor the picture will take just a portion of the display. It's a 1-by-1 relationship. The display of the monitor is a grid. There is no "pixel stretcher" :)

But all that shouldn't be a problem since the resolution of his LCD. 1280x720 should be displayed in it's native size to fill the screen (The few pixels overshoot will be for a black border in the overscan, I'm guessing)

On the other hand, I have less trouble believing the 1080i footage of the sony FX1 (and the Z1) looks not quite as good for 3 reasons: 1) The resolution doesn't match 2) the width needs to be stretched from 1440 to 1920 pixels (and after that downscaled to 1280 or 1366), but most importantly 3) it's interlaced footage and LCD's are progressive by nature. Deïnterlacing shakes off a whole lot of the original quality...