I'm offering this uncompressed sequence (once again) to those who wish to see what uncompressed images look like from an HD-100. The last time I posted, I put up a 2vuy file. People complained (of all things!) that 2vuy is an old Pinnacle codec. Actually 2vuy is not an old Pinnacle codec and in fact the same wrapper Aja puts on their uncompressed 422 (in both 8 bit and 10 bit varieties).

Since nobody seems to work with Blackmagic codecs here, I've placed the file up on the server for a short time in an uncompressed sequence (which everyone should be able to use).

Click here for zipped sequence (http://media.dvinfo.net/ProHD_Clips/uncompressed720p.zip) (625MB).

The original 2vuy file is no longer valid on the server.
Regards,

S.Noe

I'm offering this uncompressed sequence (once again) to those who wish to see what uncompressed images look like from an HD-100. The last time I posted, I put up a 2vuy file. People complained (of all things!) that 2vuy is an old Pinnacle codec. Actually 2vuy is not an old Pinnacle codec and in fact the same wrapper Aja puts on their uncompressed 422 (in both 8 bit and 10 bit varieties).
I believe you are confusing the Pinnacle 2VUY codec with the Apple 8bit 2vuy codec and the Cinewave 2Vuy codec.

As I explained before the Pinnacle 2VUY is totally proprietary and has a frame size of 720x512, totally proprietary and legacy for the old Pinnacle Liquid hardware.

It appears Liquid still uses it internally, but if it is fused out it is totally and unawsomely unreadable by any standard program such as Procoder, which will read virtually anything that is installed on the system or is in any kind of non-proprietary format.

The Pinnacle/Avid 2VUY uncompressed is not 2vuy or 2Vuy.

Apparently, according to some lengthy and retro white papers the extra lines in the 512 frame are used internally by the Pinnacle/Avid software and hardware.

Liquid does DV well and apparently it is one of the only solutions for JVC's ProHD. But otherwise, the myth of Liquid is highly mythologized.

And I have been told the rationale for Avid not officially supporting ProHD with Liquid, but I think that it is relevant that Avid currently does not officially support ProHD with Liquid.

I have BlackMagic codecs on my machine and the codecs are freely downloadable, so I don't know what the problem would be with those.

For anyone interested, I've posted the clip.....

And I have been told the rationale for Avid not officially supporting ProHD with Liquid, but I think that it is relevant that Avid currently does not officially support ProHD with Liquid.


To other forum users: this has been discussed before and they should take Jack's comments with a pinch of salt. It is simply not true that Avid does not officially support HDV1/ProHD with Liquid. ProHD is JVC's name for its range of HDV products which use the HDV1 standard. HDV1 IS officially supported by Avid with Liquid at both 30 and 25fps. You can confirm this on Avid's website by looking at the product description, support guides, reference guide, system requirement details and the product brochure. If anyone out there is considering Liquid, do not be put off by Jack's comments. HDV1 works very well indeed at 25 and 30 fps and is supported by Avid. 24fps is not supported officially but we have it on good authority that it works well also.

I have solid personal experience with the codec issue. Yes, it's a proprietary codec but - as I said before - Quicktime Pro can give you a work-around and it does work very well with the traditional Avid apps. When Liquid is installed on the same system as Liquid, both QT pro and Avid apps (AXPro/MC/Symph) will read and write 2VUY files even though ProCoder will not. Don't let Jack put you off here either!

Sorry for the side-track, Stephen. I just thought it was important not to put accurate information out there for those looking for a solution to working with HDV1.

Stephen,

Just to let you know the 2vuy format for Liquid is it's own format and not just a codec. The files are actually "file.2vuy" and not "file.avi" or "file.mov". These 2vuy files do use the same channel structure as some other codecs but they are not in a AVI or quicktime wrapper but instead just a rare raw 2vuy format. Avid has special quicktime codecs which are installed when we install Liquid that allow quicktime or any application that can read quicktime files to load the 2vuy files as quicktime files. Without these codecs from Liquid quicktime or any other application has no idea what a "file.2vuy" is.

These formats are very hard to work with because the codecs from Avid are for read only and not export codecs. There is a way to export as a 2vuy from quicktime pro and After Effects but you have to use a special export format and not a normal quicktime render codec in order for it to work.

So without having Liquid installed there is no way for any program to know what a 2vuy file is because it is a totally different format and not just a codec.

Hi Stephen,
I understand you recorded component out of the camera but what did you record onto, what kind of deck, what format?
thanks
Jack

I use Blackmagic codecs! :)

Me too. It works just fine with almost identical file sizes for 2vuy 8-bit.

And I have been told the rationale for Avid not officially supporting ProHD with Liquid, but I think that it is relevant that Avid currently does not officially support ProHD with Liquid.
Here is a link to the only statement by an Avid employee that I have seen regarding the the support for "ProHD" by Liquid:
http://www.avid.com/exchange/forums/post/92587.aspx

Here is the text:
"The JVC support is in a category we call "implemented but not yet tested". The engineers have done the work. The QA team has not completely tested it. Product Marketing has not yet added it to the official feature list."

It is my understanding that the employee who wrote this no longer works for Avid. However, it is also my clear understanding that this had not changed. If it has changed, please give me a link to to an Avid website page or official statement that contradicts this and puts ProHD support in the "officially supported" column.

There has been no question that Liquid does unofficially support the JVC format. In fact, Liquid seems to be only one of two Editors that have end to end support for JVC's format.

Also, in some countries JVC has bundled Liquid with the JVC cameras. Since the only choice for bundling seem to be Liquid and Edius at the moment, and Canopus isn't likely to get in on this kind of deal, Liquid is the only realistic option for such a package.

Nevertheless, the support within Liquid for the JVC format is not official.

Yes, it has been "semi-officially" announced that a 7.2 update for Liquid may be out in the first half of next year. This may fix some of the bugs in Liquid and it may make ProHD support official. However, it's not here yet.

I think incorrect info on a topic should be corrected -- on both sides.

Stephen,

Just to let you know the 2vuy format for Liquid is it's own format and not just a codec. The files are actually "file.2vuy" and not "file.avi" or "file.mov". These 2vuy files do use the same channel structure as some other codecs but they are not in a AVI or quicktime wrapper but instead just a rare raw 2vuy format. Avid has special quicktime codecs which are installed when we install Liquid that allow quicktime or any application that can read quicktime files to load the 2vuy files as quicktime files. Without these codecs from Liquid quicktime or any other application has no idea what a "file.2vuy" is.

These formats are very hard to work with because the codecs from Avid are for read only and not export codecs. There is a way to export as a 2vuy from quicktime pro and After Effects but you have to use a special export format and not a normal quicktime render codec in order for it to work.

So without having Liquid installed there is no way for any program to know what a 2vuy file is because it is a totally different format and not just a codec.
The 2vuy file structure is only a wrapper for the uncompressed sequence so that the entire capture can be tidy. Inside of the 2vuy is nothing more than the sequence of frames. Very similar to QT using it's wrapper for TGA sequence to create a MOV.

Anyway, what I gave was the uncompressed sequence (which equals the 2vuy file). Anyone should be able to use the sequence to test for CC with the uncompressed signal.

This sequence was sourced on HD-100. The HD-250's A/D converter is miles above the HD-100's great encoder (especially in the blue channel) so you can expect even better results from the HD-SDI from the HD-250 (and probably the HD-200).

Here is a link to the only statement by an Avid employee that I have seen regarding the the support for "ProHD" by Liquid:
http://www.avid.com/exchange/forums/post/92587.aspx

Here is the text:
"The JVC support is in a category we call "implemented but not yet tested". The engineers have done the work. The QA team has not completely tested it. Product Marketing has not yet added it to the official feature list."

It is my understanding that the employee who wrote this no longer works for Avid. However, it is also my clear understanding that this had not changed. If it has changed, please give me a link to to an Avid website page or official statement that contradicts this and puts ProHD support in the "officially supported" column.

There has been no question that Liquid does unofficially support the JVC format. In fact, Liquid seems to be only one of two Editors that have end to end support for JVC's format.

Also, in some countries JVC has bundled Liquid with the JVC cameras. Since the only choice for bundling seem to be Liquid and Edius at the moment, and Canopus isn't likely to get in on this kind of deal, Liquid is the only realistic option for such a package.

Nevertheless, the support within Liquid for the JVC format is not official.

Yes, it has been "semi-officially" announced that a 7.2 update for Liquid may be out in the first half of next year. This may fix some of the bugs in Liquid and it may make ProHD support official. However, it's not here yet.

I think incorrect info on a topic should be corrected -- on both sides.
What you keep missing is that it's not 24, it's 59.94.

As I wrote you, the reason they haven't officially said 24 is because their is no way to create a 24p DVD from the Liquid timeline (without laying it on a 29.97 timeline). That is the only flaw, 24p DVD. Everything else works.

As stated above, ProHD is the name JVC gives its range of products that use the HDV1 format. HDV1 (720p) is officially supported by Avid Liquid at 25 and 30fps. Official support is noted as the format itself - 'HDV1' or 'HDV 720p', not 'ProHD', which refers to a family of hardware products which use 'HDV1' or 'HDV 720p'. Furthermore, there are HDV1 presets in Liquid.

http://www.avid.co.uk/products/liquidpro/specs.asp
"Avid Liquid - HDV Editing (720p)"

http://www.jvcpro.co.uk/getResource2/e1_nle_compatibility_chart_2.pdf?id=6650

FYI, Edius was bundled with the HD100 in the UK, at least, in the early part of this year. Later there was a promotion with Liquid. Do we think Avid would provide software to be bundled with a format that it doesn't officially support?

FYI, Edius was bundled with the HD100 in the UK, at least, in the early part of this year. Later there was a promotion with Liquid. Do we think Avid would provide software to be bundled with a format that it doesn't officially support?
Very good about Edius. Didn't know this.

Regarding: "Do we think Avid would provide software to be bundled with a format that it doesn't officially support?"

Yes! I do and it does. I hope we understand we are talking about 24p.

And if I'm wrong, show me a link to the webpage or literature -- officially from Avid -- that shows I am wrong.

I provided a link to a statement from the Liquid Product Manager that shows I am right. Show I am wrong with facts, not wishful thinking.

As I said before, Anthony M, at DV Expo, showed confusion and no knowledge about Liquid support for JVC ProHD 24 support? He is the number one demonstrator for Liquid, working, I think 8 years with the product (not sure on the number of years) and coming to Avid from Pinnacle. If he didn't know... or even if he was pretending not to know for official reasons and a directive from Avid superiors... the fact remains, the support within Liquid for JVC ProHD 24p is not official.

Third parties have privately suggested reasons for this... but the very fact that people will go out of their way to give reasons for the lack of official support certainly points out that the official support is not there.

On other matters it has been suggested by others that pressure on Avid might be the only way to get them to react. This has been shown to be true in the past and I believe the culture within the company remains the same that it may work in the future. One thing is certain is that without pressure, there will be no result.

The more people try to cover for Avid and Avid remains silent (oh, and there policy of no advance info on the future is used only as it serves the moment) it is appropriate to point out the facts.

You're absolutely right that there is no official support for 24 fps in Liquid. That's why I said 25fps and 30fps in my first post on this thread. The claim I was challenging was that there is no official support for 'ProHD' in Liquid:

"And I have been told the rationale for Avid not officially supporting ProHD with Liquid, but I think that it is relevant that Avid currently does not officially support ProHD with Liquid."

This sort of thing is misleading to other forum users who are looking for solutions for cutting material shot on the HD100 series.

I for one have never tried to apologise or cover for Avid. If you search other posts by me on the subject of lack of support in AXPro/MC/Symph for HDV1 at 25 or 24fps (and for 720p/25, 24 or 50 in general) you'll see that. On the official Avid boards I and several others have been complaining about this continually for over a year now, doing our level best to put on pressure. We have been very vocal on this subject. The fact remains, however, that Liquid is one of the very few good solutions for HDV1 editing. It is also worth pointing out that the only reason Avid can offer any support for HDV1 at all is because they inherited Liquid when they purchased Pinnacle, so it's worth cutting Liquid and Liquid users some slack.

Believe me when I say that I understand your frustrations with Avid more than most. However, I think it is unfair and misleading to vent on Liquid!

I think we've cleared this one up, so I won't be diverting this thread any further!

I feel so stupid when asking this but what do you mean with uncompressed sequence? Straight out of component or just pure data from tape/firewire?
Sorry I got a bit confused here.

T

Looks very good!
Thank you Stephen for showing us the potential of this camera.

I feel so stupid when asking this but what do you mean with uncompressed sequence? Straight out of component or just pure data from tape/firewire?
Sorry I got a bit confused here.

T
Halo,

Uncompressed sequence means the uncompressed sequence of frames captured from component or in other words, without sending the signal through the camera's mpeg encoder. If you downloaded the ZIP file I've linked and then unzipped it, you'd find a sequence of 350 (or more) uncompressed Targa frames. You would import this sequence as an "animation" into your NLE. I did this because not everyone's NLE can accept a file sequence thats in a "wrapper". An example of a wrapper would be a quicktime file that's been encoded TGA. The wrapper is what keeps the file sequence tidy and in one package (ie file). Otherwise you're dealing with the individual frames (like in an animation).

Regards,

S.Noe

Looks very good!
Thank you Stephen for showing us the potential of this camera.
You are welcome, Sergio. I plan on giving you a greenscreen uncompressed as well (when I get a minute).

ALL,

I don't know why 2vuy wouldn't work or your systems. The 2vuy files I produce out of Liquid on my system open right up in Quicktime 7 (windows).

All I do is open up QT (Pro) and then go to File>Open and point to the 2vuy file. It plays fine every time. The only caveate may be that I have the Blackmagic codecs loaded on my system.

Smet, Try for yourself. I think you are confusing the YUV (DV uncompressed) files with the 2vuy (uncompressed HD sequence) files. The 2vuy files are standard files.

Regards,

Stephen

BTW: I've posted another 2vuy file for you to try Click Here for 78MB 2vuy file (http://media.dvinfo.net/ProHD_Clips/Liquid_2vuy.2VUY)

Stephen there are special quicktime codecs installed with Liquid which is why the file plays fine for us with quicktime. A .2vuy file is not a standard file in any way shape or form. As a wrapper that means it is different. AVI and quicktime are also wrappers but a program that can only read AVI wrappers will not be able to read a quicktime wrapper.

On our Liquid systems we will always be able to open the 2vuy files because Liquid installs a quicktime codec on our system. The Blackmagic codecs have nothing to do with it at all but the AVID codecs do.

When we install Liquid we get a YUV, 2VUY, 2VUY HD, M2V and DVCPRO50 codec installed for normal quicktime applications.

Most of the software I have been working on for Liquid can load these files but only if you have the codecs installed on your system. I have also limited support to write these file formats from my software. The AVID codecs are very buggy for creating files so it is very limited but it does work. On systems that do not have Liquid and that have never had Liquid installed the files will not load at all. I have been messing around with these codecs for the last few years trying really hard to figure out a better way for non Liquid systems to be able to write these files. For as good of quality that the codecs are they are one of the most unorthodox formats I have ever seen in my life. Why oh why Avid doesn't just switch to a AVI format with a 2VUY codec I will never know. It really would make things a lot easier. Of course people would still have to have that codec in order for it to open. There is no standard windows based 2vuy avi codec so AVID would either have to use their own codec or piggy back off of the Blackmagic codecs which has my vote.

This is the same concept as FCP users who can create a DVCPROHD quicktime file but PC users cannot read them because we do not have the codec for DVCPROHD. The only way to have the codec is to install FCP on a mac.


Try to open the 2vuy file on a system that has never had Liquid installed and you will not be able to open it.

Why oh why Avid doesn't just switch to a AVI format with a 2VUY codec I will never know. It really would make things a lot easier. Of course people would still have to have that codec in order for it to open. There is no standard windows based 2vuy avi codec so AVID would either have to use their own codec or piggy back off of the Blackmagic codecs which has my vote.
I agree. This totally sums up what is really my only point.

Yes, Stephen, Thomas is right about this. We can force QT to open the .2vuy files on our workstations because we have Liquid installed. This is why a lot of the guys out there can't do anything with native Liquid files. The legacy Pinnacle .2vuy files are virtually identical to the legacy 8-bit Apple QT and the equivalent Blackmagic files, though. So, if you have Liquid installed, you can save fused files out as legacy BM 8-bit and you are effectively adding a QT wrapper to your original .2vuy file and creating a file that can be ready by everyone who has the BM codec set installed, which is free to download, of course.

However, let us not confuse the Pinnacle/Fast Liquid codecs with the true Avid codecs that come with AXPro/MC/Symph or the Avid codec installer (also free to download from the Avid website). The true Avid codecs WILL work with all other applications that can read/write .mov files. They are Avid MXF/OMF files re-designated with a .mov wrapper and will fast import into Avid systems (not Liquid, of course) and are usually the most efficient method to create graphics/animations or whatever for use in Avid systems (not Liquid). Liquid's proprietary codec AND file format are big stumbling blocks, of course, because most of us want to be able to bring material in and out of the app with minimum fuss, time and image degradation.

As a footnote, if you have Liquid and AXPro/MC/Symph installed on the same crate as Liquid, you can directly import .2vuy files into the Avid app because the traditional Avid line-up uses QT architecture. AXPro/MC/Symph onwers can therefore use Liquid to ingest HDV1 at 24 or 25 fps (not supported in the other Avid apps) and then fuse native Liquid uncompressed files that can be imported directly (and quickly) into Avid. This is a way to get around the QT batch export bugs in Liquid that come into play if you try to batch export a Liquid rack as true Avid QT for fast import. This is a better method than using something like MPEG Streamclip for conforming an Avid offline because Liquid can actually import decomposed offline clips for batch digitising as ALE. If anyone out there is confused by this and wants to know the details for using Liquid as a capture/conform utility for traditional Avid apps like Xpress Pro, just PM me and I'll explain.

I don't have Liquid installed and the files still play in QTPro. Are you guys sure that you can't install Blackmagic codecs and get 2vuy files to play in QT?

@Smet, you know you can export RGB-AVI from any timeline.

I don't have Liquid installed and the files still play in QTPro. Are you guys sure that you can't install Blackmagic codecs and get 2vuy files to play in QT?

@Smet, you know you can export RGB-AVI from any timeline.

Did that system at one point have Liquid installed? If it did the codecs will stay on your system even if you remove Liquid.

I do use a RGB-AVI fuse many times and is in fact one of my favorite formats to work with but it is huge in size for HD. YUV based HD is bad enough but RGB is even larger. It needs over 179MB/S compared to 125MB/S so it is not exactly a great format to work with. Most of the time 4:2:2 video will not be captured or used as RGB-AVI so therefore it isn't very universal.

I will try cleaning out a system and see if the Blackmagic codecs will read the files on their own but I doubt it. It isn't just the codec we are talking about here but the 2vuy file extension. Most applications look to the file extension and will not read or open a file that has a file extension that it has never heard of before. It may be just a wrapper but all wrappers are different and an application needs to know how to read that wrapper.

Stephen,

Next time you get a chance try running one more test, I think it would be good for HD100 owners to know this before investing too quickly in an component/uncompressed solution ... capture uncompressed and at the same time go to tape. Compare the uncompressed component image to that same image from tape as HDV.

For us, when doing this same test the HDV frame looked better, even with it's MPEG compression, than the component uncompressed simply because the component (result of DAC?) degrades the image and goes soft. This in turn sort of defeats the purpose IMO. It's a bit of a catch 22 in that you bypass MPEG compression noise only to lose image detail to the component signal. This was our findings anyway, I would love to see if someone else can get better results with their camera.

As you mentioned the HD250 with SDI is far better, miles in fact, and is the only method I would use if uncompressed ProHD is what someone is after. I have not tried the HD200 component/uncompressed route yet but would be interested in giving it a shot, more so if our rep thinks it's worth looking at.

Peace!

Stephen,

Next time you get a chance try running one more test, I think it would be good for HD100 owners to know this before investing too quickly in an component/uncompressed solution ... capture uncompressed and at the same time go to tape. Compare the uncompressed component image to that same image from tape as HDV.

For us, when doing this same test the HDV frame looked better, even with it's MPEG compression, than the component uncompressed simply because the component (result of DAC?) degrades the image and goes soft. This in turn sort of defeats the purpose IMO. It's a bit of a catch 22 in that you bypass MPEG compression noise only to lose image detail to the component signal. This was our findings anyway, I would love to see if someone else can get better results with their camera.

As you mentioned the HD250 with SDI is far better, miles in fact, and is the only method I would use if uncompressed ProHD is what someone is after. I have not tried the HD200 component/uncompressed route yet but would be interested in giving it a shot, more so if our rep thinks it's worth looking at.

Peace!
The process you mention is one of the first things I tried (ie comparing images between uncompressed and mpeg). The image is different without question. Both mpeg and uncompressed would have gone through the DAC's process so there would be no difference there. The difference is no post DAC processing on uncompressed like in mpeg2. It's what happens before/during the mpeg compression that changes the image, I believe (enhancement).

The thing I'm most impressed about, in the uncompressed signal, is how much you can adjust color and still have a viable image. This is where I think the uncompressed component trumps the mpeg every time. I'm an advocate of "getting it right" in the camera (color wise) but uncompressed allows you to get it wrong and still be able to salvage color without creating macroblock when the image is pressed too far in the secondary color corrector.

On another side though Dan, I've found Magic Bullet II handles the mpeg-2 with aplomb. You can get away with murder on mpeg2 using Magic Bullet. The image holds up. This leads me to think/believe Magic Bullet is a better investement than an uncompressed workflow.

your thoughts?

Stephen,
Looking forward to that green screen uncompressed you mentioned. I'm not sure what the last clip you posted was but it won't play on my Mac quicktime and I even have blackmagic codecs installed although I don't have the card anymore. The targa sequence looks great.

Warren

Agreed, you have more to work with in regard to pushing around color when working with uncompressed and avoiding the MPEG route. For us uncompressed was the solution for anything requiring post work, keying being the main reason and for the Multibridge Pro investment.

Also agreed, Magic Bullet does a great job at working with HDV's limitations. We have been very happy with all of the Red Giant products in fact. It's all good stuff and in my book rates high in ROI.

The only thing I'm unclear on is why you might say "Both mpeg and uncompressed would have gone through the DAC's process so there would be no difference there". Maybe so but something more is in fact happening during output via component that's doing some additional damage, more than the MPEG encoded route. I'm speaking strictly image/pixel detail here, not so much in the color depth. Either there is an additional conversion on the side of the component outputs, or JVC has some damn good voodoo with the MPEG encoder thats enhancing the image. ;)

The only thing I'm unclear on is why you might say "Both mpeg and uncompressed would have gone through the DAC's process so there would be no difference there". Maybe so but something more is in fact happening during output via component that's doing some additional damage, more than the MPEG encoded route. I'm speaking strictly image/pixel detail here, not so much in the color depth. Either there is an additional conversion on the side of the component outputs, or JVC has some damn good voodoo with the MPEG encoder thats enhancing the image. ;)
Now that I think about it, maybe it doesn't go through the same DAC since the component is not changed to Digital. I wonder what the true route of the signal is through the camera when using component out. Does it come straight off the CCD's? How can that be if the signal is YUV? or is it RGB?

we need some engineering whitepaper describing the signal flow.

we need some engineering whitepaper describing the signal flow.

That we do.

Maybe JVC's Carl or Ken Freed could step in and help us out here?