boy its hard...? at DVinfo.net

Vamshidhar Kuchikulla · July 26th, 2004, 04:00 PM

I checked the other forums every one is talking about DSP 8 bit. May be canon will come out with a statement explaining behind its technology. Well Its an HOT HOT topic in every forum. I hope it may not become a drawback for canon on xl2. Because already i given my word to somone selling my xl1s.. Can someone come out with clear clarifications regarding 8 bit, and CCD Wastage. and focus....please..tell me the reality.

Luis Caffesse · July 26th, 2004, 04:33 PM

"tell me the reality"

I know this isn't the answer that you want, but the reality is that
no one will be able to tell you anything until after the camera is
released.

The models which were shown at DV Expo were pre production
models, so even though they were working models, they may not
be exactly what is shipped.

Wait for the camera to ship, and for real world reviews to start
coming in from users.

Also, don't worry so much about CCD 'wastage' and DSP bit depth.
At the end of the day, your audience won't care, and won't notice.

Can you hear the difference between a WAV file and an MP3?
I can't. Yet on paper the WAV file has much more information, and
should obviously sound better.

All that matters is 'perceived' quality, not mathematical quality.
Wait for the camera, and then let the footage speak for itself.

-Luis

Vamshidhar Kuchikulla · July 26th, 2004, 05:56 PM

I appreciate for your early reply.well you just tried to convience. You asked me a question weather wav or mp3...There is a lot a lot of difference between wav and mp3. After all mp3 cant be a wav file. everybody prefers advancement in technology to get better results.? Alright do you like MS-DOS 8 bit or Windows XP 128 bit...? wether its true or not..the answer is XP...here also the same thing....

Let me tell you truly... I brought xl1s for the first time , Initially I faced a lot of problems, with regarding to focusing etc.., after that i brought sony pd170, that too is not good enough for me. a simple example I shoot weddings especially hot blooded americans in jamaica. if anything goes wrong i ll loose my contracts already lost some. I already told focusing was the big mistake on xl1s , with pd170 it colour ranges from situation to situation., sometime blue more, some time gray more, some times red more. its becoming hectic work on my editing machine. Although when the bride and groom is sitting besides a window. Sony PD170 is not at all suitable, also when you go from dark to light...it behaves in different way. Although I got a good offer for Canon xl1s, to replace xl2., if anything goes wrong it makes a huge difference for me.. man! afterall my livelihood. I want a camcorder with no problem at any cost , with in my budget.
If i get xl2 ill certainly replace my pd170.. I know every camera has some drawbacks. I can understand...but not the people who are getting married. This is the main reason why i am enquiring before buying a camera.
Well regarding your pre production camera thing. it looks like showing something and giving something.
Well if anything is wrong ill take my words back...After all i am investing on something for my livelihood...understand...
brother thats what the difference between technology and engineering.

thanx again....

Michael Wisniewski · July 26th, 2004, 06:17 PM

Vamshidhar, most of the problems you mentioned sound like user error, not a problem with the camcorder or technology.

Vamshidhar Kuchikulla · July 26th, 2004, 06:27 PM

i shooted almost 200 weddings...i can realise which part is where on the cameras. Afterall i am digital videographer...can you explain what is the error...user error.
I expressed my views what i observed clearly, Also dont forget i do editing too...got it ...i know cearly what i am doing...Come on man you are completely dissing me? As if i dont know anything about video cameras. I dont have any problem in handling canon xl1s and pd170.....got it boss!

Michael Wisniewski · July 26th, 2004, 06:38 PM

Yes, I was dissing you :-) User error means, it's a problem with the user not the equipment.

But then, I'm not a professional wedding videographer, so apologies if I'm wrong. You might want to check out the Wedding forum here on DV info, to get other opinions.

Gints Klimanis · July 26th, 2004, 06:54 PM

>Can you hear the difference between a WAV file and an MP3?
>I can't. Yet on paper the WAV file has much more information, >and
>should obviously sound better.

Are you talking about a full format (16-bit, 48000 Hz) WAV file and, say, a 128 kbps (kilobits/second) MP3? For pop music, I bet you can easily tell a 96 kbps MP3 file from a WAV file. If you are listening to wind chimes, I bet you can easily tell the difference between a full format WAV and a 128 kbit MP3 file. Most people can't tell hear any changes in equalization other than bass, so
as a producer of audio and video. I've worked with audio DSP and computers for a long time. It's well known that one sound card/system can be made to sound better than others with a simple volume boost. I wouldn't want to base my
editing decisions on an average hearing ability.

Limp Bizkit or any other pop tunes with an isolated distorted guitar riff will easily bust 128 kbs. So, the question really isn't whether you can hear the difference. The question is: is the degradation significant for me to look for another solution?

MP3s make due by throwing away information deemed redundant.
If you listen carefully to your pop tune, you'll notice that cymbals and snare drums sound kinda funny. Generally, MP3 does a good job of compression. It will flop on material with a broad spectrum signal with rapid time-variance. Listen to a cymbal or snare drum
encoded in MP3 at 128 kbits.

The issue with the 8-bit DSP is whether you can tell the difference
between 8-bit and whatever-bit processing. Since you have nothing to compare it to, I don't think it's accurate to assume that 8-bit DSP on video signals is perfect. The influencing factor in choosing an 8-bit DSP is the recruitment of existing devices.
When you see the background of your video "swimming", you can
wonder whether its the CCD, the limit of DV25 encoding, or the accuracy of the DSP doing the encoding.

Yang Wen · July 26th, 2004, 08:16 PM

8 bit DSP simply refers to the width of the data stream that the chips inside the XL2 can handle at once.. obviously, with a wider stream, such as 12bit, you can represent numbers more accurately and software designers are allowed more flexibility in their instructions set(hardware level commands). There really is no saying that 8bit instruction sets are shockingly less inferior than 12bit in the context of DV camera. Other than the numerical precision advantage, i don't believe 12bit will give you any other substantial advantages over 8bit. Of course, the DVX100A is 12bit and that has increased latitude over the old DVX, but the older one is damned good as well!

I think you ought to be more concerned with the CCD usage on the XL2. On paper it sounds bad, lets see if it performs better than it sounds.

Luis Caffesse · July 26th, 2004, 10:24 PM

Alright, so maybe my WAV vs. MP3 analogy wasn't the best thing to use, but you saw my point.

Yang said it well:
"On paper it sounds bad, lets see if it performs better than it sounds."

We can debate the merits of bit depth and CCD usage all day long,
but in the end it won't matter. In the end all that matters is how
that image looks on screen.

That's all I meant.

-Luis

July 26th, 2004, 04:00 PM	#1
Vamshidhar Kuchikulla Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: ocho rios Posts: 45	boy its hard...? I checked the other forums every one is talking about DSP 8 bit. May be canon will come out with a statement explaining behind its technology. Well Its an HOT HOT topic in every forum. I hope it may not become a drawback for canon on xl2. Because already i given my word to somone selling my xl1s.. Can someone come out with clear clarifications regarding 8 bit, and CCD Wastage. and focus....please..tell me the reality.

July 26th, 2004, 05:56 PM	#3
Vamshidhar Kuchikulla Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: ocho rios Posts: 45	hi luis I appreciate for your early reply.well you just tried to convience. You asked me a question weather wav or mp3...There is a lot a lot of difference between wav and mp3. After all mp3 cant be a wav file. everybody prefers advancement in technology to get better results.? Alright do you like MS-DOS 8 bit or Windows XP 128 bit...? wether its true or not..the answer is XP...here also the same thing.... Let me tell you truly... I brought xl1s for the first time , Initially I faced a lot of problems, with regarding to focusing etc.., after that i brought sony pd170, that too is not good enough for me. a simple example I shoot weddings especially hot blooded americans in jamaica. if anything goes wrong i ll loose my contracts already lost some. I already told focusing was the big mistake on xl1s , with pd170 it colour ranges from situation to situation., sometime blue more, some time gray more, some times red more. its becoming hectic work on my editing machine. Although when the bride and groom is sitting besides a window. Sony PD170 is not at all suitable, also when you go from dark to light...it behaves in different way. Although I got a good offer for Canon xl1s, to replace xl2., if anything goes wrong it makes a huge difference for me.. man! afterall my livelihood. I want a camcorder with no problem at any cost , with in my budget. If i get xl2 ill certainly replace my pd170.. I know every camera has some drawbacks. I can understand...but not the people who are getting married. This is the main reason why i am enquiring before buying a camera. Well regarding your pre production camera thing. it looks like showing something and giving something. Well if anything is wrong ill take my words back...After all i am investing on something for my livelihood...understand... brother thats what the difference between technology and engineering. thanx again....

July 26th, 2004, 06:27 PM	#5
Vamshidhar Kuchikulla Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: ocho rios Posts: 45	hi michael i shooted almost 200 weddings...i can realise which part is where on the cameras. Afterall i am digital videographer...can you explain what is the error...user error. I expressed my views what i observed clearly, Also dont forget i do editing too...got it ...i know cearly what i am doing...Come on man you are completely dissing me? As if i dont know anything about video cameras. I dont have any problem in handling canon xl1s and pd170.....got it boss!

July 26th, 2004, 10:24 PM	#9
Luis Caffesse Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 704	Alright, so maybe my WAV vs. MP3 analogy wasn't the best thing to use, but you saw my point. Yang said it well: "On paper it sounds bad, lets see if it performs better than it sounds." We can debate the merits of bit depth and CCD usage all day long, but in the end it won't matter. In the end all that matters is how that image looks on screen. That's all I meant. -Luis __________________ Luis Caffesse Pitch Productions Austin, Texas

July 26th, 2004, 04:33 PM	#2
Luis Caffesse Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 704	"tell me the reality" I know this isn't the answer that you want, but the reality is that no one will be able to tell you anything until after the camera is released. The models which were shown at DV Expo were pre production models, so even though they were working models, they may not be exactly what is shipped. Wait for the camera to ship, and for real world reviews to start coming in from users. Also, don't worry so much about CCD 'wastage' and DSP bit depth. At the end of the day, your audience won't care, and won't notice. Can you hear the difference between a WAV file and an MP3? I can't. Yet on paper the WAV file has much more information, and should obviously sound better. All that matters is 'perceived' quality, not mathematical quality. Wait for the camera, and then let the footage speak for itself. -Luis

July 26th, 2004, 06:17 PM	#4
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Vamshidhar, most of the problems you mentioned sound like user error, not a problem with the camcorder or technology.

July 26th, 2004, 06:38 PM	#6
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Yes, I was dissing you :-) User error means, it's a problem with the user not the equipment. But then, I'm not a professional wedding videographer, so apologies if I'm wrong. You might want to check out the Wedding forum here on DV info, to get other opinions.

July 26th, 2004, 06:54 PM	#7
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	>Can you hear the difference between a WAV file and an MP3? >I can't. Yet on paper the WAV file has much more information, >and >should obviously sound better. Are you talking about a full format (16-bit, 48000 Hz) WAV file and, say, a 128 kbps (kilobits/second) MP3? For pop music, I bet you can easily tell a 96 kbps MP3 file from a WAV file. If you are listening to wind chimes, I bet you can easily tell the difference between a full format WAV and a 128 kbit MP3 file. Most people can't tell hear any changes in equalization other than bass, so as a producer of audio and video. I've worked with audio DSP and computers for a long time. It's well known that one sound card/system can be made to sound better than others with a simple volume boost. I wouldn't want to base my editing decisions on an average hearing ability. Limp Bizkit or any other pop tunes with an isolated distorted guitar riff will easily bust 128 kbs. So, the question really isn't whether you can hear the difference. The question is: is the degradation significant for me to look for another solution? MP3s make due by throwing away information deemed redundant. If you listen carefully to your pop tune, you'll notice that cymbals and snare drums sound kinda funny. Generally, MP3 does a good job of compression. It will flop on material with a broad spectrum signal with rapid time-variance. Listen to a cymbal or snare drum encoded in MP3 at 128 kbits. The issue with the 8-bit DSP is whether you can tell the difference between 8-bit and whatever-bit processing. Since you have nothing to compare it to, I don't think it's accurate to assume that 8-bit DSP on video signals is perfect. The influencing factor in choosing an 8-bit DSP is the recruitment of existing devices. When you see the background of your video "swimming", you can wonder whether its the CCD, the limit of DV25 encoding, or the accuracy of the DSP doing the encoding.

July 26th, 2004, 08:16 PM	#8
Yang Wen Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 991	8 bit DSP simply refers to the width of the data stream that the chips inside the XL2 can handle at once.. obviously, with a wider stream, such as 12bit, you can represent numbers more accurately and software designers are allowed more flexibility in their instructions set(hardware level commands). There really is no saying that 8bit instruction sets are shockingly less inferior than 12bit in the context of DV camera. Other than the numerical precision advantage, i don't believe 12bit will give you any other substantial advantages over 8bit. Of course, the DVX100A is 12bit and that has increased latitude over the old DVX, but the older one is damned good as well! I think you ought to be more concerned with the CCD usage on the XL2. On paper it sounds bad, lets see if it performs better than it sounds.