1080/60i 4:2:2 HD-SDI output

Nelson Maldonado · February 9th, 2008, 11:47 AM

Opps, I stand corrected.

H1 SDI - no embedded audio.

I had read a few posts that said they where using a XL H1 SDI out w/ embedded audio. May be they where mistaken and where actually using the firewire out. So, I did more research on the subject.

Also, its interesting that Canons pages on the H1 make no mention of it either.

Troy Aitken · February 9th, 2008, 03:28 PM

So then what is H1 recording to tape, then out via SDi to an uncompressed timeline? Bypassing firewire, is there less compression going into the computer? I can see better results on a Blu-ray disc when compared to HDV workflow. Can this be explained?
Troy

Dave Gosley · February 11th, 2008, 02:47 AM

Please forgive me jumping in but even after reading the first page - with GOP's and 4.2.2's (whatever they are) I am still unsure if the picture taken from an H1 is better from the tape or out of the SDI to a hard drive.

Is there a definitive on this one?

Thanks
Dave

Troy Aitken · February 11th, 2008, 08:20 AM

I will give a crack at it. This is my guess. If I take a photo in 8 bit mode and convert it to 16 bit mode before editing and then take it back to 8 bit mode the histogram will look good w/out verticle lines running thoughout. This might be somewhat true regarding video. If the Chroma and Luninance are being subsampled to 4:2:0 to tape (compression) and then sent to the hard drive via the firewire and finally to a compressed codec timeline like pro rez or hdv, then color correcting will become very restrictive on how far one would be able to push cc or added effects. Mind you alot of effects can hide the clipping and so on by implying that it was intentional.

Now in my experience, when comparing this same footage shot on tape was instead sent out to computer via SDI (BNC Cable) to an UNCOMPRESSED 8 OR 10 bit timeline I got better results. It has a much greater tolerance with cc and effects before smooth tonal gradations are compromised. Now what is going on, I don't have a clue. Is the signal still 4:2:0 but a full 1920x1080 or even 4:2:2 1920x1080 compared to 1440x1080 4:2:0 by way of firewire.

Now on the field with a proper set up like Matrox with a hd break-out box, one can be sure its' a full 4:2:2 1920x1080 subsampled signal. Keeping this signal pure by putting it in a HD project on an 8bit Uncompressed timeline takes all the guess work out of it. You would have the best the Canon H1 can do.

Now here is the most important part for me,"final output". Taking that large data file, the Matrox AVI 8bit Uncompressed file and loading it in Encore CS3, I can produce a HD Blu-ray disc that has absolutely no banding or artifacts due to the fact that it was not compressed twice.

I hope this helps as this is only my opinion and experience with my workflow.

Peter Moretti · February 13th, 2008, 12:40 AM

Is 24F out of the HD-SDI port imbedded into a 60i stream or is it 23.976 fps?

Thanks!

Will Griffith · February 13th, 2008, 01:56 PM

Here is some facts to save you from searching through several earlier posts.

1. HDSDI out of H1 is 10bit 4:2:2 @ 1920x1080 HDV is 8bit 4:2:0 @ 1440x1080

1a. 24f is output from HDSDI embedded in 1080i 29.97

2. HDSDI gives a much better grading format and effects work clip to work with.

3. HDSDI gives you true 1080p...not 1440x1080 like HDV recorded to tape

4. HDV (that which has been recorded to tape and directly recorded through the firewire port) is heavily compressed long GOP (like a DVD) format. It REALLY SLOW to render on an old computer. PERIOD. It is horribly blocky for greenscreen work. It is pleasing to the eye...but don't try to modify it!

5. Recording to HDV and then outputing HDSDI does not magically make the video better...garbage in - garbage out. Once it is recorded to HDV the show is over.

6. Is HDSDI better? YES.

7. Is HDSDI more economical? NO.

8. Should I shoot HDSDI in the field? Not unless you have a good sized crew and do extensive testing with a "foolproof" system. You can even record HDV and do a second system capture to uncompressed or ProRes and just slate each shot if you want better quality and safety at the same time.

9. Should I consider a different camera/format if 10bit 4:2:2 is what I want? YES.

hope that helps

Peter Moretti · February 13th, 2008, 02:06 PM

*Applause* Thank you very much! I aware of all of that, except that it applies pulldown.

BTW, one thing that might not be clear for G1 and XL-H1 users is those cameras will output 8-bit color packaged in 10-bits. It's not 10-bit color, even though it's in an HD-SDI 10-bit stream.

Will Griffith · February 13th, 2008, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti

*Applause* Thank you very much! I aware of all of that, except that it applies pulldown.

Feel free to repost and correct....I am exhausted from typing all that.

Troy Aitken · February 14th, 2008, 08:46 AM

Good Morning Will,

Recording to tape is exactly what?
I know output from the tape via firewire is a compressed 1440x1080 4:2:0 signal. In fact in ppro cs3 the file is stated as just that.

Now, again when that same recording from tape is sent to the computer using the SDI then in fact the signal is stated as 1920x1080 and the file is much much larger, better quality and impossible to visually see the difference when compared to pure HD-SDI recording to computer before and after editing the same for both. The key in the workflow is keeping it in an uncompressed timeline.

I know all this to be true because I have tested this again and again.

My question is does the chroma and luma stay subsampled to 4:2:0 or does it in fact output at 4:2:2 via the SDI while at 1920x1080?

Pro rez is better than HDV in my opinion but not better than 1920x1080 from tape to computer via SDI (to an uncompressed timeline) Matrox AVI

Bottom line is that the higher resolusion from tape using the SDI instead of the firewire does give a much better file to edit with and produces a much much better Blu-ray disc.

Thanks

Will Griffith · February 14th, 2008, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

Recording to tape is exactly what?
I know output from the tape via firewire is a compressed 1440x1080 4:2:0 signal. In fact in ppro cs3 the file is stated as just that.Thanks

Correct.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

Now, again when that same recording from tape is sent to the computer using the SDI then in fact the signal is stated as 1920x1080 and the file is much much larger, better quality and impossible to visually see the difference when compared to pure HD-SDI recording to computer before and after editing the same for both. The key in the workflow is keeping it in an uncompressed timeline.

You've left out the fact that the camera takes the 1440x1080 and uprezes it
to 1920x1080 when coming from tape, unlike live capture of HDSDI which
yields more resolution, better dynamic range(lots more info in the shadows),
and less compression artifacts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

My question is does the chroma and luma stay subsampled to 4:2:0 or does it in fact output at 4:2:2 via the SDI while at 1920x1080?

The luma is 4:2:2 but unfortunately it is "made up" by the the conversion.
It's kinda like dropping a GIF into a TIFF or PSD file in photoshop.
The file says 24bit color and no compression, but the GIF obviously wasn't!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

Pro rez is better than HDV in my opinion but not better than 1920x1080 from tape to computer via SDI (to an uncompressed timeline) Matrox AVI

Uncompressed is always better than a compressed format like Prores, but
like I mentioned before, you have already saved the footage as HDV and
are just converting from that to uncompressed and not actually shooting
uncompressed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

Bottom line is that the higher resolusion from tape using the SDI instead of the firewire does give a much better file to edit with and produces a much much better Blu-ray disc.

What you are seeing is uprezing of long GOP HDV 1440x1080 to intraframe
1920x1080. It could look marginally better and is obviously easier to edit
and deal with (other than the file size). I'm not arguing that. I'm just saying
that a live ProResHQ or Uncompressed capture from HDSDI during the shoot
looks MUCH better than capturing from tape in any format.

Troy Aitken · February 14th, 2008, 10:42 AM

Thanks Will,

The clouds are starting to roll back.

Just one more thing, are you absolutely sure that the mini tape in the Canon cannot receive the full 1920x1080, if not then how is the camera capable of uprezing the file? I though what's on the tape is analog until it is digitized out either by SDI or Firewire. Also isn't the sensor a full 1920x1080, wouldn,t that be sent to tape?
I really appreciate this Will. Is there anything from Canon to substantiate this?

Regards,
troy

Will Griffith · February 14th, 2008, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

are you absolutely sure that the mini tape in the Canon cannot receive the full 1920x1080, if not then how is the camera capable of uprezing the file?

HDV spec is 1440x1080. if it captured as 1920x1080 then it wouoldn't need to uprez it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

I though what's on the tape is analog until it is digitized out either by SDI or Firewire.

there haven't been any analog cameras since BetaSP was king.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

Also isn't the sensor a full 1920x1080, wouldn,t that be sent to tape?

not if they want to save it as HDV format.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

Is there anything from Canon to substantiate this?

Yes. Their website and documentation.

Troy Aitken · February 15th, 2008, 11:53 AM

Hello Will,

Maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me that Canon is silent on the color space other that HD-SDI out. I cannot find any detailed info on what you have stated. Can you point me in the right direction.

Thank you for your time, I really appreciate this
Troy

Will Griffith · February 15th, 2008, 01:23 PM

If it is 1080/60i HDV it is 4:2:0 in any camera.
That is the HDV standard.

http://news.sel.sony.com/hdvcamcorde...ology_book.pdf

Peter Moretti · February 16th, 2008, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troy Aitken

Thanks Will,

The clouds are starting to roll back.

Just one more thing, are you absolutely sure that the mini tape in the Canon cannot receive the full 1920x1080, if not then how is the camera capable of uprezing the file? I though what's on the tape is analog until it is digitized out either by SDI or Firewire. Also isn't the sensor a full 1920x1080, wouldn,t that be sent to tape?
I really appreciate this Will. Is there anything from Canon to substantiate this?

Regards,
troy

Troy,

HDV is always what the XL-H1 records to tape. HDV is always 1440 pixels wide, not 1920. It displays as 1920 during playback because the pixels are stretched to cover the same width that 1920 pixels would.

That is why you'll hear it said that HDV uses rectangular or anamorphic pixels.

What's on the tape is never analog. It's digital. And it is compressed to meet the HDV standard. I would do some searches on HDV. It is not just a vague term, but rather a very specific way of compressing a digital video and audio signal.

What comes out of the HD-SDI port is not compressed.

Finally I believe the sensor is not 1920, but rather 1440. So the camera is "uprezing" the width when the signal comes out of the HD-SDI port.

HTH ;).

P.S. I have no dobut that HDV uprezed by the camera and stored as ten bits instead of eight will give a better result than capturing w/o the uprezing. But I also have no doubt that, like Will said, uncompressed will look much better. So:

HDV captured via Firewire < HDV captured via HD-SDI <<< Uncompressed HD-SDI.

February 9th, 2008, 03:28 PM	#17
Troy Aitken New Boot Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 23	Hd-sdi So then what is H1 recording to tape, then out via SDi to an uncompressed timeline? Bypassing firewire, is there less compression going into the computer? I can see better results on a Blu-ray disc when compared to HDV workflow. Can this be explained? Troy

February 11th, 2008, 02:47 AM	#18
Dave Gosley Major Player Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Hampshire Posts: 226	Newby clearing head Please forgive me jumping in but even after reading the first page - with GOP's and 4.2.2's (whatever they are) I am still unsure if the picture taken from an H1 is better from the tape or out of the SDI to a hard drive. Is there a definitive on this one? Thanks Dave __________________ http://www.videoproductionshampshire.co.uk Last edited by Dave Gosley; February 11th, 2008 at 02:48 AM. Reason: Spelling - as always..

February 11th, 2008, 08:20 AM	#19
Troy Aitken New Boot Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 23	hd-sdi vs. tape I will give a crack at it. This is my guess. If I take a photo in 8 bit mode and convert it to 16 bit mode before editing and then take it back to 8 bit mode the histogram will look good w/out verticle lines running thoughout. This might be somewhat true regarding video. If the Chroma and Luninance are being subsampled to 4:2:0 to tape (compression) and then sent to the hard drive via the firewire and finally to a compressed codec timeline like pro rez or hdv, then color correcting will become very restrictive on how far one would be able to push cc or added effects. Mind you alot of effects can hide the clipping and so on by implying that it was intentional. Now in my experience, when comparing this same footage shot on tape was instead sent out to computer via SDI (BNC Cable) to an UNCOMPRESSED 8 OR 10 bit timeline I got better results. It has a much greater tolerance with cc and effects before smooth tonal gradations are compromised. Now what is going on, I don't have a clue. Is the signal still 4:2:0 but a full 1920x1080 or even 4:2:2 1920x1080 compared to 1440x1080 4:2:0 by way of firewire. Now on the field with a proper set up like Matrox with a hd break-out box, one can be sure its' a full 4:2:2 1920x1080 subsampled signal. Keeping this signal pure by putting it in a HD project on an 8bit Uncompressed timeline takes all the guess work out of it. You would have the best the Canon H1 can do. Now here is the most important part for me,"final output". Taking that large data file, the Matrox AVI 8bit Uncompressed file and loading it in Encore CS3, I can produce a HD Blu-ray disc that has absolutely no banding or artifacts due to the fact that it was not compressed twice. I hope this helps as this is only my opinion and experience with my workflow.

February 13th, 2008, 01:56 PM	#21
Will Griffith Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Tennessee Posts: 164	Lets clear a few things up...again Here is some facts to save you from searching through several earlier posts. 1. HDSDI out of H1 is 10bit 4:2:2 @ 1920x1080 HDV is 8bit 4:2:0 @ 1440x1080 1a. 24f is output from HDSDI embedded in 1080i 29.97 2. HDSDI gives a much better grading format and effects work clip to work with. 3. HDSDI gives you true 1080p...not 1440x1080 like HDV recorded to tape 4. HDV (that which has been recorded to tape and directly recorded through the firewire port) is heavily compressed long GOP (like a DVD) format. It REALLY SLOW to render on an old computer. PERIOD. It is horribly blocky for greenscreen work. It is pleasing to the eye...but don't try to modify it! 5. Recording to HDV and then outputing HDSDI does not magically make the video better...garbage in - garbage out. Once it is recorded to HDV the show is over. 6. Is HDSDI better? YES. 7. Is HDSDI more economical? NO. 8. Should I shoot HDSDI in the field? Not unless you have a good sized crew and do extensive testing with a "foolproof" system. You can even record HDV and do a second system capture to uncompressed or ProRes and just slate each shot if you want better quality and safety at the same time. 9. Should I consider a different camera/format if 10bit 4:2:2 is what I want? YES. hope that helps __________________ will griffith producer/editor

February 14th, 2008, 08:46 AM	#24
Troy Aitken New Boot Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 23	hd-sdi vs. tape cont..... Good Morning Will, Recording to tape is exactly what? I know output from the tape via firewire is a compressed 1440x1080 4:2:0 signal. In fact in ppro cs3 the file is stated as just that. Now, again when that same recording from tape is sent to the computer using the SDI then in fact the signal is stated as 1920x1080 and the file is much much larger, better quality and impossible to visually see the difference when compared to pure HD-SDI recording to computer before and after editing the same for both. The key in the workflow is keeping it in an uncompressed timeline. I know all this to be true because I have tested this again and again. My question is does the chroma and luma stay subsampled to 4:2:0 or does it in fact output at 4:2:2 via the SDI while at 1920x1080? Pro rez is better than HDV in my opinion but not better than 1920x1080 from tape to computer via SDI (to an uncompressed timeline) Matrox AVI Bottom line is that the higher resolusion from tape using the SDI instead of the firewire does give a much better file to edit with and produces a much much better Blu-ray disc. Thanks

February 9th, 2008, 11:47 AM	#16
Nelson Maldonado Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Canton, Michigan, USA Posts: 50	Opps, I stand corrected. H1 SDI - no embedded audio. I had read a few posts that said they where using a XL H1 SDI out w/ embedded audio. May be they where mistaken and where actually using the firewire out. So, I did more research on the subject. Also, its interesting that Canons pages on the H1 make no mention of it either.

February 13th, 2008, 12:40 AM	#20
Peter Moretti Trustee Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Sherman Oaks, CA Posts: 1,259	Is 24F out of the HD-SDI port imbedded into a 60i stream or is it 23.976 fps? Thanks!

February 13th, 2008, 02:06 PM	#22
Peter Moretti Trustee Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Sherman Oaks, CA Posts: 1,259	Applause Thank you very much! I aware of all of that, except that it applies pulldown. BTW, one thing that might not be clear for G1 and XL-H1 users is those cameras will output 8-bit color packaged in 10-bits. It's not 10-bit color, even though it's in an HD-SDI 10-bit stream.

February 14th, 2008, 10:42 AM	#26
Troy Aitken New Boot Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 23	hd-sdi vs. tape cont..... Thanks Will, The clouds are starting to roll back. Just one more thing, are you absolutely sure that the mini tape in the Canon cannot receive the full 1920x1080, if not then how is the camera capable of uprezing the file? I though what's on the tape is analog until it is digitized out either by SDI or Firewire. Also isn't the sensor a full 1920x1080, wouldn,t that be sent to tape? I really appreciate this Will. Is there anything from Canon to substantiate this? Regards, troy

February 15th, 2008, 11:53 AM	#28
Troy Aitken New Boot Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 23	hd-sdi vs tape Hello Will, Maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me that Canon is silent on the color space other that HD-SDI out. I cannot find any detailed info on what you have stated. Can you point me in the right direction. Thank you for your time, I really appreciate this Troy

February 15th, 2008, 01:23 PM	#29
Will Griffith Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Tennessee Posts: 164	If it is 1080/60i HDV it is 4:2:0 in any camera. That is the HDV standard. http://news.sel.sony.com/hdvcamcorde...ology_book.pdf __________________ will griffith producer/editor