So Chris, how does 24f actually look?

[Michael Struthers]

A "filmish" look of some sort I imagine...

[Chris Hurd]

Hey guys, can't really get away from all the activity right now but I will be back online tonight... in my opinion 24F looks great, but you be the judge: I'll post an AVI this evening which should show it off somewhat. Hope this helps,

[Steven White]

Awesome Chris.

I just read your article on the chip etc., and if it is indeed correct, I've got to say that I think Canon is shooting themselves in the foot by giving their competitors buzzwords to hyperbolize. From what I can gather, 24F absolutely is equivalent to 24P... it's just a different way at arriving at the same result from an interlaced chip.

-Steve

Chris,

Is 24F a totally new format created by Canon or is it in use by other manufacturers as well? I've never seen it, but then again, I've never had a reason to look for it in the past.

I edit in Final Cut Pro 5 and did not see any settings at all for 24F. Will Apple, Avid, etc. be sending out software upgrades for this format? I know you can't speak for them directly, but what are your thoughts.

Is this even a valid concern or question that I have?

[Steven White]

Is this even a valid concern or question that I have?

Not really. The output stream will be HDV 60i... and any implementation of 24p will be simply added with a 2:3 or a 2:3:3:2 pull-down (like it is on the XL2 and DVX100). In other words, if your editing system supports HDV, it will support this camera.

Oh - and if you had Premiere Pro with AspectHD - you could probably remove the pull-down on acquisition and edit native 24p hassle free!

-Steve

[Stephen van Vuuren]

But if it is 24p, why not call it 24p? JVC calls their HDV 24p in the HD100 because it's 24 frames per second, full rez.

Processing like that may mean audio lag or artifacts or something else - DV Filmmaker on a chip maybe?

[Philip Williams]

Originally Posted by Stephen van Vuuren

But if it is 24p, why not call it 24p? JVC calls their HDV 24p in the HD100 because it's 24 frames per second, full rez.

Processing like that may mean audio lag or artifacts or something else - DV Filmmaker on a chip maybe?

Well, since JVC's CCD is a Progressive CCD, I guess that's what lets them use 24P in their description. Its really shooting a progressive frame. Apparently no matter how good an interlaced CCD is, or the processing power behind it, its taboo to call anything it ouputs "progressive". Possible legal ramifications?

Philip Williams
www.philipwilliams.com

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Philip Williams

Well, since JVC's CCD is a Progressive CCD, I guess that's what lets them use 24P in their description. Its really shooting a progressive frame. Apparently no matter how good an interlaced CCD is, or the processing power behind it, its taboo to call anything it ouputs "progressive". Possible legal ramifications?

Philip Williams
www.philipwilliams.com

Exactly. They have to call it 24F because the ccd block is not progressive, it's interlaced.

[Michael Dalton]

How does the image compare to the other HD cameras? Especially fast moving objects? Does the Image still look good, or do you get a huge interlaced blob?

How does the 60fps look?

Any samples we can see of this?

Michael

[Greg Boston]

Good news for XL-2 owners, the new console software for the XLH1 is fully compatible with the XL-2. Just can't figure out what the price is yet.

-gb-

[Stephen van Vuuren]

Originally Posted by Greg Boston

Exactly. They have to call it 24F because the ccd block is not progressive, it's interlaced.

But Canon (from what the Skinny says) is saying that the CCD is sampling a progressive frame and then upsampling to 60i - something is still not clear about exactly how this works...

[Steven White]

something is still not clear about exactly how this works...

It's clear.

Step 1: CCD shutter operates at 24 Hz
Step 2: CCD is sampled into the computer as interlaced fields
Step 3: Fields are recombined into complete frames
Step 4: Image processing
Step 5: Complete frames are pulled-down into 60i storage/broadcast format via 2:3 or 2:3:3:2 pull-down = "upsampling to 60i"
Step 6: Signal is output via HD-SDI, sent to HDV compressor
Step 7: 60i HDV signal is written to tape.

Steps 2 and 3 are different from the XL2 and DVX. All the rest of the steps are common to the XL2 and DVX.

-Steve

[Stephen van Vuuren]

Originally Posted by Steven White

It's clear.

Step 1: CCD shutter operates at 24 Hz
Step 2: CCD is sampled into the computer as interlaced fields
Step 3: Fields are recombined into complete frames
Step 4: Image processing
Step 5: Complete frames are pulled-down into 60i storage/broadcast format via 2:3 or 2:3:3:2 pull-down = "upsampling to 60i"
Step 6: Signal is output via HD-SDI, sent to HDV compressor
Step 7: 60i HDV signal is written to tape.

Steps 2 and 3 are different from the XL2 and DVX. All the rest of the steps are common to the XL2 and DVX.

-Steve

Steve:

Where is the information from?

[Glenn Gipson]

The bottom line is going to be how the image actually looks anyway, who cares how it's created.

[Stephen van Vuuren]

Originally Posted by Glenn Gipson

The bottom line is going to be how the image actually looks anyway, who cares how it's created.

For those doing film blow-ups etc and other resolution intensive work, it does matter how it's created. And for figuring out if the 24F is available via SDI.