Kaku Ito's XL H1 video clips -- here's the second batch

Nate Weaver · October 9th, 2005, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Roper

They are not periodic. The Canon 24F mode appears to be capturing at 60i (30 fps). You can thus drop every 5th frame and replace it with a flag to repeat the 4th, (so that the it doesn't play back speeded up), to get a filmic look. And though you get 24 discrete frames every second that way, the cadence is irregular.

To do this right, you have to have a variable frame rate like the HVX200, which this cam does not.

I'm confused about your methodology, but I won't debate it.

The Canon 24F streams I have (the true ones that weren't mislabeled), act identically to the 24fps streams I have from my own HD100. Same rendering of motion, everything.

Chris Hurd · October 9th, 2005, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Roper

... you have to have a variable frame rate like the HVX200, which this cam does not.

Actually the HVX200 does *not* have variable frame rates. It has selectable frame rates. There is a big difference between variable and selectable. Hope this helps,

Steven White · October 9th, 2005, 02:22 PM

I doubt it's worth getting that technical Chris...

Even the Varicam has only frame rates between 1 and 60 in integer steps. If you want truly continuously variable, you have to consider an analog crank I guess.

-Steve

Yi Fong Yu · October 12th, 2005, 07:27 PM

all i can muster right now... is WOW!

Thanks my Ito&Chris for bringing us advanced footages before the cam's even released. This is incredible previlege to be a part of a group to see a dawn of a new revolution =).

i'm projecting some of those images on my 80" front screen projector and all the footages look awesome. i'm so gettin this.... in 5 years after price drops =). with all these new HDV cams coming out, we're coming upon an impasse. yesh it is still "video" but so was star wars episode ii&iii (so far the MOST financially successful "video" movies ever).

Daniel Broadway · November 4th, 2005, 08:06 PM

Has anyone else noticed that this camera seems to exhibit FAARRR less MPEG artifacting than the Sony? I mean, how is this possible?

Is it because the image is being compressed as a progressive image, and not interlaced? If you shoot in CF25 on the Z1U, does it produce less artifacting than in 60i?

Hse Kha · November 4th, 2005, 10:36 PM

I know that progessive frames like up a lot less storage (for the same quality) than interlaced frames. Each interlaced frame is really two frames in one (fields).

So for the same bit rates, progressive "frames" are much less artifact free then interlaced "fields".

Remember Kakus clips (except one) are also 24fps and not even 30fps, and so there is even more allocated data for each frame.

Personally I think that unless there is a lot of movement, at 24fps there will hardly be any noticable MPEG-2 baddies...

Hse Kha · November 4th, 2005, 10:37 PM

<<If you shoot in CF25 on the Z1U, does it produce less artifacting than in 60i?>>

For sure.

October 12th, 2005, 07:27 PM	#79
Yi Fong Yu Trustee Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vulcan Posts: 1,564	all i can muster right now... is WOW! Thanks my Ito&Chris for bringing us advanced footages before the cam's even released. This is incredible previlege to be a part of a group to see a dawn of a new revolution =). i'm projecting some of those images on my 80" front screen projector and all the footages look awesome. i'm so gettin this.... in 5 years after price drops =). with all these new HDV cams coming out, we're coming upon an impasse. yesh it is still "video" but so was star wars episode ii&iii (so far the MOST financially successful "video" movies ever). __________________ bow wow wow

October 9th, 2005, 02:22 PM	#78
Steven White Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 547	I doubt it's worth getting that technical Chris... Even the Varicam has only frame rates between 1 and 60 in integer steps. If you want truly continuously variable, you have to consider an analog crank I guess. -Steve

November 4th, 2005, 08:06 PM	#80
Daniel Broadway Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Alabama Posts: 165	Has anyone else noticed that this camera seems to exhibit FAARRR less MPEG artifacting than the Sony? I mean, how is this possible? Is it because the image is being compressed as a progressive image, and not interlaced? If you shoot in CF25 on the Z1U, does it produce less artifacting than in 60i?

November 4th, 2005, 10:36 PM	#81
Hse Kha Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: New England Posts: 195	I know that progessive frames like up a lot less storage (for the same quality) than interlaced frames. Each interlaced frame is really two frames in one (fields). So for the same bit rates, progressive "frames" are much less artifact free then interlaced "fields". Remember Kakus clips (except one) are also 24fps and not even 30fps, and so there is even more allocated data for each frame. Personally I think that unless there is a lot of movement, at 24fps there will hardly be any noticable MPEG-2 baddies...

November 4th, 2005, 10:37 PM	#82
Hse Kha Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: New England Posts: 195	<<If you shoot in CF25 on the Z1U, does it produce less artifacting than in 60i?>> For sure.