A clue to 24F for Steve Mullen?

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Christopher Glaeser

Is there nothing wrong with the implication that Steve is a geek?

Oh, the irony of trying to derail a technical discussion with distracting comments like this. Let's see if we can find a more productive and less distracting post in the archives. Ah yes, a post regarding the color of the XL H1.

Good to know when making a purchasing decision. Nothing unproductive there. :)

Best,
Christopher

I'm fine with "geek!"

I find several things wrong with the "use your eyes" line of reasoning:

1) It's totally subjective in the worst possible way. Person A claims they see noise. Person B claims they don't. Such postings are nearly useless because we have no reason to trust either A or B. Moreover, we have no idea of the real conditions each were shooting in. Or, how they had their cameras setup. (How many of these posts conatin ALL the necessary information?) Worse, if B owns the camcorder, I know Cognitive Dissonance pushes him to "not see" problems in his new purchase. And, if person A owns something else, then we have a double set of motivations at work.

2) Because of the above problems, until the internet, folks read reviews by professional reviewers. These are people who have eyes that can be trusted. They are also people who know how to test cameras under equal conditions. And, they have always been people who had a very deep knowedge of technology. And, that's because knowing technology allows a pro reviewer to get past the tricks used by all manufacturers to get good "numbers." (Using pixel-shift with format sub-sampling CCDs to get good static resolution numbers is a prime example. Once objects move, as is most often the case with video, as Adams' tests show, real-world resolution drops.) Or, more relevant to this discussion, create instant WOW. Examples of these include, super brite TV pictures, bass boom, treble sizzle, no noise (only later does one realize there is no chrma detail), super warm color. There are hundreds of ways to trick buyers.

3) Until recently, no magazine would even trust these folks eyes. So the equipment was sent to an independent lab for testing. Here standardized tests were run of equipment, and information reported to the reviewer to write up. This process let a reader know with confidence how each piece of equipment performed -- and using comparative charts -- how it performed compared to other equipment. For example, recent TESTING of the h950 showed it's audio recording to be equal to a Nagra. With these tests, the internert rumor that one HAS to use double-system sound can be put to rest.

4) Unfortunately, IMHO too much of what gets posted -- except for the geek stuff -- is nothing but either rumors ("I heard ...) or subjective comments ("I saw ...) -- that starts rumors. Magazines pay good money to reviwers. They have to worry about "what if my reviewer is wrong?" So they chose very, very carefully.

5) But what's really appalling, is that certain companies -- are now promoting "use your eyes" as a way of avoiding describing their technology. They give a range of "reasons" to avoiding talking about their technology and giving numbers, but we know two things:

a) when these same companies had great technology, they were the first to reveal it. They published Handbooks and White Papers going into their "better" technology. They were not the least the least bit shy about company "secrets."

b) when companies have, by the press, been pushed to reveal their technology -- we find they did, in fact, have reasons to be concerned. And, this is not OT to the H1. Anyone with an understanding of the deinterlacing technology perhaps used by Canon -- can TEST my speculation and, even more important, they know extactly how/when 24F will not look as good as 24p.



Chris says he likes posts about "how to use the gear and what we're creating with it." Certainly nothing wrong with that, but if you check, these types of posts are in the minority. If these were the only posts published, these groups would be dead. Clearly, what he wants posted and what folks want to read about are at odds. The posts on technology have been read far more than such "positive" posts. Just look at the numbers. Almost 10,000 hits on posts releated to how the HVX200 worked.

And, there's a reason. Deep down most folks correctly don't trust the eyes of other folks who post. And, they are not sure that in a few minutes at a store they will make the right decision. Other's don't even live near a store. And, they sure don't trust Marketing from anyone.

All these folks are in need of objective information from folks who deeply understand the technology. That's why magazines like Road & Track have readers. And, why they do reviews. And, why they hire technology experts to do the reviews.

Readers understand that it is the technology geeks who are trying to keep things honest and objective. And, the reason geeks can do this is because we understand the technology. True, we can't change it -- in the CURRENT generation. But we can reveal it. And, we can reveal what DIFFERENCE that technology makes to the shooter. Sometimes that helps him or her avoid problems. Sometimes that helps someone avoid buying something. And, although geeks often do "speculate" we try to make our speculations TESTABLE by others. That's how science works.

If you read how the top shooters approach a project, they combine both science and art. A deeper understanding of one's tools is never is distracting to a true craftsman.

[John Cordell]

Another point, hopefully on topic: for an extra $500, H1 owners have the option of shooting 50i instead of 24f. If an understanding of 24f yields info that makes it clear that shooting 50i and converting to progressive in post is a better choice for filmout, some users might go that route.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Chris says he likes posts about "how to use the gear and what we're creating with it" but if you check, these types of posts are in the minority. If these were the only posts published, these groups would be dead.

No, they wouldn't be dead. They would be a lot quieter. And that just might happen. As is clearly indicated by the complete lack of any banner ads on this board, I don't make a living off this site and I'm not depending on it for any financial gain (happily it covers its own costs thanks to the generous support of a select handful of equipment dealers). I could just as easily pull the plug on this thing if I thought it was veering too far off the course I originally intended for it. As for the pixel counters, these endless measurebatory threads can be found on any of a wide variety of cookie-cutter message boards that seem to thrive on hype, controversy and hyperbolic sensationalism. One can find that stuff anywhere; DV Info Net isn't needed for that. I would much rather have those posts that are in the minority. And the quality of our content would actually benefit from having *less* traffic, not more. Anyone who knows me knows also that this site has always been about the quality, not quantity of discussions we have here.

Clearly, what he wants posted and what folks want to read about are at odds.

Folks are free to go elsewhere to read whatever they wish... and more importantly, folks can excersize their freedom of speech and start their own message board / blog / site / whatever, and run it however they see fit. Meanwhile, I'll continue to liberally shape the type of content that I prefer to see here. On those occassions where we're "at odds," believe me it never lasts very long. With regard to those occassional decisions I've made as to how I shape it, the phenomenal growth rate this site has experienced in recent years obviously supports my claim that I know what I'm doing. I'm not interested in attracting a large audience here... I'm interested in attracting only a certain type of person seeking a different kind of internet experience. Those who choose to participate here exclusively know exactly what I'm talking about.

The posts on technology have been read far more than such "positive" posts. Just look at the numbers. Almost 10,000 hits on posts releated to how the HVX200 worked.

Incorrect. If you're referring to the two HVX threads I closed, one by you with 4700 views and one by Jaser Stockert with 5100 views, then you're sadly mistaken. And now I'll show you the numbers which prove it.

If you look at the HVX forum and sort its order by the popularity of threads (their total "hits" as represented by the Views column), you'll clearly see that our most popular threads have nothing at all to do with counting pixels. The single most popular HVX thread has more than 15,000 views (thanks again to Kaku Ito!) and there are at least a dozen others that received more hits than Jaser Stockert's pixel count thread. See for yourself:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisp...esc&sort=views

Point being, that just because Steve Mullen says something, does not necessarily make it so. The board statistics don't lie, and they clearly show that the posts on technology have NOT been read "far more than such positive posts." In fact, they show quite the opposite.

From what are these posts distracting? Actual real-world owner experiences, not to mention practical information that a reader can take away and put to use in their own particular setting. That is what is truly helpful to this particular community, as opposed to counting pixels.

[John Cordell]

That's too bad, I just started using this board and was really liking it. What a drag this thread is.

Chris, up until you stated your dislike for the kind of technical discussion this thread is about, I would have been *certain* that this was exactly the kind discussion this board was for. Maybe you should write up some guidelines or criteria that would make it clear what you want on this 'digital video information network' you've created. I'd be fine abiding by those guidelines and using the board for whatever remaining sections interest me.

Or maybe there are guidelines already somewhere. I haven't look for them. I'll do that now.

[Barry Goyette]

Boy, I can't think of any more productive discussions than the one you're having here, so since I haven't weighed in around here in awhile, I thought that I might as well stick my big foot in now...

It's hard to imagine the harm that discussions of a geek nature, such as those given birth by Steve's testing, could cause to a forum like dvinfo. In steve's mind he's providing information that wouldn't be out there (and certainly in the case of the HVX resolution...it is really quite amazing that Panasonic simply fessed up once he published his numbers). Now to many of us, we didn't need steve's numbers to prove that the HVX has lower resolution than some other cameras...I mean..I know rezzed up footage when I see it, and most of what I saw looked exactly like something that had come from a lower resolution source. Yet I'm also sure that if I viewed it on my HD set at home...it would look fabulous.

You see I'm smart enough to see for myself, like chris says, and I don't really need the numbers. But I do find the numbers fascinating. I find Steve's mysterious "model" fascinating, partially because I don't understand much of it, but partially because steve has spent the time to understand it himself, and to try to explain it to us. I think there should be room for that, even if he IS on a fools errand. It's only a couple of threads. I realize they are Chris's threads, he pay's for them, but they really seem minor in the scheme of damage that they could cause.

Thank god that we have chris to save us from the 32 page threads over at dvxuser...filled with comments like "yeah.....exactly", and "whatcha talkin bout?Dog...don't be dissin Barry (the other barry) like that!!!!!!!". The problem with forums like that is that they DO waste my time...because it takes so long to get to (or even find) the info...which is what it's all about. (And unfortunately this thread has long since headed into the same territory, and that's a shame.) DvInfo has always been about the "info" to me, and I guess that's why I don't see a problem with steve's posts.

I love all you guys.

Barry

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by John Cordell

Another point, hopefully on topic: for an extra $500, H1 owners have the option of shooting 50i instead of 24f. If an understanding of 24f yields info that makes it clear that shooting 50i and converting to progressive in post is a better choice for filmout, some users might go that route.

You are right! You maybe remember that I posted the words great deinterlacer for "mobil device." I did that because there are several techniques that are used by TV stations. Ternnex makes a very expensive box.

Now a computer, given enough speed and time, can compute like one of these. So, you are right, shooting 50i or 60i and then using advanced software could yield better results than 24F. Now I'm not sure I would want do that for all my source files, but you remind us that there are options.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Barry Goyette

I think there should be room for that, even if he IS on a fools errand. It's only a couple of threads.

I'm comfortable with that assessment. What I take exception to, however, is the altogether incorrect presumption that this sort of thing is what our readers find to be most popular over everything else. I've easily disproved that (using numbers, above), but can't help wondering if such inaccurate statements are intentionally misleading. That's where the damage comes from, and also in the hype attached to such over the top levels of false self-importance. Any heavy-handed "anti-marketing" proclamation is itself ultimately nothing more than marketing of its own, only more distasteful. That's tabloid journalism. Sure, it sells, but I want no part of it, or the audience who buys into it.

Thank god that we have chris to save us from the 32 page threads over at dvxuser

Easy does it, Barry! You'll upset the treaty. Those 32 page threads happen because DVX User defaults to ten replies per page, whereas ours are fifteen. If it weren't for Canadian customs, I would have sent Jarred a bottle of Stoli the day DVX User's total post count surpassed ours (shortly before he moved to L.A.), because it put DV Info Net back where I wanted it, in the relatively discreet "oh yeah, that other board" category. This way we're less of a target. And I couldn't easily say "it's all about quality, not quantity" if we had the highest total post count.

unfortunately this thread has long since headed into the same territory, and that's a shame

Not to worry; like a tired, drawn out and overplayed 1080i vs 720p thread, I'll put it out of its misery if the demand is popular enough.

Originally Posted by John Cordell

Or maybe there are guidelines already somewhere.

Common sense usually prevails, that is until someone steps in with an agenda. Nevertheless we're probably due for some clarifications. It's a group effort which takes a little time, but we'll make it happen. Thanks,

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

I'm comfortable with that assessment. What I take exception to, however, is the altogether incorrect presumption that this sort of thing is what our readers find to be most popular over everything else.

While I'm happy to hear you are now "comfortable" with geek topics -- I'm surprised by you saying "the altogether incorrect presumption that this sort of thing is what our readers find to be most popular over everything else."

"Altogether incorrect presumption?" You had a way to access a different set of numbers -- while I didn't think it was worth going back farther than the first post we have been talking about. I started on page 1 and went back to my "CCD" post on page 4. Of all the posts to this point, which are the most current, mine had 4,700 hits and the "hvx200 pixel count revealed" thread had 5,100 hits. Add those two geek threads and you get nearly 10,000 hits. Even by themselves, each has the most hits of any thread in the most current 4 pages.

Simply put, we came to different conclusions because we each used a different way of counting. Nevertheless, I'm sorry if my count offended you.

[John Cordell]

Disclaimer: This post isn't about 24f, it's about the discussion about whether this thread is useful or appropriate. There is no technical content in this post, so feel free to skip it.

I am truly baffled that anyone has a problem with a technical discussion of how 24f works. After all, progressive vs. interlace is a key issue for these camcorders being pressed into service for filmmaking.

A leading camera (H1) is out and has interlaced CCDs but has a "tastes just like progressive" mode. The manufacturer won't say how they do it. The camera has some interesting features (HD-SHI out, timecode sync) that are unique to it. There are people still deciding which camera to buy. I would think knowing exactly what 24f is might be salient to their $9000 purchase decision. Some might be spending many times that amount producing a feature and deciding between shooting 50i or 24f. What people choose to use as a purchase criteria is up to them.

I think clamping down on mis-information, highly partisan information, needlessly repetitive information and off-topic or innappropriate information is exactly what the moderator should be doing. But deprecating a perfectly valid and quite useful discussion doesn't make sense to me. There are hundreds of threads on this board that aren't of interest to me, but I don't go posting into them pointing out what a 'distraction' they are because I presume they are valuable to those who are posting and reading them.

The actual subject of this thread -- how 24f works -- is very interesting to me, I'm looking forward to more technical info on that subject.

I don't need to have the last word in this discussion, but perhaps closing this thread and allowing other technically-oriented 24f threads to organically arise would make sense? I assume that if more info surfaces, starting such a thread would be considered fair game.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by John Cordell

I don't need to have the last word in this discussion, but perhaps closing this thread and allowing other technically-oriented 24f threads to organically arise would make sense?

Yes indeed, it makes perfect sense. Unless (or hopefully, until) Canon officially confirms or denies how Frame mode works on the H1, this is all sheer speculation anyway. Just like everybody else, I'm hoping Canon will come forward and choose to reveal exactly what Frame mode is, because then we'll have graduated from speculation to bona fide information.

Meanwhile, if anyone else has a 24F clue for Steve Mullen, please do me a huge favor and send it to him directly. Like a couple of other recent threads of this nature, I'm closing this one because once again a new member whose input I value has suggested that it's a good idea to do so. And I think he's right. Thanks,