XL1S imaging problem/question

Ken Tanaka · May 1st, 2002, 01:38 PM

Ozzie,
That may be the most significant bit of information to help us leverage Canon toward expedient resolution of this matter.

Bill Ravens · May 1st, 2002, 01:46 PM

Ken/Ozzie....

If what Ozzie is saying is right, then there must be a "fix". As I said earlier, my VX1000 has vertical black bars up both sides of each frame. If the PD150 doesn't have any, then, I guess I can assume Sony found a way to eliminate them. (I also assume the PD150 grew out of the VX1000)

AlexOsadzinski · May 1st, 2002, 02:29 PM

I think that there's a ray of hope that this isn't directly related to CCD size, although Pete's posting about 270,000 pixels is very interesting. Boy, this is a confusing area, isn't it?

The black bar problem exists, at least on my camera, in 16:9 mode, too. By eyeballing the Firewire output in both 4:3 and 16:9 modes, I can see that the black bar is there in both cases, although slightly less tall, maybe 1 pixel less, in 16:9. The camera appears to use all of the 720 horizontal pixels in both modes, but it's clearly not using the top or bottom of the CCD(s) in 16:9.

Chris Hurd · May 5th, 2002, 10:21 PM

My reply here functions only to move the thread to the top of the list. Every Monday morning, Canon USA swings through to read the boards, and I wanted this one to be noticed. As I said earlier I am also passing the full contents of this thread along to certain people at CUSA. This has not been forgotten about.

Rob Lohman · May 7th, 2002, 03:56 AM

I am starting to wonder if we are going to hear from Canon about
all of this. It is a little bit too quiet for my taste. Anyone heard
anything yet? Chris?

Chris Hurd · May 7th, 2002, 07:06 AM

Corporations tend to move with the speed of a turtle... ponderous and slow and careful. I'll see what I can find out.

AlexOsadzinski · May 7th, 2002, 01:25 PM

A small piece of additional data: the internally-generated color bars do NOT have the black line problem, i.e. they seem to fill the frame.

Aaron Koolen · May 7th, 2002, 02:48 PM

Because I'm thinking about buying an xl1s, I contacted Canon to get some information about this problem, and got the typical company rhetoric

"In regards to the lines on the Canon XL-1S camera in playback mode, I suspect that this would occur due to a setting not correctly done on the camera.

The Canon XL-1S is an extremely versatile camera, and care must be taken to ensure that the camera is configured properly before you commence shooting."

I doubt it's just a setting, but has anyone managed to get rid of them through different settings? Regardless they shouldn't occur, unless there is a setting called

"Put two pixels of black at the bottom of the image"

Bill Ravens · May 7th, 2002, 03:15 PM

a setting? no way...no how!!

AlexOsadzinski · May 7th, 2002, 03:43 PM

Well, now I feel really stupid. I looked on the camera, and, sure enough, there's a little button on the bottom hidden under a rubber panel marked "mess up the image".

Seriously, I got a similar response when I first called Canon tech support. First, there's no obvious setting that would cause this problem. Second, I tried a lot of things to nail the problem down by process of elimination, per my earlier postings.

I'm quite prepared to discover that there's an INTERNAL setting to fix this. But there doesn't seem to be one that's accessible by the user.

Ozzie Alfonso · May 7th, 2002, 04:37 PM

>>"In regards to the lines on the Canon XL-1S camera in playback mode, ...<<

In "playback mode"? Funny, I can see the lines on an underscanned monitor while we record. I wonder if Canon knows what anyone is talking about?

Regarding the "setting not correctly done in the camera" -- that might be true if Canon is the one who didn't setup the camera correctly. (Notice the ambiguity in the language.) I think that gobbledigook is insulting to the very experienced technicians I've had look at the problem. Their only dissagreement is whether it's due to shoddy blanking set up at the factory (which can be adjusted by Canon), or a simple design flaw (which can't be easily adjusted if at all.)

Canon really has to come clean and deal with this problem. Stop feeding loyal customers this kind of condescending and infuriating baby talk. Canon must know that many of these "loyal customers" are not amateurs but professionals with a wide array of testing and measuring gear at their disposal.

Just to rub it in again -- the SONY PD150 does NOT have this problem.

Ken Tanaka · May 7th, 2002, 11:10 PM

<< Ozzie: "Just to rub it in again -- the SONY PD150 does NOT have this problem." >>

This evening I attended a film presentation sponsored by National Geographic featuring a remarkable young Australian journalist (Michael Davie) who travels the world to tell stories-within-the-stories. He generally uses a Sony PD-150. His footage, often taken under stressful, less-than-ideal conditions looked outstanding. And no blanking problems! <g>

Jerry Bixman · May 8th, 2002, 01:40 PM

I pick this off of another newsgroup, does this answer any of the questions posted, or is it more run around?

"> Using Adobe Premiere I've noticed that when I export single >frames
>of my DV footage (PAL 720x576), there are always two black >bars on
>the left and right sides of the image, about 5 pixels wide each. I
>began to wonder where these empty spaces come from. This is >not
>particularly annoying, but I got really curious about where the >two
>sides of the image data might get lost...

This happens in NTSC because DV captures a square pixel (which is
also what VGA uses). NTSC Television however has a pixel aspect
ratio of 10/11 or about .91. So DV is either 'letter boxed' into the
NTSC frame, or is distorted to fill the frame. The NLE software
software I use (Vegas Video) gives me this option during rendering.

I understand that PAL does not have a square pixel either (59/54 =
1.09). So presumably you would have the same 'problem' only in the
other direction.

Even though it is un-noticeable, I don't like the word 'distortion',
so let Vegas 'letter box' my files and sacrifice a bit of the screen
(which in your case is about 10 pixels)."

Chris Hurd · May 8th, 2002, 02:03 PM

Jerry, can you specify this source? Thanks,

Bill Ravens · May 8th, 2002, 02:05 PM

what you're saying doesn't make sense to me, jerry. If the DV video size is 720x480 in NTSC and the pixel ratio is .91, then the effective image size would be 720 x 436 (=480*.91). That's an effective letterbox that is 480-436=44 pixels....much more than the 10 pixels we are experiencing. What am I missing, here?

I've got VV3 and will try changing the pixel ratio as you have suggested, however, I think a 9% distortion will be noticeable.

May 1st, 2002, 01:38 PM	#76
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	Ozzie, That may be the most significant bit of information to help us leverage Canon toward expedient resolution of this matter. __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

May 5th, 2002, 10:21 PM	#79
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	My reply here functions only to move the thread to the top of the list. Every Monday morning, Canon USA swings through to read the boards, and I wanted this one to be noticed. As I said earlier I am also passing the full contents of this thread along to certain people at CUSA. This has not been forgotten about. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

May 7th, 2002, 03:56 AM	#80
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	I am starting to wonder if we are going to hear from Canon about all of this. It is a little bit too quiet for my taste. Anyone heard anything yet? Chris? __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

May 7th, 2002, 07:06 AM	#81
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Corporations tend to move with the speed of a turtle... ponderous and slow and careful. I'll see what I can find out. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

May 7th, 2002, 04:37 PM	#86
Ozzie Alfonso Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: New York, NY Posts: 355	>>"In regards to the lines on the Canon XL-1S camera in playback mode, ...<< In "playback mode"? Funny, I can see the lines on an underscanned monitor while we record. I wonder if Canon knows what anyone is talking about? Regarding the "setting not correctly done in the camera" -- that might be true if Canon is the one who didn't setup the camera correctly. (Notice the ambiguity in the language.) I think that gobbledigook is insulting to the very experienced technicians I've had look at the problem. Their only dissagreement is whether it's due to shoddy blanking set up at the factory (which can be adjusted by Canon), or a simple design flaw (which can't be easily adjusted if at all.) Canon really has to come clean and deal with this problem. Stop feeding loyal customers this kind of condescending and infuriating baby talk. Canon must know that many of these "loyal customers" are not amateurs but professionals with a wide array of testing and measuring gear at their disposal. Just to rub it in again -- the SONY PD150 does NOT have this problem. __________________ *Ozzie Alfonso* www.ozziealfonso.com

May 1st, 2002, 01:46 PM	#77
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	Ken/Ozzie.... If what Ozzie is saying is right, then there must be a "fix". As I said earlier, my VX1000 has vertical black bars up both sides of each frame. If the PD150 doesn't have any, then, I guess I can assume Sony found a way to eliminate them. (I also assume the PD150 grew out of the VX1000)

May 1st, 2002, 02:29 PM	#78
AlexOsadzinski Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Redwood City, CA Posts: 40	I think that there's a ray of hope that this isn't directly related to CCD size, although Pete's posting about 270,000 pixels is very interesting. Boy, this is a confusing area, isn't it? The black bar problem exists, at least on my camera, in 16:9 mode, too. By eyeballing the Firewire output in both 4:3 and 16:9 modes, I can see that the black bar is there in both cases, although slightly less tall, maybe 1 pixel less, in 16:9. The camera appears to use all of the 720 horizontal pixels in both modes, but it's clearly not using the top or bottom of the CCD(s) in 16:9.

May 7th, 2002, 01:25 PM	#82
AlexOsadzinski Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Redwood City, CA Posts: 40	A small piece of additional data: the internally-generated color bars do NOT have the black line problem, i.e. they seem to fill the frame.

May 7th, 2002, 02:48 PM	#83
Aaron Koolen Trustee Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 1,727	Because I'm thinking about buying an xl1s, I contacted Canon to get some information about this problem, and got the typical company rhetoric "In regards to the lines on the Canon XL-1S camera in playback mode, I suspect that this would occur due to a setting not correctly done on the camera. The Canon XL-1S is an extremely versatile camera, and care must be taken to ensure that the camera is configured properly before you commence shooting." I doubt it's just a setting, but has anyone managed to get rid of them through different settings? Regardless they shouldn't occur, unless there is a setting called "Put two pixels of black at the bottom of the image"

May 7th, 2002, 03:15 PM	#84
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	a setting? no way...no how!!

May 7th, 2002, 03:43 PM	#85
AlexOsadzinski Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Redwood City, CA Posts: 40	Well, now I feel really stupid. I looked on the camera, and, sure enough, there's a little button on the bottom hidden under a rubber panel marked "mess up the image". Seriously, I got a similar response when I first called Canon tech support. First, there's no obvious setting that would cause this problem. Second, I tried a lot of things to nail the problem down by process of elimination, per my earlier postings. I'm quite prepared to discover that there's an INTERNAL setting to fix this. But there doesn't seem to be one that's accessible by the user.

May 7th, 2002, 11:10 PM	#87
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	<< Ozzie: "Just to rub it in again -- the SONY PD150 does NOT have this problem." >> This evening I attended a film presentation sponsored by National Geographic featuring a remarkable young Australian journalist (Michael Davie) who travels the world to tell stories-within-the-stories. He generally uses a Sony PD-150. His footage, often taken under stressful, less-than-ideal conditions looked outstanding. And no blanking problems! <g> __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

May 8th, 2002, 01:40 PM	#88
Jerry Bixman Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Southern Utah Posts: 25	blanking I pick this off of another newsgroup, does this answer any of the questions posted, or is it more run around? "> Using Adobe Premiere I've noticed that when I export single >frames >of my DV footage (PAL 720x576), there are always two black >bars on >the left and right sides of the image, about 5 pixels wide each. I >began to wonder where these empty spaces come from. This is >not >particularly annoying, but I got really curious about where the >two >sides of the image data might get lost... This happens in NTSC because DV captures a square pixel (which is also what VGA uses). NTSC Television however has a pixel aspect ratio of 10/11 or about .91. So DV is either 'letter boxed' into the NTSC frame, or is distorted to fill the frame. The NLE software software I use (Vegas Video) gives me this option during rendering. I understand that PAL does not have a square pixel either (59/54 = 1.09). So presumably you would have the same 'problem' only in the other direction. Even though it is un-noticeable, I don't like the word 'distortion', so let Vegas 'letter box' my files and sacrifice a bit of the screen (which in your case is about 10 pixels)."

May 8th, 2002, 02:03 PM	#89
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Jerry, can you specify this source? Thanks, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

May 8th, 2002, 02:05 PM	#90
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	what you're saying doesn't make sense to me, jerry. If the DV video size is 720x480 in NTSC and the pixel ratio is .91, then the effective image size would be 720 x 436 (=480*.91). That's an effective letterbox that is 480-436=44 pixels....much more than the 10 pixels we are experiencing. What am I missing, here? I've got VV3 and will try changing the pixel ratio as you have suggested, however, I think a 9% distortion will be noticeable.