CineForm and Sony XDCAM EX

Marty Baggen · October 23rd, 2007, 09:14 AM

Thanks for your input Carl... that's the way I interpreted it. This unit seems to offer some very nice solutions. The lens is a welcome change to conventional controls.... and not having to invest in additional interfacing is another plus.

Carl Middleton · October 23rd, 2007, 09:17 AM

Aye, the workflow rocks with that thing from what I hear.

Now, if I can find more paying jobs for the next 3 months, I'll be happy! I really want to be able to bump the Z1 down to a B camera, because that means I've got a *really* spiffy A camera =D

After that, I'll be discussing FCP automation for a job I'll be working waaay too much on. There has got to be a way for some sort of software I own to pull text from a database and crank out a thousand different 30 second commercial spots..... :)

C

David Newman · October 23rd, 2007, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marty Baggen

When using this camera in HQ capture, is there any remaining advantage of utilizing the HDMI interface for transfer to NLE?

HQ mode is still 4:2:0 MPEG compressed. The HD-SDI output will still offer uncompressed 4:2:2 when captured live.

Marty Baggen · October 23rd, 2007, 09:28 AM

Ah yes... the old database-to-commercial spot trick. Hmmm.... you may need some fancy interfacing technology after all !

On your Z1 comment... I'm in the same boat, and I would expect that the EX and Z1 would match up fairly well. Sony cameras have always produced that trademark "cool" color temp very consistently.

Marty Baggen · October 23rd, 2007, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Newman

HQ mode is still 4:2:0 MPEG compressed. The HD-SDI output will still offer uncompressed 4:2:2 when captured live.

Thanks for the confirmation David. This sounds like it could be a nifty studio cam based on the availability of SDI out.

For recorded data, it looks like simple file transfer and conversion is no compromise from any other means given the 1920 x 1080 raster of the native files.

Carl Middleton · October 23rd, 2007, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marty Baggen

Sony cameras have always produced that trademark "cool" color temp very consistently.

The only major mismatch issues I've had between Sonys are matching their 1CCD or 1CMOS to 3CCD... the HC3 and Sony A1 are painful to place next to the Z1. For a wide distribution TV show I was recently working on, the HC3 was supplied to me for a B camera to my Z, and I absotutely detested it. I whined enough, and got upgraded from that POS to an A1, which produced very bright, vivid colors, but very cartoony looking next to the Z1. Bleh. I did the best I could to work with it on set and in post, the producer loved it and the network did too, but I can't bring myself to show any of my video geek friends most of the episodes because of the extremely shoddy cutaways. Oh, how I would have loved the budget to get an FX or something, so the show would have some sort of visual continuity....

C

Marty Baggen · October 23rd, 2007, 02:33 PM

That DOES sound like a tough match, and it reminds me that the EX is a CMOS chip pickup system if I remember correctly.

James Huenergardt · October 24th, 2007, 11:45 AM

David,

Any idea as to when Prospect would support the new XDCam EX HQ format? I just placed an order for the EX. Can't wait to try it out.

Also, Cineform is a GREAT SD workflow option for this camera. A lot of guys are disappointed that the camera does not downconvert like the Z1 does, but with Cineform, it's just a batch convert, and you're done.

Sweet!

Carl Middleton · October 24th, 2007, 12:12 PM

Just a clarification:

The matching issue was 1 chip to 3 chip, whether CCD or CMOS. the 1CMOS actually matched a lot better than the 1CCD, and the V1 footage looks like it would match rather well to the Z1 (3CCD to 3CMOS). The feeling I got was that it made much more vivid colors with the A1 at 1CMOS than the Z1, because the 3CCDs of the Z1 captured much more realistically and the 1CMOS was doing the best it could, and then making everything more vivid to compensate. Looked good in it's own right, just not next to a Z1. I could probably do some work with the picture profiles, but the project I was working on was VERY run and gun, and tinkering was never really an option. (No dailies, on set monitors, etc, just watching tapes back in the cameras later)

The 3CMOS doesn't scare me as far as matching to the Z1. I thought the V1 pulled some beautiful footage that looked very similar to the Z1.

C

Marty Baggen · October 24th, 2007, 12:46 PM

Interesting and useful observations Carl... A far cry from the old days when you could spend an afternoon getting two identical make/model cameras to match.

David Newman · October 24th, 2007, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Huenergardt

Any idea as to when Prospect would support the new XDCam EX HQ format? I just placed an order for the EX. Can't wait to try it out.

Using MXF conversion tool provided it should work today, but we are hoping to bypass that step and convert the captured media directly. So it will work as soon as your camera arrives, and hopeful get even better.

Carl Middleton · October 24th, 2007, 01:01 PM

I'm (somewhat) glad I wasn't around for that. I learned on matching XL1 to XL1S... nice and simple :)

As a younger-generation videographer/filmmaker, I've always wished I had the film based training, as all the terminology and techniques seems to come from there. :) Another example would be 'masking' in photoshop being based off of a physical process for developing film, and how they even kept the red color of the chemical used for the process. I think I've got that correct, anyways. :)

C

John Hewat · October 25th, 2007, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Newman

Using MXF conversion tool provided it should work today, but we are hoping to bypass that step and convert the captured media directly.

I don't really follow this. Does that mean that you plan to have the conversion from MXF (to avi I asume) happen as we drag and drop the files from the SxS card to the Hard Disk?

Does that mean that you encourage us to use your HDLink program instead of the program provided by Sony included with the camera?

Mike McCarthy · October 25th, 2007, 01:00 AM

I believe what David Newman was originally saying is that the Sony tool will allow you to convert MXFs to something usable, and HDLink can convert THAT to Cineform, but in the future, he plans to enable you to convert the new MXFs directly in HDLink, once the new XD format revision is available to test with. The drag and drop thing from SxS would be cool, but don't hold your breath.

James Huenergardt · October 25th, 2007, 08:20 AM

>Using MXF conversion tool provided it should work today, but we are hoping to >bypass that step and convert the captured media directly.

So, am I understanding this correctly that when I copy my files from the SxS card to my hard drive, I then have to convert them to MXF (using the Sony tool) and then convert them again to Cineform? Is that how it works?

If so, I'm hoping Cineform is able to convert the raw files that are captured to my SxS card. That would sure help workflow.

October 25th, 2007, 01:00 AM	#44
Mike McCarthy Major Player Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Northern California Posts: 517	I believe what David Newman was originally saying is that the Sony tool will allow you to convert MXFs to something usable, and HDLink can convert THAT to Cineform, but in the future, he plans to enable you to convert the new MXFs directly in HDLink, once the new XD format revision is available to test with. The drag and drop thing from SxS would be cool, but don't hold your breath. __________________ For more information on these topics, check out my tech website at www.hd4pc.com

October 23rd, 2007, 09:14 AM	#31
Marty Baggen Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: monroe, or Posts: 572	Thanks for your input Carl... that's the way I interpreted it. This unit seems to offer some very nice solutions. The lens is a welcome change to conventional controls.... and not having to invest in additional interfacing is another plus.

October 23rd, 2007, 09:17 AM	#32
Carl Middleton Major Player Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Fernandina Beach, FL Posts: 562	Aye, the workflow rocks with that thing from what I hear. Now, if I can find more paying jobs for the next 3 months, I'll be happy! I really want to be able to bump the Z1 down to a B camera, because that means I've got a really spiffy A camera =D After that, I'll be discussing FCP automation for a job I'll be working waaay too much on. There has got to be a way for some sort of software I own to pull text from a database and crank out a thousand different 30 second commercial spots..... :) C

October 23rd, 2007, 09:28 AM	#34
Marty Baggen Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: monroe, or Posts: 572	Ah yes... the old database-to-commercial spot trick. Hmmm.... you may need some fancy interfacing technology after all ! On your Z1 comment... I'm in the same boat, and I would expect that the EX and Z1 would match up fairly well. Sony cameras have always produced that trademark "cool" color temp very consistently.

October 23rd, 2007, 02:33 PM	#37
Marty Baggen Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: monroe, or Posts: 572	That DOES sound like a tough match, and it reminds me that the EX is a CMOS chip pickup system if I remember correctly.

October 24th, 2007, 11:45 AM	#38
James Huenergardt Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Chehalis, WA Posts: 513	David, Any idea as to when Prospect would support the new XDCam EX HQ format? I just placed an order for the EX. Can't wait to try it out. Also, Cineform is a GREAT SD workflow option for this camera. A lot of guys are disappointed that the camera does not downconvert like the Z1 does, but with Cineform, it's just a batch convert, and you're done. Sweet!

October 24th, 2007, 12:12 PM	#39
Carl Middleton Major Player Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Fernandina Beach, FL Posts: 562	Just a clarification: The matching issue was 1 chip to 3 chip, whether CCD or CMOS. the 1CMOS actually matched a lot better than the 1CCD, and the V1 footage looks like it would match rather well to the Z1 (3CCD to 3CMOS). The feeling I got was that it made much more vivid colors with the A1 at 1CMOS than the Z1, because the 3CCDs of the Z1 captured much more realistically and the 1CMOS was doing the best it could, and then making everything more vivid to compensate. Looked good in it's own right, just not next to a Z1. I could probably do some work with the picture profiles, but the project I was working on was VERY run and gun, and tinkering was never really an option. (No dailies, on set monitors, etc, just watching tapes back in the cameras later) The 3CMOS doesn't scare me as far as matching to the Z1. I thought the V1 pulled some beautiful footage that looked very similar to the Z1. C

October 24th, 2007, 12:46 PM	#40
Marty Baggen Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: monroe, or Posts: 572	Interesting and useful observations Carl... A far cry from the old days when you could spend an afternoon getting two identical make/model cameras to match.

October 24th, 2007, 01:01 PM	#42
Carl Middleton Major Player Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Fernandina Beach, FL Posts: 562	I'm (somewhat) glad I wasn't around for that. I learned on matching XL1 to XL1S... nice and simple :) As a younger-generation videographer/filmmaker, I've always wished I had the film based training, as all the terminology and techniques seems to come from there. :) Another example would be 'masking' in photoshop being based off of a physical process for developing film, and how they even kept the red color of the chemical used for the process. I think I've got that correct, anyways. :) C

October 25th, 2007, 08:20 AM	#45
James Huenergardt Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Chehalis, WA Posts: 513	>Using MXF conversion tool provided it should work today, but we are hoping to >bypass that step and convert the captured media directly. So, am I understanding this correctly that when I copy my files from the SxS card to my hard drive, I then have to convert them to MXF (using the Sony tool) and then convert them again to Cineform? Is that how it works? If so, I'm hoping Cineform is able to convert the raw files that are captured to my SxS card. That would sure help workflow.