Aspect HD

David Newman · October 10th, 2003, 09:42 AM

Back on the original thread.

Charlie White for Digital Media Net resently completed an online review of Aspect HD.

http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/c...thd_review.htm

It is a nice review of Aspect HD although he is a little hard on the camera itself (maybe unfairly.) Tell me what you think.

Raymond Krystof · October 10th, 2003, 01:42 PM

David,

I agree with you on both counts.

I’m already sold on Aspect HD. I’m only waiting for my “need” to catch up with my finances before I place an order.

As for Charlie White’s references to the HD1/HD10. I view those comments as the proverbial ……”Is the glass half empty or half full”. Any comments that compare a $2400 consumer camera to a $75,000 + professional camera are …… (IMO) Duh! The fact is that I find it something of a compliment to even begin to compare such cameras. I think it was Paul Mogg who did a somewhat controlled comparison between such camera’s for the purpose of seeing just where the HD1/HD10 did fall into the mix. This I felt had merit and was objective. I think Pauls opinion as is mine is that the HD1/HD10 constitute a lot of bang for the buck.

Cheers!

Ken Hodson · October 10th, 2003, 01:51 PM

In the review he states "For example, in some of the test shots I saw, the camera pans across some trees, and the shaky/shimmering moiré effect made the shots almost painful to watch. So if you're looking to show off with a camcorder like this, stay away from high contrast scenes and lots of moving detail"

Is this fair assesment? Could someone experienced with this camera explain what they would do to avoid this problem?
Ken

Darren Kelly · October 10th, 2003, 01:59 PM

ANy camera - I mean ANY CAMERA is capable of what Charlie described and others a chuddering.

It occurs when you use too slow a shutter speed for the scene you are shooting.

Most people recommend locking the shutter speed on this camera when shooting an action scene.

We will be dealing with this in the JumpStart Guide to HDV aquisition and production. How to avoid it, when to use a slow shutter speed, etc.

I also did a controlled comparison of a Cinealta vs HD1 vs HD10U and you can read a complete review of it by looking through the threads. Safe to say, the bottom line was that the Cinealta is a better camer, but for the bucks, the HD1/HD10U does a great job.

Cheers

Raymond Krystof · October 10th, 2003, 02:13 PM

Darren,

Sorry! It may have been your review I was thinking of. I did indeed think it was very objective. The bottom line is the "bang for the buck". I have seen more professional use of the HD10 as a suppliment to the high end Cinealta etc. But it certinally shouldn't be thought of as replacement.

Ken Hodson · October 10th, 2003, 04:23 PM

When you can't afford a CineAlta it is a replacement ;>)
Ken

Steve Mullen · October 10th, 2003, 05:56 PM

It sounds like he didn't shoot the HD video so who knows how it was shot. Frankly, I think if he didn't shoot it -- and if he didn't know HOW to shoot it -- he should not have commented on the HD10's quality. That's just bad reviewing.

Sounds like the laptop didn't have letterboxed NTSC output. It's not HD, but it helps.

David might want to comment how much resolution is available "inside" Premiere. The displayed Premiere window is typically about 384x216. Is Wavelet decompressed to this size? Is it decompressed to 1280x720 and then scaled to the RGB window?

What rez is the "overlay" that feeds the Matrox board?

The point is that if Wavelet is decompressed to 1280x720 and is available within Premiere, some PCI card might be able to grab the image and output as YPbPr in HD.

Darren Kelly · October 11th, 2003, 10:45 AM

Charlie didn't shoot it I know for a fact. JVC did not have a loaner available, so he got a tape that someone else shot and provided on a DVHS machine.

I guess he thought that was OK to comment.

David Newman · October 11th, 2003, 11:47 AM

Steve,

Aspect HD certainly has clever solutions to get to its performance level. Some of which does reduce the data rate load on the system (although not as low as your window size would suggest -- plus I run my display much bigger than that.) For competitive reasons we don't discuss the details on how CineForm achieves what it does.

Full resolution HD over PCI is impractical (the standard PCI bus in PCs is too slow.) However the AGP bus is plently fast enough for 720p30 (it is a little loaded with 1080i30 or 720p60.) However, I haven't seen an AGP video card that has YPrPb outputs and supporting overlay trick Maxtrox supports (but I haven't looked much.) The Maxtrox output via DVI does produce a nice HD picture -- so if your HD monitor uses DVI that should work fine.

Steve Mullen · October 11th, 2003, 12:41 PM

<<<-- I haven't seen an AGP video card that has YPrPb outputs and supporting overlay trick Maxtrox supports (but I haven't looked much.) The Maxtrox output via DVI does produce a nice HD picture -- so if your HD monitor uses DVI that should work fine. -->>>

I think you meant to say "nice SD" picture.

The PCI HD cards for the Mac output analog and HD-SDI from an uncompressed HD 1080i60/720p60 FCP Timeline. So it's possible. Of course, they may need fast PCI which may or may not be be present on PCs.

How big can a Premiere window be?

David Newman · October 11th, 2003, 01:09 PM

Most PCs only have 32bit 33MHz PCI. Of course faster PCI is available on PCs, I just don't have one of those on my desktop. :(

Note: I did mean "HD" not "SD". True, the real-time preview is not full HD (although is not SD), yet you can playback full resolution HD CFHD files out to an HD monitor, through any playback tool like MediaPlayer.

It is possible that future versions of Aspect HD will support HD-SDI cards for direct HD playback and export from the timeline (we just don't have that today.)

The Premiere window can be a big as you like. I run mine to fit half (horizontally) my desktop. Around 800x450 on a 1600x1200 display. On a 1280x1024 LCD I tend to use around 640x360. Note: I don't like "dual" editing modes, I prefer the single view, so I can have the high-res image quality. The desktop picture within http://www.cineform.com/products.html is snapshot on my workspace, so you can see how I run my editing environment.

Steve Mullen · October 11th, 2003, 09:50 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by David Newman : Note: I did mean "HD" not "SD". True, the real-time preview is not full HD (although is not SD), yet you can playback full resolution HD CFHD files out to an HD monitor, through any playback tool like MediaPlayer. -->>>

The original poster wanted to see video on an HD monitor WHILE editing in Premiere. So that means using the Matrox overlay feature which only goes out as NTSC.

You can move the Premiere Program monitor to the second or third Matrox monitor at SXGA rez. Then pass the DVI to an HD monitor. Alternately, output through a converter to HD YPbPr and then to an HD monitor.

But this assumes Aspect HD will output 1280x720 to the Premiere Program monitor. Can it?

Steve Mullen · October 11th, 2003, 09:52 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by David Newman : Note: I did mean "HD" not "SD". True, the real-time preview is not full HD (although is not SD), yet you can playback full resolution HD CFHD files out to an HD monitor, through any playback tool like MediaPlayer. -->>>

The original poster wanted to see video on an HD monitor WHILE editing in Premiere. So that means using the Matrox overlay feature which only goes out as NTSC.

OR -- you can move the Premiere Program monitor to the second or third Matrox monitor at SXGA rez. Then pass the DVI to an HD monitor. Alternately, output through a converter to HD YPbPr and then to an HD monitor.

But this assumes Aspect HD will output 1280x720 to the Premiere Program monitor. Can it?

David Newman · October 12th, 2003, 09:48 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Mullen : <<<--
OR -- you can move the Premiere Program monitor to the second or third Matrox monitor at SXGA rez. Then pass the DVI to an HD monitor. Alternately, output through a converter to HD YPbPr and then to an HD monitor.

But this assumes Aspect HD will output 1280x720 to the Premiere Program monitor. Can it? -->>>

Sort-of. We can output the overlay to SXGA as you describe, but because you are running in preview mode for real-time editing, not all the definition will be there. At that resolution the image will be a little softer than the final full quality export. There is enough definition to still look great on a now common place 42" plasma screen. Technically 4 channels of full HD is not possible today, not enough CPU (this why AVID $200k+ systems only do two streams.) We needed to make sure that there was both high enough performance and image quality that a editor could play a work in progress off the timeline for customers; allowing edits on the fly while seeing flawless 30 fps playback. No one else can match this.

Steve Mullen · October 12th, 2003, 04:06 PM

So if I drag the Premiere monitor to it's own Matrox output window and connect an "HD" monitor of some type, I'll see full-motion playback that folks are asking for.

And, while this has higher rez than NTSC it is not true 1280x720. It's softter.

Now about the SXGA overlay. Are you saying the internal Premiere overlay HAS the 1280x720 full-motion, real-time video?

If so, is the problem that Matrox only outputs the overlay via NTSC? Or, can the user send the overlay out one of the RGB/DVI ports as SXGA graphics.

While I'm happy with a letterboxed NTSC output to an ordinary monitor -- I think if I could hook-up my HD projector to the computer and see the Preview monitor in HD I would be even happier. And, for some this is essential.

October 10th, 2003, 09:42 AM	#91
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	Aspect HD review Back on the original thread. Charlie White for Digital Media Net resently completed an online review of Aspect HD. http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/c...thd_review.htm It is a nice review of Aspect HD although he is a little hard on the camera itself (maybe unfairly.) Tell me what you think.

October 10th, 2003, 01:42 PM	#92
Raymond Krystof Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Santa Clarita, California Posts: 97	David, I agree with you on both counts. I’m already sold on Aspect HD. I’m only waiting for my “need” to catch up with my finances before I place an order. As for Charlie White’s references to the HD1/HD10. I view those comments as the proverbial ……”Is the glass half empty or half full”. Any comments that compare a $2400 consumer camera to a $75,000 + professional camera are …… (IMO) Duh! The fact is that I find it something of a compliment to even begin to compare such cameras. I think it was Paul Mogg who did a somewhat controlled comparison between such camera’s for the purpose of seeing just where the HD1/HD10 did fall into the mix. This I felt had merit and was objective. I think Pauls opinion as is mine is that the HD1/HD10 constitute a lot of bang for the buck. Cheers! __________________ Ray

October 10th, 2003, 01:51 PM	#93
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	In the review he states "For example, in some of the test shots I saw, the camera pans across some trees, and the shaky/shimmering moiré effect made the shots almost painful to watch. So if you're looking to show off with a camcorder like this, stay away from high contrast scenes and lots of moving detail" Is this fair assesment? Could someone experienced with this camera explain what they would do to avoid this problem? Ken __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 10th, 2003, 01:59 PM	#94
Darren Kelly Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver Posts: 351	ANy camera - I mean ANY CAMERA is capable of what Charlie described and others a chuddering. It occurs when you use too slow a shutter speed for the scene you are shooting. Most people recommend locking the shutter speed on this camera when shooting an action scene. We will be dealing with this in the JumpStart Guide to HDV aquisition and production. How to avoid it, when to use a slow shutter speed, etc. I also did a controlled comparison of a Cinealta vs HD1 vs HD10U and you can read a complete review of it by looking through the threads. Safe to say, the bottom line was that the Cinealta is a better camer, but for the bucks, the HD1/HD10U does a great job. Cheers __________________ Darren Kelly

October 10th, 2003, 02:13 PM	#95
Raymond Krystof Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Santa Clarita, California Posts: 97	Darren, Sorry! It may have been your review I was thinking of. I did indeed think it was very objective. The bottom line is the "bang for the buck". I have seen more professional use of the HD10 as a suppliment to the high end Cinealta etc. But it certinally shouldn't be thought of as replacement. __________________ Ray

October 10th, 2003, 04:23 PM	#96
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	When you can't afford a CineAlta it is a replacement ;>) Ken __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 10th, 2003, 05:56 PM	#97
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	It sounds like he didn't shoot the HD video so who knows how it was shot. Frankly, I think if he didn't shoot it -- and if he didn't know HOW to shoot it -- he should not have commented on the HD10's quality. That's just bad reviewing. Sounds like the laptop didn't have letterboxed NTSC output. It's not HD, but it helps. David might want to comment how much resolution is available "inside" Premiere. The displayed Premiere window is typically about 384x216. Is Wavelet decompressed to this size? Is it decompressed to 1280x720 and then scaled to the RGB window? What rez is the "overlay" that feeds the Matrox board? The point is that if Wavelet is decompressed to 1280x720 and is available within Premiere, some PCI card might be able to grab the image and output as YPbPr in HD. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

October 11th, 2003, 10:45 AM	#98
Darren Kelly Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver Posts: 351	Charlie didn't shoot it I know for a fact. JVC did not have a loaner available, so he got a tape that someone else shot and provided on a DVHS machine. I guess he thought that was OK to comment. __________________ Darren Kelly

October 11th, 2003, 11:47 AM	#99
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	Steve, Aspect HD certainly has clever solutions to get to its performance level. Some of which does reduce the data rate load on the system (although not as low as your window size would suggest -- plus I run my display much bigger than that.) For competitive reasons we don't discuss the details on how CineForm achieves what it does. Full resolution HD over PCI is impractical (the standard PCI bus in PCs is too slow.) However the AGP bus is plently fast enough for 720p30 (it is a little loaded with 1080i30 or 720p60.) However, I haven't seen an AGP video card that has YPrPb outputs and supporting overlay trick Maxtrox supports (but I haven't looked much.) The Maxtrox output via DVI does produce a nice HD picture -- so if your HD monitor uses DVI that should work fine.

October 11th, 2003, 12:41 PM	#100
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	<<<-- I haven't seen an AGP video card that has YPrPb outputs and supporting overlay trick Maxtrox supports (but I haven't looked much.) The Maxtrox output via DVI does produce a nice HD picture -- so if your HD monitor uses DVI that should work fine. -->>> I think you meant to say "nice SD" picture. The PCI HD cards for the Mac output analog and HD-SDI from an uncompressed HD 1080i60/720p60 FCP Timeline. So it's possible. Of course, they may need fast PCI which may or may not be be present on PCs. How big can a Premiere window be? __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

October 11th, 2003, 01:09 PM	#101
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	Most PCs only have 32bit 33MHz PCI. Of course faster PCI is available on PCs, I just don't have one of those on my desktop. :( Note: I did mean "HD" not "SD". True, the real-time preview is not full HD (although is not SD), yet you can playback full resolution HD CFHD files out to an HD monitor, through any playback tool like MediaPlayer. It is possible that future versions of Aspect HD will support HD-SDI cards for direct HD playback and export from the timeline (we just don't have that today.) The Premiere window can be a big as you like. I run mine to fit half (horizontally) my desktop. Around 800x450 on a 1600x1200 display. On a 1280x1024 LCD I tend to use around 640x360. Note: I don't like "dual" editing modes, I prefer the single view, so I can have the high-res image quality. The desktop picture within http://www.cineform.com/products.html is snapshot on my workspace, so you can see how I run my editing environment.

October 11th, 2003, 09:50 PM	#102
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	<<<-- Originally posted by David Newman : Note: I did mean "HD" not "SD". True, the real-time preview is not full HD (although is not SD), yet you can playback full resolution HD CFHD files out to an HD monitor, through any playback tool like MediaPlayer. -->>> The original poster wanted to see video on an HD monitor WHILE editing in Premiere. So that means using the Matrox overlay feature which only goes out as NTSC. You can move the Premiere Program monitor to the second or third Matrox monitor at SXGA rez. Then pass the DVI to an HD monitor. Alternately, output through a converter to HD YPbPr and then to an HD monitor. But this assumes Aspect HD will output 1280x720 to the Premiere Program monitor. Can it? __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

October 11th, 2003, 09:52 PM	#103
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	<<<-- Originally posted by David Newman : Note: I did mean "HD" not "SD". True, the real-time preview is not full HD (although is not SD), yet you can playback full resolution HD CFHD files out to an HD monitor, through any playback tool like MediaPlayer. -->>> The original poster wanted to see video on an HD monitor WHILE editing in Premiere. So that means using the Matrox overlay feature which only goes out as NTSC. OR -- you can move the Premiere Program monitor to the second or third Matrox monitor at SXGA rez. Then pass the DVI to an HD monitor. Alternately, output through a converter to HD YPbPr and then to an HD monitor. But this assumes Aspect HD will output 1280x720 to the Premiere Program monitor. Can it? __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

October 12th, 2003, 09:48 AM	#104
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Mullen : <<<-- OR -- you can move the Premiere Program monitor to the second or third Matrox monitor at SXGA rez. Then pass the DVI to an HD monitor. Alternately, output through a converter to HD YPbPr and then to an HD monitor. But this assumes Aspect HD will output 1280x720 to the Premiere Program monitor. Can it? -->>> Sort-of. We can output the overlay to SXGA as you describe, but because you are running in preview mode for real-time editing, not all the definition will be there. At that resolution the image will be a little softer than the final full quality export. There is enough definition to still look great on a now common place 42" plasma screen. Technically 4 channels of full HD is not possible today, not enough CPU (this why AVID $200k+ systems only do two streams.) We needed to make sure that there was both high enough performance and image quality that a editor could play a work in progress off the timeline for customers; allowing edits on the fly while seeing flawless 30 fps playback. No one else can match this.

October 12th, 2003, 04:06 PM	#105
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	So if I drag the Premiere monitor to it's own Matrox output window and connect an "HD" monitor of some type, I'll see full-motion playback that folks are asking for. And, while this has higher rez than NTSC it is not true 1280x720. It's softter. Now about the SXGA overlay. Are you saying the internal Premiere overlay HAS the 1280x720 full-motion, real-time video? If so, is the problem that Matrox only outputs the overlay via NTSC? Or, can the user send the overlay out one of the RGB/DVI ports as SXGA graphics. While I'm happy with a letterboxed NTSC output to an ordinary monitor -- I think if I could hook-up my HD projector to the computer and see the Preview monitor in HD I would be even happier. And, for some this is essential. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c