nano @ 24pn?

[Bob Griffiths]

My next shoot looks like it might end up being spec'd at 24pn shooting with a Pany AJ-HPX2700 P2 VariCam. I've been waiting for my next shoot to confirm to buy the nanoFlash... but this might be a curveball. Can the nano do 24pn? If not, is it on the update horizon?

Thanks!

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Bob,

I am assuming that you want to record 720pn24

(I do not know the best order to say this: 720p 24 frames per second, no extra duplicated frames included.)

Not at this time. We currently have Pulldown removal for 1080p24, but not for 720p.

This is not due to any technical reason.

One of the dilemmas that we have is enabling features or modes that cannot be edited in the current popular Non-Linear Editors.

As we understand it, at this time, Final Cut Pro, does not support 720p24 (without the extra duplicated frames), in the XDCam 4:2:2 50 Mbps CBR codec.

Frankly, we are not certain about other editors at this time.

We want to be careful not to offer modes that cannot be edited, as this could be a potential problem for our customers. We want to avoid the situation where one records footage only to find that it can not be edited.

Just this morning, Mike Schell and I were discussing an "Editor to be Used" menu item.
Then, if one selects Final Cut Pro, we could restrict the menu choices to the modes supported by Final Cut Pro.

Then one could choose Avid, Vegas, Edius, Premiere Pro, etc. and we would adjust the menu options accordingly.

[Alister Chapman]

Hi Dan.

An "editor to be used" menu is a brilliant idea. There should be an "any" option for users that want full access to all options, but locking out modes that would not be supported is an excellent idea. Now I know why you never seem to sleep, your too busy coming up with great ideas. keep em coming!

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Alister,

Thanks!

Mike likes this idea also.

We will definitely have an "any" or "unrestricted" option.



We are also working on having "Custom Profiles or Setups".

In this case, we will offer preconfigured setups or profiles, for the nanoFlash and Flash XDR.

Of course, we want our users to be able to create these setups or profiles, so that they can be truly customized for their individual situations.

When this is done, one will be able to select one of their custom setups and instantly configure all of the menu settings for their nanoFlash or Flash XDR for the task at hand.

Switching to another setup, or cloning one setup to other units will be easy and one can be assured that the setup is complete.

Other advanced features will be included so that one can specify which features/modes/settings/menu items, in a custom setup, can be freely changed, versus ones that can not be changed without special steps, or even passwords.



Also, we will be adding features, in a custom setup, so that certain user selectable menu items may be locked out. The goal is to have confidence that once a custom setup has been selected, and unintentional, destructive menu changes can be locked out.

Of course, we will need levels of lockout so that intentional changes can be made, with appropriate precautions, cautions, or levels of permission.

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

Dear Alister,

Thanks!

Mike likes this idea also.

We will definitely have an "any" or "unrestricted" option.



We are also working on having "Custom Profiles or Setups".

In this case, we will offer preconfigured setups or profiles, for the nanoFlash and Flash XDR.

Of course, we want our users to be able to create these setups or profiles, so that they can be truly customized for their individual situations.

When this is done, one will be able to select one of their custom setups and instantly configure all of the menu settings for their nanoFlash or Flash XDR for the task at hand.

Switching to another setup, or cloning one setup to other units will be easy and one can be assured that the setup is complete.

Other advanced features will be included so that one can specify which features/modes/settings/menu items, in a custom setup, can be freely changed, versus ones that can not be changed without special steps, or even passwords.



Also, we will be adding features, in a custom setup, so that certain user selectable menu items may be locked out. The goal is to have confidence that once a custom setup has been selected, and unintentional, destructive menu changes can be locked out.

Of course, we will need levels of lockout so that intentional changes can be made, with appropriate precautions, cautions, or levels of permission.

...I think this is a great idea. This reminds me of the custom presets for the Canon XL H1, which allows you to set what kind of visual look you want, then save the settings to an SD card. These saved settings can be shared with other users.

[Steve Brown]

Dan,

I love the idea of the "Editor to be used" option... makes the system slightly more idiot resistant.

IRT Bob's original question though... don't the new P2 Varicams allow 24p over 1080i as the HDX900 does? In that case, the pulldown removal should work, eh? I don't think Bob wrote that he would be shooting in 720. (FYI, I did notice that Panasonic says the P2 Varicam outputs "24psf when in 1080 mode".)

Of course, 1080 on the Panasonic cameras is always really 1080p, since the imager produces two identical frames (no temporal shift) when recording in the 1080i mode.

That brings me to another point regarding Panasonic cameras and progressive output. I tried using the "psf in" option on the nano with my HDX900 and found some issues. At certain frame rates, using that option causes some ugly artifacts. Those artifacts never appear when using the nano with "psf in" unchecked. I believe the answer is because the Panasonic never really outputs a true interlaced image (see explanation above).

[Aaron Newsome]

The editor to be used idea is the most brilliant idea I've seen yet.

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Steve,

1. If one provides us with 1080p24 with extra frames, then we can do Pulldown Removal.

2. There is no such thing, as far as I know, as PSF when working with 720p. As such, for 720P is it inappropriate to set the PSF In checkbox.And we will ignore it if it is checked.

3. One should only check our "PSF In" checkbox, if one is actually sending us PSF (Progressive Segemented Frame).

4. If one does set the "PSF In" and the footage is not PSF, then we will create artifacts.

5. The PSF In checkbox does not need to be set if one is sending us 1080p24, as we detect this automatically and set the option internally as an aid to our users.

Please note: If one shots 108op30, then the user must set the PSF In checkbox appropriately.


If on set, if in doubt, run a test. One should see interlace artifacts on playback and the footage will just look wrong if the PSF In Checkbox is set inappropriately.


PSF footage is true progressive footage which is transmitted, say over HD-SDI, in two fields in one frame, one field being the odd lines, one the even lines. Thus, true progressive footage is transmitted in a psuedo interlaced format.

If we detect PSF, or if the user sets the PSF In checkbox, then we put the odd and even scan lines back together, to recreate the true progressive footage, just as it was originally, so we can record it properly.

I hope everyone understands that we did not create this dilemma. We are just trying to work with it. It would have been wonderful if there was a flag in the HD-SDI signal to tell us that the footage is in PSF format. Or it would be wonderful if we found that such a flag already exists.

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

Dear Steve,

1. If one provides us with 1080p24 with extra frames, then we can do Pulldown Removal.

2. There is no such thing, as far as I know, as PSF when working with 720p. As such, for 720P is it inappropriate to set the PSF In checkbox.And we will ignore it if it is checked.

3. One should only check our "PSF In" checkbox, if one is actually sending us PSF (Progressive Segemented Frame).

4. If one does set the "PSF In" and the footage is not PSF, then we will create artifacts.

5. The PSF In checkbox does not need to be set if one is sending us 1080p24, as we detect this automatically and set the option internally as an aid to our users.

Please note: If one shots 108op30, then the user must set the PSF In checkbox appropriately.


If on set, if in doubt, run a test. One should see interlace artifacts on playback and the footage will just look wrong if the PSF In Checkbox is set inappropriately.


PSF footage is true progressive footage which is transmitted, say over HD-SDI, in two fields in one frame, one field being the odd lines, one the even lines. Thus, true progressive footage is transmitted in a psuedo interlaced format.

If we detect PSF, or if the user sets the PSF In checkbox, then we put the odd and even scan lines back together, to recreate the true progressive footage, just as it was originally, so we can record it properly.

I hope everyone understands that we did not create this dilemma. We are just trying to work with it. It would have been wonderful if there was a flag in the HD-SDI signal to tell us that the footage is in PSF format. Or it would be wonderful if we found that such a flag already exists.

....Hi Dan: I find this stuff slightly nebulous, but I think I'm getting a clearer understanding from your explanations. I am aware my 24 F output from my XL H1 is *NOT* being recognized in the HD-SDI 1080i stream being recorded in my XDR. Correct me if I am wrong, but there is a signal flag embedded within the HD 1080i video signal which the XDR and Nano (And other editing apps) can read, which tells the application to discard the extra frames until only 24 frames per second remain. I've been checking my recorded XDR files in FCP 7.0 and in Avid Media Composer, and these apps both indicate my clips to be 1080 i @ 59.94 Hz ! This is a *Big* problem for our production, as we must have 24 F and timelapse feature. You mentioned CD had a fix for this in another thread, so I am hoping the October 9th update will contain both the Canon 24 F fix and timelapse. 24 F is fundamental for us. Our production runs on the Internet, so I'm sure you understand how 24 progressive frames is a lot less information to push downstream than 60 interlaced frames per second.

[Bob Griffiths]

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

I am assuming that you want to record 720pn24

Truth is, I'm not sure... I'm advocating for 1080 but it's too soon to tell. According to the specs, the HPX-2700 records both 720/24pn and 1080/24pn, i.e., no duplicate frames... pure 24p... not 23.98.

From the AJ-HPX2700 Pany spec sheet:
• Offers choice of progressive/interlace HD video formats including 720 23.98p/24.00p/25p/29.97p / 50p / 59.94p, as well as 1080 23.98p/24.00p/25p/29.97p / 50i / 59.94i
• Variable frames (1 to 60fps) and 1080 23.98/24psf HD-SDI output (when in 1080 mode)

So back to the original question: Can the nanoFlash record this "native" 1080/24pn signal? If so, Steve seems to indicate that the psf box should be unchecked. Is that the group grok? Also, with this native 24p recording without "duplicate frames", will the CF cards in the nano realize the 20% storage gain Pany claims for the P@ media?

BTW, love the "editor to be used" and "profiles" ideas.

Thanks all!

[Dan Keaton]

Originally Posted by Mark Job

....Hi Dan: I find this stuff slightly nebulous, but I think I'm getting a clearer understanding from your explanations.

I am aware my 24 F output from my XL H1 is *NOT* being recognized in the HD-SDI 1080i stream being recorded in my XDR. Correct me if I am wrong, but there is a signal flag embedded within the HD 1080i video signal which the XDR and Nano (And other editing apps) can read, which tells the application to discard the extra frames until only 24 frames per second remain.

I've been checking my recorded XDR files in FCP 7.0 and in Avid Media Composer, and these apps both indicate my clips to be 1080 i @ 59.94 Hz !

This is a *Big* problem for our production, as we must have 24 F and timelapse feature. You mentioned CD had a fix for this in another thread, so I am hoping the October 9th update will contain both the Canon 24 F fix and timelapse.

24 F is fundamental for us. Our production runs on the Internet, so I'm sure you understand how 24 progressive frames is a lot less information to push downstream than 60 interlaced frames per second.

Dear Mark,

Yes, you need the Pulldown Removal code in our next firmware release to accomplish the goal of just recording pure 1080p24 (actually 1080p23.976).

I am not 100% certain if your 24F footage from Canon has a flag in each duplicated frame or not. Our Pulldown Removal code analyzes each frame to determine if it is a duplicate or not, we do not rely on a "Flag".

Yes, your 24F footage is 24P (actually 23.976) over 60 (actually 59.94). In other words, the HD-SDI output has duplicated frames. This is the same as many cameras, as not all monitors can handle 24p with only 24 frames.

[Dan Keaton]

Originally Posted by Bob Griffiths

So back to the original question: Can the nanoFlash record this "native" 1080/24pn signal?

Bob, yes, with the current release in the nanoFlash, and in the soon to be release firmware for the Flash XDR, you can record your 1080/24pn signal, just check the Pulldown Removal checkbox and run a test.

But, please be aware that I feel that while your camera records only the real frames, the output over HD-SDI is most likely 24 over 60, in other words, contains the duplicated frames. Then our Pulldown Removal feature is used, when the Pulldown Removal box is checked to remove these duplicated frames before we record anything.

If so, Steve seems to indicate that the psf box should be unchecked. Is that the group grok?

We detect 24p (and 23.98/2.976) footage, and automatically set the PSF In Checkbox funcationality internally. You can always set the flag yourself.

Also, with this native 24p recording without "duplicate frames", will the CF cards in the nano realize the 20% storage gain Pany claims for the P@ media?

Yes, if Pulldown Removal is checked. As always, run a test then run it through your post workflow to ensure that it works with your setup.

BTW, love the "editor to be used" and "profiles" ideas.

Thank you very much. Our team appreciates your kind comments.

Thanks all![/QUOTE]

[Bob Griffiths]

Thanks to Dan and all for your input and insight. This is forum has a great level of vendor and user interaction and the CD products seem to be better for it. Certainly this forum is a great source of pre & post-sale information.

Thanks!

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

Dear Mark,

Yes, you need the Pulldown Removal code in our next firmware release to accomplish the goal of just recording pure 1080p24 (actually 1080p23.976).

....Pulldown Removeall Code ! Wow ! This is that alchemy angle to this sophisticated technology I have written about before. I am amazed how a software engineer can actually write a program which can "analyze" the signal to see what the frames are doing and then adjust accordingly. Man ! This is like some kind of Fuzzy Logic.

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

I am not 100% certain if your 24F footage from Canon has a flag in each duplicated frame or not. Our Pulldown Removal code analyzes each frame to determine if it is a duplicate or not, we do not rely on a "Flag".

...Actually, this is even a more sophisticated way of doing it, since there is no "help" from the incoming signal itself then. (??) The code in the XDR/Nano has to do it all - this is rather amazing when you stop and consider what the code is actually doing. -And it does all this on the fly. You folks at CD must have one heck of a built in CPU to get these jobs done.

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

Yes, your 24F footage is 24P (actually 23.976) over 60 (actually 59.94). In other words, the HD-SDI output has duplicated frames. This is the same as many cameras, as not all monitors can handle 24p with only 24 frames.

...Isn't it amazing how our eyes cannot even detect the duplicated frames ? This is a testimony to how slowly the human brain processes visual information input.