SxS vs NanoFlash stills at DVinfo.net

Olof Ekbergh · January 2nd, 2010, 10:54 AM

I will be posting a number of comparison shots of Nano and SxS from the new EX1R.

This first one is of my father 81 still skiing XC.

The shot was 1080p 30.
SxS 35mb/s
Nano 100mb/s QT long-gop.

These are uncompressed tiff exports, no manipulation at all.

Can you tell the difference?

I think both are very good.

Alister Chapman · January 2nd, 2010, 11:57 AM

There is more detail in his mustache and the texture of his fleece jacket is better represented in the NanoFlash still. With so much of the image background being soft due to the DoF this is not a tough test for the EX codec.

Lots of falling snow against a dark background would be a tougher test. In all my NanoFlash footage the difference between it and the native EX or XDCAM HD422 material is hard to spot in all but the most challenging scenes. It's in post production where the difference becomes much more apparent with the 100Mb/s (my chosen bit rate) NanoFlash footage holding up much better during grading etc. I'm really excited about pairing up the nano with my PMW-350 when it arrives. Super clean camera with super clean recordings should allow me to really push things in post if I want.

Paul Cronin · January 2nd, 2010, 01:05 PM

Very hard to tell the difference. It is there but even at zoom tough to see.

I have shot some clips with the EX350 and the Nano today. Once I have finished paying work I will try and post but I am sure it won't be till tomorrow at the earliest.

Olof Ekbergh · January 2nd, 2010, 02:21 PM

Here are 2 more with much sharper BG.

The shot was 1080p 30. 180º shutter.
SxS 35mb/s
Nano 100mb/s QT long-gop.

I see very supple differences in the colors. The Nano is more "real", look in the greens in the BG.

I plan on posting a number of different types of shots, that are typical of what I shoot.

I think this will interest people reading this forum.

I am personally really sold on the NanoFlash.

Olof Ekbergh · January 2nd, 2010, 06:27 PM

OK here is a third example. Very difficult lighting daylight from the door and fluorescent interior ceiling lights. Walking with cam on shoulder. A little shaky.

The shot was 1080p 30. 180º shutter.
SxS 35mb/s
Nano 100mb/s QT long-gop.

On this one I did levels adjustment equal on both to lighten the shot a little.

Any comments?

Gints Klimanis · January 2nd, 2010, 07:43 PM

Regarding your first set, I'm surprised to see that much of a difference on the black jacket zippers as well as the bill of the cap. Nanoflash wins.

I don't see as much of a difference in the second set other than more purple noise in the trees. The Nanoflash images look ever so slightly worse in this regard. Chroma noise? I'd expect that to be better in 4:2:2 . I hate to say it: Nanoflash loses. Any chance you swapped the images?

I see differences in the third set: less noise in the shadows and slightly better detail on the container labels and American flag. The green rake looks sharper in the Nanoflash. Nanoflash wins.

Thanks for posting, Olof.

Paul Cronin · January 2nd, 2010, 08:24 PM

Easier for me to see the difference in the second round. I am seeing a big difference off the EX350 with and without Nano.

Agree Nano is a winner. I have not shot a job without it since it arrived.

Olof I will contact you about HD-SDI cables this week.

Rafael Amador · January 3rd, 2010, 11:15 AM

There is a problem when trying to compare an still from the SxS with the same from the NANO: You should compare two "I frames".

This may be a problem with movement. The GOPs recorded in the two devices they have very little possibilities (1/12 or 1/15) to start in the same frame.

But even if they may look the same , the difference is huge.
Rafael

Dennis Dillon · January 3rd, 2010, 04:19 PM

They are really close. I had to zoom in quite a bit to see the Nano deliver more color gradients. see pic. I agree with Rafael. An I frame side by side should be a truer comparison. And diagonal motion subjects would be a true test of the higher bit rate. We have already seen this with the grinding wheel stills that CD has posted.

Dennis Dillon · January 3rd, 2010, 04:33 PM

If the blue pixels on the tool box coming from the lower edges of the draws, which have a diagonal aspect are from CA, than the Nano seems to increase the CA . If this is not CA, than the Nano reproduced the blue as it is. I welcome smarter people to contribute.

Dan Keaton · January 3rd, 2010, 06:37 PM

Dear Friends,

Personally, I find it hard to make meaningful comparisions.

We know that the nanoFlash is 4:2:2, so that should help make the nanoFlash images better, provided the footage was shot at 50 Mbps or higher.

I wonder if the blue on the bottom edges of the toolbox's drawers are a reflection of the blue plastic gas can. This gas can seems to have light from the windows shining on it.

David Paul · January 4th, 2010, 03:37 AM

Hello all, During a tv drama i shot at beginning of 2009 I was pulling frame grabs off SxS back up footage while watching rushes each night....the producer and director saw them and wanted some for production stills as we were not having to much success with on set stills at the time...after much ado and testing (actually the Post House) found we could pull good quality stills from the XDR footage (but could not from the SxS footage) that was suitable for print media promotional material..so it was another bonus from using the XDR.....and a very happy Director(who also was one of the producers)....I was shooting 100mbps-long gop-mxf-25p...
cheers David Paul
www.davidpaul.co.nz

Gints Klimanis · January 4th, 2010, 09:28 PM

Would you mind posting your comparisons? The rest of us are noticing more subtle differences when comparing frames of unprocessed footage.

January 2nd, 2010, 10:54 AM	#1
Olof Ekbergh Sponsor: Westside AV Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA Posts: 1,365	SxS vs NanoFlash stills I will be posting a number of comparison shots of Nano and SxS from the new EX1R. This first one is of my father 81 still skiing XC. The shot was 1080p 30. SxS 35mb/s Nano 100mb/s QT long-gop. These are uncompressed tiff exports, no manipulation at all. Can you tell the difference? I think both are very good. Attached Thumbnails

January 2nd, 2010, 11:57 AM	#2
Alister Chapman Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK Posts: 4,957	There is more detail in his mustache and the texture of his fleece jacket is better represented in the NanoFlash still. With so much of the image background being soft due to the DoF this is not a tough test for the EX codec. Lots of falling snow against a dark background would be a tougher test. In all my NanoFlash footage the difference between it and the native EX or XDCAM HD422 material is hard to spot in all but the most challenging scenes. It's in post production where the difference becomes much more apparent with the 100Mb/s (my chosen bit rate) NanoFlash footage holding up much better during grading etc. I'm really excited about pairing up the nano with my PMW-350 when it arrives. Super clean camera with super clean recordings should allow me to really push things in post if I want. __________________ Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com

January 2nd, 2010, 01:05 PM	#3
Paul Cronin Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 4,048	Very hard to tell the difference. It is there but even at zoom tough to see. I have shot some clips with the EX350 and the Nano today. Once I have finished paying work I will try and post but I am sure it won't be till tomorrow at the earliest. __________________ Paul Cronin www.paulcroninstudios.com

January 2nd, 2010, 02:21 PM	#4
Olof Ekbergh Sponsor: Westside AV Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA Posts: 1,365	Here are 2 more with much sharper BG. The shot was 1080p 30. 180º shutter. SxS 35mb/s Nano 100mb/s QT long-gop. I see very supple differences in the colors. The Nano is more "real", look in the greens in the BG. I plan on posting a number of different types of shots, that are typical of what I shoot. I think this will interest people reading this forum. I am personally really sold on the NanoFlash. Attached Thumbnails

January 2nd, 2010, 06:27 PM	#5
Olof Ekbergh Sponsor: Westside AV Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA Posts: 1,365	OK here is a third example. Very difficult lighting daylight from the door and fluorescent interior ceiling lights. Walking with cam on shoulder. A little shaky. The shot was 1080p 30. 180º shutter. SxS 35mb/s Nano 100mb/s QT long-gop. On this one I did levels adjustment equal on both to lighten the shot a little. Any comments? Attached Thumbnails

January 2nd, 2010, 07:43 PM	#6
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	Regarding your first set, I'm surprised to see that much of a difference on the black jacket zippers as well as the bill of the cap. Nanoflash wins. I don't see as much of a difference in the second set other than more purple noise in the trees. The Nanoflash images look ever so slightly worse in this regard. Chroma noise? I'd expect that to be better in 4:2:2 . I hate to say it: Nanoflash loses. Any chance you swapped the images? I see differences in the third set: less noise in the shadows and slightly better detail on the container labels and American flag. The green rake looks sharper in the Nanoflash. Nanoflash wins. Thanks for posting, Olof. Last edited by Gints Klimanis; January 2nd, 2010 at 09:24 PM.

January 2nd, 2010, 08:24 PM	#7
Paul Cronin Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 4,048	Easier for me to see the difference in the second round. I am seeing a big difference off the EX350 with and without Nano. Agree Nano is a winner. I have not shot a job without it since it arrived. Olof I will contact you about HD-SDI cables this week. __________________ Paul Cronin www.paulcroninstudios.com

January 3rd, 2010, 11:15 AM	#8
Rafael Amador Major Player Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Vientiane (Lao PDR) Posts: 349	There is a problem when trying to compare an still from the SxS with the same from the NANO: You should compare two "I frames". This may be a problem with movement. The GOPs recorded in the two devices they have very little possibilities (1/12 or 1/15) to start in the same frame. But even if they may look the same , the difference is huge. Rafael

January 3rd, 2010, 04:19 PM	#9
Dennis Dillon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Hobe Sound, Florida Posts: 213	They are really close. I had to zoom in quite a bit to see the Nano deliver more color gradients. see pic. I agree with Rafael. An I frame side by side should be a truer comparison. And diagonal motion subjects would be a true test of the higher bit rate. We have already seen this with the grinding wheel stills that CD has posted. Attached Thumbnails

January 3rd, 2010, 04:33 PM	#10
Dennis Dillon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Hobe Sound, Florida Posts: 213	If the blue pixels on the tool box coming from the lower edges of the draws, which have a diagonal aspect are from CA, than the Nano seems to increase the CA . If this is not CA, than the Nano reproduced the blue as it is. I welcome smarter people to contribute. Attached Thumbnails

January 3rd, 2010, 06:37 PM	#11
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear Friends, Personally, I find it hard to make meaningful comparisions. We know that the nanoFlash is 4:2:2, so that should help make the nanoFlash images better, provided the footage was shot at 50 Mbps or higher. I wonder if the blue on the bottom edges of the toolbox's drawers are a reflection of the blue plastic gas can. This gas can seems to have light from the windows shining on it. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

January 4th, 2010, 03:37 AM	#12
David Paul New Boot Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11	production stills from XDR/Nano footage Hello all, During a tv drama i shot at beginning of 2009 I was pulling frame grabs off SxS back up footage while watching rushes each night....the producer and director saw them and wanted some for production stills as we were not having to much success with on set stills at the time...after much ado and testing (actually the Post House) found we could pull good quality stills from the XDR footage (but could not from the SxS footage) that was suitable for print media promotional material..so it was another bonus from using the XDR.....and a very happy Director(who also was one of the producers)....I was shooting 100mbps-long gop-mxf-25p... cheers David Paul www.davidpaul.co.nz

January 4th, 2010, 09:28 PM	#13
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	Would you mind posting your comparisons? The rest of us are noticing more subtle differences when comparing frames of unprocessed footage.