What Is The Real Deal With This JVC HD Cam??

Bill Ravens · September 2nd, 2003, 02:26 PM

rez means nothing, nada, zip if your display device can't use it.
that's like buying a $10K stereo and plugging radio shack speakers into it

Raymond Krystof · September 2nd, 2003, 03:15 PM

Bill,

I couldn’t agree more. That’s a point that can’t be stressed enough. The projector I’m using is an Infocus Screenplay 7200. This projector has the TI Mustang HD2 (1280 x 720; 16:9) DLP chip. I’m projecting the image onto a 94-inch wide 1.0 gain screen. The image from the HD10 in HD mode is fantastic. I suspect that I will endeavor to create progressive DVD’s in the near term which should also look very good on this projector.

Paul Mogg · September 2nd, 2003, 03:49 PM

I am soooo jealous! Would somebody please buy me one of those projectors for Christmas?, or my birthday?, or YOUR birthday?

Kevin A. Sturges · September 2nd, 2003, 05:52 PM

Ha! I would agree. Thanks for the input guys. I'm happy to hear about your positive experiences with the cam.

Now - on with the questions: How do you like/dislike it's single chip color response? Have you had a chance to compare it with a 3 chip cam? How does it work in basic indoor living room lighting? Did you notice it to be any less sensative than other cams? I'm curious with all that extra resolution - is grain and noise more noticable with it? Maybe lower resolution DV cams are more "forgiving" of lower light conditions.

So many questions......does anyone in this thread have the GR1? Do you feel it looks oversharpened? I wish I could just get my hands on this cam once and for all so I could see for myself....

I am still surprised by so many opposite user opinions about the output from a camcorder. I've never seen one generate so much emotional static before! You'd think either people would see it's output and say "oh yeah", or "no way".

I understand that this camera's video is very sensitive to viewing on an appropriate HD monitor ( it is after all a "new" technology), but having some regulars here insist it's junk, while others praise it - some regulars making statements that MPEG2 has to be LESS resolution than DV (!), others saying things like "well if your going to have to resample it's video down to DVD or DV size it's going to look terrible - statements that are basically NOT TRUE in the real world, makes me wonder how many are speaking out of just plain emotional predjudice, intead of dealing with facts. ..

Strange stuff indeed. I have never seen a piece of gear generate so many emotions and different points of view before. If it was a new guitar effect, or a synthesizer, people would be gathering around in excitement to see what this new thing could do! And keyboard technology changes and is introduced far faster than camcorders. Makes for interesting reading, at least.

Charles Henrich · September 2nd, 2003, 06:08 PM

I just got ahold of a fairly large (46mb) .wmv of footage a coworker took with the GR-HD1. How do I go about uploading it for everyone? From what I can see, you can definatly see the sharpening in high contrast areas, but its not super-horrific. Certainly would be better without, but im not sure its worth $600 to $1000.

Raymond Krystof · September 2nd, 2003, 11:43 PM

Kevin,

I don’t have any first hand experience with 3 chip camera’s, all I can offer is that I’m totally satisfied with the color rendition of the HD10. My comparison is with the JVC GR3 “instamatic” DV camera, which seems to over empisize colors and older HI8 and SVHS cameras that seem to mute colors. By comparison I think the HD10 records very natural colors. Neither overemphasized nor muted. In my opinion, right on.

As far as low light. Again, my experience is with middle range cameras. As such, I would say it compares favorably with the like. As an experiment, I taped some nighttime footage in my back yard, which was illuminated by only tiki torches and pool lights and as such was virtually unusable as far as seeing discernable images. However, I was actually surprised at the absence of video noise. It seemed as though there was less noise than with low to middle range DV cameras, which use high gain to compensate. Any good video and film benefits with abundant light. Anything less is a compromise. That said, I’d say this camera does an adequate job in low light.

Now as far as the issue of the GR1 having an over sharpened image vs. the HD10. I can’t comment at all. I have seen the HD1 only in a store and own the HD10, but this isn’t a just test. I can only tell you I choose the HD10 primarily for the higher resolution viewfinder. I use the viewfinder more often than not in bright outdoor light and although the HD10 viewfinder is nothing to brag about, it’s far better than the HD1. This is primarily important when using the manual focus.

At this point I’d like to summate by saying that I have no regrets in purchasing the HD10. My main priorities are capturing High Definition video for personal use. However, that isn’t to say I’m totally satisfied with the camera either. The main complaint I’d like to point out is again from a consumer/hobbyist point of view. This is in the area of audio. As a consumer/hobbyist I’m often content with on camera edits. That is to say, I haven’t always found it necessary to edit all scenes of a tape. However, with the HD10 and presumably the HD1, most people will be compelled to edit all scenes. This is because the on camera edits truncate the audio 1 to 2 seconds before the end of a scene and 1 to 2 seconds after the start of a scene. This is less of a problem to professionals who presumably edit all scenes. However, to me this is a nuisance.

OK OK…how about a second summate.
This camera is somewhat inspirational to me. That is to say as a consumer/hobbyist, this camera is inspiring me to be a better video photographer. The potential of the final product is pushing me to use/learn more professional techniques. Tripods, filters, zoom control, manual focus, static shooting, etc. I’m finding myself analyzing what I like about professional “films/video” and trying to emulate it. This camera is pushing me into a true hobbyist realm. And I’m jazzed!

Most everything in life is a trade off of priorities; desires, needs, affluence and perception. Only the individual can make the final decision.

Mike Eby · September 4th, 2003, 08:41 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Paul Mogg : I am soooo jealous! Would somebody please buy me one of those projectors for Christmas?, or my birthday?, or YOUR birthday? -->>>

Paul,
You don't have to mortgage your sole to get great large screen performance. If you tinker like I, look into a used CRT projector. They are large and can be a little tricky to setup but coupled to a PC the results are most satisfying. Do some research at http://www.avsforum.com in the CRT front projector forum. A very decent used CRT can be had in the $800-$2000 range.

Now back on topic… I bought my HD1U to replace my very aged analog camcorder and could not be happier with it. I am not a pro by any means but I have a basic understanding of photographic. I shot some footage of semi pro water skiing the other day the with the proper manual settings the results are nothing short of fantastic on a 100" wide screen. The subjects I shot were have never seen them selves ski with such detail they were truly amazed. The camera is not for everyone epically if you really don’t have a way to display the image it can produce. But if you do the results are very gratifying.

Mike

Ron Evans · September 6th, 2003, 07:48 AM

If I read the specs correctly the camcorder will record in 720/30P which is almost 50% greater than DV25. IT will also record in standard DV25 too as well as 480P. This is not magic info its on the JVC WEB site!!!
I am sure that in the next year we will see versions in the more professional camcorders too now that a large number of manufacturers have agreed on the spec. Just like checking DV quality on a $100 WalMart TV is not a good indication of the compression quality HD has to be viewed on the right device. Steve is correct, the reactions are much the same as to the introduction of DV---fear of change and mostly wrong.

Ron Evans

Barry Green · September 6th, 2003, 11:24 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Ron Evans : If I read the specs correctly the camcorder will record in 720/30P which is almost 50% greater than DV25. -->>>

While technically correct that 720 is 50% greater than DV25's 480 lines, that doesn't really tell the story. Multiply the pixels out and you'll get a better idea:

DV25 = 720 x 480 = 345,600

HDV = 1280 x 720 = 921,600

921600 / 345600 = 2.67.

So the JVC puts up nearly three times as many pixels as a standard-def camera. As I've said before, while the JVC has its shortcomings, resolution certainly isn't one of them!

Jay Nemeth · September 7th, 2003, 02:45 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Sturges : How do you like/dislike it's single chip color response? -->>>

Color response is good, 3 chips would be better

<<<-- Have you had a chance to compare it with a 3 chip cam? -->>>

It reminds me of the early CCDs, it will streak vertically if something is real bright like car headlights or the sun.

<<<-- How does it work in basic indoor living room lighting? -->>>

Not great, but not much worse than most broadcast cameras at 0 db gain. Most people that slam this camera for poor lowlight performance, are comparing it to DV cameras with auto gain always on. They don't see the noise thay are adding.

<<<-- Did you notice it to be any less sensative than other cams? I'm curious with all that extra resolution - is grain and noise more noticable with it? -->>>

Very quiet in the blacks. Chroma noise is an issue.

<<<-- Maybe lower resolution DV cams are more "forgiving" of lower light conditions. -->>>

Yes.

<<<-- So many questions......does anyone in this thread have the GR1? -->>>

Yes, I bought it when it first came out. I wish the HD10 was available then.

<<<-- Do you feel it looks oversharpened? -->>>

Only at the transitions of high contrast objects.

<<<-- I wish I could just get my hands on this cam once and for all so I could see for myself....

I am still surprised by so many opposite user opinions about the output from a camcorder. I've never seen one generate so much emotional static before! You'd think either people would see it's output and say "oh yeah", or "no way". -->>>

A friend of mine, who is also a cinematographer told me he was sad when he heard I bought one of these cameras. Well, I thought about buying the DVX100, it's the best looking DV camera I've seen, but another friend of mine, Barry Green already had one. I sold my VX1000 (which I used to tape my kids' birthday parties) on ebay for $1500 and bought the HD1 for $3100 and got the JVC DVHS deck for free. I am puzzled why my respected friend is sad. He also bashes the camera when talking about it. Yes the camera has lots of shortcomings, but anyone who has shot reversal stock can handle this thing, just bring a full set of NDs so you can force the shutter speed and fstop to where you want them.

I like shooting film, but a lot of stories gather dust because no one can get them financed. I'm doing a short this weekend for a buddy with the JVC that will probably tour the film festivals and hopefully will be digitally projected in 720p. It's a "no budget" project which at best, would have been shot with a traditional video camera.

The lack of manual control is frustrating, the loss of color when a highlight blows out is maddening, the chroma noise is a new problem I'm just now seeing, but..........when everything is right on, the pictures are gorgeous.

Now, we just have to figure out how to edit this stuff.

Jay

Robert J. Wolff · September 8th, 2003, 06:27 AM

Kevin.

Think about your original query this way: Some people believe that "my toys are better than your toys".

It doen't matter whether its a cam, a lens, a tripod, a car, a house, etc. The stuff that they own MUST be better than yours.

Ignore them.

Get the most out of your system. Eventually, they will join you.

Maheel Perera · September 10th, 2003, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by Barry Green

"Regarding the JVC cam being embraced and loved by the low-budget filmmaker, that ignores the camera's biggest obstacle: the fact it shoots HD in 30P only, which is the single worst frame rate for transfer to film or to PAL for international distribution. Besides its other limitations, which can mostly be overcome, the 30P-only is a dealbreaker"

How about using After effects or ReVision's Fieldkit to convert 30p to 24p

http://www.revisionfx.com/

Barry Green · September 10th, 2003, 11:37 AM

Interesting idea, but will it work? Fieldskit is a de-interlacing product, and the HD1 footage is progressive - no fields. So I don't know whether this would work or not.

Anybody want to give it a try?

Ken Hodson · September 10th, 2003, 11:57 AM

If your movie is a huge success and worthy of distribution there are professional studio programs as well as independent soulutions like Magic Bullet and twixtor. That is not the problem, making a movie worthy of film distrobution is.

September 2nd, 2003, 03:15 PM	#62
Raymond Krystof Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Santa Clarita, California Posts: 97	Bill, I couldn’t agree more. That’s a point that can’t be stressed enough. The projector I’m using is an Infocus Screenplay 7200. This projector has the TI Mustang HD2 (1280 x 720; 16:9) DLP chip. I’m projecting the image onto a 94-inch wide 1.0 gain screen. The image from the HD10 in HD mode is fantastic. I suspect that I will endeavor to create progressive DVD’s in the near term which should also look very good on this projector. __________________ Ray

September 2nd, 2003, 03:49 PM	#63
Paul Mogg Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Francisco CA Posts: 386	I am soooo jealous! Would somebody please buy me one of those projectors for Christmas?, or my birthday?, or YOUR birthday? __________________ Paul

September 2nd, 2003, 11:43 PM	#66
Raymond Krystof Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Santa Clarita, California Posts: 97	Kevin, I don’t have any first hand experience with 3 chip camera’s, all I can offer is that I’m totally satisfied with the color rendition of the HD10. My comparison is with the JVC GR3 “instamatic” DV camera, which seems to over empisize colors and older HI8 and SVHS cameras that seem to mute colors. By comparison I think the HD10 records very natural colors. Neither overemphasized nor muted. In my opinion, right on. As far as low light. Again, my experience is with middle range cameras. As such, I would say it compares favorably with the like. As an experiment, I taped some nighttime footage in my back yard, which was illuminated by only tiki torches and pool lights and as such was virtually unusable as far as seeing discernable images. However, I was actually surprised at the absence of video noise. It seemed as though there was less noise than with low to middle range DV cameras, which use high gain to compensate. Any good video and film benefits with abundant light. Anything less is a compromise. That said, I’d say this camera does an adequate job in low light. Now as far as the issue of the GR1 having an over sharpened image vs. the HD10. I can’t comment at all. I have seen the HD1 only in a store and own the HD10, but this isn’t a just test. I can only tell you I choose the HD10 primarily for the higher resolution viewfinder. I use the viewfinder more often than not in bright outdoor light and although the HD10 viewfinder is nothing to brag about, it’s far better than the HD1. This is primarily important when using the manual focus. At this point I’d like to summate by saying that I have no regrets in purchasing the HD10. My main priorities are capturing High Definition video for personal use. However, that isn’t to say I’m totally satisfied with the camera either. The main complaint I’d like to point out is again from a consumer/hobbyist point of view. This is in the area of audio. As a consumer/hobbyist I’m often content with on camera edits. That is to say, I haven’t always found it necessary to edit all scenes of a tape. However, with the HD10 and presumably the HD1, most people will be compelled to edit all scenes. This is because the on camera edits truncate the audio 1 to 2 seconds before the end of a scene and 1 to 2 seconds after the start of a scene. This is less of a problem to professionals who presumably edit all scenes. However, to me this is a nuisance. OK OK…how about a second summate. This camera is somewhat inspirational to me. That is to say as a consumer/hobbyist, this camera is inspiring me to be a better video photographer. The potential of the final product is pushing me to use/learn more professional techniques. Tripods, filters, zoom control, manual focus, static shooting, etc. I’m finding myself analyzing what I like about professional “films/video” and trying to emulate it. This camera is pushing me into a true hobbyist realm. And I’m jazzed! Most everything in life is a trade off of priorities; desires, needs, affluence and perception. Only the individual can make the final decision. __________________ Ray

September 8th, 2003, 06:27 AM	#71
Robert J. Wolff Major Player Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Adirondacks of New York Posts: 210	Kevin. Think about your original query this way: Some people believe that "my toys are better than your toys". It doen't matter whether its a cam, a lens, a tripod, a car, a house, etc. The stuff that they own MUST be better than yours. Ignore them. Get the most out of your system. Eventually, they will join you. __________________ Himself

September 10th, 2003, 11:57 AM	#74
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	If your movie is a huge success and worthy of distribution there are professional studio programs as well as independent soulutions like Magic Bullet and twixtor. That is not the problem, making a movie worthy of film distrobution is. __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

September 2nd, 2003, 02:26 PM	#61
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	rez means nothing, nada, zip if your display device can't use it. that's like buying a $10K stereo and plugging radio shack speakers into it

September 2nd, 2003, 05:52 PM	#64
Kevin A. Sturges Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 167	Ha! I would agree. Thanks for the input guys. I'm happy to hear about your positive experiences with the cam. Now - on with the questions: How do you like/dislike it's single chip color response? Have you had a chance to compare it with a 3 chip cam? How does it work in basic indoor living room lighting? Did you notice it to be any less sensative than other cams? I'm curious with all that extra resolution - is grain and noise more noticable with it? Maybe lower resolution DV cams are more "forgiving" of lower light conditions. So many questions......does anyone in this thread have the GR1? Do you feel it looks oversharpened? I wish I could just get my hands on this cam once and for all so I could see for myself.... I am still surprised by so many opposite user opinions about the output from a camcorder. I've never seen one generate so much emotional static before! You'd think either people would see it's output and say "oh yeah", or "no way". I understand that this camera's video is very sensitive to viewing on an appropriate HD monitor ( it is after all a "new" technology), but having some regulars here insist it's junk, while others praise it - some regulars making statements that MPEG2 has to be LESS resolution than DV (!), others saying things like "well if your going to have to resample it's video down to DVD or DV size it's going to look terrible - statements that are basically NOT TRUE in the real world, makes me wonder how many are speaking out of just plain emotional predjudice, intead of dealing with facts. .. Strange stuff indeed. I have never seen a piece of gear generate so many emotions and different points of view before. If it was a new guitar effect, or a synthesizer, people would be gathering around in excitement to see what this new thing could do! And keyboard technology changes and is introduced far faster than camcorders. Makes for interesting reading, at least.

September 2nd, 2003, 06:08 PM	#65
Charles Henrich New Boot Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: LA, CA Posts: 14	I just got ahold of a fairly large (46mb) .wmv of footage a coworker took with the GR-HD1. How do I go about uploading it for everyone? From what I can see, you can definatly see the sharpening in high contrast areas, but its not super-horrific. Certainly would be better without, but im not sure its worth $600 to $1000.

September 4th, 2003, 08:41 PM	#67
Mike Eby Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Osceola,IN Posts: 62	<<<-- Originally posted by Paul Mogg : I am soooo jealous! Would somebody please buy me one of those projectors for Christmas?, or my birthday?, or YOUR birthday? -->>> Paul, You don't have to mortgage your sole to get great large screen performance. If you tinker like I, look into a used CRT projector. They are large and can be a little tricky to setup but coupled to a PC the results are most satisfying. Do some research at http://www.avsforum.com in the CRT front projector forum. A very decent used CRT can be had in the $800-$2000 range. Now back on topic… I bought my HD1U to replace my very aged analog camcorder and could not be happier with it. I am not a pro by any means but I have a basic understanding of photographic. I shot some footage of semi pro water skiing the other day the with the proper manual settings the results are nothing short of fantastic on a 100" wide screen. The subjects I shot were have never seen them selves ski with such detail they were truly amazed. The camera is not for everyone epically if you really don’t have a way to display the image it can produce. But if you do the results are very gratifying. Mike

September 6th, 2003, 07:48 AM	#68
Ron Evans Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,220	If I read the specs correctly the camcorder will record in 720/30P which is almost 50% greater than DV25. IT will also record in standard DV25 too as well as 480P. This is not magic info its on the JVC WEB site!!! I am sure that in the next year we will see versions in the more professional camcorders too now that a large number of manufacturers have agreed on the spec. Just like checking DV quality on a $100 WalMart TV is not a good indication of the compression quality HD has to be viewed on the right device. Steve is correct, the reactions are much the same as to the introduction of DV---fear of change and mostly wrong. Ron Evans

September 6th, 2003, 11:24 AM	#69
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	<<<-- Originally posted by Ron Evans : If I read the specs correctly the camcorder will record in 720/30P which is almost 50% greater than DV25. -->>> While technically correct that 720 is 50% greater than DV25's 480 lines, that doesn't really tell the story. Multiply the pixels out and you'll get a better idea: DV25 = 720 x 480 = 345,600 HDV = 1280 x 720 = 921,600 921600 / 345600 = 2.67. So the JVC puts up nearly three times as many pixels as a standard-def camera. As I've said before, while the JVC has its shortcomings, resolution certainly isn't one of them!

September 7th, 2003, 02:45 AM	#70
Jay Nemeth Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 64	<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Sturges : How do you like/dislike it's single chip color response? -->>> Color response is good, 3 chips would be better <<<-- Have you had a chance to compare it with a 3 chip cam? -->>> It reminds me of the early CCDs, it will streak vertically if something is real bright like car headlights or the sun. <<<-- How does it work in basic indoor living room lighting? -->>> Not great, but not much worse than most broadcast cameras at 0 db gain. Most people that slam this camera for poor lowlight performance, are comparing it to DV cameras with auto gain always on. They don't see the noise thay are adding. <<<-- Did you notice it to be any less sensative than other cams? I'm curious with all that extra resolution - is grain and noise more noticable with it? -->>> Very quiet in the blacks. Chroma noise is an issue. <<<-- Maybe lower resolution DV cams are more "forgiving" of lower light conditions. -->>> Yes. <<<-- So many questions......does anyone in this thread have the GR1? -->>> Yes, I bought it when it first came out. I wish the HD10 was available then. <<<-- Do you feel it looks oversharpened? -->>> Only at the transitions of high contrast objects. <<<-- I wish I could just get my hands on this cam once and for all so I could see for myself.... I am still surprised by so many opposite user opinions about the output from a camcorder. I've never seen one generate so much emotional static before! You'd think either people would see it's output and say "oh yeah", or "no way". -->>> A friend of mine, who is also a cinematographer told me he was sad when he heard I bought one of these cameras. Well, I thought about buying the DVX100, it's the best looking DV camera I've seen, but another friend of mine, Barry Green already had one. I sold my VX1000 (which I used to tape my kids' birthday parties) on ebay for $1500 and bought the HD1 for $3100 and got the JVC DVHS deck for free. I am puzzled why my respected friend is sad. He also bashes the camera when talking about it. Yes the camera has lots of shortcomings, but anyone who has shot reversal stock can handle this thing, just bring a full set of NDs so you can force the shutter speed and fstop to where you want them. I like shooting film, but a lot of stories gather dust because no one can get them financed. I'm doing a short this weekend for a buddy with the JVC that will probably tour the film festivals and hopefully will be digitally projected in 720p. It's a "no budget" project which at best, would have been shot with a traditional video camera. The lack of manual control is frustrating, the loss of color when a highlight blows out is maddening, the chroma noise is a new problem I'm just now seeing, but..........when everything is right on, the pictures are gorgeous. Now, we just have to figure out how to edit this stuff. Jay

September 10th, 2003, 09:16 AM	#72
Maheel Perera Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Sri Lanka Posts: 128	Originally posted by Barry Green "Regarding the JVC cam being embraced and loved by the low-budget filmmaker, that ignores the camera's biggest obstacle: the fact it shoots HD in 30P only, which is the single worst frame rate for transfer to film or to PAL for international distribution. Besides its other limitations, which can mostly be overcome, the 30P-only is a dealbreaker" How about using After effects or ReVision's Fieldkit to convert 30p to 24p http://www.revisionfx.com/

September 10th, 2003, 11:37 AM	#73
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	Interesting idea, but will it work? Fieldskit is a de-interlacing product, and the HD1 footage is progressive - no fields. So I don't know whether this would work or not. Anybody want to give it a try?