Picture Quality *To The Average Person*

[Dave Largent]

Maybe you guys can help me here. I know a lot of you are pros
with an eye to independant film making so you are particular
about image quality for your particular application(s). But I, myself, am trying to decide which of the two JVCs would be best for my application.
See, I'm mostly interested in doing some hobby-type things for
family and friends, such as family reunions, etc. I believe it was Steve who mentioned that JVC claims to have increased edge
enhancement on the HD1U because it looks better to the average
consumer.
Now, there were a couple JVC stills on this site that a couple friends looked at -- one was an interior bed shot and the other was an outdoor beach shot -- which were purported to show the edge enhancement difference. To *our* eyes, the more enhanced HD1U looked sharper/better. But that was only a couple small pics.
My question is: Do you think the average uncle, cousin, next door neighbor, et cetera who's not in the business would overall prefer the look of the HD1U? Is there anyone here who actually prefers the HD1U look, or have heard of anyone who does?
Thanks.

[Christopher C. Murphy]

The average person (non video person) wouldn't know the difference.

However, you will and that's more important in my opinion. If you are buying the HD10 for a hobby - it might not be the best choice because you'll have to do extra work just to see your labor. (Especially if you have a Mac and not Windows.) If you buy a standard DV camera - you'll be able to crank out lots of stuff.

Do you want to crank out fun footage or do you have lots of time to play? If you have lots of time...consider the HD10 seriously. If you don't and just like to turn on a camera and shoot...consider a Canon or Sony product. The models vary, but I would choose a PD150 over the HD10 for "hobby" shooting...family videos etc. If the HD10 wasn't such a time drain for setups...I would choose it.

I believe the HD10 is for people that have extra time available to take TLC and light, setup shots and also don't plan to shoot much action footage. I've shot some stuff with it...and it's beautiful when using a tripod, nice lighting.....basically, I pretend I'm using a film camera! Ok, maybe I am biased...I LOVE this HD10 for silly reasons.....it makes me feel like I'm one step beyond video and closer to a film-like experience.

If you want that experience...get the HD10. If you want to shoot all over place and always be fairly satisfied with your shots...buy a PD150. Oh, if you plan to always dump to DVD...lean more towards the HD10........so many choices!

Hope this helps and doesn't confuse.

Chris

[Raymond Krystof]

Dave,

I thought I’d jump in here since I too am an amateur video hobbyist. I can’t directly answer your question about edge enhancement between the HD1 vs. HD10 since I haven’t seen the direct comparisons. But I do have an HD10 and will say that I find the sharpness slightly on the soft side but not unlike broadcast HDTV. I don’t know what negative attributes higher edge enhancement may induce, if any? I was aware of the reported differences before I purchased the HD10. My decision to go with the HD10 was based primarily based on the higher resolution view finder.

The other reason I jumped in here is to comment on Christopher’s reply. As a consumer/hobbyist I’ve been using this camera with just a little more care than I had in the past with DV, HI8, and SVHS etc. and am finding the results extremely satisfying. Christopher and other professionals are entirely correct in stating that taking extra time to setup shots, lighting and using tripods are highly beneficial. In fact this camera is inspiring me to do so whenever possible. But…..I’ve been finding that with the exception on using ND or polarizing filters the HD10 does as well as any consumer “point and shoot” DV camera for everyday stuff. I just returned from a vacation trip to Lake Powell in Utah. I shot about an hour and 20 minutes of video, 90+ percent handheld and full auto. No time to setup shots and lighting when you have grandkids running in three separate directions. Since almost all the scenes included water I chose to use a polarizing filter for all daylight shots. I downloaded the results last night using the included capture software (single pass with scene detection). Just started to edit and title etc. and am finding the results very, very satisfying. Far better quality than I’d ever achieved before.

I like to also note that upon my initial arrival to the marina I noticed a Japanese film crew apparently packing up from a shoot. What caught my eye was their equipment. The first thing I spotted was a massive tripod and a Cinealta Camera. The next thing I saw was an HD10 sitting next to the Cinealta.

[Darren Kelly]

If you are a hobbiest, you will be thrilled with the HD1 and need not spend the money on the HD10. BUT..... I suggest you might be happier with a DV only consumer camera.

I am a pro and have a total of 5 video cameras ranging from a Pro DSR300 to a PD150, HD10U and a really small DV camera that fits in my pocket.

While all my pro cameras work regularly and do a great job, the camera that travels the most extensively is the small, JVC mini DV camera that fits in my pocket. It's been to tradeshows in Vegas and toronto, gone scubba diving off the coasts of Mexico and Hawaii and to just about every party I get myself invited to. It's seen weddings, Mexican historical locations, Christmas about 6 times and much more.

If you really are just looking for something for the family and friends, spend $1-$2K and get yourself one of these. I promise th picture quality will more than impress, the portabulity will make it a joy to use and the extra savings in money will make your wife happy. All in All a Win-Win.

These new HD cameras are the latest and greatest, but without special care and handling, they might disapoint more than please.

Good luck with your decision.

DBK

[Eric Bilodeau]

I tend to agree with Darren on the portability issue. I too bring my lower end DV camera while I travel more than my other "bigger" cameras and it provides me with surprisingly good images ( I have a Canon ZR first generation one CCD miniDV). On the other end, if you want HD your choice is limited to the two JVCs. As you pointed out you will use it for family reunions and such so I would recommend spending the less money possible so aim for the HD1. I guess from the comments here that we seem to reach pretty much an overall agreement on this but then again, it is still a choice you have to make on your own.

[Raymond Krystof]

I also agree with Darren on the issue of portability. By coincidence, I too have a JVC pocket camera. Mine is the DVP3U (680k pixel count). I absolutely love this camera due to its size. It’s always with me and as such I’ve gotten shots that I just wouldn’t have gotten otherwise. However, when I started to create DVD’s for use on my front projector I was very disappointed at the quality. Again my camera only has a 680k CCD and perhaps the 1 megapixel CCD of the DVP7U may make all the difference. I jumped into the HD10 because my projector is HD capable but on the other hand, until I get a DVHS recorder or HD DVD becomes a reality I’m going to create SD DVD’s.

Question to Darren, Eric or anyone. I haven’t tried, but is it possible to mix the 16X9 “squeeze mode” (presumably anamorphic) of DV with the 16X9 “native mode” of HD after conversion to mpeg at the DVD creation stage? If so, I will continue to use the DV pocket cam in as a compliment to the HD cam.

[Eric Bilodeau]

Of course you can mix the two but the differences will be noticeable. Nevertheless, the format will be equivalent once transferred to DVD 720X480 16:9. Making an edit of both is not necessarily a good idea since the images will look very different (especially in definition, sharpness, edge enhancement, ect) but you could have two separate clips from each camera both in 16:9 on the same DVD without problem. You could probably mix them in some documentary cases where image quality does not need to be kept to a constant level. Remember that "untrue" 16:9 is a 16:9 part of a 3:4 image (720X360) squeezed back to 720X480 (that is when the CCD is at least of 345600 pixels, if less, the difference is even worse) so the image quality often is very low.

[Steve Mullen]

I've gotten email from someone who hates the HD edge enhancement and is going to take a loss selling it.

I think we are discounting the viewing device.

Most folks have their TVs and HDVTVs with Sharpness turned up. Most videofiles have Shapness at, ar near zero.

With my HD projector I want NO edge enhancement.

So, if HD1 stuff is viewd on most folks TVs, it problably will look fine. But it will be a painful shock to others.

[Raymond Krystof]

Thanks Eric,

I thought or at least hoped this was the case. I understand the quality differences, but it does allow for some flexibility.

Thanks again,

[Barry Green]

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Mullen :
I think we are discounting the viewing device.

Most folks have their TVs and HDVTVs with Sharpness turned up. Most videofiles have Shapness at, ar near zero.

-->>>

Steve speaks the truth! The sharpness control on the television will make so much difference that it's hard to describe. The only fair comparison is a direct apple to a direct apple (i.e., both cameras on the same television). Other than that, there is simply no way to know how the TV will be set up, and therefore no way to know how your particular settings will affect the picture.

[Eric Bilodeau]

True but than again thorough testing has to be done on the same environnement from tip to toes so it makes sense to test on the same monitor/tv/projector. Of course, every step of the way there might be losses but an oversharpened TV will not "create" visible edge enhancement in most cases, it will only harden it, make it more noticeable providing it was there in the first place, a shot without edge enhancement will not display that much differently on such a television (of course, a little 3 inch LCD with not much definition is more likely to create some of this enhancement). The more the definition of the TV, the lesser the chances of creating artefacts that where not there.

[Darren Kelly]

Guys, we're staring at our navels too closely again.

First off, you need to know what to look for to see what edge sharpening is. I'm going to bet the average viewer, and even the average contributor to this forum won't know what they are looking at.

I've seen the two cameras side by side shooting the same test chart and the edge sharpening, while present to the naked eye to a deserning knowledgable viewer is not that big of a deal.

As a matter of fact, one of the dealers who participated in the testing couldn't see a difference.

Now, let's take it one step further. The end user will likely distribute his product how? Likely on DVD as an MPEG 2 DVD compliant file. It changes everything. At the end of the day, after it's been shot, uncompressed for editing, recompressed into a different format entirely and back to a DVD to play on grandma's 1992 TV with her new $79.00 DVD player she got from her grandkids from Costco.......

Get the picture, it won't make a difference. In many cases, it may even hit the evil VHS format, and then, well it won't matter at all what camera it was shot on. Either the HD10 or the HD1 will look the same.

IF..... on the other hand, you are going to take what you do, keep it as high a quality as you possible can, with little or no further compression. Editing it on an uncompressed capture card, and output it for use in broadcasting, or film distribution or projection in a film festival, you would want to start with as little in-camera processing as you can, and then the HD10 is the best choice for your aquisition.

I don't see a need for this user to spend the extra cash for the HD10.

Off to clean my navel out.

DBK

[Steve Mullen]

I think Darron's got it right.

I'm love to get hold off an HD1 and playback it and my HD10 footage on a 7-foot screen.

I don't like the viewfinder anyway, nor do I care about the XLR.

It would be nice to see how much difference there is.

Anyone in NYC?

[Dave Largent]

Thanks all. Still thinking it over. After reading your replies, I decided to play around with my TV's sharpness control and compare "looks" to see what I prefer. (Yes, the sharpness level I usually watch at was maximum.) Is a TV's sharpness control similar to a camcorder's "edge enhancement"? I normally watched with the control maxed because I just figured "sharper is best", but now I'm not so sure.
With sharpness dialed back, the image appears smoother and less "videoy". I'm not used to that look but ... we'll see. (I *want* to want the cheaper model, but this almost looks better.) I'll let y'all know.
Dave
P.S. I wonder if the 10U pro model has *some* EE or if it's set to "0".

[Steve Mullen]

At MAX???


I run my project or at 0.

My TV at 1.

I've never seen TV calibrated at any higher than 25%. Usually 0 is the setting because on some TVs, it turns off SVM.

Which on HDTVs should always be turned off.

I'm afraid to ask what Contrast was set to?

75% is max!

And, use SMPTE pluge to set Brightness.

And, without seeing your TV I can guess you should turn down COLOR by 10% to help reduce "red push."