JY-HD10 quality opinions?

Steve Mullen · October 11th, 2003, 11:54 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin :
I don't see how this would work if editing is kept in MPEG2 format domain, like wth Aspect HD. -->>>

Problem is -- your understanding of aspect isn't correct. No problem using AE. It works fine.

Ken Hodson · October 12th, 2003, 12:54 PM

Emilio- The quality=19 setting is interesting. But my concern all along is unless you are going to leave your final video in Mjpeg format (not very usefull) you will want to convert to WM9, Divx, Mpeg2, or back to Mpeg2ts. From my experience in the past I have found that Mjpeg, due to the way it compresses is not very suitable when recompressing back to a mpeg4 type codec (WM9 or Divx) I have never tried recompressing back to mpeg2 or mpeg2ts in that situation.
I would be very interested in knowing the visual differences between
mpeg2ts --> Pic Mjpeg quality=19 --> mpeg2
&
mpeg2ts --> HuffYUV --> mpeg2

Alex Raskin · October 12th, 2003, 01:52 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Ken Hodson : I would be very interested in knowing the visual differences between
mpeg2ts --> Pic Mjpeg quality=19 --> mpeg2
&
mpeg2ts --> HuffYUV --> mpeg2 -->>>

I've done the following:

mpeg2ts --> HuffYUV (edit... edit...) --> (a few steps omitted) mpeg2 ->m2t -> back to D-VHS

...with great success. No visible image degradation using HD monitor.

Of course, it'd be great if someone did the tests using professional signal analyzers, so actual measurements could be used to proof whether the quality of the signal deteriorates or not.

Again, subjectively, looks the same to my eye.

Alex Raskin · October 12th, 2003, 01:55 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Mullen : <<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin :
I don't see how this would work if editing is kept in MPEG2 format domain, like wth Aspect HD. -->>>

Problem is -- your understanding of aspect isn't correct. No problem using AE. It works fine. -->>>

I have no understanding of Aspect HD except what I read in this forum and on their web site.

Nowhere did I see any mentioning of Aspect working with AE, but rather with P 6.5 only.

If I missed something... care to elaborate?

One-liners are not very helpful/useful, sorry.

David Newman · October 12th, 2003, 01:59 PM

The CineForm Aspect HD high definition CODEC (CFHD) works perfectly well with After Effects. In fact CFHD works will all VfW and DirectShow window packages (VirtualDub, AVISync, MediaPlayer, third editing and effects apps) and really anything that can use an AVI file. This is one of the many benefits of Aspect HD.

Alex Raskin · October 12th, 2003, 02:12 PM

Thanks David!

Now, *practically* speaking, what is the workflow?

My workflow: PPro outputs HUFFYUV AVIs of whatever I want to be processed by AE. Then I import them into AE, process, output back to PPro. Repeat until PPro edit is done.

Result: lossless roundabout, as HUFFYUV is a lossless codec.

Your workflow (I guess): PPro with Aspect imports the original mpeg2's. Whatever needs to be output to AE is then compressed into mpeg2 and imported into AE using Aspect. Then AE uses Aspect to compress ITS output into mpeg2, which then is imported back to PPro.

Is this correct?

If it is, what I see is multiple mpeg2 compression/degradation.

Note that because in "my workflow" example above the HYFFYUV codec used is lossless, there's no image degradation.

(I hope no-one is taking my comments as an attack on Aspect HD: I'm simply interested in figuring out the best possible way of practical HD editing, now.)

Emilio Le Roux · October 12th, 2003, 02:59 PM

Ken and Alex:

<<mpeg2ts --> HuffYUV --> mpeg2 -->>
I agree with your workflow. As I was saying I am using MJPEG at almost max quality, with a little compromise with quality, because huffyuv video is still huge for my current storage capacity.

Steve:

<<Problem is -- your understanding of aspect isn't correct. No problem using AE. It works fine.>>

My understanding of Aspect is that it costs $1200.

I have nothing against anyone who wants to profit from this apparent HD boom, with unique software and books. People who buy a camera usually have money for extras, i suppose. But sadly this isnt' the case of this particular 3rd-wordly guy. I simply don't have the money.

I haven't tried Aspect HD, i think there's no demo available, but my guess is that MPEG2 recompression during edition will introduce more artifacts than Huffyuv lossless codec, and perhaps more than a high rate MJPEG codec either.

Of course there's more than a simple MPEG2 editing scheme. Aspect HD is based in a new codec technology, so I can be wrong about the quality.

But I'd rather be wrong with free huffyuv codec, or picvideo free demo, or with $99 picvideo MJPEG registered codec, that works seamlessly with premiere, vegas and AE for any purpose.

Perhaps my next investment could be Aspect HD, if it proves to pay itself in a short period of time. But i fear there will always be some nice video hardware offer at this price tag to tempt me. Perhaps I would trade the $3000 camera plus the $1200 codec for a $4200 camera.

David Newman · October 12th, 2003, 03:14 PM

Aspect HD of course is much more than a codec. The Codec is not MPEG2 based (for all the reasons mentioned.) CFHD is wavelet based with very high quality multi-generation abilities -- plus real-time. It is 2-3 more efficient than HUFFYUV and 3-4 times faster.

Steve Mullen · October 12th, 2003, 03:38 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin : Thanks David!

Your workflow (I guess): PPro with Aspect imports the original mpeg2's. Whatever needs to be output to AE is then compressed into mpeg2 and imported into AE using Aspect. Then AE uses Aspect to compress ITS output into mpeg2, which then is imported back to PPro. -->>>

Did you get this understandstanding from the the Aspect HD site?

Steve Mullen · October 12th, 2003, 03:43 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Emilio Le Roux :

My understanding of Aspect is that it costs $1200. -->>>

Didn't the HD10 cost you nearly $4000? So I'm curious since you already have the KDDI NLE, why you aren't using it. It really isn't that bad.

And you can avoid all these convertions you worry about.

Matthew Phillips · October 12th, 2003, 09:12 PM

As earlier stated by David Newman:
"It comes with two handles, yes (one with and one without the XLR audio input.) It doesn't come with the shotgun mic."

Is this true? (sorry I don't always believe what I read.)

If so, What would be a quality shot gun mic that would work well in most cases?

Matt

Darren Kelly · October 13th, 2003, 08:43 AM

To get the most out of the audio, you will want to use a professional -60db mic.

It helps with the camera's auto gain.

October 11th, 2003, 11:54 PM	#31
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin : I don't see how this would work if editing is kept in MPEG2 format domain, like wth Aspect HD. -->>> Problem is -- your understanding of aspect isn't correct. No problem using AE. It works fine. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

October 12th, 2003, 12:54 PM	#32
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	Emilio- The quality=19 setting is interesting. But my concern all along is unless you are going to leave your final video in Mjpeg format (not very usefull) you will want to convert to WM9, Divx, Mpeg2, or back to Mpeg2ts. From my experience in the past I have found that Mjpeg, due to the way it compresses is not very suitable when recompressing back to a mpeg4 type codec (WM9 or Divx) I have never tried recompressing back to mpeg2 or mpeg2ts in that situation. I would be very interested in knowing the visual differences between mpeg2ts --> Pic Mjpeg quality=19 --> mpeg2 & mpeg2ts --> HuffYUV --> mpeg2 __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 12th, 2003, 03:38 PM	#39
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	<<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin : Thanks David! Your workflow (I guess): PPro with Aspect imports the original mpeg2's. Whatever needs to be output to AE is then compressed into mpeg2 and imported into AE using Aspect. Then AE uses Aspect to compress ITS output into mpeg2, which then is imported back to PPro. -->>> Did you get this understandstanding from the the Aspect HD site? __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

October 12th, 2003, 03:43 PM	#40
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	<<<-- Originally posted by Emilio Le Roux : My understanding of Aspect is that it costs $1200. -->>> Didn't the HD10 cost you nearly $4000? So I'm curious since you already have the KDDI NLE, why you aren't using it. It really isn't that bad. And you can avoid all these convertions you worry about. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

October 13th, 2003, 08:43 AM	#42
Darren Kelly Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver Posts: 351	To get the most out of the audio, you will want to use a professional -60db mic. It helps with the camera's auto gain. __________________ Darren Kelly

October 12th, 2003, 01:52 PM	#33
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	<<<-- Originally posted by Ken Hodson : I would be very interested in knowing the visual differences between mpeg2ts --> Pic Mjpeg quality=19 --> mpeg2 & mpeg2ts --> HuffYUV --> mpeg2 -->>> I've done the following: mpeg2ts --> HuffYUV (edit... edit...) --> (a few steps omitted) mpeg2 ->m2t -> back to D-VHS ...with great success. No visible image degradation using HD monitor. Of course, it'd be great if someone did the tests using professional signal analyzers, so actual measurements could be used to proof whether the quality of the signal deteriorates or not. Again, subjectively, looks the same to my eye.

October 12th, 2003, 01:55 PM	#34
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Mullen : <<<-- Originally posted by Alex Raskin : I don't see how this would work if editing is kept in MPEG2 format domain, like wth Aspect HD. -->>> Problem is -- your understanding of aspect isn't correct. No problem using AE. It works fine. -->>> I have no understanding of Aspect HD except what I read in this forum and on their web site. Nowhere did I see any mentioning of Aspect working with AE, but rather with P 6.5 only. If I missed something... care to elaborate? One-liners are not very helpful/useful, sorry.

October 12th, 2003, 01:59 PM	#35
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	The CineForm Aspect HD high definition CODEC (CFHD) works perfectly well with After Effects. In fact CFHD works will all VfW and DirectShow window packages (VirtualDub, AVISync, MediaPlayer, third editing and effects apps) and really anything that can use an AVI file. This is one of the many benefits of Aspect HD.

October 12th, 2003, 02:12 PM	#36
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	Thanks David! Now, practically speaking, what is the workflow? My workflow: PPro outputs HUFFYUV AVIs of whatever I want to be processed by AE. Then I import them into AE, process, output back to PPro. Repeat until PPro edit is done. Result: lossless roundabout, as HUFFYUV is a lossless codec. Your workflow (I guess): PPro with Aspect imports the original mpeg2's. Whatever needs to be output to AE is then compressed into mpeg2 and imported into AE using Aspect. Then AE uses Aspect to compress ITS output into mpeg2, which then is imported back to PPro. Is this correct? If it is, what I see is multiple mpeg2 compression/degradation. Note that because in "my workflow" example above the HYFFYUV codec used is lossless, there's no image degradation. (I hope no-one is taking my comments as an attack on Aspect HD: I'm simply interested in figuring out the best possible way of practical HD editing, now.)

October 12th, 2003, 02:59 PM	#37
Emilio Le Roux Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Salvador, Bahia Posts: 33	Ken and Alex: <<mpeg2ts --> HuffYUV --> mpeg2 -->> I agree with your workflow. As I was saying I am using MJPEG at almost max quality, with a little compromise with quality, because huffyuv video is still huge for my current storage capacity. Steve: <<Problem is -- your understanding of aspect isn't correct. No problem using AE. It works fine.>> My understanding of Aspect is that it costs $1200. I have nothing against anyone who wants to profit from this apparent HD boom, with unique software and books. People who buy a camera usually have money for extras, i suppose. But sadly this isnt' the case of this particular 3rd-wordly guy. I simply don't have the money. I haven't tried Aspect HD, i think there's no demo available, but my guess is that MPEG2 recompression during edition will introduce more artifacts than Huffyuv lossless codec, and perhaps more than a high rate MJPEG codec either. Of course there's more than a simple MPEG2 editing scheme. Aspect HD is based in a new codec technology, so I can be wrong about the quality. But I'd rather be wrong with free huffyuv codec, or picvideo free demo, or with $99 picvideo MJPEG registered codec, that works seamlessly with premiere, vegas and AE for any purpose. Perhaps my next investment could be Aspect HD, if it proves to pay itself in a short period of time. But i fear there will always be some nice video hardware offer at this price tag to tempt me. Perhaps I would trade the $3000 camera plus the $1200 codec for a $4200 camera.

October 12th, 2003, 03:14 PM	#38
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	Aspect HD of course is much more than a codec. The Codec is not MPEG2 based (for all the reasons mentioned.) CFHD is wavelet based with very high quality multi-generation abilities -- plus real-time. It is 2-3 more efficient than HUFFYUV and 3-4 times faster.

October 12th, 2003, 09:12 PM	#41
Matthew Phillips New Boot Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Dallas, Texas, USA Posts: 14	As earlier stated by David Newman: "It comes with two handles, yes (one with and one without the XLR audio input.) It doesn't come with the shotgun mic." Is this true? (sorry I don't always believe what I read.) If so, What would be a quality shot gun mic that would work well in most cases? Matt