CHROMA NOISE in HD10s

Steve Mullen · October 21st, 2003, 02:29 PM

Paul, I'm really sorry to hear about your monitor.

The X1 from InFous -- i think.

But for $1300 you can get the Sanyo Z1 which I have and recommend highly.

The X1 uses a spinning color filter which cause some/most folks to see rainbows on moving objects.

Head to Video Systems where I review the Z1.

The color shifts are Color PHASE errors (PM) while brightness changes are Color AMPLITUDE AM) errors.

But, while I see PM, I also see AM on saturated red and blue areas.

AM is far more annoying.

Eric Bilodeau · October 21st, 2003, 04:17 PM

I agree with Steve that Amplitude modulation errors are more noticeable. I did see a lot of yellowish skintone shifts on HD monitors and it looked just fine to me, it is not all that bad

Alex Raskin · October 22nd, 2003, 09:39 AM

Does anybody else have HD10's footage snapshots?

If yes, please post the web links so we can see how chroma noise propagates itself in YOUR camera.

Mine are at:

http://fancyflix.com/hd10.htm

Darren Kelly · October 22nd, 2003, 07:13 PM

You know, I've looked at the footage off this camera on about 15 different monitors. Everything from LCD to progessional $20K HD monitors from Sony.

the level of quality of the monitor is a big difference and in my opinion, a CRT monitor is superior to an LCD.

If you're buying a new monitor for this camera, consider tube instead of LCD. The chroma noise is reduced, so in my opinion it's the monitor and not the camera in many cases (thought not all - traffic lights are trouble)

Cheers

Ken Hodson · October 22nd, 2003, 08:15 PM

I think if the footage is imported into the computer then a snapshot is taken and chroma noise is evident, iit s proof that it has come from the camera. Does this make sense? I mean the monitor is out of the question because it is not subjective viewing, but a frame from raw captured footage.

The questions that remain are:
Is the croma noise dependant on lighting levels?
Do the combinations of ample lighting and filters eliminate chroma noise ?
Is Alex's camera pooched?

Ken

Mitch Gould · October 23rd, 2003, 12:30 AM

These speculations on the origins of the high chroma noise fail to mention the extremely high noise-to-signal ratio that naturally results from dividing a single 1/3-inch chip into so many tiny sensors. It's the laws of physics, people.

A redesign could ameliorate this by using a much bigger chip or perhaps adding extremely sophisticated error-correction techniques in the chip.

But that would require HDV licensees to reconsider whether they want to continue treating this technology like Video **HOME** System for the 21st century.

(I hope they do just that.)

Hasn't it occured to you how much HD10 chroma noise looks like VHS noise?

Ken Hodson · October 23rd, 2003, 01:29 AM

We all know the camera could be better in many respects but that is not the issue.
We have to work around these limitations, or the problem we are having now, defining them.
I strongly believe that the chroma noise is proportional to light levels. If you look at Alex's pictures you can see the first two pictures have the most chroma noise, but they also are lacking in lighting. The out-door shot has higher levels of light but it is very direct giving us over exposed and under exposed areas. The shadow areas have the chroma noise.
It is my feeling that in studio conditions with pro lighting, chroma noise would be minimal. This cam seems like it can really benefit from a general high lumen environment. Almost treat it like a film camera. Shoot extreemly well lit, then drop the levels in post.
Ken

Eric Bilodeau · October 23rd, 2003, 05:51 AM

Ken is absolutely right, as I said earlier in this thread, with enough lighting it becomes less aparent, even totally absent.

Alex Raskin · October 23rd, 2003, 07:54 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Ken Hodson : ...the monitor is out of the question because it is not subjective viewing, but a frame from raw captured footage.>>>

Obviously.

<<<Is the croma noise dependant on lighting levels? >>>

All 3 videos were made at different light levels from radically different light sources, yet chroma noise is present very visibly in each snapshot.

Ken Hodson · October 23rd, 2003, 03:18 PM

Were the chroma noise levels the same through all 3 shots?
The chroma looks to be less on the final shot, and is the only shot approaching adequate lighting.
Ken

Frederic Lumiere · October 23rd, 2003, 03:25 PM

As far as I can tell the chroma noise gets more apparent in badly lit situations. I will post some snap shots as soon as I receive my copy of Panther to show how good and how bad the image can be. In a perfect lighting condition this camera takes AMAZING footage. So the morale of the story is, invest in a good gaffer before shooting with this camera.

Ken Hodson · October 23rd, 2003, 03:37 PM

Sounds good Frederic. That will help us get to the bottom of this.
Ken

Frederic Lumiere · October 24th, 2003, 06:14 PM

Here are some stills from footage I shot over the last couple of days. This is all in natural light. Anything shot in manual mode by tweeking the settings comes out beautiful, especially when it's well lit (i.e. butterfly shots). I notice plenty of chroma noise when i shot in shadows, or down on the sand while it was heavily overcast. You will notice my little notes under each shot. Compare the benches. One was shot in manual and the other in automatic mode. Automatic mode is no good. I know that the colors aren't ideal but it's nothing color correction can't enhance. (I'm a color correction freak).

My favorite however is B&W, looks like super 16mm. Take a look and let me know what you think. Oh, one last thing...I just got my copy of Panther today and i still haven't figured out how to convert m2t to something I can open in quicktime so these are frame grabs from OS X and they are not at full resolution because my G4 monitor doesn't have full HD rez. The max is 1152 X 768.

However, it's pretty cool to know that we're looking at these huge shots and they're not even full rez. DV NTSC is only 720 X 480!!!

Here's the link:

www.lumieremedia.com/hdv

Alex Raskin · October 24th, 2003, 07:17 PM

pathfinder.jpg:

the house's roof, doors, and back of the estate sign all have green stains - the same chroma noise I observed with my camera.

So what's your conclusion - we just live with it?

Frederic Lumiere · October 24th, 2003, 07:42 PM

Alex,

It's night time now and I'll check tomorrow morning but I'm pretty sure these stains are on the paint of the building. I'll check and let you guys know.

If indeed these are stains from the camera it's a major bummer...however, the stains did not show up on the bright scene with the butterfly.

The best test would be to light a color pattern the best we can.

I will let you know what i find about the house.

Hey, is the only way to get m2t converted to something usable by FCP to by Steve Mullen's $100 4HDV solution?

October 21st, 2003, 02:29 PM	#16
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	Paul, I'm really sorry to hear about your monitor. The X1 from InFous -- i think. But for $1300 you can get the Sanyo Z1 which I have and recommend highly. The X1 uses a spinning color filter which cause some/most folks to see rainbows on moving objects. Head to Video Systems where I review the Z1. The color shifts are Color PHASE errors (PM) while brightness changes are Color AMPLITUDE AM) errors. But, while I see PM, I also see AM on saturated red and blue areas. AM is far more annoying. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

October 21st, 2003, 04:17 PM	#17
Eric Bilodeau Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chicoutimi, Canada Posts: 334	I agree with Steve that Amplitude modulation errors are more noticeable. I did see a lot of yellowish skintone shifts on HD monitors and it looked just fine to me, it is not all that bad __________________ Eric Bilodeau video SFX,DOP ___________________ http://www.fictis.net info@fictis.net

October 22nd, 2003, 07:13 PM	#19
Darren Kelly Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver Posts: 351	You know, I've looked at the footage off this camera on about 15 different monitors. Everything from LCD to progessional $20K HD monitors from Sony. the level of quality of the monitor is a big difference and in my opinion, a CRT monitor is superior to an LCD. If you're buying a new monitor for this camera, consider tube instead of LCD. The chroma noise is reduced, so in my opinion it's the monitor and not the camera in many cases (thought not all - traffic lights are trouble) Cheers __________________ Darren Kelly

October 22nd, 2003, 08:15 PM	#20
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	I think if the footage is imported into the computer then a snapshot is taken and chroma noise is evident, iit s proof that it has come from the camera. Does this make sense? I mean the monitor is out of the question because it is not subjective viewing, but a frame from raw captured footage. The questions that remain are: Is the croma noise dependant on lighting levels? Do the combinations of ample lighting and filters eliminate chroma noise ? Is Alex's camera pooched? Ken __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 23rd, 2003, 01:29 AM	#22
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	We all know the camera could be better in many respects but that is not the issue. We have to work around these limitations, or the problem we are having now, defining them. I strongly believe that the chroma noise is proportional to light levels. If you look at Alex's pictures you can see the first two pictures have the most chroma noise, but they also are lacking in lighting. The out-door shot has higher levels of light but it is very direct giving us over exposed and under exposed areas. The shadow areas have the chroma noise. It is my feeling that in studio conditions with pro lighting, chroma noise would be minimal. This cam seems like it can really benefit from a general high lumen environment. Almost treat it like a film camera. Shoot extreemly well lit, then drop the levels in post. Ken __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 22nd, 2003, 09:39 AM	#18
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	Does anybody else have HD10's footage snapshots? If yes, please post the web links so we can see how chroma noise propagates itself in YOUR camera. Mine are at: http://fancyflix.com/hd10.htm

October 23rd, 2003, 12:30 AM	#21
Mitch Gould New Boot Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 12	These speculations on the origins of the high chroma noise fail to mention the extremely high noise-to-signal ratio that naturally results from dividing a single 1/3-inch chip into so many tiny sensors. It's the laws of physics, people. A redesign could ameliorate this by using a much bigger chip or perhaps adding extremely sophisticated error-correction techniques in the chip. But that would require HDV licensees to reconsider whether they want to continue treating this technology like Video HOME System for the 21st century. (I hope they do just that.) Hasn't it occured to you how much HD10 chroma noise looks like VHS noise?

October 23rd, 2003, 05:51 AM	#23
Eric Bilodeau Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chicoutimi, Canada Posts: 334	Ken is absolutely right, as I said earlier in this thread, with enough lighting it becomes less aparent, even totally absent. __________________ Eric Bilodeau video SFX,DOP ___________________ http://www.fictis.net info@fictis.net

October 23rd, 2003, 07:54 AM	#24
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	<<<-- Originally posted by Ken Hodson : ...the monitor is out of the question because it is not subjective viewing, but a frame from raw captured footage.>>> Obviously. <<<Is the croma noise dependant on lighting levels? >>> All 3 videos were made at different light levels from radically different light sources, yet chroma noise is present very visibly in each snapshot.

October 23rd, 2003, 03:18 PM	#25
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	Were the chroma noise levels the same through all 3 shots? The chroma looks to be less on the final shot, and is the only shot approaching adequate lighting. Ken __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 23rd, 2003, 03:25 PM	#26
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	As far as I can tell the chroma noise gets more apparent in badly lit situations. I will post some snap shots as soon as I receive my copy of Panther to show how good and how bad the image can be. In a perfect lighting condition this camera takes AMAZING footage. So the morale of the story is, invest in a good gaffer before shooting with this camera.

October 23rd, 2003, 03:37 PM	#27
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	Sounds good Frederic. That will help us get to the bottom of this. Ken __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

October 24th, 2003, 06:14 PM	#28
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Stills from HD10U footage Here are some stills from footage I shot over the last couple of days. This is all in natural light. Anything shot in manual mode by tweeking the settings comes out beautiful, especially when it's well lit (i.e. butterfly shots). I notice plenty of chroma noise when i shot in shadows, or down on the sand while it was heavily overcast. You will notice my little notes under each shot. Compare the benches. One was shot in manual and the other in automatic mode. Automatic mode is no good. I know that the colors aren't ideal but it's nothing color correction can't enhance. (I'm a color correction freak). My favorite however is B&W, looks like super 16mm. Take a look and let me know what you think. Oh, one last thing...I just got my copy of Panther today and i still haven't figured out how to convert m2t to something I can open in quicktime so these are frame grabs from OS X and they are not at full resolution because my G4 monitor doesn't have full HD rez. The max is 1152 X 768. However, it's pretty cool to know that we're looking at these huge shots and they're not even full rez. DV NTSC is only 720 X 480!!! Here's the link: www.lumieremedia.com/hdv

October 24th, 2003, 07:17 PM	#29
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	pathfinder.jpg: the house's roof, doors, and back of the estate sign all have green stains - the same chroma noise I observed with my camera. So what's your conclusion - we just live with it?

October 24th, 2003, 07:42 PM	#30
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Alex, It's night time now and I'll check tomorrow morning but I'm pretty sure these stains are on the paint of the building. I'll check and let you guys know. If indeed these are stains from the camera it's a major bummer...however, the stains did not show up on the bright scene with the butterfly. The best test would be to light a color pattern the best we can. I will let you know what i find about the house. Hey, is the only way to get m2t converted to something usable by FCP to by Steve Mullen's $100 4HDV solution?