Color, etc., with the GR-HD1

Tom Roper · March 31st, 2005, 12:57 AM

(rolling eyes...) Knock it off...Now!

If anyone is paying attention, Ben and Ken are the film makers!

Steve Watnet · March 31st, 2005, 01:05 AM

It's turning into an orgy in here. Back to hardware. Any speculation on what the nature of the HDx problem is?

Do you think that the problem it has with really bright sunlight is the same thing causing the problem with the poor handling of low light (I know that mught be a hard thing to speculate about).

And what does it mean when you say you have to "experiment" and be careful with lighting and stuff, can you elaborate and amplify?

Tom Roper · March 31st, 2005, 01:52 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Watnet :Do you think that the problem it has with really bright sunlight is the same thing causing the problem with the poor handling of low light (I know that mught be a hard thing to speculate about).

And what does it mean when you say you have to "experiment" and be careful with lighting and stuff, can you elaborate and amplify? -->>>

I'm just repeating what's already been noted by others, that small (1/3 inch) high density CCDs (1280x720) are slow to respond to light. The problem of latitude is one of attempting to record the full dynamic range from maximum brightness to minimum, without clipping the brights or losing detail in the dark areas.

The other problem is mpeg compression, where in the 6 GOP (group of pictures) scheme used by HD1/10, only one frame contains all the picture information, and subsequent/previous frames record only the difference from adjacent frames. That's a problem with the compressed HDV format that appears during fast motion and panning, and the result of the compromise of storing 19mb/s on miniDV tape.

To experiment, is simply to repeat things you've already tried under known conditions, so that when faced with crux of performing for real in a new situation, you have a basis of previous judgment to call upon.

Where it's convenient to, I practice shooting and re-shooting the same irrelevant scenes to gain experience with shutter speeds, apertures, white balance, programmed modes, lens filters, viewfinders, basically any and all of the camera's feature set. Eventually, you acquire the judgment that lets you forsee the potential problems of the scene in advance. In the end, the goal is to attain perfect exposure, white balance and latitude that captures shadow detail without blowing the highlights, maximize sharpness, color saturation and fluidity, and minimize panning artifacts and chroma noise. To achive all of those things at once is difficult, but mostly possible with practice and experience.

So it's a camera that rewards planning and preparation, and a smooth and steady hand, and penalizes the abrupt point and shoot style. That's why I made the Ansel Adams comment, it's a modern day view camera, not a pocket digital cam. The really good 1080i cameras, HDCAM, VARICAMs make everyone an expert. Lesser cams like the HD1/10 are less forgiving of hand holds, exposure and motion.

Tom Roper · March 31st, 2005, 02:32 AM

As I was writing the last post, I was distracted by a short feature on Discovery HD Theater about a Japan Auto show. It was an indoor setting with brightly colored automobiles, interesting human subjects and crisp overhead mercury lamps.

It was exactly the type of setting I was referring to, where a HD1/10 would excel. You wouldn't need any filters, a 1/60th shutter speed would be about optimum, and you'd have richly saturated colors, high sharpness and contrast that would really set off the HD1/10. I was visualizing that with probably just a tripod, I could make something that would hold up respectably to the 1080i VARICAM in that circumstance, with a bit of a filmic look added.

And just now, Discovery HD is showing the US Navy Blue Angels aerobatic team. That type of footage would be considerably more difficult to mimic with the HD1/10. In one sense, it's oversaturated in the manner of vibrant colors we are accustomed to with broadcast television, and artifact free panning. But it combines unparalleled image stabilization, the exposure and latitude are perfect under a rich blue sky, shadow detail and highlights that are not overexposed. Combined with high motion and changing light, it would not be possible to match that quality with the HD1/10, it's just too much all at once.

Steve Watnet · March 31st, 2005, 02:52 AM

I could listen to you all day long

Murad Toor · April 5th, 2005, 10:11 AM

My biggest problem with my HD10 is it takes a long time to render all the beautiful HD stuff in the final stages of production. :)

I'm delivering a few hours of programming and my machine has both its processors full. This last week of production it'll be at or near 100% for more than 60 hours. Of course I'm letting a lot of stuff process overnight.

Steve Watnet · April 6th, 2005, 02:10 AM

You're editing offline, right?

Nobody edits online with this stuff, right?

Murad Toor · April 6th, 2005, 03:59 AM

I edited everything offline using Apple's OfflineRT NTSC Anamorphic preset, which is PhotoJPEG 320x240 at 35% quality, with uncompressed 16 bit 48KHz stereo. I'm in the final stages, bringing everything "online." I put that in quotes because I'm using DVCProHD720p as my online codec. The reason for that is I've got 6+ hours of programming to turn out and only 1.7 terabytes of hard drive space.

I bet there are people out there editing online with this stuff. Those people are working on shorter running time projects and/or have the hard drive capacity to do it.

Steve Watnet · April 6th, 2005, 09:54 PM

I just went and looked at the HD1 for the first time today. I can see why everybody was so up in arms saying /the dvx is a better camera etc/

Just a couple controls on the cam. Is the 10 as simple as the 1?

Ken Hodson · April 6th, 2005, 10:35 PM

By simple do you mean lack of controlls or do you mean easy to operate?
As far as contolls go they are identical.

Graham Hickling · April 6th, 2005, 11:02 PM

>Just a couple controls on the cam

Ah but ... each control does more than one thing!

Tom Roper · April 7th, 2005, 12:49 AM

Guys, I just got through watching Ben Buie's Docudrama, "ON OUR WAY UP" in Hi-Definition WMV-HD. Wow! I'll have more to say about it later, but if you're HD-ready and bought a dvx because it had more controls without seeing HD1/10 output done right, you'll be sick with envy later.

Steve Watnet · April 7th, 2005, 06:52 AM

Part of what I've noticed out here (+I assume this is true anywhere) is that in looking for work, people want to know what your gear is--primarily your camera. DVXs are popular. I have never heard of a JVC requested by name. I imagine the next under 10k camera to occupy that category will be the Z1 (everybody loves to contemplate his/her 35mm blow-up).

But the HD100 looks like it might win hearts and minds at the low end of the scale (even though it is more professional than prosumer). I think this really is a battle of technology platform marketing, and just like choosing mac or PC, the game is to try and anticipate where the market will go.

(Either that or I am just spending way too much time fantasizing about all the gear I'm going to buy.)

What I'm wondering is, is the JVC HD platform really kind of fundamentally different from the Sony or Pana? Over in the HD100 area, in the Sean Dinwoodie post, Sean posited that JVC does HD really really well.

One assumes that the chips in the HD100 can trace their lineage back to the HD1/10 chip. Does that mean in spending the time to understand the nuances of HD1/10 operation, you are buying into the JVC platform and therefore, in some respects, training yourself for the HD100? Or are the differences negligible?

PS,

I think Ben should put his film on BitTorrent.

Murad Toor · April 7th, 2005, 08:34 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Watnet : What I'm wondering is, is the JVC HD platform really kind of fundamentally different from the Sony or Pana? Over in the HD100 area, in the Sean Dinwoodie post, Sean posited that JVC does HD really really well.

One assumes that the chips in the HD100 can trace their lineage back to the HD1/10 chip. Does that mean in spending the time to understand the nuances of HD1/10 operation, you are buying into the JVC platform and therefore, in some respects, training yourself for the HD100? Or are the differences negligible? -->>>

The JVC HD100's version of HD is almost identical to the Sony FX1/Z1 (all are HDV, with JVC adding a little something extra to HDV in the HD100), and both are very distinct from Panasonic's DVCProHD.

I think the training aspect isn't necessarily to do with the cameras but with the post production workflows. Today's FX1/Z1 editor can be completely comfortable working with HD100 editing. As operating the cameras go, the HD100 will be almost nothing like the HD1/10 because all of the controls make a huge difference. In that sense the FX1/Z1 are more similar to the HD100. Anyway 1080p24 will be great, and FX1/Z1 shooters will be envious.

Ken Hodson · April 7th, 2005, 09:03 AM

Thats 720p24.

March 31st, 2005, 12:57 AM	#31
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	Aw shucks... (rolling eyes...) Knock it off...Now! If anyone is paying attention, Ben and Ken are the film makers!

April 5th, 2005, 10:11 AM	#36
Murad Toor Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 125	my biggest problem with my HD10 My biggest problem with my HD10 is it takes a long time to render all the beautiful HD stuff in the final stages of production. :) I'm delivering a few hours of programming and my machine has both its processors full. This last week of production it'll be at or near 100% for more than 60 hours. Of course I'm letting a lot of stuff process overnight.

April 6th, 2005, 02:10 AM	#37
Steve Watnet Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: la, ca Posts: 87	Are you editing offline? You're editing offline, right? Nobody edits online with this stuff, right?

April 6th, 2005, 10:35 PM	#40
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	By simple do you mean lack of controlls or do you mean easy to operate? As far as contolls go they are identical. __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

April 7th, 2005, 09:03 AM	#45
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	Thats 720p24. __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

March 31st, 2005, 01:05 AM	#32
Steve Watnet Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: la, ca Posts: 87	It's turning into an orgy in here. Back to hardware. Any speculation on what the nature of the HDx problem is? Do you think that the problem it has with really bright sunlight is the same thing causing the problem with the poor handling of low light (I know that mught be a hard thing to speculate about). And what does it mean when you say you have to "experiment" and be careful with lighting and stuff, can you elaborate and amplify?

March 31st, 2005, 01:52 AM	#33
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Watnet :Do you think that the problem it has with really bright sunlight is the same thing causing the problem with the poor handling of low light (I know that mught be a hard thing to speculate about). And what does it mean when you say you have to "experiment" and be careful with lighting and stuff, can you elaborate and amplify? -->>> I'm just repeating what's already been noted by others, that small (1/3 inch) high density CCDs (1280x720) are slow to respond to light. The problem of latitude is one of attempting to record the full dynamic range from maximum brightness to minimum, without clipping the brights or losing detail in the dark areas. The other problem is mpeg compression, where in the 6 GOP (group of pictures) scheme used by HD1/10, only one frame contains all the picture information, and subsequent/previous frames record only the difference from adjacent frames. That's a problem with the compressed HDV format that appears during fast motion and panning, and the result of the compromise of storing 19mb/s on miniDV tape. To experiment, is simply to repeat things you've already tried under known conditions, so that when faced with crux of performing for real in a new situation, you have a basis of previous judgment to call upon. Where it's convenient to, I practice shooting and re-shooting the same irrelevant scenes to gain experience with shutter speeds, apertures, white balance, programmed modes, lens filters, viewfinders, basically any and all of the camera's feature set. Eventually, you acquire the judgment that lets you forsee the potential problems of the scene in advance. In the end, the goal is to attain perfect exposure, white balance and latitude that captures shadow detail without blowing the highlights, maximize sharpness, color saturation and fluidity, and minimize panning artifacts and chroma noise. To achive all of those things at once is difficult, but mostly possible with practice and experience. So it's a camera that rewards planning and preparation, and a smooth and steady hand, and penalizes the abrupt point and shoot style. That's why I made the Ansel Adams comment, it's a modern day view camera, not a pocket digital cam. The really good 1080i cameras, HDCAM, VARICAMs make everyone an expert. Lesser cams like the HD1/10 are less forgiving of hand holds, exposure and motion.

March 31st, 2005, 02:32 AM	#34
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	As I was writing the last post, I was distracted by a short feature on Discovery HD Theater about a Japan Auto show. It was an indoor setting with brightly colored automobiles, interesting human subjects and crisp overhead mercury lamps. It was exactly the type of setting I was referring to, where a HD1/10 would excel. You wouldn't need any filters, a 1/60th shutter speed would be about optimum, and you'd have richly saturated colors, high sharpness and contrast that would really set off the HD1/10. I was visualizing that with probably just a tripod, I could make something that would hold up respectably to the 1080i VARICAM in that circumstance, with a bit of a filmic look added. And just now, Discovery HD is showing the US Navy Blue Angels aerobatic team. That type of footage would be considerably more difficult to mimic with the HD1/10. In one sense, it's oversaturated in the manner of vibrant colors we are accustomed to with broadcast television, and artifact free panning. But it combines unparalleled image stabilization, the exposure and latitude are perfect under a rich blue sky, shadow detail and highlights that are not overexposed. Combined with high motion and changing light, it would not be possible to match that quality with the HD1/10, it's just too much all at once.

March 31st, 2005, 02:52 AM	#35
Steve Watnet Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: la, ca Posts: 87	I could listen to you all day long

April 6th, 2005, 03:59 AM	#38
Murad Toor Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 125	I edited everything offline using Apple's OfflineRT NTSC Anamorphic preset, which is PhotoJPEG 320x240 at 35% quality, with uncompressed 16 bit 48KHz stereo. I'm in the final stages, bringing everything "online." I put that in quotes because I'm using DVCProHD720p as my online codec. The reason for that is I've got 6+ hours of programming to turn out and only 1.7 terabytes of hard drive space. I bet there are people out there editing online with this stuff. Those people are working on shorter running time projects and/or have the hard drive capacity to do it.

April 6th, 2005, 09:54 PM	#39
Steve Watnet Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: la, ca Posts: 87	I just went and looked at the HD1 for the first time today. I can see why everybody was so up in arms saying /the dvx is a better camera etc/ Just a couple controls on the cam. Is the 10 as simple as the 1?

April 6th, 2005, 11:02 PM	#41
Graham Hickling Trustee Join Date: May 2004 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 1,669	>Just a couple controls on the cam Ah but ... each control does more than one thing!

April 7th, 2005, 12:49 AM	#42
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	Guys, I just got through watching Ben Buie's Docudrama, "ON OUR WAY UP" in Hi-Definition WMV-HD. Wow! I'll have more to say about it later, but if you're HD-ready and bought a dvx because it had more controls without seeing HD1/10 output done right, you'll be sick with envy later.

April 7th, 2005, 06:52 AM	#43
Steve Watnet Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: la, ca Posts: 87	Part of what I've noticed out here (+I assume this is true anywhere) is that in looking for work, people want to know what your gear is--primarily your camera. DVXs are popular. I have never heard of a JVC requested by name. I imagine the next under 10k camera to occupy that category will be the Z1 (everybody loves to contemplate his/her 35mm blow-up). But the HD100 looks like it might win hearts and minds at the low end of the scale (even though it is more professional than prosumer). I think this really is a battle of technology platform marketing, and just like choosing mac or PC, the game is to try and anticipate where the market will go. (Either that or I am just spending way too much time fantasizing about all the gear I'm going to buy.) What I'm wondering is, is the JVC HD platform really kind of fundamentally different from the Sony or Pana? Over in the HD100 area, in the Sean Dinwoodie post, Sean posited that JVC does HD really really well. One assumes that the chips in the HD100 can trace their lineage back to the HD1/10 chip. Does that mean in spending the time to understand the nuances of HD1/10 operation, you are buying into the JVC platform and therefore, in some respects, training yourself for the HD100? Or are the differences negligible? PS, I think Ben should put his film on BitTorrent.

April 7th, 2005, 08:34 AM	#44
Murad Toor Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 125	<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Watnet : What I'm wondering is, is the JVC HD platform really kind of fundamentally different from the Sony or Pana? Over in the HD100 area, in the Sean Dinwoodie post, Sean posited that JVC does HD really really well. One assumes that the chips in the HD100 can trace their lineage back to the HD1/10 chip. Does that mean in spending the time to understand the nuances of HD1/10 operation, you are buying into the JVC platform and therefore, in some respects, training yourself for the HD100? Or are the differences negligible? -->>> The JVC HD100's version of HD is almost identical to the Sony FX1/Z1 (all are HDV, with JVC adding a little something extra to HDV in the HD100), and both are very distinct from Panasonic's DVCProHD. I think the training aspect isn't necessarily to do with the cameras but with the post production workflows. Today's FX1/Z1 editor can be completely comfortable working with HD100 editing. As operating the cameras go, the HD100 will be almost nothing like the HD1/10 because all of the controls make a huge difference. In that sense the FX1/Z1 are more similar to the HD100. Anyway 1080p24 will be great, and FX1/Z1 shooters will be envious.