Hd1 new info

[Joseph George]

Check this out, pulled from another site, will download slowly; I'm in a hotel and my connection is very slow.

While we're all waiting for some new video samples, I did some searching of Japanese web sites and found 2 sites that compared the GR-HD1 to some other available dv cams - text as well as pictures. If you don't real Japanese (I don't), you can still get the gist of the comments from the translation performed on the site.

top level - site 1

http://www.sonyshop.c-tec.co.jp/main/vcam/gr-hd1.htm

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babe...lp=ja_en&tt=url

http://www.sonyshop.c-tec.co.jp/mai...r-hd1_info4.htm

translated version

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babe...r-hd1_info4.htm

http://www.sonyshop.c-tec.co.jp/mai...r-hd1_info3.htm

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babe...r-hd1_info3.htm

Site 2

http://www.soundweb-asia.com/produc..._hd1/page_1.htm

translated version:

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babe...lp=ja_en&tt=url

Please note:

30 fps for film production is perfectly okay if the indie film is intended for North American Markets. Top cinematographers actually prefer 30 to 24 fps. IMAX HD is 48 fps. Landmark is installing digital projection in something like 170 theater screens in major US markets. This is the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure Europe will follow. The equipment Landmarks is installing does accept 30p footage.

Russian Arc, one of the biggest achievements in film ever, that was shot in CineAlta and released on film in the US is now in addition to that being shown digitally in some of the Landmarks---that were converted already.

[Joseph George]

Let's see if JVC will be able make this camcorder usable for HD production. Let's see what Consumer Reports will say about it. If they say it's junk, it will be even more so for pro applications.

[Steve Mullen]

<<<-- Originally posted by Joseph George :30 fps for film production is perfectly okay if the indie film is intended for North American Markets. Top cinematographers actually prefer 30 to 24 fps. IMAX HD is 48 fps. Landmark is installing digital projection in something like 170 theater screens in major US markets. This is the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure Europe will follow. The equipment Landmarks is installing does accept 30p footage.

Russian Arc, one of the biggest achievements in film ever, that was shot in CineAlta and released on film in the US is now in addition to that being shown digitally in some of the Landmarks---that were converted already. -->>>

This is misleading to anyone thinking of shooting film with the JVC:

1) 35mm film is 24fps. No 35mm projector anywhere runs at any other speed. No one shoots anything but 24fps except as a special effect.

2) There is no way to get a high quality conversion from 30fpds PROGRESSIVE to 24fps. You can do any other format you want: 25p, 50i, 60i, and 60p. The mathematics of tracking objects and partially hidden objects makes it unrealistic to think of doing a feature film that way.

3) No one who is shooting video for film should count on it being shown in Landmark theaters. Do you expect them to tell their potential distibutor "oh, just one little thing, you can only show this on 53 theaters in the whole world. And, yes it's true that NYC has only one screen and they may not yet have installed digital."

4) CineAlta is 24p/25p. HDCAM is 50i or 60i. Varicam is 24p, 50p, or 60p. (Russian Ark was transferred to film for distribution. I believe that it would then have been converted to Windows Media 9 for Landmark.)

5) There are many non-Landmark theaters with DLP projectors. The input to these is digital media FROM 24fps film. The conversion is done by an HD telecine at a lab. From film. Even Landmark distributes from a central lab that inputs film. (It may also have a D-5 and/or HDCAM deck, but that won't help you.)

Please call DuArt or DVFilm or Swiss Effects if you doubt me on this. One of the key advantages of film is you can show it anywhere.

[Joseph George]

Landmark covers major markets in the US. They are installing digital projection that accepts 30p. This new digital projection costs a lot less to install than the one Steve Mullen talks about.

This forum is about 30p camera and the audience wants to hear if they will be able to use 30p, not that they can't.

Landmark Theaters is a chain that caters to indie films. So you'll be able to shoot in 30p and distribute to major US markets. And you will not have to transfer to film. Landmark will have something like 170 digital screens in their US chain.

30p, or fps, was used in the past on expensive productions but for economic reasons it did not succeed -- not for artistic reasons. 24 fps is an archaic speed that dates to 1929.

[Frank Granovski]

>24 fps is an archaic speed that dates to 1929.<

Isn't film projected at 48fps on the big screen (each frame flashed twice)?

[Steve Mullen]

<<<-- Originally posted by Joseph George This forum is about 30p camera and the audience wants to hear if they will be able to use 30p, not that they can't. -->>>

They deserve the truth -- not a claim they can IF they show their work at one chain of theaters. (53 physical locations in only 13 states)

Specifically, the questions have been about going to FILM. If you bring your D-VHS deck to a Landmark theater (or any location with a projector), you are not going to film. You're simply using the local projector. That's not distribution.

What you need to post is a Statement of Acceptance from Landmark that they will let you bring/send your D-VHS VTR or HD10 to their central site and connect, via 1394, at 720p30 to their WM9 conversion system. (I went to their site and found only PR -- no detailed info at all.)


HOWEVER, if you are interested in forgetting film -- then 30p HD-DVD distribution to DLP projectors is a great idea. Since projectors are all over the world, the only missing link is a cheap Blu-ray DVD Player for use at those locations.

Of course, JVC makes copyprotect D-VHS decks right now for about $1500.

[Peter Moore]

Obviously the HD1 is not intended for indy movies. It would not have been that hard to give it a 24p mode. That said, is there really no way to convert 30p to 24p?

[Joseph George]

Re: Steve Mullen's post.

You do not bring your deck to the theater. You supply them with your film on tape. They'll convert it and will distribute it for you. I have no idea which formats they accept, so you may have to spend very little extra $ to have your tape transfered to an acceptable format. It is nothing comared to transfer to film. Landmark is in most major markets that has audience for foreign and art movies. You do not have to go beyond Landmark for your US distribution.


Re: Peter More's post:

Yes, you can slow down digitally 30p to 24p. The software exists, but it is a slow, tedious, and expensive work -- you have to do a lot of manual adjustments on fast moving objects or complex motion. Even if you have the work done by pros, it will be a fraction of cost of transfer to film and making prints. Again, it is doable, and results are outstanding.

Basically you start with Landmark and if this turns out to be a hit, and you'd like to go with a much wider distribution, no problem; at that time you've made many times more than it would cost to go optical.

[Steve Mullen]

<<<-- Originally posted by Peter Moore : It would not have been that hard to give it a 24p mode. -->>>

Sorry, but comments like these drive me crazy. It has taken 50 years to get progressive vodeo to market. Sony still hasn't done it in DV. It could have cost a lot or little. But, for sure, no one on this site knows.

Equally, silly is the repeated claims of what Landmark will do without any link to a site that supports the claim. I'd be happy if this were true -- but where's the data to support the claim.

And, as one would expect -- the stills from the Japanese sites don't show much. The DVX100 sites spent months looking at stills.


But this silliness no doubt will get worse while we wait. The DX100 site was unreadable in the month before and after NAB. At least we don't have Sony folks claiming how someone somewhere compared something Sony to the DVX100 -- and found the Sony far better at IR photography.

[Peter Moore]

"Sorry, but comments like these drive me crazy. It has taken 50 years to get progressive vodeo to market. Sony still hasn't done it in DV. It could have cost a lot or little. But, for sure, no one on this site knows."

Who cares what Sony has done? Technologically speaking, especially since it uses MPEG-2, this HD1 camera could have easily been given a 24p mode if it has been given a 30p mode. How could it possibly be harder to do 24p than 30p when you're designing a totally new piece of hardware and scrapping the DV format?

[Joseph George]

Steve:

It is true about Landmark. I had this inside information for a while and posted it here, yet everyone ignored it. It was in one of the HD1 threads. Maybe you can email or call them if it is not on their site, or call the people that are installing the equipment. Anyway, a new era started. You no longer need 24p for cinema production. And why should I give you some links to support my claim? Do your own research! Guys, be glad that I am giving you this groundbreaking information, already 2nd time, before it is even announced.


Peter:

The reasons Sony is not including 24 fps and is playing catch up with Panasonic are:

1. Sony is making a lot more money in the pro market than Panasonic and if they started to include features like this, they would lose sales of some of the more profitable -- more expensive -- models.

2. Matsushita is trying to gain market share in Sony territory, that's why they are coming out with DVX100 and HD1/10. In order to prevent losing sales in the more expensive categories, they are putting too many limitations on these camcorder. The DVX has a viewfinder and LCD with about a 300-line resolution, interlaced, on a 500-line resolving progressive system. The DVX has something like up to 1.5 or 2 frames shift between sound and picture. PD150, an older camera, has no shift. To get rid of the shift would cost Panasonic about $1 or something on that order. PDX10 basically has native CCD chip and 500 and 800 horizontal line resolving viewfinder and LCD, but Sony never really promoted much this camera, because it would again cut into sales of their more expensive models. They achieve the high resolution by using B/W viewfinder and special pixel arrangement on the LCD. The DVX does not autofocus in progressive, does not have gain up in progressive, which lowers it's lux rating to about 24 (in progressive). To fix these features would cost them something like $10, or something on that order. They sell expensive anamorphic adapter instead of using 16:9 chips. Although anamorphic lenses are OK, adapters are never of sufficient quality. I could go on. The HD1 has something like 100K color interlaced viewfinder (apparently without any special pixel arrangement) on a 1 meg (1000K) progressive CCD. I could go on. Beside all these limitations the DVX, because of its progressive scan, is the greatest bargain anywhere near its price.

3. Sony had the technology to come out with blu-ray HD DVD at this year's NAB. But they did not. Again, it has everything to do with not cutting into the sales of their expensive SD models. CineAlta cameras cost nearly twice as much as Varicam and sell better. They don't want to jeopardize their expensive sales, and will hold on introduction of low cost HD stuff as long as they can. Then they will enter the market with a boom and will probably regain their market share.

4. Because we are not getting quality low end pro stuff has nothing to do with technology but everything to do with marketing.

5. By Christmas or the next NAB there will be other MPEG2 HD camcorders, including Sony HD DVD model(s).

Have a good one! I'll be back on the road.

[Peter Moore]

"4. Because we are not getting quality low end pro stuff has nothing to do with technology but everything to do with marketing."

I think that's probably right. I complain all the time about my Canon GL2 being castrated of certain features in the still photo mode. People make fun of me - "Why would you want to shoot a still photo with a DV camera?" Hello - because the pictures are gorgeous. But they screw up the exposure settings so much that you can't get decent pictures in low light. Oh well.

[Chris Hurd]

Joseph:

"And why should I give you some links to support my claim? Do your own research!"

It is my firm belief that the responsibility for substantiating claims lies squarely on the person making them, not reading them.

As the owner of this discussion board, I will always strongly advise anyone to regard with suspicion any instance of such a claim where the poster is unable or unwilling to provide some form of documentation to support it. If the poster can't or won't back something up, then it's probably not for real.

[Joseph George]

Lot of the news in this town comes way before it's officially announced. E.g. it was well known that Lucas is choosing between Viper and CineAlta SR. It was also known weeks ahead of the official announcement that he decided in SR w/Fuji lenses. Everyone thought that it was such an important news. The news about Landmark and 30p is the same. Not all news comes with an official press release.

[Joe Carney]

The issue about Landmark and 30p is not accurate. Windows Media 9 can play 24p just fine, or 25p at up to 1080p. Plus up to 24/96 5.1 surround. It can also play back SD interlaced formats as well. It also has built in 3:2 pull down options for NTSC video that originated on film (much like a progressive DVD player)

If someone shoots with a cinealta at 24p (or 23.9xp) it can stay at 24p when encoding to Windows Media 9. Same for 30p. or 25p or...

Windows Media is NOT a 30p only format. That would make it useless for most of the world.

What is so great about the Landmark announcement is with the right software, moviemakers can take SD footage and upconvert to HD progressive while still keeping reasonably good quality.

Progressive projectors, like CRT monitors, can handle any frame rate up to their max refresh rate.

With Win Media 9 the choice of using SD/HD/NTSC or PAL can become a asthetic issue, not a distribution one.

If anyone doesn't believe this, go here...
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/download/default.asp
and downlaod both the player and the encoder utilities. Both are free and try out different frame rates, playback speeds and what ever.

Its the flexibility and low cost of entry that make the Landmark deal important to the independent community.

Note, I think you have to have WinXP to get HD with surruond encodng capabilites.

Here is the link to the Windows Media encoder home page:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/win...r/default.aspx