Split screen technical explanation

[John Mitchell]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

All of the major hardware and software makers really do care about this stuff and they're definitely making the time for due diligence. After all, it's in their best interest to do so.

I 100% agree Chris - some on this thread are concerned that JVC are not even trying to fix the split screen problem. I think behind the scenes they're working their butts off to solve a difficult technical hurdle, but like most major corporations they're wary of coming out point blank and admitting the problem.

[Guy Barwood]

I have no doubt that they are aware and are working very hard. That is in a way part of the problem. Even though they have likely been working very hard for some time now there hasn't been a single update to try to help those with the cameras experiencing the problem.

My other concern is what will they do if they can't fix it with a firmware upgrade no matter how hard they try. Will they replace units or will users wear the problem? What if it takes more than a year to fix, many will be out of warranty, where will they stand.

I wouldn't be the first time a problem is fixed with a new model (HD1000 anyone?)

[Werner Wesp]

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

I agree. It doesn't matter what a single rep says to one person in a private discussion, thats not going to make JVC in my country commit to the same level of service. A public announcement is needed before anyone who is aware of the problem is going to be satisfied they will have the issue sorted.

Ken freed posted something here. Obviously lot's of dangers are included in doing that. I can see that for business-purposes not making a comment could be wise. Since this community is relatively small, this might be the optimal place to make a public statement - if it seems the right thing to do...

Anyway, such a statement isn't an easy one to make. The fact that it needs to be clear and true is obvious. The fact that it needs to be accepted is more of a problem. If it isn't it might work the other way and 'backfire'. A video-campany doesn't need an engineer to make his statement here - for obvioous reasons - but the statement of an sales rep won't do either... It is a fine judgement that needs to be made and performed in nice coëxistence with company policy.

Anyhow, JVC is welcome to send me a mail...

[Steve Mullen]

I think we may be seeing SSE as much more of a problem that it is. There are a few simple rules to follow to prevent SSE.

1. Be sure the darker areas (not black areas) when metered -- open the iris to F2 at the gain you want to use. For noise reasons, that means +12dB or under. (Alternately, be sure the average reading is about F4 and F5.6.)

2. Now -- at this gain -- manually White Balance. Now, don't switch gain.

You've got to look at the HD100 as a film camera using negative film. With negative film, you have to "expose for the dark." Unless you do so, the film will be clear -- with no details -- in the dark areas.

This is the opposite of most DV camcorders which act as though they use postive film. Here, you worry most about highlights. With film you must worry that highlights will yield clear areas with no detail.

I don't think we should expect JVC will "fix" this so-called -- by some -- problem. (Any fixes are already in the USA models. So if you are using a non-USA model, your coments simply don't apply to us!)

While looking for a faint SSE line -- moving lines of vertical smear were far more visable in my tests. Do we expect any company to "fix" these. Of course not. We either live with them or work to avoid them. And, overtime CCDs get better.

SSE is the same -- a visual artifact from the nature of the CCDs. There are dozens of artifacts in low-cost camcorders. And, plenty in DTV and HDTV. What's really new?

[Guy Barwood]

Honestly Steve, I think you are just making excuses for JVC. Film never produced such problems like this. When this effect is seem it just looks plain wrong. If vertical smear is bad thats another issue, but vertical smear is not uncommon to many cameras.

"What's really new?"
'SSE' is new. Show me one single camera other than the HD10x that has this problem. This problem is new, and that is the problem.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

This problem is new, and that is the problem.

All artifacts, when first seen, are a "problem."

I find PAL 50Hz intolarable, but millions don't.

I find interlace line-twiiter a horrible problem. Obviously, lots of folks don't.

The difference -- which you seem bent on missing -- is that most artifacts can't be prevented. SSE can.

So, either learn to work around SSE -- or don't buy the JVC. But your complaints are not going to produce any changes in the camcorder. It is exactly what it is -- in the USA.

This a repeat of the Sony "better fix" the Z1 to shoot 24p postings. It wasn't fixed and is selling very well! Or, the HD10 should be "fixed" to avoid 30p strobing. It was -- in the next generation, the HD100.

Interesting that the Motion Filter is working so well we don't hear complainys anymore about 30p. But, I can still see times when it doesn't work perfectly. I'm sure someone will spot this at some point.

Those that have real HD work to do will evaluate the trade-offs and then buy or not buy. Wishing things were different doesn't make any changes.

Changes happen, these days, only when semiconductor technology allows the wanted change. Not one day earlier.

[Guy Barwood]

I can see how this camera can work for a very highly set up enviroment, but that is a big limitation. Shooting a movie with this camera won't convince an event videographer to buy it if they know of this problem. Can't shoot a wedding, concert with one...

"Wishing things were different doesn't make any changes"
Sure beats the heck out of sitting back and praising manufactures for their faulty products. It takes a lot for changes to be made, but I'll guarrantee you this problem isn't in the HD100's successor, whenever that is released. That will speak volumes about the effectiveness of the voices of those who choose to speak out and complain about yet another new problem in new cameras.

Chris has already clearly discussed how manufacturers do listen to people like you and me in forums like this. Your message to them is clearly don't worry about fixing the problem, and personally, I believe that is the wrong message to be sending.

edit: By the way, I can't see any similarity of this issue with Sonys CF, but I can see a similarity with what I hear Canon went through with the XL1 with noise feedback from the tape mechanism (or was that the Sony PD170?, or both?) I believe both of these issues were fixed because they were faults with the cameras, not just a useless feature.

[Michael Maier]

Originally Posted by John Mitchell

It seems to me that a lot of people are only too happy to say they're not buying the camera because of x or y. But you can hear the frustration in their posts because, they know, that right now, it's the only camera in this budget range that has the features they really want. It isn't perfect, yes it has a design defect (due to new technology) - but it's an excellent compromise between price and functionality.

That about sums it all.

[Michael Maier]

Originally Posted by John Mitchell

I still bought it (on the grounds that if the split screen was a huge issue I'd simply return it) and I'm very pleased with it's performance. The split screen has not been a problem (barely noticeable at +9, slight even at +18). I may have one of the better units in this respect,

John, is your camera a NTSC or PAL? When did you get it?

Originally Posted by John Mitchell

I do know that newer cameras are coming out with updated firmware, as I already know one user with newer firmware than mine.

What is your version and the newer version of the firmware you saw from the other user's camera?

[Michael Maier]

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

Honestly Steve, I think you are just making excuses for JVC. Film never produced such problems like this. When this effect is seem it just looks plain wrong. If vertical smear is bad thats another issue, but vertical smear is not uncommon to many cameras.

"What's really new?"
'SSE' is new. Show me one single camera other than the HD10x that has this problem. This problem is new, and that is the problem.

I don't think Steve is making any excuses. He's just analysing from the point of view of what causes the split It seems that a firmware would not fix it, as it is a limitation of the CCD construction. So people buying the camera shouldn’t expect a fix. They should only buy if they know they can leave with it and work around it.

So, to sum it up, the HD100 is a great camera with a limitation. But it's price is also limited to $5500.
So, these are the alternatives;

a) take it for what it is and live with it

b) buy something else (good luck on finding another true progressive HD camera with interchangeable lens for that price)

c) Sell it and buy something else.

As easy as that.

[Stephen L. Noe]

I really think the issue will need to be fixed on the hardware side. A straight answer about the progress from JVC would be great even if it was not favorable to them. Knowing they are working on it and getting the solution in place on the production line is a great step.

The question was raised whether the people who already have the camera should suffer. I think not. The policy is, if the camera has the split screen then it is to be replaced, no questions asked. That's JVC's stand on it. This policy alone and seeing what the camera can produce would make me want to get it and if I had a problem with split screen, just take it back until I got one without the issue.

People are saying JVC should come out and say something but the fact is, they already have. If you have split screen, take the camera back in exchange for another one. It's a pain but how many shoot @ 50-60 lux constantly?

[Michael Maier]

I don't think JVC said "if the camera has the split screen then it is to be replaced, no questions asked"

Because all cameras have it. Maybe they said if it's visble under +18db or something, you can bring it back.

[Guy Barwood]

Obviously there are two distinct trains of thoughts in here:

A: Bad luck, live with it or don't buy it, what do you expect for 2 months wages, a camera without design flaws?

B: It needs to be fixed as it is a design flaw in the camera and should be competely fixed under warranty and before any more are shipped. It should never have been there to start with.

[Michael Maier]

Guy, have you bought one?

[Jiri Bakala]

Can anybody tell me about similar grade 'flaws' or 'defects' on DSR150/170, Z1U, DVX100/100A or XL2? Like, I am talking visible 'mistake-like' image flaw, not slightly noisy audio or bad ergonomics. I can think of the DVX100 zoom being really soft at the end of its range, some people complained about noisy audio on the PD150 but other than that... nothing else comes to mind.

So yes, I think that this camera has lot going for it but one serious problem that needs to be addressed and not accepted!