And now, for a change from the SSE whining...

Douglas Villalba · October 14th, 2005, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Maier

It looked more like great sharp 16:9 SD than HD to me. Yes, not sharp enough. Well done and shot, just not as sharp as some other stuff that surfaced online. Maybe it was the compression for the web?

It is sharper than anything I have seen posted and a lot sharper than any Mini 35. It is not as finished or well lite but it is a wedding not a pre planned shot. It is so sharp on the bride's face that you can see every imperfection.
It is not as sharp as some of the PBS HD demos but for $5,500 what do you want. Just get an SD footage and blow it up to 720 and tell me if you don't see a differense.

Michael Maier · October 14th, 2005, 12:05 PM

Excuse Villalba, but I also have the camera, and the footage looks much sharper than that if seen natively. I'm guessing it was the web compression or it may be downconverted to SD, since it's a avi file.
It might have got me confused and I thought it was SD. No big deal.
But it's really well shot. Since it's HD, I'm sure the m2t version will look much better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Douglas Villalba

It is not as sharp as some of the PBS HD demos but for $5,500 what do you want. Just get an SD footage and blow it up to 720 and tell me if you don't see a differense.

You should hold down your horses fellow. I'm one of the most energetic believers in this camera around here. You really have nothing to convince me about.

Joseph H. Moore · October 14th, 2005, 12:07 PM

It does indeed have a nice look ... there is absolutely more *real detail* being resolved than any SD camera. (I hate the term "sharpness" ... we're not talking about focus.)

That said, it is a 1/3" CCD, and it shows. The mini-35 does a great job of adding a film-like DOF to the already film-like 24P motion, (I know this wasn't shot with the Mini-35) but nothing is going to magically give it the resolving power of a CineAlta or a Varicam with top shelf glass.

Thomas Smet · October 14th, 2005, 12:42 PM

That looks pretty good to me. I sometimes do weddings for people and one of the things I wanted to see was the camera used in a real wedding. Laszlo you showed the perfect examples of what the camera can be done for weddings. This footage should be shown to wedding videographers who are thinking of getting an HD camera. Your video alone could sell to that market.

For me it isn't all about detail but how clean the image is. I don't care about detail really because the last thing the bride wants to see is her wrinkles and how bad her dress was made. What is important is a clean overall image and this looks pretty clean to me. Blownup fullsscreen on my 1280x1024 monitor it looked very nice where DV blown up on the same monitor just doesn't look as nice.

Even if the lens doesn't resolve as much detail as the camera can do it will always look better to put softer pixels in a large resolution image than it does to blow up a sharp smaller image because you will get muddy looking aliased edges. This HD100 image looks clean and brides will want that over detail anyday.

On another note this is the first time I have really heard the compressed HDV audio in a live wedding environment and I thought it sounded pretty darn good. Weddings can really stress audio quality due to noise, background sound, shooting right into a band's speakers. I felt the audio actually held up pretty well for those concerned about compressed audio quality.

Laszlo have any of your clients seen any of their video yet and if so have you had any comments about the 30p look compared to 60i/60p. I notice you shoot with a 30 shutter speed so maybe this helps smooth the motion.

Greg Boston · October 14th, 2005, 01:12 PM

The comments about detail on things such as the bride's face are also concerns expressed by some Hollywood actors/actresses. Does the HD100 have a skin detail feature that softens skin tones while leaving the rest of the image razor sharp? I know several SD cameras do this but I'm not certain about the HD100.

Thanks,

-gb-

Marty Baggen · October 14th, 2005, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

I don't care about detail really because the last thing the bride wants to see is her wrinkles and how bad her dress was made.

Thomas! At your next wedding shoot..... if you have the urge to speak, DON'T. We all want you to stay alive!!

Barry Green · October 14th, 2005, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Boston

Does the HD100 have a skin detail feature that softens skin tones while leaving the rest of the image razor sharp?

Yes, there is a skin tone detail feature.

Laszlo Horvath · October 14th, 2005, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

Laszlo have any of your clients seen any of their video yet and if so have you had any comments about the 30p look compared to 60i/60p. I notice you shoot with a 30 shutter speed so maybe this helps smooth the motion.

Actually we shoot this wedding with my two DSR-300a camcorder, and I just shoot for my self all day with the HD100 to try it, see how the final footage will look. We was VERY SURPRISED on the overal image at the night after the wedding. I edited faaaaast, basically, just to show to few brides, women at different ages, (beleive me or not this count) and everyboody LOVED IT. One couple for the following Saturday, and one other for last Saturday give up a two camera shoot with the Sony DSR-300a and they want shoot they wedding with the HD100. I told them I have only one camera loke this, they was OK with it. Post to be $2000 chiper because only one camera shoot, but guess what? They ask, how much extra they need to pay!!!!!!
Whow.... that something. Of course I din't charged extra. I even explained to them a jerkyness of the 720p30 but first of all they don't even realized, sacond of all, they don't care. They said: "I feel my self in the movie.... The picture look like a 3D .... This picture have a depth ....The suits much blacker then on the other camera (Sony DSR-300a) At the dance floor everything is realistic, not over lighted Just like a movie..." etc
But, I need change my shooting style a big time, because the 720p30, but actually I don't mind to learn some new, higher end stuff. (like learn to shoot with "film" camera) I very enjoyed. I know LOT'S of wedding videographer who never used this camera, just b.....ing about this camera because the splitscreen, "jerkyness" etc... but again, they never ever used this camera, just read a lot on the internet.
I love this camera, love it, love it, love it.

Laszlo

Joseph H. Moore · October 14th, 2005, 01:55 PM

I'll take 30P over 60i anytime, anywhere. The progressive capture coupled with the shutter speed you chose did not yield a "jerky" look at all ... very solid.

The average Joe doesn't know why, or can conciously understand it, but they've been conditioned over the last 50 years to equate progessive display with quality and interlaced with cheap.

Greg Boston · October 14th, 2005, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laszlo Horvath

...and they want shoot they wedding with the HD100. I told them I have only one camera loke this, they was OK with it. Post to be $2000 chiper because only one camera shoot, but guess what? They ask, how much extra they need to pay!!!!!!
Whow.... that something. Of course I din't charged extra.

Well shucks Laszio, you could have paid for your second HD100 right there! ;-)

-gb-

Michael Maier · October 15th, 2005, 05:26 AM

A question for PAL users. When you shoot 24p, can you play it back in color via composite out to your TV? I can't. It shows black and white.

Werner Wesp · October 15th, 2005, 05:47 AM

I think we (PAL-users) beter use 25p...

Michael Maier · October 15th, 2005, 06:49 AM

But does the same happen when you try to play 24p in your TV?

Werner Wesp · October 15th, 2005, 10:20 AM

Not a clue, but I'll let you know as soon as I know (somewhere next week I'll test it).

SD-pal TV's won't be able to display it. An LCD shouldn't have any problem with it.... How do you think to connect it?

Michael Maier · October 15th, 2005, 10:56 AM

I just connected it to a big SD CRT 16:9 TV using composite. It showed in black and white. I just wanted to see how it looked in a bigger TV.

October 14th, 2005, 12:07 PM	#18
Joseph H. Moore Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 362	It does indeed have a nice look ... there is absolutely more real detail being resolved than any SD camera. (I hate the term "sharpness" ... we're not talking about focus.) That said, it is a 1/3" CCD, and it shows. The mini-35 does a great job of adding a film-like DOF to the already film-like 24P motion, (I know this wasn't shot with the Mini-35) but nothing is going to magically give it the resolving power of a CineAlta or a Varicam with top shelf glass.

October 14th, 2005, 12:42 PM	#19
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	That looks pretty good to me. I sometimes do weddings for people and one of the things I wanted to see was the camera used in a real wedding. Laszlo you showed the perfect examples of what the camera can be done for weddings. This footage should be shown to wedding videographers who are thinking of getting an HD camera. Your video alone could sell to that market. For me it isn't all about detail but how clean the image is. I don't care about detail really because the last thing the bride wants to see is her wrinkles and how bad her dress was made. What is important is a clean overall image and this looks pretty clean to me. Blownup fullsscreen on my 1280x1024 monitor it looked very nice where DV blown up on the same monitor just doesn't look as nice. Even if the lens doesn't resolve as much detail as the camera can do it will always look better to put softer pixels in a large resolution image than it does to blow up a sharp smaller image because you will get muddy looking aliased edges. This HD100 image looks clean and brides will want that over detail anyday. On another note this is the first time I have really heard the compressed HDV audio in a live wedding environment and I thought it sounded pretty darn good. Weddings can really stress audio quality due to noise, background sound, shooting right into a band's speakers. I felt the audio actually held up pretty well for those concerned about compressed audio quality. Laszlo have any of your clients seen any of their video yet and if so have you had any comments about the 30p look compared to 60i/60p. I notice you shoot with a 30 shutter speed so maybe this helps smooth the motion.

October 14th, 2005, 01:12 PM	#20
Greg Boston Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DFW area, TX Posts: 6,117 Images: 1	The comments about detail on things such as the bride's face are also concerns expressed by some Hollywood actors/actresses. Does the HD100 have a skin detail feature that softens skin tones while leaving the rest of the image razor sharp? I know several SD cameras do this but I'm not certain about the HD100. Thanks, -gb-

October 14th, 2005, 01:55 PM	#24
Joseph H. Moore Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 362	I'll take 30P over 60i anytime, anywhere. The progressive capture coupled with the shutter speed you chose did not yield a "jerky" look at all ... very solid. The average Joe doesn't know why, or can conciously understand it, but they've been conditioned over the last 50 years to equate progessive display with quality and interlaced with cheap.

October 15th, 2005, 05:26 AM	#26
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	A question for PAL users. When you shoot 24p, can you play it back in color via composite out to your TV? I can't. It shows black and white.

October 15th, 2005, 05:47 AM	#27
Werner Wesp Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Belgium Posts: 497	I think we (PAL-users) beter use 25p...

October 15th, 2005, 06:49 AM	#28
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	But does the same happen when you try to play 24p in your TV?

October 15th, 2005, 10:20 AM	#29
Werner Wesp Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Belgium Posts: 497	Not a clue, but I'll let you know as soon as I know (somewhere next week I'll test it). SD-pal TV's won't be able to display it. An LCD shouldn't have any problem with it.... How do you think to connect it?

October 15th, 2005, 10:56 AM	#30
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	I just connected it to a big SD CRT 16:9 TV using composite. It showed in black and white. I just wanted to see how it looked in a bigger TV.