HD100 with mini35 today & Sony Z1 - good day

[Soroush Shahrokni]

Shawn, try www.yousendit.com ! =)

[Jiri Bakala]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

You set the exposure for one shot and take it. Then you turn to a darker area and snap. The second pix will be under-exposed. Everyone accepts this in photography.

The HD100 is like being restricted to about ASA 200 film as it ranges from 125 to 250. That's why I suggest folks shoot ASA 200 color film with a shutter at 1/60th an an F1.4 lens to get a real feeling what shooting will be like.

Being restricted to a certain sensitivity is one thing. Not being able to shoot in low light situations is another. You don't have to tell me that I need lights. Imagine this situation: a person walking from one well lit room to another through a dar(ker) hallway. That's your 60's right here. But if the SSE shows up in the middle of the shot, it's still unacceptable and these rules are just really silly. Of course we light when we can and what we can but if one is unable to light certain areas (i.e. a documentary) or wants a moody look then I have to agree with you Steve; your rules are just too restrictive.

Frankly, it seems that every time someone 'manages' to happen on a situation that creates the SSE and it doesn't fall within the already limited range of usability, a new rule is created. I for one would prefer keeping the pressure on JVC to deal with it and find a solution. Don't do their work for them, please.

[Chris Hurd]

For Shawn Alyasiri, I'd be happy to host your sample clips here at DV Info Net for others to download and view. I've sent you an email regarding that -- thanks in advance,

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Jiri Bakala

Of course we light when we can and what we can but if one is unable to light certain areas (i.e. a documentary) or wants a moody look then I have to agree with you Steve; your rules are just too restrictive.

You will have to do what any filmmaker would do with ASA 200 film -- light the hallway so it meets the exposure required for adequate negative density (You certainly don't want NO details in the hallway). Now you add light to the other rooms until you achieve the LIGHTING RATIO you want. Now you set and lock your exposure.

This is film school 101. Do you really think all the movies shot for a 100 years that looked moody were really shot with no lights? Why do you think any film set has banks of lights -- even in the day.

You do not get moody by turning off lights. You ACHIEVE the look by setting-up lights to CREATE THE LOOK by appropriate lighting ratios.

And, here's another rule -- when you set the ratios you must limit the ratio to that which the video camera can handle or the film will expose. This is film school 101. Try about 5-stops for video.

Folks wanted a video camcorder that would let them make films. JVC gave you one. Now you say "but I want to shoot like I shot DV" not like I'm "really" shooting film. No way! Shooting film is way too hard. Too many rules. I might even have use a light meter.

And, don't give me the BS about "I can't shoot docs if I have to have sufficient light." Thousands of docs were shot on ASA 25 thru ASA 100 film. Gee -- how did they get negative film that wasn't clear? Gee--how could they have done that? If you don't know, don't want to learn, or don't care to work that way -- why are you here? There are other camcorders that will work for you. Some, very expensive ones, will even shoot HD.

JVC is not going to "fix" the HD100. It's not broken. Like any camera it has a minimum light requirement for an 'acceptable' picture. Meet that requirement and you don't get SSE -- and don't get noise and do get good color.

Future camcorders will be better. In a few years they will get you back to shooting at DV light levels. But not today.

[Shawn Alyasiri]

alright guys, alright.... :)

Like you said Steve, it's also my guess that mine may need a tweak. I've arranged for that, and my dealer has been very gracious and understanding.

I also picked up the Z1 recently, and I'm a fan of it's capabilities as well, although I prefer the HD100 layout. I'll want to pick up an adaptor for it with the mini35 as well. If the HD100 also had 1080i capabilities, I think it'd be incredible, and from what I've read, would not necessarily be subject to the SSE issue(?). I'll take one when it comes out ;)

Looking forward to what comes out in the $20-$40K range this spring. I think there are going to be amazing choices out there.

This camera is essentially 'tuition' for me, prior to larger $ commitments.

Thanks to all for your comments guys and keep slugging it out - I learn and laugh from these posts every day.

[Jiri Bakala]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Thousands of docs were shot on ASA 25 thru ASA 100 film. Gee -- how did they get negative film that wasn't clear? Gee--how could they have done that?

Have you ever seen a negative with a split in the middle?

Steve, I am really curious what makes you continuously defend this. Look, we all seem to agree on many things here; we like the form factor of the camera, progressive scanning, interchangable lens, etc. The list is long and good. We accept limitation such as chip-size induced DOF, relatively fragile tape format, GOP, etc. Together we try to figure out work-arounds for problems and challenges, in some cases if you will, create 'rules'. Now, with the SSE, it seems that there is a way of calibrating the camera with advanced firmware, tighter specs on processors and perhaps, more time spent factory-calibrating the settings. More recent units seem to be much better than the earlier ones. All we are doing is saying to JVC, keep (get) the resources assigned to the improvement of this great product and keep us informed. Many of us happily migrated (or are planning to) from often arrogant SONY (and others) to JVC because of their approach to this camera. Because they listened to the marketplace and brought what people wanted.

What you seem to be doing is saying, this is it, take it or leave it, JVC gave you a product that doesn't need any improvements. Now shut up and lern my rules. In the process you also manage to insult us by implying that if we don't want to follow your 'rules' we don't know how to light, shoot, etc. As someone suggested earlier, it almost seems that you have a vested interest with JVC. Look Steve, I always enjoy your articles and technical expertise but I can't help but dislike your attitude towards people who disagree with you on keeping pressure on JVC to work on the SSE.

And, by the way, your arguments about low light simply don't make sense. Nobody will of course shoot an entire film or even a scene in low light but within a scene/shot, there could be a moment or an area of very low light or outright no light at all and it doesn't matter if you shoot film, DV, HDV and anything else, it will be black. It will be black BECAUSE the DP wants it black. With HD100, it may end up with a split in the middle. Extreme example? Yes. Would I worry about it? Not really that much, I am just trying to say that the argument is elsewhere. It's not about setting the 'rules'. It is about getting the problem to the point where it's no longer unpredictable and where it becomes a rarity, rather then a very likely occurrence. And I believe that we are doing it and slowly we are getting there (eventhough, you are trying to prevent us...:-)

[Chris Hurd]

Easy does it, folks... let's please try not to get too personal about this stuff. If all parties will kindly take a more amiable and friendly attitude, we'll all be so much better off. Thanks in advance,

[Joe Carney]

I'm trying to wrap my head around all this, so in laymens and hopefull logical terms, this is how I see the HD100

1. This is really a 6 chip video camera, not a 3 chip one. With 2 CCDs put on each die (like the new gen dual core cpus).

2. This requires twice the support circuitry of of a 3 chip camera. (12 AD converters?)

3. This requires much more calibration information than a normal 3 chip camera. Maybe JVC simply underestimated how much calibration was needed during the design and test phase and through feedback is getting it right.

4. At this price point, there may be an occasional substandard AD converter, thus requireing a replacement camera, but for the most part, everything is fine and better calibration is all that is needed.


The whole SSE issue is simply one of the on die CCDs not having the correct information to process the video, which is why the updated firmware seems to be increasing the number of calibration points and thus fixing the problem.

For you old motorheads, this is akin to tuning 6 2 barrel carbuerators on an old 12 cylinder Jaguar engine to have the exact same fuel/air mixture and flow. Hard to do sometimes. And since it was almost impossible to do that, you worked with keeping everything within acceptable parameters.

So to me logically (if not physically) we have 6 - 640x780 chips that occasionally get out of sync. Something that can be fixed it seems.

Am I way off base here?

[Jiri Bakala]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Easy does it, folks... let's please try not to get too personal about this stuff. If all parties will kindly take a more amiable and friendly attitude, we'll all be so much better off. Thanks in advance,

I agree Chris, sorry if I sounded sharper than necessary. Didn't mean to...nothing personal :-)
(I guess we all get passionate about our profession and tools we use)

[Shawn Alyasiri]

You got me bro - the only chips I know about are Doritos...

We should all have a beer together - JVC can bring the chips.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Jiri Bakala

What you seem to be doing is saying, this is it, take it or leave it, JVC gave you a product that doesn't need any improvements. Now shut up and lern my rules. I can't help but dislike your attitude towards people who disagree with you on keeping pressure on JVC to work on the SSE.

Perhaps you missed JVC's public statement on SSE at their USA website:

"Under rare shooting conditions, a small difference in the shading or color may be noticed between the left and right portions of the screen. This is a characteristic of the CCD readout method employed in the GY-HD100U and should not normally pose a problem."

Sorry, but that sure sounds like it IS "a take it or leave it deal."

Now for those who plan to "take it" -- I'm only helping them minimize SSE. iF THAT'S DEFENDING JVC -- so be it. Most folks want to use the camera they have. Start a thread of your own that "keeps the pressure on JVC." Stop jumping into every thread to bring up your crusade to fix the HD100. Go have yours recalibrated if you think that will help.

Even if JVC really do believe it should be fixed, perhaps they know it will take the next generation of CCDs to really fix it. Or, each batch will be better than the last. Who knows?

I'm simply not interested in a crusade in the middle of folks talking about actually using their HD100. What's your experience been with your HD100?