How are the HDV artifacts on this camera?

John Trent · February 6th, 2006, 12:12 PM

Ok, I'm resurrecting my two month old thread. After seeing the Adam Wilt DV article, the JVC looks like the best bet for me, but I'm still uncertain about the image going soft in pans.

One expert said the JVC has the cleanest implementation of HDV but you can get it to "break". Another expert complained of "nasties" and put up a pretty damning jpg. I respect both these men so I am a bit confused. I've shot some standard DV stuff of leaves panned in high-contrast daylight that seemed to "break" DV, so is this all we can expect from compressed video. I guess any GOP would make every problem worse, right?

If it's a problem with only certain types of footage (leaves, water, & the like), I guess I'll have to consider it, but if every single pan goes soft and has an exaggerated motion blur to it, like the Sony I saw, did, it's not acceptable.

So, please tell me does every pan cause trouble?

Thanks in advance.

Nate Weaver · February 6th, 2006, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Trent

So, please tell me does every pan cause trouble?

No. Not like the Sonys. I see the image soften up a little bit during quick, whole-frame movement, but not at all to the extent of the Sony cameras. Not once have I found the HDV to be objectionable on the HD100.

The frame Graeme posted of the the tree is the worst I've ever seen. I've never had anything like that in my own work.

Graeme Nattress · February 6th, 2006, 12:41 PM

I must admit it was pretty awful, but after a weekend of playing with the camera, that's the worst I got.

HDV would be fine in this regard if you saw the compression in the viewfinder, then you'd know to do another take. What would worry me is not knowing quite what it looks like until you get it back to the NLE.

The other stuff I shot with the JVC looked nice though, especially after some Film Effects:

http://www.nattress.com/Movies/StereoImages.mov

Graeme

John Trent · February 8th, 2006, 12:58 PM

Graeme,

Was your jpg. from a 24p shoot? Did 24p have less problems then 30p?

Nate,

Does the image softness on pans happen as much on 24p as opposed to 30p?

The Sony's problems seemed less, when I increased the shutter speed. Seeing how the JVC has less problems to begin with, and has shutter speeds that can be set incrementally over it's entire range, wouldn't a very modest increase possibly rid us of the soft blur problem? Has anybody tried this?

I know alot of DVX shooters use shutter speeds of 1/42 or 1/36 to help cover the stutter on pans. Would lower shutter speeds, such as these, possibly mask the soft blur problem on the JVC pans? Or make it worse?

Thank you, once again.

Graeme Nattress · February 8th, 2006, 01:31 PM

That frame was from 30p. I did most of my tests at 30p. I did use 24p, but not too much. I only had the camera for 2 days....

Graeme

February 6th, 2006, 12:41 PM	#18
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	I must admit it was pretty awful, but after a weekend of playing with the camera, that's the worst I got. HDV would be fine in this regard if you saw the compression in the viewfinder, then you'd know to do another take. What would worry me is not knowing quite what it looks like until you get it back to the NLE. The other stuff I shot with the JVC looked nice though, especially after some Film Effects: http://www.nattress.com/Movies/StereoImages.mov Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP

February 8th, 2006, 01:31 PM	#20
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	That frame was from 30p. I did most of my tests at 30p. I did use 24p, but not too much. I only had the camera for 2 days.... Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP

February 6th, 2006, 12:12 PM	#16
John Trent Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Merrillville, IN Posts: 54	Ok, I'm resurrecting my two month old thread. After seeing the Adam Wilt DV article, the JVC looks like the best bet for me, but I'm still uncertain about the image going soft in pans. One expert said the JVC has the cleanest implementation of HDV but you can get it to "break". Another expert complained of "nasties" and put up a pretty damning jpg. I respect both these men so I am a bit confused. I've shot some standard DV stuff of leaves panned in high-contrast daylight that seemed to "break" DV, so is this all we can expect from compressed video. I guess any GOP would make every problem worse, right? If it's a problem with only certain types of footage (leaves, water, & the like), I guess I'll have to consider it, but if every single pan goes soft and has an exaggerated motion blur to it, like the Sony I saw, did, it's not acceptable. So, please tell me does every pan cause trouble? Thanks in advance.

February 8th, 2006, 12:58 PM	#19
John Trent Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Merrillville, IN Posts: 54	Graeme, Was your jpg. from a 24p shoot? Did 24p have less problems then 30p? Nate, Does the image softness on pans happen as much on 24p as opposed to 30p? The Sony's problems seemed less, when I increased the shutter speed. Seeing how the JVC has less problems to begin with, and has shutter speeds that can be set incrementally over it's entire range, wouldn't a very modest increase possibly rid us of the soft blur problem? Has anybody tried this? I know alot of DVX shooters use shutter speeds of 1/42 or 1/36 to help cover the stutter on pans. Would lower shutter speeds, such as these, possibly mask the soft blur problem on the JVC pans? Or make it worse? Thank you, once again.