Dead Pixels. at DVinfo.net

Sean McHenry · December 18th, 2005, 12:07 AM

New issue. This is not related to the slow shutter speed issue but we just found 3 dead pixels in the first JVC HD-100 we bought a few weeks back.

The field shooters brought it into the shop Friday and told us it had at least 3 that were obvious. In full auto mode or no matter what AGC setting we used, there are 2 dead spots and one of them is larger than the other so I am thinking it's 2 right next to each other.

We will be checking our second, slightly newer camera in the next few days.

NOTE: As this wasn't related to the other dead pixel post in that it wasn't related to the slow shutter speed issue, I started a new thread but if the moderator feels it could be added to the other post, please feel free to move it.

Sean McHenry

Tim Dashwood · December 18th, 2005, 12:14 AM

Do you know the procedure for masking them? Have you contacted JVC? A technician can talk you through it over the phone.

Sean McHenry · December 18th, 2005, 12:21 AM

Thanks Tim, not yet on the learning how to map the pixels. Shouldn't have to know how to do that yet. It's a new camera and shouldn't have developed any dead pixels that wouldn't have already been mapped by the QC folks at JVC. I will be talking with them in the next few days. I have a whole backlog of issues for them.

What really concerns me is that the camera is less than a month old, is used by professional videographers who do not abuse their tools and yet it lost 3 pixels in about 1 months usage. The 3 we lost is bad enough but I wonder how many are already being masked?

The new Canon is starting to look mighty nice.

Thanks Tim. I'll be talking to them soon.

Sean

Salar Ghazi · December 18th, 2005, 12:39 AM

Forget it!

I bought a DV-500 two years ago. It hat 3 dead pixels, no matter which setting . I was lucky to meet a representative of JVC by chance, so I was able to contact somebody when they serviced the camera. JVC replaced it two times, it still had dead pixels. Then they tried to argue that I had to accept this problem, because it was described in the operating manual (which is true - but only described as a temporal effect of overheating).
After six weeks of silly arguing, I got my money back. One year before, my XL-1s had o n e dead pixel, barely visible when you lifted the gain. But Canon replaced the CCD without any discussions.
Never again JVC!!

All the best,
Salar

Tim Dashwood · December 18th, 2005, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean McHenry

Thanks Tim, not yet on the learning how to map the pixels. Shouldn't have to know how to do that yet. It's a new camera and shouldn't have developed any dead pixels that wouldn't have already been mapped by the QC folks at JVC. I will be talking with them in the next few days. I have a whole backlog of issues for them.

No one should have to know how to do that other than a technician, but it is actually very easy on the JVC. I've done it myself - just call them for help.

The dead pixels can occur after the camera has been through QC and is being shipped to you or your dealer. It is common. Don't sweat it. The masking procedure takes 30 seconds and then you are good.

Sean McHenry · December 28th, 2005, 11:01 AM

Just thought I would post a resolution to the issue. I was able to "mask" the dead pixels and have not heard of any more developing at this time. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

We have had other issue since but they are for another thread.

I did ask how many pixels can be masked total but did not get an answer to that. Seems someone mentioned 16 was the limit. With 3 plus however many were masked in QC before it left the factory, I am wondering how to know how many are left?

Anyway, for now, problem mostly solved.

Sean McHenry

Terry Nixon · December 28th, 2005, 04:26 PM

Masking pixels is common to all cameras.
i have had other brands of cameras with dead pixels and was told "that's the way it is"
The JVC policy and pixel mapping technique is not uncommon among the big three.

Sean McHenry · December 28th, 2005, 04:42 PM

I understand pixel masking happens. That is a given but the current question for me is, how many can be masked in total?

The reason I ask is we have several types of cameras here at work, up to a VariCam but there are only so many pixels that can physically be masked by the circuitry. Some of the Sony's we have can only mask 8 total. If you develop 9, you can remap but you have to allow the least objectionable dead pixel to reamin visible.

What I am not sure of is, if there are a total of say 16 that can be masked, and I had to hide 3 the other day, and let's suppose they masked 4 at the factory, that leaves me with the possibility of masking 9 more total. I am down almost 50% of the correctable pixels and it's only a month old. That's what I am a bit concerned about.

In the high pixel count world and with the tight packing of pixels on tiny chips, etc. And especially since I have had to hide 3 new pixels in the one month we have owned this factory fresh camera, I am trying to get a fix on how long I can expect to remain dead-pixel free.

One the other hand, I still marvel that we have the technology to make these things work at all. Tiny electronics devices like these are amazing to me.

Anyway, for now, it's a (pixel) dead issue. ; )

Sean McHenry

Nate Weaver · December 28th, 2005, 05:03 PM

I would expect, as far as something like dead pixels were concerned, for there to be a few dead off the bat, a few crop up within the early life of the camera (due to heat cycling), then for the CCD to be stable for quite a long time from then on, until end of life, where they'd die quickly.

I say this just based on my lay experience with electronics over the years, I'm by no means an expert on this.

Sean McHenry · December 29th, 2005, 08:03 AM

Agreed to a point. Heating and cooling cycles are a big thing and will continue throughout the life of the beast. It runs a tad warm to begin with so this may become an issue. I believe this is a new imager too. Time will tell.

We defeated my age old line of "Never be the first" on these.

I sucessfully avoided those single chip early models like the plague.

Thanks all,

Sean

Brian Tori · December 29th, 2005, 09:43 AM

I purchased a DV300 this year and upon arrival the CCD's had two dead pixels. Luckily I was able to mask them with a JVC procedure. I hope they do not return. I also work with a DV500 which after 4 years has also developed numerous dead pixels. Upon visiting other forums it seems that this issue it quite frequent with JVC cams.

Marc Colemont · December 29th, 2005, 10:45 AM

Every high resolution camera will have dead pixels. The technology is not perfect. The same for LCD screens.
Some camera's have a build-in dead-pixel remover so the users does'n know.
But I prefer to have it manual like the JVC.
Of course then the user sees it more and makes a big fuzz about it... certainly if it is the HD100 to bash on.
I like this forum very much. I want to improve my skills and possibilities with this camera. And if there is a problem then it is mentioned.
But I'm sick reading the same new treads all over again about the same stuff which is then become blown out of proportion. Certainly if it comes from users who don't own the camera...

Brian Tori · December 29th, 2005, 06:08 PM

First, I am a proud owner of several JVC products and have defended their products on numerous occasions. In my opinion, they provide excellent quality and a good value. In no way did my previous post claim otherwise. And certainly I am not a HD100 basher. I think the camera is revolutionary and I am quite intrigued by it. However, I do believe that "Professional" cameras need to be held to different standard than consumer cameras.

Secondly, In my 12 years of production with numerous models and formats, I have never come across this problem as frequently as it is reported with some JVC cameras. I know I do not own a HD100, but it is highly likely that the CCD's are manufactured with the same methods and parts as the SD models I have worked with. And never have I read that all high resolution cameras WILL have dead pixels. If that was the case, it would be discussed alot more frequently. And if in fact there are methods to automatically conceal the dead pixels, why would JVC not include this on their pro cameras?
I doubt anybody who shoots video beyond home use wants to return to post production to find that there is a dead pixel in the center of the screen. The dead pixels I have come across are not easily visible in the LCD and certainly not in the small viewfinder.

If in fact the camera only allows manual pixel correction and it is very common, JVC should be obligated to include this in the user manual as well as the procedure to fix them. I have corrected the pixels on my DV300 for which I am happy, however, if they return I will not be. Professional users should not have to check a broadcast monitor for dead pixels before every shoot. This is counter productive and a deterrent for future buyers.

When multiple people come forward all claiming to have the same problem,this is not blowing an issue out of proportion, it is a valid, legitimate, problem which needs to be addressed for the benefit of the users and manufacturer.

December 18th, 2005, 12:07 AM	#1
Sean McHenry Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hilliard, Ohio Posts: 1,193	Dead Pixels. New issue. This is not related to the slow shutter speed issue but we just found 3 dead pixels in the first JVC HD-100 we bought a few weeks back. The field shooters brought it into the shop Friday and told us it had at least 3 that were obvious. In full auto mode or no matter what AGC setting we used, there are 2 dead spots and one of them is larger than the other so I am thinking it's 2 right next to each other. We will be checking our second, slightly newer camera in the next few days. NOTE: As this wasn't related to the other dead pixel post in that it wasn't related to the slow shutter speed issue, I started a new thread but if the moderator feels it could be added to the other post, please feel free to move it. Sean McHenry __________________ ‘I don’t know what I’m doing, and I’m shooting on D.V.’ - my hero - David Lynch http://www.DeepBlueEdit.com

December 18th, 2005, 12:14 AM	#2
Tim Dashwood Wrangler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Posts: 3,637	Do you know the procedure for masking them? Have you contacted JVC? A technician can talk you through it over the phone. __________________ Tim Dashwood

December 18th, 2005, 12:21 AM	#3
Sean McHenry Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hilliard, Ohio Posts: 1,193	Thanks Tim, not yet on the learning how to map the pixels. Shouldn't have to know how to do that yet. It's a new camera and shouldn't have developed any dead pixels that wouldn't have already been mapped by the QC folks at JVC. I will be talking with them in the next few days. I have a whole backlog of issues for them. What really concerns me is that the camera is less than a month old, is used by professional videographers who do not abuse their tools and yet it lost 3 pixels in about 1 months usage. The 3 we lost is bad enough but I wonder how many are already being masked? The new Canon is starting to look mighty nice. Thanks Tim. I'll be talking to them soon. Sean __________________ ‘I don’t know what I’m doing, and I’m shooting on D.V.’ - my hero - David Lynch http://www.DeepBlueEdit.com

December 28th, 2005, 11:01 AM	#6
Sean McHenry Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hilliard, Ohio Posts: 1,193	Just thought I would post a resolution to the issue. I was able to "mask" the dead pixels and have not heard of any more developing at this time. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. We have had other issue since but they are for another thread. I did ask how many pixels can be masked total but did not get an answer to that. Seems someone mentioned 16 was the limit. With 3 plus however many were masked in QC before it left the factory, I am wondering how to know how many are left? Anyway, for now, problem mostly solved. Sean McHenry __________________ ‘I don’t know what I’m doing, and I’m shooting on D.V.’ - my hero - David Lynch http://www.DeepBlueEdit.com

December 28th, 2005, 04:26 PM	#7
Terry Nixon Texas Media Systems DVi Sponsor Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 289	Masking Pixels Masking pixels is common to all cameras. i have had other brands of cameras with dead pixels and was told "that's the way it is" The JVC policy and pixel mapping technique is not uncommon among the big three.

December 18th, 2005, 12:39 AM	#4
Salar Ghazi New Boot Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Germany Posts: 20	Forget it! I bought a DV-500 two years ago. It hat 3 dead pixels, no matter which setting . I was lucky to meet a representative of JVC by chance, so I was able to contact somebody when they serviced the camera. JVC replaced it two times, it still had dead pixels. Then they tried to argue that I had to accept this problem, because it was described in the operating manual (which is true - but only described as a temporal effect of overheating). After six weeks of silly arguing, I got my money back. One year before, my XL-1s had o n e dead pixel, barely visible when you lifted the gain. But Canon replaced the CCD without any discussions. Never again JVC!! All the best, Salar

December 28th, 2005, 04:42 PM	#8
Sean McHenry Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hilliard, Ohio Posts: 1,193	I understand pixel masking happens. That is a given but the current question for me is, how many can be masked in total? The reason I ask is we have several types of cameras here at work, up to a VariCam but there are only so many pixels that can physically be masked by the circuitry. Some of the Sony's we have can only mask 8 total. If you develop 9, you can remap but you have to allow the least objectionable dead pixel to reamin visible. What I am not sure of is, if there are a total of say 16 that can be masked, and I had to hide 3 the other day, and let's suppose they masked 4 at the factory, that leaves me with the possibility of masking 9 more total. I am down almost 50% of the correctable pixels and it's only a month old. That's what I am a bit concerned about. In the high pixel count world and with the tight packing of pixels on tiny chips, etc. And especially since I have had to hide 3 new pixels in the one month we have owned this factory fresh camera, I am trying to get a fix on how long I can expect to remain dead-pixel free. One the other hand, I still marvel that we have the technology to make these things work at all. Tiny electronics devices like these are amazing to me. Anyway, for now, it's a (pixel) dead issue. ; ) Sean McHenry __________________ ‘I don’t know what I’m doing, and I’m shooting on D.V.’ - my hero - David Lynch http://www.DeepBlueEdit.com

December 28th, 2005, 05:03 PM	#9
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	I would expect, as far as something like dead pixels were concerned, for there to be a few dead off the bat, a few crop up within the early life of the camera (due to heat cycling), then for the CCD to be stable for quite a long time from then on, until end of life, where they'd die quickly. I say this just based on my lay experience with electronics over the years, I'm by no means an expert on this. __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

December 29th, 2005, 08:03 AM	#10
Sean McHenry Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hilliard, Ohio Posts: 1,193	Agreed to a point. Heating and cooling cycles are a big thing and will continue throughout the life of the beast. It runs a tad warm to begin with so this may become an issue. I believe this is a new imager too. Time will tell. We defeated my age old line of "Never be the first" on these. I sucessfully avoided those single chip early models like the plague. Thanks all, Sean __________________ ‘I don’t know what I’m doing, and I’m shooting on D.V.’ - my hero - David Lynch http://www.DeepBlueEdit.com

December 29th, 2005, 09:43 AM	#11
Brian Tori Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Detroit, MI Posts: 408	I purchased a DV300 this year and upon arrival the CCD's had two dead pixels. Luckily I was able to mask them with a JVC procedure. I hope they do not return. I also work with a DV500 which after 4 years has also developed numerous dead pixels. Upon visiting other forums it seems that this issue it quite frequent with JVC cams.

December 29th, 2005, 10:45 AM	#12
Marc Colemont Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Belgium Posts: 695	Every high resolution camera will have dead pixels. The technology is not perfect. The same for LCD screens. Some camera's have a build-in dead-pixel remover so the users does'n know. But I prefer to have it manual like the JVC. Of course then the user sees it more and makes a big fuzz about it... certainly if it is the HD100 to bash on. I like this forum very much. I want to improve my skills and possibilities with this camera. And if there is a problem then it is mentioned. But I'm sick reading the same new treads all over again about the same stuff which is then become blown out of proportion. Certainly if it comes from users who don't own the camera...

December 29th, 2005, 06:08 PM	#13
Brian Tori Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Detroit, MI Posts: 408	First, I am a proud owner of several JVC products and have defended their products on numerous occasions. In my opinion, they provide excellent quality and a good value. In no way did my previous post claim otherwise. And certainly I am not a HD100 basher. I think the camera is revolutionary and I am quite intrigued by it. However, I do believe that "Professional" cameras need to be held to different standard than consumer cameras. Secondly, In my 12 years of production with numerous models and formats, I have never come across this problem as frequently as it is reported with some JVC cameras. I know I do not own a HD100, but it is highly likely that the CCD's are manufactured with the same methods and parts as the SD models I have worked with. And never have I read that all high resolution cameras WILL have dead pixels. If that was the case, it would be discussed alot more frequently. And if in fact there are methods to automatically conceal the dead pixels, why would JVC not include this on their pro cameras? I doubt anybody who shoots video beyond home use wants to return to post production to find that there is a dead pixel in the center of the screen. The dead pixels I have come across are not easily visible in the LCD and certainly not in the small viewfinder. If in fact the camera only allows manual pixel correction and it is very common, JVC should be obligated to include this in the user manual as well as the procedure to fix them. I have corrected the pixels on my DV300 for which I am happy, however, if they return I will not be. Professional users should not have to check a broadcast monitor for dead pixels before every shoot. This is counter productive and a deterrent for future buyers. When multiple people come forward all claiming to have the same problem,this is not blowing an issue out of proportion, it is a valid, legitimate, problem which needs to be addressed for the benefit of the users and manufacturer.