50 in Plamsa screen + JVC tests at DVinfo.net

John Vincent · February 7th, 2006, 02:46 AM

Before I bought the JVC last week I picked up a 50 in HD 720p plasma screen Zenith (a consumer model).

On our first day of tests with the camera, I noticed a dead pixel (not actually dead, but 'burning' w/ a sick green like color as we were watching the footage on the Zenith.

I had not noticed it in the viewfinder or the flip-out screen. Of course once you see a dead pix you don't forget it, and when I looked very closely at the flip out screen I could make it out. Could not see it at all in the viewfinder.

Which makes me very glad I bought the Zenith - obviously I wouldn't have wanted to shoot something I needed w/ that dead pix. Masked it today and no problems.

The consumer Zenith is proving to be a very nice way to review/test the footage because you really can see everything (and by 'you' I mean anyone watching 'cause that sucker is big).

John

Nate Weaver · February 7th, 2006, 03:01 AM

...underscoring the need to properly monitor HD, any which way you can.

Steven Thomas · February 8th, 2006, 11:46 AM

Nate,
Do you own, or have you used this monitor with the HD100?

How does it look?

Is it good enough for focus?

thxs, Steve

Nate Weaver · February 8th, 2006, 03:16 PM

Nooooo.

I own a Sony 14" HD PHM-line monitor, soon to be replaced with a 20" JVC HD Pro monitor for edit and a 9" Sony BVM HD monitor for field work.

I have yet to purchase a plasma for home use...hopefully sometime in 2006!

John Vincent · February 9th, 2006, 03:36 AM

I'm telling you Nate, these consumer plasma's are great. I got a 50 in HD (720p) monitor for $2600 - I love it.

We do all our tests using it. I know the colors are harder to dial in, and I'm oversimplfying the process, but I figure if what I see on the screen is the same color as the stuff I'm shooting, good enough.

Already an actor I've used in a previous film has been 'wowed' by the image of the JVC on the thing.

It's my version of 'shock and awe' because once they see themselves on this big ole screen, they start to understand why they have to hit their marks - they'll be outta focus if they don't - and they can see it whith their own eyes.

Never had that with film of course, and not w/ the Cannon XL1 I used to use. It really is pretty cool....

John

Nate Weaver · February 9th, 2006, 10:00 AM

No no no...I wasn't condemning John's choice in monitors. Just surprised somebody thought I had one too.

I tussled a bit as to what kind of HD monitor to get, since I wanted one for the living room also. In the end, with a bit of shopping, I found production monitors for quite bit cheaper than a good plasma, so I went with those.

Living room is next.

Aaron Koolen · February 9th, 2006, 11:46 AM

I have a question. People talk about getting dead pixels, and then "masking" them. Could someone explain what that is exactly? I ask because it seems to me that it would mean making the pixel such that it's always set to a particular colour, or, maybe the same as the pixel next to it. If this is the case, to me that's unacceptable, and why would anyone put up with that?

Wouldn't mind some clarification on this.
Cheers

Nate Weaver · February 9th, 2006, 12:34 PM

A dead pixel is a photosite on a CCD that is unresponsive...or stuck sending out what the camera interprets as red signal, or a blue signal, or the like. It manifests itself as a tiny green dot, or blue dot, or...you get the idea.

They exist in high end LCD and CCD manufacturing, because the makers of such products let them through to make a certain yield. In short, many, many CCD products have a dead pixel or two...it's very common.

If JVC is guilty of anything, it's of not having an automatic mechanism built-in to the camera's power cycle to mask them like some other cameras.

Aaron Koolen · February 9th, 2006, 12:50 PM

I understand what one is, just wondering what exactly "masking" is. Do they chose a colour, make it the same as the pixel next to it or what?

In NZ (Don't know about other countries) I would think that this would be deemed unacceptable and any purchaser could return for replacement any camera with one, under our Consumer Guarantees Act. If I was shooting a movie or some important paying gig and one of the pixels was bogus, I'd be an unhappy camper I'd have thought. Maybe it's really not an issue at all in the real world, just sort of scared me that's all.

John Vincent · February 9th, 2006, 07:21 PM

Aaron -

When you mask a dead pixel, you tell the camera:

1. To scan its CCD for dead pixels;

2. Then replace the dead pixel with a 'clone' of another 'live' pixel that is next to/close to it.

That's pretty much it. The main effect is that the pixel no longer just sits then and glows.

It is my understanding that ALL CCD based cameras can and will have a dead pixel from time to time and that's its an unavoidable apart of the process.

Remember the more pixels on the chip(s) - over a million on the JVC, the more likely one will die. Also note that certain kinds of TV's can suffer from this effect, ie - projectors.

BOTTOM LINE: Don't sweat dead pixels - they're easily fixed and are a common occurance.

John

Warren Shultz · February 10th, 2006, 12:38 PM

Nate, what was your source for those monitors? Always looking for a good deal.

As far as the Marshal 7" monitor, I've been wanting to know about that myself. Does anyone know if it's good enough to use in the field for focus or could see that stuck pixel?

February 7th, 2006, 02:46 AM	#1
John Vincent Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,065	50 in Plamsa screen + JVC tests Before I bought the JVC last week I picked up a 50 in HD 720p plasma screen Zenith (a consumer model). On our first day of tests with the camera, I noticed a dead pixel (not actually dead, but 'burning' w/ a sick green like color as we were watching the footage on the Zenith. I had not noticed it in the viewfinder or the flip-out screen. Of course once you see a dead pix you don't forget it, and when I looked very closely at the flip out screen I could make it out. Could not see it at all in the viewfinder. Which makes me very glad I bought the Zenith - obviously I wouldn't have wanted to shoot something I needed w/ that dead pix. Masked it today and no problems. The consumer Zenith is proving to be a very nice way to review/test the footage because you really can see everything (and by 'you' I mean anyone watching 'cause that sucker is big). John Last edited by John Vincent; February 7th, 2006 at 03:56 AM.

February 7th, 2006, 03:01 AM	#2
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	...underscoring the need to properly monitor HD, any which way you can. __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

February 8th, 2006, 11:46 AM	#3
Steven Thomas Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Gilbert, AZ Posts: 1,896	Marshall V-R70P HD Nate, Do you own, or have you used this monitor with the HD100? How does it look? Is it good enough for focus? thxs, Steve

February 8th, 2006, 03:16 PM	#4
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	Nooooo. I own a Sony 14" HD PHM-line monitor, soon to be replaced with a 20" JVC HD Pro monitor for edit and a 9" Sony BVM HD monitor for field work. I have yet to purchase a plasma for home use...hopefully sometime in 2006! __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

February 9th, 2006, 03:36 AM	#5
John Vincent Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,065	Hmmm...Big tv good I'm telling you Nate, these consumer plasma's are great. I got a 50 in HD (720p) monitor for $2600 - I love it. We do all our tests using it. I know the colors are harder to dial in, and I'm oversimplfying the process, but I figure if what I see on the screen is the same color as the stuff I'm shooting, good enough. Already an actor I've used in a previous film has been 'wowed' by the image of the JVC on the thing. It's my version of 'shock and awe' because once they see themselves on this big ole screen, they start to understand why they have to hit their marks - they'll be outta focus if they don't - and they can see it whith their own eyes. Never had that with film of course, and not w/ the Cannon XL1 I used to use. It really is pretty cool.... John

February 9th, 2006, 10:00 AM	#6
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	No no no...I wasn't condemning John's choice in monitors. Just surprised somebody thought I had one too. I tussled a bit as to what kind of HD monitor to get, since I wanted one for the living room also. In the end, with a bit of shopping, I found production monitors for quite bit cheaper than a good plasma, so I went with those. Living room is next. __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

February 9th, 2006, 11:46 AM	#7
Aaron Koolen Trustee Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 1,727	I have a question. People talk about getting dead pixels, and then "masking" them. Could someone explain what that is exactly? I ask because it seems to me that it would mean making the pixel such that it's always set to a particular colour, or, maybe the same as the pixel next to it. If this is the case, to me that's unacceptable, and why would anyone put up with that? Wouldn't mind some clarification on this. Cheers __________________ My Website Meat Free Media

February 9th, 2006, 12:34 PM	#8
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	A dead pixel is a photosite on a CCD that is unresponsive...or stuck sending out what the camera interprets as red signal, or a blue signal, or the like. It manifests itself as a tiny green dot, or blue dot, or...you get the idea. They exist in high end LCD and CCD manufacturing, because the makers of such products let them through to make a certain yield. In short, many, many CCD products have a dead pixel or two...it's very common. If JVC is guilty of anything, it's of not having an automatic mechanism built-in to the camera's power cycle to mask them like some other cameras. __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

February 9th, 2006, 12:50 PM	#9
Aaron Koolen Trustee Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 1,727	I understand what one is, just wondering what exactly "masking" is. Do they chose a colour, make it the same as the pixel next to it or what? In NZ (Don't know about other countries) I would think that this would be deemed unacceptable and any purchaser could return for replacement any camera with one, under our Consumer Guarantees Act. If I was shooting a movie or some important paying gig and one of the pixels was bogus, I'd be an unhappy camper I'd have thought. Maybe it's really not an issue at all in the real world, just sort of scared me that's all. __________________ My Website Meat Free Media

February 9th, 2006, 07:21 PM	#10
John Vincent Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,065	Aaron - When you mask a dead pixel, you tell the camera: 1. To scan its CCD for dead pixels; 2. Then replace the dead pixel with a 'clone' of another 'live' pixel that is next to/close to it. That's pretty much it. The main effect is that the pixel no longer just sits then and glows. It is my understanding that ALL CCD based cameras can and will have a dead pixel from time to time and that's its an unavoidable apart of the process. Remember the more pixels on the chip(s) - over a million on the JVC, the more likely one will die. Also note that certain kinds of TV's can suffer from this effect, ie - projectors. BOTTOM LINE: Don't sweat dead pixels - they're easily fixed and are a common occurance. John

February 10th, 2006, 12:38 PM	#11
Warren Shultz Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 248	Nate, what was your source for those monitors? Always looking for a good deal. As far as the Marshal 7" monitor, I've been wanting to know about that myself. Does anyone know if it's good enough to use in the field for focus or could see that stuck pixel?