Does Anyone Have Any HD100 Slo-Mo Footage That Can Be Posted?

[Rogelio Salinas]

I know that there was a thread posted recently on Slo-Mo, but I was wondering if anyone had any footage they could either post or show a link to view some footage. Thanks.

[Javier Velez]

Rogelio,

Here's a small file from some tests I did over the weekend (mind it still turned out to be 56MB):
http://www.jvelez.com/media/water_slo_mo.m2t

The first portion is at regular speed. The second at 25%.

The methodology:
1. Set the HD100 to HDV-SD 60P (shutter @ 100/detail @ +2/true color scene 2 from Paolo Ciccone)
2. Capture AVI through Connect HD (rate change set to "No Change")
3. Drop on Vegas timeline (preview 720x480x32 59.940p)
4. Duplicate file on timeline and slow to .25
5. Render to m2t 720x480x32 @ 24P

I have no experience with other NLEs, so the steps may have to be translated accordingly. I slowed down only to .25 because after that it starts getting jittery. One more thing: The media was captured at 720x480 HDV-SD, so this will not show HDV in all its glory. Still great quality IMHO for 720x480 output. I haven't tested HDV-SD50P, but I'm confident the resolution will look even better. Hope this helps give you an idea of the slo-mo capabilities of the HD100.

-JV

PS - Please forgive the cheap bowl from my wife's kitchen.

[Steven Thomas]

Dang that looks good considering it's SD.
The slo-mo looks good.

[Tim Dashwood]

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/...60Pto24fps.m2t

It was a little underexposed, but you'll get the idea.

The clip was shot in "HDV-SD60P" mode. I captured this on a Mac with HDVxDV.
I then used Mpeg Streamclip to upconvert and uprez to 1280x720 FCP Uncompressed 4:2:2 codec at 60P.
Then I "Conformed" the uncompressed 1280x720 clip to 23.98fps using Cinema Tools.
I then used Lumiere HD to encode back to m2t so you could look at it.

[Rogelio Salinas]

Thanks guys. I am at work today, but I will take a look at the clips later today. I am trying to decide between the HD100 and the HVX200. I was orginally considering the XLH1, but I figured I could get an HD100 and a new CPU with for less than the price of the XLH1. The reason I was looking for slo-mo HD100 clips was to compare them to the slo-mo clips from the HVX200. I love the look of the HVX clips, but the resolution is just slightly above SD quality. The HD100 brings it to a whole new level. Next year I am going to be shooting a feature, but I am doing some r&d on which 1/3" HD camera to invest in. So far for resolution on normal shots, it's the HD100, but the slo-mo on the HVX200 would look incredible for some of the scenes I have planned. I know the Good Lord will provide an answer when the time is right.

[David Newman]

This clip at this link http://indiefilmlive.blogspot.com/20...explained.html use an HD100 but bypassed the MPEG/tape for 720p60 capture.

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by Rogelio Salinas

I love the look of the HVX clips, but the resolution is just slightly above SD quality.

If that's what you're basing your decision on, you've been quite misinformed. All the HD cameras provide roughly comparable resolution, and the HVX is far above SD quality! Here's an extraction of resolution charts so you can see how the Sony, JVC and HVX compare.
http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/3-Cams-Charts.JPG

[Stephen L. Noe]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

If that's what you're basing your decision on, you've been quite misinformed. All the HD cameras provide roughly comparable resolution, and the HVX is far above SD quality! Here's an extraction of resolution charts so you can see how the Sony, JVC and HVX compare.
http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/3-Cams-Charts.JPG

Barry,

Those still resolution charts just don't cut it. You MUST put the camera in motion in order to reveal the true resolution. Rogelio is correct, the HVX200 is just above SD. Sitting still on a tripod Panansonic's math kicks in but with camera in motion the rez drops to just above SD. As much as I wish it was not true, it is.

[Barry Green]

You'll forgive me if I don't agree. Your assertion simply doesn't hold with real-world experience. I've shot plenty of motion with the HVX and it's high-def all the way, all the time.

Here's a simple example:
http://www.salatar.com/hvx200/720-DVCPRO-ball.Xmov

[Tim Dashwood]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Here's a simple example:
http://www.salatar.com/hvx200/720-DVCPRO-ball.Xmov

I know this conversation is veering away from the original question of slo-mo samples, but I find it interesting.

Barry, that was a great clip, and very telling of how Panasonic is handling the pixel shift.

It is interesting to watch the clock during the clip. Assuming the clock cycles at 60Hz, it gives us an indication of how fast the pixel shifting samples each pass. Since this was a 24P clip, it looks like the HVX200 is sampling at either 48Hz (2-passes per frame) or 96Hz (4-passes per frame) and then using some smart algorithm to predict motion blur. The only problem here was that it couldn't figure out the clock because it flickered at 60Hz, and we ended up getting double images on some frames.
This reminds me of the effect of a butterfly shutter (aka bowtie shutter) on a CP16.

http://homepage.mac.com/timdashwood/...200-motion.jpg

Now back to the slo-mo question: I'm curious to see a 720P60 captured clip from the HVX200. I would guess it would have to sample at 120Hz in order to interpolate the full 720 lines. I'm curious how accurate that info would be.
I really should spend more time in the HVX forum! I could see the HVX200 making an ideal crash-cam for overcranking on stunts, pyro. etc.