Noise on HD200/250

[Brian Duke]

Has anyone been able to fix the noise on the 200/250? I want to maybe ue one of them but not if they are too noisy compared to the HD100.

Duke

[Ronald Wilk]

Hi Brian:

I have read the same posts regarding noise but I own and use an HD-250U and have not noticed any noise from either the fan or the audio chain! On the other hand, if you are referring to gain related picture noise, that has not been an issue for me since I shoot either in daylight or in a light controlled environment. It would appear, however, that some degree of noise is inevitable in high gain, low light situiations.


Ron

[Adam Letch]

Yes Brian,

I've been trying to get something solid on this for weeks, it depends on the user, some people say 'No Problem with audio Noise', or "Thats what all professional cameras are like" (as in regard to fan noise). And then early in the piece Stephen Noe shows on a avi how much cleaner the new encoder is. But then you get multiple posts saying how it's like there's gain on all the time in the image.

I've come to the conclusion I'm still getting the camera, I'll deal with fan noise using sound gates on my recording, and the noise issue in the image must only be people not use to the image the HD101/110 made??

And it's also a little frustrating, though not surprising no one is posting footage from the new camera. Most people that use these cameras use them professionally which means either (a) They're too busy (b) They don't have intellectual rights to the footage they shoot to post them here. I remember when the HD100 first came out, it took a looonnnggg time to get footage posted as compared to say the DVX100 or HVX200, and even when you look at the massive amount of material coming through on the new Canon XHG1's and XHA1's.

cheers

Adam

[Brian Duke]

Yeah, I was referring to noise on the image. Sorry it wasn't clear. I didn't know there were also issues with sound noise. That makes it worse. I was hoping we could get some conclusive answer whether its a problem, and if so, is it being dealt with, or has it been dealt with.

Duke

[Chad Terpstra]

I find the noise issue to be somewhat sporadic. Sometimes it's bad, other times it's totally fine. A few observations are:

- keep your gamma level at 0 or below
- keep black stretch off and your black level at 0 or below
- the warmer white balances seem to increase noise levels (it doesn't like reds so much). Try some tests with this one and see if it's true. I'm guessing for tungsten-lit scenes using 3000K instead of 3200K would yield less noise. Just a speculation though.

But the gamma, black stretch, and black level all have the greatest impact on it. I shot a scene this past weekend outdoors at night and I used standard gamma bumped up to 4 (almost max) combined with BS2 and the noise was outrageous. No gain was on at all but it looked like at least 6db if not worse.

I have an HD100 so I only have two choices for gamma (since filmout is not usable). But I haven't noticed much of a difference between the two where picture noise is concerned.

FWIW: The fan noise is not audible to me or the mics I use.

[Daniel Patton]

That's a first.

I have heard nothing of a noiser image from the 250 over the 100, maybe I missed something and need to do some reading.


You might add Chad that keeping the detail at -7 to Min also helps keep the noise down. You can watch the noise increase as the numbers go up.

All our testing on the 250 looked great. Just this week an associate of ours brought over some footage shot (HDV) on the 250 to preview on the new JVC 24" monitor (it reveals everything, nothing hides from that beast), and it looked fantastic, very clean. Maybe I'm just use to the small amount of noise these sub 10K cameras make.

Peace!

[Tim Dashwood]

I'm still evaluating the video noise issue. The HD250 I had borrowed for evaluation ended up being a pre-release model, so that may have had something to do with it. JVC Canada just swapped it for a production release HD200 and I'll do more side by side HD100/200 comparisons this week and let you know.

Noise in the image doesn't make any sense in HD200/250, so that is why it is so surprising. The whole point of the new 14-bit DSP and DNR is to eliminate noise and allow us to manipulate the DSP controls more than in the 12-bit version. JVC made a point of promoting that in the brochure. That's why I think there's probably some simple explanation that I just haven't discovered yet.
It looked to me like analog gain amplification, even though gain was set to 0dB. The first thing I did was turn down the detail.

[Tyson Perkins]

Do you think something like this could be resolved in a firmware upgrade? or would it require handing in the cam to JVC - thats if it cant be resolved in the settings

[Chad Terpstra]

Tim, In your tests do you think you could examine each of the new gamma settings on the HD200. I'd like to know more about what options there are with it. Thanks.

[Brian Duke]

Originally Posted by Tim Dashwood

It looked to me like analog gain amplification, even though gain was set to 0dB. The first thing I did was turn down the detail.

Tim,

Hopefully it’s an issue that can be resolved before I shoot this feature. I was hoping for better quality besides the 60P as attributes. I am almost done casting talent and crew so this is one of the last issues I need resolved. I love to get my hands on a 250 for this shoot especially because I have some slow mo and well-choreographed shots.

[Tim Dashwood]

Originally Posted by Chad Terpstra

Tim, In your tests do you think you could examine each of the new gamma settings on the HD200. I'd like to know more about what options there are with it. Thanks.

Absolutely. I am going to conduct the exact same extensive comparisons I did with the gamma curve controls on the HD100. For the most part, the HD250 is very easy to match to a HD100. I will program and post HD200/250 equivalents for the existing HD100 scene files, which will hopefully allow seamless multi-cam shooting with the different models.
The lowest common denominator will of course be the HD100, so I'll probably also create some new scene files that take advantage of the new curves.

Originally Posted by Brian Duke

Hopefully it’s an issue that can be resolved before I shoot this feature. I was hoping for better quality besides the 60P as attributes. I am almost done casting talent and crew so this is one of the last issues I need resolved. I love to get my hands on a 250 for this shoot especially because I have some slow mo and well-choreographed shots.

It should be resolved by then. The new DSP does show an obvious improvement in color processing and encoding. The noise thing needs more exploration, and I've been reluctant to post much because I haven't had a chance to dedicate one day to just solving it alone. Hopefully I can squeeze it in before I leave for NAB.
You can judge the noise for yourself, at least what I got from the pre-release HD250 with Black stretch 3. I've posted a short 100/250 comparison, native HDV QT in my public folder. Sorry PC guys, I don't have a m2t capture of this, only native HDV QT.

[Brian Duke]

Originally Posted by Tim Dashwood

I've posted a short 100/250 comparison, native HDV QT in my public folder. Sorry PC guys, I don't have a m2t capture of this, only native HDV QT.

Tim, the file is giving me problems opening. It is a Quicktime, right?

[Sean Adair]

Thanks Tim for posting the comparision file, and dropping a few more hints on differences in tweaking the cameras. I've been aware of picture noise in my inital work, but haven't had the chance to directly compare it or put it in perspective as this is my first HD camera. The detail and color rendition I've found so compelling that some graininess hasn't bothered me so much for these shots.
What strikes me immediately in this comparision is how different the look is with the settings the same. The 250 looks warmer and more saturated - especially in the reds. Shadows and midtones are darker, with less detail perceptible next to the window - while highlights match quite closely is this a difference in gamma rendition?
Overall the 250 image looks more natural and prettier, but I'm not sure whether this is meant to be a neutral setting for optimum preservation for post correction - in which case it might not be ideal...
I'm hanging on your every word regarding this issue, and hope you do have time before NAB to cover optimizing settings on the 200 series, and whether the noise is really increased and an issue to be concerned about.
My guess is that this will be useful to have at the venue while meeting with JVC, and that there will probably be some big distractions that you bring back with you (although I suspect FCP 6 will be linked with Leopard release a little afterwards...)
Brian: Regarding viewing the file, you have to let the page sit in your browser with just the blue "Q" for awhile to let it download. It might be easier if it was a direct downloadable link to the .mov, but it's a page that has to load.

[Tim Dashwood]

Originally Posted by Brian Duke

Tim, the file is giving me problems opening. It is a Quicktime, right?

Originally Posted by Sean Adair

It might be easier if it was a direct downloadable link to the .mov, but it's a page that has to load.

It is a direct download link... just right-click and save as.

[Brian Duke]

Originally Posted by Tim Dashwood

It is a direct download link... just right-click and save as.

I tried. It just says there is an error opening. There is no option to Save As.