GS400 16:9 uprez at DVinfo.net

Andre De Clercq · August 16th, 2005, 01:02 PM

How good is the 16 :9 in camera uprez with GS400. Comparable to DVX100A when set in progressive?(see A Wilt test) Is progressive in GS400 in "thin" mode by default?

Joshua Provost · August 16th, 2005, 02:39 PM

Andre,

Not sure what you mean by in-camera uprez 16:9... the GS400 uses a 16:9 footprint on the CCD in Wide mode, with a wider angle of view than in 4:3 mode. It's actually downrezing from 1152x646 to 720x480 in Wide mode, as illusrated on this page.

GS400 doesn't do progressive, and DVX100A doesn't do real 16:9, so it's tough to compare.
Josh

Boyd Ostroff · August 16th, 2005, 03:01 PM

Andre: The GS-400 has 1/4.7" hi res CCD's which would appear to be the same as the Sony PDX-10 (or at least the specs match). So it's actually doing real 16:9 and is in fact "downrezzing" the image to 720x480 (or 720x576 PAL).

Andre De Clercq · August 16th, 2005, 03:42 PM

Thanks Joshua and Boyd. I tought it was a letterbox uprezzer. The question on progressive scan relates to what I read in the Users Manual PAL(bottom of pg 26): "Wide/pro-cinema... In addition to the effects on Wide Function,
images are recorded at a rate of 25 frames a
second with a strobe-like effect." Maybe just for PAL version?

Young Lee · August 16th, 2005, 11:38 PM

Hope this helps.

MX5000 Frame Grabs (**In 16:9 mode: MX5000 < GS250/400)

http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/gallery/glow2.jpg

http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/gallery/glow3.jpg

Benjamin Durin · August 17th, 2005, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andre De Clercq

Thanks Joshua and Boyd. I tought it was a letterbox uprezzer. The question on progressive scan relates to what I read in the Users Manual PAL(bottom of pg 26): "Wide/pro-cinema... In addition to the effects on Wide Function,
images are recorded at a rate of 25 frames a
second with a strobe-like effect." Maybe just for PAL version?

André, the Pro-Cinema mode is not a progressive mode but a frame mode. So the GS400 internally deinterlace.
Some people like this mode, others don't.

Andre De Clercq · August 17th, 2005, 03:38 AM

Thanks Benjamin, but why do you think that frame mode is a deinteraced version and not a native progressive picture ? See http://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-etc.html#filmlook about frame mode.

Andre De Clercq · August 17th, 2005, 05:57 AM

Maybe somewhat more background info why I started this thread. I have a Sony VX2K. A good camera especially in low light conditions, but it has a poor 16:9 uprez image (vertical resolution and artifacts)..I want 16:9 on my widescreen LCD displays (37"Sharp and 40"Barco).. instead of side panneled 4:3 pictures. In addition to that I luke a smaller DV camcorder for traveling.

Boyd Ostroff · August 17th, 2005, 07:14 AM

Andre, have you ever looked at the PDX-10? If you like the VX-2000 then it would see very familiar. It also has the advantage of DVCAM recording, hi res BW viewfinder, XLR inputs and a short shotgun mike. The XLR box and mike are removable for those times when you want something small, and the camera also has builtin stereo mikes. It will give you very nice 16:9 but no frame mode.

It has perhaps been discontinued however, see the discussion in the PDX-10 forum. I suspect you can still find them though, probably at a good price too.

Of course the new Sony HDR-HC1 and HVR-A1 would also give you nice widescreen in a very small package, plus HDV. Maybe more than you want to spend though.

Andre De Clercq · August 17th, 2005, 08:01 AM

Yes Boyd PDX10 looks fine too. I will look at it in more detail (and see if still available in Europe). About the Sony HC1 I still have questions on how it handles low-light sitiuations (window and level mapping trade-offs)) and fast moving objects (rolling shutter). Also my NLE is not MPEG2 compatible,,,

Boyd Ostroff · August 17th, 2005, 08:20 AM

If you aren't ready for HDV then the HC1 allows you to shoot in regular DV mode (AFAIK), but you still have the advantage of the hi-res 16:9 native CCD's. When used this way you avoid the MPEG issues with movement.

Andre De Clercq · August 17th, 2005, 08:40 AM

Boyd, I mean the CMOS related motion problems with fast motion caused by the rolling shutter.

David Andrews · August 17th, 2005, 12:03 PM

I have a PAL version of the GS400 and now always use the 16:9 widescreen mode. This delivers good results for me. I understand this mode uses 50 frames per second interlaced in PAL format.

I have not used the 16:9 "pro-cinema" frame mode. This uses 25 frames per second full frame mode.

Andre De Clercq · August 17th, 2005, 02:01 PM

Thanks for correcting me David. Indeed , the "wide" mode produces standard interlace anamorphic pics (you mean 50 interlaced fields/sec.I suppose). I am not a specific progressive scan enthousiast, but depending on the camera's vertical filtering (thin/thick)and the performance of the deinterlacer/rescaler in flatscreen LCD displays, vertical resolution can be higher for native progressive images.

David Andrews · August 18th, 2005, 12:14 AM

This subject came up on one of the DVdoctor forums recently, to be found here:
http://dvdf.hexus.net/showthread.php...t=GS400+16%3A9

It may be of interest. The expert here is Alan Roberts.

August 16th, 2005, 01:02 PM	#1
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	GS400 16:9 uprez How good is the 16 :9 in camera uprez with GS400. Comparable to DVX100A when set in progressive?(see A Wilt test) Is progressive in GS400 in "thin" mode by default?

August 16th, 2005, 02:39 PM	#2
Joshua Provost Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 493	Andre, Not sure what you mean by in-camera uprez 16:9... the GS400 uses a 16:9 footprint on the CCD in Wide mode, with a wider angle of view than in 4:3 mode. It's actually downrezing from 1152x646 to 720x480 in Wide mode, as illusrated on this page. GS400 doesn't do progressive, and DVX100A doesn't do real 16:9, so it's tough to compare. Josh __________________ Owner/Operator, 727 Records Co-Founder, Matter of Chance Productions Blogger, Try Avoidance

August 16th, 2005, 03:01 PM	#3
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Andre: The GS-400 has 1/4.7" hi res CCD's which would appear to be the same as the Sony PDX-10 (or at least the specs match). So it's actually doing real 16:9 and is in fact "downrezzing" the image to 720x480 (or 720x576 PAL).

August 16th, 2005, 03:42 PM	#4
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Thanks Joshua and Boyd. I tought it was a letterbox uprezzer. The question on progressive scan relates to what I read in the Users Manual PAL(bottom of pg 26): "Wide/pro-cinema... In addition to the effects on Wide Function, images are recorded at a rate of 25 frames a second with a strobe-like effect." Maybe just for PAL version?

August 16th, 2005, 11:38 PM	#5
Young Lee Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 268	Hope this helps. MX5000 Frame Grabs (**In 16:9 mode: MX5000 < GS250/400) http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/gallery/glow2.jpg http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/gallery/glow3.jpg

August 17th, 2005, 03:38 AM	#7
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Thanks Benjamin, but why do you think that frame mode is a deinteraced version and not a native progressive picture ? See http://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-etc.html#filmlook about frame mode.

August 17th, 2005, 05:57 AM	#8
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Maybe somewhat more background info why I started this thread. I have a Sony VX2K. A good camera especially in low light conditions, but it has a poor 16:9 uprez image (vertical resolution and artifacts)..I want 16:9 on my widescreen LCD displays (37"Sharp and 40"Barco).. instead of side panneled 4:3 pictures. In addition to that I luke a smaller DV camcorder for traveling.

August 17th, 2005, 07:14 AM	#9
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Andre, have you ever looked at the PDX-10? If you like the VX-2000 then it would see very familiar. It also has the advantage of DVCAM recording, hi res BW viewfinder, XLR inputs and a short shotgun mike. The XLR box and mike are removable for those times when you want something small, and the camera also has builtin stereo mikes. It will give you very nice 16:9 but no frame mode. It has perhaps been discontinued however, see the discussion in the PDX-10 forum. I suspect you can still find them though, probably at a good price too. Of course the new Sony HDR-HC1 and HVR-A1 would also give you nice widescreen in a very small package, plus HDV. Maybe more than you want to spend though.

August 17th, 2005, 08:01 AM	#10
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Yes Boyd PDX10 looks fine too. I will look at it in more detail (and see if still available in Europe). About the Sony HC1 I still have questions on how it handles low-light sitiuations (window and level mapping trade-offs)) and fast moving objects (rolling shutter). Also my NLE is not MPEG2 compatible,,,

August 17th, 2005, 08:20 AM	#11
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	If you aren't ready for HDV then the HC1 allows you to shoot in regular DV mode (AFAIK), but you still have the advantage of the hi-res 16:9 native CCD's. When used this way you avoid the MPEG issues with movement.

August 17th, 2005, 08:40 AM	#12
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Boyd, I mean the CMOS related motion problems with fast motion caused by the rolling shutter.

August 17th, 2005, 12:03 PM	#13
David Andrews Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 131	I have a PAL version of the GS400 and now always use the 16:9 widescreen mode. This delivers good results for me. I understand this mode uses 50 frames per second interlaced in PAL format. I have not used the 16:9 "pro-cinema" frame mode. This uses 25 frames per second full frame mode.

August 17th, 2005, 02:01 PM	#14
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	Thanks for correcting me David. Indeed , the "wide" mode produces standard interlace anamorphic pics (you mean 50 interlaced fields/sec.I suppose). I am not a specific progressive scan enthousiast, but depending on the camera's vertical filtering (thin/thick)and the performance of the deinterlacer/rescaler in flatscreen LCD displays, vertical resolution can be higher for native progressive images.

August 18th, 2005, 12:14 AM	#15
David Andrews Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 131	This subject came up on one of the DVdoctor forums recently, to be found here: http://dvdf.hexus.net/showthread.php...t=GS400+16%3A9 It may be of interest. The expert here is Alan Roberts.