The New Panasonic HPX-300...

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Simon Wyndham

Not sure of the point of this. Proxies are very useful on slower media like XDCAM disc, but for solid state it is rather redundant.

The theory is that the P2 media and files on a shoot can go one route, the SDHC cards with proxies another and be used for production logging etc purposes. That could even include e-mailing them back to a base on the other side of the world. Obviously it's possible to form compressed files from SxS originals, but it's another step and probably take several times real time, let alone the time to send them.

The other possibility I've heard is that for such as breaking news, the proxies can be very quickly linked back, even over a fairly slow link, and put on air quickly, the full res material following as and when.

Like a lot of features on a lot of cameras, they are something that some users with some requirements will see as very useful, others will never use them.

[Simon Wyndham]

vThe theory is that the P2 media and files on a shoot can go one route, the SDHC cards with proxies another and be used for production logging etc purposes.

Yeah, I can see how that would work. Shame though that the processing can't create the proxies on import. Perhaps with more GPGPU processing in computers this might be possible, thus saving what on P2 is valuable space.

[Jon Fairhurst]

The proxies could be quickly loaded on a laptop in the field, which can be used to edit an EDL. The key point is that you don't have to waste any time encoding the proxies before you start editing. Sure, they'll copy to the hard drive/raid a bit quicker than the full-sized files, but it's the "edit now" feature that shines.

[Simon Wyndham]

The proxies could be quickly loaded on a laptop in the field, which can be used to edit an EDL.

Want to know something funny?

For a long while I bemoaned the lack of proxy files with P2 because I was used to working with them with XDCAM disc based systems. They had a lot of uses for speeding up workflow and for providing downloadable content for clients via FTP. A lot of the P2 guys told me how they wouldn't have much use for them.

Now that I am using the EX I have less use for the proxies. For clip reference over FTP they would still be useful, but for the most part I am not missing them too much.

[Steve Phillipps]

Originally Posted by Simon Wyndham

Enough of the skew issue already. Unless you are in a press scrum on a dark evening most of your shooting life it isn't an issue. I've shot hundreds of hours of footage and it has never been an issue with my EX3. And that's with fast moving footage such as WRC class rally cars etc.

Still not convinced Simon, I've an EX3 here and I shot some tests of birds flying on the estuary and most notably on quick tilts (ie when they plunged to land on the sand) there was still an issue with the image jittering. Whether it's rolling shutter skew or not I don't know, all I know is that I don't see it with an Arri or a Digibeta, Varicam or Sony HDW750 or PDW700.

Steve

[Simon Wyndham]

Can you post up some examples Steve?

Quite often i find that when you are looking for the effect it can be there, but most times it isn't noticeable.

Video is often a compromise and stuff that we notice simply isn't by most normal people watching. I take it you are down by the Severn a lot? We'll have to hook up and compare notes, I've been down there a lot myself recently. I am surprised you noticed it on a tilt rather than a pan. I'm also slightly confused by the word 'jittering' which doesn't seem to fit the mold of a CMOS rolling shutter issue.

Which model of monitor is this being viewed on? And how is it being output?

[Steve Phillipps]

My local test patch is the Conwy Estuary actually, up north.
Viewed it on HDTV via component out and also on laptop in FCP.
One of the companies I do work for has got an EX3 and I said I might be able to use it instead of the big cameras when I need to go a long long way and need a lighter kit. Mostly I think the EX3 is amazing (even the VF is useable), but I just can't get over this issue. It's hard to describe, all I know is I see it straight away when I'm used to viewing footage from Varicam et al and never noticed it at all.
Steve

[Simon Wyndham]

Viewed it on HDTV via component out

CRT or LCD? Native 1920x1080 capable or 768 scaling? Production monitor or consumer? So many issues attributed to a camera can be caused by the monitor! Including that laptop.

I'd need to see it to know what you are on about. I just need a better description of the physicality of the picture when you say 'jittery'?

[Steve Phillipps]

It's a 1080P plasma via component.
Can't find the time or inclination to post footage, but don't think it'd help anyway as it'd be so compressed you wouldn't be able to tell anyway.
Hope to get into a post house shortly to check all is well with PDW700 footage (including 720P for slomo which at first glance doesn't look that hot I'm afraid), so may get some answers then.
Steve

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Simon Wyndham

Shame though that the processing can't create the proxies on import. Perhaps with more GPGPU processing in computers this might be possible, thus saving what on P2 is valuable space.

I don't think they affect the P2 recordings or card space at all, though my experience is based on the first SD P2 2/3" cameras. On those, the idea was that the main recording went to P2, and the proxies went to an SD card. Hence, regardless of what happened to the main recordings, the producer could just walk away with an SD card at the end with a low res copy, and use that for off-line viewing or even e-mailing back to base, say, for an exec producer to see. The viewing could even be on a PDA if it had an SD slot.

Much better to do it in camera than on import, since it can just be handed straight to the producer etc after shooting - that may be well before any import or other post process.

[Simon Wyndham]

but don't think it'd help anyway as it'd be so compressed you wouldn't be able to tell anyway.

That in itself would indicate that it isn't a CMOS issue.

The viewing could even be on a PDA if it had an SD slot.

The XDCAM series tried something similar with a Memory Stick addon, but it never caught on. It is still funny though because I remember having arguments with people on various forums who used P2 who told me that proxy files were useless and that they would much rather just use the final footage.

PDA viewing of footage would be useful though in some circumstances. One issue that would need sorting out is meta data linking. For example on the XDCAM discs any changes you make to the proxy metadata can be transferred to the full resolution files the next time that disc is hooked up. Does this new system have that capability?

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Simon Wyndham

It is still funny though because I remember having arguments with people on various forums who used P2 who told me that proxy files were useless and that they would much rather just use the final footage.

It depends what you're using them for. In the early XDCAM days I heard Sony describing two main reasons for having them on the discs - getting down to edit more quickly, before the full res files had transferred, and for the breaking news scenario - getting low res pictures on air quickly.

Come solid state, and the first reason tends to go away, and so too the need to record proxies on the main media. But the breaking news argument is still valid, and also the possibility of using them for off line logging/viewing/e-mailing. Here there's a clear advantage in NOT having them on the main media, but on a separate cheap SD card. And that can be far more easily played on a PDA, computer etc than a Memory Stick as the device is far more likely to support SD!

[Elijah Lynn]

Why would they take such a lovely camera and put such a small chip in it? Seems a bit late in the game for more 1/3" chip cameras with the current state of things. Lovely codec and all that jazz though.

If a Sandisk Extreme III SDHC card can handle 30 MBps, that's 30 MegaBYTES per second then it could easily handle 100 Mbps, thats 35 MegaBITS per second or 240 Mbps.

You could over crank 60p and then some with a 30 MBps card.

Even a Sandisk Extreme II SDHC 15 MBps card could handle that with a 20% of overhead coming in at 120 Mebabits per second.

I think Sandisk is fibbing a whole bunch and that there sustained write speeds are nothing close to that and they are only burst write speeds. They have a "video" sdhc card and coincidentally the specs are left off for it's write speeds. This link What are SDHC Cards? says the minimum specs for SDHC are:

* Class 2: minimum sustained DTS of 2MB/sec
* Class 4: minimum sustained DTS of 4MB/sec
* Class 6: minimum sustained DTS of 6MB/sec

Basically the class number means how many MB/s. I never knew that until now. It would be cool if they would publish their sustained write speed as well. There is no reason you would need a super expensive raided P2 card if a Sandisk Ultra III can even get half of it's advertised 35 MBps.

[Perrone Ford]

If you head over to the EX1 forum and look, you'll see that we have been testing the read and write speeds of the Sandisk, Lexar, Transcend, and other cards regularly for use in our cameras.

I've attached the test for my Sandisk Ultra2 16GB card. Mind you, this is testing through the expresscard adapter.

[Elijah Lynn]

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

If you head over to the EX1 forum and look, you'll see that we have been testing the read and write speeds of the Sandisk, Lexar, Transcend, and other cards regularly for use in our cameras.

I've attached the test for my Sandisk Ultra2 16GB card. Mind you, this is testing through the expresscard adapter.

Wow! Faster than advertised!!

Well I was just about to post back that the 15 MBps on the Ultra II 16 GB does not claim write speed, which I overlooked, and that it probably means read speed and that it really only has to comply with the class 4 rating of 4 MBps write speed which would equal 32 Mbps write speed but your screenshot tells a very different story!

Your screenshot proves that the Sandisk Ultra II is capable of handling full 100 Mbit AVC Intra. Very interesting. I will have to head over to the EX1 forum.

Edit - Although I just noticed it was only a 100 MB block, correct?