Question for Jan Crittenden Livingston about 1080p

Radek Svoboda · June 10th, 2005, 09:59 AM

I am not making assumptions or spreading rumors. I am telling what I see and I don't see 1080p uncompressed. Progressive gets written to interlaced tracks after compression. Why you assuming that new Panasonic camera would be different and Panasonic would do it hard way? And if really did this and 1080p uncompressed would be available, why they would leave it out from descreiption, or unit itself?

I wanted Panasonic to comment this. You are repeating same thing that not apply. Please check how cameras work before making assumptions and spreading rumors. Please don't accuse me of this. All I did was commented on what I saw and I asked Panasonic for clarification.

Radek

Joe Carney · June 10th, 2005, 03:16 PM

Barry, from what I've read, the new JVC will write 720x24p directly to tape, not convert to 60i. It does convert to interlace via the component outputs (including 1080i). Same goes for 25/30p mode. 60p to tape is only supported in NTSC/PAL SD resolution. According to the latest info at their web site.

Radek, you are going to have accept that there is no uncompressed 1080p output from this camera. If that is a problem, then go plunk down your 100K for a cinealta and another 100k for the equipment to handle uncompressed 1080p. Even if the camera output progressive 1080p it would still have an approx 3 to 1 compression ratio.

If you have a compatible NLE you can convert the source back to 1080x24p (but still compressed) during capture. Since most of us would have to capture the video anyway that is not a problem. And there is no live 1080p broadcast as of today.
Thats it, nothing else to say. NO 1080P UMCOMPRESSED OUT from a sub 20K camera anywhere (excluding the folks doing the custom imaging over in Alternate Imaging).

btw, my HP notebook is ready to accept those P2 cards if I ever need to.

Thomas Smet · June 11th, 2005, 08:08 AM

We are not spreading rumors but are trying to tell you what we know so far. If you would listen you would see we are trying to tell you tht no there is no 1080p uncompressed output but who cares? You can still get 24p from the 1080i output.

Do you consider the DVX-100 a 480p camera? You have never answered this. I am not spreading rumors but trying to explain that based on what we know so far we are sure it works like the DVX-100. That is all we have said is to give facts.

The problem at least that I had with this whole thing starting is that you were making the assumption that since there wasn't real 1080p uncompressed output that meant the chips were making a fake 1080 video that was scaled up or interpolated from 720p video. At the start I was trying to explain that the lack of 1080p didn't mean that at all. Yes the 1080p vieo from the HVX-200 could be interpolated but I do not think the form of uncompressed output would reflect this in any way.

All along we have been saying that yes there is no 1080p uncompressed ouput because it doesn't need it. By us saying the 1080p stream is inside a 1080p stream is saying that there is no 1080p output. That however doesn't mean you cannot get true 24p frames from this however.

I know how the ouput system and camera works on the DVX-100 and if the HVX-200 works the same way for 1080p then that should settle this issue.

How do you know how the camera works? Do you have one? You seem to be the only current expert on the HVX-200.

You read one article somewhere and are now assuming the camera doesn't even make a real 1080 video but fakes one. I am not saying it does or doesn't but at this point you know as much as the rest of us. The thing is you could have a chip block with 1920x1080 progressive pixels and still have a camera that outputs 1080i only or you could have a block with 960x720 pixels that gets muxed up to simulate a 1080p video and still ouput on the same 1080i or pump that out some high end 1080p output. The method of either having 1080i or 1080p output doesn't really reflect what the chips or camera are doing.

I am not debating if the HVX-200 does or does not have uncompressed 1080p output but trying to explain that I know it doesn't but it doesn't really need to because it works like the DVX-100. You seem to ignore the comparison of the DVX-100.

I know the output is 1080i but I also know that in post I can get true 24p frames from this which is a lot more than any other camera in this price range will do.

Didn't Jan already respond on this?

June 10th, 2005, 09:59 AM	#16
Radek Svoboda Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Prague, Czech Republic Posts: 500	I am not making assumptions or spreading rumors. I am telling what I see and I don't see 1080p uncompressed. Progressive gets written to interlaced tracks after compression. Why you assuming that new Panasonic camera would be different and Panasonic would do it hard way? And if really did this and 1080p uncompressed would be available, why they would leave it out from descreiption, or unit itself? I wanted Panasonic to comment this. You are repeating same thing that not apply. Please check how cameras work before making assumptions and spreading rumors. Please don't accuse me of this. All I did was commented on what I saw and I asked Panasonic for clarification. Radek

June 10th, 2005, 03:16 PM	#17
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	Barry, from what I've read, the new JVC will write 720x24p directly to tape, not convert to 60i. It does convert to interlace via the component outputs (including 1080i). Same goes for 25/30p mode. 60p to tape is only supported in NTSC/PAL SD resolution. According to the latest info at their web site. Radek, you are going to have accept that there is no uncompressed 1080p output from this camera. If that is a problem, then go plunk down your 100K for a cinealta and another 100k for the equipment to handle uncompressed 1080p. Even if the camera output progressive 1080p it would still have an approx 3 to 1 compression ratio. If you have a compatible NLE you can convert the source back to 1080x24p (but still compressed) during capture. Since most of us would have to capture the video anyway that is not a problem. And there is no live 1080p broadcast as of today. Thats it, nothing else to say. NO 1080P UMCOMPRESSED OUT from a sub 20K camera anywhere (excluding the folks doing the custom imaging over in Alternate Imaging). btw, my HP notebook is ready to accept those P2 cards if I ever need to.

June 11th, 2005, 08:08 AM	#18
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	We are not spreading rumors but are trying to tell you what we know so far. If you would listen you would see we are trying to tell you tht no there is no 1080p uncompressed output but who cares? You can still get 24p from the 1080i output. Do you consider the DVX-100 a 480p camera? You have never answered this. I am not spreading rumors but trying to explain that based on what we know so far we are sure it works like the DVX-100. That is all we have said is to give facts. The problem at least that I had with this whole thing starting is that you were making the assumption that since there wasn't real 1080p uncompressed output that meant the chips were making a fake 1080 video that was scaled up or interpolated from 720p video. At the start I was trying to explain that the lack of 1080p didn't mean that at all. Yes the 1080p vieo from the HVX-200 could be interpolated but I do not think the form of uncompressed output would reflect this in any way. All along we have been saying that yes there is no 1080p uncompressed ouput because it doesn't need it. By us saying the 1080p stream is inside a 1080p stream is saying that there is no 1080p output. That however doesn't mean you cannot get true 24p frames from this however. I know how the ouput system and camera works on the DVX-100 and if the HVX-200 works the same way for 1080p then that should settle this issue. How do you know how the camera works? Do you have one? You seem to be the only current expert on the HVX-200. You read one article somewhere and are now assuming the camera doesn't even make a real 1080 video but fakes one. I am not saying it does or doesn't but at this point you know as much as the rest of us. The thing is you could have a chip block with 1920x1080 progressive pixels and still have a camera that outputs 1080i only or you could have a block with 960x720 pixels that gets muxed up to simulate a 1080p video and still ouput on the same 1080i or pump that out some high end 1080p output. The method of either having 1080i or 1080p output doesn't really reflect what the chips or camera are doing. I am not debating if the HVX-200 does or does not have uncompressed 1080p output but trying to explain that I know it doesn't but it doesn't really need to because it works like the DVX-100. You seem to ignore the comparison of the DVX-100. I know the output is 1080i but I also know that in post I can get true 24p frames from this which is a lot more than any other camera in this price range will do. Didn't Jan already respond on this?