DVCPRO50 vs. DV

Shannon Rawls · February 1st, 2006, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Imported to Vegas.

Vegas??? Barry... you still hangin in there with the PC Federation? *smile* I thought you went over to the Dark Side??
How did you capture and prepare the DVCPRO-50 stuff for Vegas?

Also....I'm gonna call you about that Vegas gig.

- ShannonRawls.com

Barry Green · February 1st, 2006, 03:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marty Hudzik

Barry,
Can you give me a quick rundown on how you use DV50 in vegas and what codecs or add-ons you used?

Files were converted using DVFilm RayLight software, and the free Matrox DVCPRO50 codec. Marcus van Bavel of DVFilm is a ninja, and he supplied a beta-test upgrade of Raylight that includes DVCPRO50 and DV MXF file conversion.

So the process is: buy & install raylight. Download the Matrox codec. Copy the files to the hard disk through the USB2 port on the camera. Convert the files using RayMaker; then edit as normal.

RayMaker works pretty well for DV50, I can almost (ALMOST) get a stream of realtime playback on my aging P4 2.66GHz system. It's about 28fps playback rate for a single stream.

Quote:

Also.....can you preview out via firewire to an NTSC monitor? If so is it downsampled to DV25?

Vegas only does DV25 firewire preview. You can put high-def on the timeline and it'll downconvert to DV25 for a firewire preview.

Barry Green · February 1st, 2006, 03:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shannon Rawls

Vegas??? Barry... you still hangin in there with the PC Federation? *smile* I thought you went over to the Dark Side??

Well, no, didn't "go over" per se; I am currently running both platforms. I tried Raylight/Vegas on my existing system, and... man, there's just no comparison.

I also finally set up the Mac G5, and it plays back multiple streams of high-def at full frame rate with realtime transitions inbetween! It's just like editing DV, but the frame size and data rate are 4x as high. I don't have a RAID either, I'm just running off the internal drive. Don't know what those Apple guys have done, but man, this is the bottom-of-the-line G5 and it's way ahead of the PC as far as DVCPRO-HD playback/editing goes. We ran some HD on an FX guy's dual xeon 3.06ghz system, and it was pokey slow by comparison.

I'm looking at Edius Broadcast too for the PC, but they're recommended minimum editing stations are a bit pricey for my blood (about 3x as expensive as the Mac was, recommending a dual Xeon 3.6 or better with RAID storage), so I'm going to work with the Mac for a while and wait and see what happens with Vegas. I keep using Vegas because it's so unbelievably convenient and it's just so awesome -- the learning curve on FCP has not proved to be quite as simple as I'd hoped. It looks more like Premiere than I would like; once I fled Premiere for Vegas I have never wanted to see Premiere again. But it's hard to argue the performance; the Apple just has it all over the PC apps when it comes to DVCPRO-HD editing.

Quote:

How did you capture and prepare the DVCPRO-50 stuff for Vegas?

You can't capture, at least not until Vegas (someday, hopefully) implements a capture app. You have to copy the MXF files manually from the card, and then run RayMaker on them. It's not any big deal, it's just another step. Direct MXF import would be magnificent though; this "import P2/unwrap/rewrap" process on the Mac is just a big waste of time to get a more limited system. Hopefully they'll announce a new version that just lets you edit native; it's the only flaw in their system (well, that plus the learning curve for us current Vegas exiles!) Right now Vegas feels like "home", FCP feels like a hotel room. I'll give it a shot though.

David Heath · February 1st, 2006, 06:10 AM

I'd be very interested to see the same tests done with a 50Hz camera, as DV25 is then 4:2:0. I don't deny the superiority of the 50Mb end product over 25Mb, but wonder how much it is due to the far lower general compression of that codec, as opposed to the differing colour space.

My reasoning goes that for DV25 there are two colour samples (one each U and V) for every four luminance, in DV50 there are four - so a 33% increase in no of samples, whilst the bitrate increases by 100%. Hence 2/3 of the bitrate increase is going towards lowering the general compression level rather than a colourspace ratio improvement.

I find another part of the images very interesting - namely around the girls left elbow. Enlarge the image until you can make pixels out and the compression artifacting (on DV25) is very obviously asymmetrical - far, far worse on vertical edges than horizontal. Which leads me to think that maybe it's the one sample in four going into the compressor that is causing the worst problems, and makes me wonder how 4:2:0 as in PAL DV25 would compare? My suspicion (based on the problem being so assymetrical in NTSC 4:1:1) is that the difference would be less, but I'd find it a very interesting experiment.

Dean Sensui · February 1st, 2006, 01:59 PM

Barry...

Was the DVCPro 50 format written to tape or the P2 card? If to tape, that would be a pretty useful feature.

Thanks,

Vincent Rozenberg · February 1st, 2006, 02:10 PM

You can not record DVCpro 50 to tape with the HVX unfortunately. Only DV.

Barry Green · February 1st, 2006, 06:58 PM

New photos, total still-life with no motion whatsoever, exact same subject in both. Again, this is the same camera for all shots, same settings etc., the only thing whatsoever that changed was the recording format.

DV:
http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/Turkey-DV25.JPG

DV50:
http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/Turkey-DV50.JPG

Blown up to 400% to compare:
http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/Turkey-DV-DV50.JPG

Here's a shot where the DV50 was blown up to 200% size and put side-by-side with an HD shot:
http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/Lemonade-DV50-DVHD.JPG

David Heath · February 5th, 2006, 06:42 PM

Barry, they are very good illustrations, and if anyone is in any doubt of the extent of the superior quality of HD just look at the last one.

It's left me thinking that an interesting comparison along the same lines would be to use a Z1 to shoot the same scene as Barry has done, but both in NTSC and PAL SD DV25, all else kept the same. Obviously the vertical resolution will differ, but the big difference between the two examples will be 4:1:1 for NTSC, 4:2:0 for PAL. The compression applied should be the same in each case as both have the same number of samples/second (720*480*30 = 720*576*25 = 10368000 for luminance), so any significant differences in artifacting should be due to colour space, and how the codec handles them.

Any takers?

Mattew Love · February 6th, 2006, 04:09 PM

I'm relatively new to the world of video and just bought an HVX as my first "Real" camera. After shooting with DVCpro50 and P2 for the first time I cannot imagine ever going back to dv25 and tape. The difference is night and day. Bigger even than the difference between Vegas and FCP in my opinion.

......Of course I have no real world experience to base that last comment on, but it sure did sound good. Here's to Panasonic!!!

Chris Medr · February 10th, 2006, 08:34 AM

well, the DV25 looks really horrible in the chroma channel, but people tend to forget what can be done with a bit of preprocessing of the footage (it's not really much exta work).

here's a comparison between raw DV25, smoothed DV25 and the DV50 after keying:

http://voon.dyndns.org/hvx/DV25vsDV50.jpeg

(or lossless compressed for those who want to take a closer look)
http://voon.dyndns.org/hvx/DV25vsDV50.png

++ chris

Jon Pumin · February 10th, 2006, 08:58 AM

Chris, what kind of preprocessing did you use on that DV25 smooth? That looks as good as raw dv50 to me.. Will Pal DV25 achieve a better result then NTSC DV25? I'm considering a pal DVX100b, or HVX for DV50 since I'm sticking with SD for now..

Chris Medr · February 10th, 2006, 10:15 AM

it's really just some chroma reconstruction/smoothing before the key and a lightwrap after the key...

i updated the sample pic to do the same thing with the DV50 footage.
++ chris

Albert Rudnicki · February 11th, 2006, 03:37 PM

Just another chroma key test.

It was done with primate 2 (after effects); I tried to keep the same settings for both images.

http://www.ahproductions.com/public/video/DV50-Green comp.tif
http://www.ahproductions.com/public/video/DV25-Green comp.tif

On this one I have applied deartifacting filter.
http://www.ahproductions.com/public/video/DV25-Green comp deartifacting.tif

February 1st, 2006, 01:59 PM	#20
Dean Sensui Inner Circle Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 2,054	Barry... Was the DVCPro 50 format written to tape or the P2 card? If to tape, that would be a pretty useful feature. Thanks, __________________ Dean Sensui Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing

February 1st, 2006, 06:10 AM	#19
David Heath Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,699	I'd be very interested to see the same tests done with a 50Hz camera, as DV25 is then 4:2:0. I don't deny the superiority of the 50Mb end product over 25Mb, but wonder how much it is due to the far lower general compression of that codec, as opposed to the differing colour space. My reasoning goes that for DV25 there are two colour samples (one each U and V) for every four luminance, in DV50 there are four - so a 33% increase in no of samples, whilst the bitrate increases by 100%. Hence 2/3 of the bitrate increase is going towards lowering the general compression level rather than a colourspace ratio improvement. I find another part of the images very interesting - namely around the girls left elbow. Enlarge the image until you can make pixels out and the compression artifacting (on DV25) is very obviously asymmetrical - far, far worse on vertical edges than horizontal. Which leads me to think that maybe it's the one sample in four going into the compressor that is causing the worst problems, and makes me wonder how 4:2:0 as in PAL DV25 would compare? My suspicion (based on the problem being so assymetrical in NTSC 4:1:1) is that the difference would be less, but I'd find it a very interesting experiment.

February 1st, 2006, 02:10 PM	#21
Vincent Rozenberg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Rotterdam, The Netherlands Posts: 475	You can not record DVCpro 50 to tape with the HVX unfortunately. Only DV.

February 1st, 2006, 06:58 PM	#22
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	New photos, total still-life with no motion whatsoever, exact same subject in both. Again, this is the same camera for all shots, same settings etc., the only thing whatsoever that changed was the recording format. DV: http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/Turkey-DV25.JPG DV50: http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/Turkey-DV50.JPG Blown up to 400% to compare: http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/Turkey-DV-DV50.JPG Here's a shot where the DV50 was blown up to 200% size and put side-by-side with an HD shot: http://www.fiftv.com/HVX200/Lemonade-DV50-DVHD.JPG

February 5th, 2006, 06:42 PM	#23
David Heath Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,699	Barry, they are very good illustrations, and if anyone is in any doubt of the extent of the superior quality of HD just look at the last one. It's left me thinking that an interesting comparison along the same lines would be to use a Z1 to shoot the same scene as Barry has done, but both in NTSC and PAL SD DV25, all else kept the same. Obviously the vertical resolution will differ, but the big difference between the two examples will be 4:1:1 for NTSC, 4:2:0 for PAL. The compression applied should be the same in each case as both have the same number of samples/second (72048030 = 72057625 = 10368000 for luminance), so any significant differences in artifacting should be due to colour space, and how the codec handles them. Any takers?

February 6th, 2006, 04:09 PM	#24
Mattew Love New Boot Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 11	I'm relatively new to the world of video and just bought an HVX as my first "Real" camera. After shooting with DVCpro50 and P2 for the first time I cannot imagine ever going back to dv25 and tape. The difference is night and day. Bigger even than the difference between Vegas and FCP in my opinion. ......Of course I have no real world experience to base that last comment on, but it sure did sound good. Here's to Panasonic!!!

February 10th, 2006, 08:34 AM	#25
Chris Medr Tourist Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2	well, the DV25 looks really horrible in the chroma channel, but people tend to forget what can be done with a bit of preprocessing of the footage (it's not really much exta work). here's a comparison between raw DV25, smoothed DV25 and the DV50 after keying: http://voon.dyndns.org/hvx/DV25vsDV50.jpeg (or lossless compressed for those who want to take a closer look) http://voon.dyndns.org/hvx/DV25vsDV50.png ++ chris

February 10th, 2006, 08:58 AM	#26
Jon Pumin New Boot Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: TN Posts: 5	Chris, what kind of preprocessing did you use on that DV25 smooth? That looks as good as raw dv50 to me.. Will Pal DV25 achieve a better result then NTSC DV25? I'm considering a pal DVX100b, or HVX for DV50 since I'm sticking with SD for now..

February 10th, 2006, 10:15 AM	#27
Chris Medr Tourist Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2	it's really just some chroma reconstruction/smoothing before the key and a lightwrap after the key... i updated the sample pic to do the same thing with the DV50 footage. ++ chris

February 11th, 2006, 03:37 PM	#28
Albert Rudnicki Regular Crew Join Date: May 2005 Location: Montreal Posts: 52	Just another chroma key test. It was done with primate 2 (after effects); I tried to keep the same settings for both images. http://www.ahproductions.com/public/video/DV50-Green comp.tif http://www.ahproductions.com/public/video/DV25-Green comp.tif On this one I have applied deartifacting filter. http://www.ahproductions.com/public/video/DV25-Green comp deartifacting.tif