The 1080P mode vs the 720P mode! at DVinfo.net

Michael Pappas · February 8th, 2006, 10:59 PM

Since this is a hot topic and a major concern among many of us that wanted a true promised 1080P mode on the HVX, where does Panasonic stand on this now.

I for one love the HVX and it's image, and are part of a very few who saw the film out which was very gorgeous directed by Ben Rich. However the 1080P was promoted for film out if you need the highest level of res.

With the advent of 1080P TV's coming in all over the place; these viewing systems will want that extra punch. I'll tell ya, 720P is no match for true 1080P on my 24' dell.

Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }
XLH1 and HVX200 frame grabs and news here:
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

Steve Mullen · February 9th, 2006, 02:26 AM

1) My model predicts these data from three 960x576 CCDs with H. Green-shift.

2) However, there have been reports from the USA and Japan that the CCD uses both H. and V. Green-shift. If this is true -- then my model estimates the V. rez.should be about 590 TVL. But, it was only 540 TVL.

3) I'm concerned by the test being run with Sharpness turned down.

"The HVX200's corresponding control had a subtler effect; the machine holds its fundamental sharpness better with detail turned down ... . Sharpness on the ... HVX ... used -3 or -4, ... to give the same apparent sharpness (as judged from edging artifacts) as the Canon did on its minimum setting."

If the Sharpness affects V. rez, more than H. rez. -- then that could account for the lower measure.

We really need several more measures of HVX200 resolution! Barry?

4) Adam is correct that a 960x1080p CCD that discarded every other line would also yield 540 TVL. Why would Panasonic -- if it had a 1080-row CCD -- toss away half the lines? Perhaps their current DSP can't handle more than 540-lines at 60Hz. Which could mean an enhanced model could come later. Or, perhaps a firmware enhancement?

5) Yes -- the HVX200 offers less resolution than does the HD100, but it also offers real 720p60 which is very important for those who are NOT into film.

For those shooting "video for film" the HD100 is, to me, the obvious correct choice. Some, of course, will prefer the HVX200 at 24p because they need 4:2:2 and/or believe that DVCPRO HD is "less compressed" than 720p HDV -- which is untrue.

But, for the much larger market of those shooting video -- these folks have a choice of under-sampled 1080i or under-sampled 720p or 720p30 with a Motion Filter. Right now there is no PERFECT camcorder at under $10K.

You'll have to make choices!

Putting all this into perspective. At the NAB 2004 after JVC announced HDV, Panasonic announced they too would release an MPEG-2 camcorder. They even passed around a model that used SD cards. I suspect they were in a bit of a panic about JVC's decision to team with NTT to embed an NTT MPEG-2 chip into a DV camcorder.

By NAB 2005 -- the said they had "switched priorities" and decided to go with DVCPRO HD because "the editing technology was ready." In reality, they didn't have a 60fps MPEG-2 encorder. Nor does anybody.

By NAB 2007 we should see an HVX*** that has "real" HD CCDs and a 60fps MPEG-2 encoder. By then P2 will be large and cheap and we'll have an hour of HD per P2 card.

Allan Barnwell · February 9th, 2006, 03:30 AM

For a better understanding of how Panasonic views HDV as compared to DVCPRO HD, or more generally MPEG-2 formats versus their DVCPRO codec, you should read the 3 published books that Panasonic began releasing in 1998. It is clear from these publications that Panasonic has been very consciously avoiding MPEG-2 due to several drawbacks they consider critical to the future of video as it relates to the IT infrastructure.

These books can be found at http://panasonic-broadcast.com in pdf form and are an enlightening read – a must for anyone wanting to make informed statements about Panasonic’s official opinion of their DVCPRO codec.

The 3 books in chronological order are:
THE VIDEO COMPRESSION BOOK
THE VIDEO CONNECTION BOOK
TV BY IT

These short volumes are great technical resources for those who are not extremely technical as they have been written not for engineers, but producers, directors, etc.

As for the subject of 1080p, the HVX-200 is meant to be a supporting camera for the VariCam, as well as open the DVCPRO HD format to a larger market. Panasonic definitely has emphasized the indie film market with this camera, and it has some unique features that you only find available on this unit. The 1080p feature was added to the HVX-200 because it was possible with the P2 format, and the 1080p split frame version of the DVCPRO HD codec was already available in editors like Final Cut using cards like the Kona 2. At the time that format was introduced to the edit system, there was no camera that could shoot that format natively. It was used primarily for editing HDCAM to avoid the inconvenience of going uncompressed since Sony’s codec was not available natively on any edit systems but their own.

Allan Barnwell
Omega Broadcast Group
Panasonic/Canon/Apple Dealer
Austin, Texas

Steve Mullen · February 9th, 2006, 04:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allan Barnwell

It is clear from these publications that Panasonic has been very consciously avoiding MPEG-2 due to several drawbacks they consider critical to the future of video as it relates to the IT infrastructure.

The books are marketing tools against Sony's IMX. The reality is that at NAB Pansonic has had multiple year's of exhibts showing the work they are doing with MPEG-2. They are very big into MPEG-2!

P2 was clearly invented for MPEG-2, but at bit rates of 35Mbps, 50Mbps and 70Mbps (422) where it equals HDCAM and DVCPRO HD.

Panasonic, Sony, and JVC are moving toward MPEG-2 -- with Sony and JVC showing non-HDV products at NAB 2006. Pansonic will milk DVCPRO HD for a few more years.

Allan Barnwell · February 9th, 2006, 05:05 AM

Panasonic is certainly not opposed to MPEG-2 for application where best suited, they've got several consumer camcorders using it, but there are many times it requires too much overhead with inferior results to their DVCPRO codec.

You currently see the hoops Apple had to jump through to get HDV working in Final Cut. The long-gop nature of MPEG-2 makes HDV very difficult to process. By its nature, the HDV tapes can't even be cloned to HDV. Many drawbacks, but certainly not a good fit for certain applications.

Likewise, what DVCPRO HD lacks in resolution, it makes up for in color.

But this has strayed from the original topic... 1080p

Allan

Steven White · February 9th, 2006, 09:13 AM

I don't see why people are making a big issue of this.

Having an "upsample" mode to 1080p is no different than the DVX100 having a "squeeze" mode that upsamples the middle 16:9 portion of the frame to make 720x480 PA 1.2 DV "widescreen" video. There is room for improvement in all the HD cameras out there, and the HVX200 is no exception.

People seem to think that this first release of sub $10k HD camcorders is for whatever reason going to be the first-and-only. Sorry folks - nope. I mean, how many generations of DV cameras did we have before we got to the "pinnacle" of the technology?

That said, it is quite unlikely that the 1080p mode is "useless". Simply by merit of the 80 Mbps or 100 Mpbs available to the 1080p video, and the additional 1280x1080 resolution for storage, there should be superior chroma and luma information available in the 1080p footage to any 720p rendering. Furthermore, since the vertical resolution is really not any higher than 720p can store, 1080p offers an excellent shooting solution to produce true 1280x720p in your final master copy.

-Steve

Steve Mullen · February 9th, 2006, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven White

People seem to think that this first release of sub $10k HD camcorders is for whatever reason going to be the first-and-only. Sorry folks - nope. I mean, how many generations of DV cameras did we have before we got to the "pinnacle" of the technology?e

Excellent point -- and I've gone back and edited my post to more accurately convey this message.

Assuming Canon is ramping up Sony's 1440x1080 CCD production line -- we should see a "better" FX1/Z1 next year.

Sony will have 35Mbps MPEG-2 -- and so may JVC.

JVC will have a 60fps MPEG-2 encoder to provide 720p60.

Over the next few years there will be a rapid roll-out of new low-cost HD products.

I've also edited my first post to consider alternate CCD resolution options including the use of BOTH horizontal and vertical Green-shift and Adam's mention of 1080p CCDs outputting half the rows.

Betsy Moore · February 10th, 2006, 02:51 AM

I don't understand, in layman's terms is there 1080p on the camera or not. Jan told us A YEAR AGO there would be--she didn't say there'd be some synthetic version of it--she said there'd be 1080 24p period. So... is there? I can't quite keep up with the math talk of the above posts.

Steev Dinkins · February 10th, 2006, 03:11 AM

There is 1080p over 1080i recording. The big beef is over the apparent lack of a huge difference between 720p and 1080p resolution.

I think people are freaking out over feeling deceived. I am not one of those people. I think people need to get over it. The camera shoots gorgeous imagery and is fantastically flexible. But I'm sure this thread will live longer than it should.

These are my very quick tests as you saw earlier. 480p and 720p blown up to 1080, along with 1080 itself:

480p - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20...0_027_DV25.jpg

720p - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20...27_720p24N.jpg

1080p - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20...27_1080p24.jpg

I may run more tests, but I've never planned on doing 1080 with the camera anyway. 720p24N baby!!

Mike Marriage · February 10th, 2006, 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betsy Moore

I don't understand, in layman's terms is there 1080p on the camera or not. Jan told us A YEAR AGO there would be--she didn't say there'd be some synthetic version of it--she said there'd be 1080 24p period. So... is there? I can't quite keep up with the math talk of the above posts.

The camera records a 1080 format - DVCPRO HD, but subsamples, just like HDV and HDCAM, only DVCPROHD uses only 1280x1080 instead of 1440x1080. So, yes it is a 1080 camera. About the "p24" part, the camera actually records this inside the 1080i stream, but I believe the CCD is capturing progressively at 24Hz, so that has been fufilled.

However, it appears the camera can not deliver resolution as high as the codec. This is due to a number of factors: lens, CCD block, laws of physics.

Panasonic have always said that at this price they would have to make compromises. It seems they have choosen to opt for a lower resolution in order to focus on latitude capabilities and low light performance. If you want pure resolution, it probably isn't the camera for you.

Steve Mullen · February 10th, 2006, 03:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betsy Moore

I don't understand, in layman's terms is there 1080p on the camera or not. Jan told us A YEAR AGO there would be--she didn't say there'd be some synthetic version of it--she said there'd be 1080 24p period. So... is there? I can't quite keep up with the math talk of the above posts.

Yes, the camcorder records 1080/24p. The controversy comes from two things:

1) The Panasonic website claims the CCDs "scan and capture 1080p."

2) The EFFECTIVE Vertical resolution from 1080p CCDs should about 1000-lines, but the HVX200 provides only about 540-lines.

That leaves a huge set of question questions:

1)) Was Jan wrong? (I'm very sure she did not lie!!!) But, the info she got from Japan could have been incorrect.

2) Is the website wrong?

3) Were the test measurements wrong? Why has no one measured any units in the latest batch? Why the silence?

4) If the CCDs are 1080p chips -- why are half of the lines "lost?"

5) If the CCDs are not 1080p -- what size are they? Panasonic could clear this whole mess up by simply telling us the CCD's resolution, but they won't.

6) Why won't they?

7) One possibility is that camcorder uses SD -- not HD -- CCDs. Likely 960x576.

8) Jan has also claimed the CCDs would use BOTH vertical and horizontal Green-shift to increase resolution. Is this true?

9) Why, since the camcorder doesn't even deliver true 720p resolution -- why would Panasonic add insult to injury by offering 1080p? You are sending empty bits to P2.

10) Why would Panasonic promote a 1080p camcorder and then deliver one that offers less real resolution than a 3 year old JVC single-CCD HD1 you can buy from eBay for $1500?

Steven White · February 10th, 2006, 06:56 AM

Quote:

9) Why, since the camcorder doesn't even deliver true 720p resolution -- would Panasonic add insult to injury by offering 1080p? You are sending empty bits to P2!

This one's easy. Less compression.

-Steve

Barry Green · February 11th, 2006, 12:15 AM

The official info from Panasonic was that it samples at 1080/60p (or whatever frame rate you're using). Any other formats are converted from that.

1080/60i has the exact same resolution as 1080/60p does.

There is no interlace scanning being done on the chip, nor is there any line-twitter filtering. The thick/thin filter doesn't apply in high-def. It takes two 60p frames and slices them into fields and creates the 60i stream from that.

Barry Werger · February 11th, 2006, 01:51 AM

Some compelling evidence that 1080i is indeed providing more resolution than 720p...

Steev Dinkins · February 11th, 2006, 02:22 AM

It is. There is more resolution from 1080 than 720. Comparing the two doesn't show that there's a huge difference between the two though. Something else to considered is this. If the other cameras could do both 720 and 1080, would you see much of difference on those cameras??? Heh heh heh.

Here are two screen grabs:

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/1920x1080_a.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/1920x1080_b.jpg

Which one is an upres from 1280x720?!?!

Can you really say there's a tremendous difference?? I think not.

February 8th, 2006, 10:59 PM	#1
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	The 1080P mode vs the 720P mode! Since this is a hot topic and a major concern among many of us that wanted a true promised 1080P mode on the HVX, where does Panasonic stand on this now. I for one love the HVX and it's image, and are part of a very few who saw the film out which was very gorgeous directed by Ben Rich. However the 1080P was promoted for film out if you need the highest level of res. With the advent of 1080P TV's coming in all over the place; these viewing systems will want that extra punch. I'll tell ya, 720P is no match for true 1080P on my 24' dell. Michael Pappas Arrfilms@hotmail.com PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER AT { PAPPASARTS2 } XLH1 and HVX200 frame grabs and news here: http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms http://www.PappasArts.com http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts

February 9th, 2006, 02:26 AM	#2
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	1) My model predicts these data from three 960x576 CCDs with H. Green-shift. 2) However, there have been reports from the USA and Japan that the CCD uses both H. and V. Green-shift. If this is true -- then my model estimates the V. rez.should be about 590 TVL. But, it was only 540 TVL. 3) I'm concerned by the test being run with Sharpness turned down. "The HVX200's corresponding control had a subtler effect; the machine holds its fundamental sharpness better with detail turned down ... . Sharpness on the ... HVX ... used -3 or -4, ... to give the same apparent sharpness (as judged from edging artifacts) as the Canon did on its minimum setting." If the Sharpness affects V. rez, more than H. rez. -- then that could account for the lower measure. We really need several more measures of HVX200 resolution! Barry? 4) Adam is correct that a 960x1080p CCD that discarded every other line would also yield 540 TVL. Why would Panasonic -- if it had a 1080-row CCD -- toss away half the lines? Perhaps their current DSP can't handle more than 540-lines at 60Hz. Which could mean an enhanced model could come later. Or, perhaps a firmware enhancement? 5) Yes -- the HVX200 offers less resolution than does the HD100, but it also offers real 720p60 which is very important for those who are NOT into film. For those shooting "video for film" the HD100 is, to me, the obvious correct choice. Some, of course, will prefer the HVX200 at 24p because they need 4:2:2 and/or believe that DVCPRO HD is "less compressed" than 720p HDV -- which is untrue. But, for the much larger market of those shooting video -- these folks have a choice of under-sampled 1080i or under-sampled 720p or 720p30 with a Motion Filter. Right now there is no PERFECT camcorder at under $10K. You'll have to make choices! Putting all this into perspective. At the NAB 2004 after JVC announced HDV, Panasonic announced they too would release an MPEG-2 camcorder. They even passed around a model that used SD cards. I suspect they were in a bit of a panic about JVC's decision to team with NTT to embed an NTT MPEG-2 chip into a DV camcorder. By NAB 2005 -- the said they had "switched priorities" and decided to go with DVCPRO HD because "the editing technology was ready." In reality, they didn't have a 60fps MPEG-2 encorder. Nor does anybody. By NAB 2007 we should see an HVX*** that has "real" HD CCDs and a 60fps MPEG-2 encoder. By then P2 will be large and cheap and we'll have an hour of HD per P2 card. __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c Last edited by Steve Mullen; February 9th, 2006 at 07:21 PM.

February 9th, 2006, 03:30 AM	#3
Allan Barnwell Sponsor: Omega Broadcast Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 239	Panasonic's official view of DVCPRO VS MPEG-2 For a better understanding of how Panasonic views HDV as compared to DVCPRO HD, or more generally MPEG-2 formats versus their DVCPRO codec, you should read the 3 published books that Panasonic began releasing in 1998. It is clear from these publications that Panasonic has been very consciously avoiding MPEG-2 due to several drawbacks they consider critical to the future of video as it relates to the IT infrastructure. These books can be found at http://panasonic-broadcast.com in pdf form and are an enlightening read – a must for anyone wanting to make informed statements about Panasonic’s official opinion of their DVCPRO codec. The 3 books in chronological order are: THE VIDEO COMPRESSION BOOK THE VIDEO CONNECTION BOOK TV BY IT These short volumes are great technical resources for those who are not extremely technical as they have been written not for engineers, but producers, directors, etc. As for the subject of 1080p, the HVX-200 is meant to be a supporting camera for the VariCam, as well as open the DVCPRO HD format to a larger market. Panasonic definitely has emphasized the indie film market with this camera, and it has some unique features that you only find available on this unit. The 1080p feature was added to the HVX-200 because it was possible with the P2 format, and the 1080p split frame version of the DVCPRO HD codec was already available in editors like Final Cut using cards like the Kona 2. At the time that format was introduced to the edit system, there was no camera that could shoot that format natively. It was used primarily for editing HDCAM to avoid the inconvenience of going uncompressed since Sony’s codec was not available natively on any edit systems but their own. Allan Barnwell Omega Broadcast Group Panasonic/Canon/Apple Dealer Austin, Texas

February 9th, 2006, 05:05 AM	#5
Allan Barnwell Sponsor: Omega Broadcast Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 239	Panasonic and MPEG-2 Panasonic is certainly not opposed to MPEG-2 for application where best suited, they've got several consumer camcorders using it, but there are many times it requires too much overhead with inferior results to their DVCPRO codec. You currently see the hoops Apple had to jump through to get HDV working in Final Cut. The long-gop nature of MPEG-2 makes HDV very difficult to process. By its nature, the HDV tapes can't even be cloned to HDV. Many drawbacks, but certainly not a good fit for certain applications. Likewise, what DVCPRO HD lacks in resolution, it makes up for in color. But this has strayed from the original topic... 1080p Allan

February 10th, 2006, 03:11 AM	#9
Steev Dinkins Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 613	There is 1080p over 1080i recording. The big beef is over the apparent lack of a huge difference between 720p and 1080p resolution. I think people are freaking out over feeling deceived. I am not one of those people. I think people need to get over it. The camera shoots gorgeous imagery and is fantastically flexible. But I'm sure this thread will live longer than it should. These are my very quick tests as you saw earlier. 480p and 720p blown up to 1080, along with 1080 itself: 480p - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20...0_027_DV25.jpg 720p - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20...27_720p24N.jpg 1080p - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20...27_1080p24.jpg I may run more tests, but I've never planned on doing 1080 with the camera anyway. 720p24N baby!! __________________ www.holyzoo.com

February 9th, 2006, 09:13 AM	#6
Steven White Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 547	I don't see why people are making a big issue of this. Having an "upsample" mode to 1080p is no different than the DVX100 having a "squeeze" mode that upsamples the middle 16:9 portion of the frame to make 720x480 PA 1.2 DV "widescreen" video. There is room for improvement in all the HD cameras out there, and the HVX200 is no exception. People seem to think that this first release of sub $10k HD camcorders is for whatever reason going to be the first-and-only. Sorry folks - nope. I mean, how many generations of DV cameras did we have before we got to the "pinnacle" of the technology? That said, it is quite unlikely that the 1080p mode is "useless". Simply by merit of the 80 Mbps or 100 Mpbs available to the 1080p video, and the additional 1280x1080 resolution for storage, there should be superior chroma and luma information available in the 1080p footage to any 720p rendering. Furthermore, since the vertical resolution is really not any higher than 720p can store, 1080p offers an excellent shooting solution to produce true 1280x720p in your final master copy. -Steve

February 10th, 2006, 02:51 AM	#8
Betsy Moore Major Player Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 444	I don't understand, in layman's terms is there 1080p on the camera or not. Jan told us A YEAR AGO there would be--she didn't say there'd be some synthetic version of it--she said there'd be 1080 24p period. So... is there? I can't quite keep up with the math talk of the above posts.

February 11th, 2006, 12:15 AM	#13
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	The official info from Panasonic was that it samples at 1080/60p (or whatever frame rate you're using). Any other formats are converted from that. 1080/60i has the exact same resolution as 1080/60p does. There is no interlace scanning being done on the chip, nor is there any line-twitter filtering. The thick/thin filter doesn't apply in high-def. It takes two 60p frames and slices them into fields and creates the 60i stream from that.

February 11th, 2006, 01:51 AM	#14
Barry Werger Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 104	Some compelling evidence that 1080i is indeed providing more resolution than 720p... Last edited by Barry Werger; February 11th, 2006 at 11:13 AM.

February 11th, 2006, 02:22 AM	#15
Steev Dinkins Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 613	It is. There is more resolution from 1080 than 720. Comparing the two doesn't show that there's a huge difference between the two though. Something else to considered is this. If the other cameras could do both 720 and 1080, would you see much of difference on those cameras??? Heh heh heh. Here are two screen grabs: http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/1920x1080_a.jpg http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/1920x1080_b.jpg Which one is an upres from 1280x720?!?! Can you really say there's a tremendous difference?? I think not. __________________ www.holyzoo.com