PDW800 overcranking

[Steve Phillipps]

Anyone know for sure how the overcranking of the 800 works? I'm pretty much assuming it's like a de-interlace, recording say 60i, splitting the fields, interpolating them and laying them down as 60 frames. This would mean it'd be just the same as doing it in post from the 700, just saving time as it's done in-camera.
Or am I missing something, is there some magic going on in there that I don't know about - trying very hard to justify spending thousands to upgrade!
Steve

[Alister Chapman]

It's certainly half vertical resolution, so yes you probably can get a very similar result by shooting 50 and slowing it down in post. The only real issue will be with slowing it down by anything other than 50% as that will create jumpy sequences. Convergent designs will be adding overcrank to the NanoFlash and FlashXDR in a future firmware release. So you could always shoot 720/50P and record to a NanoFlash and let that then change the file headers so it plays back at 25P.

Can't wait to see what 100Mbps from the NanoFlash and 700 looks like. Should be supper clean.

[Emmanuel Plakiotis]

1080 50p half resolution and 720 50p have a pixel difference of 115200 which represent a 12.5% only increase from the latter format. So the real addition as Alister pointed out is 800's ability to do stepped over/under cranking.
I'm also very curious how the nanoflash will fare on the over/under cranking which of course is only 720.

[Alister Chapman]

Overcrank on the PDW-F800 is 1920x540 not 720P

[Steve Phillipps]

That's what Emmanuel was saying, comparing 1920x540 to 1280x720. I did the same calculation, thinking that if 720 is accepted as HD then 1920x540 should be OK.
Steve

[Alister Chapman]

I expect most HD productions would allow 720P for a moderate amount of overcrank within an otherwise 1080 production. Whether they would prefer 1920x540 or 720P, well that's another question entirely.