Sony HC1 Cineframe Rocks

David Schachman · March 6th, 2006, 07:42 PM

2 questions:
1. where can you download or find the program HDLink?
2. Is there any way to set the cinema effect as a default so the camera doesn't reset when you turn it off and turn it back on?

Steve Mullen · March 6th, 2006, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Albert Henson

i believe it is. At least it is what it claims in the manual. On other forums the cineframe in the hc1 is also discussed. I haven't seen the cinema effect in too many other cameras myself. At least not one that works this well.

It looks like Sony wanted the A1 effect to seem different (better) that the same effect on the HC1 so it could justify charging more for the A1.

Graham Hickling · March 7th, 2006, 01:16 AM

David, HDLink comes as part of Cineform's ConnectHD and AspectHD packages.

I have the AspectHD version of HDLink, which includes the 24P functionality discussed above. I am not sure if the ConnectHD version is identical or not (ConnectHD is the cheaper of the two packages)..

Look here: www.cineform.com

David Schachman · March 7th, 2006, 08:49 AM

Is Aspect HD a better or easier program than Adobe Premiere? I tried using Sony's Vegas 6 to copy hd video, and it didn't work. Adobe did, but i was hoping to find something easier to use. Thanks

Graham Hickling · March 7th, 2006, 09:48 AM

AspectHD essentially works as a plugin within Premiere, providing a high-def codec and extra functionality. So you need BOTH programs.

However, when you install AspectHD, HDLink then also gets installed as a small separate program that can be run independently of Premiere to provide tape read and write fucntions. (Its essentially the original way that Cineform implemented read and write to and from the camera ... functionality that later got built into Premiere itself.)

Were you using a full version of Vegas, or the trial version? Most of the trial versions of Vegas, Premiere, etc don't include full HD functions (which is a poor decision if you ask me, since HD-functions may be precisely what people are wanting to evaluate!).

David Schachman · March 7th, 2006, 05:31 PM

They were the full version of the program. Thanks again.
Does anyone have an answer to my second question?
2. Is there any way to set the cinema effect as a default so the camera doesn't reset when you turn it off and turn it back on??

Glenn Thomas · March 8th, 2006, 03:51 PM

I use DV Film Maker to deinterlace my footage which works really well. Here's the link - http://www.dvfilm.com/maker/index.htm

It does batch processing, so you can leave it for a few hours and it will deinterlace a whole bunch of clips. It's an adaptive deinterlacer, so you don't lose any vertical resolution, as would be the case with most standard deinterlacers that just duplicate one of the fields. Because of how well this works, I've never used Cineframe and never will. The shutter speed issue is just one reason.

Another thing, shooting with Cineframe you would never have the option of interpolating the fields for a slow motion look.

Clay Coulter · March 8th, 2006, 09:04 PM

I used DV Film Maker to convert to 24p and compared this to 24p footage created by using Cineform's codec with CineFrame 24 enabled. A frame-by-frame comparison showed that the frames created with the CineFrame/Cineform combination appeared much more natural than those from DV Film Maker. However, there is clearly a reduction in resolution in using CineFrame/Cineform, so DV Film Maker would be the better choice for maintaining sharpness. As an aside, the best conversion that I have seen was accomplished with Adobe After Effects using the Magic Bullet frame rate conversion plug-in. Those excellent results only require you to wait a few days while your system renders ;)

Glenn Thomas · March 9th, 2006, 05:08 AM

Yes, Magic Bullet is nice from the tests I've seen, but I've heard it's quite slow and within After Effects wouldn't be ideal for converting a whole bunch of clips. In DV Film I set the 'Blur horizontal lines' parameter to 3 which will smooth things out a bit more.

David Schachman · March 10th, 2006, 07:42 AM

Does anyone know if you can set the cinema mode to default so it doesn't have to be selected every time you turn on the camera?

Timothy Stidham · March 26th, 2006, 12:33 AM

You can't make it a default, but you can add digital effects to the LCD menu so you can quickly select it. You can even give it the #1 position so it's first up when you touch pmenu on the screen.
After a few experiments it seems if you can create very even lighting and lock down on a tripod or steadicam- cinema effect can create some nice looking footage. But it degrades pretty quickly with lighting changes. It would take some effort to maintain a look throughout a short film, but it could be done. It's not as robust as the frame mode of my GL-2, but looks way better on a 1080 display or tv! Very bright lighting also seems to wash out the effect looking much more video-like.
Anyone else agree or disagree?

March 8th, 2006, 03:51 PM	#37
Glenn Thomas Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 320	Try this I use DV Film Maker to deinterlace my footage which works really well. Here's the link - http://www.dvfilm.com/maker/index.htm It does batch processing, so you can leave it for a few hours and it will deinterlace a whole bunch of clips. It's an adaptive deinterlacer, so you don't lose any vertical resolution, as would be the case with most standard deinterlacers that just duplicate one of the fields. Because of how well this works, I've never used Cineframe and never will. The shutter speed issue is just one reason. Another thing, shooting with Cineframe you would never have the option of interpolating the fields for a slow motion look.

March 8th, 2006, 09:04 PM	#38
Clay Coulter Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Nashville TN Posts: 29	CineFrame + Connect HD vs. DV Film Maker I used DV Film Maker to convert to 24p and compared this to 24p footage created by using Cineform's codec with CineFrame 24 enabled. A frame-by-frame comparison showed that the frames created with the CineFrame/Cineform combination appeared much more natural than those from DV Film Maker. However, there is clearly a reduction in resolution in using CineFrame/Cineform, so DV Film Maker would be the better choice for maintaining sharpness. As an aside, the best conversion that I have seen was accomplished with Adobe After Effects using the Magic Bullet frame rate conversion plug-in. Those excellent results only require you to wait a few days while your system renders ;)

March 6th, 2006, 07:42 PM	#31
David Schachman New Boot Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: west orange, nj Posts: 5	2 questions: 1. where can you download or find the program HDLink? 2. Is there any way to set the cinema effect as a default so the camera doesn't reset when you turn it off and turn it back on?

March 7th, 2006, 01:16 AM	#33
Graham Hickling Trustee Join Date: May 2004 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 1,669	David, HDLink comes as part of Cineform's ConnectHD and AspectHD packages. I have the AspectHD version of HDLink, which includes the 24P functionality discussed above. I am not sure if the ConnectHD version is identical or not (ConnectHD is the cheaper of the two packages).. Look here: www.cineform.com

March 7th, 2006, 08:49 AM	#34
David Schachman New Boot Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: west orange, nj Posts: 5	Is Aspect HD a better or easier program than Adobe Premiere? I tried using Sony's Vegas 6 to copy hd video, and it didn't work. Adobe did, but i was hoping to find something easier to use. Thanks

March 7th, 2006, 09:48 AM	#35
Graham Hickling Trustee Join Date: May 2004 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 1,669	AspectHD essentially works as a plugin within Premiere, providing a high-def codec and extra functionality. So you need BOTH programs. However, when you install AspectHD, HDLink then also gets installed as a small separate program that can be run independently of Premiere to provide tape read and write fucntions. (Its essentially the original way that Cineform implemented read and write to and from the camera ... functionality that later got built into Premiere itself.) Were you using a full version of Vegas, or the trial version? Most of the trial versions of Vegas, Premiere, etc don't include full HD functions (which is a poor decision if you ask me, since HD-functions may be precisely what people are wanting to evaluate!).

March 7th, 2006, 05:31 PM	#36
David Schachman New Boot Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: west orange, nj Posts: 5	They were the full version of the program. Thanks again. Does anyone have an answer to my second question? 2. Is there any way to set the cinema effect as a default so the camera doesn't reset when you turn it off and turn it back on??

March 9th, 2006, 05:08 AM	#39
Glenn Thomas Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 320	Yes, Magic Bullet is nice from the tests I've seen, but I've heard it's quite slow and within After Effects wouldn't be ideal for converting a whole bunch of clips. In DV Film I set the 'Blur horizontal lines' parameter to 3 which will smooth things out a bit more.

March 10th, 2006, 07:42 AM	#40
David Schachman New Boot Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: west orange, nj Posts: 5	Does anyone know if you can set the cinema mode to default so it doesn't have to be selected every time you turn on the camera?

March 26th, 2006, 12:33 AM	#41
Timothy Stidham New Boot Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Dyer, IN Posts: 13	You can't make it a default, but you can add digital effects to the LCD menu so you can quickly select it. You can even give it the #1 position so it's first up when you touch pmenu on the screen. After a few experiments it seems if you can create very even lighting and lock down on a tripod or steadicam- cinema effect can create some nice looking footage. But it degrades pretty quickly with lighting changes. It would take some effort to maintain a look throughout a short film, but it could be done. It's not as robust as the frame mode of my GL-2, but looks way better on a 1080 display or tv! Very bright lighting also seems to wash out the effect looking much more video-like. Anyone else agree or disagree?