Report on V1 24p footage shot in India

[Steve Mullen]

I just reviewed several hours of 24p tonight that I shot in India using Sony's Cinema setting (Sharpness = 5). Sent to calibrated 50-inch Sony via HDMI.

1) No edge noise at all. Infacy no noise at all even inside temple where I was at +12dB gain -- and still clean.

2) No aliasing. Zero. None.

3) No Edge Enhancemen artifacts. Zero. None.

4) Because there is no edge enhancement at "5" -- the image looks less detailed than it would at "7." Obviously, Sony feels this is correct for a transfer to film. And, I agree. There is no need to go below "5" except as an FX. (Probably no need to go above "7" either.

5) If you like 24p motion judder, it's there just like it should be. IMHO it is a nasty motion artifact that has no role in the 21st Century HD video. (I've had enough judder to last a lifetime with my 720p30 JVC.)

I would use 24p ONLY if I were sure I was going to transfer to film. In which case, I would use it to match frame-rates. If I wasn't sure, I would deinterlace in post.

6) The use of Gamma 1 crushes dark gray to black. If your idea of film is from the 70-80's, I guess you'll like this.

7) The use of Gamma 2 REALLY crushes gray to black. If your idea of film is K64 from the 60's, I guess you'll like this.

8) The problem with both is they limit latitude. In the bright India sun, the last thing I needed was less latitude. Frankly, I would never ever use Gamma 2 again! Except as an FX.

9) If I were going to film, I would adjust for maximum latitude. I would deliver the flatest image I could to the lab. In short, do not pre-crush the blacks. You can never get the detail back. Let the lab do it.

9) Bottom-line, if you want HDCAM/Varicam Discovery HD like video -- and I do -- forget P unless it is 60p. Focus on getting the maximum latitude and detail from 60i. Pop the color for even more impact.

Conversly, if you truly want "film-look" video, you can get it with the V1U. Simply start with Sony's CINEMA Profile and tweak to your heart's content. My stuff definitely does have a film-look, so my experiment was successful -- even if I don't like the result.

Good luck!

[Bob Grant]

Which part of India were you in, I've been around Rajasthan on a Enfield a little later than this in the year and man the sun has a real bite to it.
I really want to go back, this time with a camera and I was thinking a V1 would be ideal, well OK I'd take a F350 if I had the money. The country deserves the best I could afford and I think there's not much time left to capture a lot of it.

I'm interested in how you went shooting in the temples. We visited a wonderfull Jain temple in the middle of nowhere, only oil lamps for light mostly but photography was out of the question anyway.

[Chris Medico]

Hi Steve,

Do you find the image quality of the i60 better than p30?

I understand the jutter issue with p24 but curious why you prefer i60 to p30. Sorry if this sounds like a dumb question.

[Boyd Ostroff]

Hi Steve, thanks for the report. The gamma settings sound a lot like what I've experienced with Cinematone 1 and 2 on the Z1. The progressive scan aspect of this camera is what seems to appeal to many people, so your comments are interesting. If you're shooting interlaced, do you feel that the V1 still has an advantage over the Z1 due to the CMOS chips? I was very impressed with the amount of detail I saw in the V1 footage which Sony projected on a 40' screen at the press conference when they announced the camera. I'm pretty sure my Z1 wouldn't have looked as good in comparable conditions.

[Craig Irving]

Thanks for re-affirming my decision to buy the V1U, Steve! I haven't been dissapointed one bit by this camcorder either. I've shot progressively in 24 and 30p and prefer 30p as well. But I'll still probably shoot films in 24p and everything else in 30p.

Will you be continuing your "On The Road Reports" with the V1U now that you're back?

[Ken Ross]

Steve, I couldn't agree with you more about the motion judder. It's the major reason I returned the JVC shortly after buying it. I'll never understand the love affair that some people have with this 'look'.

[Paul Frederick]

I think the judder is mostly a matter of people not processing it properly in post. It doesn't look good when played out of the camera. Also try shooting in the 24A mode. It looks smoother to me, especially when played out of the camera...maybe it's my imagination, I'd be curious to hear what others think. 24p MUST have the pulldown removed and then added back to look smooth on TV. I've been doing some tests and it can look very smooth if handled right. Do you see Hollywood films looking all juddery on TV? No, they are processed correctly.

Boyd,
I have an FX1 and this camera is WAY, WAY sharper. It also, to my eyes, holds the image better and doesn't "break up" or pixelate as much as the FX1. It's hard to describe but it just looks alot better to me. The 20x zoom is nice and I've found the 1.5 digital extender adds very MINIMAL distortion. So little in fact that I use it frequently to get wildlife shots. It makes the camera have a 30x zoom when engaged! I almost didn't even try it as in the past using digital zooms were a waste of time, but it's different with this cam.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Craig Irving

Thanks for re-affirming my decision to buy the V1U, Steve! I haven't been dissapointed one bit by this camcorder either.

Will you be continuing your "On The Road Reports" with the V1U now that you're back?

Yes I will. I'm pulling photos now.

I think the folks with FX1 and Z1 are giving a good insight into how they experience the V1. And, yes the Zoom is wonderful. In fact, after looking at about 8 hours of stuff I haven't found a negative yet.

However, I'm putting together a list of tips for my V1 book.

Does anyone want to try an experiement? Try shooting using AF -- monitoring with Peaking. My experience is it works perfectly at Wide- to Medium-zoom. In fact, if you zoom slowly you can go full Tele.

I found every time I didn't trust the Peaking -- and manually focused -- it was a waste of effort as I was already in focus.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Bob Grant

Which part of India were you in, I've been around Rajasthan on a Enfield a little later than this in the year and man the sun has a real bite to it.

I'm interested in how you went shooting in the temples. We visited a wonderfull Jain temple in the middle of nowhere, only oil lamps for light mostly but photography was out of the question anyway.

I was in Chennai (Madras) for a week this year -- normally I spend a month. I did Rajasthan in March `87 and it was getting hot.

I started shooting the building of a Jain temple in `82 using sound Super 8. They were just cutting stone. Over the next 3-4 years I shot the construction every time I went. Because they got to know me, they let me shoot in the temple. By the end I was shooting VHS with Sony's very first single-chip 2/3-inch CCD camera. If only I had HD when I was young.

In Chennai I used max zoom and also found that certain temple areas were OK to shoot in. The problem is that deep inside where the gods are -- I needed +12db yet the folks standing outside looking into the gods were in light shirts in noon sun. No way!

The next day I went back and set the camera for max lattitude. I'll review this tape tonight.

The V1 was perfect for me -- go for it!

[Bob Grant]

Steve,
thanks for sharing that. Sounds like quite a venture.

The one I mentioned was very old, the steps inside were almost completely worn away. The local ladies were cleaning the outside with old toothbrushes using a hand made cleaning mixture. That cleaning mixture was made by smashing glass into powder then mixing that with soap and water.

[Paulo Teixeira]

Steve Mullen,
You could go to Allahabad and record the Kumbh Mela festival if you feel you can handle it. It’s a great way to test the camcorder’s capabilities.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Paul Frederick

I think the judder is mostly a matter of people not processing it properly in post. It doesn't look good when played out of the camera. Also try shooting in the 24A mode. It looks smoother to me, especially when played out of the camera...maybe it's my imagination, I'd be curious to hear what others think. 24p MUST have the pulldown removed and then added back to look smooth on TV. I've been doing some tests and it can look very smooth if handled right. Do you see Hollywood films looking all juddery on TV? No, they are processed correctly.

There is no difference between the 24p modes.

There is no special "24" processing done in post. You either remove pulldown and go to film, or remove pulldown, edit, and then add pulldown back for DVD or video. If you do the former -- then you see motion judder plus the double projection of each frame. That should look like film. And, IMHO that's the primary purpose of 24P and 25P. After living with 720p30 judder for years, I just see no need for it.

But once you go back to video -- it's just like what it looks like from the camera. Not a look either of us seem to like. But I did find using a 216-degree shutter to look better -- slightly more motion blur.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff

The progressive scan aspect of this camera is what seems to appeal to many people, so your comments are interesting. If you're shooting interlaced, do you feel that the V1 still has an advantage over the Z1 due to the CMOS chips? I was very impressed with the amount of detail I saw in the V1 footage which Sony projected on a 40' screen at the press conference when they announced the camera. I'm pretty sure my Z1 wouldn't have looked as good in comparable conditions.

Looking at more 24p tonight, I feel Sony's "5" recommendation is too soft for my tastes. I hesitate to say it, but I sense P is about 1 click softer than I. Maybe 2 clicks.

If I'm right, then it says there is a very tiny difference between I and P -- with I having more natural detail. If you read my explanation of how the V1 works -- that makes perfect sense. 2X greater information captured for each frame.

All this means is you may want to use "6" or "7" rather than Sony's default "5" for Cinema. I've set to my Cinema setting to "7." I may even move VIDEO to "8" to get a bit more detail. Perhaps, even "9."

Remember, this is a "low conrast" camera so it doesn't use contrasty images to boost apparent sharpness.

PS: I have my HDTV set to add LOW (25 of 100) edge enhancement.

[Paul Frederick]

Steve,

What I've seen is people shooting 24p, then editing in a 60i timeline without proper pulldown removal. That is what I meant by not processing it properly. Maybe it's just me, but after editing and adding the pulldown back, my stuff looks smoother than playing it out of the camera. Maybe it's all psychological!

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Paul Frederick

Steve,

What I've seen is people shooting 24p, then editing in a 60i timeline without proper pulldown removal. That is what I meant by not processing it properly. Maybe it's just me, but after editing and adding the pulldown back, my stuff looks smoother than playing it out of the camera. Maybe it's all psychological!

I'll bet you get used to the judder in your material the more you watch it.

Edius allows you to see fields. So you can avoid cutting to a judder frames.