Questions about V1U

[Mikko Lopponen]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Unless you shoot a spinning fan you'll never see it. There's none -- even shooting high-speed traffic.

I can see it in 1/25 shutter speed also, the motion blur masks it but it is definitely viewable. I'm not that interested in the bending of lines when doing pans and stuff, but the overall bulging that happens when doing fast speed action where the camera moves is horrible.

I tend to use 1/100 shutter alot because of the HC1's electronic image stabiliser. But it's still viewable in 1/50. And I DO INDEED make a lot of "saving private ryan-style, michael bay-waving the camera around" action shots so it is definitely an issue for me with the hc1. But I haven't seen the V1 so my criticism isn't towards it just generally against the rolling shutter phenomenon.

It also makes tracking shots and effects placement a bit...strange. Not to mention slowmo shots where its 2x more visible.

As someone who specifically ASKS about the '24' style camera movements he wants to make, I'd really like too see some 24 style V1 stuff. I can post HC1 rolling shutter videos that are very apparent when I get home from work.

I can perfectly understand that most people won't notice it. It's an issue only when doing action. Simple pans or just watching "high" speed traffic isn't it. It also makes handheld shots look pretty darn fugly as the bottom part of the image moves at a different time than the upper part. I had to cut a frame out of one my action clips because one of the camera shakes had caused a weird bulge in the picture.

But lets say the V1 has a higher speed than the hc1. I read somewhere that it has a 4x faster readout speed, so that would be enough even for me.

BTW, I've never aimed the camera towards a fan or looking spefically for problems. The first time I spotted the rolling shutter effect was when I was doing telephoto handheld shots in a city.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Since you can't see the dark band in that shot, which is readily apparent and was shocking to the Sony engineers (this wasn't shot with a V1, BTW) obviously it's not acceptable to them. Audiences *can* clearly see it.
I find it ironic I'm with Mikko on this one, because we've had rolling shutter debates before. Nice to be on the same side of the fence here, Mikko. :-)

I believe the original quote is

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

And, you should never use more than 1/120 under ANY condition when shooting video -- unless you want a Saving Private Ryan look -- which has already been used.

I believe the statement disqualifies slow mo in post.
Additionally, just because *you* can't see it doesn't mean it's there. Professional editors and shooters know what they're looking at the moment they experience it. It looks like a faint scan line,not horribly different from CRT scan lines shot at 1/60th by a camcorder without clear-scan features. I see the darkened ripple in the posted shot plain as day, look at the frame roughly 40 frames earlier. Clean and clear. Shot two has a nasty horizontal line that runs from top to bottom for all of 10 seconds.

[Marcus Marchesseault]

I think the reason I don't see rolling shutter as a problem with the V1 is that it is not a bottleneck. The systems on the V1 seem to mesh well together an nothing sticks out as a significant problem. To get any sort of noticeable rolling shutter effects, you would probably be doing some action that would also start to induce compression artifacts. Neither of these problems come in so soon that it is going to ruin footage except in freakishly demanding circumstances. If you need an F950, buy or rent an F950. The V1 is like a Japanese sports car. It may not be as flashy as a Ferrari or as fast as a McLaren, but it goes fast and is perfect as an everyday driver. It also does all you need without breaking the budget. People seem to be looking for a sort of flaw that breaks the deal with the V1. That flaw is just not there. There may be another camera that you like better, but the V1 isn't handicapped by anything but the fact that it isn't a $25,000 camera.

Besides the V1 being a fine camera, it's not really the camera that does the job anyway. I've seen great images from all of the HDV cameras so none of them are really a limiting factor. I feel the need for the manual controls on the mid-size cameras like the FX1, V1, and Canon A1, but they all can make a nice picture. If you don't believe me that the camera is no longer a limitation, go to the "Show Your Work" section of this forum. Take a look at "Living the Dream" by Charles Papert and you will have to agree that, for most scenes, few people could tell the difference between this and big-budget shots.

[Stephen Armour]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

Not quite.

Rolling shutter can be seen at any speed over 1/60 in a variety of situations, particularly that where the camera is moving fast over a horizonal line or near horizontal line. In some very rare instances, rolling shutter can be seen even at 1/60.
Image One shows the subject with nothing of substance in the background.
Image Two shows a semi-horizontal skyline, same subject, less than 3 seconds later. Rolling shutter is *very* apparent in the video, and visible in the still frame grab I just captured using PRT SC.
Additionally, high shutter speeds are of course, very common in many forms of video production, such as when slow motion is the end goal, to name but one of several reasons one would use high shutter speeds.

Douglas, NOBODY I showed those pics to, could see anything seriously wrong with them that made them un-usable.

Either we're really sloppy and unprofessional, or maybe you're too picky...

[Matt Vanecek]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

Since you can't see the dark band in that shot, which is readily apparent and was shocking to the Sony engineers (this wasn't shot with a V1, BTW) obviously it's not acceptable to them. Audiences *can* clearly see it.

I see some dark diagonal (more or less) banding that to me look like depressions in the earth and shadows. Whether or not those are the bands to which you refer, my impression is further solidified by examing a road through the area, where it appears that the road goes down and up, which corresponds to one of the shadowy areas.

Is that the banding? I magnified the picture a lot, and I don't see any straight side-to-side banding like a bad CRT. The picture's just a little fuzzy, and frankly, makes me wonder how I ended up jockeying software instead of riding in aircraft....

Thanks,
Matt

[Mikko Lopponen]

http://hmcindie.pp.fi/rollingshutter/

There's a small clip where the rolling effect can be seen pretty well in a city environment with some '24'-type of shooting. Shot with the hc1. It makes the type of shooting I like to do almost unusable. I have to be very careful about stuff moving in front of the lens and about keeping the shutter low.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Mikko Lopponen

http://hmcindie.pp.fi/rollingshutter/

There's a small clip where the rolling effect can be seen pretty well in a city environment with some '24'-type of shooting.

Sorry Mikko, but that video looks like it was shot as you tripped and fell while shooting. It looks nothing at all like "24."

Also remember that the HC1 is not the V1.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Actually, Mikko's stream is very "24"-like, but the shutter speed is also very fast, which as we all know, is not suited for CMOS cams on a budget.
A more reasonable example, IMO, is this one, where you can clearly see the rolling lines in the vid once horizontal elements come into the frame. Maybe the video presentation will help vs the still images, as it's very, very clear to trained or untrained eye. This is vertical motion with very little horizontal motion, add fast horizontal motion to fast shutter speed, it can be a problem. IMO, Mikko's piece is exaggerated, I'd consider mine exaggerated too, unless you're in the habit of falling out of aircraft. But...the relative motion is still relative motion, and you *can* see the rolling artifact regardless.

[Marcus Marchesseault]

Has it been confirmed that the V1 uses the same shutter system as the A1/HC CMOS cameras? Sony's sales sheet seemed to imply otherwise, but I'm not sure how much stock should be taken in a sales document. I haven't noticed anything remotely like this with the V1, but I don't shoot like this at all. How high was the shutter speed?

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Marcus Marchesseault

I haven't noticed anything remotely like this with the V1, but I don't shoot like this at all. How high was the shutter speed?

The V1 does not behave like the HC1 or A1. So bringing the HC1 into this thread offers nothing.

24 isn't shot like that either. Every shot is VERY controlled by pros who know how to shoot quick moves at 24fps and have it look great. (Moreover, the HC1 doesn't shoot 24p if that was the frame-rate it was shot at.)

And, if someone likes to fall out of planes -- and they had any understanding of how the V1 works -- they would have used a different camcorder.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

And, if someone likes to fall out of planes -- and they had any understanding of how the V1 works -- they would have used a different camcorder.

.

Yep, that's why the V1 was used to shoot commercial pieces for the Superbowl, Everready commercial, Remax commercials, and many other commercial spots, because I (and others like me) don't understand how the V1U works? <Tongue out of cheek now...)

Given that one of these pieces is produced by working professionals that shoot for an income, and used by many aerial professionals, I'd submit that we do know quite well how they work. Neither video piece is "stupid" but one indeed is taken out of context by Mikko for purposes of demonstration, I suspect. If one is shooting the interior of the local coffee house, shooting from straight sticks, or shooting pictures of kitty-cats, then of course one will never see these sorts of challenges exposed by *all* CMOS camcorders in the low-cost range whether we're talking about the HC1, V1, or anyone else' CMOS camcorder.
The key is keeping shutter speed low, or not using high camcorder motion at high shutter speeds.
Steve, I'd *love* to see you shoot better video. Especially in a skydive. I'll be in Boulder City soon doing an aerial video clinic, I'd like to personally invite you to come fly with me.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

Steve, I'd *love* to see you shoot better video.

1) No where did I say the V1 wasn't for "pros". Quite the opposite. Yet on you go, way OT, seemingly unware that your words have nothing to do with any post on this Thread.

2) And, no where did I say you shot bad video.

3) I said you chose the wrong camera for shooting sky diving. And, my comment was based upon YOUR post bitching about YOUR problems with rolling-shutter. You even posted an example. In fact, this post of yours was also OT because sky diving is not exactly a "typical" camcorder application.

PS: Flying a plane, glider, and ultralight I'm cool with and have done over the years. Jumping out of a plane unless there's a good reason -- what for? However, as a psychologist I understand the childhood origins of compulsive thrill seeking behavior when combined with the need to film it all so it can be shown to -- them.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

My apologies, Steve...I didn't explain myself clearly.
As an aerial videographer, I've chosen to fly with the V1 and A1 camcorders most of the time. I do have an HC5 and an HC7, plus an older HC3 for those "fun" moments vs working moments.
My video work isn't for other skydivers, it's for sports channels, commercial work, and basically the same sort of thing I do on the ground.

Norman Kent, arguably the #1 aerial videographer in the world, saw the V1 I was jumping back in September (the same preproduction camcorder you have in your possession) and was so impressed, he too, purchased the V1. So did Tom Sanders, Joe Jennings, and Matt Wimmer. All are hugely renowned videographers in the air. True, when Norman is shooting for "Charlie's Angels" he's shooting an Arri235, but when he's shooting for a Remax real estate spot, he's shooting the HVRV1U.
In other words, I don't think we chose badly. The V1 has been used for several aerial commercials, Superbowl ad work, and is currently in use for a feature or two, all using aerial videographers/cinematographers.
The point of my post is that:
a-Rolling shutter indeed exists at various shutter speeds and may be induced on demand.
b-It can be seen in *some* circumstances at slower shutter speeds.
c-Rolling shutter can be avoided, if one knows how/where/when.

Your initial post said "we have badly shot video, and poor choices in cameras." You didn't specify as to whose video was badly shot, and given that you indicated that both video clips are bad, and I shot one of them, I apparently mistook your reply to mean that my video is badly shot.

Very happy to throw you out of an airplane, with me right behind. We'll share it with the community, rather than shooting video just for skydivers. I guess I have a child like compulsion to enjoy and document lifestyles rather than just watching. As to the why? If you've never done it, you couldn't possibly understand.

If I could get a freebie camera (I'm not a journalist, I'm a shooter/editor) I'd probably jump a more expensive camera, but always have to be prepared to lose one, which is why we've now purchased six of them. If I could manage my XDCAM HD on my head vs the expensive Gyron belly mount, I'd probably jump that, too.

Back to point and rolling shutter...the very camera that you have (that I set up), was used to shoot the first-ever broadcast footage from an HVR V1U in the world. CNN, ESPN, ESPN2, Discovery all broadcast the footage from that camcorder. It went world-wide on two networks.
It was one of the first 3 chip aerial HD pieces ever shot, and other than HDCAM, the only progressive 1080 video ever shot, to my knowledge.
The producers felt that the V1 was a good camera choice. So did the subject, and the videographer.

[Mike Gorski]

Wow, aerial videography with the V1! Thats impressive. Being an aviation technician and possibly a future skydiver still in school its incredible to see the application of the V1 in such an extreme condition and utilized by such major networks. My intention of reading this thread was to gain more insight into the the V1 as I'm torn between the V1 and the A1. I'm in the business to shoot a lot of outdoor fast motion shoots like surfing, aviation, cars, and sports. I love the true 24P and 30P options as well as the uncompressed HD output capabilities if I have read correctly. The whole rolling shutter thing and low light capabilities have made me double think about the V1. Can you add anything as of advice or information that you feel is the best choice since you own the V1? I appreciate your time.

Gorski

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

I also own an A1, FWIW. I choose to fly with the V1 for several reasons, lightweight and balance being the chief reasons, but also because as discussed in various threads, it's a tad faster to find the sweet spot in setting up the cam, and it's rarely the same setup from morning to afternoon in our environment (shooting lake or mountains in background, differing sun positions, clouds)
24p is GREAT for certain types of flying, but generally shot at 60i so it can be slowed easily by 15-20%. Long battery life is a major plus, LANC is necessary for flying, IMO.
The rolling shutter you see in the shot is set up almost deliberately to see if I could induce it, based on posts in another forum, claiming it's there at all times. Of course it's not.
The two salient points of this particular discussion are that any CMOS camcorder (perhaps even the higher dollar cams) can be induced to show rolls. Second, is that you can avoid them if you consider the issue even peripherally in your workflow. The issue seems bigger than it is due to one person advocating that it's a huge problem and another advocating that it's not any kind of a consideration at all. IMO, neither is correct, and I'd say it's safe to suggest that I shoot roughly 60% of my work with a V1, easily 50% in the air with a V1. The Performance Designs Factory Team (multiple world record holders, and best canopy pilots in the world) are thrilled with the V1 and A1's they have, and as mentioned, Norman Kent is tickled to death with his, even carrying it virtually everywhere he goes. His non-video related interview at the Parachute Industry Association tradeshow shows him walking the show floor with a well-used V1 in his hands. Almost cute, if you know Norman at all. Had a brief discussion tonight with him, and while he's not at liberty to publically talk about a major motion picture he just shot pieces for, he used the V1. This will end up as part of a film transfer, theatrical release.