SONY HDV HDR-FX1 will be out Oct. 15th

Eric Bilodeau · September 9th, 2004, 05:53 AM

Ignacio, you are right for 24p in HDV because it is a GOP compression but DV is a individual frame compression and so far, 24p is recorded in 60i with either standard or advanced pulldown so there is no gain in quality whatsoever.

Adam also has a point, 4:2:0 is a disastrous compression in an interlace signal because it is performed in a 2 pixel height by 2 pixel width scheme witch means that it compresses over two lines of different field but it is better than 4:1:1 in a progressive signal no doubt since it does not extend over 4 pixel long.

Ignacio Rodriguez · September 9th, 2004, 11:05 AM

> Ignacio, you are right for 24p in HDV because it is a GOP
> compression but DV is a individual frame compression
> and so far, 24p is recorded in 60i with either standard
> or advanced pulldown so there is no gain in quality whatsoever.

Exactly, because there is no real 24p DV, so redundancy from the pulldown pattern kills any advantage that could be had from the more efficient use of bandwidth. But since HDV is not meant to be compatible with the analog SD world, it could perfectly be extended to real 24 fps, it would most likely be technically trivial for all subsequent HDV equipment to support 24, 25 and 30 fps.

Barry Green · September 9th, 2004, 11:12 AM

Except that DV actually has two compression methods, depending on the amount of difference between fields. If it detects a substantial motion difference between fields, DV will compress the fields individually as part of the full frame. If it detects little motion difference between fields, DV will compress the full frame as a frame.

That means when you're compressing 24PA/2:3:3:2, you're actually compressing frames as frames, as efficiently as possible. DV is already optimized for excellent progressive-scan capture, even with 24P!

I have no idea if HDV provides a similar optimization.

Eric Bilodeau · September 9th, 2004, 01:14 PM

Barry, I was not aware that DV compression performed as such... I doubt HDV will work that way since it is a GOP based compression, still there should be a gain in using 24p, even by pulldown since there will be less difference between frames and GOP compression takes advantage of that.

Michael Struthers · September 9th, 2004, 02:02 PM

C'mon, guys I still trust Sony enough so that I'm sure the picture with this cam will KICK ASS, 24p or not. Just by specs alone, it will smoke the jvc, (3 chips vs 1, 25mgps vs 19mgps, better lens) and the jvc has a better picture than the dvx....

Of course the sound is crippled, but I guess 3k will fix that ;-).

The cameras you guys are talking about are coming, but at much higher price ranges. For 20k I'd still take an Aaton A-minima.

1080i deinterlaces really well. I've seen it in post.

Tommy Haupfear · September 9th, 2004, 03:01 PM

Quote:

and the jvc has a better picture than the dvx....

I think you meant to say the JVC HDVs have higher resolution than the DVX100s?

Betsy Moore · September 9th, 2004, 04:32 PM

"I think you meant to say the JVC HDVs have higher resolution than the DVX100s?"

Personally, I aver JVC has a much better picture, although the hard candy quality to the Sony's colors is adorable.

Lynne Whelden · September 9th, 2004, 05:20 PM

Didn't one of the web sites say this Sony camera would appear at the IBC in Amsterdam? Well, that started today (Sept. 9). Any word on its unveiling?

September 9th, 2004, 05:53 AM	#76
Eric Bilodeau Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chicoutimi, Canada Posts: 334	Ignacio, you are right for 24p in HDV because it is a GOP compression but DV is a individual frame compression and so far, 24p is recorded in 60i with either standard or advanced pulldown so there is no gain in quality whatsoever. Adam also has a point, 4:2:0 is a disastrous compression in an interlace signal because it is performed in a 2 pixel height by 2 pixel width scheme witch means that it compresses over two lines of different field but it is better than 4:1:1 in a progressive signal no doubt since it does not extend over 4 pixel long. __________________ Eric Bilodeau video SFX,DOP ___________________ http://www.fictis.net info@fictis.net

September 9th, 2004, 11:05 AM	#77
Ignacio Rodriguez Contributor Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 932	> Ignacio, you are right for 24p in HDV because it is a GOP > compression but DV is a individual frame compression > and so far, 24p is recorded in 60i with either standard > or advanced pulldown so there is no gain in quality whatsoever. Exactly, because there is no real 24p DV, so redundancy from the pulldown pattern kills any advantage that could be had from the more efficient use of bandwidth. But since HDV is not meant to be compatible with the analog SD world, it could perfectly be extended to real 24 fps, it would most likely be technically trivial for all subsequent HDV equipment to support 24, 25 and 30 fps. __________________ Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.

September 9th, 2004, 01:14 PM	#79
Eric Bilodeau Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chicoutimi, Canada Posts: 334	Barry, I was not aware that DV compression performed as such... I doubt HDV will work that way since it is a GOP based compression, still there should be a gain in using 24p, even by pulldown since there will be less difference between frames and GOP compression takes advantage of that. __________________ Eric Bilodeau video SFX,DOP ___________________ http://www.fictis.net info@fictis.net

September 9th, 2004, 02:02 PM	#80
Michael Struthers Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: SF, Ca Posts: 421	C'mon, guys I still trust Sony enough so that I'm sure the picture with this cam will KICK ASS, 24p or not. Just by specs alone, it will smoke the jvc, (3 chips vs 1, 25mgps vs 19mgps, better lens) and the jvc has a better picture than the dvx.... Of course the sound is crippled, but I guess 3k will fix that ;-). The cameras you guys are talking about are coming, but at much higher price ranges. For 20k I'd still take an Aaton A-minima. 1080i deinterlaces really well. I've seen it in post. __________________ Michael Struthers www.buzzdigital.com

September 9th, 2004, 05:20 PM	#83
Lynne Whelden Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: williamsport, pa Posts: 604	IBC Didn't one of the web sites say this Sony camera would appear at the IBC in Amsterdam? Well, that started today (Sept. 9). Any word on its unveiling?

September 9th, 2004, 11:12 AM	#78
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	Except that DV actually has two compression methods, depending on the amount of difference between fields. If it detects a substantial motion difference between fields, DV will compress the fields individually as part of the full frame. If it detects little motion difference between fields, DV will compress the full frame as a frame. That means when you're compressing 24PA/2:3:3:2, you're actually compressing frames as frames, as efficiently as possible. DV is already optimized for excellent progressive-scan capture, even with 24P! I have no idea if HDV provides a similar optimization.

September 9th, 2004, 04:32 PM	#82
Betsy Moore Major Player Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 444	"I think you meant to say the JVC HDVs have higher resolution than the DVX100s?" Personally, I aver JVC has a much better picture, although the hard candy quality to the Sony's colors is adorable.