Sony HDV footage online

Don Berube · September 18th, 2004, 10:42 PM

Wayne O. writes:
>>>>>>>>"Three or four posts about the Sony FX1 and still no one bites, eh Don?"

Hi Wayne, yes, only our good friend Ben has taken the time so far. How about you? Care to share with us how you feel?

>>>>>>>>"It could just be that the folks here know that Canon is one of your top clients."

Yes, Canon is one of my top clients. One of them. I don't see how that matters though. Perhaps you did not know that I shoot more on other brands of camera, some of which are much higher end. It is inconsequential whether or not you knew that though. I'm not trying to compare camera brands here. I don't even see why one would bring Canon into the discussion,,, Everyone knows that Canon does not offer an HD solution, other than their lenses. I'm talking about formats,,, which has nothing to do with any brand of camera per se, especially HDV - at least for now since the format has still yet to mature. Again, would be interesting to hear your thoughts on the format, since you are so involved in the high end High Def production scene - what comes to your mind when you look at HDV footage? What artifacts, if any, do you see? What comes to your mind when *some* people say that it more or less looks just as good as High Def footage from cameras using more robust formats such as VariCam or Cine-Alta?

Ben, to answer your question, yes I have used the HD10. I think you are on target to address the delivery aspects of consumer HD and the notion that it is there where the bottleneck lies.

Wishing everyone well,

- don

Michael Pappas · September 19th, 2004, 01:32 AM

I think to presume that HDV as Sony has used it may have artifacts on movement is a bit premature. I have one of the first Sony demos of miniDV from way back. It's contains the same static like shots and my HD demo tests from Sony that were shot by Allen Daviau contain the same static type shots or very slow movement. Mini DV and CineAlta didn't have that issue and I am sure the 25mbps HDV doesn't to. What's so funny about all this banter from all the boards is this same bashing of the standards was done in 1996-97 to MiniDV. All I heard was MiniDV and it's compression artifacts. It's not Broadcast quality, it's a cheap consumer format with out any professional merits. It was hogwash then and I am willing to bet it's hogwash today in regards to HDV.

Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms
PappasArts.com

Don Berube · September 19th, 2004, 06:38 AM

Hey Mike,

Nobody is bashing here, well, at least I am not. We should be able to discuss topics here in a mature, professional way without being perceived as negative bashing. I don't want to be perceived as only looking for the negatives and not being able to focus on the positives regarding HDV,,, and I have no intention of starting a flame war or motivating any HDV users or supporters to get upset,,, I just want the artifacts to go away. That's all. Just speaking from experience and what I have seen so far. I go to all of the trade shows and I keep my eyes and mind open. My experience with viewing HDV sample clips is not limited to just downloading clips from the web. Iv'e seen the stuff resolved in just about every which way you can think of, including very large screen projection from extremely high end projectors, 20"+ CRT monitors, 42"+ DLP, LCD and plasma panels, etc... The only output which I have not yet seen is an HDV film out.

I admit that the new Sony HDV clips look somewhat impressive for still video images. I'm looking forward to seeing motion samples shot in both outdoor light and indoor light. Every other HDV sample clip I have seen so far has exhibited some form of lossy compression artifacting to some degree, sometimes it is minimal and sometimes excessive - but usually it is dithering and banding in the colors, sometimes excessive bleeding in the colors, sometimes MPEG breakup in the colors and in the shadowy areas. Yes, there may be more pixels up on the screen in a much larger frame size, but that perceived higher resolution is dampered by the artifacting if it cannot be dealt with and negated. Hopefully, the format will improve and these issues will be resolved. I just hope the manufacturers will collaborate together to create something more than just another consumer format.

Wishing you well,

- don

Heath McKnight · September 19th, 2004, 09:46 AM

Hey all,

Our passions for this camera are high, but let's keep things cool.

heath

Michael Pappas · September 19th, 2004, 12:03 PM

Unfortunately Sony etc can't cut corners on optics,artifact prevention, overall performance because the monitor system in which we the buyers now view this material on doesn't hide imperfections like SD monitors have always done. That's why they can't throw any old lens on a HD camera. It would stand out like a pimple on a brides face. Because the bar has been raised, we will benefit from the fact that the building of these cameras are going to have to be better and use better components or it will look like junk on a 60" Sony LCD HD television. Sony wants to sell HD tv's like crazy. This will help to promote that product line. Not the FX1 but all the trickle down cameras that will follow over the next 12+ months.

I wanted to bring up another point that I have not read on the boards is the capturing from the FX1's component output to a HD card into a NLE. Like, Kona 2 you’ll be able to capture in 12-bit 4:4:4 RGB format. I bring this up because if Mpeg2 is going to be an issue for some, what about capturing the material from the component output to another standard like above. This would get the file out of the Mpeg2 realm and allow one to work with it in a post house better. Ofcourse the file sizes are going to huge, but that is not an issue at all any more with the size of Sata drives and there speed.

Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms
PappasArts.com

John Jay · September 19th, 2004, 12:50 PM

The FX1 component output intrigues me.

I have another post in two forums but no takers - is it RGB or YUV?

The fact that it exists at all is a BIG PLUS for this camera. I for one know that under certain conditions 25Mbs 1080i MPEG2 tape wont cut it for me. However a component recorder most definitely will even if its 50Mbs MPEG2.

A portable (over the shoulder job?) component recorder - that's it - for fast action sequences - the rest to HDV tape.

Michael Pappas · September 19th, 2004, 02:06 PM

I saw your post's and found it odd that no one even entertained your question, even if it was speculation. It's doesn't surprise me at all that Sony put this on. Not any different then $50 dvd players that have YUV out. FW is only good with PC's or the very few tv's that have it. So YUV is the only other way. Glad it's on it, and I think the advantage to capture with a Kona or like card is you get the Quicktime file etc from the first capture and the need to convert a Mpeg to AVI,QT is bypassed if that's what you need.

Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms
PappasArts.com

Daymon Hoffman · September 19th, 2004, 03:26 PM

Is this type of process similar to an alternate imaging method? Like a few of the tech heads have done with other cameras, try to get the footage off of the camera without the camera doing its "after processing" etc ? mmmm Imagine that with this cam! oh la la!

Michael Pappas · September 19th, 2004, 11:33 PM

No! This is using the YUV out put to a PCI etc HD capture card. This would create a non mpeg file and put the project in a 4:2:2 10 bit format or even higher color space. It won't give you more resolution, but will take you out of the Mpeg codec and in a more main stream post production flow.

Daymon Hoffman · September 20th, 2004, 01:23 AM

Well i'm no Sony technician (yet :P). But woudlnt it depend on how the video was processed before it gets output even on those connections? perhaps its "faked" component from the MPEG2 stream? Just my line of thought...

Barry Green · September 20th, 2004, 12:01 PM

I don't think we know yet. On DV cameras (at least back on the VX1000, and assumedly on all newer DV cameras) the S-video port is taken AFTER DV compression. So will the component output on these cameras be before or after MPEG-2 compression?

We'll have to wait and see... I guess the only ways to really know are to either trace the signal path on a schematic, or to invent some circumstance that really shows MPEG-2 compression artifacts and then see if it shows up on the raw component output as well.

Michael Pappas · September 20th, 2004, 01:20 PM

If we forget the camera and use a HDV deck with YUV playback out to a Kona 2 like card, your still doing better in a post production flow then capturing all that mpeg2 via FW and converting it to another file format like HD 10bit 422 or 12bit 444. With a card like the Kona, it all happens in real time conversion to what you want. It all depends on what you need and where the final product is going ofcourse.

Michael Pappas · September 21st, 2004, 12:24 PM

Off this subject for a second.. Anyone notice that the first review of the FX1 on http://www.camcorderinfo.com/ is no longer on the main page. The article was titled ( Sony HDR-FX1 First Impression Camcorder Review ) . No longer on the page now. I have it saved as a file, but why did they pull the piece off the front page. Anyone know? I sent an email but never got an answer!

Michael Pappas

Troy Lamont · September 21st, 2004, 01:03 PM

Quote:

I'm sure that's true Bob, but the footage I've seen posted so far doesn't look like 1440 * 1080 footage to me in terms of detail, (which is the same as the CineAlta I believe). I hope that native footage from the camera, when it becomes available, looks closer to what you would expect from that 1080i HD resolution. Let's hope.

Paul, remember that the footage provided was downconverted to 720p from 1080i and also recompressed using WM9. So it took two hits on resolution.

Quote:

So will the component output on these cameras be before or after MPEG-2 compression?

My take;

When outputting recorded content, the component outs will be after MPEG2 compression. This makes sense because the content will have to be compressed to MPEG2 prior to be stored to tape.

When 'monitoring' via component I believe Sony will do as JVC has done and limit the output to 480p. As much as I complained about this when I first got my camera, it makes perfect business sense. Just imagine being able to do just as John suggests and taking a RAW HD stream and recording it at a higher bandwidth to a HDD based recording system in possibly 4:2:2 format.

There wouldn't be no need to record to the tape and you as the consumer would have probably one of the best kept video secrets on the planet. Raw 1080i HD that's "main stream post production ready".

That's not going to happen.

Troy

Michael Pappas · September 21st, 2004, 01:16 PM

I believe that the YUV is going to put out 1440x1080 mpeg2. I don't believe Sony is going to cripple the image just cause you don't have firewire on your HD/Tv/monitor. Sony is also banking on high end consumers as well, and they will be hooking up directly to large HD tv's to watch little johny's birthday etc. Ofcourse this is just a guess....

September 18th, 2004, 10:42 PM	#31
Don Berube Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Boston, MA (travel frequently) Posts: 837	Re Wayne Orr Wayne O. writes: >>>>>>>>"Three or four posts about the Sony FX1 and still no one bites, eh Don?" Hi Wayne, yes, only our good friend Ben has taken the time so far. How about you? Care to share with us how you feel? >>>>>>>>"It could just be that the folks here know that Canon is one of your top clients." Yes, Canon is one of my top clients. One of them. I don't see how that matters though. Perhaps you did not know that I shoot more on other brands of camera, some of which are much higher end. It is inconsequential whether or not you knew that though. I'm not trying to compare camera brands here. I don't even see why one would bring Canon into the discussion,,, Everyone knows that Canon does not offer an HD solution, other than their lenses. I'm talking about formats,,, which has nothing to do with any brand of camera per se, especially HDV - at least for now since the format has still yet to mature. Again, would be interesting to hear your thoughts on the format, since you are so involved in the high end High Def production scene - what comes to your mind when you look at HDV footage? What artifacts, if any, do you see? What comes to your mind when some people say that it more or less looks just as good as High Def footage from cameras using more robust formats such as VariCam or Cine-Alta? Ben, to answer your question, yes I have used the HD10. I think you are on target to address the delivery aspects of consumer HD and the notion that it is there where the bottleneck lies. Wishing everyone well, - don __________________ DONALD BERUBE - noisybrain. Productions, LLC Director Of Photography/ Producer/ Consultant http://noisybrain.com/donbio.html CREATE and NETWORK with http://www.bosfcpug.org and also http://fcpugnetwork.org

September 19th, 2004, 06:38 AM	#33
Don Berube Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Boston, MA (travel frequently) Posts: 837	Hey Mike, Nobody is bashing here, well, at least I am not. We should be able to discuss topics here in a mature, professional way without being perceived as negative bashing. I don't want to be perceived as only looking for the negatives and not being able to focus on the positives regarding HDV,,, and I have no intention of starting a flame war or motivating any HDV users or supporters to get upset,,, I just want the artifacts to go away. That's all. Just speaking from experience and what I have seen so far. I go to all of the trade shows and I keep my eyes and mind open. My experience with viewing HDV sample clips is not limited to just downloading clips from the web. Iv'e seen the stuff resolved in just about every which way you can think of, including very large screen projection from extremely high end projectors, 20"+ CRT monitors, 42"+ DLP, LCD and plasma panels, etc... The only output which I have not yet seen is an HDV film out. I admit that the new Sony HDV clips look somewhat impressive for still video images. I'm looking forward to seeing motion samples shot in both outdoor light and indoor light. Every other HDV sample clip I have seen so far has exhibited some form of lossy compression artifacting to some degree, sometimes it is minimal and sometimes excessive - but usually it is dithering and banding in the colors, sometimes excessive bleeding in the colors, sometimes MPEG breakup in the colors and in the shadowy areas. Yes, there may be more pixels up on the screen in a much larger frame size, but that perceived higher resolution is dampered by the artifacting if it cannot be dealt with and negated. Hopefully, the format will improve and these issues will be resolved. I just hope the manufacturers will collaborate together to create something more than just another consumer format. Wishing you well, - don __________________ DONALD BERUBE - noisybrain. Productions, LLC Director Of Photography/ Producer/ Consultant http://noisybrain.com/donbio.html CREATE and NETWORK with http://www.bosfcpug.org and also http://fcpugnetwork.org

September 19th, 2004, 09:46 AM	#34
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Hey all, Our passions for this camera are high, but let's keep things cool. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

September 19th, 2004, 12:50 PM	#36
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	The FX1 component output intrigues me. I have another post in two forums but no takers - is it RGB or YUV? The fact that it exists at all is a BIG PLUS for this camera. I for one know that under certain conditions 25Mbs 1080i MPEG2 tape wont cut it for me. However a component recorder most definitely will even if its 50Mbs MPEG2. A portable (over the shoulder job?) component recorder - that's it - for fast action sequences - the rest to HDV tape. __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*

September 19th, 2004, 03:26 PM	#38
Daymon Hoffman Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 267	Is this type of process similar to an alternate imaging method? Like a few of the tech heads have done with other cameras, try to get the footage off of the camera without the camera doing its "after processing" etc ? mmmm Imagine that with this cam! oh la la! __________________ Welcome... to the real world!

September 19th, 2004, 01:32 AM	#32
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	I think to presume that HDV as Sony has used it may have artifacts on movement is a bit premature. I have one of the first Sony demos of miniDV from way back. It's contains the same static like shots and my HD demo tests from Sony that were shot by Allen Daviau contain the same static type shots or very slow movement. Mini DV and CineAlta didn't have that issue and I am sure the 25mbps HDV doesn't to. What's so funny about all this banter from all the boards is this same bashing of the standards was done in 1996-97 to MiniDV. All I heard was MiniDV and it's compression artifacts. It's not Broadcast quality, it's a cheap consumer format with out any professional merits. It was hogwash then and I am willing to bet it's hogwash today in regards to HDV. Michael Pappas http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms PappasArts.com

September 19th, 2004, 12:03 PM	#35
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	Unfortunately Sony etc can't cut corners on optics,artifact prevention, overall performance because the monitor system in which we the buyers now view this material on doesn't hide imperfections like SD monitors have always done. That's why they can't throw any old lens on a HD camera. It would stand out like a pimple on a brides face. Because the bar has been raised, we will benefit from the fact that the building of these cameras are going to have to be better and use better components or it will look like junk on a 60" Sony LCD HD television. Sony wants to sell HD tv's like crazy. This will help to promote that product line. Not the FX1 but all the trickle down cameras that will follow over the next 12+ months. I wanted to bring up another point that I have not read on the boards is the capturing from the FX1's component output to a HD card into a NLE. Like, Kona 2 you’ll be able to capture in 12-bit 4:4:4 RGB format. I bring this up because if Mpeg2 is going to be an issue for some, what about capturing the material from the component output to another standard like above. This would get the file out of the Mpeg2 realm and allow one to work with it in a post house better. Ofcourse the file sizes are going to huge, but that is not an issue at all any more with the size of Sata drives and there speed. Michael Pappas http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms PappasArts.com

September 19th, 2004, 02:06 PM	#37
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	I saw your post's and found it odd that no one even entertained your question, even if it was speculation. It's doesn't surprise me at all that Sony put this on. Not any different then $50 dvd players that have YUV out. FW is only good with PC's or the very few tv's that have it. So YUV is the only other way. Glad it's on it, and I think the advantage to capture with a Kona or like card is you get the Quicktime file etc from the first capture and the need to convert a Mpeg to AVI,QT is bypassed if that's what you need. Michael Pappas http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms PappasArts.com

September 19th, 2004, 11:33 PM	#39
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	No! This is using the YUV out put to a PCI etc HD capture card. This would create a non mpeg file and put the project in a 4:2:2 10 bit format or even higher color space. It won't give you more resolution, but will take you out of the Mpeg codec and in a more main stream post production flow.

September 20th, 2004, 01:23 AM	#40
Daymon Hoffman Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 267	Well i'm no Sony technician (yet :P). But woudlnt it depend on how the video was processed before it gets output even on those connections? perhaps its "faked" component from the MPEG2 stream? Just my line of thought... __________________ Welcome... to the real world!

September 20th, 2004, 12:01 PM	#41
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	I don't think we know yet. On DV cameras (at least back on the VX1000, and assumedly on all newer DV cameras) the S-video port is taken AFTER DV compression. So will the component output on these cameras be before or after MPEG-2 compression? We'll have to wait and see... I guess the only ways to really know are to either trace the signal path on a schematic, or to invent some circumstance that really shows MPEG-2 compression artifacts and then see if it shows up on the raw component output as well.

September 20th, 2004, 01:20 PM	#42
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	If we forget the camera and use a HDV deck with YUV playback out to a Kona 2 like card, your still doing better in a post production flow then capturing all that mpeg2 via FW and converting it to another file format like HD 10bit 422 or 12bit 444. With a card like the Kona, it all happens in real time conversion to what you want. It all depends on what you need and where the final product is going ofcourse.

September 21st, 2004, 12:24 PM	#43
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	FX1 Review is now missing from main page. Hmmmm! Off this subject for a second.. Anyone notice that the first review of the FX1 on http://www.camcorderinfo.com/ is no longer on the main page. The article was titled ( Sony HDR-FX1 First Impression Camcorder Review ) . No longer on the page now. I have it saved as a file, but why did they pull the piece off the front page. Anyone know? I sent an email but never got an answer! Michael Pappas

September 21st, 2004, 01:16 PM	#45
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	I believe that the YUV is going to put out 1440x1080 mpeg2. I don't believe Sony is going to cripple the image just cause you don't have firewire on your HD/Tv/monitor. Sony is also banking on high end consumers as well, and they will be hooking up directly to large HD tv's to watch little johny's birthday etc. Ofcourse this is just a guess....