Sony HDV footage online

Troy Lamont · September 21st, 2004, 04:11 PM

Quote:

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

For playback yes, for recording no. I guess I didn't make that clear distinction in my post earlier. I assumed the conversation was with regards to recording.

Playback will actually be upconverted to 1920X1080i/60 via the component outs on playback just like the JVC does.

Troy

John Jay · September 21st, 2004, 06:58 PM

I suppose 3 weeks is not that long to wait on this puzzle, but I can already see that Sony are not taking JVCs lead on anything and have already designed a camera which is way up against the stops on the HDV Spec.

HDV is quite specific that the format is tape based, however the YUV would allow that to be circumvented if a portable recording device from the camera head was in the pipeline.

Further if it is only 480p (were did that come from?) it means that the live feed from the YUV could not be monitored at native HDV resolution, which would hit sales of HDV field monitors when they come to market.

My calcs indicate there could be a delay of around 4 seconds if the live feed was YUV Mpeg2 - a tad impractical

The notion of uncompessed YUV would not necessarily hurt the Hi-End sales since they will always be protected by the availability of Hi-End glass and other features.

Furthermorre, uncompressed YUV offers more opportunity for further Sony after market sales than a crippled feed, which to my mind would be a wasted market opportunity

We live in hope until 10/15

Heath McKnight · September 21st, 2004, 07:09 PM

I thought it was mid-November...

heath

John Jay · September 22nd, 2004, 05:41 AM

Sony Japan have it written as 15 October also the component out is defined as D3/D1

spec is the second 'play' symbol under the picture:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=32320

Troy Lamont · September 22nd, 2004, 11:55 AM

John,

You make some valid points, but again it would be hard to believe that Sony would allow 1080i to be captured RAW from the component outputs.

Quote:

Further if it is only 480p (were did that come from?) it means that the live feed from the YUV could not be monitored at native HDV resolution, which would hit sales of HDV field monitors when they come to market.

The HD1/HD10 camcorders can only display 480p through it's component outs while recording. You can't monitor HD (720p) from the component outs while recording.

Let's hope that Sony didn't follow JVCs crippling footsteps. I for one will sell my HD1 in a heartbeat and get the FX1 if it's not crippled like the HD1 and especially if it offers 1080i monitoring via the component outs while recording .

Now to find someone who works for Sony so I can get a discount!!! :)

10/15 it is...

Troy

Michael Pappas · September 22nd, 2004, 12:11 PM

<<<Let's hope that Sony didn't follow JVCs crippling footsteps. I for one will sell my HD1 in a heartbeat and get the FX1 if it's not crippled like the HD1 and especially if it offers 1080i monitoring via the component outs while recording .>>>>

Even if so, i can't imagine that would stop you from wanting to achieve a much higher original quality recording. I too want it 1440x1080 mpeg2 out the yuv. If it's not I will have to get a deck that does or whatever will do it. But first and fore most it's important to achieve the best image first generation and then go from there.

Peter Moore · September 22nd, 2004, 10:37 PM

"Playback will actually be upconverted to 1920X1080i/60 via the component outs on playback just like the JVC does."

Remember, component out is analog, so the display device doesn't know or care how many pixels make up each line, only how many lines per frame there are. So it doesn't matter if the sony captures at 1440, 720, or 1920, it's all the same to the TV.

Daniel von Euw · October 3rd, 2004, 06:11 AM

I have seen the sony FX-1 on Fotokina in Cologne. The pal-version will ship in oktober for 4200 €.

But for me the Sony-Cam is useless. Very sharp hires picture. But by pans in normale speed the picture quality break down.

And don't forget that already dv is not very good for color correction - how woud it be by mpeg 2?

HDV is in my opinion a interessting development but not yet ready for professional use.

regards
Daniel

Eric Bilodeau · October 3rd, 2004, 08:07 AM

I've just seen the images.

I must say I'm not sold yet. The JVC's images looks sharper than those of the FX1 and the XL2's looks so much more beautiful and less like video. Of course the XL2 is SD but the image is so much sharper for the size. I agree with Don, we should see some moving images, even those stills are not impressing, I saw (and took) equally good flower footage on the JVC, the chroma noise seems less apparent but no High colors where taken (pure reds, greens and blues). Chroma noise has a tendency to appear in low contrast highly colored areas. Another thing, 4:2:0 performs better in progressive than in interlace because of the field separation witch makes a 4:2:2 field and a 4:0:0 one so it is important to see moving images, not just for the MPEG2 compression, but for the 4:2:0 as well.

I guess we should have a better idea in a few weeks.

Charlie McCarrick · October 3rd, 2004, 10:49 PM

Yeah, I'm still unsure about the Sony. Some of the footage looked easily superior to anything I've seen from the XL2 or HD1 (can't remember if I've seen HD10 footage), but some of the shots were a bit too sharp and video-like (although I find the XL2 too soft). Of course, the best XL2 and HD1 footage I've seen has seemed to have been from skilled videographers who know their cams, while this FX-1 clip looks too spontaneous to be a real indication of the cam's abilities. And I'd definitely like to see more motion shots before deciding.

Heath McKnight · October 4th, 2004, 05:05 AM

Charlie,

I think you nailed it:

<<he best XL2 and HD1 footage I've seen has seemed to have been from skilled videographers who know their cams>>

That is so true, and really makes the difference with the camera!

heath

Michael Struthers · October 5th, 2004, 01:10 PM

You can always make something look "filmlike" in post, somehow, someway. Maximum, clean resolution is what I would like.

Well who knows till the darn thing comes out...

Heath McKnight · October 5th, 2004, 01:23 PM

you're right--do a film-look if you end up not going to 35mm.

heath

Carlos E. Martinez · October 5th, 2004, 06:47 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Daniel von Euw : I have seen the sony FX-1 on Fotokina in Cologne. The pal-version will ship in oktober for 4200 €.

But for me the Sony-Cam is useless. Very sharp hires picture. But by pans in normale speed the picture quality break down.

And don't forget that already dv is not very good for color correction - how woud it be by mpeg 2?

HDV is in my opinion a interessting development but not yet ready for professional use.
-->>>

What's the problem with pans? The tests you did were NTSC or PAL?

Can you ellaborate a bit more on why HDV is not ready for professional use?

Carlos

Heath McKnight · October 5th, 2004, 10:30 PM

I don't know if they meant it's not ready for pro use, but remember this...DV has problems with fast pans and tilts, etc.

heath

September 21st, 2004, 06:58 PM	#47
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	I suppose 3 weeks is not that long to wait on this puzzle, but I can already see that Sony are not taking JVCs lead on anything and have already designed a camera which is way up against the stops on the HDV Spec. HDV is quite specific that the format is tape based, however the YUV would allow that to be circumvented if a portable recording device from the camera head was in the pipeline. Further if it is only 480p (were did that come from?) it means that the live feed from the YUV could not be monitored at native HDV resolution, which would hit sales of HDV field monitors when they come to market. My calcs indicate there could be a delay of around 4 seconds if the live feed was YUV Mpeg2 - a tad impractical The notion of uncompessed YUV would not necessarily hurt the Hi-End sales since they will always be protected by the availability of Hi-End glass and other features. Furthermorre, uncompressed YUV offers more opportunity for further Sony after market sales than a crippled feed, which to my mind would be a wasted market opportunity We live in hope until 10/15 __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*

September 21st, 2004, 07:09 PM	#48
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I thought it was mid-November... heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

September 22nd, 2004, 05:41 AM	#49
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	Sony Japan have it written as 15 October also the component out is defined as D3/D1 spec is the second 'play' symbol under the picture: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=32320 __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*

October 3rd, 2004, 08:07 AM	#54
Eric Bilodeau Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chicoutimi, Canada Posts: 334	I've just seen the images. I must say I'm not sold yet. The JVC's images looks sharper than those of the FX1 and the XL2's looks so much more beautiful and less like video. Of course the XL2 is SD but the image is so much sharper for the size. I agree with Don, we should see some moving images, even those stills are not impressing, I saw (and took) equally good flower footage on the JVC, the chroma noise seems less apparent but no High colors where taken (pure reds, greens and blues). Chroma noise has a tendency to appear in low contrast highly colored areas. Another thing, 4:2:0 performs better in progressive than in interlace because of the field separation witch makes a 4:2:2 field and a 4:0:0 one so it is important to see moving images, not just for the MPEG2 compression, but for the 4:2:0 as well. I guess we should have a better idea in a few weeks. __________________ Eric Bilodeau video SFX,DOP ___________________ http://www.fictis.net info@fictis.net

October 4th, 2004, 05:05 AM	#56
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Charlie, I think you nailed it: <<he best XL2 and HD1 footage I've seen has seemed to have been from skilled videographers who know their cams>> That is so true, and really makes the difference with the camera! heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

September 22nd, 2004, 12:11 PM	#51
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	<<<Let's hope that Sony didn't follow JVCs crippling footsteps. I for one will sell my HD1 in a heartbeat and get the FX1 if it's not crippled like the HD1 and especially if it offers 1080i monitoring via the component outs while recording .>>>> Even if so, i can't imagine that would stop you from wanting to achieve a much higher original quality recording. I too want it 1440x1080 mpeg2 out the yuv. If it's not I will have to get a deck that does or whatever will do it. But first and fore most it's important to achieve the best image first generation and then go from there.

September 22nd, 2004, 10:37 PM	#52
Peter Moore Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Arlington VA Posts: 1,034	"Playback will actually be upconverted to 1920X1080i/60 via the component outs on playback just like the JVC does." Remember, component out is analog, so the display device doesn't know or care how many pixels make up each line, only how many lines per frame there are. So it doesn't matter if the sony captures at 1440, 720, or 1920, it's all the same to the TV.

October 3rd, 2004, 06:11 AM	#53
Daniel von Euw Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Köln, NRW, Germany Posts: 70	I have seen the sony FX-1 on Fotokina in Cologne. The pal-version will ship in oktober for 4200 €. But for me the Sony-Cam is useless. Very sharp hires picture. But by pans in normale speed the picture quality break down. And don't forget that already dv is not very good for color correction - how woud it be by mpeg 2? HDV is in my opinion a interessting development but not yet ready for professional use. regards Daniel

October 3rd, 2004, 10:49 PM	#55
Charlie McCarrick Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Bridgewater, USA Posts: 44	Yeah, I'm still unsure about the Sony. Some of the footage looked easily superior to anything I've seen from the XL2 or HD1 (can't remember if I've seen HD10 footage), but some of the shots were a bit too sharp and video-like (although I find the XL2 too soft). Of course, the best XL2 and HD1 footage I've seen has seemed to have been from skilled videographers who know their cams, while this FX-1 clip looks too spontaneous to be a real indication of the cam's abilities. And I'd definitely like to see more motion shots before deciding.

October 5th, 2004, 01:10 PM	#57
Michael Struthers Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: SF, Ca Posts: 421	You can always make something look "filmlike" in post, somehow, someway. Maximum, clean resolution is what I would like. Well who knows till the darn thing comes out...

October 5th, 2004, 01:23 PM	#58
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	you're right--do a film-look if you end up not going to 35mm. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

October 5th, 2004, 06:47 PM	#59
Carlos E. Martinez Trustee Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Posts: 1,138	<<<-- Originally posted by Daniel von Euw : I have seen the sony FX-1 on Fotokina in Cologne. The pal-version will ship in oktober for 4200 €. But for me the Sony-Cam is useless. Very sharp hires picture. But by pans in normale speed the picture quality break down. And don't forget that already dv is not very good for color correction - how woud it be by mpeg 2? HDV is in my opinion a interessting development but not yet ready for professional use. -->>> What's the problem with pans? The tests you did were NTSC or PAL? Can you ellaborate a bit more on why HDV is not ready for professional use? Carlos

October 5th, 2004, 10:30 PM	#60
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I don't know if they meant it's not ready for pro use, but remember this...DV has problems with fast pans and tilts, etc. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog