Sony HDV-FX1 footage is quite telling... at DVinfo.net

Mark Kubat · September 10th, 2004, 08:33 PM

okay, there are various sources for this test footage shot by the Vegas Video team posted today... I think it might even be here somewhere in one of the threads...

I imported the wmv into vegas video 5 and rendered out as avi to play back live through my television. So there is downsampling taking place for sure, etc. etc. But what I can tell you is that the advantage of 1080i is still very apparent in the quality of the video - this is the sharpest "mini-dv" I've ever seen - it doesn't look like film - it does look like HD, though.

The 4:2:0 colour space looks very similar to dv's 4:1:1 in a lot of instances. You just "see" so much more detail in terms of texture and outlines.

The flower footage provided shows me for sure that this cam will be a hit with wedding videographers and industrial shooters alike - nature videographers will be amazed. You know when you're travelling on a jet plane and you watch the HD tourist video showing all the highlights of your destination and it all looks so rich and vibrant? That's what this stuff looks like.

A lot of the flower shots were set up to show a DOF effect with blurred background - there is a slight cadence that I thought might be the cineframe mode but it turns out that the footage was encoded as 25P pal, hence the "filmic" quality.

Yes, I'd have to say that it does look better than the XL2...

Better in terms of sharper, more detail - there is more "apparent" to the viewer, the picture is richer. And this is even when downsampling to mini-dv resolution.

So far so good, Sony...

I'm liking the look of 1080i - I'm wondering if 720p would have been an appreciable enough advantage over XL2's 525 lines...

This kind of image for $3700 US? Crazy.

Anhar Miah · September 11th, 2004, 05:42 AM

i agree with Mark, but we really need much more footage, also the file that was we downloaded was encoded with unrelaseasd Vegas, and i'm wondering if other encoders may have done an even better Job as compared to Vegas.

This cam will cause a stir, and i suspect that the Canon and Sharp and JVC (maybe even panasonic he he :) )
will have something to follow up.

Mark Kubat · September 11th, 2004, 10:14 AM

unreleased vegas? I thought it was vegas 5b that was used for this footage...

sony hdv software support links dated sept. 7 include link to vegas press release from NAB (April) with Sept. addendum tacked on at the bottom of it explaining that HDV has been supported since ver. 4 and any refinements/enhancements to formats will be supported in future versions. Vegas is very robust - you can even edit quicktime mov and apple dv directly in timeline...

Who cannot afford to support hdv?

I am curious to know pipeline for getting best possible look from HDV to DVD for non-HD televisions - Based on the HDV footage downsampled, I think it will still end up looking better than from XL2... Wow. And then when U.S. goes HD in 2 years, you can still use your HDV cam... Sony is thinking!

Wayne Orr · September 11th, 2004, 10:59 AM

"And then when U.S. goes HD in 2 years..."
Huh? Where did you get this info Mark?

Steve Crisdale · September 12th, 2004, 08:04 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Orr : "And then when U.S. goes HD in 2 years..."
Huh? Where did you get this info Mark? -->>>

I assume America has Governmental guidelines for the implementation of HD FTA broadcasts.

Here in Australia; for instance, the FTA stations must already be providing (if memory serves me well) at least 50% HD programming, and total digital services with parallel HD service by 2007.

Perhaps Mark was indicating something similar.....

Ben Buie · September 12th, 2004, 12:59 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Crisdale : <<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Orr : "And then when U.S. goes HD in 2 years..."
Huh? Where did you get this info Mark? -->>>

I assume America has Governmental guidelines for the implementation of HD FTA broadcasts.

Here in Australia; for instance, the FTA stations must already be providing (if memory serves me well) at least 50% HD programming, and total digital services with parallel HD service by 2007.

Perhaps Mark was indicating something similar..... -->>>

Well, there is some confusion over this . . .

The FCC is mandating all stations to be broadcasting digital (DTV) by a certain date (can't remember when), but there are ABSOLUTELY NO requirements for them to start broadcasting HD.

Unfortunately, while the technical and financial requirements for "going digital" (broadcasting digital instead of analog) are relatively low, going HD is a different story. For primary markets this will not be an issue (as they are all broadcasting HD right now anyway), but for secondary and tertiary markets cost is a big factor.

Case in point; all the "major" stations in Alabama are already broadcasting their DTV signals (some at half power though), but very few are passing along the HD signals from the networks yet.

Hopefully customer demand will move things along though. It is good to see when you walk into Circuit City "affordable" HDTV's, that should definitely help matters.

Ben

Greg Harris · September 13th, 2004, 06:10 AM

WAIT!!!! Mark, you used the New Sony????????? Can you tell more if you did? Would you make the change from the DVX100 to that camera?
thanks

Daymon Hoffman · September 13th, 2004, 03:33 PM

There is mandate here for DTV, and it is 'law' for them to broadcast 1080hrs (oh the irony!) of "High Definition." Unforunatly for us the Ruling bodies allowed 576p50 to be called "HD" (and it drives us crazy!!!). No 720 broadcats at all... its either 576p or 1080i. Ok thats bad enough... but get this... there is no laws about quality or nativeness of the footage. i.e. it can be fake upconverted 576p50 (frame doubled) or it can be upconverted 1080i!!! Not Happy Jan!

That combined with simulcasting DTV and Analog means the HD streams get seroiusly starved of bitrates.. so most run at 12mbps 1440x1080 while the other FTA channels (2 of them) do poor 576p50 and try promoting it as "HD".

September 10th, 2004, 08:33 PM	#1
Mark Kubat Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 375	Sony HDV-FX1 footage is quite telling... okay, there are various sources for this test footage shot by the Vegas Video team posted today... I think it might even be here somewhere in one of the threads... I imported the wmv into vegas video 5 and rendered out as avi to play back live through my television. So there is downsampling taking place for sure, etc. etc. But what I can tell you is that the advantage of 1080i is still very apparent in the quality of the video - this is the sharpest "mini-dv" I've ever seen - it doesn't look like film - it does look like HD, though. The 4:2:0 colour space looks very similar to dv's 4:1:1 in a lot of instances. You just "see" so much more detail in terms of texture and outlines. The flower footage provided shows me for sure that this cam will be a hit with wedding videographers and industrial shooters alike - nature videographers will be amazed. You know when you're travelling on a jet plane and you watch the HD tourist video showing all the highlights of your destination and it all looks so rich and vibrant? That's what this stuff looks like. A lot of the flower shots were set up to show a DOF effect with blurred background - there is a slight cadence that I thought might be the cineframe mode but it turns out that the footage was encoded as 25P pal, hence the "filmic" quality. Yes, I'd have to say that it does look better than the XL2... Better in terms of sharper, more detail - there is more "apparent" to the viewer, the picture is richer. And this is even when downsampling to mini-dv resolution. So far so good, Sony... I'm liking the look of 1080i - I'm wondering if 720p would have been an appreciable enough advantage over XL2's 525 lines... This kind of image for $3700 US? Crazy.

September 11th, 2004, 10:14 AM	#3
Mark Kubat Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 375	update re: vegas support for hdv unreleased vegas? I thought it was vegas 5b that was used for this footage... sony hdv software support links dated sept. 7 include link to vegas press release from NAB (April) with Sept. addendum tacked on at the bottom of it explaining that HDV has been supported since ver. 4 and any refinements/enhancements to formats will be supported in future versions. Vegas is very robust - you can even edit quicktime mov and apple dv directly in timeline... Who cannot afford to support hdv? I am curious to know pipeline for getting best possible look from HDV to DVD for non-HD televisions - Based on the HDV footage downsampled, I think it will still end up looking better than from XL2... Wow. And then when U.S. goes HD in 2 years, you can still use your HDV cam... Sony is thinking!

September 12th, 2004, 12:59 PM	#6
Ben Buie Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 184	<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Crisdale : <<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Orr : "And then when U.S. goes HD in 2 years..." Huh? Where did you get this info Mark? -->>> I assume America has Governmental guidelines for the implementation of HD FTA broadcasts. Here in Australia; for instance, the FTA stations must already be providing (if memory serves me well) at least 50% HD programming, and total digital services with parallel HD service by 2007. Perhaps Mark was indicating something similar..... -->>> Well, there is some confusion over this . . . The FCC is mandating all stations to be broadcasting digital (DTV) by a certain date (can't remember when), but there are ABSOLUTELY NO requirements for them to start broadcasting HD. Unfortunately, while the technical and financial requirements for "going digital" (broadcasting digital instead of analog) are relatively low, going HD is a different story. For primary markets this will not be an issue (as they are all broadcasting HD right now anyway), but for secondary and tertiary markets cost is a big factor. Case in point; all the "major" stations in Alabama are already broadcasting their DTV signals (some at half power though), but very few are passing along the HD signals from the networks yet. Hopefully customer demand will move things along though. It is good to see when you walk into Circuit City "affordable" HDTV's, that should definitely help matters. Ben __________________ Ben Buie, Producer "On Our Way Up" - Shot Completely in HDV http://www.onourwayup.com HD Articles and Reviews at HDSource! http://hdsource.highlydef.com

September 13th, 2004, 03:33 PM	#8
Daymon Hoffman Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 267	There is mandate here for DTV, and it is 'law' for them to broadcast 1080hrs (oh the irony!) of "High Definition." Unforunatly for us the Ruling bodies allowed 576p50 to be called "HD" (and it drives us crazy!!!). No 720 broadcats at all... its either 576p or 1080i. Ok thats bad enough... but get this... there is no laws about quality or nativeness of the footage. i.e. it can be fake upconverted 576p50 (frame doubled) or it can be upconverted 1080i!!! Not Happy Jan! That combined with simulcasting DTV and Analog means the HD streams get seroiusly starved of bitrates.. so most run at 12mbps 1440x1080 while the other FTA channels (2 of them) do poor 576p50 and try promoting it as "HD". __________________ Welcome... to the real world!

September 11th, 2004, 05:42 AM	#2
Anhar Miah Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: United Kindom, England Posts: 290	i agree with Mark, but we really need much more footage, also the file that was we downloaded was encoded with unrelaseasd Vegas, and i'm wondering if other encoders may have done an even better Job as compared to Vegas. This cam will cause a stir, and i suspect that the Canon and Sharp and JVC (maybe even panasonic he he :) ) will have something to follow up.

September 11th, 2004, 10:59 AM	#4
Wayne Orr Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Northridge Ca Posts: 734	"And then when U.S. goes HD in 2 years..." Huh? Where did you get this info Mark?

September 12th, 2004, 08:04 AM	#5
Steve Crisdale Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Katoomba NSW Australia Posts: 635	<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Orr : "And then when U.S. goes HD in 2 years..." Huh? Where did you get this info Mark? -->>> I assume America has Governmental guidelines for the implementation of HD FTA broadcasts. Here in Australia; for instance, the FTA stations must already be providing (if memory serves me well) at least 50% HD programming, and total digital services with parallel HD service by 2007. Perhaps Mark was indicating something similar.....

September 13th, 2004, 06:10 AM	#7
Greg Harris Major Player Join Date: May 2004 Location: Fairfax, VA Posts: 356	WAIT!!!! Mark, you used the New Sony????????? Can you tell more if you did? Would you make the change from the DVX100 to that camera? thanks