Raw HDR-FX1 mpeg2 files are posted.

[Jung Kyu]

thanks for uploading wonderful clip...looks like hd1 can't compete with fx1..

here's few clip of hd1 with wide lense

http://www.oysy.com/citv/test2.htm

[Brad Abrahams]

Looks Fantastic. I'd suggest viewing with VLC player. It plays m2t streams smoothly, and allows you to watch them deinteralced without a noticable performance hit.

http://www.videolan.org/vlc/

[Donal Briard]

That daylight footage looks pretty bad! An awful amount of noise and the image isn't very sharp!

[Daniel Broadway]

Can someone post frame grabs from this video in JPEG format? I am at work and won't be able to watch this footage until Monday. If someone could post frame grabs, I would greatly appreciate it.

[Gabriele Turchi]

THANKS AGAIN KAKU ITO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have downloaded the all daylight clip.........very impressive!!!!!!
But I must tell you another very very very very big plasure:



If you have time....can you plese shot and post a Daylight clip with
peolpe ,car bike ecc...in moviment(and with camera moviment) in the 3 mode (60i 30p 24p)?

For example a clip similar "dfootbag"( that you have posted) ,but in the 3 mode it Will be PERFECT!!!!!!



I tell you this becouse in the clip that you have posted "dwaterfountain" and "dwaterfront" we can see the different resolution result image between 60i and 30/24p,
but the shot is very stable and there is not to much moviment (people and camera)for valutate the "cinema stile" of the 24/30p shot"
If you can post this 3 clip of the same situation we can valutate if is best the 24/30p mode or the 60i mode after a deinterlace softwere,
but for make that comparison we need a shot with moviment of people in the pictures and camera movimet


PS:the moviment of the camera it will be not to much fast becouse in 30/24p mode fast pan it will be cause blur!


If you can't......no problem,i have very very very very appreciate the clip that you have posted!



Best regards


Gabriele

[Lorin Thwaits]

I wonder if anyone else is seeing this anomily:

In the night videos, check out mini.m2t from frame 460 through 739. The red background of the car is rendered perfectly. But look at the thin lines of blue and purple being reflected on the chrome and paint. They come through fine on I and P frames, but they're randomly less intense on the B frames, sometimes much lower in intensity! And worse, when the dark gray interior becomes visible around frame 590, its intensity is pulsing like mad, perfect on I and P, and darker than it should be on B frames.

Another place this oddity shows up is on the first part of fersshwwndw.m2t. Anyone else see the slightly varying background color there at the start of that clip? The I and P frames show a pinkish tone, but on some B frames it shifts to a white background. And check out the light in the distance on the left. It pulses pretty badly. When Kaku zooms up on the fur, the green and red reflections of color start pulsing pretty badly there, too. They look right on I and P frames, and randomly goofed on the B frames.

I tried filtering on the different primary colors to try to see where the source of this issue was, and it seems that this artifact affects the blue and green channels worse than the red.

I was wondering if my MPEG2 codec was giving me the trouble, so I've tried it with another, but still the same results. I've tried VirtualDub with the MPEG2 add-in, and the old standby -- Flask 0.6. Both had exactly the same results. I've never had these kinds of problems with either of these codecs in the past, and I haven't seen the same kind of thing out of the JVC, either. Is anyone else seeing this small artifact?

-Lorin

[Michael Pappas]

Hello Lorin! I will look for this later.

I was going to hold my opinion tell we received a higher level of production value from the FX1. Well why not at-least mention what I see. All the night footage has way too much noise. Leads me to believe that the camera is on Auto everything and the gain went to the top. I sure hope that's what it is. The daytime shots on my 50" XBR HD piped out of VLC via DVI look better then NTSC, but exhibit a high degree of noise and dancing artifacts within the image. I hate to say it, and for someone that has been around HD since 1987 i was hoping not to see that. Again maybe this is a isolated issue because Kaku is still learning how to use the FX1. But the first thing he must do is shoot 1/60th-0db gain and a tripod. All manual everything. There was that footage shot at a temple and the boat in the water at night that was awesome. I didn't get that same feeling at all from this footage. Just a preliminary opinions...........

PS: By the way the 24 cineframe so far is horrible. Jesus sony it's simple. 1/48th at 24fps.

Michael Pappas

[Brian Carrell]

Thank you Kaku for posting the files for us and to Chris for hosting them.

In the specs I was reading, (correct me if I am wrong) that this camera is 1080i so this progressive cinema deal is being simulated in-camera?

On my Mac, through CRT TV and Projection TV, it looks like the interlaced footage has a much nicer, cleaner image than the Cine Simulation...

Kaku, I was wondering if that was your observation as well, or just my setup?

[Kaku Ito]

I might have shoto the 24p at shutter speed of 60. I will make sure I check it the next time. So, please do not make the conclusion about the 24p quality by this clip. Also, 60i waterfront clip was shot too bright.

But as few people realized, I'm noticing some small blurred edges in the clip even watching on my Sony monitor. I was using the preset (P1) as Sony described in the manual which is ideal setup for HDV shooting, but I found it has very high value of sharpness parameter. I gathered my moutainbike friends today and shoot them riding around. I will change the parameter to see if I can fix this problem. I'm also concerned about how the fast moving beanbag turned out. It seems the interlace is not working as good as reagular NTSC specification.

I'm not trying to make excuses, but this is what I think about in frame mode and progressive in general.

After trying to see how "frame mode" or progressive could be used on few cameras that I tried, FX1, XL2 and GS400, you have to shoot like the film camera to make it look nice. I'm not movie style cameraman, so I can't do it good. However, what I understood is that, after seeing what the "subject" looks like, frame mode does not give you all the details. It give you more briefer veiw, so it is easier to follow the story itself, not the detail of the subject itself (Magic bullet's manual has wonderfull explanation of this explaining the film effect). So, probably it is not good to provide the same subject shot in three different modes. The shots should be taken with what each mode can do the best.

In movies, when pros shoot fast moving subject, they shoot in high speed frams like 60 or faster. Then they slow it down, so you can see the details of how fast it is going. What we are missing is this. We don't have videocams that do 60p except very expensive ones. We are trying to do everything filmmakers do, but if we are limited to purchase cams raging $1000 (GS400) to $6000, we have no choice. Then we have to work within what these cams can do, not putting them in the same level of demand that you would expect in HDcam of boradcast P2.

Then the small Panasonic P2 (the one they showed before) comes on the stage. That things supposed to do 720p/60frame. But I could not wait untill it is finished, so I bought FX1. FX1 is cheap available now and I can go back to DV if I wanted to.

We will start to find out what FX1 is good for and the same time bad for. I think the community here is going to help everybody to get good ideas to work around the cons. That is the main reason why I'm providing these clips.

I'm sorry but the time is running out and I have to leave to shoot the bikers.
I will get back to you for more details that everyone wants to find out.

[Kaku Ito]

<<<-- Originally posted by Brian Carrell :
In the specs I was reading, (correct me if I am wrong) that this camera is 1080i so this progressive cinema deal is being simulated in-camera?

On my Mac, through CRT TV and Projection TV, it looks like the interlaced footage has a much nicer, cleaner image than the Cine Simulation...

Kaku, I was wondering if that was your observation as well, or just my setup? -->>>

Brian,
It is not real progressive cam. It is called frame mode which used interlaced CCD and put to fields together to creat the similar resolution as progressive, but it is not the same. Because the timing on field A and field B are not shot at the same time, when progressive ccd can shoot the whole frame at the same time (maybe almost). So, my understanding is that frame mode can't be sharp as progressive as can be. I think what you are seeing is true.

[Kaku Ito]

<<<-- Originally posted by Michael Pappas : Hello Lorin! I will look for this later.

I was going to hold my opinion tell we received a higher level of production value from the FX1. Well why not at-least mention what I see. All the night footage has way too much noise. Leads me to believe that the camera is on Auto everything and the gain went to the top. I sure hope that's what it is. The daytime shots on my 50" XBR HD piped out of VLC via DVI look better then NTSC, but exhibit a high degree of noise and dancing artifacts within the image. I hate to say it, and for someone that has been around HD since 1987 i was hoping not to see that. Again maybe this is a isolated issue because Kaku is still learning how to use the FX1. But the first thing he must do is shoot 1/60th-0db gain and a tripod. All manual everything. There was that footage shot at a temple and the boat in the water at night that was awesome. I didn't get that same feeling at all from this footage. Just a preliminary opinions...........

PS: By the way the 24 cineframe so far is horrible. Jesus sony it's simple. 1/48th at 24fps.

Michael Pappas -->>>

Mike,

It is true that I'm still getting used to this cam. I actually didn't use too much of the auto setting though. I will try to bring the best of this cam, but what I'm doing at this point is that I'm trying to get as close look as what I see with my eyes. And so far, to be able to do that, I have to turn the gain on most of the time. So, this must be the reason why my clips has more noise?

Also, it was very cloudy and it was close to the sunset.

[Kaku Ito]

I'm sorry that I forgot to mention. The one with really wide angle is shot with the wide lens converter that they started selling. Some of the optical problems might have been introduced because of this on the day time clips.

[Mark Kubat]

You're already discovering nuances with the cam - of course, you'll have to play with it.

The stuff looks pretty good - I like the resolution - do you find the manuals helpful? Do they recommend how to shoot cineframe mode? I assue shutter speed should be something other than what you used?

Your night bike footage (dscndingbike) is incredible - the detail in the cars at night - it did look like something from "Collateral" - I think the cam has great potential.

Go crazy, man! Have a blast with the dudes! Play with settings and experiment - please shoot lots of people action - the "footbag" (hacky-sack we call it here in North America) footage was great to judge - it's hard from shots of waterfront and fountains - great work, Kaku!

Can't wait to see more...

[Donal Briard]

<<<-- Originally posted by Kaku Ito : I'm sorry that I forgot to mention. The one with really wide angle is shot with the wide lens converter that they started selling. Some of the optical problems might have been introduced because of this on the day time clips. -->>>

What's the name of that clip,please?


Also, you are scaring me with that gain thing... The night clips... I can understand the noise (it's got less than many cam actually) but the daytime shots are just horrible (except for the last GAP clip)! Can please try a daytime shot tomorrow with gain at 0db on a tripod just to see how little noise the camera has? A shot of a street with moving cars is best because there's a lot of contrast and different color to judge it with!

Thanks

[Lorin Thwaits]

<<<-- Originally posted by Donal Briard :

... the daytime shots are just horrible (except for the last GAP clip)!

-->>>

Yeah, I was pretty worried after checking out the daytime clips until that one popped up. Up until that point I had thought that perhaps Sony had crippled the consumer version, and would "open up all the stops" for the pro version with a simple software upgrade. But seeing the GAP footage I'm very encouraged, and eager to get this camera. It blows doors when compared with the GR-HD1.

Say Kaku -- any chance you had the darker of the two neutral density filters on for some of the daytime scenes? That could have partially contributed to all the noise. Just a curiosity.

One thing that's totally impressive on this small chip is that in the night shots there's very little vertical blooming artifacts! Hats off to the Super HAD CCD engineers for that one I guess.

Thanks again Kaku for your diligent effort in making these clips available.

On another board a couple people have gotten back with me on the B-frame pulsing issue, and from what I can tell it appears to be a problem with the codec in the camera. Kaku, do you remember trying out any special enhancement features such as when filming the "mini.m2t" or "fersshwwndw.m2t" files? Those files both exhibit this odd artifact, and I'm pointing the finger at the FX1's compressor because it only happens on B frames in the MPEG2 GOP.

-Lorin