Is Cineframe 25 acceptable? at DVinfo.net

John Hewat · January 26th, 2007, 10:45 PM

I seem to be finding more and more people saying that CF25 is actually not as bad as originally suggested.

Is it the case that the CF mode on the Z1 is not so good in NTSC land but ok in PAL land where it's just going from 50i to CF25?

I am considering shooting a short with two cameras using the 25p function on the V1 and the CF25 function on the Z1. Final product will be a simple HDV output.

I know the V1P has its own 25p issues but those aside, is the CF25 function on the Z1P really that bad? Is it going to make me regret using it?

And sub-question - should CF25 footage be edited in PPro on a 50i timeline like the V1s 25p footage is it better on or a customized 25p timeline?

Boyd Ostroff · January 27th, 2007, 08:46 AM

Evidently Clint Eastwood liked it :-)

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=80246

John Hewat · January 27th, 2007, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff

Evidently Clint Eastwood liked it :-)

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=80246

Yeah, I read that - but for Clint, it sounds like it was kind of a last resort - a cheap way to get some shaky-cam shots.

For me it'll be the best I can get. I want to make sure it's not going to be a mistake.

Boyd Ostroff · January 27th, 2007, 09:33 AM

I assume you've seen Adam Wilt's analysis here?

http://www.adamwilt.com/HDV/cineframe.html

Quote:

If you have a true 1080-line display, Cineframe looks just like field-doubling (as you might expect), with half the vertical resolution of normal interlace shooting.

I've never used CF25 on my Z1 personally so I can't comment. But I ran the Z1 at the Texas HD Shootout. When we put the other cameras in 24p mode, Adam had me use 50i on the Z1 because he felt it was the highest quality equivalent the Z1 could offer.

Why not do some tests of your own and see what you think. I suspect it will come down to a subjective judgement in the end.

John Hewat · January 27th, 2007, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff

Why not do some tests of your own and see what you think. I suspect it will come down to a subjective judgement in the end.

I have been and I'm happy with the outcome. But my eye is not up to scratch and I don't have a professional monitor to judge.

Kurth Bousman · January 27th, 2007, 10:53 AM

John - do a search on site for the 50i to 24p workflow used in Tomorrow is Today. There's a pdf you can download .

Aldric Bailey · January 27th, 2007, 03:17 PM

Hi guys, I'm new here...

I've used it in the past to great effect, it's really kinda handy to know that one can have that kind of effect in the camera, on the fly...

but, that said though, it has it's place...

Mark Utley · January 27th, 2007, 03:44 PM

I don't know if CF25 is different from CF30, but CF30 field doubles and leaves you with half as many lines of resolution. Personally, I don't consider that hi-def anymore.

John Hewat · January 28th, 2007, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurth Bousman

John - do a search on site for the 50i to 24p workflow used in Tomorrow is Today. There's a pdf you can download .

I'll look it up. I can remember reading it a long time ago. But I'm not interested in going to 24p - just 25p.

Gareth Watkins · January 28th, 2007, 02:30 AM

Hi John,

I've used CF25 quite a lot over the last year, and like it a lot. Admittedly I output my videos for either DVD or web but the look is much nicer than interlaced, and you don't have any noticeable loss of resolution in SD.

I can't comment on the differences in you output in HDV. Adam Wilt's article that you've seen gives the best insight..

I did read elsewhere that several people have used it to good effect.

Regards
Gareth

John Hewat · January 28th, 2007, 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gareth Watkins

I did read elsewhere that several people have used it to good effect.

Me too. I just don't wonder if it's all dependant upon where/how you'll be watching the final product.

I guess I don't look at it as a resolution loss so much as a detail loss. Maybe it's the same thing when it comes down to it, but I can sort of justify it as being a little better than it maybe is if I think like that...

The other thing I haven't been able to figure out is whether to edit CF25 footage in a 50i timeline. Specifically so it will cut well with V1 25p footage. So that basically, when I output a 50i final product, I'll essentially be getting a true 25p product.

Gareth Watkins · January 28th, 2007, 05:03 AM

Hi John

I import it into a Progressive timeline in Premiere and edit like that... I did some tests before using it on a shoot and the still frames I got were far batter than the stills from deinterlacing the video. They certainly seemed to be sharp and held a lot of detail...

Anyway perhaps others will chip in to give their experiences. I believe I saw a post by DSE where he said to a guy to try it out as he was sure he'd like the result...
Regards
Gareth

John Hewat · January 28th, 2007, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gareth Watkins

I import it into a Progressive timeline in Premiere and edit like that...

Presumably you create a custom timeline then? PPro doesn'e have 25p timelines in the standard settings.

Gareth Watkins · January 28th, 2007, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Hewat

Presumably you create a custom timeline then? PPro doesn'e have 25p timelines in the standard settings.

Yes that's right... easy to do..

cheers
Gareth

John Hewat · January 28th, 2007, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gareth Watkins

Yes that's right... easy to do..

cheers
Gareth

Can you work with the V1P's 25p footage in a prgoressive timeline in PPro too though? Because DSE says to do it in a 50i timeline.

I guess that's my big concern - that even thought they're both a kind of 25p, they're encoded differently and therefore can't be edited on the same timeline...

January 26th, 2007, 10:45 PM	#1
John Hewat Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA Posts: 735	Is Cineframe 25 acceptable? I seem to be finding more and more people saying that CF25 is actually not as bad as originally suggested. Is it the case that the CF mode on the Z1 is not so good in NTSC land but ok in PAL land where it's just going from 50i to CF25? I am considering shooting a short with two cameras using the 25p function on the V1 and the CF25 function on the Z1. Final product will be a simple HDV output. I know the V1P has its own 25p issues but those aside, is the CF25 function on the Z1P really that bad? Is it going to make me regret using it? And sub-question - should CF25 footage be edited in PPro on a 50i timeline like the V1s 25p footage is it better on or a customized 25p timeline? __________________ John Hewat Mammoth Media Productions Last edited by John Hewat; January 26th, 2007 at 11:20 PM.

January 27th, 2007, 03:17 PM	#7
Aldric Bailey New Boot Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Galway, Ireland Posts: 14	Is Cineframe 25 acceptable? Hi guys, I'm new here... I've used it in the past to great effect, it's really kinda handy to know that one can have that kind of effect in the camera, on the fly... but, that said though, it has it's place...

January 27th, 2007, 03:44 PM	#8
Mark Utley Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Posts: 479	I don't know if CF25 is different from CF30, but CF30 field doubles and leaves you with half as many lines of resolution. Personally, I don't consider that hi-def anymore. __________________ Mark Utley

January 27th, 2007, 08:46 AM	#2
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Evidently Clint Eastwood liked it :-) http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=80246

January 27th, 2007, 10:53 AM	#6
Kurth Bousman Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: san miguel allende , gto , mexico Posts: 644	John - do a search on site for the 50i to 24p workflow used in Tomorrow is Today. There's a pdf you can download .

January 28th, 2007, 02:30 AM	#10
Gareth Watkins Major Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: France Posts: 578	Hi John, I've used CF25 quite a lot over the last year, and like it a lot. Admittedly I output my videos for either DVD or web but the look is much nicer than interlaced, and you don't have any noticeable loss of resolution in SD. I can't comment on the differences in you output in HDV. Adam Wilt's article that you've seen gives the best insight.. I did read elsewhere that several people have used it to good effect. Regards Gareth

January 28th, 2007, 05:03 AM	#12
Gareth Watkins Major Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: France Posts: 578	Hi John I import it into a Progressive timeline in Premiere and edit like that... I did some tests before using it on a shoot and the still frames I got were far batter than the stills from deinterlacing the video. They certainly seemed to be sharp and held a lot of detail... Anyway perhaps others will chip in to give their experiences. I believe I saw a post by DSE where he said to a guy to try it out as he was sure he'd like the result... Regards Gareth