Sony NEX-VG10 AVCHD E-Mount Lens Camcorder

[Ozzy Alvarez]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

This may be the best explanation I've heard yet. I'll get plenty of use out of 1080/60i.

Given the relatively small size of the camera from the pictures I've seen and given it's capabilities, anyone think that if Sony develops a Pro version of this camcorder with several firmware upgrades and XLRs, that it would make a worthy successor to the HVR-A1? Maybe I'm being too hopeful that Sony releases a Pro version of this camcorder, but, as an avid A1 user, I've been waiting for the true successor of the A1 for some time.

[Robert Young]

Seems like there have been very clear signals that Sony does have a ramped up version of the VG10 in the works, supposedly to be announced by the end of the year.
It could be the same body with some XLRs added to the handle, plus a few extra buttons, or could be a bigger body- essentially a whole new cam based around the same APS chip. Rumors are that it will be priced in the $4,000 range, so you would think they're going to have to give more than just a couple of XLR plugs.
We'll have to wait & watch.

[Lawrence Bansbach]

I just hope Canon comes up with something in the $1,200-$2,000 range. I can live without XLRs. The lack of 24p is a little harder to overlook.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Robert Young

The typical "deinterlacing" software that we use for true 60i to 30p conversion would not be recommended, as it would alter the fields in its attempt to "blend" them into single frames.
I have no first hand experience with this yet, but some posters have indicated that simply importing the clips to a 30p timeline is all that's needed. Apparently, the NLE should interpret the footage correctly.
That will be sweet, if it's really that simple.

There is no conversion. There is no deinterlacing. There is no blending. There is no "interpretation."

1) 60i is 30 FRAMES per second.

2) 30p is 30 FRAMES per second.

There is NO frame rate difference between the two, hence no timeline difference, You can use a 30p timeline or a 60i timeline. Both are 30fps.

The only difference is that with CCD/CMOS captured 60i the odd lines and even lines are captured 1/50th or 1,60th second apart while with 30p ALL lines are captured at the same time.

This very simple difference has five implications:

1) With 60i, the odd and even lines make up 2 FIELDS that, on CRTs, are displayed one after the other thereby providing a FIELD TEMPORAL RESOLUTION of 1/60th second in contrast to 30p that has a FIELD TEMPORAL RESOLUTION of 1/30th second. This is why motion looks more smooth with 60i.

2) With flat-panel displays 60i must be deinterlaced. Simply put, each FIELD is converted in SIZE to a FRAME. Thus 60i is converted to 60p. Therefore, the FIELD TEMPORAL RESOLUTION remains 1/60th second.

3) Because SCALING must be done by FIELD (interlaced video) or FRAME (progressive video) your NLE needs to know what kind of video is in the timeline. BUT, as long as you set your timeline to INTERLACED all will be well because scaling the odd lines separately from the even lines does NO harm to progressive video. So all this talk about editing as progressive is a waste of time. Simply edit based upon the recorded format -- which is why Sony calls it 50i/60i.

4) In fact, if you want to burn a BD, you want to keep the timeline as 60i because it will happily output video that can go to a BD. BD does not support p25 or p30.

5) If you want to go to the web, DO NOT DEINTERLACE! When you compress, be sure the output is H.264/AVC as this codec has no tag "i" vs "p" tag. (Apple allows assumes H.264/AVC IS progressive.)

Folks are overthinking this.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Lawrence Bansbach

The lack of 24p is a little harder to overlook.

UNLESS watch film in a theater you have not ever seen 24p.

UNLESS you transfer to film and watch in a theater you have not ever seen 24p.

UNLESS you transfer to film and watch in a theater you have not ever seen 24p.

All this 24p talk -- unless you transfer 24p to FILM -- is nonsense!

What every person demands -- they will never get when viewing on any home video device -- except the Kuro.

What you see on ANY video device is 2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER present in 60i video.

2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER present in 60i video does NOT look like 24fps projected film.

24fps is smooth -- with low temporal resolution.

2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER is NOT smooth but has low temporal resolution.

What is smooth AND has low temporal resolution? What looks like real projected film?

25p and 30p.

When folks claim they can see the difference between 24p and 30p they are actually saying they can see the difference between "smooth" (30p) and "non-smooth" (2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER). Somehow they have lost the fact that real film projected is smooth.

So from now on lets get real. Please say "The lack of 2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER is a little harder to overlook."

PS: you don't even see 24p on your computer because LCDs run at 60p. You see 2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER.

[Ron Evans]

Well said Steve. Both posts.

Ron Evans

[Robert Young]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

3) Because SCALING must be done by FIELD (interlaced video) or FRAME (progressive video) your NLE needs to know what kind of video is in the timeline. BUT, as long as you set your timeline to INTERLACED all will be well because scaling the odd lines separately from the even lines does NO harm to progressive video. So all this talk about editing as progressive is a waste of time. Simply edit based upon the recorded format -- which is why Sony calls it 50i/60i.

Steve- I agree with what you have said.
The issue I was attempting to address in my post was the issue of using the VG10 30p in 60i footage on a 30p timeline.
For example, to mix VG10 footage with true (non pseudo interlaced) 30p footage on a 30p timeline. Some have suggested that you can simply import the raw VG10 clps to the 30p timeline and the NLE will interpret it properly.
I don't know if that is correct or not, and I don't know if all of the footage would be processed identically when rendering out to final formats.

[Rick Hill]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

UNLESS watch film in a theater you have not ever seen 24p.

UNLESS you transfer to film and watch in a theater you have not ever seen 24p.

UNLESS you transfer to film and watch in a theater you have not ever seen 24p.

All this 24p talk -- unless you transfer 24p to FILM -- is nonsense!

What every person demands -- they will never get when viewing on any home video device -- except the Kuro.

What you see on ANY video device is 2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER present in 60i video.

2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER present in 60i video does NOT look like 24fps projected film.

24fps is smooth -- with low temporal resolution.

2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER is NOT smooth but has low temporal resolution.

What is smooth AND has low temporal resolution? What looks like real projected film?

25p and 30p.

When folks claim they can see the difference between 24p and 30p they are actually saying they can see the difference between "smooth" (30p) and "non-smooth" (2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER). Somehow they have lost the fact that real film projected is smooth.

So from now on lets get real. Please say "The lack of 2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER is a little harder to overlook."

PS: you don't even see 24p on your computer because LCDs run at 60p. You see 2:3 PULLDOWN JUDDER.

Keep in mind 24p in theaters is actually 48fps with the each frame shown twice. Regardless each frame is shown for a true 1/24 of a second.

The judder problem with 2:3 pulldown is each frame is _not_ shown for a true 1/24 of a second. Frame periods can only be either 1/30 (2 60i or 60p fields) or 1/20 (3 60i or 60p fields) of a second and is easily perceptible as _variable_ judder for fast moving objects. 24p still has judder but it is even and invariable for fast moving objects.

Today it is possible to purchase home displays that can show a progressive frame rate of 120 Hz. These displays (disable the oversampling/judder removing "smooth scan"/interframe interpolating technology) can reproduce a filmic 24p experience in a home setting. The 120Hz display shows the same progressive 24p frame 5 times (vs the theaters 2).

Temporally this is equivalent. Both show a single frame for a true 1/24 of a second. Perception of judder is equivalent. I think it can be argued that one is seeing true 24p with a 120Hz display as much as they see true 24p from a 48Hz projector in a theater.

[Chris Barcellos]

Its not wrong to want 24p, just because another doesn't have a need. In fact I think 30p is great looking and 60p even smoother, but for technical reasons associated with your final production needs, 24p may be the right way to go.

24p is wanted by film makers who want to have the same amount of frames in a second of film, as are found on one second of 35mm or 16mm film in modern cine film production.

Most 24p formats give you 24 single frames of film. In some of the formats, particurly in HDV, 24 p is laid into a 60i format, of 60 half frames per second. That does not mean that the information is not there their to extract those 24 frames into true 24 single shot frames. It is there, but has just been laid into the 60i stream to create the 24p frames, while conforming with the HDV requirements. Many will use a convertor like Cineform to remove pull down, and at that point you will begin working with only the 24 frames per second. It will save space and time.

Now why do so many film makers want to use 24p? While they say that, I don't think it is because they feel it shows better on video screens. While they say they can tell the difference, the main reason is that film outs (the dream of most cinema film makers) are 24p. Obviously if you shout in HDV 60i, some frames have to be thrown out to get 24p, and it may even be that interpolation will have to occur. Kind of a crappy thing to do, if you can just get it all by shooting 24p in the first place. And from my experience with 30p to 24p conversion with the Canon 5D material, even more problems occur.

As to the judder thing, I am finding that it doesn't show up if you are panning properly, and shooting at a proper shutter speed. And I do have to disagree that you don't seen judder in 35mm celluloid films. I believe I have seen it on many occasions. Control of camera movement is the key to preventing issues there.

[Graham Hickling]

Originally Posted by Rick Hill

Today it is possible to purchase home displays that can .... can reproduce a filmic 24p experience in a home setting.

Indeed! I have one such display (a Panasonic) sitting downstairs. 24P from my Pentax K-x and Pana HMC40 both look great on it.

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Originally Posted by Rick Hill

Today it is possible to purchase home displays that can show a progressive frame rate of 120 Hz. These displays (disable the oversampling/judder removing "smooth scan"/interframe interpolating technology) can reproduce a filmic 24p experience in a home setting. The 120Hz display shows the same progressive 24p frame 5 times (vs the theaters 2).

Temporally this is equivalent. Both show a single frame for a true 1/24 of a second. Perception of judder is equivalent. I think it can be argued that one is seeing true 24p with a 120Hz display as much as they see true 24p from a 48Hz projector in a theater.

Plus, certain models of LG plasmas do 24p as 72 Hz, just like Kuro (of course, it could be argued that just about nothing else about LG plasmas is like a Kuro!). And if you want 24p as 48 Hz, Panasonic's G-series plasmas will do it. Many people -- probably most of whom have seen film projected in a movie theater -- report objectionable flicker. Even though it's the same frequency as in a movie theater, there's a difference in the experience.

[Ron Evans]

There is a difference between the flicker rate and the frame rate. Film projectors can have 2, 3 or even 5 blades ( mine at home have 3 and 5 blades) this reduces the flickering of image on the screen only. The exposure rate at which the film was taken is 24 fps in most cases and it is possible to ensure that there is no judder. Lots of books have been written on this subject and any film school or even film clubs will focus on this to get the best picture possible within the constraints of what was an economic decision. Nothing to do with art or technology but was the best compromise for motion and optical sound performance with minimum film stock used and distributed.

Yes modern 72hz, 120hz and 240hz displays technically have the capability to show true 24p with flicker rate at display refresh rate but the playback chain has to be complete at this level for it all to work properly. ie compatible Bluray player/display and HDMI interface etc. The vast majority of viewers do not see 24p on their systems. They see a modified form depending on their systems and almost impossible on normal CRT's.

Shooting 24p video to me only has value if the intent is to go to film for projection. 30P would be a better choice for the film look if the intent is never to go to film. Personally, I don't like either and was so glad when I moved from film to video.

Ron Evans

[Steve Mullen]

Ron -- glad you pointed out the need for the entire chain to support 24p.

And I'm glad to learn of the LG -- did they buy the Kuro line?

The maximum presentation rate for film to look like film is 96Hz. And with video, the minimum is 72Hz.

There are only a few HDTVs that meet these specs! The vast majority of those wanting 24p do not own these monitors. Likely 1% of their audience has the few HDTVs.

Thus, NONE will ever see 24fps. EVER!

They are asking for 24p because frankly they are uneducated about video tek. Having no understanding themselves they lemming like repeat what they heard.

What they think is the film look IS 2-3 pulldown not 24p.

What will most look like theater 24fps is 30fps.

They demand 24 for was valid when video was going to transferred to FILM. It has no validity now that indie productions are watched on flat-panels and computers.

PS: you can always put 30p in a 60i timeline.

[Ethan Cooper]

Ok, well I happen to like the 2:3 Pulldown Judder look.

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

And I'm glad to learn of the LG -- did they buy the Kuro line?

No, I think LG was doing 72 Hz on their plasmas before Pioneer stopped producing Kuros. And I think Panasonic acquired the Kuro tech, at least the image-processing part of it (not the panels -- in fact, I believe Panasonic was set to produce panels for the Kuro line, that is, until Pioneer pulled the plug).