Vertical Smear: sounds like the worst skiing accident ever.

Kenn Jolemore · August 13th, 2003, 10:32 AM

Most of these cam's have a verticle smeer problem to some extent or the other but I was supprised at how much they seem to differ between each cam. The 953 has the same problem as do most small HAD CCD camcorders with high pixel counts. You do get a feel for the parameters of your camcorder with use and it solves the vast majority of these problems.Even the VX2000 has a bit of a verticle smeer problem ,just not as bad as the newer(higher pixel count) models.
KennJ

Shawn Mielke · August 13th, 2003, 12:04 PM

Thanks Ken, that's the sort of input I'd been hoping for.

There, Rick, you see, nothing to be frightened of, and you just might be encountering smear with your new 953. It is, as was mentioned several posts ago, rather avoidable. Do let us know how the Panny works out for you, though!

Rick Tugman · August 13th, 2003, 12:54 PM

Hey Shawn:

YES I read and took into consideration Boyd's and your e-mail especially about "avoidable" but I think for my purposes the PV953 will be ok.

It arrived today and I have been out a little working with it and have already look at the low light. There are plenty of manual controls and the only drawback is 1/60 shutter speed is the lowest it can go. There is plenty of iris control and you can step through other options quite easily.

Reports about a menu called "Gain up" greatly help the low light on the 953. I was quite impressed this afternoon looking at my kid watching TV in a dark room with only a little (and I stress little) light coming through the closed blinds and what light was behind me coming through the doorway and around a little nook.

So as I begin to put the camera through it paces I will be happy to post some things for you guys to see. I'm sure there will be some smearing, but not the line that I saw on Boyd's video, but time will tell if it can be replicated.

Thanks for all your input.

Boyd Ostroff · August 13th, 2003, 03:24 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Rick Tugman :Sad to hear these stories about the PDX-10 which had promise. -->>>

Well we all have our own set of expectations and priorities. The PDX-10 has some quirks to be sure. But, just returning from a shoot yesterday, I'm still very happy with mine. If I did event videography I probably wouldn't be happy with the PDX-10. But I just want to put the best possible 16:9 DV on a big screen, and I can work around the vertical smear problem.

I posted the example of vertical smear as a "worst case" for people to see, but I have plenty of nice footage, shot right into the sun, where this isn't a problem...

Rick Tugman · August 13th, 2003, 03:57 PM

Very true Boyd .... and you are correct about expectations. I can't agree with you more. I had seen your photos and it was those photos that made me want to get the PDX-10 after seeing big brother (PD-150) in person. I think if I wasn't having trouble getting it (some dealers promise you and never deliver) I would have still gone with it.

I think in rethinking my situation and what I wanted from the camera (price point, family usage and the 3MP still feature), I now think (with not too much difference in quality) I have the best of both worlds for my situation. Time will truly tell that. I truly believe the smear can be avoided on the PDX-10, but like the GS100 Japanese menus did I want to deal with it being a bigger issue and possibly a little more prevelant on the PDX-10.

Since this is my first DV camera and I believe this will be a stop gap for a few years then who knows .... I'll hand it down to the kids and I'll get that Sony PDX whatever will be at that time.... but for now I think it will this will do the job maybe not as well as the PDX-10, but I'm not the operators you all are either.

Shawn Mielke · August 13th, 2003, 08:54 PM

I admire the balance in your judgment, Rick. And I'm eager to catch glimpses of your output with the 953. As I constructed my own debate recently on which cam to buy in the least amount of time, for the lower price, it boiled down to the pdx10 and the dv953. Small world. (Small selection of quality, relatively inexpensive 3ccd cams, too!)
Enjoy,
regards,
Shawn

Rick Tugman · August 13th, 2003, 09:18 PM

Thanks Shawn .... this was a long drawn out process for me. I have looked over cameras for the past 5 months. I even considered the smaller Panasonic GS70, but after seeing it and learning of the PV953 the choice was basically made for me. Then I continued searching then after seeing Boyd's pictures and seeing the PD-150 I had made the choice for the PDX-10. It was really more than I wanted to spend and when the dealers didn't deliver what they promised, I said to myself, it's not worth the extra money right now. That was really the crux of it. Your right there really wasn't anything out there except for these cameras which are below 2 grand.

I'll be happy to get something posted once I get things going and I finish a little bit of traveling I have coming up.

Best regards,

Rick.

Boyd Ostroff · August 13th, 2003, 10:06 PM

FWIW, here are some frames from yesterday's video shoot with the PDX-10: http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/film/20030812

All of these have been deinterlaced by superimposing clips of the odd and even fields in FCP. Some of them have had a "silk stocking" filter applied in post, however yesterday was beautiful and foggy in NJ as this unprocessed frame shows.

Regarding low light performance, there are several examples. These were shot just after sunset on a densely overcast day... it was really dark outside! There is noticeable noise in these frames, but it sort of fits the mood we were trying to create.

Custom presets were used with WB set to daylight then tweaked slightly in some frames. Sharpness was turned to the minimum and color level was turned down two clicks. The night shots are at 1/30 sec, all others at 1/60. For the night shots I had the lens wide open with 0db gain. It would have been possible to get a pretty bright image by boosting the gain.

Now we were going for a very soft misty look (this is getting used in a slow motion sequence), so don't make too many judgements about the sharpness of the PDX-10's lens from these.

Vladimir Koifman · August 14th, 2003, 03:08 AM

I'm wondering if anybody of you, guys, tried to slow down shutter speed to alleviate the problem, just like Sony recommends on p.71 of TRV950 manual:
'
ftp://ftp.ita.sel.sony.com/ccpg/dvimag/manuals/camcorders/TRV950.pdf

Does it help?

Young Lee · August 14th, 2003, 10:26 PM

http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...y/IMGA0151.JPG

Hehe... There are ways to avoid smearing. On the last pic above, I created the smear intentionally. Sorry, I didn't use the tripod as always. :)

Anyway, here are the same photos "with" and "without" the smear. Manual treakings did the trick.

http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0197.JPG

http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0198.JPG

P.S. I don't know why, but vertical smearing from the TRV950 is, indeed, nastier than from the DV953 when shot in auto mode.

Vladimir Koifman · August 15th, 2003, 12:39 AM

Young Lee, I see only a modest amount of smear on your pictures. Smear is a faint vertical line coming from the sun. I'm not sure about origin of 45 deg angled lines from the sun. My guess it's because of iris having small number of blades, probably four.

Shawn Mielke · August 15th, 2003, 02:51 AM

Lovely pics, Lee, smear or no :). I guess one of my main concerns with underexposing shots to get rid of smear is that it will then create noise. Unsure whether that is a valid concern.

Andre De Clercq · August 15th, 2003, 03:43 AM

FYI, this is what I posted on Sept 27 2002 about vert smear...

Young Lee · August 15th, 2003, 09:31 AM

I knew you would say that. :) How about these pics? I tweaked the shutter speed, and one has the vertical line and the other doesn't. Sorry, I didn't use the tripod (my laziness). :)

http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0194.JPG

http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0196.JPG

Vladimir Koifman · August 15th, 2003, 11:30 AM

Lee, yes the first picture has a clear vertical smear. I'm puzzeld to explain a ring around the sun. May be some kind of lens flare? As for these 45deg lines that I think come from iris, they make picture more beatiful, in my opinion.

August 13th, 2003, 10:32 AM	#16
Kenn Jolemore Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: norfolk Va. Posts: 124	Most of these cam's have a verticle smeer problem to some extent or the other but I was supprised at how much they seem to differ between each cam. The 953 has the same problem as do most small HAD CCD camcorders with high pixel counts. You do get a feel for the parameters of your camcorder with use and it solves the vast majority of these problems.Even the VX2000 has a bit of a verticle smeer problem ,just not as bad as the newer(higher pixel count) models. KennJ __________________ KennJ

August 13th, 2003, 12:04 PM	#17
Shawn Mielke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, California Posts: 745	Thanks Ken, that's the sort of input I'd been hoping for. There, Rick, you see, nothing to be frightened of, and you just might be encountering smear with your new 953. It is, as was mentioned several posts ago, rather avoidable. Do let us know how the Panny works out for you, though! __________________ Breakthrough In Grey Room

August 13th, 2003, 12:54 PM	#18
Rick Tugman Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Parkland, Florida Posts: 105	Hey Shawn: YES I read and took into consideration Boyd's and your e-mail especially about "avoidable" but I think for my purposes the PV953 will be ok. It arrived today and I have been out a little working with it and have already look at the low light. There are plenty of manual controls and the only drawback is 1/60 shutter speed is the lowest it can go. There is plenty of iris control and you can step through other options quite easily. Reports about a menu called "Gain up" greatly help the low light on the 953. I was quite impressed this afternoon looking at my kid watching TV in a dark room with only a little (and I stress little) light coming through the closed blinds and what light was behind me coming through the doorway and around a little nook. So as I begin to put the camera through it paces I will be happy to post some things for you guys to see. I'm sure there will be some smearing, but not the line that I saw on Boyd's video, but time will tell if it can be replicated. Thanks for all your input. __________________ Camera: Panasonic DV953 PC: Apple Aluminum G4 Powerbook - 15 inch Final Cut Pro 4 and other assorted goodies!

August 13th, 2003, 03:57 PM	#20
Rick Tugman Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Parkland, Florida Posts: 105	Very true Boyd .... and you are correct about expectations. I can't agree with you more. I had seen your photos and it was those photos that made me want to get the PDX-10 after seeing big brother (PD-150) in person. I think if I wasn't having trouble getting it (some dealers promise you and never deliver) I would have still gone with it. I think in rethinking my situation and what I wanted from the camera (price point, family usage and the 3MP still feature), I now think (with not too much difference in quality) I have the best of both worlds for my situation. Time will truly tell that. I truly believe the smear can be avoided on the PDX-10, but like the GS100 Japanese menus did I want to deal with it being a bigger issue and possibly a little more prevelant on the PDX-10. Since this is my first DV camera and I believe this will be a stop gap for a few years then who knows .... I'll hand it down to the kids and I'll get that Sony PDX whatever will be at that time.... but for now I think it will this will do the job maybe not as well as the PDX-10, but I'm not the operators you all are either. __________________ Camera: Panasonic DV953 PC: Apple Aluminum G4 Powerbook - 15 inch Final Cut Pro 4 and other assorted goodies!

August 13th, 2003, 08:54 PM	#21
Shawn Mielke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, California Posts: 745	I admire the balance in your judgment, Rick. And I'm eager to catch glimpses of your output with the 953. As I constructed my own debate recently on which cam to buy in the least amount of time, for the lower price, it boiled down to the pdx10 and the dv953. Small world. (Small selection of quality, relatively inexpensive 3ccd cams, too!) Enjoy, regards, Shawn __________________ Breakthrough In Grey Room

August 13th, 2003, 03:24 PM	#19
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	<<<-- Originally posted by Rick Tugman :Sad to hear these stories about the PDX-10 which had promise. -->>> Well we all have our own set of expectations and priorities. The PDX-10 has some quirks to be sure. But, just returning from a shoot yesterday, I'm still very happy with mine. If I did event videography I probably wouldn't be happy with the PDX-10. But I just want to put the best possible 16:9 DV on a big screen, and I can work around the vertical smear problem. I posted the example of vertical smear as a "worst case" for people to see, but I have plenty of nice footage, shot right into the sun, where this isn't a problem...

August 13th, 2003, 09:18 PM	#22
Rick Tugman Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Parkland, Florida Posts: 105	Thanks Shawn .... this was a long drawn out process for me. I have looked over cameras for the past 5 months. I even considered the smaller Panasonic GS70, but after seeing it and learning of the PV953 the choice was basically made for me. Then I continued searching then after seeing Boyd's pictures and seeing the PD-150 I had made the choice for the PDX-10. It was really more than I wanted to spend and when the dealers didn't deliver what they promised, I said to myself, it's not worth the extra money right now. That was really the crux of it. Your right there really wasn't anything out there except for these cameras which are below 2 grand. I'll be happy to get something posted once I get things going and I finish a little bit of traveling I have coming up. Best regards, Rick. __________________ Camera: Panasonic DV953 PC: Apple Aluminum G4 Powerbook - 15 inch Final Cut Pro 4 and other assorted goodies!

August 13th, 2003, 10:06 PM	#23
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	New pdx-10 framegrabs FWIW, here are some frames from yesterday's video shoot with the PDX-10: http://www.greenmist.com/trovatore/film/20030812 All of these have been deinterlaced by superimposing clips of the odd and even fields in FCP. Some of them have had a "silk stocking" filter applied in post, however yesterday was beautiful and foggy in NJ as this unprocessed frame shows. Regarding low light performance, there are several examples. These were shot just after sunset on a densely overcast day... it was really dark outside! There is noticeable noise in these frames, but it sort of fits the mood we were trying to create. Custom presets were used with WB set to daylight then tweaked slightly in some frames. Sharpness was turned to the minimum and color level was turned down two clicks. The night shots are at 1/30 sec, all others at 1/60. For the night shots I had the lens wide open with 0db gain. It would have been possible to get a pretty bright image by boosting the gain. Now we were going for a very soft misty look (this is getting used in a slow motion sequence), so don't make too many judgements about the sharpness of the PDX-10's lens from these.

August 14th, 2003, 03:08 AM	#24
Vladimir Koifman Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Israel Posts: 115	I'm wondering if anybody of you, guys, tried to slow down shutter speed to alleviate the problem, just like Sony recommends on p.71 of TRV950 manual: ' ftp://ftp.ita.sel.sony.com/ccpg/dvimag/manuals/camcorders/TRV950.pdf Does it help?

August 14th, 2003, 10:26 PM	#25
Young Lee Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 268	http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...y/IMGA0151.JPG Hehe... There are ways to avoid smearing. On the last pic above, I created the smear intentionally. Sorry, I didn't use the tripod as always. :) Anyway, here are the same photos "with" and "without" the smear. Manual treakings did the trick. http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0197.JPG http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0198.JPG P.S. I don't know why, but vertical smearing from the TRV950 is, indeed, nastier than from the DV953 when shot in auto mode.

August 15th, 2003, 12:39 AM	#26
Vladimir Koifman Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Israel Posts: 115	Young Lee, I see only a modest amount of smear on your pictures. Smear is a faint vertical line coming from the sun. I'm not sure about origin of 45 deg angled lines from the sun. My guess it's because of iris having small number of blades, probably four.

August 15th, 2003, 02:51 AM	#27
Shawn Mielke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, California Posts: 745	Lovely pics, Lee, smear or no :). I guess one of my main concerns with underexposing shots to get rid of smear is that it will then create noise. Unsure whether that is a valid concern. __________________ Breakthrough In Grey Room

August 15th, 2003, 03:43 AM	#28
Andre De Clercq Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Belgium Posts: 804	FYI, this is what I posted on Sept 27 2002 about vert smear...

August 15th, 2003, 09:31 AM	#29
Young Lee Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 268	I knew you would say that. :) How about these pics? I tweaked the shutter speed, and one has the vertical line and the other doesn't. Sorry, I didn't use the tripod (my laziness). :) http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0194.JPG http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...c/IMGA0196.JPG

August 15th, 2003, 11:30 AM	#30
Vladimir Koifman Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Israel Posts: 115	Lee, yes the first picture has a clear vertical smear. I'm puzzeld to explain a ring around the sun. May be some kind of lens flare? As for these 45deg lines that I think come from iris, they make picture more beatiful, in my opinion.