|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 10th, 2007, 04:18 PM | #16 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 26
|
Quote:
p.s.: I've watched them on wmp, but my old graphic card is only good to preview files... |
|
November 10th, 2007, 04:25 PM | #17 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 4,086
|
I guess the main advantege of the long GOP 35Mbps VBR vs the 25Mbps CBR codec is in movement/detail handliig, not colour handling...
__________________
Sony PXW-FS7 | DaVinci Resolve Studio; Magix Vegas Pro; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive |
November 10th, 2007, 05:05 PM | #18 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 26
|
I'm doing a quick test via photoshop cs3 (i've extracted some png files right now via videolan player)...highlights seem to show big problems, they simple don't have enough data to play with it, I've pumped to 60% saturation, after this they show nasty color artifacts but I'm not worried about it. According to my old test, pushing up saturation to 60% show artifacts also in dvcpro format, but highlights are more tweakable.
|
November 11th, 2007, 03:01 AM | #19 | |
Mustang. Legend.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 36
|
Quote:
There will be an EX codec released for FCP shortly. You'll need the latest Sony File Transfer Software version and latest Quicktime to make it all work. I'm sure there'll be instructions aplenty on the web about this. (We edited the just-premiered EX promo videos in FCP-- worked great.) |
|
November 11th, 2007, 07:48 AM | #20 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posts: 3,841
|
Will it be Intel only or will PPC Macs be supported?
I can understand that Apple (& Sony?) may want to keep the specifics under wrap as it were but if it's NOT going to support PPC some of us need to know ASAP because having to buy a MacPro or MacBookPro has an impact on what ancillary gear some of us need to purchase ASAP if we are to use the camera. I am disappointed that the Clip Browser is Intel only. It's something I may need to distribute to clients to view master clip and no PPC support means many clients won't be able to view clips at all. Quote:
|
|
November 11th, 2007, 09:09 AM | #21 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,414
|
They also seem to play fine with the program Mplayer Classic
for those wanting to download the program... http://www.free-codecs.com/Media_Pla...c_download.htm |
November 11th, 2007, 10:11 AM | #22 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 2,488
|
|
November 11th, 2007, 06:31 PM | #23 |
Trustee
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,719
|
I wouldn't think much of these clips right now. There are very rough shots done in a pretty dull setting and environment. This is about as bad of shots as any of us could ever even think of shooting with a camera. I would just look at these in terms of how the mp4 wrapper will play and work on your system. We do not even know what type of settings were used for these shots. Do not judge the camera quality based on a few sneaked through clips pointed at a white wall with a few bored looking people walking by.
|
November 11th, 2007, 06:44 PM | #24 |
Trustee
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 1,896
|
True the flicker is due to fluorescent lighting, probably older ballasts.
Under these conditions, flicker can be a problem with any video camera. It looks different due to the rolling shutter . I agree, we just don't know the setting used for these quick show room floor clips. |
November 12th, 2007, 01:42 AM | #25 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 234
|
These clips may be of poor technical quality (flickering flourescents, fast frame rate for the other two clips) but they look gorgeous. The clips played fine with Media Player Classic.
I'm viewing them on a 1600x1050 display and the best way to describe the picture is "a Digital SLR at 25 frames per second." And it has no noise and artifacting can barely be seen. I've seen much worse at half-res 1080i on an HVX200. At full resolution the image looks crisp and will definitely be a force to be reckoned with in the world of prosumer video ;-) |
November 12th, 2007, 12:11 PM | #26 |
Trustee
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,719
|
I do agree. Even though this is the nastiest environment you could ever put a camera in the level of detail is amazing. The 720p shot is more detailed then most 1/3" 1080i HDV cameras.
|
November 12th, 2007, 12:48 PM | #27 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 68
|
Clips?
Hello, can i have a link for downloads sample clips from the EX1, please?
Alessandro Zumstein |
November 12th, 2007, 08:45 PM | #28 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Salt Lake City, Ut
Posts: 155
|
see first post in this thread
|
November 13th, 2007, 04:40 AM | #29 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Norfolk, UK
Posts: 627
|
Quote:
Shouldn't this mean in theory that the camera is applying less compression to the 720p images? Paul. |
|
November 13th, 2007, 04:52 AM | #30 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 4,086
|
Quote:
On the other hand, no chance of more material length fitting on the same capacity card than in 1080 mode. This is all speculation though - there is too little action in those clips to conclusively state how the two modes average data rate differ.
__________________
Sony PXW-FS7 | DaVinci Resolve Studio; Magix Vegas Pro; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive |
|
| ||||||
|
|