JVC Previews NEW Pro HD Camera Specs to Select AVR Resellers

Aaron Shaw · March 21st, 2005, 10:14 AM

Quite right Chris! My comment was only in reference to comparing the data rates. The true test will always be, as you say, what you see :).

Chris Hurd · March 21st, 2005, 10:29 AM

Oh, trust me Aaron, my remarks were definitely not directed toward you.

I was just trying to head off some of these numbers guys that tend to get hung up on specifications, having never laid a finger on the camera. You know who I'm talking about... the kind of mentality that thinks, "well, if it's 19mbps, it can't be any good." I like to discourage that element.

There's nothing wrong with talking about numbers, of course... but as we both agree, the proof is in the image. Cheers,

Luis Caffesse · March 21st, 2005, 10:43 AM

"There's nothing wrong with talking about numbers, of course... but as we both agree, the proof is in the image."

This is aboslutely right.
A friend of mine always reminds me when I get carried away with numbers that it is perceived quality that matters.

If the amount of data were all that really mattered, why would most of us think 24P looks so good? Obviously 30fps should give us a better image...I mean, it is giving us more information per second, right?
:)
And before anyone jumps on my analogy, i realize I'm talking about temporal samples and not datarate....I'm just trying to illustrate a point.

Obviously numbers can't be completely discounted...but there is much more to an image that it's datarate.

Four weeks left and then we'll have something concrete to talk about (hopefully).

Ron Evans · March 21st, 2005, 01:25 PM

Personally I don't think 24P does look good. 24P is an effect to simulate film shot at 24fps ( which is played back at 24fps but with at least a 3 blade shutter to mask the flicker!!!) I like to see smooth motion with clear sharp images so for me the faster the frame rate the better. So for me 30P is better than 24P and 60P would be even better but for now 60i is the best compromise.

Ron Evans

Tom Roper · March 21st, 2005, 01:52 PM

3:2 pullup is the equivalent 3 blade shutter for 24fps content displayed on 720p 60hz refreshed monitor.

Brad Abrahams · March 21st, 2005, 02:38 PM

The 24p acquisition will also depend on the sampling rate at which the frames are recorded. As we've seen with the Sony cam, 24fps captured at 60hz causes a strobed look.

Ron Evans · March 21st, 2005, 07:52 PM

I understand 3:2 mechanism Tom but it still looks like my Super8 film of the mid 60's. I have moved on 40 years. I understand the use of film look for dramatic effect but it doesn't do anything for me and is overused on projects that would be better served by 60i.

Ron Evans

Thomas Smet · March 21st, 2005, 10:38 PM

When you rent or buy a movie on DVD remember they are 24p with 3:2 pulldown. When is the last time somebody complained about watching Star Wars on DVD saying it wasn't very smooth? The same is actually true for all your old VHS tape movies as well.

Ken Hodson · March 21st, 2005, 10:59 PM

"When is the last time somebody complained about watching Star Wars on DVD saying it wasn't very smooth?"

Well I watched them in the theater at 24p and thought the lack of frame rate sucked. Movies are made with such massive amounts of high speed motion and FX these dasys, the 24p just can't show enough. A blurry mess is often how it looks, or if they use a high shutter ala Saving Private Ryan, it is stuttery. Modern, high action movies are crying for 60p.

Ron Evans · March 22nd, 2005, 08:23 AM

Absolutely agree Ken. Staying with 24P is like having a modern car that had the ride of a model T Ford just because that was how everyone thought a car should ride.!!! Thomas, well directed movies take great care to allow for the deficiencies of 24p using carefully arranged angles for moving shots to give the impression of smooth movement. A straight movement across the screen will not be smooth neither will a pan. 3:2 pulldown or the three blade shutter is there to remove flicker does nothing for smoothness as this is governed by the number of different frames captured. For this there is no substitute for higher frame rate whether this is interlaced or progressive. Ideally the frame rate should be high enough to capture smooth motion for the fastest moving object being filmed and be above the flicker rate for ones eyes ( at least 60fps effective, 24P with 3 blade shutter flickers at 72 frames a second but there are only 24 unique images so to the observer it stutters but doesn't flicker). A lot of special effects are filmed with high speed cameras( not 24P ) and then inserted as slow motion as this is a nice way of creating a smooth image in a 24p film. How many slow motion crash scenes have you seen in movies? Making films is all about illusion. Smooth motion is perceived by ones eyes if frame rate and flicker rate are high enough to be perceived as smooth. It is different for different people. As an example when I go visit relations in the UK for the first few days the TV has a terrible flicker ( 50Hz) but after a week I can't see it, my eyes/brain have allowed for the flicker. But when I come back to Canada the TV somehow looks very stable!!!

Ron Evans

Kenn Christenson · March 22nd, 2005, 10:18 AM

Unfortunately or fortunately, 24P will be here for a while. The vast majority of motion pictures are still shown, theatrically, with film-based projection equipment and the universal frame rate for these projectors is 24 f.p.s. Originating in 24P also makes your product more easlily converted to those countries using the PAL television system.

What use is it to originate in a frame rate that limits who can watch your show or adds unwanted artifacts in a conversion process?

Lawrence Bansbach · March 22nd, 2005, 10:45 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Oh, trust me Aaron, my remarks were definitely not directed toward you.-->>>

My comments were also directed only at what I perceived to be a misstatement of fact. I agree that the numbers themselves are only part of the story, and what is most important is how the image looks.

Ron Evans · March 22nd, 2005, 11:51 AM

Unfortunately I have to agree with you Kenn that we are stuck with the projection equipment in service.
However to my eyes the artifacts associated with 24P are worse than any conversion I have seen between PAL and NTSC. To me the odd zaggies are a lot less disturbing than the stuttering of motion that is continuously present in 24P movies. For me the move to high definition whether at 720P(30) or 1080i is an improvement and eventually I hope we will get 1080P(60) and theatres will convert to video projection and this 24P issue will go away.

Ron Evans

Joe Carney · March 22nd, 2005, 07:34 PM

I thought that in theaters, film is projected at 48fps, each frame shown twice to reduce flicker.

Barry Green · March 22nd, 2005, 09:03 PM

No, film is projected at 24fps. Each frame is shown 2 or 3 times (depending on how many blades are on the shutter) but only 24 frames go through the projector each second.

March 21st, 2005, 10:29 AM	#47
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Oh, trust me Aaron, my remarks were definitely not directed toward you. I was just trying to head off some of these numbers guys that tend to get hung up on specifications, having never laid a finger on the camera. You know who I'm talking about... the kind of mentality that thinks, "well, if it's 19mbps, it can't be any good." I like to discourage that element. There's nothing wrong with talking about numbers, of course... but as we both agree, the proof is in the image. Cheers, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

March 21st, 2005, 10:43 AM	#48
Luis Caffesse Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 704	"There's nothing wrong with talking about numbers, of course... but as we both agree, the proof is in the image." This is aboslutely right. A friend of mine always reminds me when I get carried away with numbers that it is perceived quality that matters. If the amount of data were all that really mattered, why would most of us think 24P looks so good? Obviously 30fps should give us a better image...I mean, it is giving us more information per second, right? :) And before anyone jumps on my analogy, i realize I'm talking about temporal samples and not datarate....I'm just trying to illustrate a point. Obviously numbers can't be completely discounted...but there is much more to an image that it's datarate. Four weeks left and then we'll have something concrete to talk about (hopefully). __________________ Luis Caffesse Pitch Productions Austin, Texas

March 21st, 2005, 10:59 PM	#54
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	"When is the last time somebody complained about watching Star Wars on DVD saying it wasn't very smooth?" Well I watched them in the theater at 24p and thought the lack of frame rate sucked. Movies are made with such massive amounts of high speed motion and FX these dasys, the 24p just can't show enough. A blurry mess is often how it looks, or if they use a high shutter ala Saving Private Ryan, it is stuttery. Modern, high action movies are crying for 60p. __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

March 21st, 2005, 10:14 AM	#46
Aaron Shaw Major Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 587	Quite right Chris! My comment was only in reference to comparing the data rates. The true test will always be, as you say, what you see :).

March 21st, 2005, 01:25 PM	#49
Ron Evans Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,220	Personally I don't think 24P does look good. 24P is an effect to simulate film shot at 24fps ( which is played back at 24fps but with at least a 3 blade shutter to mask the flicker!!!) I like to see smooth motion with clear sharp images so for me the faster the frame rate the better. So for me 30P is better than 24P and 60P would be even better but for now 60i is the best compromise. Ron Evans

March 21st, 2005, 01:52 PM	#50
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	3:2 pullup is the equivalent 3 blade shutter for 24fps content displayed on 720p 60hz refreshed monitor.

March 21st, 2005, 02:38 PM	#51
Brad Abrahams Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 65	The 24p acquisition will also depend on the sampling rate at which the frames are recorded. As we've seen with the Sony cam, 24fps captured at 60hz causes a strobed look.

March 21st, 2005, 07:52 PM	#52
Ron Evans Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,220	I understand 3:2 mechanism Tom but it still looks like my Super8 film of the mid 60's. I have moved on 40 years. I understand the use of film look for dramatic effect but it doesn't do anything for me and is overused on projects that would be better served by 60i. Ron Evans

March 21st, 2005, 10:38 PM	#53
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	When you rent or buy a movie on DVD remember they are 24p with 3:2 pulldown. When is the last time somebody complained about watching Star Wars on DVD saying it wasn't very smooth? The same is actually true for all your old VHS tape movies as well.

March 22nd, 2005, 08:23 AM	#55
Ron Evans Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,220	Absolutely agree Ken. Staying with 24P is like having a modern car that had the ride of a model T Ford just because that was how everyone thought a car should ride.!!! Thomas, well directed movies take great care to allow for the deficiencies of 24p using carefully arranged angles for moving shots to give the impression of smooth movement. A straight movement across the screen will not be smooth neither will a pan. 3:2 pulldown or the three blade shutter is there to remove flicker does nothing for smoothness as this is governed by the number of different frames captured. For this there is no substitute for higher frame rate whether this is interlaced or progressive. Ideally the frame rate should be high enough to capture smooth motion for the fastest moving object being filmed and be above the flicker rate for ones eyes ( at least 60fps effective, 24P with 3 blade shutter flickers at 72 frames a second but there are only 24 unique images so to the observer it stutters but doesn't flicker). A lot of special effects are filmed with high speed cameras( not 24P ) and then inserted as slow motion as this is a nice way of creating a smooth image in a 24p film. How many slow motion crash scenes have you seen in movies? Making films is all about illusion. Smooth motion is perceived by ones eyes if frame rate and flicker rate are high enough to be perceived as smooth. It is different for different people. As an example when I go visit relations in the UK for the first few days the TV has a terrible flicker ( 50Hz) but after a week I can't see it, my eyes/brain have allowed for the flicker. But when I come back to Canada the TV somehow looks very stable!!! Ron Evans

March 22nd, 2005, 10:18 AM	#56
Kenn Christenson Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Medford Oregon Posts: 152	Unfortunately or fortunately, 24P will be here for a while. The vast majority of motion pictures are still shown, theatrically, with film-based projection equipment and the universal frame rate for these projectors is 24 f.p.s. Originating in 24P also makes your product more easlily converted to those countries using the PAL television system. What use is it to originate in a frame rate that limits who can watch your show or adds unwanted artifacts in a conversion process?

March 22nd, 2005, 10:45 AM	#57
Lawrence Bansbach Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 295	<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Oh, trust me Aaron, my remarks were definitely not directed toward you.-->>> My comments were also directed only at what I perceived to be a misstatement of fact. I agree that the numbers themselves are only part of the story, and what is most important is how the image looks.

March 22nd, 2005, 11:51 AM	#58
Ron Evans Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,220	Unfortunately I have to agree with you Kenn that we are stuck with the projection equipment in service. However to my eyes the artifacts associated with 24P are worse than any conversion I have seen between PAL and NTSC. To me the odd zaggies are a lot less disturbing than the stuttering of motion that is continuously present in 24P movies. For me the move to high definition whether at 720P(30) or 1080i is an improvement and eventually I hope we will get 1080P(60) and theatres will convert to video projection and this 24P issue will go away. Ron Evans

March 22nd, 2005, 07:34 PM	#59
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	I thought that in theaters, film is projected at 48fps, each frame shown twice to reduce flicker.

March 22nd, 2005, 09:03 PM	#60
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	No, film is projected at 24fps. Each frame is shown 2 or 3 times (depending on how many blades are on the shutter) but only 24 frames go through the projector each second.