View Full Version : JVC Says that the split screen can be fixed


Pages : [1] 2

Panos Bournias
October 9th, 2005, 08:37 AM
Last week the Company that represents JVC in Jakarta, Alphateck, assured us that the split screen can be fixed with a softwear and some more adjustments. I will give my camera on the 15th of the month for fixing. Then I will come back with the results. Anyhow they fixed in less than an hour a dead pixel that I had in mine. The technician told me that he would need more than a couple of hours to fix the split screen and i didn't have the time that day. The cameras in Indonesia are 100 and 101E. But i do not think that this could make any difference.
Panos

Dave Perry
October 9th, 2005, 09:50 AM
Panos,

Welcome to the DVInfo Forums!

Please visit regularly and keep us informed about the split screen issue. I, for one, am very interested in this camera as are many others here who are considering what HD/HDV camera to commit to.

Panos Bournias
October 12th, 2005, 08:06 PM
Coming back with the news about the split screen. Our first camera has been repaired yesterday. We tested it throught full gain, low light, etc. and there is no trace of split screen any more. JVC Jakarta (Alphateck), assured us that with the new softwear that they use to repair the split screen, there will be no problem any more. Today we will adjust our second camera that has a very obvious split screen problem also.
So, guys... If the softwear arrived in Jakarta, I think that it is a matter of weeks until it arrives in the USA. Don't forget that we have the cam hear since last month, and the procedures went faster in this part of the world.
Panos

Stephen L. Noe
October 12th, 2005, 08:16 PM
Great news amigo. This is the first instance/news of an actual repair as opposed to a camera replacement. Same serial number? and can you post the firmware version if you get a minute?

once again it's good to hear a sucess.

Warren Shultz
October 13th, 2005, 12:22 AM
As of this week I'm still being told by the JVC northwest rep that in their last sales meeting they're being told no software fix is forthcoming and this split screen is "normal" phenomena. But hey, they're sales reps not engineers.

Panos Bournias
October 13th, 2005, 07:09 PM
Yesterday our second camera was repaired. This time i have been present, so, the guy downloaded a completely new software. It took 15 min until it was installed to the camera and then he went throught a detailed adjustment with the camera in all the modes, NTSC,PAL,24 HD etc. until he maneged to eliminate the split sceen. We tested the camera yesterday night and the split screen was really not there in the most extreme gain and low light conditions. He told us that JVC is preparing another software that will deal with other defects of the cam as well. With the split screen fixed we don't have anymore the double line that was present in some hard and shiny volumes (Like fruits, or metallic balls etc.). He said that both phenomena were interilated. Yesterday we had two cameras responding really well in low light and gain conditions so we are happy and ready to shoot in two days a great project in Sumatra and lake Toba. Thats all - For more details just post your questions and i will try to get the answers from JVC Jakarta. Actually the first countries to get the cam were Indonesia and Thailland. The first uogrades are happening hear as well. Panos Bournias

Robin Hemerik
October 14th, 2005, 11:23 AM
That's great to hear. Is that part of Asia NTSC or PAL?

Steve Mullen
October 14th, 2005, 02:58 PM
Flight leaving for LV. Head to www.gyhduser.com for full info on firmware. Sorry i DON'T HAVE TIME TO POST HERE.

Barry Green
October 14th, 2005, 05:08 PM
Here's a link to Steve's post:
http://www.gyhduser.com/showthread.php?t=273

Quick summary: firmware doesn't affect split-screen, so ongoing firmware development won't change it. And they're not planning on making any firmware updates that will affect it, nor will they be changing the CCD or DSP either.

So -- basically, they're saying that the hardware issues are not going to be changed, it is what it is.

Guy Barwood
October 14th, 2005, 06:56 PM
So if it is a hardware issue and JVC can't fix it in firmware, what magic hardware change did they do to Panos's camera in that 15min to fix the problem?

Sounds like it can be pretty much eliminated by a firmware revision and calibration by a decent technician.

I hope this is right, then I can finally get on with buying on of these suckers.

Panos, maybe you could ask your tech to detail what he did (in terms other JVC techs would understand) so others can contact their JVC service and ask for the same repairs, and those buying can specify that this must have been done on their camera before being supplied.

I heard another storey yesterday first hand of an Australian JVC rep telling a Pro Video reseller they aren't interested in fixing it, yet clearly they are fixing it in some cases. JVC is a pretty big company, I don't think the left hand knows what the right is doing sometimes.

Michael Maier
October 14th, 2005, 08:01 PM
Here's a link to Steve's post:
http://www.gyhduser.com/showthread.php?t=273

Quick summary: firmware doesn't affect split-screen, so ongoing firmware development won't change it. And they're not planning on making any firmware updates that will affect it, nor will they be changing the CCD or DSP either.


Barry, you left out some important information Steve gave in that post. To quote Steve:

"I was also happy to learn that JVC has a much simpler way to ELIMINATE SSE should it occur. It's not that my "rules" are wrong -- it's that they are more complex and restricting than they need to be. I'll share that information next week as well."

Please, deliver the whole information or nothing at all. The last thing we need here is half baked summaries which could generate more confusion.

Barry Green
October 14th, 2005, 08:35 PM
The confusion has been over whether they're repairing them, and what firmware version, etc. According to Steve's interview with JVC USA, no they are not going to repair anything, and there's nothing in firmware that they could repair anyway.

The part you point out is more "workaround rules". Not a fix. I was just trying to address the issue of "will it be FIXED or not", and according to what Steve posted there, no it will not. You will be expected to try to work around it.

I don't think that comes off as "half baked" at all. It is what it is. It will not be anything different than what it is. The challenge left to the shooter is whether they can work around it. Steve will be posting new guidelines; then shooters will have the info they need and will be able to make a fully-formed decision on whether they can accomodate the issue.

Chris Hurd
October 14th, 2005, 08:37 PM
Please, deliver the whole information or nothing at all.It's okay to paraphrase or summarize something that comes from another site, but posting "the whole information" is never allowed, as that's a copyright violation that I don't care to deal with. Giving the link as Barry did was the right thing to do.

Michael Maier
October 14th, 2005, 08:48 PM
The confusion has been over whether they're repairing them, and what firmware version, etc. According to Steve's interview with JVC USA, no they are not going to repair anything, and there's nothing in firmware that they could repair anyway.

That's the thing many seem to be missing out. You can only repair a defect. It's been said over and over that SSE is not a defect. It's a limitation of the design. So there can be only a work around. This is obvious!

I don't think that comes off as "half baked" at all. It is what it is. It will not be anything different than what it is.

The way you posted it, sounded like there's no more hope. But Steve said JVC has a way to ELIMINATE SSE. Couldn't you have added that bit?

Stephen L. Noe
October 14th, 2005, 08:52 PM
Let's wait for some news. The user from Jakarta actually saw their dealer support fix SSE somehow.

we'll see..

Michael Maier
October 14th, 2005, 08:53 PM
It's okay to paraphrase or summarize something that comes from another site, but posting "the whole information" is never allowed, as that's a copyright violation that I don't care to deal with. Giving the link as Barry did was the right thing to do.

I wasn't talking about posting the full article, but the complete information. If he had added that Steve mentioned JVC has a way to eliminate SSE, it wouldn't be any copyright violation. It would just reflect what Steve wrote, which is, firmware won't help, and hardware won't be changed, but there's a solution. But his post can be understood by people as, firmware won't help, hardware won't be changed, we are stuck.

Barry Green
October 14th, 2005, 09:08 PM
Michael, to each his own. I have spoken to JVC myself. They do not consider the split-screen a defect. They figure that every camera has compromises, and this is one that theirs has, and people can choose to work around it or not.

I thought that point had been adequately made. Perhaps in the dozens of times that Steve has posted his list.

But whether Steve considers SSE "not a defect," and whether JVC considers it "not a defect," is not necessarily the end of the issue, for many people. Many people here consider it a defect, and have held out hope that there will be some firmware or hardware fix that makes it go away once and for all.

That isn't going to happen.

They've been waiting for an official statement from JVC -- apparently Steve got one. And that's what the "news" is here. Not that there are yet more workaround rules, but that (as I say again): "it is what it is." Work with it or don't, but don't expect it to change because it's not going to.

Diogo Athouguia
October 14th, 2005, 09:58 PM
So, from what I understood... and I'm getting a bit confused here, SSE on PAL units can be better controled by latest firmware, so firmware updates can fix SSE. The split on NTSC units is not better controled by latest firmware, so firmware uptdates are useless.

PAL units can be fixed, NTSC units can't, is this correct? If this is a limitation and not a defect why some cameras have it and others don't?

Steve Muller's post is being interpreted in many different ways.

Panos Bournias
October 14th, 2005, 10:02 PM
So, coming back. JVC Japan send via e-mail the firmware to JVC Indonesia (Alphateck). The guy reistalled the new software to my camera. This took 15min. Then with a vectroscope and a monitor he went through all the modes of frame rate of the camera and through its color. After a few hours of work he managed to eliminate the split screen and the haze? phenomenon. At the same time he said that the color aberation would be improved. Yesterday we shot with the lense against a 1000W Fresnel light and the reflection looked better than before. It looked almost as in a 35mm lense. Before the fixing of the cam the direct reflections had this boiling feeling or they ended up us a laser spot in the image. I can tell you for sure that the split screen is gone, the haze is gone. JVC guys told us that a new firmware is also under development and as soon as they get it from JVC they will upgrade our cameras again. Another colegue of mine had his camera repaired yesterday. He called and said that he came back from a shooting and his footage was really optimized. My opinion is that in the USA you will have the same solution soon. It is impossible that JVC will stay in a limbo at its biggest market. I will not have the time to ask for technical details as tomorrow morning i will fly to Sumatra for a shooting project and for 2 weeks. As soon as i will get back i think that you will have your problem solved. Panos Bournias

Barry Green
October 14th, 2005, 11:06 PM
Steve Muller's post is being interpreted in many different ways.
Well, yes -- it's not just Steve's post, it's that what Steve was told seems to directly contradict what Panos is reporting.

So I guess the confusion will continue...

Huiy Tang
October 14th, 2005, 11:33 PM
If it takes a few hours to do the firmware upgrade, we can all expect to be shipping our cameras off again.
at least it's an improvement. I hope.

Stephen L. Noe
October 15th, 2005, 01:44 AM
Panos is reporting first hand (seems like) with a technician. I was told that a "proceedure" was being done on the camera's in QC. Maybe it's the same proceedure Panos' technician was performing. I do know (from JVC) that the HD-100's are selling by the pallet load.

Panos Bournias
October 15th, 2005, 07:06 AM
We had the same stress with the camera and we were really cautious when shooting, in order to avoid the split screen and the double lines around of some objects.. and even around human portraits sometimes!
The cameras are indeed fixed.
There is no split screen anymore, at least as far as we tested them and all the other obvious defects are noy there anymore.
The technician adjusted our cameras in NTSC and PAL modes, then in 24p mode, each color by the time so it took him around 3 hours to finish with the vectroscope. He was coming back in a monitor pointing the camera towards a white surface. I saw the split screen and how gradually it disapeared from the image. For its mode of the cam separately.
We have the HD101E, that is PAL, but there was an NTSC part and i saw it posted on the screen after he went into the extention of the menu, after NTSC, PAL, as expected, and all the other possible modes of the cam in DV and HDV.

The reality is that the cameras are really serviced and perform well without these serious defects, that have been a bad dream for us...
We are shooting HDV 30p by tomorrow. We will capture and edit in FCP. We will come back hear as soon as we finish. I will try to get a technical description from the JVC guys and post it hear in 2 weeks time. All the Best
- Panos Bournias

Greg Boston
October 15th, 2005, 10:37 AM
We had the same stress with the camera and we were really cautious when shooting, in order to avoid the split screen and the double lines around of some objects.. and even around human portraits sometimes!
The cameras are indeed fixed.
There is no split screen anymore, at least as far as we tested them and all the other obvious defects are noy there anymore.
The technician adjusted our cameras in NTSC and PAL modes, then in 24p mode, each color by the time so it took him around 3 hours to finish with the vectroscope. He was coming back in a monitor pointing the camera towards a white surface. I saw the split screen and how gradually it disapeared from the image. For its mode of the cam separately.
We have the HD101E, that is PAL, but there was an NTSC part and i saw it posted on the screen after he went into the extention of the menu, after NTSC, PAL, as expected, and all the other possible modes of the cam in DV and HDV.

The reality is that the cameras are really serviced and perform well without these serious defects, that have been a bad dream for us...
We are shooting HDV 30p by tomorrow. We will capture and edit in FCP. We will come back hear as soon as we finish. I will try to get a technical description from the JVC guys and post it hear in 2 weeks time. All the Best
- Panos Bournias

Let me throw my technician hat on for a moment and explain what's happening, given the description of the technician's actions that Panos described. The firmware updates are most likely adding more 'calibration points' than were originally available. This makes it possible for the technician to use the scope and monitor to calibrate both sides independently at more points in the response curve so that their outputs match up in all modes under all conditions. BTW, the high tech term for a calibration point is 'fudge factor'. :-)

This is how you overcome the inherent flaw or limitation of the original design. Had the same scenario with a new to market machine in our wafer fab a few years ago. The factory had to revise the software to allow for more calibration points in the magnet response curve so that what was actually happening at the physical level would jibe with what the front panel monitor displayed. Without those extra points, the machine couldn't accurately auto tune itself at various points in the AMU curve.

-gb-

Guy Barwood
October 15th, 2005, 10:48 AM
Here's the bite. It sounds like it could come down to how skilled and motivated your local JVC technician is when it come to 'eliminating' SSE from your camera if what Panos had done holds true for everyone.

3 hours is a lot of time to spend in service for every camera sold, I wonder how long these techs can stand doing these calibrations for? Will they get better with time or just get p*ssed off doing so many...

If this process is a successful one, do you think JVC will start properly calibrating every single unit as it comes off the factory floor? Or only for those who complain?

Would each firmware update require a complete recalibration? That would be nasty for Victor.

I think it is a bit of a joke though that JVC don't consider this a 'defect', even if it becomes a documented limitation, it certainly isn't a deliberate feature. Even Steve has mentioned he hopes they 'fix' it, which means even he sees it as a defect. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", must be broke then...

If Greg is on track with his analsys, then it is as good as any fix I hoped for(would be nice to be an automatic process but so be it). I really don't care how, just if.

Stephen L. Noe
October 15th, 2005, 11:04 AM
Here's the bite. It sounds like it could come down to how skilled and motivated your local JVC technician is when it come to 'eliminating' SSE from your camera if what Panos had done holds true for everyone.

Also consider, the more of them they fix, the faster they become at fixing them (and more skilled). They'll find some commonalities to the 'fixing' process, that's human nature.

Thomas Smet
October 15th, 2005, 11:14 AM
If this is mainly a calibration issue I don't see how every single camera that comes from the factory could be the same. Perhaps where JVC is coming from is true. The camera using 2 processors and that is that. I think what they do not realize is how bad off some of the camera are. The position they are taking is pretty ignorant considering there is a better way to calibrate the cameras. Usually for the stupidest little issues companies recall cameras to make sure they all work the same.

I do not think the HD100 is defective at all but they are just calibrated badly. The sad part about this is we ourselves cannot do it. If JVC continues to have this position of "hey it is what it is deal with it" I think it will be only a matter of time before somebody posts the info for the service menu so we can calibrate the cameras ourselves.

The funny thing about all of this is that these rapid firmware releases are not just falling down from the heavens into a few european techs hands. Not only must they be coming from JVC but they sure are pumping out a lot of them at one time for the camera being "fine". To say there is nothing wrong with the camera and pump out 5 firmware updates in a few weeks kind of makes no sense.

If this issue can be fixed this easily in a few weeks why wasn't JVC able to come up with this firmware before the camera came out? Were the engineers hoping we wouldn't notice and were too lazy to deal with it or could they really not tell. Or maybe it just goes back to the cameras coming out of the factory with different levels of calibration and nobody at JVC is going to test each camera for 3 hours to calibrate them.

This issue may have been easier for people to take in if it was a common issue with 1/3" HD cameras but as it stands the HD100 is curently the only camera with this issue.

Greg Boston
October 15th, 2005, 12:01 PM
If this is mainly a calibration issue I don't see how every single camera that comes from the factory could be the same. Perhaps where JVC is coming from is true. The camera using 2 processors and that is that. I think what they do not realize is how bad off some of the camera are. The position they are taking is pretty ignorant considering there is a better way to calibrate the cameras. Usually for the stupidest little issues companies recall cameras to make sure they all work the same.

I do not think the HD100 is defective at all but they are just calibrated badly. The sad part about this is we ourselves cannot do it. If JVC continues to have this position of "hey it is what it is deal with it" I think it will be only a matter of time before somebody posts the info for the service menu so we can calibrate the cameras ourselves.

The funny thing about all of this is that these rapid firmware releases are not just falling down from the heavens into a few european techs hands. Not only must they be coming from JVC but they sure are pumping out a lot of them at one time for the camera being "fine". To say there is nothing wrong with the camera and pump out 5 firmware updates in a few weeks kind of makes no sense.

If this issue can be fixed this easily in a few weeks why wasn't JVC able to come up with this firmware before the camera came out? Were the engineers hoping we wouldn't notice and were too lazy to deal with it or could they really not tell. Or maybe it just goes back to the cameras coming out of the factory with different levels of calibration and nobody at JVC is going to test each camera for 3 hours to calibrate them.

This issue may have been easier for people to take in if it was a common issue with 1/3" HD cameras but as it stands the HD100 is curently the only camera with this issue.


Thomas,

Any complex piece of equipment, be it a video camera, or a multi-million dollar ion implanter (the machine I referenced in my earlier post), can have unforeseen issues after getting into real world use. The cameras were probably calibrated at the factory with the available points they had to work with. They have figured out that the original number wasn't enough and have added more to keep both sides matched up in their output. There's a trade-off usually made where just enough points are used and the space between is interpolated, vs. needing more actual reference points and less space between for interpolation. The latter making it more time consuming to set up (3 hours in Panos' description). Also, you have to have non-volatile memory to store that in so it becomes a matter of how much available memory space do you want to devote to holding calibration curve points.

But it looks promising and I think JVC is probably already calibrating at the factory with the newer firmware and probably getting better results out the door than with the first cameras shipped. Time will tell.

Guy mentioned it would be nice if were an automated process and that got me to thinking. Remember the advice to do a manual white balance? That's sort of an automated process using the current lighting and camera set-up which helps to remove SSE for that scenario only. It gives the two sides a single common point in their response curve. The problem is, if you swing the camera and change the light enough, the two sides will become different again because their response curves aren't matched. And that's where I think the new firmware is helping the techs get the camera to behave by having more points to cal the response curve with, thus keeping both sides producing an identical OUTPUT under changing conditions.

Just my humble opinion based on years of dealing with this type of thing under different circumstances.

-gb-

Steve Mullen
October 15th, 2005, 01:18 PM
Greg, I think your experience with complex equipment is helping you "grok" SSE very well.

There is no one "cause" and no single "fix." There are 9 microprocessor controlling the HD100. Each has it's own firmware. Any one of these firmware loads could affect something that in turns effects something else which in turn effects SSE. (By the way, it is other issues we are totally unaware of that is generating these firmware updates.)

It is an assumption that JVC has been working on SSE "fix" firmware. It may be the calibration process that has been getting the attention.

As anyone who has calibrated anything wil tell you -- time is critical and time is money. It's entirely possible the latest SSE firmware (which the USA got and which Europe is installing) did nothing more than make calibration easier and faster and more realiable!

THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT TALKING ABOUT FIRMWARE IS FUTILE. By now almost every HD100 has the latest "SSE Firmware" and has been adjusted and inspected.

That does not mean firmware that, for example, made AWB more accurate in low light might not help the shooter avoid SSE. It does not mean that a 3 hour calibration won't make ANY production-line camera look better.

You are all free to debate forever. I review production equipment. I'm able to proceed with my review without worrying about V1.172345J. It doesn't exist. (Although, I know all products have on going firmware updates.)

Perhaps more importantly, JVC is willing to have the HD100 reviewed as it has come from the factory.

Steve Mullen
October 15th, 2005, 01:34 PM
I wasn't talking about posting the full article, but the complete information. If he had added that Steve mentioned JVC has a way to eliminate SSE, it wouldn't be any copyright violation. It would just reflect what Steve wrote, which is, firmware won't help, and hardware won't be changed, but there's a solution. But his post can be understood by people as, firmware won't help, hardware won't be changed, we are stuck.

I'm glad Berry did NOT quote all of it because the word "eliminated" was a poor word choice. What I mean, is that under some conditions, when you see SSE, a very tiny exposure adjustment up or down will cause SSE to "dissappear." Someone, in fact posted they could make it come and go by slightly rocking the iris. They were right!

Also, my rules do work, but not for all the reasons I thought. But, I'm working on simpler rules. These will not eliminate SSE, yet they may help "prevent" SSE.

Think of SSE as Vertical Smear. Smear is a characteristic of IT CCDs. CCDs can be made exhibit less. But, it can still happen. CMOS, on the other hand, does not have Smear.

So if you buy a CCD camera you need to learn to CONTROL smear. You'll need to learn to control SSE if you buy an HD100. We are not stuck -- but there is no magic bullet coming that will make us totally free of the need to control SSE.

It sure is nice to get out of the rain!

Jiri Bakala
October 15th, 2005, 01:59 PM
You'll need to learn to control SSE if you buy an HD100. We are not stuck -- but there is no magic bullet coming that will make us totally free of the need to control SSE.
The difference is to "control" SSE in a camera that is out of adjustment and to "keep an eye" on it, just in case, with a camera that has the latest firmware and has been calibrated well.

I think that what JVC has done to date in terms of improvements of the firmware and QC, based on what we are hearing from owners in Europe and Australia, is a direct response to our "whining" and complaining. Had we all accepted the camera the way the first units were delivered and had we "learned" to live with it and work by the "new" rules, I doubt JVC would have been as responsive as they were. That's not to say that it's all done and they can stop trying to make it better. But the progress has been encouraging...:-)

Steve Mullen
October 15th, 2005, 07:38 PM
I think that what JVC has done to date in terms of improvements of the firmware and QC, based on what we are hearing from owners in Europe and Australia, is a direct response to our "whining" and complaining. Had we all accepted the camera the way the first units were delivered and had we "learned" to live with it and work by the "new" rules, I doubt JVC would have been as responsive as they were.

If you like to feel you made a difference --feel free to indulge.

But, the plans to update PAL unit firmware and the USA decision to delay until the firmware was ready -- were made long before any units were shipped to anyone. Sometime in June -- I suspect.

Now, maybe the PAL users complaints have made their country managers more aware of how demanding HD customers can be and so will help you in the future.

But, from what I hear -- the Europe managers had no interest in HD because there's no HD of any magnitude in their countries. Which is true! One HD station!?! They simply wanted a 24p DV camcorder to offer something against Canon and Panasonic. That's the reason they refused to import the first generation JVC HDV camcorder. No HDTV stations. No HDTV sets. And, no real movement to HD by consumers.

Guy Barwood
October 15th, 2005, 09:40 PM
"That's the reason they refused to import the first generation JVC HDV camcorder. No HDTV stations. No HDTV sets. And, no real movement to HD by consumers."

I think you are ignoring the biggest reason of them all, and the same reason that even though you could, in the end, by these cameras in Australia basically no one ever did.

They are 30p only. No matter what you might think, if the HD100 only had 30p, it would be selling as well in Europe and Australia (and other PAL nations) as the previous models (almost zero). Just think about how well it would sell in the US with only 25p (but for some reason 25p was as bad at shooting for 24p as 30p is). Even with 24p and 30p it would be hard pressed to come anywhere near what it will see like in these countries with 25p as well.

Steve Mullen
October 16th, 2005, 12:04 AM
"They are 30p only.

Obviously, our cameras ran at 480p60. Had they been imported into Europe, the 720p30 would have become 25p.

Guy Barwood
October 16th, 2005, 12:17 AM
Nope, they were imported into Australia (we are as 25p as Europe), but remained a 30p unit only. JVC tried to promote them at least a little but I don't know anyone who bought one, why would you, no one wants 30p in PAL based lands. They would have needed a new model with 25p for Europe, but JVC clearly were never willing to make one.

The point is these cameras never stood a chance in Europe as they were only 30p, not because they were HD.

Barry Green
October 16th, 2005, 12:43 AM
Well that's odd... JVC introduced the GR-PD1 in Europe, which was the same as the HD1 except it didn't have the high-def mode at all; instead it offered the "SD" mode of 576/50p.

Are you saying that in Australia they didn't offer the PD1, but instead offered the NTSC HD1? Was it PAL-compatible at all?

Guy Barwood
October 16th, 2005, 01:37 AM
I never saw the PD1 advertised but that doesn't mean it wasn't or isn't avaliable. Although it may be based on the 10U it is a totally different camera not having any HD so it isn't relevant, it is a SD single chip camera, its only advantage is 50p which isn't a huge drawcard in a single chiper. As a HD camera with 25p I probably would have got one some time ago.

I doubt the European HD market has changed much lately from what I have heard, yet there seems a pretty big market for the HD100E/101E. Same would have applied to a 25p enabled 10U, though the single chip nature would have scared many off.

We don't exactly have a big HD market here yet either. All pay TV is SD and having only just gone digital SD at that, HD's light at the end of the tunnel hasn't even been installed. HD free to air exists here however the tuners are still very expensive and few people have them (most are happy with SD for general TV given the cost of tuners). HDTV PVRs are 2-3 times the cost again. From all accounts though the HD101E is selling very well here. Just shows that the uptake of HDTV has little to do with the demand for HD enabled cameras.

Just my thoughts, nothing gospel about it.

Steve Connor
October 16th, 2005, 07:35 AM
I doubt the European HD market has changed much lately from what I have heard, yet there seems a pretty big market for the HD100E/101E. Same would have applied to a 25p enabled 10U, though the single chip nature would have scared many off.



We get a launch of HD on the Sky platform here in the UK early next year, that should stir things up a bit, they will be using both 720 and 1080. Most producres I know here in the UK are now starting to look at HD although the actual use of it is still limited.

John Mitchell
October 16th, 2005, 10:00 AM
Maybe what Steve Mullen is saying and the guy from Jakarta (and myself for that matter) are saying is not directly at odds with each other.

Consider this (and remember I've been speaking directly to a JVC technician) -when the wrong version of firmware was accidentally applied, it resulted in a camera that actually exhibited a black line up the centre of the screen. I know it is far from being definitive but that black line up the centre of the screen is apparently an extreme case of split screen. This camera could not be re-aligned with the incorrect firmware.

This seems to imply that-
a:the firmware is definitely implicated in split screen and being revised to try and deal with it.
b:hardware or baseboard changes have been made since the first cameras which rule out something as simple as a firmware upgrade for those units. and
c:JVC ARE working on eliminating split screen by revising the hardware/baseboard.

The same technician told me that there IS an automated calibration (yes automated) performed at the factory; but that for some reason it is failing on a lot of units. He can MANUALLY re-align them and minimise/eliminate split screen (see separate report from Jakarta) but he doesn't have the time, so they are actually rejecting units. He has also told me from day 1 that the firmware definitely played a vital role in balancing the two halves of the CCD and was being worked on to reduce split screen in the camera, and he reaffirmed that only last Friday when I queried him about the conflicting reports I was seeing on this forum. So according to him the firmware HAS been revised as a direct result of split screen - sure other issues have been tackled - wouldn't make sense to bring out new firmware and not look at the whole camera.

From the above you could choose to believe that maybe there is truth in what Steve and I are both saying. Maybe JVC USA told Steve that a firmware upgrade will not fix the units in the field because that was true .. up to a point (read firmware version). Many units would need both hardware and firmware revisions to apply a fix - those units might actually be considered "faulty". Maybe JVC USA don't want to expose themselves to a whole can of worms...

Stephen L. Noe
October 16th, 2005, 10:19 AM
...the firmware HAS been revised as a direct result of split screen ...
How could the firmware NOT have an effect? There are alot of sweeping statements made lately...

Greg Boston
October 16th, 2005, 10:36 AM
How could the firmware NOT have an effect? There are alot of sweeping statements made lately...

It does. Even if nothing more than having a newer service menu with additional functionality for the techs to make use of. Also, as John mentioned, there have likely been pc board revisions perhaps that specify the use of a different component or vendor for such component.

-gb-

Steve Mullen
October 16th, 2005, 11:22 PM
This seems to imply that-
a:the firmware is definitely implicated in split screen and being revised to try and deal with it.
b:hardware or baseboard changes have been made since the first cameras which rule out something as simple as a firmware upgrade for those units. and
c:JVC ARE working on eliminating split screen by revising the hardware/baseboard.


I'm still not sure why anyone needs to deal with "imply" when JVC has made it very clear that those units that have "Inspected by JVC USA" stickers have the latest of everything. Whatever SSE these units might have they are not "defective." (Which does not mean that an occasional unit might be defective and need to be replaced for all sorts of reasons.

In the PAL countries, the ONLY fix being offered is to upgrade to the firmware that the USA waited for. There are no hardware fixes. After this firmware is installed, whatever SSE they might have, they are not "defective." (Which does not mean that an occasional unit might be defective and need to be replaced for all sorts of reasons.

It is likely that as part of the PAL firmware install, the units are being calibrated. That's because the primary, if not the ONLY thing this firmware does, is speed and improve calibration.

Since the path is clear for PAL owners on what they should -- contact their dealer, and NTSC owners need do nothing -- why are folks still even talking about firmware?

There is no future "SSE FIX" firmware coming because firmware can't decrease SSE any more than the latest firmware already does.

Why are they talking about board revisions? Such talk might apply to "pre-production" units, but the only folks who have these know who they are and will get production units. Unless you are a VIP -- you didn't get one.

There is no future "SSE FIX" hardware coming either.

Guy Barwood
October 17th, 2005, 03:43 AM
"There is no future "SSE FIX" hardware coming either."

While I am sure you believe what you have been told, but it would be very interesting to see the inside components of a first release model and a model released in 6 months. I wouldn't be suprised if there were slight modifications made, quite possible some changes made to reduce SSE as much as possible (maybe just some higher tolerance components). This is normal course for such products anyway isn't it?

Greg Boston
October 17th, 2005, 06:34 AM
Why are they talking about board revisions? Such talk might apply to "pre-production" units

Steve, that is simply not how the manufacturing chain operates. There will likely be board revisions for many reasons. Sometimes it's because the original component layout isn't optimal for the automated insertion process or wave soldering process. Sometimes a different component is needed. Sometimes more components are needed. Often times these updates occur without fanfare or ever having been the result of customer complaints. Sometimes it makes a good product even better. Oh trust me, there will be revisions to production units during the manufacturing life cycle, but they will be transparent to you and I, the end user. But in the end, you have to allow for the possibility that the design will be updated to help reduce or eliminate this SSE issue without fanfare or public acknowledgement of any kind.

-gb-

Chris Hurd
October 17th, 2005, 08:50 AM
Often times these updates occur without fanfare or ever having been the result of customer complaints.Otherwise known as "the silent fix." All camera manufacturers do this.

Jiri Bakala
October 17th, 2005, 02:48 PM
I will indulge here and share with you what I was told by a JVC dealer here in Canada:

The dealer(s) are not selling the cameras as well as expected because too many people are waiting to see how the whole situation gets resolved (many of those are on this board). The dealer(s) are also not ordering the cameras because of concerns that if there is at some point an upgrade/new version/etc., they would get stuck with 'old inventory'. As a result, the dealer(s) are putting pressure on JVC and there are (allegedly) discussions about the need for some kind of official response.

I bet JVC is working on improvements/fix for the problem. There is just too much noise about it and at this point they are already feeling the heat from not selling as much as they hoped. There you have it.

Disclaimer: All conclusions are mine and mine only and, hey, I might be indulging in a serious case of wishful thinking.

Huiy Tang
October 17th, 2005, 04:25 PM
Jiri-I'm glad that someone is in the same boat as me. As a fellow Canadian I have never gotten straight answers from JVC Canada. In-fact I was told the the split screen in my camera was an isolated incident. I was hoping to like the camera so much that I recommended it to the dean of the college I work at to allow our faculty to order 11 units for student learning. Looks like another semester with those darn reliable sony dsr 250's. Anyhow once the split screen became an issue, and I became sure that JVC was not being completely honest about the severity of the issue, I cancelled the order. This still left me with an HD100 that was nothing more than a paper weight as far as I was concerned. After some serious complaining and several cameras later (each with the SSE problem, all with the JVC Quality Inspected sticker) my dealer refunded my money and apologized for the inconvenience. I'm glad that your dealer and others are leaning on JVC to rectify the issue. My dealer is still relatively in denial and has wrote the units off as nothing more than coincidence and bad luck. They've also been convinced by JVC canada that anyone who posts on the forums is a Sony Rep. and should not be trusted. Insecurities aside, they have however become puzzled and are wondering why JVC wouldn't give them a heads up of any sort given that cameras are being returned, and orders being cancelled. Perhaps my dealer isn't ready to get their head out of the sand. It's nice to know that JVC is biting the hand that feeds them by keeping even the dealers in the dark. Anyhow, I am not a sony rep and will purchase an HD100 once the appropriate hardware upgrades are completed to correct the defect. Yes, I called it a defect. It is indeed a defect. Sticker or no sticker. The whole lot of them in Canada are infected-so buyer beware. It is a flaw that is a blatant imperfection in the picture quality. I must have been defective to believe JVC would release a camera without such a substantial problem. I may just defect back over to Canon or Sony if they don't deal with this appropriately ro ina reasonable amount of time.

Jiri Bakala
October 17th, 2005, 07:41 PM
As a fellow Canadian ...
Huiy, would you like to contact me off the list to compare stories, etc.?
info@ascentfilms.com

Tommy James
October 17th, 2005, 07:43 PM
Well to be honest with you if I were a student and all you had to offer were shoulder mounted standard definition camcorders I would not even bother to take the class. Even if I thought the JVC high definition camera was a paperweight it is still better than nothing to be able to learn the craft of shooting in high definition with a real shoulder mounted high definition camcorder at an affordable price point. With high definition training on your resume you can have a shot at a job operating a high end camcorder like the Panasonic Varicam, JVC HD7000, or a Sony Alta Cine.

Jiri Bakala
October 17th, 2005, 08:00 PM
Well to be honest with you if I were a student and all you had to offer were shoulder mounted standard definition camcorders I would not even bother to take the class.
Tommy, I am sorry but I disagree. The students that Huiy talks about are presumably learning the craft of camera operating, lighting and general production. There is so much to learn before they can even tell the difference between SD and HD. HD is a big buzzword but the reality is (and I have taught at a college myself) that most students need to start by learning how to put a camera on a tripod and why and how they should use lights. Most cameramen who get the HD jobs have been working in the industry for years and have many years of Betacam, etc. under their belt before they get hired to shoot HD. I am very doubtful that a line on their resume referring to an HD training at some college would give them much advantage. Not up here in Canada, anyway...:-)