XL-H1 Overcrank clip!
 

Ok folks,

I've been trying an experimental procedure to get the equivalent of 60p overcrank slow motion from the XL-H1.

Before I go into the details, please let me apologize for the underexposed clip. It was almost sundown and I just rolled off some footage in the backyard of my sister's house with the kid's jumping around on a trampoline, and I forgot to adjust the brightness of the EVF, so it's a little wonky...color settings were a little off too...but oh well.

Workflow:

--Shot SDI straight to DVCPRO HD 1080i into the Kona card
--brought clip into Compressor and converted to DVCPRO HD 720/60p
--Brought 60p clip into Cinema Tools and conformed to 720/24p
--converted clip in Compressor to 720/24p h.264 @10 mbs

That's it.

Please tell me what you think of the motion rendition

www.homepage.mac.com/mrbarlowelton

that looks great on my powerbook. i'll load it on my workstation and look at it on a bigger monitor tomorrow.

but i have to tell you, it looks really smooth and clean. i'll be starting a Barlow Book with all the cool stuff you're discovering and sharing.

vince

Thanks, Vince.

I'll post a few more from better material in the future. Just thought it had some geek value.

Edit: forgot to say, there's a 1080i of the original FCP clip. It's DVCPRO HD so sorry to anyone who can't open it.

Sincerely? If it's possible this overcrank from 60i, I don't know why so talk about HVX200 or Varicam...

Frankly to me, the quality image, noiseless, etc or the resolution is quite more important than any toy, specially if it's possible to get it at post.

On the other hand, with this effect all the footage will go similar. So popular at the Hollywood stuff! Formulas used by one industry not art! Blackmail to the spectator...any good film critic knows it!... And if the creative filmmakers are thinking that the art is a trick that it's possible to copy ad nauseam, they are completely wrong.

IMHO this is just marketing and brands like Panasonic know how to sell their products.

And you, with this sample, you put the HVX200 point down. Comparatively with Canon's XL-H1, where are the differences? And you have been to prove it.

BTW, how is it possible to open the backyard file? I'm at PC side. Thank you.

EDIT: I already saw your warning. Thank you for the care. Again for the tests and posts.

I'll post the 60p of it in h.264 later on

Thanks for posting this! Looks great. I'd been wanting to see exactly this scenario. Well, not the kids or trampoline part, but the simulated overcranking from 60i for sure.

Did you happen to try the same thing using the HDV 1080i footage to compare how much better the SDI capture straight to DVCPRO HD is?

As a matter of fact...yes. The HDV is not much different...perhaps sharper.
I even converted the HDV to DV100, and did all this stuff, and the result was almost identical.

There's a 60p DV100 of the same clip, and a h.264 60p also, for comparison.

www.homepage.mac.com/mrbarlowelton

Well, I think the advantage of the HVX and Varicam is you don't have to put up with render times in Compressor to get to these results. It just goes to show there's A LOT of temporal resolution available from 1080i. Lots of flexibility to downconvert to 720p format with good results.

I would agree. All that matters is the output.

I've often thought the slow motion features of the HVX might create a bit of a cliche' look. But who doesn't want options?


They sure do...but they have some great products. My point was to show there's always more than one way to skin a cat.

Lots of differences, but we've all been through this before. I only wanted to show that the H1 downsamples to 720p quite nicely, with temporal flexibility to boot!

Lookin good! And not even using Twixtor or Shake. Very impressive. Nice crisp image too.

As I said: where are the differences? Of course, there are lots of...exactly but not as some are saying.

You did it!

Wow that looked really smooth and clear! I guess the only advantage of an hvx is render time then.

I am not surprised by the results of this method. I have actually done this with SD footage in the past. What I am surprised about however is the amount of detail that is still in the image after pulling the fields into their own frames. In theory a 1080i field should only have about 405 lines of detail after filtering but this looks much higher.

Were the missing lines duplicated or interpolated?

Interpolated, I think. Basically, under frame controls in the inspector, I checked on every temporal filtering quality option to "best". Compressor does some pretty slick math...a poster on another forum said he thought the program borrowed some stuff from Shake because Ben Waggoner (compression guru) said Compressor did a nearly flawless conversion of 1080i to 720 60p. So far, that would seem to be a fair claim.

Major Differences:

HVX

--HVX does the math for you. You can simulate over and undercrank with various post methods, but the HVX will give you instant gratification.
--Wider lens
--form factor
--P2

H1

--Higher resolution. The H1 delivers a very sharp image in 720p. Possibly sharper than the Panny.
--interchangeable lens
--SDI!!
--cheap tape and good hd
--great telephoto and OIS
--form factor (shoulder stabilized)
--less noise (IMHO, of course, but there are noise reduction options w/H1 too...although I\'ve found them to be mostly unnecessary.

Does that help? I\'m not bashing the HVX at all. I think it\'s an incredible camera and would love to own one too.

I think it all comes down to what your priorities are in image quality, and how much time and effort you\'re willing to put in to get good results from either product.

Major differences at my point of view, codecs away:

HVX200

color + filmic dynamic range + wide latitude + native progressive scan = better film-like look

XL-H1

native higher resolution + superior lowlight & noise handling = better run and gun