Steven Soderbergh uses PAL or NTSC version of XL1S for his new film? at DVinfo.net

Steve Kim · January 8th, 2002, 04:59 PM

I read that Steven Soderbergh makes his new film, "Full Frontal"
with XL1S with a AF Lens.

Do you know whether he uses PAL or NTSC version of XL1S?

I am interested in this fact because I am considering buy a
PAL version of XL1S.
I prefer PAL because it has more lines (625) than NTSC (525 lines)
and 25 fps vs. 30 fps.

My problem is I live in USA where NTSC is standard.

Do you think using PAL version in US is too much trouble and is not much noticeable gain in the picture quality?

If I want to submit PAL images to US broadcasting system,
I need to convert it to NTSC.

Do I lose a lot in terms of picture quality on the conversion process?

I don't think I use it for movies in the near future.

I need your opinion.

For the posting about Steven Soderbergh 's new film,

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?threadid=271&highlight=Soderbergh

Justin Walter · January 9th, 2002, 03:46 AM

I live in the US and I just bought the Pal version of the Canon XL1 in November. Although I've only made 7 shorts so far, there does seem to be some problems converting to NTSC. The interlace tends to show up annoyingly on movement. This problem seems to be avoided by simply shooting in Frame Movie Mode. I haven't had the time to really figure out a good method for avoiding the pitfalls. If I had it to do again I probably would still purchase the Pal version, just for the fact that I feel like I've got a better camera than anyone else around me.

Steve Kim · January 9th, 2002, 07:27 AM

Do you have any specific purpose of your PAL version such as movie shooting?

Do you view your shooting in PAL monitor?

Can you see the image is noticebly better than NTSC?

How did you convert PAL image to NTSC?

Did you see any degradation of image quaility on your
NTSC converted image comparing to the original PAL image.

I am really interested in having PAL one.

Justin Walter · January 10th, 2002, 01:55 AM

1) Q:Do you have any specific purpose of your PAL version such as movie shooting?
A: not really... I'm going to produce a DVD, I read up about it and there appeared to be many advantages to shooting in PAL not the least of which was image quality. There is always the posibilty that I might run into money and want to get the stuff transfered to film. I'm told many NTSC television programs shoot 24 frames progressive to get get that elusive film quality.

2)Q: Do you view your shooting in PAL monitor?
A: I haven't bought the monitor yet but I plan to in the next couple of months. Most professional monitors have a NTSC and Pal switch so you can view both on the same monitor.

3)Q: Can you see the image is noticebly better than NTSC?
A: I've yet to compare it to an image that was shot with a comparable NTSC camera. Before I bought this I was using a dinky NTSC Hi 8 and this is so much better than that it is ridiculous.

4)Q:How did you convert PAL image to NTSC?
A: I haven't really found a completely satisfactory method of doing this yet (I haven't looked very hard yet), since I've only had the camera for a couple of months. Basically, I just pump some PAL into my Computer through Firewire... and then using Primere export it to NTSC.

5)Q: Did you see any degradation of image quaility on your NTSC converted image comparing to the original PAL image.
A: like I said before the only problem appears to be the interlace thing... which looks like it can be avoided by shooting in frame movie mode

I'm sorry I'm not more help, but like I said I just bought the thing. I figure it will take about 6 months before I have the detailed info you seek.

Steve Kim · January 10th, 2002, 09:25 AM

I appreciate your detailed answers.
I am going to buy PAL one.
Do you know any good dealer?
I wish it comes with 1year US warrenty.

One question about viewing PAL images in Premire:
Are PAL images displayed with 625 lines of resolution
(which is the PAL's standard resolution) when you view them in Premire?

Rob Lohman · January 10th, 2002, 10:18 AM

Bout the resolution, that depends on your settings in
Premiere and the size of your monitor window there
(which you can rescale)... But the images in your DV
stream and your output (if you don't re-scale/-sample
them) is 720 x 576 indeed (some under/overscan is
in that signal).

I believe one of chris' sponsers offers a XL1S PAL
version (www.zgc.com I believe), since they import
them I assume they also give you the standard
one year warranty. If you want to know contact
them.

Hope this helps some

January 11th, 2002, 01:41 PM

yes, i would definitely go for the pal version, the res is higher, and if you wanted to do a blowup to 35mm film it is possible. NTSC = impossible, or at least much more difficult. From what i hear, 'full frontal' is in PAL.

greg

Steve Nunez · January 11th, 2002, 06:52 PM

who is Steven Soderbergh and why is it important what he is using and shoots with.....(he must have done something awesome in DV)???

(not trying to be a smart-aleck...just have no clue who he is)

Steve Nunez · January 11th, 2002, 06:54 PM

disregard last question- found out who he is and what he's done.

katelins · January 14th, 2002, 12:30 PM

According to www.digitalfilmgroup.net it is no longer a requirement to shoot in PAL and that an NTSC shoot could even provide similar quality: http://www.moviemaker.com/issues/44/dv.htm

However, I too am about to purchase a Canon XL1s and would like some help on which format I should go for. I will be shooting shorts primarily for the web but would love to be able to transfer to film and know I am getting better quality. Is there any problems I should know about when it comes to working with PAL footage on the computer? I understand I would have to deinterlace PAL footage unless I use the progressive mode of the Canon, right? Is there any issues working with PAL footage on a Canopus DVStorm SE Plus? The shorts are going to be streamed from a Windows Media cluster.

Can anyone tell me what if any changes there are to the warranty if I purchase a PAL XL1s and whether or not I will have trouble servicing, fixing, or buying parts for a PAL camcorder here where I live in the US? Or can they all be sent to Canon at some point?

Are the accessories offered by Canon and other third parties also determined by format, or can I interchange say between a PAL and NTSC XL1s?

So far from my planned usage, the PAL is the way to go but I wouldn't mind burning the films on DVD and in this regard I know I will definitely run into some problems..

Is this an indication of things to come? I went to the Canon Europe site inorder to download the instruction manual for the PAL version (since the .pdf file I obtained from Canon USA was actually marked with NTSC in the name so I wondered if there was a PAL version too) but the site is horribly timing out. I know I can probably find it elsewhere on the net, but for those of you who own a PAL XL1s and live in the states, do you regret it for any reason?

I have posted so many questions here, it would be amazing if they were all answered, so I'd better stop and just say thanks so much. This is a terrific site!

Okay, one more question: did anyone verify with certainty that Steven Soderbergh did indeed use a PAL version XL1s? Is there a link that states this from some other site perhaps? Thanks again!

Chris Hurd · January 14th, 2002, 12:37 PM

Howdy from Texas,

With the exception of the electronic viewfinder (I think), all other Canon parts are interchangeable between PAL and NTSC versions of the XL1 and XL1S, including lenses.

PAL cameras purchased from dealers in the United States who are authorized to sell Canon PAL, such as my sponsor ZGC, include the standard 1-year Canon warranty. Not so for cameras purchased elsewhere and brought into the U.S.

Soderbergh did indeed shoot in PAL. Details of his production are forthcoming in my next XL1 Watchdog update. Stay tuned,

Steve Kim · January 14th, 2002, 12:53 PM

I like PAL and am going buy one.
Editing software handle both PAL and NTSC.

You can capture it to editor and view from there, but not as same video quality.

I would buy a professional multi-format(NTSC/PAL) monitor.
JVC 13" is less than $500.
You can see more detail and color in PAL which is much newer
video format than NTSC.

Unless you have to submit your work in NTSC, go for PAL.
Canopus offers DV Format converter (PAL<-->NTSC), but it works
for Canopus product and downgrades video quality somewhat.
Unless I don't care about the quality of the converted image and really need to convert it, I would not do that.

As far as I know EVF and XL1S body are specific to either PAL, or
NTSC. Other part are exchangeable.

I would be very careful to buy any graymarket thing with a short
term warrenty like 90 days.

I would buy one from zgc.com

katelins · January 14th, 2002, 01:28 PM

Hello again all, thanks for your help. I'm excited enough now, knowing that I'm closer to narrowing in on my research and will be able to test out on my own what I like/dislike about the XL1s soon. I'm still undecided between NTSC/PAL primarily because its difficult for me to account how often I will be required to burn to DVD and show any of my shorts on an American television set but aside from this detail it looks like PAL would be best for web and transfer to film. I'm especially anxious to see your report Chris, on Soderbergh's results. I wonder if he shot in interlaced mode as opposed to the progressive mode, since this is what I'm seeing recommended now by tape to film transfer houses (or at least the number I visited on the net). Thanks again for your help, I'll keep you all posted on the end decision.

katelins · January 21st, 2002, 02:00 AM

Hello, sorry to resurrect this thread again. How's the article coming along Chris? I've been checking out a few magazine articles here and there on DV productions, but they always seem to lack the right amount of detail. Some will mention the XL1s used as the camera, but then that's it. I haven't seen anything period for the Soderbergh film, so any info would be great I'm sure.

Ron Pfister · January 23rd, 2002, 10:04 AM

Dear all:

I just wanted to add my experience using footage from my PAL XL-1s for an NTSC DVD project...

I edited all the footage in FCP, the exported it in DV stream format. I then used Cleaner (see <http://www.discreet.com> for more information) to transcode the final edit from PAL to NTSC. It does a pretty awesome job, particularly if you use de-interlace filters during the transcoding. By comparison, transcoding in QuickTime Pro - while available - is absolutely lousy ...lots of interlace artefacts during pans!

Hope this helps!

Regards,

Ron

Add-on: I did NOT shoot in Frame Movie Mode, and transcoding worked fine with Cleaner!

January 8th, 2002, 04:59 PM	#1
Steve Kim Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: McLean, VA Posts: 47	PAL or NTSC version of XL1S? I read that Steven Soderbergh makes his new film, "Full Frontal" with XL1S with a AF Lens. Do you know whether he uses PAL or NTSC version of XL1S? I am interested in this fact because I am considering buy a PAL version of XL1S. I prefer PAL because it has more lines (625) than NTSC (525 lines) and 25 fps vs. 30 fps. My problem is I live in USA where NTSC is standard. Do you think using PAL version in US is too much trouble and is not much noticeable gain in the picture quality? If I want to submit PAL images to US broadcasting system, I need to convert it to NTSC. Do I lose a lot in terms of picture quality on the conversion process? I don't think I use it for movies in the near future. I need your opinion. For the posting about Steven Soderbergh 's new film, http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?threadid=271&highlight=Soderbergh Last edited by Steve Kim; January 8th, 2002 at 06:06 PM.

January 9th, 2002, 07:27 AM	#3
Steve Kim Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: McLean, VA Posts: 47	Where did you buy it? Do you have any specific purpose of your PAL version such as movie shooting? Do you view your shooting in PAL monitor? Can you see the image is noticebly better than NTSC? How did you convert PAL image to NTSC? Did you see any degradation of image quaility on your NTSC converted image comparing to the original PAL image. I am really interested in having PAL one.

January 10th, 2002, 09:25 AM	#5
Steve Kim Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: McLean, VA Posts: 47	Where can I buy PAL one? I appreciate your detailed answers. I am going to buy PAL one. Do you know any good dealer? I wish it comes with 1year US warrenty. One question about viewing PAL images in Premire: Are PAL images displayed with 625 lines of resolution (which is the PAL's standard resolution) when you view them in Premire?

January 10th, 2002, 10:18 AM	#6
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	Bout the resolution, that depends on your settings in Premiere and the size of your monitor window there (which you can rescale)... But the images in your DV stream and your output (if you don't re-scale/-sample them) is 720 x 576 indeed (some under/overscan is in that signal). I believe one of chris' sponsers offers a XL1S PAL version (www.zgc.com I believe), since they import them I assume they also give you the standard one year warranty. If you want to know contact them. Hope this helps some __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

January 11th, 2002, 01:41 PM	#7
bobbyxl1 Posts: n/a	pal xl1 yes, i would definitely go for the pal version, the res is higher, and if you wanted to do a blowup to 35mm film it is possible. NTSC = impossible, or at least much more difficult. From what i hear, 'full frontal' is in PAL. greg

January 9th, 2002, 03:46 AM	#2
Justin Walter Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Justin Walter - Salt Lake City Posts: 51	I live in the US and I just bought the Pal version of the Canon XL1 in November. Although I've only made 7 shorts so far, there does seem to be some problems converting to NTSC. The interlace tends to show up annoyingly on movement. This problem seems to be avoided by simply shooting in Frame Movie Mode. I haven't had the time to really figure out a good method for avoiding the pitfalls. If I had it to do again I probably would still purchase the Pal version, just for the fact that I feel like I've got a better camera than anyone else around me.

January 10th, 2002, 01:55 AM	#4
Justin Walter Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Justin Walter - Salt Lake City Posts: 51	1) Q:Do you have any specific purpose of your PAL version such as movie shooting? A: not really... I'm going to produce a DVD, I read up about it and there appeared to be many advantages to shooting in PAL not the least of which was image quality. There is always the posibilty that I might run into money and want to get the stuff transfered to film. I'm told many NTSC television programs shoot 24 frames progressive to get get that elusive film quality. 2)Q: Do you view your shooting in PAL monitor? A: I haven't bought the monitor yet but I plan to in the next couple of months. Most professional monitors have a NTSC and Pal switch so you can view both on the same monitor. 3)Q: Can you see the image is noticebly better than NTSC? A: I've yet to compare it to an image that was shot with a comparable NTSC camera. Before I bought this I was using a dinky NTSC Hi 8 and this is so much better than that it is ridiculous. 4)Q:How did you convert PAL image to NTSC? A: I haven't really found a completely satisfactory method of doing this yet (I haven't looked very hard yet), since I've only had the camera for a couple of months. Basically, I just pump some PAL into my Computer through Firewire... and then using Primere export it to NTSC. 5)Q: Did you see any degradation of image quaility on your NTSC converted image comparing to the original PAL image. A: like I said before the only problem appears to be the interlace thing... which looks like it can be avoided by shooting in frame movie mode I'm sorry I'm not more help, but like I said I just bought the thing. I figure it will take about 6 months before I have the detailed info you seek.

January 11th, 2002, 06:52 PM	#8
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Who Is??? who is Steven Soderbergh and why is it important what he is using and shoots with.....(he must have done something awesome in DV)??? (not trying to be a smart-aleck...just have no clue who he is) __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

January 11th, 2002, 06:54 PM	#9
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Disregard disregard last question- found out who he is and what he's done. __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

January 14th, 2002, 12:30 PM	#10
katelins Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Honolulu, Hawaii Posts: 31	According to www.digitalfilmgroup.net it is no longer a requirement to shoot in PAL and that an NTSC shoot could even provide similar quality: http://www.moviemaker.com/issues/44/dv.htm However, I too am about to purchase a Canon XL1s and would like some help on which format I should go for. I will be shooting shorts primarily for the web but would love to be able to transfer to film and know I am getting better quality. Is there any problems I should know about when it comes to working with PAL footage on the computer? I understand I would have to deinterlace PAL footage unless I use the progressive mode of the Canon, right? Is there any issues working with PAL footage on a Canopus DVStorm SE Plus? The shorts are going to be streamed from a Windows Media cluster. Can anyone tell me what if any changes there are to the warranty if I purchase a PAL XL1s and whether or not I will have trouble servicing, fixing, or buying parts for a PAL camcorder here where I live in the US? Or can they all be sent to Canon at some point? Are the accessories offered by Canon and other third parties also determined by format, or can I interchange say between a PAL and NTSC XL1s? So far from my planned usage, the PAL is the way to go but I wouldn't mind burning the films on DVD and in this regard I know I will definitely run into some problems.. Is this an indication of things to come? I went to the Canon Europe site inorder to download the instruction manual for the PAL version (since the .pdf file I obtained from Canon USA was actually marked with NTSC in the name so I wondered if there was a PAL version too) but the site is horribly timing out. I know I can probably find it elsewhere on the net, but for those of you who own a PAL XL1s and live in the states, do you regret it for any reason? I have posted so many questions here, it would be amazing if they were all answered, so I'd better stop and just say thanks so much. This is a terrific site! Okay, one more question: did anyone verify with certainty that Steven Soderbergh did indeed use a PAL version XL1s? Is there a link that states this from some other site perhaps? Thanks again!

January 14th, 2002, 12:37 PM	#11
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Howdy from Texas, With the exception of the electronic viewfinder (I think), all other Canon parts are interchangeable between PAL and NTSC versions of the XL1 and XL1S, including lenses. PAL cameras purchased from dealers in the United States who are authorized to sell Canon PAL, such as my sponsor ZGC, include the standard 1-year Canon warranty. Not so for cameras purchased elsewhere and brought into the U.S. Soderbergh did indeed shoot in PAL. Details of his production are forthcoming in my next XL1 Watchdog update. Stay tuned, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

January 14th, 2002, 12:53 PM	#12
Steve Kim Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: McLean, VA Posts: 47	I like PAL image I like PAL and am going buy one. Editing software handle both PAL and NTSC. You can capture it to editor and view from there, but not as same video quality. I would buy a professional multi-format(NTSC/PAL) monitor. JVC 13" is less than $500. You can see more detail and color in PAL which is much newer video format than NTSC. Unless you have to submit your work in NTSC, go for PAL. Canopus offers DV Format converter (PAL<-->NTSC), but it works for Canopus product and downgrades video quality somewhat. Unless I don't care about the quality of the converted image and really need to convert it, I would not do that. As far as I know EVF and XL1S body are specific to either PAL, or NTSC. Other part are exchangeable. I would be very careful to buy any graymarket thing with a short term warrenty like 90 days. I would buy one from zgc.com

January 14th, 2002, 01:28 PM	#13
katelins Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Honolulu, Hawaii Posts: 31	Hello again all, thanks for your help. I'm excited enough now, knowing that I'm closer to narrowing in on my research and will be able to test out on my own what I like/dislike about the XL1s soon. I'm still undecided between NTSC/PAL primarily because its difficult for me to account how often I will be required to burn to DVD and show any of my shorts on an American television set but aside from this detail it looks like PAL would be best for web and transfer to film. I'm especially anxious to see your report Chris, on Soderbergh's results. I wonder if he shot in interlaced mode as opposed to the progressive mode, since this is what I'm seeing recommended now by tape to film transfer houses (or at least the number I visited on the net). Thanks again for your help, I'll keep you all posted on the end decision.

January 21st, 2002, 02:00 AM	#14
katelins Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Honolulu, Hawaii Posts: 31	Hello, sorry to resurrect this thread again. How's the article coming along Chris? I've been checking out a few magazine articles here and there on DV productions, but they always seem to lack the right amount of detail. Some will mention the XL1s used as the camera, but then that's it. I haven't seen anything period for the Soderbergh film, so any info would be great I'm sure.

January 23rd, 2002, 10:04 AM	#15
Ron Pfister Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Basel area, Switzerland Posts: 285	Transcoding... Dear all: I just wanted to add my experience using footage from my PAL XL-1s for an NTSC DVD project... I edited all the footage in FCP, the exported it in DV stream format. I then used Cleaner (see <http://www.discreet.com> for more information) to transcode the final edit from PAL to NTSC. It does a pretty awesome job, particularly if you use de-interlace filters during the transcoding. By comparison, transcoding in QuickTime Pro - while available - is absolutely lousy ...lots of interlace artefacts during pans! Hope this helps! Regards, Ron Add-on: I did NOT shoot in Frame Movie Mode, and transcoding worked fine with Cleaner! __________________ Ronald P. Pfister halimedia - digital solutions and services www.halimedia.com Last edited by Ron Pfister; January 24th, 2002 at 03:36 AM.