|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 26th, 2001, 07:41 AM
|
#16 |
|
Obstreperous Rex
|
Hi Rob,
Sorry for any confusion, but Frame Movie mode and Progessive Scan are not available on the same cameras... a better way to have said it is to state that the XL1 and GL1 have Frame Movie mode *instead of* Progressive Scan. A lot of folks have a common misconception that the XL1 and GL1 have progressive scan CCD's, based on how Frame Movie mode looks. However this is not the case. The XL1 and GL1 do not have progressive scan chips. However, Frame Movie mode produces the same results as progressive scan... but through a different way. I would not get too hung up on numbers. Specs, numbers, etc are meaningless compared to how well the final image holds up, and many professionals out there are using the XL1 in Frame Movie mode all the time. |
|
|
|
October 26th, 2001, 08:11 AM
|
#17 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
(Sorry for all the typos in my last post - what a mess!)
The XL1/GL1 only offers normal mode (480 line interlaced) and frame movie mode (360 line progressive scan). I just projected my DV short in a 200 seat theater on a 9X12 screen using an Epson 3000 lumens projector via rear projection. The results were jaw-dropping - my footage never looked better. It looked better than via S-Video into my 32" Sony XBR. Most people at the premiere thought was film or HD. The softness was only apparant in the front 3 rows. My footage was subject to the recipe I posted in the thread in response to Michael Pappas, so whatever "loss" involved in deinterlacing, shooting 16:9 mode, is not a huge deal. I wish I had identical footage shot in frame mode to compare. This to me would be a good test of how much difference the two actually make 360 lines progressive vs. 480 interlaced. |
|
|
|
|
October 26th, 2001, 08:33 AM
|
#18 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Anyone know?
So, what would the actual resolution be, in frame movie mode, using PAL? Anyone know?
|
|
|
|
October 26th, 2001, 08:43 AM
|
#19 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
432 lines (576/2 X 1.5)
|
|
|
|
|
October 26th, 2001, 10:17 AM
|
#20 |
|
New Boot
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: connecticut, washington D.C, maryland, virginia
Posts: 16
|
Does anyone know how to effectively render interlaced video with Premiere 6 so that it appears as if it was shot with frame mode?
If I am following the discussion properly, then if you have the rendering power, it is better (better as in a higher resolution image) to combine the fields in post than to use canon's frame movie mode. Will the final product have the same 'texture' that so many people admire in an image created using canon's mode? Only asking because I wont be able to find out myself until I get my camera back from servicing... :( |
|
|
|
|
October 26th, 2001, 11:12 AM
|
#21 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
Yes, Premiere can do it (see my recipe) - just do step 3 in premiere using transperancy rubberband. Premiere has a deinterlacer - or the Revision FX will work in Premiere 6.
I will post a DV clip with and without the effect if people don't mind downloading a very large file. Need to see it an native DV res. |
|
|
|
|
October 29th, 2001, 01:55 AM
|
#22 |
|
RED Code Chef
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
|
Stephenvv,
Thank you for your elaborate responses, greatly appreciated.... It would be really great if you could post some native Canon XL1 DV footage indeed (I have been looking around for this). I don't mind downloading some large files (am on a broadband connection)! Would it be possible to set me up with some footage shot in frame movie mode as well so that I can compare the too and see for myself? (this would be very ideal)... How did you shoot 16x9 mode? Through an anamorphic lens or through the canon's "digital" anamorphic squeeze option? If it is the last one, did you encounter much resolution loss or problems due to this? Thanks again!
__________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
October 29th, 2001, 08:45 AM
|
#23 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
I would be happy to but I lack the storage space on my site.
Would 5 second clips be long enough? What we have is: (1) Regular 4:3 Interlaced (2) Frame Move 4:3 (3) Post Progressive Mode 4:3 Space allowing we could also do: (1) In camera 16:9 versions of above (2) Cropped in post versions of above. Total would be 15-45 seconds of DV. Chris H. - how's your server space? :) Per your 16:9 question - as no anamorphic lens exists for XL1, I used in-camera mode, which according to my eye and some tests, produces less resolution loss than cropping in post. See www.adamwilt.com (DV FAQ) for more details and links to the page that first tested this. |
|
|
|
|
October 29th, 2001, 10:24 AM
|
#24 |
|
RED Code Chef
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
|
Stephenvv,
I thought I read somewhere that an anamorphic lense exists for the XL1.... after some browsing I came to this: http://www.zgc.com/html/anamorphic_attachment.html but that's only for the GL1.... strange.. I really thought I read some article about some anamorphic lense for XL1... oh well :) As for storage space... I can arrange an FTP for you where you could upload several gigabytes (theoratically).... Unfortunately the download from there is allmost impossible (especially speed) so I can't really share it with others :( ... but if your on a broad- band connection and willing to upload, that would be great. Please sent me an e-mail at r.lohman@lectric.nl and we'll arrange it. Thanks in advance!
__________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
October 29th, 2001, 12:35 PM
|
#25 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
Rumors of an anamorphic adapter have abounded but none for the XL-1 so far.
I'll have to figure out when I get do the tests - I'm editing a couple of projects right now. |
|
|
|
|
October 29th, 2001, 01:37 PM
|
#26 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
There is an xl-1 anamorphic lens...
http://www.xl1s.com
|
|
|
|
October 29th, 2001, 01:43 PM
|
#27 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
I stand corrected - Optex finally did it - or not? Not usable at the wide end. That would PRECISELY the focal range that you would want to use it. That makes no sense to me at all...
Widescreen is to capture wide angle - I use my Wide Angle adaptor on the 3X frequently - losing that would be painful just to get anamorphic. |
|
|
|
|
October 30th, 2001, 10:05 AM
|
#28 |
|
Obstreperous Rex
|
Stephen,
The XL1 anamorphic from Optex is indeed fairly recent and significant news. I hope to have one to test and soon as ZGC (my sponsor and US distributor for Optex) receives them. << Total would be 15-45 seconds of DV. Chris H. - how's your server space? >> I'm pretty sure I can do it. Let me check with Jeff, the DVinfoNet servermeister , to make sure. Can you provide some descriptive text? We'll make a page out of it and put it all on the website. Just make sure to tell everybody who you are and what you do... some of my contributors forget to plug themselves. Since I can't pay for submissions, the least I can do is help promote the heck out of whatever it is you do for a living! ;-) |
|
|
|
|
October 30th, 2001, 10:24 AM
|
#29 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
Okay - let me work on it this weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
November 20th, 2001, 05:36 PM
|
#30 |
|
New Boot
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Franconia NH 03580 USA
Posts: 19
|
5 Second Clips?
Hi Stephen and Chris,
Have you guys been successful in putting these sample DV clips online yet? Thanks. Tim |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
