Nano worth it for the 4.2.2 alone
 

I have been using my Nano for the last two months on all of my shoots. I have stopped using the footage off my EX S&S cards. After doing multiple tests I have found that not only does the bit rate make a huge difference, which we all discuss. But the color spacing is huge, I mean huge if you view it properly.

I did this yesterday at a production studio while delivering footage to a client. Take a clip shot at the Nano’s sweet spot Long GOP 100Mbps and the same clip off the S&S card and either split screen or use two identical corrected monitors, then view the clip. With the aerial fall colors of New England in my viewing yesterday at my clients production studio with great monitors is was easy to see. The clients comment was “Did you shoot with two cameras at once?” The difference is stunning.

Also of course the bit rate makes a big difference but don’t discount the color spacing that alone is worth the purchase.

Now my S&S cards are just emergence back up of footage until I pull the clips off the CF cards and back them up on a Raid 1 then put the working clips on my Raid 3 and start editing.

Now the next step is waiting on my pre-ordered PMW-350 to go up one more step.

Dear Paul,

Gints would love for you to post some of the original Sony 4:2:0 footage, and the corresponding nanoFlash 4:2:2 footage for comparison purposes.

He has asked for this in this thread:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/converge...ecordings.html

Hi Paul,

I read somewhere that the Flash only records 8 bit colour. It seems a pity since the EX1's HDSDI port provides a full 10 bit 4.2.2. Why not go the extra mile?

it would be great if devices like the Flash also offered additional audio inputs so that more sound sources could be recorded in-sync. on dedicated channels.

I like the compactness of my EX1, I would need to see some more compelling features to justify sacrificing any of that.

I look forward to the next generation of Convergent Design products.

Dan I can not send to Gints client footage that is against my contracts. As for the clip I am sending you with watermark if I did not already delete the S&S card I could send that clip. But they both will have a watermark in the middle of the clip.

Paul the Nano raises the quality of the footage to the level so I can no longer live with the 4.2.0 that comes out of the camera at 35Mbps. The XDR I think has extra XLR connections but you need to check. Also my client base would not hang around waiting for the next CD product they would go to someone with a current product and be happy.

As for the 8bit to 10bit debate that will not hold me back at this point. I can't spend my time waiting for the next best product. The time for me to shoot is now and live my passion with the best product that fits my business. And for now that is the EX with Nano.

Dear Paul,

The watermark, on both clips, will be fine. And I understand that you may have already deleted the SxS 4:2:0 35 Mbps footage, as is your usual custom.

Paul,

Of course, if the the clients demand it...

I would like the extra versatility of the XDR but it's a bit of a luxury at this point. I can afford to wait. It certainly doesn't stop me shooting anything.

I guess I'm lucky - my clients are very pleased with the current results.

Hi Paul. MPEG-II is 8 bit. If they want to do 10 bit, it won't be with MPEG-II.

Perhaps a STICKY in this group laying down the simplicity of the 8/10 bit deal will help put that one to bed.

People who've never seen or worked with the XDR/Nano footage, fret about the 8 vs. 10 bit. I must admit, I did too. When you actually work with the footage, you'll realize that the 8 bit footage is superb. I transcode during color correct to get the extra bits required for CC, so the original 8 bit files work just perfectly for me.

We're all gonna be 8 bit for a while I believe (assuming we don't have huge budgets).

For my pro projects I bring 8 bit in, convert to 10 bit and stay that way specifically for critical color work and/or efx.

That act does not ADD to the image, but prevents further loss.

Otherwise, 8 bit is fine.

Hi Aaron,

I'm sure you're right however, I have worked with both and the difference between 8 and 10 bit has been worth fretting over - particularly when it comes to process work.

Obviously other factors are important too.

Dan I will look for the clip today if I have time. If not it will have to wait till the week of the 9th since I am off on a shoot out your way for a week.

Dan I have two examples I will send shortly the same way I sent the clips last week.

Both are aerial shots of Lighthouses and they are in 4.2.0 35Mbps.
For the Nano record one is 4.2.2 I-Frame 220Mbps and the other is 4.2.2 Long GOP 100Mbps. One shot is on a overcast low ceiling day and the other is with sun just prior to sunset.

Clips are exported from Final Cut as Final Cut quicktime files.

I hope this helps people see what we are discussing.

Sorry about the watermark but the client agreed to let me send along but they needed the watermark.

Dear Paul,

Thank you.

We appreciate your efforts to help others.

(Paul is sending these files to our server. We will then have to make them available.)

How is the watermark added? Does its addition require recompression of the clips or alter the original video in any way?

In the interest of showing off the abilities of the Nanoflash, a few short clips (10-30 Seconds) of parallel recordings should be available, complete with screen grabs of the same time slice. While some grandiose clips make for great demos, even pictures of a home aquarium, a spinning bicycle wheel, water from a faucet or something with motion.

I saw the Nanoflash/EX1 demo frame grabs with the rotating frame on the house and the welder sparks. Are the original parallel recordings available?