Is HDV ready for all types of videography? at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > High Definition Video Acquisition > General HD (720 / 1080) Acquisition

General HD (720 / 1080) Acquisition
Topics about HD production.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 27th, 2005, 09:55 PM   #1
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Conway, NH
Posts: 574
Is HDV ready for all types of videography?

I just read an article in the May issue of DV magazine about HDV and it was a bit depressing: the article basically says HDV will exhibit generation artifacts over repeated dubbing of only a few times, that motion artifacts are evident in "high frequency detail and/or abrupt complex motions" and that these cause "noticeable degradation in the form of poserization, blocking, and psuedo-random noise." Adding that "HDV's artifacts can permeate the entire frame."

Finally, when talking about dubbing your edited program back to HDV "shows more artifacts than the camera original does".

How expensive are small sized HD monitors anyway? Monitor issues are another whole ball of wax...
Bill Edmunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2005, 12:03 AM   #2
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 1,315
"that motion artifacts are evident in "high frequency detail and/or abrupt complex motions" and that these cause "noticeable degradation in the form of poserization, blocking, and psuedo-random noise." Adding that "HDV's artifacts can permeate the entire frame."
"

This so far this problem has only been mentioned in regards to the 12GOP interlaced cams.
The problem with "generalizing" HDV is that they are doing so using only two cams. The progressive JVC HD1/10 made two years ago, and the recent Sony FX1/Z1 interlaced release. Imagine if someone generalized DV after the first two cams were released.
__________________
Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.
Ken Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2005, 08:08 AM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 547
Not only that, but because of the nature of the HDV compression, results can vary dramatically based on workflow. It's pretty easy to reduce the quality of the footage to zero if you lack an understanding of generational losses etc... so it really depends on who the author is.

-Steve
Steven White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2005, 09:41 AM   #4
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Ridgeville, Ohio
Posts: 407
I have always edited in native format (JVC-KDDI, MSP), and I have never seen anything like that described. Artifacts are WAY below that seen on broadcast. And even then I prefer that to SD television.

At Best Buy recently I saw a 27" (I think) monitor in the TV section (not computer) that was at least 1280 x 720 LCD panel. This was Westinghouse (a name I didn't expect to see). It was as good as the best on display, and was the lowest priced - $890 as I recall.
__________________
Dave
David Kennett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2005, 05:01 PM   #5
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,943
I agree with Stephen. IT is very easy to totally mess up an MPEG file with the wrong work flow/computer system. IF by dubbing they mean copying then HDV is a data stream and should have no degradation in copying at all. So this comment alone makes me very suspicious of the author. For your information a PC that is only just capable of decoding a HDV image for display will find it difficult to capture with any of the programs that have a preview screen and will likely only be able to capture a m2t native file ( which is 25mbs just like DV) For instance on my AMD XP2500 I have to capture native m2t with capDVHS, then import into Edius Pro 3 ( HDlink from Cineform will also do this capture). Any attempt to capture using Premiere Pro 1.5.1 which simultaneously encodes to the CFHD intermediate codec will result in blockies and other defects in the data stream aand in my case system just locks up with not enough power!!!!. The question is how powerful a machine can ensure that there are no defects on capture? Having had this problem with my admittedly low power PC and will continue to adopt the same approach latter this summer when I get a dual core PC and then encode to intermediate afterwards for editing if needed.

Ron Evans
Ron Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2005, 05:33 PM   #6
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 3,840
The author is Adam Wilt. Perhaps the best known and most respected DV Guru around. It's a positive review, he just points out the limitations inherent in the format, along with it's strengths. I think it's an excellent article, worth reading before discounting.
Richard Alvarez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2005, 05:37 PM   #7
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Conway, NH
Posts: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Evans
IF by dubbing they mean copying then HDV is a data stream and should have no degradation in copying at all.
Ron, the author was talking about recording the edited program (timeline) back to tape, and that the generationl loss was a result of essentially recompressing because of the HDV compression scheme. He was saying that HDV compresses at 32:1 to start with, then dubbing it back to tape results in yet another 32:1 compression. Ouch!
Bill Edmunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2005, 09:17 PM   #8
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,943
I have just found and read the article and it is very good as usual from Adam. I was thrown by the use of the word dubbing which I could not find in the article. To me dubbing is copying. Generation loss was the only comment I could find Adam was talking about, this is repeated decode for editing on the computer and then re-encode to MPEG----absolutely agree, which is why I made my comment about work flow as being even more critical than DV. Adam even made similar comments about the high power requirments for the PC. In my 5 months with my FX1 I am almost convinced that staying in native m2t may be the answer for highest quality even editing with a proxy then final render with the source HDV m2t, to absolutely limit the generation losses as Adam points out. For a lot of people this will mean a different work flow to what they are used to now. My interest is using HDV to create a multi camera 4x3 SD output mixed with DV camera video. That is, just two cameras on a shoot could look like many after editing. In Edius it is possible to use the Layout ( Motion in Premiere) feature to crop 4x3 image from the HDV frame and in experimenting with this I found it just as easy to scrub the timeline using the m2t file and as long as I didn't need to see realtime playback all was well on my meagre XP2500. Rendered output was about 2.5 times realtime to DV file with about 50% mix of HDV and DV on the timeline. I am hoping that come my PC upgrade late summer(wife and bank account willing!!) to dual core PC this render will be close to realtime.

Ron Evans
Ron Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 28th, 2005, 11:37 PM   #9
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Coronado Island
Posts: 1,452
Ron: How does that work?

I'm wondering how you render the HDV out from a proxy timeline. I read another post by a guy in Europe, talking about editing with a DV proxy and rendering the m2t- I think on Premiere Pro 1.51. As he describes the process:
1) Download a single long clip as m2t
2) Use the camera to downconvert and download the same long clip as DV
3) Make sure the timecodes on the two clips match
4) Edit the DV in the usual fashon
5) Break the link between the clip file icon in the editor and the DV file
5) Relink the clip file icon to the m2t file
6) Render the timeline out to the camera on firewire (using exactly what command??)
Would this actually work? All the cuts, xsitions, effects, filters, etc. would integrate into the GOPs?
Sounds too easy
Bob
Robert Young is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29th, 2005, 12:18 AM   #10
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
Robert, if you're a Vegas user, this is exactly what the GearShift plugin does.
Capture HDV
Gearshift converts HDV to two of 3 options; DVWidescreen proxy, 4:2:2 YUV HD, or Cineform 4:2:2 avi.
You can edit the proxy, which is calibrated for the correct 709 colorspace, then press a single button which "shifts" out the proxy for the HD, whether it's the m2t, or 4:2:2 file, and all titles, filters, transitions, framerate conversions, etc all take place. Set it to render and go have dinner.
For a while, proxy-based editing is going to be common. It's an ironic return to what we used to do with MJPEG or other formats when computers were slow and acceleration was horrendously expensive.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot
Author, producer, composer
Certified Sony Vegas Trainer
http://www.vasst.com
Douglas Spotted Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2005, 03:00 PM   #11
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Ridgeville, Ohio
Posts: 407
Bob,

Just noticed your location. I have a wonderful sunset shot at the 5 gate Kona airport, taken in November 2003 with my then four month old JVC HD10. I'm ready to come back!

Anybody! What is the GOP structure of the FX1? Six frames like the JVC? Did I mention how much I liked Hawaii?
__________________
Dave
David Kennett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2005, 03:11 PM   #12
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 3,840
Surprise, surprise. Got my copy of "Videography" mag the day after my DV mag arrived in the mail, and they too have an HDV article. This one entitled :"Is HDV right for your editing workflow?"

Covers most of the same aspects, and comes to much the same conclusions: "HDV is not for everyone, but it may be perfect for you"...'

and

"Is HDV right for you? Well if your goal is to make money now, probalby not. The lack of any viable distribution format makes commecialization of HDV difficult..."

Both articles are fair representations of where the work flow is RIGHT NOW versus where it promises to be in the future.
Richard Alvarez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2005, 11:50 AM   #13
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: California
Posts: 667
The 6-GOP path that JVC choose is much better. Your not going to see issues at 6 GOP in my opinion. HDV/MPEG is a very advanced Codec that is getting a bad wrap as an acquisition format in the public arena.

I think people are going to be very surprised how well the HD100u is going to perform. As well future HDV systems.



Current article on the HVX200 removable Lens possibility

http://www.pbase.com/aghvx200/do_hvx...ream_of_lenses

Michael Pappas



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Edmunds
I just read an article in the May issue of DV magazine about HDV and it was a bit depressing: the article basically says HDV will exhibit generation artifacts over repeated dubbing of only a few times, that motion artifacts are evident in "high frequency detail and/or abrupt complex motions" and that these cause "noticeable degradation in the form of poserization, blocking, and psuedo-random noise." Adding that "HDV's artifacts can permeate the entire frame."

Finally, when talking about dubbing your edited program back to HDV "shows more artifacts than the camera original does".

How expensive are small sized HD monitors anyway? Monitor issues are another whole ball of wax...

Last edited by Michael Pappas; May 1st, 2005 at 12:10 PM.
Michael Pappas is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > High Definition Video Acquisition > General HD (720 / 1080) Acquisition

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:24 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network