Call to JVC - split screen - Page 7 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems
GY-HD 100 & 200 series ProHD HDV camcorders & decks.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 7th, 2005, 05:50 PM   #91
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Mullen
This streak is called "vertical smear" and is present on EVERY "IT" CCD camcorder. It is inherent it IT CCDs which are used in almost every camcorder.
Naturally, the higher the pixel count and the smaller the CCD -- the greater probability of smear. It can be any color
The difference between 1/3" and 1/2" must be like night and day when it comes to smear then. Because I have shoot with Sony DSR300 and Panasonic DVC200 pointed directly to car head lights and stadium spots and never got smear.
Michael Maier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2005, 06:01 PM   #92
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 497
Or perhaps you exposed the footage somewhat less...
Werner Wesp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2005, 06:09 PM   #93
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,268
Hey Werner, if you are referring to my post, I don't think I could have underexposed at all, since I wanted detail in the background, and if I had underexposed, the background would have gone dark.
Michael Maier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2005, 07:20 PM   #94
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kelowna BC Canada
Posts: 706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Mullen
When have you seen a pro shoot a sunset with vertical smear? Never!

Any time you get smear that wide from the sun -- the shot is over exposed by definition.

To do a sunset correctly one must bias the exposure for the sun which means the beach would be much darker. This guy likely did an AVERAGE exposure.

In any case, the shot could never have been used because of the smear -- the SSE was irrelevant.
It seems that you never shot a sunset, Steve. The sun will be ALWAYS overexposed. No matter what camera, what size chip, to expose for the sun, you would get nothing in the foreground, all pitch black and the sun would be still overexposed. Vertical smear is an unfortunate characteristic of CCD sensors and sometimes cannot be avoided, especially with smaller chip cameras. When I shot sunsets with my DSR500, the sun itself was overexposed but there was no smear and that's thanks to the bigger size chip. With the HD100 there will likely be some smear in sunset shots, as well as, in night-time shots with car headlights but there should not be SSE.

I am pretty tired and don't have time for your on-going defence of this particular issue and I am just gonna leave the battle to someone else.

However, I want to mention one more thing, the suggestion of white balancing in low light. One technique used by electronic cinematography is NOT to white balance for every setup and to use a pre-set WB instead. The reason is that the process of white balancing removes hues that are dominant in the shot (i.e. WB with blue gel minimizes blues and 'warms up' the image). If one manually WB in the evening (sunset) the camera electronics will attempt to 'compensate' and remove the warm hues that make a sunset what it is, giving the image a non-descript flatness. Also, in order to create a colour continuity it is important not to change WB between setups, among other settings (of course that doesn't apply when switching between daylight and incandescent lighting). So, even rental houses set up high end cameras (like CineAlta and others) to the liking of the DP/client and then the settings are not typically changed and certainly one doesn't manually white balance.
__________________
www.ascentfilms.com
Jiri Bakala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2005, 07:50 PM   #95
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 423
"The difference between 1/3" and 1/2" must be like night and day when it comes to smear then. Because I have shoot with Sony DSR300 and Panasonic DVC200 pointed directly to car head lights and stadium spots and never got smear."

One thing to remember is the smear is related to the size of the pixels right?
THese cameras have many more pixels in the same size CCD so when it comes to things like smear and sensitivity they will perform like a much smaller SD block. So a 1/3" HD CCD will proabably have pixels about the size of a 1/6" or smaller SD CCD. Your probably going to need a 2/3" HD block to get the performance of a 1/3" SD block with 1280x720.

Still, I havn't heard of the Sony 1/3" block having such bad smear and it has about the same size pixels.

Anyone know who actually makes the CCD block in the JVC?
Guy Barwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2005, 08:30 PM   #96
Trustee
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,707
Guy, I haven't had any smearing with the Z1U. I haven't shot into the sun yet, but I will try this weekend.
__________________
Christopher C. Murphy
Director, Producer, Writer
Christopher C. Murphy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2005, 09:32 PM   #97
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,214
FWIW- The XL-H1 smears in the sun too. If you download the attempted CA shot over on the H1 community you can look at a nice smear from the sun all the way to the bottom of the frame.
Stephen L. Noe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2005, 10:44 PM   #98
MPS Digital Studios
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Posts: 8,531
We're getting way off topic here, but one shouldn't shoot into the sun to begin with, because of all the reasons we've discussed and more.

heath
__________________
My Final Cut Pro X blog
Heath McKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2005, 11:40 PM   #99
HDV Cinema
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Barwood
"Your probably going to need a 2/3" HD block to get the performance of a 1/3" SD block with 1280x720.

Still, I havn't heard of the Sony 1/3" block having such bad smear and it has about the same size pixels.

Anyone know who actually makes the CCD block in the JVC?
Sony's Hyper HAD CCDs have really, really low vertical smear. Nevertheless, trying to shoot a direct sun and keep the forground visable is exceeding the exposure latitude one would expect from a 1/3-inch CCD. It's simply not good practice as was bourne out by the results.

Guy's right -- for those tough situations there's a reason pros buy camcorders with 1/2-inch and 2/3-inch CCDs!

And, it is rumored that Sony makes the CCDs.
__________________
Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c
Steve Mullen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7th, 2005, 11:45 PM   #100
MPS Digital Studios
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Posts: 8,531
I've heard that Sony has made the Canon XL H1's chips.

heath
__________________
My Final Cut Pro X blog
Heath McKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2005, 05:07 AM   #101
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
Hey Werner, if you are referring to my post, I don't think I could have underexposed at all, since I wanted detail in the background, and if I had underexposed, the background would have gone dark.
No, no, I meant that if you exposed less with your 1/2 inch camcorders, you are likely to get less smear...
Werner Wesp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2005, 05:18 AM   #102
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,268
I know. But I didn't expose less, since the background was not dark at all.
Michael Maier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2005, 05:45 AM   #103
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 497
Ah, well, that clearly shows how big the difference is. Keep in mind though that the CCD's are bigger AND there are lesser pixels on each...
Werner Wesp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2005, 01:10 AM   #104
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 25
Repaired camera?

Hello Everyone,
I picked up my HD 100 from the JVC repair shop ( same unit) . The tech was able to lessen the degree of SSE but could not completely eradicate it. He basically said that it is all new technology...that SSE is inherent with this HD camera. He said he "corrected the gain" and showed me a monitor with an isoelectric line (I had no clue what it represented ), mid way through the line was a break ...he said the camera was under spec. The tech said to test it and bring it back again if I was not satisfied.
Mel Namnama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2005, 01:55 AM   #105
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Fremantle, Western Australia
Posts: 253
Dear Mel,

Please let us know how you get on and whether you are satisfied with the result.

I must confess to coming around to Steve Mullen's point of view on the SSE. Even though I can reproduce the SSE under specific and awkward conditions, it has not (thus far) been a factor in either of the two shoots that I have done even though both were under low light conditions. I have found that the camera actually performs well under low light.

My overall impression after using this camera quite a bit (mines a PAL unit) is that it is a terrific unit with a lot of potential.

Rob
Robert Castiglione 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 > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:25 AM.


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