Finally shot with a HD101 on the weekend... at DVinfo.net

Guy Barwood · October 17th, 2006, 01:03 AM

1: Rental camera had a hot pixel without any gain which I will have to edit out in post (any recommended techniques). The viewfinder, being so low res didn't even hint to its existance. While this is dissapointing I don't hate the camera for it. I should have checked the camera before using it and I wasn't using a monitor in the field etc. The rental house has since masked the spot out which they were extatic at being able to do so quickly in-house, sighting a month service for a Canon XL2 hot pixel to be fixed. They have also agreed not to charge for the rental and a discount on my next rental to compensate for the problem.

2: Used a brand new Panasonic MQ tape but still had way too many drop outs for my liking (3 in the first 4 minutes of footage alone). Just re-enforces to me that tape is great for a backup recording process but HDD, Solid State or the likes of XDCAM is the way of the future.

3: Liquid 7.1 captured the 720 25p footage without any problems.

4: Editing a 16 camera multicam clip is going to be a lot of fun (I have about 19 shots to use but Liquid only supports 16 cameras in a single multicam clip)....

5: The viewfinder is pretty dam poor. Give me a high res BW VF anyday.

6: Focus Assist is of little assistance in low light :-(

7: I saw a bit of 25p panning shuddering. A bit scary to the likes of me up front but its just another thing to learn about in the end. Fortunately most of my shots are static angles so it won't effect this shoot (a music video).

8: Finding a 6p to 6p 1394 cable might be a stress if you havn't pre-thought of it! Renters beware and be prepared with the right cable for capture.

Summary: Great camera but I am glad I havn't put any serious money down on one yet. The biggest issues to me are an improved VF and an economical HDD recording option (such as what I hope the catalyst will bring). I think 50p in the 200 is a big + too as long as the compression holds up.

Cheers

Guy

Stephan Ahonen · October 17th, 2006, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

1: Rental camera had a hot pixel without any gain

Always always always double check your rental gear. Did I mention always? Even though it really is the rental house's responsibility, sometimes things just slip through, and it's you who have to ultimately deal with the consequences in the field.

Quote:

Editing a 16 camera multicam clip is going to be a lot of fun

I'm very curious as to what anybody could conceivably need a 16 camera shoot for. Unless you're working a high profile national event I just can't see anybody needing that much. Heck, the national events I've worked haven't used more than 10 or so.

Quote:

The viewfinder is pretty dam poor. Give me a high res BW VF anyday

Can I have an amen? I'm definitely not a fan of the low-res LCD viewfinders in prosumer cameras. However, a high-res B&W CRT is expensive and possibly a bit too large to fit on such a small camera. I think it would be possible to split the difference though, making the viewfinder in color means requiring red green and blue elements for every pixel. Simply making the viewfinder a black and white LCD could triple the horizontal resolution of the viewfinder as well as substantially simplifying its construction. Just a thought. And drop the flip-out LCD, for a camera trying to be a "professional" form factor, a flip out-LCD is really a glaringly "consumer-like" feature that's really redundant considering the regular viewfinder.

Quote:

Focus Assist is of little assistance in low light :-(

Since pretty much all focus assistance mechanisms (peaking etc.) rely on detecting local contrast differneces, and low light pretty much kills contrast, you won't get a fix for that any time soon.

Werner Wesp · October 17th, 2006, 02:42 AM

Well there are some minor problems with the camcorder - I believe anyone would prefer a BW VF. And I would like the other lenses to come soon as well (no sign of them here in Belgium, except the 13x)...

Anyhow, I have one for about a year now, and everytime I see the footage shot with it, I'm pleased I've bought it...

One thing is for sure: they should find some focus assistance for low light situations (but physically it is indeed a problem)

Guy Barwood · October 17th, 2006, 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephan Ahonen

I'm very curious as to what anybody could conceivably need a 16 camera shoot for. Unless you're working a high profile national event I just can't see anybody needing that much. Heck, the national events I've worked haven't used more than 10 or so.

In my case it is not a 16 camera shoot, only a single camera shoot. However I have 1 take of the same thing done 19 time and need to edit them together as if it was one shoot with more than one camera.

Being a very low budget music video (by low budget I mean I am not being paid for it, I took it on as a personal project) it was the simplest way to produce a music video by myself with the appearance of more than a single angle. It does rely on the talent playing in sync to a constant audio source of course.

Drew Curran · October 17th, 2006, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

6: Focus Assist is of little assistance in low light :-(

Me thinks focusing anything in low light is difficult - SLR's included. However in good lighting, focus assist is excellent.

Andrew

Guy Barwood · October 17th, 2006, 08:36 AM

Quote:

However in good lighting, focus assist is excellent.
Andrew

Not arguing with that.

Adam Oas · October 17th, 2006, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephan Ahonen

Can I have an amen? I'm definitely not a fan of the low-res LCD viewfinders in prosumer cameras. However, a high-res B&W CRT is expensive and possibly a bit too large to fit on such a small camera. I think it would be possible to split the difference though, making the viewfinder in color means requiring red green and blue elements for every pixel. Simply making the viewfinder a black and white LCD could triple the horizontal resolution of the viewfinder as well as substantially simplifying its construction. Just a thought.

AMEN!!!! Have you ever taken the vf viewer lense off the camera? I just about fell over when I saw how absolutely TINY the actual screen is. I wonder if a old used viewfinder off a betacam would work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephan Ahonen

And drop the flip-out LCD, for a camera trying to be a "professional" form factor, a flip out-LCD is really a glaringly "consumer-like" feature that's really redundant considering the regular viewfinder.

I'll disagree there. I know it looks sorta "consumer-like" but I think it's one of the things that really comes in handy. Especially when you are on a tripod for a hour long head & shoulders shoot. I also find it invaluable for the arm hoist above my head shot. I guess that I could see it going away if they'd put a really nice viewfinder on the camera, but even then, I love the thing.

Guy Barwood · October 17th, 2006, 09:26 AM

Yes I stumbled on the tiny tiny VF LCD panel. Its a credit they can make that thing look so big. Just imagine how high res they could really make the LCD VF if they used one the size of your thumb nail rather than half the size of your pinky nail. It could almost be native...

PS: I agree on the body LCD panel too. I too often miss it on my DV500 for exactly the reasons you state. No one forces you to open it and you should be able to reverse it like on the DV5000 and display shooting data (such as levels etc) alone.

Daniel Patton · October 17th, 2006, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

6: Focus Assist is of little assistance in low light :-(

This is nothing new of course but crank your peaking up, get use to using it instead and you will find that you never touch Focus Assist ever again. You not only gain a constant visual reminder like when using FA, but you also see proper lighting levels,etc., at all times (unlike when switching back and forth to use FA, more of a hassle). In fact, I have not used that feature in so long I even forgot that the camera has it, and I can't remember the last time I shot anything soft (or blown out for that matter).

Stephen L. Noe · October 17th, 2006, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

1: I will have to edit out in post (any recommended techniques).

In your Liquid system you should create a title in TDKPro that just has a circle on it and make it black. Now take the circle title and size it to just cover the dead pixel with the 2d editor CPU. Now create a matte track under your video and place the sized title on the matte track. Now take a copy of your original video and lay it on the track under your track matte then take the 2d CPU and place it on the lower track clip. In the 2d editor turn off keyframes and then with your X coordinate move the video 1 pixel to the left or right.

What this effectively does is matte the pixel to the left or right onto the video. Since it's all RT you should be able to get 25fps playout.

take care,

S.Noe

Guy Barwood · October 17th, 2006, 10:52 PM

Thanks for that I'll definetly follow that through.

Charles Lacey · October 17th, 2006, 11:49 PM

To get rid of it, copy the video and place it in a layer above it. Crop the top layer to only include a pixel or two to the right or left of the hot pixel and then move it over the hot pixel. It's a pain, but it works well. Good luck.

Carl Hicks · October 18th, 2006, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charles Lacey

To get rid of it, copy the video and place it in a layer above it. Crop the top layer to only include a pixel or two to the right or left of the hot pixel and then move it over the hot pixel. It's a pain, but it works well. Good luck.

Hi Charles,

Another McKinney, TX guy!

Jiri Bakala · October 18th, 2006, 11:00 AM

Frankly, asking for a B/W viewfinder is crazy. We all lived through decades of B/W viewfinders on Betacams and it's been painfull and not very practical to see the world deprived of colour.

Now, the fact that the HD100 VF is way too small is a problem too, especially for HD. So, my wish would be a bigger high res LCD VF with the option through menu to switch to B/W mode. I agree that if this was the case, JVC should drop the side LCD. And there is really no excuse for not designing a better VF because the technology is here - just look at the beautiful VF and the LCD panel on the Sony Z1U. In fact the LCD is so good that it could be view in a direct sunlight, something that cannot be said about the JVC variety.

Guy Barwood · October 18th, 2006, 05:21 PM

You clearly want higher resolution but want colour too. Colour reduces resolution needing 3 physical pixels per single pixel of resolution so for me, with a choice between a high res BW VF and a low res colour one I'll take the BW anyday, especially when you are using manual focus. If you need colour swing out the side panel LCD.

I can't see how a B/W mode on a colour LCD will help either (ie I can't see the point of the BW mode in the HD200/250). A colour LCD has red, green and blue pixels. To display grey scale you would have to just turn each of these on in levels which appears to display grey. You are still using three pixels per display pixel, no resolution gain.

October 17th, 2006, 01:03 AM	#1
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	Finally shot with a HD101 on the weekend... 1: Rental camera had a hot pixel without any gain which I will have to edit out in post (any recommended techniques). The viewfinder, being so low res didn't even hint to its existance. While this is dissapointing I don't hate the camera for it. I should have checked the camera before using it and I wasn't using a monitor in the field etc. The rental house has since masked the spot out which they were extatic at being able to do so quickly in-house, sighting a month service for a Canon XL2 hot pixel to be fixed. They have also agreed not to charge for the rental and a discount on my next rental to compensate for the problem. 2: Used a brand new Panasonic MQ tape but still had way too many drop outs for my liking (3 in the first 4 minutes of footage alone). Just re-enforces to me that tape is great for a backup recording process but HDD, Solid State or the likes of XDCAM is the way of the future. 3: Liquid 7.1 captured the 720 25p footage without any problems. 4: Editing a 16 camera multicam clip is going to be a lot of fun (I have about 19 shots to use but Liquid only supports 16 cameras in a single multicam clip).... 5: The viewfinder is pretty dam poor. Give me a high res BW VF anyday. 6: Focus Assist is of little assistance in low light :-( 7: I saw a bit of 25p panning shuddering. A bit scary to the likes of me up front but its just another thing to learn about in the end. Fortunately most of my shots are static angles so it won't effect this shoot (a music video). 8: Finding a 6p to 6p 1394 cable might be a stress if you havn't pre-thought of it! Renters beware and be prepared with the right cable for capture. Summary: Great camera but I am glad I havn't put any serious money down on one yet. The biggest issues to me are an improved VF and an economical HDD recording option (such as what I hope the catalyst will bring). I think 50p in the 200 is a big + too as long as the compression holds up. Cheers Guy

October 17th, 2006, 11:49 PM	#12
Charles Lacey New Boot Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: McKinney, TX Posts: 11	bummer about the pixel. To get rid of it, copy the video and place it in a layer above it. Crop the top layer to only include a pixel or two to the right or left of the hot pixel and then move it over the hot pixel. It's a pain, but it works well. Good luck.

October 18th, 2006, 11:00 AM	#14
Jiri Bakala Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Kelowna BC Canada Posts: 706	Frankly, asking for a B/W viewfinder is crazy. We all lived through decades of B/W viewfinders on Betacams and it's been painfull and not very practical to see the world deprived of colour. Now, the fact that the HD100 VF is way too small is a problem too, especially for HD. So, my wish would be a bigger high res LCD VF with the option through menu to switch to B/W mode. I agree that if this was the case, JVC should drop the side LCD. And there is really no excuse for not designing a better VF because the technology is here - just look at the beautiful VF and the LCD panel on the Sony Z1U. In fact the LCD is so good that it could be view in a direct sunlight, something that cannot be said about the JVC variety. __________________ www.ascentfilms.com

October 17th, 2006, 02:42 AM	#3
Werner Wesp Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Belgium Posts: 497	Well there are some minor problems with the camcorder - I believe anyone would prefer a BW VF. And I would like the other lenses to come soon as well (no sign of them here in Belgium, except the 13x)... Anyhow, I have one for about a year now, and everytime I see the footage shot with it, I'm pleased I've bought it... One thing is for sure: they should find some focus assistance for low light situations (but physically it is indeed a problem)

October 17th, 2006, 09:26 AM	#8
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	Yes I stumbled on the tiny tiny VF LCD panel. Its a credit they can make that thing look so big. Just imagine how high res they could really make the LCD VF if they used one the size of your thumb nail rather than half the size of your pinky nail. It could almost be native... PS: I agree on the body LCD panel too. I too often miss it on my DV500 for exactly the reasons you state. No one forces you to open it and you should be able to reverse it like on the DV5000 and display shooting data (such as levels etc) alone.

October 17th, 2006, 10:52 PM	#11
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	Thanks for that I'll definetly follow that through.

October 18th, 2006, 05:21 PM	#15
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	You clearly want higher resolution but want colour too. Colour reduces resolution needing 3 physical pixels per single pixel of resolution so for me, with a choice between a high res BW VF and a low res colour one I'll take the BW anyday, especially when you are using manual focus. If you need colour swing out the side panel LCD. I can't see how a B/W mode on a colour LCD will help either (ie I can't see the point of the BW mode in the HD200/250). A colour LCD has red, green and blue pixels. To display grey scale you would have to just turn each of these on in levels which appears to display grey. You are still using three pixels per display pixel, no resolution gain.