HVX-200 footage!

John Benton · February 3rd, 2006, 11:46 PM

Cassidy,
You are gonna give your HVX to REEL | STREAM?
I bet you mean a DVX (REEL | STREAM doesn't do HVX...yet, if ever)
in that case I would love to see the comparison between the two:

HVX vs DVX(REEL | STREAMed)

super Nice Footage !!!
Keep it coming

Pete Bauer · February 4th, 2006, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Gundu

For the second half of the video, I believe he adjusted the Speed in the timeline by 40% with frame blending.

That's what I suspected but don't understand. If you have 60 progressive frames each second, and conform them to 24 progressive frames per second in a NLE's timeline, there shouldn't be any frame blending -- or at least no need for it, anyway -- just 40% speed footage.

Cassidy, do you think this was a function of a setting (such as frame blending) that would normally be used for interlaced footage being turned on unnecessarily, or is there a peculiarity of the 60p itself that causes this? It is really tough to tell when I can't do a frame advance, just random pauses, but it gives the feel of a pull-down cadence problem a la DVX100 or XL2...but that should be impossible with true progressive footage. Any ideas what's happening?

Barry Green · February 4th, 2006, 03:40 AM

The NLE did it. He said in the file that he turned frame blending on.

Pete Bauer · February 4th, 2006, 07:32 AM

Cassidy,

Assuming Barry Wan Kenobi is correct (as usual) and this was nothing more than an export "oops"...

If you have the time, I'd be interested to see a re-export without the frame blending as a downloadable QT file, as many of us can't enjoy the full resolution of the picture in a small embedded web page window.

It is wonderful thing to shoot HD, eh?

Cassidy Bisher · February 4th, 2006, 08:25 AM

bob this is correct

Cassidy Bisher · February 4th, 2006, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Benton

Cassidy,
You are gonna give your HVX to REEL | STREAM?
I bet you mean a DVX (REEL | STREAM doesn't do HVX...yet, if ever)
in that case I would love to see the comparison between the two:

Hey John, yes I know they haven't confirmed that HVX will be able to work with andromeda.. but why wouldn't they develop this technology ASAP... so when they do, I think we'll get some beautiful images...

Cassidy Bisher · February 4th, 2006, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Bauer

That's what I suspected but don't understand. If you have 60 progressive frames each second, and conform them to 24 progressive frames per second in a NLE's timeline, there shouldn't be any frame blending -- or at least no need for it, anyway -- just 40% speed footage.

Cassidy, do you think this was a function of a setting (such as frame blending) that would normally be used for interlaced footage being turned on unnecessarily, or is there a peculiarity of the 60p itself that causes this? It is really tough to tell when I can't do a frame advance, just random pauses, but it gives the feel of a pull-down cadence problem a la DVX100 or XL2...but that should be impossible with true progressive footage. Any ideas what's happening?

The first clip is just 60p footage conformed to 23.98 which I see no frame blending when i go frame by frame, which confirms that this is the right work flow..

The intension behind slowing this "conformed" footage to 40% was to make it slower. Even though I knew there would be frame blending... you can't pull blood from a stone, I wish i could.

So the first clip should be a perfect representation of what a variable frame rate like 60p looks like in a 23.98 timeline.

Although we will definitely try some different shutter speeds, maybe we can break some stuff out on the street.

I will also try to make downloadable links... I run into this problem with windows media player when i want to go frame by frame... I can't. Which is probably what your referring to by not being able to "frame advance" I know that is frustrating.

Pete Bauer · February 4th, 2006, 10:15 AM

So rather than "conforming" (at least by the After Effects definition of the word) to a new timebase -- making a 60p clip into a 24p clip -- you simply slowed down the footage to 40% speed while remaining in a 60p workflow? If so, then I understand the frame blending. If it was conforming...taking "X" number of frames over "Y" amount of time in 60p and making a clip that is "X" number of frames over "Y x 2.5" time, at 24p...then I'm still confused about it, as no new frames would be created. (Note: error in formula EDITED after original post)

Craig Seeman · February 4th, 2006, 10:47 AM

I don't know about other NLEs but in Final Cut Pro, when you do a SlowMo (speed change of any sort), you can turn off frame blending. I'd consider that ability a must have when doing this sort of thing with the HVX.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassidy Bisher

The first clip is just 60p footage conformed to 23.98 which I see no frame blending when i go frame by frame, which confirms that this is the right work flow..

The intension behind slowing this "conformed" footage to 40% was to make it slower. Even though I knew there would be frame blending... you can't pull blood from a stone, I wish i could.

So the first clip should be a perfect representation of what a variable frame rate like 60p looks like in a 23.98 timeline.

Although we will definitely try some different shutter speeds, maybe we can break some stuff out on the street.

I will also try to make downloadable links... I run into this problem with windows media player when i want to go frame by frame... I can't. Which is probably what your referring to by not being able to "frame advance" I know that is frustrating.

Cassidy Bisher · February 4th, 2006, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig Seeman

I don't know about other NLEs but in Final Cut Pro, when you do a SlowMo (speed change of any sort), you can turn off frame blending. I'd consider that ability a must have when doing this sort of thing with the HVX.

Think about it though... and i did try it... if you take footage that only has 60 frames and you slow it down 40 percent... your going to get 2 or 3 frames in a row if you don't use frame blending... (using a 23.98 timeline)

again, you can't pull blood from a stone... you can only extrapolate so much data... If I did do this... it would be choppy. It's an aestheic taste at this point. So if I wanted a choppy slow mo, i would uncheck frame blending.

Tom Wills · February 4th, 2006, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Bauer

So rather than "conforming" (at least by the After Effects definition of the word) to a new timebase -- making a 60p clip into a 24p clip -- you simply slowed down the footage to 40% speed while remaining in a 60p workflow? If so, then I understand the frame blending. If it was conforming...taking "X" number of frames over "Y" amount of time in 60p and making a clip that is "X" number of frames over "Y x 2.5" time, at 24p...then I'm still confused about it, as no new frames would be created. (Note: error in formula EDITED after original post)

Actually, what he did was he conformed the footage to a 23.59 FPS timeline, then, in the second half, he turned the speed of that clip down to 40% of the speed after it had been conformed, and when he did that, he added frame blending to keep it from being too choppy.

Cassidy Bisher · February 4th, 2006, 11:39 AM

Yes, Tom.. right on the money.

Pete Bauer · February 4th, 2006, 11:50 AM

Sorry to belabor this. I meant it to be a straightforward "Method A" or "Method B" sort of question. But now that my morning cappucino has kicked in, I think that I can figure out the answer that hasn't been explicitly stated.

I'm realizing that since both the normal-motion and slow-motion versions of the scene are in the same file, they have to be displayed using the file's frame rate...almost certainly 60p or 60i because the normal-speed doesn't exhibit anomalies. If the slow-mo version is in a 60p/i file, there will have to be either frame blending (60p) or a pull-down scheme (60i) for the slo-mo .

If the slow-mo were actually conformed from 60p to 24p -- eg, taking 60 frames and displaying those 60 frames in 2.5 seconds rather than 1 second -- it would have to be saved to a separate file with a 24fps timebase.

This and Cassidy's indication that frame blending was absolutely necessary, pretty well answer the question for me: the slow-mo has the "coin doubling anomaly" because it was kept in a 60p or 60i timeline, rather than being exported as an actual 24fps file (which would not require frame blending).

Would still look forward to a downloadable, 60p-to-24p conformed slo-mo, but at least I'm confident now that the anomaly was a NLE workflow issue, and NOT a camera output issue.

EDIT: Just read Tom's post...thanks for explaining the workflow; that's what we needed. So conforming from 60p to 24p, and then doing a timeline slo-mo of 40% gives us slo-mo of 16% of realtime, if I did my morning math right.

Cassidy Bisher · February 4th, 2006, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Bauer

Would still look forward to a downloadable, 60p-to-24p conformed slo-mo, but at least I'm confident now that the anomaly was a NLE workflow issue, and NOT a camera output issue.

I put a download file link underneath the movie now... just right click save as...

Cassidy Bisher · February 4th, 2006, 01:57 PM

Ok here is a full-res quicktime file of the first half of what i posted earlier...
My compression settings were H.264 set to high, not best.. to keep the file small... so i may have contradicted the full res statement.

http://www.motivitypictures.com/hvx2...4conformed.mov right click save as

Here is my sequence setting...

http://www.motivitypictures.com/hvx2...60_setting.jpg

February 4th, 2006, 07:32 AM	#19
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	Cassidy, Assuming Barry Wan Kenobi is correct (as usual) and this was nothing more than an export "oops"... If you have the time, I'd be interested to see a re-export without the frame blending as a downloadable QT file, as many of us can't enjoy the full resolution of the picture in a small embedded web page window. It is wonderful thing to shoot HD, eh? __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

February 4th, 2006, 10:15 AM	#23
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	So rather than "conforming" (at least by the After Effects definition of the word) to a new timebase -- making a 60p clip into a 24p clip -- you simply slowed down the footage to 40% speed while remaining in a 60p workflow? If so, then I understand the frame blending. If it was conforming...taking "X" number of frames over "Y" amount of time in 60p and making a clip that is "X" number of frames over "Y x 2.5" time, at 24p...then I'm still confused about it, as no new frames would be created. (Note: error in formula EDITED after original post) __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

February 4th, 2006, 11:50 AM	#28
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	Sorry to belabor this. I meant it to be a straightforward "Method A" or "Method B" sort of question. But now that my morning cappucino has kicked in, I think that I can figure out the answer that hasn't been explicitly stated. I'm realizing that since both the normal-motion and slow-motion versions of the scene are in the same file, they have to be displayed using the file's frame rate...almost certainly 60p or 60i because the normal-speed doesn't exhibit anomalies. If the slow-mo version is in a 60p/i file, there will have to be either frame blending (60p) or a pull-down scheme (60i) for the slo-mo . If the slow-mo were actually conformed from 60p to 24p -- eg, taking 60 frames and displaying those 60 frames in 2.5 seconds rather than 1 second -- it would have to be saved to a separate file with a 24fps timebase. This and Cassidy's indication that frame blending was absolutely necessary, pretty well answer the question for me: the slow-mo has the "coin doubling anomaly" because it was kept in a 60p or 60i timeline, rather than being exported as an actual 24fps file (which would not require frame blending). Would still look forward to a downloadable, 60p-to-24p conformed slo-mo, but at least I'm confident now that the anomaly was a NLE workflow issue, and NOT a camera output issue. EDIT: Just read Tom's post...thanks for explaining the workflow; that's what we needed. So conforming from 60p to 24p, and then doing a timeline slo-mo of 40% gives us slo-mo of 16% of realtime, if I did my morning math right. __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

February 3rd, 2006, 11:46 PM	#16
John Benton Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 658	Cassidy, You are gonna give your HVX to REEL \| STREAM? I bet you mean a DVX (REEL \| STREAM doesn't do HVX...yet, if ever) in that case I would love to see the comparison between the two: HVX vs DVX(REEL \| STREAMed) super Nice Footage !!! Keep it coming

February 4th, 2006, 03:40 AM	#18
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	The NLE did it. He said in the file that he turned frame blending on.

February 4th, 2006, 08:25 AM	#20
Cassidy Bisher Regular Crew Join Date: May 2005 Location: Grand Rapids MI Posts: 198	bob this is correct

February 4th, 2006, 11:39 AM	#27
Cassidy Bisher Regular Crew Join Date: May 2005 Location: Grand Rapids MI Posts: 198	Yes, Tom.. right on the money.

February 4th, 2006, 01:57 PM	#30
Cassidy Bisher Regular Crew Join Date: May 2005 Location: Grand Rapids MI Posts: 198	Ok here is a full-res quicktime file of the first half of what i posted earlier... My compression settings were H.264 set to high, not best.. to keep the file small... so i may have contradicted the full res statement. http://www.motivitypictures.com/hvx2...4conformed.mov right click save as Here is my sequence setting... http://www.motivitypictures.com/hvx2...60_setting.jpg