HDR-HC1 screen grab

Young Lee · May 30th, 2005, 10:20 PM

Definitely much better than the HD1. I like the color lattitudes.

Wayne Morellini · June 9th, 2005, 08:35 AM

Just had a look at the pictures. I can testify that the colour of the can is pretty close to real life, we have them around here. But the table looks like muffled reds and blues, probably because of the 4:2:0 but it could be the single chip filter.

I like the latitude, I think they actually have done a good job with this low end sensor. But one thing I notice, is that if you look at the bright foreheads of people in the village shots you will see they are pretty white and latitude compressed (in matter of fact everything seems to have a mild washout). Probably a latitude compromise, but a reasonably good one.

Ken Hodson · June 9th, 2005, 01:08 PM

I agree with Chris that screen grabs are less than ideal.
The high-rez can shot looks very suspicious. It has no depth of field with a close-up of the can. Not a good way to evaluate what a HD cam can do at all. It also screams touched-up to me, and looks as if it came from a completely different cam the the one that made the first set of shots.

Steven White · June 9th, 2005, 01:18 PM

Quote:

It also screams touched-up to me, and looks as if it cam from a completely different cam the the one that made the first set of shots.

I doubt that. The still comes from the cameras "picture" function... which means that it doesn't go through 15 GOP MPEG-2, but JPEG - potentially at very high quality, and it doesn't go through 1.33 resample to 1440x1080, but maintains the native luma resolution of the CMOS.

Furthermore, without knowing the settings and focus of the video stills, it's impossible to tell if it was properly focused or not.

-Steve

Ken Hodson · June 9th, 2005, 01:51 PM

Exactly. Stills are no way to evaluate video.

Wayne Morellini · June 10th, 2005, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Hodson

I agree with Chris that screen grabs are less than ideal.
The high-rez can shot looks very suspicious. It has no depth of field with a close-up of the can. Not a good way to evaluate what a HD cam can do at all. It also screams touched-up to me, and looks as if it came from a completely different cam the the one that made the first set of shots.

I agree, the picture mode might have more saturation gain inbuilt, or higher bit depth (those white foreheads in the video shots) but the answer could be much simpler. In single chip filtering, there is the possibility of the filter allowing some of the wrong colours to bleed through. In bright situations this can lead to some washout in the image, but in darker situations saturation is much better. It could also be the lens etc.

I trust, untouched, digitally copied stills only for certain things, like picture latitude, saturation and chroma aberrations, under estimable lighting conditions. Everything else is really definable by the operator, motion and compression, needing moving footage.

Speaking about touch up issues, you will notice the pictures in the brochures, are clearly better than those here, except for the can shot. I wonder if it is post production color saturation from the print process, or if they are using UV/ND/IR?CIRPOL filters to bring down the light level (like the can shoot) to take the brochure shoots?

Kaku Ito · June 13th, 2005, 03:07 AM

When I tested HC1000 before which has the CMOS inside, I was very dissapointed with the image, so I was suspecting that HDR-HC1 is not going to be that impressive. I will test the prosumer version later on my magazine article, so let you folks know how it is. Sony made it too cheap. It is typical of them to play around with the format (almost abusing people's sense of reference and standard) that I mentioned in my article on VideoAlfa magazine. They could not help to do this to fight against Panny's HVX200.

One thing from my experience with HDV camera, the resolution of the camera is pretty high, so scenaries like these file provided should look better if it was shot with FX1 or Z1. I assume HC1's CMOS is resulting these quality.

Wayne Morellini · June 13th, 2005, 07:48 AM

Kaku, thanks. What is the name of the magazine I would like to read it? A number of people are excited about the possibility of the HC1 having uncompressed video output via component output (or D connector) like FX1. Could you possibly please verify this, the pixel format, and Signal to Noise ratio, in your review?

Wayne.

Kaku Ito · June 13th, 2005, 08:36 AM

Wayne, unfortunately, the magazine is in Japanese.
If I get my hands on one, I will let you know. Now we finally received Decklink Multibridge in our hands (after I revealed the bug with my turtle footage), I can shoot something with FX1 side by side, then capture at 8bit uncompressed or 10bit uncompressed. The question is, will Sony let me test HC1? They must hate my honest reports.

Wayne Morellini · June 13th, 2005, 12:19 PM

;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaku Ito

The question is, will Sony let me test HC1? They must hate my honest reports.

They can't stop your magazine buying one.

If it gets published on their website, let us know, we can google a translation. What magazine are you from? I remember, during the early days of the JVC HD1, I could not find a review/pictures, and I found a Asian site that had an most excellent side by side comparison, maybe it could have been yours.

Thanks

Wayne.

Mark Kubat · June 13th, 2005, 07:25 PM

Kaku, your reports last year on the GS400 and then the FX1 were amazing - thanks for your contributions.

Kaku, any indication about the "cinematic" mode on HC1? Is it cineframe24 or something else?

When do you think you might get a chance to see the HC1 in person?

You're always first!

Mark

June 9th, 2005, 01:08 PM	#18
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	I agree with Chris that screen grabs are less than ideal. The high-rez can shot looks very suspicious. It has no depth of field with a close-up of the can. Not a good way to evaluate what a HD cam can do at all. It also screams touched-up to me, and looks as if it came from a completely different cam the the one that made the first set of shots. __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech. Last edited by Ken Hodson; June 9th, 2005 at 01:49 PM.

June 9th, 2005, 01:51 PM	#20
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	Exactly. Stills are no way to evaluate video. __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

June 13th, 2005, 03:07 AM	#22
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Hmm, not impressed with the image as I had guessed. When I tested HC1000 before which has the CMOS inside, I was very dissapointed with the image, so I was suspecting that HDR-HC1 is not going to be that impressive. I will test the prosumer version later on my magazine article, so let you folks know how it is. Sony made it too cheap. It is typical of them to play around with the format (almost abusing people's sense of reference and standard) that I mentioned in my article on VideoAlfa magazine. They could not help to do this to fight against Panny's HVX200. One thing from my experience with HDV camera, the resolution of the camera is pretty high, so scenaries like these file provided should look better if it was shot with FX1 or Z1. I assume HC1's CMOS is resulting these quality.

June 13th, 2005, 07:48 AM	#23
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Kaku, thanks. What is the name of the magazine I would like to read it? A number of people are excited about the possibility of the HC1 having uncompressed video output via component output (or D connector) like FX1. Could you possibly please verify this, the pixel format, and Signal to Noise ratio, in your review? Wayne. Last edited by Wayne Morellini; June 13th, 2005 at 08:21 AM.

June 13th, 2005, 07:25 PM	#26
Mark Kubat Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 375	Kaku - great to hear from you! Kaku, your reports last year on the GS400 and then the FX1 were amazing - thanks for your contributions. Kaku, any indication about the "cinematic" mode on HC1? Is it cineframe24 or something else? When do you think you might get a chance to see the HC1 in person? You're always first! Mark

May 30th, 2005, 10:20 PM	#16
Young Lee Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 268	Definitely much better than the HD1. I like the color lattitudes.

June 9th, 2005, 08:35 AM	#17
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Just had a look at the pictures. I can testify that the colour of the can is pretty close to real life, we have them around here. But the table looks like muffled reds and blues, probably because of the 4:2:0 but it could be the single chip filter. I like the latitude, I think they actually have done a good job with this low end sensor. But one thing I notice, is that if you look at the bright foreheads of people in the village shots you will see they are pretty white and latitude compressed (in matter of fact everything seems to have a mild washout). Probably a latitude compromise, but a reasonably good one.

June 13th, 2005, 08:36 AM	#24
Kaku Ito Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Posts: 1,382	Wayne, unfortunately, the magazine is in Japanese. If I get my hands on one, I will let you know. Now we finally received Decklink Multibridge in our hands (after I revealed the bug with my turtle footage), I can shoot something with FX1 side by side, then capture at 8bit uncompressed or 10bit uncompressed. The question is, will Sony let me test HC1? They must hate my honest reports.