Why do you need/want progressive? - Page 3 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony HVR-V1 / HDR-FX7

Sony HVR-V1 / HDR-FX7
Pro and consumer versions of this Sony 3-CMOS HDV camcorder.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 22nd, 2006, 09:15 PM   #31
Space Hipster
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Mullen
You long post was perfect. You summarized the issues well. It's why I have always supported progressive -- not a brand name.

Now the V1 24p, 25p, and 50p are still carried by interlace, so it can be screwed-up by one's display. But, the internals suggest are 60p and this suggests that on a NON tape media -- Sony is close to 1080/60p.
Thanks.

I'm hoping someone gets a chance soon to try HDMI capture and see if 60p might be obtainable out HDMI.
__________________
stephen v2
www.insaturnsrings.com
Stephen van Vuuren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2006, 10:01 PM   #32
New Boot
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 14
Wow

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen van Vuuren
I realize my post was long, but just to summarize. When you refer the "look" of interlace, it's 60 frames a second that creates it, not the interlacing. That's why 60p is touted as the best format for sports (not 60i). Interlacing is bad and creates artifacts as well as loses resolution.

Motion progressive images are ALWAYS more pleasing to the eye then the equivalent interlaced images, but make sure to compare the same frame rate. Compare 60i to 60p or 50i to 50p. 60i to 24p is not a very informative comparison for seeing the effects of interlacing since the frame rates are so different.
Wow, I have been a professional editor for 10 years and didnt know that. So, for example, The World Series, on FOX HD local, which has that live quality, could actually be progressive? Thats amazing. I've never even heard it discussed in editor circles before.

What kind of camera can actually pull this "60p looks-like-live camera" off? And is it possible to turn it into 30p in post, if one decides they want the more filmic look after the fact? How flexible.

Where are more examples of this being broadcasts?

Color me surprised.

-Christopher
Christopher Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2006, 10:15 PM   #33
Space Hipster
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
Fox, ESPN, ABC are all 720p at 60p. There are quite a few 60p cameras starting under 10K and going all the way to the top including JVC new ProHDV cams. Even the new JVC HD110 does 60p off analog component.

You can turn 60p into 30p or 24p with the same motion blur/artificating issues as with turning 60i into 30p or 24p.
__________________
stephen v2
www.insaturnsrings.com
Stephen van Vuuren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2006, 10:56 PM   #34
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Warren, NJ
Posts: 398
Shouldn't 60p have twice the information as 60i to work with in creating 30p or 24p? Isn't 60p to 30p a matter of just drawing alternate frames with no de-interlacing?
David Ziegelheim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2006, 11:11 PM   #35
Space Hipster
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
You won't lose resolution going from 60p to 30p or 24p since you are basically throwing out frames, but because 60p is shot with 1/60th or faster shutter speed, you will need to post process if you want 1/48th shutter look which can result in artifacts or some softness. With many 60p cams also shooting 24p, the best course is to shoot 24p when thats the look you want.
__________________
stephen v2
www.insaturnsrings.com
Stephen van Vuuren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2006, 01:34 AM   #36
HDV Cinema
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen van Vuuren
Fox, ESPN, ABC are all 720p at 60p. There are quite a few 60p cameras starting under 10K and going all the way to the top including JVC new ProHDV cams. Even the new JVC HD110 does 60p off analog component.
And JVC's coming CONSUMER HD camcorder is 1080/60p to 30GB hard disk. The V1's ClearVid is step 1 of Sony's move to progressive.
Attached Images
 
__________________
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 23rd, 2006, 07:13 AM   #37
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Mullen
And JVC's coming CONSUMER HD camcorder is 1080/60p to 30GB hard disk. The V1's ClearVid is step 1 of Sony's move to progressive.

I submit it would be more accurate to say that the V1 is Sony's move into low-end progressive. HDCAM has always been progressive, XDCam as well.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot
Author, producer, composer
Certified Sony Vegas Trainer
http://www.vasst.com
Douglas Spotted Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2006, 10:01 AM   #38
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 4,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki
Do you think I wouldn't tell a 50% cut in resolution? This would be lower than that of an SD, progressive 'factory' DVD. All my 1080i video has far more detail that any SD DVD on the displays in question!

Frankly, when buying the LCD I was very suspicious how it would display my HDV; I was very positively surprised!

I'm not saying that what you (and the article) mention is untrue, let's try and solve this 'mistery' as I bet many would benefit!
Steve, further on this because you (and the article you linked to) introduced a lot of confusion. I'd appreciate it if you gave us some more details on how de-interlacing was implemented on those displays that failed vs those that passed the test. While I still doubt it very much that I wouldn't notice a 50% resolution drop, I'd like to be able to educatively pick the right display to check the V1's 50i vs 25p modes, after I can finally put my hands on it. Also, is there a software or resolution charts (as those mentioned in the article in question) available somewhere? TIA

Piotr
Piotr Wozniacki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2006, 08:12 PM   #39
HDV Cinema
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle
I submit it would be more accurate to say that the V1 is Sony's move into low-end progressive. HDCAM has always been progressive, XDCam as well.
You are correct, but what I really meant to say step towards 1080/60p.
__________________
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 23rd, 2006, 08:44 PM   #40
HDV Cinema
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki
Steve, further on this because you (and the article you linked to) introduced a lot of confusion. I'd appreciate it if you gave us some more details on how de-interlacing was implemented on those displays that failed vs those that passed the test.
Here's a link to my HDV@Work story on "What is 1080?"

Everyone buying an HDTV should stay on top of this topic should regularly visit:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/index.php?

What's sad is in my story I noted that more sets in 2006 should pass when more failed.

My Sony A10 passed which is why I bought it. BUT, passing does not mean there are no artifacts FROM deinterlacing as I found AFTER buying.

Passing simply means "bob" is not used. My set uses regional deinterlacing which means ONLY the moving objects lose V. rez. I can far too often see a region lose 50% resolution.

A good interlacer can cost $10,000 or more.

There are 4 interlace sins:

1) Line flicker
2) Line Twitter
3) MPEG-2 artifacts caused by the separate encoding of fields
4) Deinterlacing artifacts

Which is why the world is moving to progressive.

The problem is that OTA is limited to 1080i when MPEG-2 is used. Premium services like HBO HD can use MPEG-4 and Bluray can use 1080p, but if MPEG-2 is used the much higher data rate requires 50GB discs. But, Sony may use AVC eventually. There is a lot of pressure to move past MPEG-2 given the steller performance of VC-1 on HD DVDs.

Having said this, the majority of 1080i looks great!

And, remember that 720p ALWAYS looks a bit softer than top quality 1080i. So you can imagine how great 1080p will look in a few years!
__________________
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 24th, 2006, 08:01 AM   #41
RED Code Chef
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holland
Posts: 12,514
Steve,

Are you saying blu-ray does not support VC-1? It does. Both formats support MPEG-2, H.264 & VC-1 encodings.

The new Superman movie will be available in both formats with a 1080p VC-1 encoding for example.
__________________

Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com
DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef

Join the DV Challenge | Lady X

Search DVinfo.net for quick answers | Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors
Rob Lohman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2006, 02:38 AM   #42
HDV Cinema
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Lohman
Steve,

Are you saying blu-ray does not support VC-1?
Of course not. The question is will any studios in the BR camp pay MS for VC-1? AVC is licensed from the MPEG group and not MS. My assumption is that Sony, at least, will not pay money to MS.

But, given the poor reviews of BR using MPEG-2 (despite a very public claim by Sony that MPEG-2 is the BEST codec) studios may change their minds. And, that may include Sony.

But, perhaps its the players not the codec which is why the Sony is delayed.
__________________
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 26th, 2006, 08:48 AM   #43
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Warren, NJ
Posts: 398
Now I'm confused. I though Blu-ray supported the MPEG4-Part 10/AVC. That MPEG 2 was for backward compatibility.
David Ziegelheim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 22nd, 2006, 11:41 PM   #44
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Aspen, Colorado
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Mullen
Here's a link to my HDV@Work story on "What is 1080?"

Everyone buying an HDTV should stay on top of this topic should regularly visit:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/index.php?

What's sad is in my story I noted that more sets in 2006 should pass when more failed.

My Sony A10 passed which is why I bought it. BUT, passing does not mean there are no artifacts FROM deinterlacing as I found AFTER buying.

Passing simply means "bob" is not used. My set uses regional deinterlacing which means ONLY the moving objects lose V. rez. I can far too often see a region lose 50% resolution.

A good interlacer can cost $10,000 or more.

There are 4 interlace sins:

1) Line flicker
2) Line Twitter
3) MPEG-2 artifacts caused by the separate encoding of fields
4) Deinterlacing artifacts

Which is why the world is moving to progressive.

The problem is that OTA is limited to 1080i when MPEG-2 is used. Premium services like HBO HD can use MPEG-4 and Bluray can use 1080p, but if MPEG-2 is used the much higher data rate requires 50GB discs. But, Sony may use AVC eventually. There is a lot of pressure to move past MPEG-2 given the steller performance of VC-1 on HD DVDs.

Having said this, the majority of 1080i looks great!

And, remember that 720p ALWAYS looks a bit softer than top quality 1080i. So you can imagine how great 1080p will look in a few years!
Steve,

That is well worth repeating, and repeating and repeating.. interlaced must go, interlaced must go.. :-)

I have more trouble with interlaced recovery that any single element in video production. Period.
Alex Huppenthal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 23rd, 2006, 12:28 AM   #45
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Warren, NJ
Posts: 398
Quote:
There are 4 interlace sins:

1) Line flicker
2) Line Twitter
3) MPEG-2 artifacts caused by the separate encoding of fields
4) Deinterlacing artifacts

Which is why the world is moving to progressive.
Fixing those things is probably more a by product of going progressive. Display devices are going progressive because the underlying technology--LCD, DLP, plasma, LCOS--is progressive. If analog broadcasts to CRTs were the only available technology, we would probably still be interlaced.
David Ziegelheim 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 > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony HVR-V1 / HDR-FX7

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:36 AM.


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