Capturing FX1 video signal with its analog component out to 8-bit uncompressed HD

Joel Corral · January 13th, 2005, 03:21 PM

don't you have compression when you export a frame to Bmp or jpeg? isn't that where its coming from? why don't you compare the frame export to a 32bit targa (.tga)?

John Jay · January 13th, 2005, 03:31 PM

erm,

there's no compression in a bitmap 24 bit - thats why its 6meg..

Joel Corral · January 13th, 2005, 03:46 PM

is it? ok.

just suggesting.

joel

Wayne Morellini · January 13th, 2005, 09:59 PM

Been lurking here. Is it positive that the analogue out is only 8-bit, has there many any spec sheet (of the chips and D/A convertor involved) to verify this, or test, could there be 10, 12 or 14 bits colour depth? And has there been any test to verify the resolution, where ever it is the native 960, or processed pixel shifted 1440, 1920, or 2880 at this stage of the pipeline? I say this because who knows what quality is being passed to the custom mpeg2 encoder chip to increase the quality of it's processing? Also has anybody tested the Signal to niose ratio of his stage to see what resolution and bit depth it is limited to?

Thanks

Wayne.

Jim Arthurs · January 14th, 2005, 10:21 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : Been lurking here. -->>>

Hi Wayne.. that's okay, I've been lurking at your hang-outs... read that whole thread started by Obin in one afternoon... and backwards at that. Big headache. :)

Barry Green states from his tests that the vertical resolution when interlaced is around 800 lines. CF 25 or CF 30 (the in-camera "fake" progressive) he measures to approx 575 lines (more likely 540). Best guest is that CF delivers one single raw fields worth of rez. In interlaced mode, according to Barry, each field is fuzzed down a bit closer to 400 lines to prevent buzzing on interlaced displays.

As to the specs as measured "live" from the component out, I don't think anyone has done any qualitative work here. We're pretty lucky to have had anyone actually try what Kaku has tried. I sure intend to more, when I have my Z1 in hand.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs

Barry Green · January 14th, 2005, 12:22 PM

The 775/800 in interlaced, and 575/540 in CF30, were measured from frame extractions from tape, not live, so no I don't know if the analog component out might be delivering more. We were monitoring on a large 36" HDTV, live, and I certainly don't remember it being higher, so I think those are probably pretty accurate.

As for horizontal resolution, I posted some res chart extractions here... it looks very clean at 800, and passably clean at 900 although maybe at 900 it crossed the threshold to "unresolved". It did seem like the live analog component looked acceptably clean even at 1000, but examining the tape it looks like 800 is the cleanest resolved resolution. So perhaps it is delivering more horizontal resolution at live analog component out, as opposed to the downsampled-to-1440 version on tape.

Wayne Morellini · January 15th, 2005, 02:56 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Jim Arthurs : <<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : Been lurking here. -->>>

Hi Wayne.. that's okay, I've been lurking at your hang-outs... read that whole thread started by Obin in one afternoon... and backwards at that. Big headache. :) -->

Crazy, that thing is over 500 printed A4 pages ;)

Thanks

Barry, so the measuments of lines, is that actual pixel lines or Test Chart lines? I understasnd the measuments have changed since 4:3.

Is it delivering a 4:2:0, or 4:2:2 (or 4:4:4) through the analogue out, what does the monitor report?

Thanks

Wayne.

Filip Kovcin · January 15th, 2005, 05:03 AM

john,

is it possible to find somewhere kind of mirror of your previously mentioned link - which is now not working.

http://s17.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=...TU1DGA089KLQNNC

thank you

filip

John Jay · January 15th, 2005, 11:22 AM

Sorry Filip,
Ive recycled it, maybe someone who downloaded it can help

January 13th, 2005, 03:31 PM	#17
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	erm, there's no compression in a bitmap 24 bit - thats why its 6meg.. __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*

January 15th, 2005, 05:03 AM	#23
Filip Kovcin Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: warsaw, poland Posts: 440	to John Jay john, is it possible to find somewhere kind of mirror of your previously mentioned link - which is now not working. http://s17.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=...TU1DGA089KLQNNC thank you filip

January 15th, 2005, 11:22 AM	#24
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	Sorry Filip, Ive recycled it, maybe someone who downloaded it can help __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*

January 13th, 2005, 03:21 PM	#16
Joel Corral Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Brea, CA Posts: 356	don't you have compression when you export a frame to Bmp or jpeg? isn't that where its coming from? why don't you compare the frame export to a 32bit targa (.tga)?

January 13th, 2005, 03:46 PM	#18
Joel Corral Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Brea, CA Posts: 356	is it? ok. just suggesting. joel

January 13th, 2005, 09:59 PM	#19
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Been lurking here. Is it positive that the analogue out is only 8-bit, has there many any spec sheet (of the chips and D/A convertor involved) to verify this, or test, could there be 10, 12 or 14 bits colour depth? And has there been any test to verify the resolution, where ever it is the native 960, or processed pixel shifted 1440, 1920, or 2880 at this stage of the pipeline? I say this because who knows what quality is being passed to the custom mpeg2 encoder chip to increase the quality of it's processing? Also has anybody tested the Signal to niose ratio of his stage to see what resolution and bit depth it is limited to? Thanks Wayne.

January 14th, 2005, 10:21 AM	#20
Jim Arthurs Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Colorado Springs CO Posts: 120	<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : Been lurking here. -->>> Hi Wayne.. that's okay, I've been lurking at your hang-outs... read that whole thread started by Obin in one afternoon... and backwards at that. Big headache. :) Barry Green states from his tests that the vertical resolution when interlaced is around 800 lines. CF 25 or CF 30 (the in-camera "fake" progressive) he measures to approx 575 lines (more likely 540). Best guest is that CF delivers one single raw fields worth of rez. In interlaced mode, according to Barry, each field is fuzzed down a bit closer to 400 lines to prevent buzzing on interlaced displays. As to the specs as measured "live" from the component out, I don't think anyone has done any qualitative work here. We're pretty lucky to have had anyone actually try what Kaku has tried. I sure intend to more, when I have my Z1 in hand. Regards, Jim Arthurs

January 14th, 2005, 12:22 PM	#21
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	The 775/800 in interlaced, and 575/540 in CF30, were measured from frame extractions from tape, not live, so no I don't know if the analog component out might be delivering more. We were monitoring on a large 36" HDTV, live, and I certainly don't remember it being higher, so I think those are probably pretty accurate. As for horizontal resolution, I posted some res chart extractions here... it looks very clean at 800, and passably clean at 900 although maybe at 900 it crossed the threshold to "unresolved". It did seem like the live analog component looked acceptably clean even at 1000, but examining the tape it looks like 800 is the cleanest resolved resolution. So perhaps it is delivering more horizontal resolution at live analog component out, as opposed to the downsampled-to-1440 version on tape.

January 15th, 2005, 02:56 AM	#22
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	<<<-- Originally posted by Jim Arthurs : <<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : Been lurking here. -->>> Hi Wayne.. that's okay, I've been lurking at your hang-outs... read that whole thread started by Obin in one afternoon... and backwards at that. Big headache. :) --> Crazy, that thing is over 500 printed A4 pages ;) Thanks Barry, so the measuments of lines, is that actual pixel lines or Test Chart lines? I understasnd the measuments have changed since 4:3. Is it delivering a 4:2:0, or 4:2:2 (or 4:4:4) through the analogue out, what does the monitor report? Thanks Wayne.