Hip Hop's Dead: The making of an HDV Music Video

John Benton · January 27th, 2006, 08:59 PM

Great Article -
After reading the 4 Camera comparison-
Correct me if I am wrong, But...
Doing 1080/60i with the FX1 and running it through Naetress
seems like it will give you a Higher Resolution 24p than the HVX (or even the XL-H1 24f)
Can This be true?

Evan C. King · January 29th, 2006, 03:39 AM

Can anyone confirm this? I wish it were true but most likely isn't so.

Heath McKnight · January 29th, 2006, 10:19 AM

I don't think that's the case. My tests with an FX1 in 60i mode and Nattress' 24p conversion didn't produce higher res. It looked like 1080p24, though!

Maybe you're thinking of Nattress' Magic Uprezzer:

http://nattress.com/magic.htm

hwm

Gustavo Godinho · January 30th, 2006, 04:36 AM

C´mon guys, post the clip!

Heath McKnight · January 30th, 2006, 09:24 AM

We're working on it. (grin)

hwm

John Benton · January 30th, 2006, 02:48 PM

You guys,
Sorry to lead this thread slightly off topic,
but it seems like the FX1 (I have a beachtek SLR adapter)
with Nattress 24p
(and 35mm adapter)
is gonna be kinda comparable to the HVX200 for less than Half the price...
(The Z1 and HVX looked more similar than different on the 6 camera test)

I would rather get the HVX, but in general I feel we are close to an affordable Real High Def / 24p / direct to HD camera soon
- it may be the next incarnation of the Pany (better res/cheaper P2)-

So i guess I kinda feel like these new cameras now are a temporary solution (the Canon is just too expensive for me and I want a 35mm = relay lens and direct to HDisk recording)...

The FX1 is a cheaper but viable solution and I can capture it directly to my apple powerbook.
Or maybe it's that by the time I get my hands on an HVX it will be a week before NAB.....and I think interesting things will appear at Nab.

Please give me advice,
thanks

Heath McKnight · January 31st, 2006, 12:02 AM

Shooting at 10-20 minute intervals then dumping to a drive is a bit annoying, but not unlike changing film magazines.

heath

Evan C. King · January 31st, 2006, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Benton

You guys,
Sorry to lead this thread slightly off topic,
but it seems like the FX1 (I have a beachtek SLR adapter)
with Nattress 24p
(and 35mm adapter)
is gonna be kinda comparable to the HVX200 for less than Half the price...
(The Z1 and HVX looked more similar than different on the 6 camera test)

I would rather get the HVX, but in general I feel we are close to an affordable Real High Def / 24p / direct to HD camera soon
- it may be the next incarnation of the Pany (better res/cheaper P2)-

So i guess I kinda feel like these new cameras now are a temporary solution (the Canon is just too expensive for me and I want a 35mm = relay lens and direct to HDisk recording)...

The FX1 is a cheaper but viable solution and I can capture it directly to my apple powerbook.
Or maybe it's that by the time I get my hands on an HVX it will be a week before NAB.....and I think interesting things will appear at Nab.

Please give me advice,
thanks

100% Agree. I can't justify the prices of the hvx stuff right now. In time when more is offered for my dollars or prices come down maybe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heath McKnight

Shooting at 10-20 minute intervals then dumping to a drive is a bit annoying, but not unlike changing film magazines.

That's true, I've worked with magazines and was fine with that. But for me doing it digital at that price is just too much. That FX1 combo John mentioned will last a good 2-3 years and cost not nearly as much. THEN I think we'll really see what HD stuff has to offer and at what price points.

Gustavo Godinho · January 31st, 2006, 06:22 AM

You guys mean that FX1 with nattress deinterlacer can give us the same image quality that an HVX200 on 24p mode? Wish it was true, but I think it´s almost impossible, due to the natural degrading process the deinterlace softwares makes to the picture. I don´t know about Nattress, but take a look at a similar test between a DVX100a on 25p mode vs a DVX100a on 50i converted to 25p with dvfilm maker, a popular deinterlacer. The result:

http://www.orphicfilm.nl/html/25p.html

Somebody should run a test like this using a Z1 on CF25 vs Z1 on 60i converted to 24p with Nattress.

John Benton · January 31st, 2006, 09:32 AM

Gustavo -
I don't mean to imply that the FX1 (with a 24p Nattress) will give you equal quality as the HVX,
But,
Part of me feels the HVX doesn't quite feel "mature" yet
& for less than half the price, they may be comprable enough (depending on your needs)
also by the time the HVX comes out - the Sony xd cameras will be here...etc etc

(I also plan on aquiring a 35mm adapter/ many other props etc which will be easily transferable to the next model HVX or whatever)

the issue is an FX1 to tide me over until there is a camera that I think will last me awhile...
the HVX might be it - but there are enough issues to lead me to believe I should slow down and wait...
whether will or not is dubious...but that's why I am on these forums -
to learn everything
So everyones feedback is greatly appreciated

keep it coming

Gustavo Godinho · January 31st, 2006, 10:45 AM

John, I agree with you about why to choose the Sony cameras, but I´m still curious about a comparison between CF25 vs. Nattress deinterlacer on 50i 1080i AND between HDV 24p (HD100, HVX200) vs. Nattress deinterlacer on 50i 1080i mode.

I´ll try to invite Graeme Nattress to this thread.

Graeme Nattress · January 31st, 2006, 02:00 PM

1080i only has 720p's vertical resolution to begin with. My plugins keep as much of that resolution as possible, while making the video progressive.

The HVX2000 has about the same resolution in 1080p as it does in 1080i, it would seem, slightly above it's 720p resolution. I need better figures on this though, as I've not played with a HVX200 yet.

Best results from HDV I've seen are 1080i50 deinterlaced with my filters, conformed to 23.98fps.

If you need to avoid the slowdown, then the Film Effects or Standards Conversion options work great.

Graeme

Gustavo Godinho · January 31st, 2006, 03:26 PM

Graeme, the problem is that I´m a PC guy! Can´t afford Mac yet, which is VERY expensive in Brazil. Do you intend to make a PC version? (sorry if you have answered this same question more than 1 million times)

Did you make any comparison between the CF25 and your deinterlacer plugin to measure the resolution of each one?

Heath McKnight · January 31st, 2006, 05:47 PM

Graeme,

I can use your software to go to 24p from 50i? What about 50i with CF25? All Z1, of course.

heath

Graeme Nattress · January 31st, 2006, 06:10 PM

For that, I'd use Cinema Tools, with my plugin for the de-interlace. For CF25, you just have to move to a friendly codec first.

Graeme

January 29th, 2006, 10:19 AM	#18
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I don't think that's the case. My tests with an FX1 in 60i mode and Nattress' 24p conversion didn't produce higher res. It looked like 1080p24, though! Maybe you're thinking of Nattress' Magic Uprezzer: http://nattress.com/magic.htm hwm __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

January 30th, 2006, 04:36 AM	#19
Gustavo Godinho Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Belém - Pa - Brazil Posts: 130	C´mon guys, post the clip! __________________ lml

January 30th, 2006, 09:24 AM	#20
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	We're working on it. (grin) hwm __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

January 31st, 2006, 12:02 AM	#22
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Shooting at 10-20 minute intervals then dumping to a drive is a bit annoying, but not unlike changing film magazines. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

January 31st, 2006, 06:22 AM	#24
Gustavo Godinho Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Belém - Pa - Brazil Posts: 130	You guys mean that FX1 with nattress deinterlacer can give us the same image quality that an HVX200 on 24p mode? Wish it was true, but I think it´s almost impossible, due to the natural degrading process the deinterlace softwares makes to the picture. I don´t know about Nattress, but take a look at a similar test between a DVX100a on 25p mode vs a DVX100a on 50i converted to 25p with dvfilm maker, a popular deinterlacer. The result: http://www.orphicfilm.nl/html/25p.html Somebody should run a test like this using a Z1 on CF25 vs Z1 on 60i converted to 24p with Nattress. __________________ lml

January 27th, 2006, 08:59 PM	#16
John Benton Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 658	Great Article - After reading the 4 Camera comparison- Correct me if I am wrong, But... Doing 1080/60i with the FX1 and running it through Naetress seems like it will give you a Higher Resolution 24p than the HVX (or even the XL-H1 24f) Can This be true?

January 29th, 2006, 03:39 AM	#17
Evan C. King Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 532	Can anyone confirm this? I wish it were true but most likely isn't so.

January 30th, 2006, 02:48 PM	#21
John Benton Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 658	You guys, Sorry to lead this thread slightly off topic, but it seems like the FX1 (I have a beachtek SLR adapter) with Nattress 24p (and 35mm adapter) is gonna be kinda comparable to the HVX200 for less than Half the price... (The Z1 and HVX looked more similar than different on the 6 camera test) I would rather get the HVX, but in general I feel we are close to an affordable Real High Def / 24p / direct to HD camera soon - it may be the next incarnation of the Pany (better res/cheaper P2)- So i guess I kinda feel like these new cameras now are a temporary solution (the Canon is just too expensive for me and I want a 35mm = relay lens and direct to HDisk recording)... The FX1 is a cheaper but viable solution and I can capture it directly to my apple powerbook. Or maybe it's that by the time I get my hands on an HVX it will be a week before NAB.....and I think interesting things will appear at Nab. Please give me advice, thanks

January 31st, 2006, 09:32 AM	#25
John Benton Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 658	Gustavo - I don't mean to imply that the FX1 (with a 24p Nattress) will give you equal quality as the HVX, But, Part of me feels the HVX doesn't quite feel "mature" yet & for less than half the price, they may be comprable enough (depending on your needs) also by the time the HVX comes out - the Sony xd cameras will be here...etc etc (I also plan on aquiring a 35mm adapter/ many other props etc which will be easily transferable to the next model HVX or whatever) the issue is an FX1 to tide me over until there is a camera that I think will last me awhile... the HVX might be it - but there are enough issues to lead me to believe I should slow down and wait... whether will or not is dubious...but that's why I am on these forums - to learn everything So everyones feedback is greatly appreciated keep it coming

January 31st, 2006, 10:45 AM	#26
Gustavo Godinho Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Belém - Pa - Brazil Posts: 130	John, I agree with you about why to choose the Sony cameras, but I´m still curious about a comparison between CF25 vs. Nattress deinterlacer on 50i 1080i AND between HDV 24p (HD100, HVX200) vs. Nattress deinterlacer on 50i 1080i mode. I´ll try to invite Graeme Nattress to this thread. __________________ lml

January 31st, 2006, 02:00 PM	#27
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	1080i only has 720p's vertical resolution to begin with. My plugins keep as much of that resolution as possible, while making the video progressive. The HVX2000 has about the same resolution in 1080p as it does in 1080i, it would seem, slightly above it's 720p resolution. I need better figures on this though, as I've not played with a HVX200 yet. Best results from HDV I've seen are 1080i50 deinterlaced with my filters, conformed to 23.98fps. If you need to avoid the slowdown, then the Film Effects or Standards Conversion options work great. Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP

January 31st, 2006, 03:26 PM	#28
Gustavo Godinho Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Belém - Pa - Brazil Posts: 130	Graeme, the problem is that I´m a PC guy! Can´t afford Mac yet, which is VERY expensive in Brazil. Do you intend to make a PC version? (sorry if you have answered this same question more than 1 million times) Did you make any comparison between the CF25 and your deinterlacer plugin to measure the resolution of each one? __________________ lml

January 31st, 2006, 05:47 PM	#29
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Graeme, I can use your software to go to 24p from 50i? What about 50i with CF25? All Z1, of course. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

January 31st, 2006, 06:10 PM	#30
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	For that, I'd use Cinema Tools, with my plugin for the de-interlace. For CF25, you just have to move to a friendly codec first. Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP