PAL EX XDCAM is 4:1:1 or 4:2:0?? at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds

Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds
Sony PMW-300, PXW-X200, PXW-X180 (back to EX3 & EX1) recording to SxS flash memory.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 17th, 2010, 11:35 AM   #1
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 120
PAL EX XDCAM is 4:1:1 or 4:2:0??

Hi,
Pal dvcam is 4:2:0.
What about Pal xdcam?
Giannis Pass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 11:37 AM   #2
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giannis Pass View Post
Hi,
Pal dvcam is 4:2:0.
What about Pal xdcam?
4:2:0 sadly.
__________________
Marcus Durham
Media2u, Corporate Video Production For Your Business - http://www.media2u.co.uk
Marcus Durham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 12:41 PM   #3
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 126
Very sad indeed :)
Bram Corstjens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 12:57 PM   #4
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 120
Thanks for the reply.
Giannis Pass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 02:20 PM   #5
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Neenah, WI
Posts: 547
all XDCAM 35 Mbps (EX and disc-based) is 4:2:0.

4:1:1 was never used before or since NTSC DV as far as I know.
__________________
TimK
Kolb Productions
Tim Kolb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 03:41 PM   #6
Major Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Carlisle, PA
Posts: 451
The camera can output 4.2.2 through the SDI port.

Sony has a video online where video compression is explained and they show examples of each and 4.2.0 looks much better than 4.1.1 so imo 4.2.0 is a good thing! That's why 4.1.1 is not used for anything but SD DV.

Actually 4.4.4, 4.2.0, etc. technically only applies to standard definition video, this number scheme is just one of the artifacts left over from the early days of digital SD but everyone uses it.
Kevin Spahr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 06:31 PM   #7
Trustee
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rhinelander, WI
Posts: 1,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Spahr View Post
Actually 4.4.4, 4.2.0, etc. technically only applies to standard definition video, this number scheme is just one of the artifacts left over from the early days of digital SD but everyone uses it.
It describes the different types of chroma subsampling regardless of definition.
Adam Stanislav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 08:04 PM   #8
Major Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Carlisle, PA
Posts: 451
It is actually referring to the sampling rate of the circuit for each of the components.

A number such as "4.4.4" was based on an image of 720x480 pixels using a sampling circuit of 13.5Mhz, a "2" would refer to a 6.75Mhz sampling circuit, etc.

Since full HD is 1920x1080 pixels you can't sample that at 13.5Mhz you need a much higher sampling frequency - 74.25Mhz.

YES, everyone uses the "4.4.4" numbers for HD but very few could explain the math that generates those numbers, because if they did they would understand how TECHNICALLY it is wrong when talking about anything but a SD sampling rate.
Kevin Spahr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 08:27 PM   #9
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,268
I don't think 4:1:1 is any better than 4:2:0.
Michael Maier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 09:03 PM   #10
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Neenah, WI
Posts: 547
True enough.

I've talked with industry guys who have proposed scaling the nomenclature from 4:2:2 to 22:11:11 to maintain the original math.

I guess that must've seemed too complicated
__________________
TimK
Kolb Productions
Tim Kolb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 09:32 PM   #11
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 1,177
We never guess, we always look it up.

The subsampling scheme is commonly expressed as a three part ratio J:a:b (e.g. 4:2:2), that describe the number of luminance and chrominance samples in a conceptual region that is J pixels wide, and 2 pixels high. The parts are (in their respective order):

J horizontal sampling reference (width of the conceptual region). Usually, 4.
a number of chrominance samples (Cr, Cb) in the first row of J pixels.
b number of (additional) chrominance samples (Cr, Cb) in the second row of J pixels.

Note that this is abstract geometry and has NOTHING to do with the actual pixel dimensions ("resolution") of the video frame.

You could look it up instead of arguing about it here.
Chroma subsampling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Richard Crowley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2010, 10:00 PM   #12
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: melb.vic.au
Posts: 447
No one is arguing, Kevin was simply pointing out the origin of 4:4:4, in which he is totally correct. You guys have simply misunderstood him.
__________________
www.davidwilliams.com.au
David C. Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2010, 02:07 AM   #13
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Neenah, WI
Posts: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier View Post
I don't think 4:1:1 is any better than 4:2:0.
I'd have to agree. In fact, I'd rather key 4:2:0.
__________________
TimK
Kolb Productions
Tim Kolb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2010, 12:45 PM   #14
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Crowley View Post
..........the number of luminance and chrominance samples in a conceptual region that is J pixels wide, and 2 pixels high.
You have to look back to the origins of digital video to see how the terminology came about. Initially the composite signal was digitised, and it made sense to lock the sampling frequency to subcarrier - frequencies of 3x sub-carr freq for PAL (13.29MHz) and 4x sub-carr freq (14.32Mhz) for NTSC became the norm.

Move to component, and the desire was to use similar frequencies for digitising the component signals. It was further desired to use the same frequency for the 525 and 625 line systems (which it now becomes wrong to call "PAL" and "NTSC") and 13.5 MHz was settled on as a common compromise.

The "4" and "2" in 4:2:2 etc therefore comes from "no of samples in a cycle of NTSC subcarrier", even though by the time it was first used the move from 14.32MHz to 13.5MHz sampling meant it was referring to longer than a cycle anyway.

That's the origins - the wikipedia definition is how it's now come to used, and it must be one of the worst and most confusing bits of nomenclature in the TV world. All too often it's heard that "X is 4:2:2, so it must be better than Y which is only 4:2:0". That's only true if the luminance aspects of both systems are the same, compare a 4:2:0 full raster system with a 4:2:2 subsampled one and it's completely untrue.
David Heath 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 XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:59 AM.


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