Progressive video on a consumer camcorder, an idea

David Warrilow · June 7th, 2004, 08:05 PM

Okay so that was a big non-event.

I don't even think I got the codec recognised as being able to be used - certainly not for capturing DVCPro50. Maybe it has to be a distincly DVCPro50 stream if there is such a thing - and only then will it be recognised.

Anyway, a couple of distinctions - clearly capturing the live output from the fw port results in no greater image size - as I suspected, the image/signal has already gone through all of its compression/resizing etc. before it ever gets to the port so that's that. Goes back to what i said before - only a mod like the "Juan and only" is building to grab the signal off the chips that is going to change anything.

On the upside, I had a really good look at the difference between the two filters the camera uses for the 'still' mode and the video (D.Wide) mode. They both provide the same FOV - i.e. use the entire chip area BUT (and this was a surprise to me) the image from the video mode is definitely softer and IMO not as good as that in 'still' mode. There is a lot more detail when running in the photo capture mode. It is a little 'harder' as I alluded to before - but in terms of retaining detail, I think it's actually better than the video mode.

You'd have to experiment with your particular camera but it would be little hassle to connect something like a Quickstream DV disc to the camera in still capture mode and record the signal directly thru firewire - for what I can see as a better image than that ending up on the Minidv tape. And of course there's the 'progressive' image signature thing happening aswell.

Best,

DW.

June 7th, 2004, 08:05 PM	#31
David Warrilow Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 106	Okay so that was a big non-event. I don't even think I got the codec recognised as being able to be used - certainly not for capturing DVCPro50. Maybe it has to be a distincly DVCPro50 stream if there is such a thing - and only then will it be recognised. Anyway, a couple of distinctions - clearly capturing the live output from the fw port results in no greater image size - as I suspected, the image/signal has already gone through all of its compression/resizing etc. before it ever gets to the port so that's that. Goes back to what i said before - only a mod like the "Juan and only" is building to grab the signal off the chips that is going to change anything. On the upside, I had a really good look at the difference between the two filters the camera uses for the 'still' mode and the video (D.Wide) mode. They both provide the same FOV - i.e. use the entire chip area BUT (and this was a surprise to me) the image from the video mode is definitely softer and IMO not as good as that in 'still' mode. There is a lot more detail when running in the photo capture mode. It is a little 'harder' as I alluded to before - but in terms of retaining detail, I think it's actually better than the video mode. You'd have to experiment with your particular camera but it would be little hassle to connect something like a Quickstream DV disc to the camera in still capture mode and record the signal directly thru firewire - for what I can see as a better image than that ending up on the Minidv tape. And of course there's the 'progressive' image signature thing happening aswell. Best, DW.