|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 3rd, 2008, 06:38 AM | #16 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 1,945
|
|
April 3rd, 2008, 11:03 AM | #17 | |
Trustee
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 1,945
|
Quote:
But the bottom line was that none of this removed the 'blue' signature from the HF10 clips. Whether it was more or less saturated, it still had a bluish cast. I also checked out 30p and was a bit surprised to see that there was still a fair amount of motion stutter. Better than 24p, but still there and not my thing. |
|
April 3rd, 2008, 11:26 AM | #18 | ||
Regular Crew
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 165
|
Quote:
I do agree that reliable AWB is nice - it certainly reduces work and setup time. My current SD camera has rather good AWB, so I would miss that if these newer cameras aren't as good. Quote:
|
||
April 3rd, 2008, 11:30 AM | #19 | |
Trustee
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 1,945
|
Quote:
As for the 30p, I may be wrong, but I think the issue is trying to interpolate motion that's simply not there in every other 'missing' frame in 30p. A display can double the number of frames, but there still is no information on rapidly moving objects. |
|
April 3rd, 2008, 12:56 PM | #20 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 165
|
Exactly, which is why I wouldn't have expected to see much difference between 30P and deinterlaced 60i. Maybe the TVs interpolate and don't just duplicate each deinterlaced frame to get 60P, I don't know since I don't yet have an HDTV (I'm sort of in the midst of modernizing our whole video setup along with the camcorder). I've been viewing camcorder footage on a 1920x1200 computer monitor, and on the monitor 30P and deinterlaced 60i look pretty much identical. Things may look different on a real TV, depending on how the extra frames are generated to get 60P from 60i.
|
April 3rd, 2008, 01:20 PM | #21 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Bristol, CT. USA
Posts: 54
|
I think anytime you edit and render out you're 60i footage it's going to be converted to 30 frames per second because you're deinterlacing to NTSC 29.937 frames per second and it will not look as smooth as watching it directly from the camera.... I think. I could be wrong. I noticed this on my Honeymoon footage. Watching the edited rendered Vegas file looks completely different then watching the HDV tape directly from the camera.
|
April 3rd, 2008, 01:28 PM | #22 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 1,945
|
Tony, I just looked at the 30p footage directly on the LCD screen of the HF10 after reading your post. It still lacks the smoothness of 60i, but doesn't look quite as bad as on my HDTV. But to be honest, part of that may be because the HF10's LCD is so small, it's not nearly as easy picking up issues as on a 60" HDTV.
My original comments about lacking smoothness was playing the 30p clip directly from the camera via HDMI to the Pioneer plasma...no editing. |
April 3rd, 2008, 02:36 PM | #23 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,222
|
Yes the combination of DVD player and HD tv can make things look bad at times. Playing DVD's through my PS3 to my Panasonic 1920x1080 Plasma is often worse than looking at the same DVD from my old DVD player on my old iArt CRT!!! The combination of the PS3 changing resolution to 1080p over HDMI causes a lot of problems. Stuttering and other artifacts. This with the same DVD. SR11 output over HDMI to the same Panasonic TV is great, makes most network HD look really bad!!!! I had originally got the PS3 as a cheap and multipurpose way of playing BluRay disc but I am now thinking that it is not such a great player. IT is not consistent though and I have yet to figure out what the issues really are with playback. Some DVD's are great others are awful. Tried playing with the 24p settings on both PS3 and Panasonic to no avail. Hate 24p anyway so now have both turned off.
Ron Evans |
April 3rd, 2008, 03:59 PM | #24 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Apple Valley CA
Posts: 4,874
|
I think this is the one area that there are some HUGE challenges - AVCHD is just new enough that there are some strange possibilities depending on processing, output device, display device, etc.
I've solved the inability to drag and drop to the Vegas timeline for instance. Installed PMB 3, seems like it works fine with the CX7, so no back compatibility issues... still couldn't drag clips without V8 freezing... forgot I hadn't installed V8 "b", put that on, everything worked smoothly... so it was something in V8 that needed an update! Another interesting observation... I've heard all about "motion trails", and if I try displaying at the highest preview qualities, it's a huge ugly mess of 'em, BUT if I drop the preview window down to "prieview(half)", trails are GONE, picture is a bit softer, but perfectly acceptable on a 24" monitor, easy to edit and compare footage. I'm suspecting that there are some issues with the display of AVCHD that need to be ironed out - I don't see trails on the LCD, still want to try it on a widescreen but I'm guessing the problem won't be there, so when it comes up in post or playback from other devices - it's going to be up to us to figure out the proper settings and whatnot... |
April 3rd, 2008, 05:42 PM | #25 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 165
|
Quote:
|
|
April 3rd, 2008, 10:29 PM | #26 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Apple Valley CA
Posts: 4,874
|
Quote:
Not sure what codec Vegas uses, but I'd think SOny would sort of have an "in house" advantage? The interesting part comes with what choice one makes in the preview window - they give 4 levels of quality, from draft (unusable IMO), preview, good and best... each of those four levels has auto, full, half, and quarter options. I found trails on anything above preview/half, but that quality played back smooth and plenty clean. I could switch to higher qualities and see the individual frames sharpen up, but any movement became obvious too. The SR11 still looked very very sharp and detailed at the preview/half resolution, the CX7 was OK, but not quite as crisp. THUS, my suspicion that there's some bumps in the AVCHD road yet to be smoothed out - maybe my computer/video card just isn't up to AVCHD (although it's not bad, and way above minimum specs, renders pretty fast, and editing is smooth). I'm going to have to do some test renders at higher resolutions and see what happens. But I think based upon what I'm seeing with the preview window differences, "motion trails" are a problem of the post processing, NOT the AVCHD recording/camera per se... |
|
April 3rd, 2008, 11:43 PM | #27 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 165
|
Quote:
Using this, I first transcode the AVCHD to huffyuv (or some other intermediate format), and I have not seen any trails at all other than very minor ghosting in low light from some cameras. OTOH, I have seen reports on the net of trails that were described as looking like special effects from a rock music video. Perhaps if you just drag a clip into Vegas with certain settings and didn't look further, it might be easy to jump to conclusions. I'm actually pretty amazed at the quality of AVCHD video for the bandwidth it takes. It's beginning to rival HDV at 2/3 the bitrate, and the processors and codecs are only going to get better. |
|
April 4th, 2008, 05:06 AM | #28 | |
Trustee
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 1,945
|
Quote:
|
|
April 4th, 2008, 07:04 AM | #29 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Traverse City, Michigan
Posts: 416
|
Quote:
Thanks. Respectfully, Mike |
|
April 4th, 2008, 08:34 AM | #30 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,222
|
I mix my FX1 HDV and SR11 AVCHD clips by just placing them on the timeline in Vegas 8, editing in the normal way and rendering out to whatever. Takes a little while to render on my AMD 4200X2 for HDV, DV and MPEG2 output. Just to clarify the preview window in Vegas bears no connection to the rendered output, it is just that, a preview window at reduced resolution and frame rate that is selectable to reduce the CPU load when editing. Edius is different as it tries to display the actual output and with my PC it is unable to do this with HDV amd AVCHD on the timeline, but with conversion to Canopus HQ is of course just fine.
Ron Evans |
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|