DV Info Net - why no difference in price?

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)

- Canon XH Series HDV Camcorders (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xh-series-hdv-camcorders/)

- - why no difference in price? (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xh-series-hdv-camcorders/103146-why-no-difference-price.html)

Bill I agree, but in the remote possibility of a film out, I just want to be sure this is true progressive.

I shoot 24f, capture in FCP with the 1080P24 setting, edit in a 23.98 timeline, export a QT and it stays 24p all the way. No artifacts, no pulldown. You can set an in and out point one second apart and count the frames and there are 24 of them--24 discrete frames, one after another, no interlace artifacts, no interlace at all, purely progressive.

Best thing for you to do would be borrow or rent a camera, shoot a test, edit it, and send it to a lab for transfer. Most places will do a silent one or two minute clip for around $250 or so and apply that to your final bill if you do the full transfer with them.

In order to capture and edit HDV at 24p in FCP, you must have at least 5.1.2. I don't know about other systems at this point.

Thanks Bill.
Transfer to film is very remote at this point. I'm going to try to borrow a cam and see how the 24F is handled by Vegas.

It might be a good idea to check with others using Vegas about how to capture and edit the footage there. I don't know anything about it, but I know with FCP a few people had initial trouble getting settings to match properly so there wouldnt' be any rendering required. FCP was the first one to handle the Canon's 24p footage, and I think Avid doesn now too, but I haven't heard about Vegas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Secrest (Post 741957)

If you people will, would you mind pointing me in the directions of articles that talk about the progressive capability of the A1?

This is what I've read elsewhere: " Canon's 24F "fakes" progressive scan by slightly offsetting the vertical readout of the green CCD from those of the blue and red, generating a frame with 1.5x the lines of the 540-line field, or 810 lines, albeit ones using spatial rather than temporal interlace. As a result, the quality question arises: Do Canon's pseudo-progressive frames look the same as a true progressive frame or does one see artifacts?"

What do you think about this?

Here is a new article that mentions the 24F on the Canon XL-H1, which is done the same way as on the XH-A1:
http://blog.broadcastengineering.com...tion/#more-138

The author is a very respected reviewer. In the article he says that he hightly praises the 24F of Canon which he says is the closest to as any of the progressive 24p modes on the current lower cost HDV cameras (lower cost meaning lower than the large Sony and Pansonic HD cameras currently used in major motion picture production).

Actually, here's what he said:

"Billups had special praise for the 24 F feature of the XL H1 as well. “Canon’s 24F system produces an output that looks and feels like 24-frame movie film,” he says. “While the technology is a closely guarded Canon secret, the proof is in the image. When digitally projected or printed to film, the image from the XLH1 compares more closely to those of ultra-high-end HD cameras than it does to the growing assortment of consumer HDV camcorders."

This article is a good outline of the XH-A1 features, with comparisons made to the XL-H1, XH-G1, XL2 and GL2. Well worth reading to get a good feel for the XH-A1 and how it sits in the Canon line-up:
http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxh/xhfaq.php

Nice links, thanks a lot.
Larry