HD10 vs. Varicam! It starts Friday! And need help... at DVinfo.net

Heath McKnight · November 6th, 2003, 11:08 PM

Well, after not knowing where the HD10 was (his super had it), my friend busts out the HD10 to shoot with the Varicam! I'm psyched! (Unfortunately, he rented out the DVX100 Tuesday, so only two-way comparisons.)

I'm psyched!!!!!!!!!!!!

heath

ps-He'll hang onto the camera, but he's gonna send the down-converts, etc. to me. He also posts on this board once in a while, so he'll probably do a review. He's the most professional dude I personally know in the HD business.

pss-any ideas how to cleanly go from HDV to DV????

Chris Hurd · November 6th, 2003, 11:17 PM

Outstanding, Heath...

Really looking forward to this. Anyone want to take a crack at Heath's question? (HDV to DV)

Heath McKnight · November 6th, 2003, 11:22 PM

I wish I was in NYC.

heath

Chris Hurd · November 6th, 2003, 11:24 PM

Heath, when you have an idea, let me know how much bandwidth you'll need. We can host a few clips online for ya.

Eric Bilodeau · November 6th, 2003, 11:26 PM

2 ways I know of and used:

1) capture directly from the HD10 analog output a 480p (or i) downconverted to a DV camera or deck with input options or a SD capture card.

2) capture the m2ts via firewire or the HD signal via a HD capture card and software downconvert to DV.

Both give good results, #1 is faster but #2 is better if you need to tweak the images since you can do it in HD before the downconversion.

Heath McKnight · November 6th, 2003, 11:31 PM

Thanks, just emailed him the info, Eric. Man, I'm dying here, wishing I was in NYC. This movie sounds kinda cool and I've never seen a VariCam (or CineAlta) in action before.

heath

Troy Lamont · November 7th, 2003, 12:25 AM

Heath,

Quote:

pss-any ideas how to cleanly go from HDV to DV

Is this for the shoot-out of just FYI for yourself? The test will involve both cameras at 720p correct? Thanks.

I just left NYC, dang it! :)

Troy

Heath McKnight · November 7th, 2003, 12:35 AM

It's to down-convert...I just wanted to FYI Jon the DP.

heath

Les Dit · November 7th, 2003, 01:58 AM

Please don't down convert to anything lower resolution than 1280 by 720 pixels, as that would crush out the detail we are dying to see.
If you have a DV cam to compare with, size that up to the HD size. Nothing lost in that conversion.

Thanks for any tests you may run, regardless,
-Les

Christopher Toderman · November 7th, 2003, 09:31 AM

both cameras are 720p and should be compared at this resolution at verious lighting levels, various colorfulness, various contrast, various motion, various amount of highlight lighting, at various shadow darkness, at various focal length. Varicam should then be converted to 720/30p

Don Berube · November 7th, 2003, 11:19 AM

I can't see how you can expect the HD10 to compare to an $85000 VariCam 27, the difference in all areas is night and day.

- don

Eric Bilodeau · November 7th, 2003, 11:26 AM

Not quite, I had experience with both and the HD10 is surprisingly close in some situations. Of course, artefacting is very apparent on the HD10. Definition is very quite equivalent, color reproduction is of course more saturated with the varicam. Keep an open mind, you might just be surprised here.

Don Berube · November 7th, 2003, 11:35 AM

I have experience with both cameras and I still maintain that the VariCam 27 outputs a significantly better image in all areas with a far superior manual control and image setup options. Color saturation is dependent upon what setting you choose. I'm always open to new, more affordable technology and quite honestly, my intention is not at all to denigrate the value of the HD10... but really, we are talking about two completely different classes of camera performance here - one camera that sets the standard for High Definition acquisition and one that wants to set the standard for the consumer HDV format.

- don

Heath McKnight · November 7th, 2003, 12:04 PM

I agree, though mini-dv wasn't too bad compared to BetaCam, and esp. to DVCPro. I use DVCPro and mini-dv a lot (XL-1 and XL-1s), and both are very close.

heath

Christopher Toderman · November 7th, 2003, 02:01 PM

We may see some surprises. Varicam is significantly more compressed than even the DVX, with both footages at 24p; Varicam's compression is based on the DV format, while HD10 is using more efficient MPEG2. I'm sure that there will be no situation that the JVC will be equal to the Varicam, unless the Varicam is not set up right and the JVC is. We've already seen on this board comparison of the JVC to CineAlta, where the images were supposed to be close in quality. This was even more autrageous. Still in certain situations the JVC should come close to the Varicam.

November 6th, 2003, 11:22 PM	#3
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I wish I was in NYC. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 6th, 2003, 11:24 PM	#4
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Heath, when you have an idea, let me know how much bandwidth you'll need. We can host a few clips online for ya. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

November 6th, 2003, 11:26 PM	#5
Eric Bilodeau Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chicoutimi, Canada Posts: 334	2 ways I know of and used: 1) capture directly from the HD10 analog output a 480p (or i) downconverted to a DV camera or deck with input options or a SD capture card. 2) capture the m2ts via firewire or the HD signal via a HD capture card and software downconvert to DV. Both give good results, #1 is faster but #2 is better if you need to tweak the images since you can do it in HD before the downconversion. __________________ Eric Bilodeau video SFX,DOP ___________________ http://www.fictis.net info@fictis.net

November 6th, 2003, 11:31 PM	#6
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Thanks, just emailed him the info, Eric. Man, I'm dying here, wishing I was in NYC. This movie sounds kinda cool and I've never seen a VariCam (or CineAlta) in action before. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 7th, 2003, 12:35 AM	#8
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	It's to down-convert...I just wanted to FYI Jon the DP. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 6th, 2003, 11:08 PM	#1
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	HD10 vs. Varicam! It starts Friday! And need help... Well, after not knowing where the HD10 was (his super had it), my friend busts out the HD10 to shoot with the Varicam! I'm psyched! (Unfortunately, he rented out the DVX100 Tuesday, so only two-way comparisons.) I'm psyched!!!!!!!!!!!! heath ps-He'll hang onto the camera, but he's gonna send the down-converts, etc. to me. He also posts on this board once in a while, so he'll probably do a review. He's the most professional dude I personally know in the HD business. pss-any ideas how to cleanly go from HDV to DV???? __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 6th, 2003, 11:17 PM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Outstanding, Heath... Really looking forward to this. Anyone want to take a crack at Heath's question? (HDV to DV) __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

November 7th, 2003, 01:58 AM	#9
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	Please don't down convert to anything lower resolution than 1280 by 720 pixels, as that would crush out the detail we are dying to see. If you have a DV cam to compare with, size that up to the HD size. Nothing lost in that conversion. Thanks for any tests you may run, regardless, -Les

November 7th, 2003, 09:31 AM	#10
Christopher Toderman Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: New York Posts: 60	both cameras are 720p and should be compared at this resolution at verious lighting levels, various colorfulness, various contrast, various motion, various amount of highlight lighting, at various shadow darkness, at various focal length. Varicam should then be converted to 720/30p

November 7th, 2003, 11:19 AM	#11
Don Berube Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Boston, MA (travel frequently) Posts: 837	I can't see how you can expect the HD10 to compare to an $85000 VariCam 27, the difference in all areas is night and day. - don __________________ DONALD BERUBE - noisybrain. Productions, LLC Director Of Photography/ Producer/ Consultant http://noisybrain.com/donbio.html CREATE and NETWORK with http://www.bosfcpug.org and also http://fcpugnetwork.org

November 7th, 2003, 11:26 AM	#12
Eric Bilodeau Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chicoutimi, Canada Posts: 334	Not quite, I had experience with both and the HD10 is surprisingly close in some situations. Of course, artefacting is very apparent on the HD10. Definition is very quite equivalent, color reproduction is of course more saturated with the varicam. Keep an open mind, you might just be surprised here. __________________ Eric Bilodeau video SFX,DOP ___________________ http://www.fictis.net info@fictis.net

November 7th, 2003, 11:35 AM	#13
Don Berube Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Boston, MA (travel frequently) Posts: 837	I have experience with both cameras and I still maintain that the VariCam 27 outputs a significantly better image in all areas with a far superior manual control and image setup options. Color saturation is dependent upon what setting you choose. I'm always open to new, more affordable technology and quite honestly, my intention is not at all to denigrate the value of the HD10... but really, we are talking about two completely different classes of camera performance here - one camera that sets the standard for High Definition acquisition and one that wants to set the standard for the consumer HDV format. - don __________________ DONALD BERUBE - noisybrain. Productions, LLC Director Of Photography/ Producer/ Consultant http://noisybrain.com/donbio.html CREATE and NETWORK with http://www.bosfcpug.org and also http://fcpugnetwork.org

November 7th, 2003, 12:04 PM	#14
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I agree, though mini-dv wasn't too bad compared to BetaCam, and esp. to DVCPro. I use DVCPro and mini-dv a lot (XL-1 and XL-1s), and both are very close. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 7th, 2003, 02:01 PM	#15
Christopher Toderman Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: New York Posts: 60	We may see some surprises. Varicam is significantly more compressed than even the DVX, with both footages at 24p; Varicam's compression is based on the DV format, while HD10 is using more efficient MPEG2. I'm sure that there will be no situation that the JVC will be equal to the Varicam, unless the Varicam is not set up right and the JVC is. We've already seen on this board comparison of the JVC to CineAlta, where the images were supposed to be close in quality. This was even more autrageous. Still in certain situations the JVC should come close to the Varicam.