I really think the issue will need to be fixed on the hardware side. A straight answer about the progress from JVC would be great even if it was not favorable to them. Knowing they are working on it and getting the solution in place on the production line is a great step.

The question was raised whether the people who already have the camera should suffer. I think not. The policy is, if the camera has the split screen then it is to be replaced, no questions asked. That's JVC's stand on it. This policy alone and seeing what the camera can produce would make me want to get it and if I had a problem with split screen, just take it back until I got one without the issue.

People are saying JVC should come out and say something but the fact is, they already have. If you have split screen, take the camera back in exchange for another one. It's a pain but how many shoot @ 50-60 lux constantly?

I don't think JVC said "if the camera has the split screen then it is to be replaced, no questions asked"

Because all cameras have it. Maybe they said if it's visble under +18db or something, you can bring it back.

Obviously there are two distinct trains of thoughts in here:

A: Bad luck, live with it or don't buy it, what do you expect for 2 months wages, a camera without design flaws?

B: It needs to be fixed as it is a design flaw in the camera and should be competely fixed under warranty and before any more are shipped. It should never have been there to start with.

Guy, have you bought one?

Can anybody tell me about similar grade 'flaws' or 'defects' on DSR150/170, Z1U, DVX100/100A or XL2? Like, I am talking visible 'mistake-like' image flaw, not slightly noisy audio or bad ergonomics. I can think of the DVX100 zoom being really soft at the end of its range, some people complained about noisy audio on the PD150 but other than that... nothing else comes to mind.

So yes, I think that this camera has lot going for it but one serious problem that needs to be addressed and not accepted!

Off topic to this discussion. Please start a new thread in the appropriate forum.

Not really, it was meant to bring another perspective to our on-going discussion about the split-screen. It's playing devil's advocate...:-)

No I don't have one yet. I have a very good chance of being able to sell my DV500 for about AU$5500-6000 which means it would only be about AU$2000-$2500 for me to buy if I let my DV500 go.

So while $2000 isn't a huge amount of money, letting the DV500 go is a big step for me. I loose 3 XLR inputs (for 2 channels), CRT viewfinder, native VMount support, 1/2" SD block, nice enough 16x Canon lens, a camera with presence etc

What I would gain is native 16:9 even if just shooting DV and the option to use HDV (576 50p interests me as well.), colour LCD on the body.

What I would loose is about 1-1.5 stops of sensitivity, and the ability to shoot in anything but ideal lighting without being in serious danger of getting this split screen. I can see how 80-90% of a wedding reception might show this problem as well as inside some of the darker chruchs' and I can't do this to someone's wedding video.

So will I sell. Probably, I have to get some money back for the DV500 before it looses all value, but will I buy a HD101E. No, I won't. Not at least at the moment. I'll shoot with my DV301, hold on to the money from the DV500 and wait until either it is fixed or a better option/new model comes along. If it didn't have this split screen, would I buy it? Absolutely.

Please lighten up on that attitude... I don't allow this sort of thing here. DV Info Net is for the discussion of technology and technique, not for finger pointing or personal slants. Besides I know Steve personally, and I have seen him really lay into a manufacturer before, by posing very difficult and challenging questions at press conferences and trade shows. He is not on anybody's "side," he is simply being realistic about this situation, no matter how painful it may be. Let us please lay off the accusations and personal admonitions... that is the sort of thing to be expected at other web sites, but definitely not here at DV Info Net. Let's keep it focused on the gear and the technique. Thanks in advance,

I think that's an excellent price, by the way (with my vague understanding of the AU dollar). That is a fine camera package. Seems to me like you should have no trouble finding that kind of money for it.

To make you feel better, I just sold my Sony DSR-500. Fantastic camera, 16x9, CRT VF, all that. Why? A handful of reasons;
1. The world is moving to HD and there is demand for 24p
2. In my market, few clients ever paid for the DSR-500
3. We seem to be getting bigger jobs for which we rent CineAlta and for other smaller scale work (corporate, travel docs, etc.) a small HDV will do fine
4. We have some travel-related work coming and crossing the border, particularily between our two friendly countries (US-Canada) is a major pain and hassle and so I hope that with a smaller HDV camera we'll travel easier.

Yeah, it is a big step for me too. But the business and operational realities have to override emotional attachements (we all have them to our beloved gear) and one just have to move on.

Hope this helps.

You've got it right! If you bought a PAL unit, you should get it updated. End of story.

If you got a USA model and the problem is really severe -- contact JVC as it my need "adjusting." Even the USA QC process can fail End of story.

But, SSE is acknowledged by JVC to be part of the HD100's nature. Just like the uneven timimg of the frames in CF24 is part of the CF24 mode's nature. Neither are going to be "fixed" because they are not "problems" but "characteristics" of their design. End of story.

The plain fact is SSE is prevented by adequate lighting. Repeat: SSE is prevented by adequate lighting.

I have wonderfull night time shots as the same menu tweaks that increase latitude for Las Vegas bright day shots, work for Times Square shots at night!

We all now know HD requires much more light than SD. So the decision is simply, given the requirements for more light -- can you work with low-cost HD camcorders?

I agree with this outlook. I personally believe the flaw to be a shortcoming of their design they chose to overcome realities of CCD design, and it will not be going away until the next product rev.

Instead in hollering and yelling about JVC's policy and actions, I propose we accept the reality of the situation, and move onto more useful discussions like how the effect can be minimized or avoided.

I am not a JVC apologist, I'm just simply "over it".

[p.s. I got a look at HVX footage last night, on a high-res LCD. While I admire the camera for it's forward thinking P2 design and other features, I am certainly not regretting my HD100 purchase quite yet in light of what I saw. The Canon now might be another story.]

You know, I might be totally wrong here. But something tells me JVC didn't design the HD100 with wedding videographers in mind. 24 frames per second, no interlaced mode, cine gamma. Sounds more like a camera geared towards filmmakers.

I agree Nate. Everytime I start a thread on a different aspect of the camera, it degenerates into a split-screen discussion.
Maybe Chris can just start a sticky split-screen thread, and then we'll can leave all of these comments in there.

I don't want to be a JVC apologist either, but I don't think it helps the customers for some on this board to suggest that JVC intended to release this camera with a known defect and hope no one would notice. That's just stupid.
I imagine they realized there was a big problem as soon as the European customers started reporting it in July, but it was probably too late in the delivery cycle to catch all the bad apples in the North American shipment. I was a victim of this first NA shipment - I received mine August 20.

I'm quite happy with my replacement cameras, but one still shows the problem intermittently. I will probably have to replace it again.
However, before I do that, I'm just concentrating on pushing the camera to its limits and documenting split-screen occurances so that I may be able to help JVC in some small way. I want to get this issue solved before I go into production on my next film.

You just beat me to the punch Nate.


Chris, I know I'm pretty new around here and I might be jumping my boundaries with this,. Or maybe I don’t even have the right of asking it. But could we get a stick thread with a title on the lines of " If the HD100 is not for you, please buy something else and leave the people who likes it alone evolve with their cameras" ?

This whole split screen bragging is really getting long in the tooth, and just wastes bandwidth and space, while we could be discussing how to get the best out of the camera.
Maybe those expecting something else could just go to the H1 or HVX200 forum and speculate about those cameras, leaving us alone here to evolve with the gear we have chosen. It’s not that people are not allowed to criticise or to point flaws in the camera. If something else comes up, it should definitely be posted and discussed. But the split has been explained and analysed to death. It has been said it’s not a defect as it’s a design compromise in order to offer an under $6,000 720p camera. Those who either can’t accept it or don’t think it’s right can move on. Just buy a HVX200 or a H1. What’s the point of beating the dead horse, if the camera is not for you? Let’s focus on developing ways to work around the limitations, to develop settings for different shooting conditions, reporting dropout frequency with the particular tape brand you are using, report what accessories you are using with the camera, and whatever move us forward in the process of understanding and getting the best of the camera we have chose to use.
Is it too much to ask?

Beat me while I was typing Tim :)

Just reinforces the idea that this split screen topic is way over blown, over discussed and about ready to be put to death.

This Camera is Great
 

I just bought this camera. I have not discovered the split screen effect so far. That includes shooting at magic hour in NYC with lots headlights, tailights, street lights, and illumated signs.

I have been reviewing the footage on an HD monitor and I am blown away.
The image is beautiful, simply put.

This camera is a fantasitic value for the money.

Every camera I have ever owned for the past 15+ years has had limitations or quirks. I will gladly live with whatever quirks this camera has given the image it is delivering.

The lens is not perfect, but it's really quite nice and the zoom ratio is quite generous for this price point.

The ergonomics of the camera as well as its balance are first class.

The viewfinder could be better, but with Zebra Indicator will keep you out of trouble if you know what your are doing.

I am so inspired to make images with this camera.

I will make movies.
I will make commercials.
I will make TV shows.
I will make art.
I will make money.

I am very happy. I have been in the business for years and I know the value of what this camera provides. I have dreamed of a camera like this for year.

I do not own JVC stock.

Thank you JVC,

David Dessel

On Tim's footage it was like a "where's waldo" for alot of poeple. I didn't notice the split until I was really getting up close and looking for it specifically. Nevertheless, it was evident and once it was pointed it was obvious. Tim, I don't think this thread degenerated into a splitscreen discussion since it was labeled splitscreen from the beginning.

@Chris Hurd, I understand what Guy is saying in that Steve Mullen wrote his post as if he was speaking on behalf of JVC. That's exactly the impression I got as well.

@Steve Mullen, Hopefully you can see that what you've written reads like you are a person of authority at JVC. I see how anyone could misconstrue what you've written as JVC's stance on the subject of split screen. Fact is that there is nothing officially from JVC on the matter.

Anyway, all the jabbering aside, I'd like to know how many people are going to be dedicating the camera to 60 lux shots???

If I came accross that way it's only because I have the camera to review and I've been talking with JVC. Frankly, I'm now focused on the magic menu controls -- some of which are clearly for film makers.

I'd love to be a "person of authority" at any company if it meant I didn't have to give back my review unit in a few weeks. I feel like Ive been given a Bolex in some respects (it feels so familar to have a hand-held camera with a real lens) and a Cine-Alta in other respects (my god there are a lot controls to master).

I'm also often simply blown away by how good stuff looks projected to 7 feet.

Very Much Like Super 16
 

Yes, Steve, the menus are deep, but what a great palette to work from. After playing with the menus for about two hours while the camera was hooked up to a high def monitor, I was able to tweak the image to look like Super16 transfered to film.

Good optics will make this camera a serious piece of gear.

There is so much potential here. Let's focus on that.

-Dave Dessel

I can acknowledge that you may have received that impression, but Steve will be the first to tell you that he most certainly does *not* speak on behalf of any manufacturer. Try to look past his choice of words and check out the message instead. Perhaps Nate Weaver did a better job of saying the same thing, either way it's an accurate and appropriate summation. It's certainly something to be aware of.

Steve Mullen is an excellent technical writer, and like I said, I know him somewhat better than most of you do. I've been to his house. His feisty overweight Siamese cat has gnawed on my fingers until they bled. We've shared more than one beer together. Do not make the mistake of reading into someone's posts that which is not there. Look past a person's writing style, try not to pass judgement on what you perceive to be some sort of authoritative position due to a certain choice of words. Instead, look at the message. Try not to get emotional about words on a screen. End of rant.

And I'm happy to post a sticky about this issue; I'm in agreement that we definitely need one. Should it be this thread? Or something more concise. I like Nate's post best. Who will write it up in a way that best serves this community?

I vote for Nate or Steve :)

Not fair, you guys have had all the fun while I was sleeping then out shooting a wedding (on my DV301 as well, got to get to know that camera as more than just my backup).

Chris, I think you took me the wrong way. I didn't think Steve was speaking on behalf of JVC, but I did feel like he was, and still is telling me to just drop it because its not important to him. We each have our own opinions on this matter and should respect that. It seems that while I can understand his acceptance of the problem for his shooting requirements, he can't quite get a grip on mine.

The price on my DV500 is good, and bad.... A new DV5100 body only here would still cost about $8000+ I think if you didn't shop around too much. Its funny, I do find it quite difficult to get interest in my JVC gear. Sony sells easy, JVC doesn't. You normally get much better value buying JVC, but suffer when it comes to selling (at least here).

Michael: "You know, I might be totally wrong here. But something tells me JVC didn't design the HD100 with wedding videographers in mind."

I am afraid they did. Have a look at http://www.prohd.net, which was the very first site JVC created for this camera. It is still there, and it still clearly shows a nice photo of a wedding cake strongly implying the camera is targeted towards event shooting, not just film making. Therefore, even though the problem can be solved by adequate lighting, it is clearly marketed towards shooting in situations where their often isn't adequate lighting (events, news gathering and to a lesser degree sports shooting).

I think I am very forgiving of JVC and until this issue raised its head, I was gave this model a lot of praise to my peers. I've have two relatively late model JVC cameras and they have their fair share of problems and poor design decisions. This HD100 has a swag of its own without even mentioning this SSE. Poor battery life, bad noise in grain, low sensitivity, no simultaneous display VF+LCD, no meters on LCD like DV5000, not the best LCD and VF to start with, expensive remote focus and iris control options, bad smear (from what Steve says). However I accept these for what they are, the other benifits outweight these. Unfortunately this SSE might just be a deal breaker (for me), because when you see it, the image doesn't look grainy, or have any traits of traditional camera problems, the image just looks faulty, plain wrong. I am 99% sure any future model won't have it, and I'll bet if JVC knew it was going to happen they wouldn't have designed it the way they did, but it was all probably too late and marketing likely pushed them to market with it (just guessing though).

Maybe what I can do, is if I sell the DV500, I can buy a HD101 from someone who is willing to sell on a 100% satisfaction guarrantee return policy. If I shoot a wedding with it, and don't see the problem, then I guess it won't matter to me either. Maybe I am overreacting, but maybe I am not.

The other problem with SSE is once you see it, you start to see it everywhere, even when it's not there. All it will take is a big name director trying then dropping the cam to turn it into the next Edsel.

I remember being hot on the 301, till I saw the slow focus issue, way slower than competitors. Made it useless in run and shoot situations, the very situations it was meant to be used in.
Yet people found uses for it outside of new gathering, under controlled situations...just don't get in a hurry.

Finally, who in their right mind wants to tell a bride and groom to just ignore the little line up the middle of the screen, the contrast and color difference between left and right...and that most people won't notice it.
No any one who wants to stay in business.

It's also obvious JVC knew about this issue before it shipped, especially with the explanatons being given. They knew it was extremely difficult to capture data off of these CCDs, yet hoped they could get away with it?.

I have to agree with Guy on this one.

Once agian the marketing doesn't match up with the product.


To me, at least in the USA, JVC is one of the great what if's of the video industry.

I have to believe most directors don't want to see a great, maybe perfect performance in a given scene and have to yell, "Cut, got that damn split screen again, check the lighting, get the talent back on mark..."

Yes, I believe Nate and Steve about how great the images can look. But is it worth the hassle? Is it worth the extra time and resources needed to avoid a design flaw (yes, flaw, tech limitations not with standing). If one needs to do all the same things that are needed for a film camera, why not just rent a film camera instead?

Mine is 101E (PAL), although in HD mode both cameras are identical (100 and 101). I got min efromt eh second shipment to Australia around the end of August.

Re- firmware: Ah now there's a complicated series of button presses to ge to the firmware version - I have it written down at work, I'll check tomorrow.

I'm not sure about the other user, because I found this out via the AB Batyery importer in Australia who was dealing with another customer, who was getting an incorrect voltage reading off the battery adapter and was trying to work out if it wasa firmware or a faulty adapter.

From memory (and mines not great!) mine was 1.12 and the other which was a newer camera was 1.14... I'll edit this post tomorrow when I confirm it.

Press the AUTO IRIS button and be sure you have at least F4 AVERAGE level of light. You should be shooting at F4 to F5.6 for the best quality from ANY lens since that's mid-way between full Open and Full Closed.

Likewise, you should check the iris isn't more closed than F8 which means engaging the ND filter as needed.

Treat this like you were shoulding negative film.

Steve, I respect you and your writings very much but I have to disagree here. There just are too many situations where one needs to go wide open, where there is no way of lighting the scene and as much as I like the camera, I have to insist that this flaw is a flaw and JVC needs to do what they can to fix it!

Yes, ideally under controlled situation you may want to go f4-5.6 but if you shoot documentaries it is without a question that sometimes you will have to go wide open and/or even add some plus gain. Same for live theater. I shoot some dance from time to time and I can tell you that often the theatrical lighting is just enough for wide open (and that is with a 2/3 SD camera). Also, when trying to achieve a shallow DOF, you will need to go as close to wide open as possible - hence, the danger of getting the dreaded split screen is still there.

We can go on and on about this but the reality is that unless JVC finds a fix there are going to be people that will simply have to pick another camera because this problem will be too severe for their type of work.

I shot a dance concert the other night which I think isn't a bad test of low light performance and also SSE. I don't do a lot of these (only three a year) as the bulk of my work is corporate, but I shot with 2 Sony's - a DSR 300 and a DSR 500 and the JVC. I also shot in SD at 575/50 4x3 to match the other two cams (also because my editing program does not support 720P25 yet).

I shot mostly around F4 - OPEN with 0DB gain, and although the backgrounds were quite often smooth and contiguous (a cyc with projected images) and at times black I have not seen one instance of SSE in this footage. Obviously the Sony's had better low light performance being interlaced and larger chips (half inch and two thirds), but the other interesting thing was the footage matched quite well (I had black stretch on two and I think I upped the chroma a couple of points). All cameras were preset to 3200K.

I did have a weird problem with my 101E - I was actually getting breakup in one half of the sensor. I thought it was the power supply so I switched to battery, but the problem stayed - it was only happening intermittently so I could edit around it, but it was a concern. I had the desk in stereo patched into the 101E and I worked out that the problem seemed to be more prevalent when the audio peaked, so I wound down the level (which was by no means excessive) and the problem disappeared. I've now spoken to JVC and this appears to be a fault with my particular unit and I'll have to get it fixed next week. We still haven't decided if it was truly related to audio or if that was coincidental.. and this is probably the subject of a new thread.

The problem as I see it for guys like Guy (wow that joke must be getting old) is that this camera may not be right for wedding videographers. Its low light performance will not match cameras with a half/two third inch SD block scanning in interlaced. But then those cameras are quite remarkable. My Nikon D70 stills camera has trouble at ISO1600 in these kinds of light conditions unless I use a fast lens. So for the time being if you consistently shoot in very low light, you are better off with an interlaced SD camera.

I think what those who own the camera have tried to articulate here are three things:

1. SSE is a technical problem and does not manifest itself at the same level on all units (ie some cameras are worse than others). As JVC produces more units there has been an anecdotal improvement in performance.
2. JVC is prepared to exchange units that exhibit excessive SSE
3. Until you actually hold this camera in your hands and use it, you won't know if it suits your purpose, whether SSE will be a dramatic issue for you, or whether (as I discovered) battery life was by far the weakest point of this model.

I'll add a fourth and that is that even if disaster struck and some key footage exhibited SSE, it isn't a problem that can't be "fixed" in post. I haven't tried but I imagine a subtle colour correction to half the image would be possible, even within most NLE's. That's not ideal but from a post production POV I've had far harder hurdles to leap.

No JVC announcement yet (or ever?)
 

[QUOTE=Steve Mullen]Since JVC explained the details to me and others and we've published them I certaintly think JVC USA has defined the problem and is QCing the camcorders. Since I know of no additional firmware -- I'm assuming that what I've got is it.

Nope - that's not an official response. One shouldn't have to buy a defective camera to get an audience with a JVC dealer or rep, only to have tell 'fixes are on the way'. To many potential buyers JVC's lack of comment is, considering that footage from the H1 and HVX are starting to be seen, a staggering bad business decision. A decision that, until addressed, will absolutely rule out a purchase of the JVC for myself and many others.
John

You're certainly entitled to express such a decision here... one time and one time only. Since you have determined that this camera is not the one for you, I will expect you to move on out of this particular board into one of the many others that we have here at DV Info Net. Meanwhile, John Mitchell's post above is the best and most realistic advice I have yet seen on this topic:

"Until you actually hold this camera in your hands and use it, you won't know if it suits your purpose, (or) whether SSE will be a dramatic issue for you..."

Thanks in advance,

I got mine today, no split screen and no dead pixels. I even tried to force the split screen but couldnt find any...am I lucky or have I just not managed to see it yet?

Steve, nothing hard at all. But it sounds like I can't do natural light shooting without taking a big risk. And the question about film was rhetorical, sorry if it sounded otherwise. I actually prefer shooting in a controlled environment, but I don't want to be constrained against taking advantage of natural light or other situations. I guess spontanaiety won't be part of a HDV100 operators job description.

I'm looking forward to JVC getting this problem solved. They've always addressed issues in the past, not always to what customers were hoping for, but at least they own up eventually (anybody remember the BR3K VTR disaster? They eventually came out with an outstanding replacement, but not before a lot of customers had given up on them, hope they don't repeat that approach this time.)
I haven't ruled out getting this camera, but for now, gonna be patient and see what happens. In case I haven't said so, I really appreciate all the reports, both good and bad.

btw, has anyone tried the 101 under flourescant lights? Especially color corrected ones, or Kino flow types? LED too?

Just a couple of comments.

I own the camera and have used it quite a lot. People might see from my other posts that I am not been happy either with the SSE - in fact I was pretty cross about it at first. However, those considering purchasing the camera should definitely not be put off for the following reasons:

1. Although I can replicate the problem in very low light test situations I have not so far experienced a problem with it in real world shooting.
2. I shot in low light in a club the other night for two hours (admittedly SD) and was very surprised - no SSE. I hope to post some footage as soon as I can get my act together.
3. I understand that JVC has pretty much sorted the problem out and that people purchasing the camera now have little to be concerned about. There have been numerous software upgrades since the original camera.
4. For those with the issue (like me) it really is a question of getting the problem sorted out with your dealer/JVC which has shown no reluctance to deal with the issue at all. I have decided to do this and my seller is being helpull and will sort out the problem as soon as he can. It is a question of sending the unit back for adjustment. I dont think that there will ever just be a download fix available to the general public. It is a question of new software and some adjustment to the sensors as far as I can tell. Anyway, I understand that there is no need to actually exchange cameras. Bottom line - the problem is fixable even for those with cameras which exhibit the problem at an unacceptable level.

In essence, notwithstanding the SSE, the footage I have taken from this camera speaks for itself. It is awesome. Videographers who want to shoot mainly docos I reckon might be better off with the interlaced Sony. If you are only used to the interlaced look then go for Sony. But for those shooting drama there is one way to go - the JVC.

It would be a great shame for the film community if early teething problems compromised sales of this camera down the track as this would be a loss to the film community.

Cheers and happy shooting!

Rob

"I was able to tweak the camera to look like Super 16"

Dear David,

Please share your settings with us - eithe here or there is another thread dealing with settings.

Rob

You most likely didn't see it yet. It seems they all have it in some degree. Maybe somebody who has one could explain you how to to test for the split .

It is possible you have one of the more recent cameras with new software which has greatly reduced the problem.

To test:

Find a flat surface with only one colour in a room. Close the blinds. Turn on the light bulb as your only source of lighting. Fill the screen with the flat surface. Now pan across the flat surface. Try on no gain and then with gain.If you have the split screen it will be immediately evident to you. If you cant see it then great!

Rob

Robert, most probably mine has got the latest software. It arrived to Singapore on thursday and was shipped on friday...I got it today.

I will be testing again tomorrow to find out. I did something similar today...I even put gain to +18db but didnt see any sign of SSE. My biggest concern b4 purchasing this cam was SSE and dead pixels, I projected the image on a 720p projector but there was no sign of either...hopefully that remains so!

Michael Maier requested my firmware version:

GY-HD101E

SYS CPU C1590 V0112
CAM CPU C1591 V0105
VTR CPU C1594 V0108
ENC CPU L1187 V0105

PACKAGE C1615 V0105
FPGA2 C1595 V0105
FPGA3 C1596 V0100
FPGA4 C1597 V0103

That apparently is firmware 1.12

Apparently the versions on field units are: 1.12; 1.14 and 1.17

This is good news. It's been said to just turn on the camera i a low lit room an you'll start to see the split.