JVC Says that the split screen can be fixed

[Jiri Bakala]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

You'll need to learn to control SSE if you buy an HD100. We are not stuck -- but there is no magic bullet coming that will make us totally free of the need to control SSE.

The difference is to "control" SSE in a camera that is out of adjustment and to "keep an eye" on it, just in case, with a camera that has the latest firmware and has been calibrated well.

I think that what JVC has done to date in terms of improvements of the firmware and QC, based on what we are hearing from owners in Europe and Australia, is a direct response to our "whining" and complaining. Had we all accepted the camera the way the first units were delivered and had we "learned" to live with it and work by the "new" rules, I doubt JVC would have been as responsive as they were. That's not to say that it's all done and they can stop trying to make it better. But the progress has been encouraging...:-)

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Jiri Bakala

I think that what JVC has done to date in terms of improvements of the firmware and QC, based on what we are hearing from owners in Europe and Australia, is a direct response to our "whining" and complaining. Had we all accepted the camera the way the first units were delivered and had we "learned" to live with it and work by the "new" rules, I doubt JVC would have been as responsive as they were.

If you like to feel you made a difference --feel free to indulge.

But, the plans to update PAL unit firmware and the USA decision to delay until the firmware was ready -- were made long before any units were shipped to anyone. Sometime in June -- I suspect.

Now, maybe the PAL users complaints have made their country managers more aware of how demanding HD customers can be and so will help you in the future.

But, from what I hear -- the Europe managers had no interest in HD because there's no HD of any magnitude in their countries. Which is true! One HD station!?! They simply wanted a 24p DV camcorder to offer something against Canon and Panasonic. That's the reason they refused to import the first generation JVC HDV camcorder. No HDTV stations. No HDTV sets. And, no real movement to HD by consumers.

[Guy Barwood]

"That's the reason they refused to import the first generation JVC HDV camcorder. No HDTV stations. No HDTV sets. And, no real movement to HD by consumers."

I think you are ignoring the biggest reason of them all, and the same reason that even though you could, in the end, by these cameras in Australia basically no one ever did.

They are 30p only. No matter what you might think, if the HD100 only had 30p, it would be selling as well in Europe and Australia (and other PAL nations) as the previous models (almost zero). Just think about how well it would sell in the US with only 25p (but for some reason 25p was as bad at shooting for 24p as 30p is). Even with 24p and 30p it would be hard pressed to come anywhere near what it will see like in these countries with 25p as well.

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

"They are 30p only.

Obviously, our cameras ran at 480p60. Had they been imported into Europe, the 720p30 would have become 25p.

[Guy Barwood]

Nope, they were imported into Australia (we are as 25p as Europe), but remained a 30p unit only. JVC tried to promote them at least a little but I don't know anyone who bought one, why would you, no one wants 30p in PAL based lands. They would have needed a new model with 25p for Europe, but JVC clearly were never willing to make one.

The point is these cameras never stood a chance in Europe as they were only 30p, not because they were HD.

[Barry Green]

Well that's odd... JVC introduced the GR-PD1 in Europe, which was the same as the HD1 except it didn't have the high-def mode at all; instead it offered the "SD" mode of 576/50p.

Are you saying that in Australia they didn't offer the PD1, but instead offered the NTSC HD1? Was it PAL-compatible at all?

[Guy Barwood]

I never saw the PD1 advertised but that doesn't mean it wasn't or isn't avaliable. Although it may be based on the 10U it is a totally different camera not having any HD so it isn't relevant, it is a SD single chip camera, its only advantage is 50p which isn't a huge drawcard in a single chiper. As a HD camera with 25p I probably would have got one some time ago.

I doubt the European HD market has changed much lately from what I have heard, yet there seems a pretty big market for the HD100E/101E. Same would have applied to a 25p enabled 10U, though the single chip nature would have scared many off.

We don't exactly have a big HD market here yet either. All pay TV is SD and having only just gone digital SD at that, HD's light at the end of the tunnel hasn't even been installed. HD free to air exists here however the tuners are still very expensive and few people have them (most are happy with SD for general TV given the cost of tuners). HDTV PVRs are 2-3 times the cost again. From all accounts though the HD101E is selling very well here. Just shows that the uptake of HDTV has little to do with the demand for HD enabled cameras.

Just my thoughts, nothing gospel about it.

[Steve Connor]

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

I doubt the European HD market has changed much lately from what I have heard, yet there seems a pretty big market for the HD100E/101E. Same would have applied to a 25p enabled 10U, though the single chip nature would have scared many off.

We get a launch of HD on the Sky platform here in the UK early next year, that should stir things up a bit, they will be using both 720 and 1080. Most producres I know here in the UK are now starting to look at HD although the actual use of it is still limited.

[John Mitchell]

Maybe what Steve Mullen is saying and the guy from Jakarta (and myself for that matter) are saying is not directly at odds with each other.

Consider this (and remember I've been speaking directly to a JVC technician) -when the wrong version of firmware was accidentally applied, it resulted in a camera that actually exhibited a black line up the centre of the screen. I know it is far from being definitive but that black line up the centre of the screen is apparently an extreme case of split screen. This camera could not be re-aligned with the incorrect firmware.

This seems to imply that-
a:the firmware is definitely implicated in split screen and being revised to try and deal with it.
b:hardware or baseboard changes have been made since the first cameras which rule out something as simple as a firmware upgrade for those units. and
c:JVC ARE working on eliminating split screen by revising the hardware/baseboard.

The same technician told me that there IS an automated calibration (yes automated) performed at the factory; but that for some reason it is failing on a lot of units. He can MANUALLY re-align them and minimise/eliminate split screen (see separate report from Jakarta) but he doesn't have the time, so they are actually rejecting units. He has also told me from day 1 that the firmware definitely played a vital role in balancing the two halves of the CCD and was being worked on to reduce split screen in the camera, and he reaffirmed that only last Friday when I queried him about the conflicting reports I was seeing on this forum. So according to him the firmware HAS been revised as a direct result of split screen - sure other issues have been tackled - wouldn't make sense to bring out new firmware and not look at the whole camera.

From the above you could choose to believe that maybe there is truth in what Steve and I are both saying. Maybe JVC USA told Steve that a firmware upgrade will not fix the units in the field because that was true .. up to a point (read firmware version). Many units would need both hardware and firmware revisions to apply a fix - those units might actually be considered "faulty". Maybe JVC USA don't want to expose themselves to a whole can of worms...

[Stephen L. Noe]

Originally Posted by John Mitchell

...the firmware HAS been revised as a direct result of split screen ...

How could the firmware NOT have an effect? There are alot of sweeping statements made lately...

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Stephen L. Noe

How could the firmware NOT have an effect? There are alot of sweeping statements made lately...

It does. Even if nothing more than having a newer service menu with additional functionality for the techs to make use of. Also, as John mentioned, there have likely been pc board revisions perhaps that specify the use of a different component or vendor for such component.

-gb-

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by John Mitchell

This seems to imply that-
a:the firmware is definitely implicated in split screen and being revised to try and deal with it.
b:hardware or baseboard changes have been made since the first cameras which rule out something as simple as a firmware upgrade for those units. and
c:JVC ARE working on eliminating split screen by revising the hardware/baseboard.

I'm still not sure why anyone needs to deal with "imply" when JVC has made it very clear that those units that have "Inspected by JVC USA" stickers have the latest of everything. Whatever SSE these units might have they are not "defective." (Which does not mean that an occasional unit might be defective and need to be replaced for all sorts of reasons.

In the PAL countries, the ONLY fix being offered is to upgrade to the firmware that the USA waited for. There are no hardware fixes. After this firmware is installed, whatever SSE they might have, they are not "defective." (Which does not mean that an occasional unit might be defective and need to be replaced for all sorts of reasons.

It is likely that as part of the PAL firmware install, the units are being calibrated. That's because the primary, if not the ONLY thing this firmware does, is speed and improve calibration.

Since the path is clear for PAL owners on what they should -- contact their dealer, and NTSC owners need do nothing -- why are folks still even talking about firmware?

There is no future "SSE FIX" firmware coming because firmware can't decrease SSE any more than the latest firmware already does.

Why are they talking about board revisions? Such talk might apply to "pre-production" units, but the only folks who have these know who they are and will get production units. Unless you are a VIP -- you didn't get one.

There is no future "SSE FIX" hardware coming either.

[Guy Barwood]

"There is no future "SSE FIX" hardware coming either."

While I am sure you believe what you have been told, but it would be very interesting to see the inside components of a first release model and a model released in 6 months. I wouldn't be suprised if there were slight modifications made, quite possible some changes made to reduce SSE as much as possible (maybe just some higher tolerance components). This is normal course for such products anyway isn't it?

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Why are they talking about board revisions? Such talk might apply to "pre-production" units

Steve, that is simply not how the manufacturing chain operates. There will likely be board revisions for many reasons. Sometimes it's because the original component layout isn't optimal for the automated insertion process or wave soldering process. Sometimes a different component is needed. Sometimes more components are needed. Often times these updates occur without fanfare or ever having been the result of customer complaints. Sometimes it makes a good product even better. Oh trust me, there will be revisions to production units during the manufacturing life cycle, but they will be transparent to you and I, the end user. But in the end, you have to allow for the possibility that the design will be updated to help reduce or eliminate this SSE issue without fanfare or public acknowledgement of any kind.

-gb-

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Greg Boston

Often times these updates occur without fanfare or ever having been the result of customer complaints.

Otherwise known as "the silent fix." All camera manufacturers do this.