Noise on HD200/250
 

Has anyone been able to fix the noise on the 200/250? I want to maybe ue one of them but not if they are too noisy compared to the HD100.

Duke

noise?
 

Hi Brian:

I have read the same posts regarding noise but I own and use an HD-250U and have not noticed any noise from either the fan or the audio chain! On the other hand, if you are referring to gain related picture noise, that has not been an issue for me since I shoot either in daylight or in a light controlled environment. It would appear, however, that some degree of noise is inevitable in high gain, low light situiations.


Ron

Noise frustration
 

Yes Brian,

I've been trying to get something solid on this for weeks, it depends on the user, some people say 'No Problem with audio Noise', or "Thats what all professional cameras are like" (as in regard to fan noise). And then early in the piece Stephen Noe shows on a avi how much cleaner the new encoder is. But then you get multiple posts saying how it's like there's gain on all the time in the image.

I've come to the conclusion I'm still getting the camera, I'll deal with fan noise using sound gates on my recording, and the noise issue in the image must only be people not use to the image the HD101/110 made??

And it's also a little frustrating, though not surprising no one is posting footage from the new camera. Most people that use these cameras use them professionally which means either (a) They're too busy (b) They don't have intellectual rights to the footage they shoot to post them here. I remember when the HD100 first came out, it took a looonnnggg time to get footage posted as compared to say the DVX100 or HVX200, and even when you look at the massive amount of material coming through on the new Canon XHG1's and XHA1's.

cheers

Adam

Yeah, I was referring to noise on the image. Sorry it wasn't clear. I didn't know there were also issues with sound noise. That makes it worse. I was hoping we could get some conclusive answer whether its a problem, and if so, is it being dealt with, or has it been dealt with.

Duke

I find the noise issue to be somewhat sporadic. Sometimes it's bad, other times it's totally fine. A few observations are:

- keep your gamma level at 0 or below
- keep black stretch off and your black level at 0 or below
- the warmer white balances seem to increase noise levels (it doesn't like reds so much). Try some tests with this one and see if it's true. I'm guessing for tungsten-lit scenes using 3000K instead of 3200K would yield less noise. Just a speculation though.

But the gamma, black stretch, and black level all have the greatest impact on it. I shot a scene this past weekend outdoors at night and I used standard gamma bumped up to 4 (almost max) combined with BS2 and the noise was outrageous. No gain was on at all but it looked like at least 6db if not worse.

I have an HD100 so I only have two choices for gamma (since filmout is not usable). But I haven't noticed much of a difference between the two where picture noise is concerned.

FWIW: The fan noise is not audible to me or the mics I use.

That's a first.

I have heard nothing of a noiser image from the 250 over the 100, maybe I missed something and need to do some reading.


You might add Chad that keeping the detail at -7 to Min also helps keep the noise down. You can watch the noise increase as the numbers go up.

All our testing on the 250 looked great. Just this week an associate of ours brought over some footage shot (HDV) on the 250 to preview on the new JVC 24" monitor (it reveals everything, nothing hides from that beast), and it looked fantastic, very clean. Maybe I'm just use to the small amount of noise these sub 10K cameras make.

Peace!

I'm still evaluating the video noise issue. The HD250 I had borrowed for evaluation ended up being a pre-release model, so that may have had something to do with it. JVC Canada just swapped it for a production release HD200 and I'll do more side by side HD100/200 comparisons this week and let you know.

Noise in the image doesn't make any sense in HD200/250, so that is why it is so surprising. The whole point of the new 14-bit DSP and DNR is to eliminate noise and allow us to manipulate the DSP controls more than in the 12-bit version. JVC made a point of promoting that in the brochure. That's why I think there's probably some simple explanation that I just haven't discovered yet.
It looked to me like analog gain amplification, even though gain was set to 0dB. The first thing I did was turn down the detail.

Do you think something like this could be resolved in a firmware upgrade? or would it require handing in the cam to JVC - thats if it cant be resolved in the settings

Tim, In your tests do you think you could examine each of the new gamma settings on the HD200. I'd like to know more about what options there are with it. Thanks.

Tim,

Hopefully it’s an issue that can be resolved before I shoot this feature. I was hoping for better quality besides the 60P as attributes. I am almost done casting talent and crew so this is one of the last issues I need resolved. I love to get my hands on a 250 for this shoot especially because I have some slow mo and well-choreographed shots.

Absolutely. I am going to conduct the exact same extensive comparisons I did with the gamma curve controls on the HD100. For the most part, the HD250 is very easy to match to a HD100. I will program and post HD200/250 equivalents for the existing HD100 scene files, which will hopefully allow seamless multi-cam shooting with the different models.
The lowest common denominator will of course be the HD100, so I'll probably also create some new scene files that take advantage of the new curves.
It should be resolved by then. The new DSP does show an obvious improvement in color processing and encoding. The noise thing needs more exploration, and I've been reluctant to post much because I haven't had a chance to dedicate one day to just solving it alone. Hopefully I can squeeze it in before I leave for NAB.
You can judge the noise for yourself, at least what I got from the pre-release HD250 with Black stretch 3. I've posted a short 100/250 comparison, native HDV QT in my public folder. Sorry PC guys, I don't have a m2t capture of this, only native HDV QT.

Tim, the file is giving me problems opening. It is a Quicktime, right?

Thanks Tim for posting the comparision file, and dropping a few more hints on differences in tweaking the cameras. I've been aware of picture noise in my inital work, but haven't had the chance to directly compare it or put it in perspective as this is my first HD camera. The detail and color rendition I've found so compelling that some graininess hasn't bothered me so much for these shots.
What strikes me immediately in this comparision is how different the look is with the settings the same. The 250 looks warmer and more saturated - especially in the reds. Shadows and midtones are darker, with less detail perceptible next to the window - while highlights match quite closely is this a difference in gamma rendition?
Overall the 250 image looks more natural and prettier, but I'm not sure whether this is meant to be a neutral setting for optimum preservation for post correction - in which case it might not be ideal...
I'm hanging on your every word regarding this issue, and hope you do have time before NAB to cover optimizing settings on the 200 series, and whether the noise is really increased and an issue to be concerned about.
My guess is that this will be useful to have at the venue while meeting with JVC, and that there will probably be some big distractions that you bring back with you (although I suspect FCP 6 will be linked with Leopard release a little afterwards...)
Brian: Regarding viewing the file, you have to let the page sit in your browser with just the blue "Q" for awhile to let it download. It might be easier if it was a direct downloadable link to the .mov, but it's a page that has to load.

It is a direct download link... just right-click and save as.

I tried. It just says there is an error opening. There is no option to Save As.

I tried too. It dosn't work.
E

Funny, the link is to a .mov file, but when I right click to dl linked file in safari, it just downloads a html page with the .mov link in a frame. Maybe .mac trickery?
In any case, I just left the page open for a while, and the .mov eventually loaded.

This issue we are looking at is all very important stuff to those of with 200 series cameras and those considering them, so I hope we can keep this on the ball, and share settings that help, as well as consider the possibility and need for firmware changes etc.

I love the look and feel of this camera, but I can see that the noise I have in some shots would be an issue, especially if displayed larger. I also suspect that noise puts quite a bit more stress on the codec, which is already working like a demon! (I mean that in a good way!)

Not just those who are intending to purchase - but those who have purchased expecting better results and have not got them as well

It is in my public folder, so you can drag and drop form there as well.

HD200 struggling still(s)
 

Combing through this forum daily makes me feel like a seagull following a charter boat, just waiting for the fishermen to throw out some scraps...

I'm definitely keyed in on this noise issue because sometimes I've got it
http://www.gotagteam.com/images/Sach...mattBeach2.jpg

and sometimes I don't
http://www.gotagteam.com/images/Sach...es/flowers.jpg

Surely I've noticed the noise most often in the lower light areas, but in a clear blue sky at 2pm in the afternoon?
http://www.gotagteam.com/images/Sach...mages/gull.jpg


I'm sure anxious to learn what the hell I'm missing here...

Got it. I know what the problem is. It says I need certain components to play it and it takes me to apple's plug in website. http://www.apple.com/quicktime/resou...btype=68647634

Problem is I don't know which one to download. Any suggestions?

You don't need any of those components.

If you have FCP 5.1.2 properly installed it will play fine. It was simply captured native QT HDV 720p24 and saved as a native QT HDV 720P24 file, so it is equivalent to camera original.

Yeah, the colors on the HD200 look better and more saturated throughout. But it's not a big surprise because the Cine-like and standard config of the HD100 color matrix were rather dull to begin with. That's what started Paulo and Stephen on their quest for better colors to begin with. It wouldn't surprise me if JVC changed the defaults on the new model based on what they found.

What would be interesting to see is if you could calibrate each camera with a DSC chart until they both read the same and then do the various gamma and scene tests. Also I find it much more helpful to point the camera at people and scenery when doing comparisons. Charts never give you what you really need to know -how it works in the real world and how the images make you feel.

Hopefully there is a fix for the noise issue. I too find it to be somewhat random. I've never seen it on sky that bad before... Could operating temperature be a factor? Humidity?

no - i definately think its a hardware problem - everyone whom i have met so far (that hasnt been shooting in very well lit situations - actually looking at those images - even some very will lit situations) has had noise problems. We need to get some kind of official finding on the topic - so i think Tim should make his best effort as soon as possible (if not Tim someone else - although Tim's expertise is always great) to do a comparison and make an 'official' finding

any news Tim?

This file will not play on my system either. Is there a direct link to the file so I can try in VLC?

Please guys don't let this thread die
 

it's like so close to my purchase now, and I'm really still in the balance, everything in your head says the HD200 is the obvious choice, but if you image is going to be poor vs the HD110 under similar circumstances. Then it's hard to convince yourself to fork out the extra $2000.

Tim, without trying to pester you as I'm sure you very busy, are you at least part way into your findings? Can you give us a part update?

Appreciate your hard work and contribution to the community.

Cheers

Adam

Ok, I've just had an example of very noisy image in a well exposed picture (a lot of sky, sun behind dark clouds. It's the mosquito quilt look. No gain, no slow shutter. Meanwhile other shots are smooth as silk. I can't figure it out.
Either there is some adjustment that needs to be made with the camera, or I have to figure how to avoid this with specific settings.

yes very similar symptoms to my cam. I attempted to film yesterday mornings sun rise - but with the gain low and no slow shutter is just got some kind of muddled mess of an image far from what i should be expecting

could you possibly upload a still from your images Sean?

I've got a 7am call tomorrow, and I'm not packed, so it won't happen tonight. I will try to get it together in the next few days though. Maybe we can figure what the trigger is. I'm wondering if it is having both very bright and very dark sections in the frame?

Thats what i pointed out previously in Eric Gulbransen's thread - when i am getting the noise most is in shots whereby you have contrasting light and dark colourings.

progress?
 

Shot this today just for you Tyson. Now doesn't that make you feel all warm and cuddly?

5:30pm SanFrancisco. Bright sunlight area, mid shade area, dark shadowed face in a high contrast against the blue sky - again. Only this time we did much better I think.

Here's the web compressed screen shot jpg
http://www.gotagteam.com/images/Sach...astTestWEB.jpg

Here's the full res jpg
http://www.gotagteam.com/images/Sach...ntrastTest.jpg

Life has changed since I hooked this camera up to the TV to set back-focus. Don't know if that was it entirely, but it sure helped.

Thats pretty good - a far leap from what im getting!

just something to throw into the mix
 

Is the problem being raised on noise mainly sitting with the HD200, or the HD250 as well. For some reason it's occurring to me the people piping up use mainly the HD200.
Now this is a completely uneducated stab, as I'm sure some even reading this now may be using the colourful language to the effect of 'Get Real!'. But maybe if that was the case, that we have nobody complaining about the 250's, but we have a number complaining about the 200's. That because there has to be in some aspect a slightly different data path or flow, that the 200's have incurred noise over the 250??
I know, I know, I'm just desperate, but thought I'd throw it out there.

Cheers

Adam

200 and 250 seem to be the same.

what's the settings used in this picture ?
i also have some noise and can't get ride of !

Eric, what picture are you referring to?

Just as a side note I've noticed that in a lot of the settings that people offer on this forum, "detail" is usually set real low. Also no gain. You should try some of Tim's settings here http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=62835

Image Noise 250
 

Did a test with our 250 going SDI into a Digital Projector, a new top of the range
Barco, sorry but do not have the model number at this time.
We used a standard 10m tv bnc cable to connect our camera abd a Sony 500
side by side, looking at the same subject, in daylight.

We noticed a fantastic improvement over the SD, Sony 500 composite in terms of detail, for instance the 18x lens produced a lot of visible backlit dust for example, but....
The image noise produced made it appear we were running with 6db gain !
This confuses me, as this noise is not a product of the MPEG 2 codec...
Sorry, do not have screen shots at this time, but if enough interest is shown I'll organise another test and take a stills camera.

i was talking about this one:
http://www.gotagteam.com/images/Sach...ntrastTest.jpg