V1U grabs at DVinfo.net

Simon Wyndham · October 9th, 2006, 01:57 AM

I'll post some footage up in the next few days. But for now here are one or two grabs. Not exactly spectacular subject matter though, sorry!

The first is a shot from my driveway. I didn't take any time to set this particular shot up because I just wanted a quick comparison of progressive scan vs interlaced. The results aren't pretty! Take a look at the house roof, trees, and car number plate in the background and compare the two.

http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%2...Interlaced.png
http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%2...rogressive.png

http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%20V1U/trains.png
http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%20V1U/Person.png
http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%20V1U/Cranes.png
http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%20V1U/Clifton_2.png

Floris van Eck · October 9th, 2006, 02:26 AM

The grabs look promising. Can't wait to see your footage!

Tony Tremble · October 9th, 2006, 02:36 AM

The camera certainly can handle a wide dynamic range.

I see what you mean about the progressive, there is quite a noticeable drop in resolution.

I'd be interested to know just how much in-camera control one has over the image if you have the time.

Many thanks Simon.

TT

Tom Roper · October 9th, 2006, 07:43 AM

I don't know what to make of these, other than to say they are interesting travel photos.

In other words, hard to judge without something side-by-side. The fringing clearly remains. I'm inclined to say the detail is better. I'd like to compare a few of my Z1U grabs to these. The images have a slightly processed look.

What were the in-camera sharpening settings?

Pretty country...

Simon Wyndham · October 9th, 2006, 07:57 AM

Sharpening settings were left at default. For once I felt that the default settings weren't intrusive, so I left them as is.

There is some fringing. Although there doesn't appear to be as much as other cameras and lenses that I have seen.

Piotr Wozniacki · October 9th, 2006, 09:13 AM

Dear Simon, I think that the very noticeable resolution drop in the progressive vs interlaced shots is all so important to us potential buyers - if the progressive mode is just a gimmick, claiming to give the "film look" but at the expense of resolution that evident - many will be better off to go for FX7 rather than the V1 (cheaper, and still offering the revolutionary exposure latitute). So, are you SURE both clips were shot in the same camera settings? No AF?

BTW, some CA is also noticeable in both interlaced and progressive:-(

Simon Wyndham · October 9th, 2006, 09:18 AM

Piotr, I make a living from video, so getting the settings exactly the same in such comparisons is something I make sure that I do. I never use auto functions on a camera ever. So rest assured, both those grabs were from EXACTLY the same camera setup. All I did was change between progressive and interlace. This is not an isolated incident

You will notice that the problem isn't simply one of lost resolution. Detail takes on a really weird effect that looks very similar to one of those filters in Photoshop that makes a picture look like it was painted.

One thing I didn't try was turning the camera off and then back on again. On the pro cameras Sony recommends switching the camera off for 10 seconds after switching modes. Although I have never come across this type of problem with the picture before.

Regarding CA, this will always be apparent in most cameras. In fact I haven't come across one that doesn't exhibit this, including high end broadcast zooms.

Stu Holmes · October 9th, 2006, 09:48 AM

thanks for posting that Simon. interesting shots!

just one thing... surely living in PAL land, this cam was the V1E and not the V1U? The thread title says "V1U".

John Froton · October 9th, 2006, 10:23 AM

Simon,

What process did you use to take the grabs? Could the grabbing itself have affected the output? It's hard to imagine how the image could degrade in progressive mode on a camera that has truly progressive chips :(

Bill Pryor · October 9th, 2006, 10:25 AM

The person who compared the V1 to his JVC (the PAL version of the 100) said the progressive mode looked a little softer.

Tony Tremble · October 9th, 2006, 10:38 AM

DSE's paragiding clip at 24p did not show those "oil paint" style artefacts but that was held in a 60i stream. I wonder if 30p softens?

Could Sony be crippling progressive recording? I ask that because those grabs of 50i are fantastic and if the same resolution was available at 25p Sony might think it was a little too good at the price point. Is that just stupid conspiracy talk???

Or is there an incompatibility with capture equipment causing the loss of resolution? How should the 25p captured? Would one capture the 25p footage as 50i? Having looked at the grab in Shake, the progressive image looks like it has been subjected to a quite severe noise reduction routine. Is there a noise reduction setting engaged in progressive mode?

I really do like these images, really quite un-Sony like...

Anyone?

TT

Simon Wyndham · October 9th, 2006, 10:47 AM

The grabs were taken direct from a Vegas 7 timeline. All project properties and clip properties were set as appropriate to each clip to make sure they were shown at their absolute best.

Trust me, the progressive mode IS softer and less detailed than interlaced. I viewed images on a 32" high def CRT and the difference was noticeable switching between the two modes.

Rest assured I'll be getting as much info as I can from Sony regarding this.

Thomas Smet · October 9th, 2006, 11:02 AM

Interesting...

I'm not sure what to think of these at this stage. They look clean and more photographic in the areas that are exposed well but the blown out areas sure do look fake to me with very high contrast edges. Actually all of the images look kind of soft to me. II would have thought your detail level was set to min and not the default level.

From these images I would have to say they look more like the HVX-200 with dull colors. They look very natural but very soft as well kind of like how the HVX-200 looks. The progressive image is clean but I see exactly what you are saying about it being softer.

I would also have to say that a lot of these stills look a lot like the footage from my SONY HC1. They colors are more accurate from th V1 but the overall soft natural look looks kind of close to me. This is not in any way a bad thing. I happen to like this type of look and think a natural look is much better than resolution.

With that said however these shots seem to be missing that sense of texture you get with HD footage where you can feel the grain in the wood or a roughness to a rock or stone wall. I will send these images to a HDV tape and see how they look on my 50" HDTV.

Tom Roper · October 9th, 2006, 11:36 AM

I am satisfied that Simon is careful and precise in his methods. The grabs are illustrative and representative of the V1E. There remains some doubt about it being exactly alike with the V1U. I see pretty good detail in these images.

Thank you Simon, nice work.

Tom Roper · October 9th, 2006, 11:40 AM

Of course the native images from the m2t stream are 1440, these are upsampled to 1920, presumably so they don't display squashed, but some interpolation has been added in that transformation.

October 9th, 2006, 01:57 AM	#1
Simon Wyndham Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Malvern UK Posts: 1,931	V1U grabs I'll post some footage up in the next few days. But for now here are one or two grabs. Not exactly spectacular subject matter though, sorry! The first is a shot from my driveway. I didn't take any time to set this particular shot up because I just wanted a quick comparison of progressive scan vs interlaced. The results aren't pretty! Take a look at the house roof, trees, and car number plate in the background and compare the two. http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%2...Interlaced.png http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%2...rogressive.png http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%20V1U/trains.png http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%20V1U/Person.png http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%20V1U/Cranes.png http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/Sony%20V1U/Clifton_2.png

October 9th, 2006, 02:26 AM	#2
Floris van Eck Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 993	The grabs look promising. Can't wait to see your footage!

October 9th, 2006, 02:36 AM	#3
Tony Tremble Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 451	The camera certainly can handle a wide dynamic range. I see what you mean about the progressive, there is quite a noticeable drop in resolution. I'd be interested to know just how much in-camera control one has over the image if you have the time. Many thanks Simon. TT

October 9th, 2006, 07:43 AM	#4
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	I don't know what to make of these, other than to say they are interesting travel photos. In other words, hard to judge without something side-by-side. The fringing clearly remains. I'm inclined to say the detail is better. I'd like to compare a few of my Z1U grabs to these. The images have a slightly processed look. What were the in-camera sharpening settings? Pretty country...

October 9th, 2006, 07:57 AM	#5
Simon Wyndham Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Malvern UK Posts: 1,931	Sharpening settings were left at default. For once I felt that the default settings weren't intrusive, so I left them as is. There is some fringing. Although there doesn't appear to be as much as other cameras and lenses that I have seen.

October 9th, 2006, 09:13 AM	#6
Piotr Wozniacki Inner Circle Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Poland Posts: 4,086	Dear Simon, I think that the very noticeable resolution drop in the progressive vs interlaced shots is all so important to us potential buyers - if the progressive mode is just a gimmick, claiming to give the "film look" but at the expense of resolution that evident - many will be better off to go for FX7 rather than the V1 (cheaper, and still offering the revolutionary exposure latitute). So, are you SURE both clips were shot in the same camera settings? No AF? BTW, some CA is also noticeable in both interlaced and progressive:-(

October 9th, 2006, 09:18 AM	#7
Simon Wyndham Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Malvern UK Posts: 1,931	Piotr, I make a living from video, so getting the settings exactly the same in such comparisons is something I make sure that I do. I never use auto functions on a camera ever. So rest assured, both those grabs were from EXACTLY the same camera setup. All I did was change between progressive and interlace. This is not an isolated incident You will notice that the problem isn't simply one of lost resolution. Detail takes on a really weird effect that looks very similar to one of those filters in Photoshop that makes a picture look like it was painted. One thing I didn't try was turning the camera off and then back on again. On the pro cameras Sony recommends switching the camera off for 10 seconds after switching modes. Although I have never come across this type of problem with the picture before. Regarding CA, this will always be apparent in most cameras. In fact I haven't come across one that doesn't exhibit this, including high end broadcast zooms.

October 9th, 2006, 09:48 AM	#8
Stu Holmes Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Europe Posts: 844	thanks for posting that Simon. interesting shots! just one thing... surely living in PAL land, this cam was the V1E and not the V1U? The thread title says "V1U".

October 9th, 2006, 10:23 AM	#9
John Froton New Boot Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Findlay, Ohio Posts: 11	Simon, What process did you use to take the grabs? Could the grabbing itself have affected the output? It's hard to imagine how the image could degrade in progressive mode on a camera that has truly progressive chips :(

October 9th, 2006, 10:25 AM	#10
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	The person who compared the V1 to his JVC (the PAL version of the 100) said the progressive mode looked a little softer.

October 9th, 2006, 10:38 AM	#11
Tony Tremble Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 451	DSE's paragiding clip at 24p did not show those "oil paint" style artefacts but that was held in a 60i stream. I wonder if 30p softens? Could Sony be crippling progressive recording? I ask that because those grabs of 50i are fantastic and if the same resolution was available at 25p Sony might think it was a little too good at the price point. Is that just stupid conspiracy talk??? Or is there an incompatibility with capture equipment causing the loss of resolution? How should the 25p captured? Would one capture the 25p footage as 50i? Having looked at the grab in Shake, the progressive image looks like it has been subjected to a quite severe noise reduction routine. Is there a noise reduction setting engaged in progressive mode? I really do like these images, really quite un-Sony like... Anyone? TT

October 9th, 2006, 10:47 AM	#12
Simon Wyndham Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Malvern UK Posts: 1,931	The grabs were taken direct from a Vegas 7 timeline. All project properties and clip properties were set as appropriate to each clip to make sure they were shown at their absolute best. Trust me, the progressive mode IS softer and less detailed than interlaced. I viewed images on a 32" high def CRT and the difference was noticeable switching between the two modes. Rest assured I'll be getting as much info as I can from Sony regarding this.

October 9th, 2006, 11:02 AM	#13
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	Interesting... I'm not sure what to think of these at this stage. They look clean and more photographic in the areas that are exposed well but the blown out areas sure do look fake to me with very high contrast edges. Actually all of the images look kind of soft to me. II would have thought your detail level was set to min and not the default level. From these images I would have to say they look more like the HVX-200 with dull colors. They look very natural but very soft as well kind of like how the HVX-200 looks. The progressive image is clean but I see exactly what you are saying about it being softer. I would also have to say that a lot of these stills look a lot like the footage from my SONY HC1. They colors are more accurate from th V1 but the overall soft natural look looks kind of close to me. This is not in any way a bad thing. I happen to like this type of look and think a natural look is much better than resolution. With that said however these shots seem to be missing that sense of texture you get with HD footage where you can feel the grain in the wood or a roughness to a rock or stone wall. I will send these images to a HDV tape and see how they look on my 50" HDTV.

October 9th, 2006, 11:36 AM	#14
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	I am satisfied that Simon is careful and precise in his methods. The grabs are illustrative and representative of the V1E. There remains some doubt about it being exactly alike with the V1U. I see pretty good detail in these images. Thank you Simon, nice work.

October 9th, 2006, 11:40 AM	#15
Tom Roper Trustee Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 1,891	Of course the native images from the m2t stream are 1440, these are upsampled to 1920, presumably so they don't display squashed, but some interpolation has been added in that transformation.