To me this just looks like perfectly ordinary interlace artifacts: I honestly don't see what the problem is.

The only difference I can think of between the Z1 DV and PD170 DV is that on the Z1 you're scaling down the DV footage when you letterbox, whereas on the PD170 you'd have native 4:3. That will make interlace artifacts even worse.

Okay Charles, here's the picts of my GlideCam rig.

http://homepage.mac.com/kene3/GlideCam.html

Ken E.

Nice job, Ken!

You can really see how much flex is occuring throughout the suspension system--even though your mounting point is biased backwards maybe 10 degrees, by the time you get to the gimbal pin at the front of the arm you can see that it has shifted to a forward bias of another 10 degrees. I would guess that you are having to hold the rig in place otherwise it would want to fly forwards, yes?

This actually is one of the as-yet unsolved issues with vehicle mounts; unlike the body mounted rig which allows the operator to dictate the floating position of the rig through his hip position, with a hard mount you are truly at the mercy of the topography. I'm sure Ken will back me up that as you traverse a grade with the vehicle, the rig "wants" to shoot out in the downhill direction. Same also with corners; the centripetal acceleration requires a good grip to rein in the rig.

In any event, Ken, I hope your format issues work out and you are able to keep shooting--best of luck with all of it!

It does want to move out from me some. But I don't find it a big problem. I can actually let go of it for a moment and it will float, not for long. I think I should be using the V16 though. I can see that this light weight unit is getting stressed with the extra weight I have on it. I've got the extra plates bolted under the sled. This is really a great thing to shoot with. I could also use the lower monitor because the on camera monitor is out of sight. I point and shoot mostly. The wide angle makes it work out. I get pretty good at it after awhile. I've done some pretty bumpy, hilly terrane and gotten great footage. You may notice I have the mount tilted up some to compensate for the bias. I can swing my arm out and tilt the camera down to get a shot of the wheel too. Or across the front of my body, and even a side profile of myself riding along.

Lots of fun down here in Baja with this.. Ken E.

Ken has an interesting, and for him serious, problem. I certainly can "feel his pain" 8-)

As I will discuss following, I don't believe it is an "format" (HDV compression) problem. I believe it is a vibration isolation problem.

Based on looking at Ken's first clip and the tests and comments he has made I am of the strong opinion he's dealing with a vibration-band-limited problem. Ken has stated that the problem is reduced at higher rpm.

And I also believe the problem he is seeing is physical (mechanical vibration somewhere in the optical chain) and not mathematical (due to the HDV compression algorithm). To my viewing the video clip shows the imagery vibrating pretty well in consonance with the ATV's.

Even though Ken stated that he could see no vibration at the lens I don't believe one can see the level of vibration causing the image "jitter" shown in the clip.

We obviously know that the problem starts with the ATV vibration. The fact that Ken sees it with the FX1 and not the PD170 can be due to at least factors - the two times higher vertical resolution of the FX1 and a potentially greater sensitivity to vibration for the FX1, or a combination of both. Also, the resonant frequency of th mechanical unit (the Glidecam plus camcorder) can be affected by the mass of the camcorder. The lower weight of the PD170 could shift the resonant frequency to a point not affected as much by the ATV at idle.

If we assume ( a BIG assumption in this situation) that Ken's camcorder is representative of all FX1/Z1U's, that is it doesn't have some anomaly causing, then the question is whether the ATV vibration can adequately isolated from the FX1 to permit good imaging.

In one posting Ken stated "Are you driving with the camera handheld, I'm sure there is no problem." To me this implies that Ken believes that a handheld FX1 would not be affected by the ATV vibration.

Is this true, Ken? If not, would you do such a test - handhold the camera while someone runs the ATV through the lower rpm range? Let someone else control the throttle so you have less coupling to the ATV.

If such handholding will eliminate the problem, then I would assert there is non-handheld solution possible.

Glidecam-type devices, by their very nature are "low pass filters". That is they allow for slow movements of the camcorder while removing higher frequency motion. But any such filter has a "corner frequency", the frequency at which the filter starts reducing higher motion frequencies. I believe in this situation the Glidecam is not rolling the higher frequencies off fast enough to eliminate the camcorder vibration.

Although not the same situation as Ken's I have posted a 3 min clip on my website that provides some footage of a car-mounted Z1U. I took the original video as a test of a windshield suction cup mount arrangement which can be seen in the clip. I made no particular attempt to minimize the vibration from the car to the camcorder. As can be seen in the clip the camera is resting on a white polystyrene block that isn't particularly soft. I have consider retesting with my Cine Saddle (bean bag) to see if that improves isolation but haven't had a chance to do that yet.

The clip is here: http://www.clamcamvideo.com/gallery.html#mount

I've tried to include samples covering fairly slow speed on a broken up paved road to fairly fast (50 mph) on a fairly smooth paved highway. At about 1:38 there's a scene of a roadside desert plant taken with the vehicle stopped but with the engine idling. At 2:02 there's a section of the pavement that is essentially flagstones. This paving ends at 2:30. The vehicle used - a Scion Xb - has some engine-induced vibration at idle that is reduced at higher rpm. I believe most of the vibration at speed comes from the road surface.

I have at least one alternative to the Glidecam that Ken might try to solve the problem but I'll save that discussion until we hear back from Ken.

Carroll Lam

Hi Carroll, Your clip and comments are very welcome. Your WMV file works pretty good, but it stalls frequently even with my 1 meg download speed. But as I examine your clip I see several places that seem to have the same problem I am having. One that seems to show it best is just over half way in you pull over to the right in a large pull out, after the bloom shot. As you start to pull back on the road look at the rock wall to the right. It seems to go fuzzy and I seem to see a doubling of the top wall line. I know your expecting some vibration distortion from your mount. But this may be more than that. It is very similar to my problem. Also, right at the start in the woods, the branches look like they go into a soft focus. Look at the logs as you pull back, there is one spot they look fuzzy too. This is another characteristic of the problem. Hi detail goes blurry, but on close examination it appears the camera can't get it straight, it has nothing to do with focus. Early in the video you hit some pretty rough stuff and the camera jumps a lot. I see traces of the problem there too. One test you might do, if you have one, use a DV camera, not the Z1 in DV mode, but another camera with the same mount and see if you get a much improved picture. My bet is you will.

And yes, it is a specific vibration frequency range that kicks the problem off. Sony also thought it was a mechanical problem in the lens assembly and they replaced it completely.

I'm going to add one more detail to this discussion. I have a 55 inch Mitsubishi HD monitor here also and I plugged the FX-1 directly into it via component video and the problem is there also. It does not seem to be an artifact of down converting.

And yes to the handheld on the ATV. It does help get rid of the problem. The camera works great until it is vibrated. The best I got was with my GlideCam vest on while riding on the back with someone else driving. But the problem is so prevalent even then that I didn't even want to consider cutting around it in the edit.

This test is perfect for the problem. I'm seeing unusable footage in this clip. If we can get the same test with a normal DV and compare, we all might come to some conclusions.

Thank you all for putting up with me... Ken E.

I might add. The jumpy characteristic of Carroll's clip is also the nature of the problem I am having. This kind of artifact can be the cause of the steady shot. Did you have it on or off? It looks to me like you have it off, because that's about as good as I can get mine to look in the rough. Turning it on only makes mine worse. This jumpy footage I'm seeing maybe from the WMV frame rate or compression though. Is that jumpy look on the master too? The feeling that part of the picture is hanging there for a moment before it goes on?

Thanks again.. Ken E.

Not surprising. The average bit rate of that particular clip is 1.5 Mbps.

I'm pretty sure the Scion's hood goes through a maximum engine-induced vibration as its rpm increases so that is probably where it most closely matches your problem. You'll note from the pictures the setup the camcorder is basically retained in place by the cantilever mount from the suction cup but its weight is mostly supported by the stiff polystyrene block resting on the Scion's hood. Thus, the camcorder essentially experiences full hood vibrations.
I'm sure that would be the case. I've done a lot of similar stuff with DV cams.

Assuming you were in HDV mode this is another bit of evidence that the problem is mechanical, not mathematical. The component outputs are no way involved with the HDV compression process.

I figured as much. Better vibration isolation means better image quality.

So....here are my conclusions based on the facts to date:

1. A couple of specific HDV camcorders (your FX1/my Z1U) are more susceptible to vibration than similar DV camcorders.

2. A properly setup Glidecam will not adequately isolate the problem vibration frequencies from the HDV camcorder.

3. Isolating the FX1 from the vibration souce (via the human body) is adequate to eliminate the problem.

4. The problem is vibrational motion of the image chain and not based on MPEG2 compression artifacts.

Some things we do not know:

a. Is the problem just due to the expected higher sensitivity of HD cameras to vibration?

b. Would another brand HDV camcorder (e.g., JVC) exhibit the same vibration sensitivity?

c. Would an HD camera (e.g. a Varicam or Pana HDX200 ) exhibit the same vibration sensitivity?

d. Can the current Glidecam setup be "tuned" to eliminate the problem vibration frequencies.

e. Are there other methods of vibration isolation that would eliminate the problem?

Questions a, b, and c can only be answered by someone with access to those units and are willing to do the testing.

Question d needs input from some good Steadicam/Glidecam "tuning" expert (Charles Papert?). Obviously the suspended weight and spring tensions need to be adjusted to try to move its rolloff frequency low enough to eliminate the problem vibration frequencies.

Question e would require tests. Two possible alternative methods of isolation (besides the human body) are some form of "bungee cam" or a Kenyon gyro suspension mount.

Obviously you have an investment in the Glidecam setup and alternative mounts may be prohibitive. Further work at tuning the Glidecam setup may be your least disruptive alternative.

Or, you may not wish to pursue the problem further. As you've stated you are going to put the FX1 up for sale.

Well, the problem you discovered (and I validated) is of importance to those of us that use our cameras in sometimes extreme conditions and want to move into the "HD age". Your input has triggered a whole host of qualitative and quantitative tests by a variety of video experts on this forum resulting in very useful information and better understanding of the HDV format and its limitations.

We obviously haven't learned everthing there is know...yet. 8-)

Carroll Lam

Yes, the problem is with the Sony's HDV cameras... They seem to have two limitations. One is keying and the other is moving motorized vehicles. No big deal if you know that going in... I'm not that put out by it. I just wish it had been put up front.. Like in small print someplace that says "This camera format may not work well when exposed to minor vibrations." Or "in vibrating places other camera formats may work." That way you can go in with your eyes open to testing. Someone suggested that NASCAR is using them in their cars. I somehow doubt it. Is that a fact? And I don't think anyone is going to come up with a mount that will work. As I've stated. I have done hand held and vest mounted GlideCam.. Think about that. The GldieCam mounted on my vest, total separation via my body, plus the GlideCam.. That footage was better, but not usable without a lot of cutting. So I don't think anyone is going to do much better than that. I also put an air tube between two plywood plates and tied them together with straps so that the top board and the bottom board had no solid connections. Then mounted the GlideCam on the top board... No go. A bungee cam might work, but what a beast to control. And I can't think of how to do that on a quad. I bet the panasonic DVCPRO HD will work. In the photos on the link of Glide mounts. I saw some pretty nice cameras there. Any of them HD? I can't be the the first person to try HD of any format on a moving vehicle with minor vibration. I really do think it's the HDV encoding. And I'm still of the opinion the Sony first goes to HDV and converts it's to DV via it's real time down converter before it goes to tape as DV. No one has proven otherwise yet to my knowledge. That would explain the problem crossing over to the DV mode and explain away the idea it's a mechanical problem.

Now that I am sure it is not just my camera. And I can't fix the problem by buying another HDV and simply replacing this one. I am actually considering keeping it. Yes, I love the camera too. I may need muti cams in music production if I get back into that down here. So for now, I'll use it. I can always sell it later and the production value now is greater than the money I might lose by selling it later on down the line.

I think Panasonic is on the right track at this point. Make a reasonably priced 100 MBS camera. Although for me, it will have to be another year or so when the P2 cards come down in price and the capacity goes up.

Again, thanks for putting up with me.. Ken E.

One more posting of a movie clip...

http://homepage.mac.com/kene3/HDVtestSequence.html

That is odd, though it's not entirely surprising that that kind of vibration could cause problems for the focus mechanism. Are you certain that the focus was locked? I've never seen such problems on my Z1 in normal use.

Uh, one. Again, you seem to be complaining about... interlace artifacts. The FX1 is an interlaced camera, you will get interlace artifacts if you view it on a computer screen.

At some point here I am going to bow out of this thread... I've spent a lot of time here this last week.

Yes, I'm sure the focus was locked down. Absolutely. I bet you will see these problems if you put your camera in contact with a slight vibration. It's not an intlace problem, you could drop one of the fields and it would clean up.. but not with this stuff. It's in both fields. None repairable, none usable... Uh, one man, yes, but how many edges does the man have? I was just trying to add a little humor to the situation. The picture looks so bad I wouldn't put it on my bathroom wall. The posting I put up in QT can be frame advanced. You can download it into your computer by saving to disk in the lower right corner triangle. Take it into FCP and de-interlace it.. You may argue that it has gone through another compression. But it wont clean up in any format. It's all goofy, each and every field. At this point I believe we have duplicated the problem with two Z1's.

Adiós, Ken E

Ken, I respectfully suggest the problem is with you and your workflow. I/we regularly key the Z1's, in Sony Vegas and in Serious Magic Ultra 2. Daily, I do this. I've also shown it to several hundred people in various classes and HDV presentations. I even have a really bad screen shot with beer stains, seamed background, and dark "blob" on the screen that I key in demos. You'll see some of that in this month's Studio Magazine.

Re; NASCAR; John Cline and his brother produce and shoot for NASCAR as official archivists of events. They are using Z1's in cars as crash cams, etc.
Jody Eldred shot the opening sequences of JAG from a BELL twin blade HELICOPTER with absolutly no stabilizing tools at all. Twin blades are painfully filled with vibration.

I've had my Z1 on the front of a motorcycle that jumped 60 feet in distance, at a height of approx 18 feet. The only problem was the landing, as one would expect.
Today, I spent about 10 mins with my Z1 on the front of my Rubicon at various speeds, just trying to see if it was nearly as bad as you suggest. I'll post pix when I find time to go shoot pix of me sitting on the Rubicon. (500cc, large Honda)

If you don't like HDV, that's fine it's certainly not for everyone. But to to make blanket statements like "can't key with it" etc is a little over the top. If HDV isn't working...then it's probably time to buy a much more expensive camera if you want HD, but then again...you'll find problems with any format on the front of an ATV rig if you don't have an expensive, well suited stabilizing system.

On the other hand, if you want to post an original, UNTOUCHED m2t somewhere, I'd be happy to look at it in a couple different apps. I can manage up to around 100 meg without complaint. I also have an HD-SDI monitor here at the moment to really delve into this.

[edit] after downloading that last DV rez clip...there's a WHOLE lot more to this story than HDV. There is clearly field reversal happening and/or other error that has zip to do with HDV or Sony.[/edit]

Just as a note for Ken -- in his post above, D.S.E. suggests uploading a native .m2t clip somewhere... I'll be more than happy to host some video for you here at HDV Info Net; just shoot me an email for the FTP access privs.

Thinking outside the box,I too think the ignition system is your problem .The higher the rpm the increasing pulses from the ignition to the sparkplugs.Maybe try some quality suppressors on the system.Its amazing how much interferance an arking or badly suppressed plug lead can cause to electronics.

Now THERE'S something I hadn't considered whatsoever. Given that my Rubicons are just a couple months old...this wouldn't rear its head on my system, should this at all be the culprit, or one of several potential culprits.

One, after you deinterlace the frame. Though I do see something odd happening around his right arm: color bleed, maybe?

I'm sorry I made the statement about the keying problem. I read that information on this forum. You look it up and and join that thread. I had no business making that statement. From what I read, it sounded pretty conclusive. Again, it wasn't for me to say one way or the other. I apologize.

I don't remember who it was, but a few months ago someone on this forum told us he was using his Z1 on a motocross bike doing fifty foot jumps with no problem and he had it attached with suction cups to the gas tank. Is that you? It was that statement that encouraged me to send my FX1 into Sony for repair. Also, what does the rev up cycle of the bike look like?

I'm very confused now... Here's a testimony that seems to say the Sony's HDV cameras don't have the problem in general. I'd love to find that out. For me, that would be the best and most affordable fix I could hope for.

My camera is in the states with my associate who did the shipping back and forth to Sony. I can ask him to post a file. Or if someone on this thread who has validated the problem I am having could make one available. I'll see if I can get one from my source. But he is very busy and I can't guarantee a quick posting and I wont see my camera until someone I know fly's back down here with it, that is if I keep it.

We've also done test on a clothes dryer.. No ignition problem there. We've had the same results. And we have covered this in this thread before. I know it's a long thread. but you can scan back to see if you want. Also, look at the clip Carroll Lam posted. He has his on a car hood, same problems. Different electronics.

I'm going to do a lot less posting on this thread. I've said more than I know to be fact. I can't say anything new. And after all of this. I'm back to square one. Do I buy another HDV or not? I'll stay tuned and if I'm needed I'll step in. But I don't think I can say anything more of much use. And I'll try to get the file for you.

Thanks.. Ken E.

Douglas, You say it is clearly field reversal. So what can be done to fix this? I'm sure you don't consider my clips to be "looking good". Can this be repaired? I can't use the camera on my mount and my mount is set up right. The GlideCam is fantastic. And from what your saying, I should get great pictures on my mount. I do with the PD-170. If your camera works, and if John Cline's works, Why is mine and a few other Sony HDV's having such problems. And why does the Sony repair team say, that's the way HDV is, sorry, your using it in a place we can't guarantee good results. I also realize you may not have any knowledge about repairing this camera. But what would you do? Sony will not try to repair this camera again. And it's not a matter of "NOT LIKING HDV" as you said, it's a matter of wanting some footage I can use. Would you use the footage I posted? Did you see my posting of my 170 on the mount? That's the way I would expect my footage to look. I would run out and buy another HDV if I where convinced I would not have the same problem.

PD-170 on the same mount. http://homepage.mac.com/kene3/QuadHeaven.html

I'm working on the m2t clip. I may have it as soon as later today if my associate gets the time to do it.

In the clip where I round the corner and see my friend. When you de-interlace it, each field is a blur. I've de-interlaced many stills of video through the years. When one field is removed, you get a much clearer picture, however degraded by half the resolution. That is not the case here. And yes, we will know more when you see the untouched file.

My main question to you is, would you use the footage I posted? Why do you say, if I don't like HDV then it's not for everyone? That implies you might use the footage. Please clarify.

Ken E.

PS. Chris, can you send me the FTP address to post at please?
kene3@mac.com

Good 'ol fix it in Post
 

Hello Ken, I don't know if you have tried this software.

This works with HDV (latest version)

I've only glanced at it, i've tried these type of software on miniDV footage and it is amazing, much better than DIS (Digital Image Stabilizer), the reason being that in DIS the hardware has to correct in real-time. With these software you can even have two pass!!

Anyway to cut a long story, I tried this type of software and it made a clip that was done handheld (very shaky) look like it was done on a glidecam.


So try this on one, I my self have not used this one, you will probably have to play around with different settings

http://biphome.spray.se/gunnart/video/deshaker.htm



hope that helps


Anhar Hussain Miah

Anhar, thanks for the suggestion, but according to me. Post stabilization can't work. Each field is a blur. Can't fix that... But maybe after we get the UNTOUCHED file posted we will all know more.

Douglas. I've spent some time doing internet searches for John Cline, NASCAR. I can't find anything about this. I've done searches for NASCAR Archives, and other variations on the theme. I cant find anything about this on the net. I would think that an archivist for NASCAR would be easy to find. Can you assist me in locating any information confirming this NASCAR Z1 usage?

Dogma = absolute belief. Catma = relative disbelief: I'd like to confirm this usage and try to find out how they have mounted this cam.

No offense meant... Ken E.

I don't think John or his brother would be posting footage. John is a personal friend from Albuquerque, NM, a power user of Sony Vegas, and I don't think he'd ever lie about such a thing. Are you suggesting I'm lying about the moto-cross footage that I shot for CMT? Or that I didn't shoot on my ATV on Sunday?
No, I wouldn't use your footage as you posted it.
I can say that since we bought our 3 Z1's, I've not turned on a DV camera in several months. National Geo, CMT, and several projects have all been shot with the Z1. After having just returned from Australia, I saw footage on television from the Z1 and FX1 all over the place. Just on the bay in a boat, I saw a video crew with 3-4 Z1's. They're around. They're being used. HDV is quite popular.
And there will be people who don't like HDV just like there are those that don't like fast food.

Without an original m2t, I'm not really able to comment. Deinterlacing and field order are not really relevant, although you likely want to deinterlace, given what you're trying to do.

Douglas, I never intended to say you were lying. I would love to see the footage you shot with your ATV. As of yet, I have not. I can only say that I don't trust anyone, not even god, more than I trust my own experience. I need to confirm that a Sony HDV camera can work when exposed to minor vibration. I understand your qualifications as a professional, I've looked you up on the net. I am trying to show respect, and express my doubt. That is a difficult paradox. And if you don't like my footage, and according to me the mount is great. As demonstrated by my 170 on the mount. What do I do? Do I go out and buy another HDV on your word? Also, am I wrong to say that if I end up de-interlacing the HDV footage to make it palatable, aren't I losing resolution, and at what point does the HDV begin to shine when half the resolution is removed? Sony is finished trying to repair my camera. I have read that you have close ties to Sony, true or not, I don't know. But if you do, it might behoove Sony to give my camera a little more attention, or replacement. This thread can't be what they want to see. I don't want to be here either. I was at a point of conclusion about my camera having limitations until you posted your activities with a Z1. I am evidently not the only one having these problems. See Carroll Lam's posting. So for us who use the camera that way and are having problems, we would like to find out what the true facts are. Is it the format, or my individual camera with a problem? And if it's my camera only. Why doesn't Sony stand behind it? It appears to me they may have taken the easy way out by quoting some paragraph on page 95 in the owners manual about not guaranteeing the camera under unusual conditions, like exposed to vibrations, or submerged in water. I am willing to accept that Sony is done with my camera too. I am willing to go buy another HDV, but as of yet, I don't feel confident about the format. Post your results and I might not have to believe you or anyone. I can see for my self. A belief is a pretense to know. I need to know via my own experience. Show me please. And even then, what are my odds of getting another problem? What percentage of the Sony's have this problem? That question does not negate the need for someone who has had success with the camera exposed to minor vibrations to post their results. We need to know if it is possible to get good video under such conditions.


I love the format too, I understand why so many are in use already. It's a fantastic break through. That has nothing to do with a possible limitation when exposed to minor vibrations. But if it has limitations, that needs to be known as well. Right now, according to me and my experience, there is reasonable doubt.

Can your friend John Cline make a clip available, and can he explain how he has the camera mounted?

With respect.. Ken E.

If you could measure that frequency, you could build a damping system to compensate (with the correct calculated damping ratio, dont ask me now its been a while since I've done those calculations:).


Anhar Hussain Miah

P.S as soon as you get the original UNTOUCHED m2t files pass it through that software I recommended, and get back to me on that.

I suggest you drive to Albuquerque or Phoenix where John does most of their work.
My motorcycle footage was on the VASST site for several weeks; there is other footage there now, albeit shot from the platform on a pickup truck bed(that was idling).
Looking at your footage, it's clear you've got some editing issues happening. I've offered to look at the m2t file, but you've not posted it.
Without that, all I can go on is what you've displayed in the mp4 file. The issues seen in that file aren't related to vibration at all. They're editing/workflow problems. But, I'm not going to attack your editing knowledge the way you've attacked the camera and/or format, which happens to be used for production and broadcast by groups as diverse as MTV and PBS, National Geographic, Discovery Channel, ABC, CBS, and many, many others. Perhaps we're all just idiots out there making great footage, revenue, and doing what we do. (create/produce/deliver)

It's not my job to convince you of anything. If it doesn't work for you, it doesn't work for you. It's probably time to move on/move up. 4:2:2 cams are all over the place. Maybe they'll work for you. Frustrated or not, the suggestion that anyone is "making any of this up" is offensive. That said, this thread is pretty bloated and I don't know that I've got anything further to add to it.

What you actually need is an Active vibration damping system.

If thats what you would like try contacting these guys, they usually manufacture "Isolation Tables" for optical labs etc


http://www.techmfg.com/

Anhar Hussain Miah

That doesn't seem practical for this sort of application.

Ken, there is the possibility that the single-section Glidecam arm may be the weakest link in the equation. Although as it has been pointed out, stabilizer arms don't deal with high frequency vibration as well as low, there is a possibility that other arms may dampen the enough of the effect to eliminate the problem. Obviously there is a cost attached to replacing this element. The new Smooth Shooter arm from Glidecam would be one possibility; the Flyer arm from Tiffen would likely be the most effective in this weight class.

It would obviously be a shame in that the system you have was working for you in the SD realm, but if you absolutely needed to go HD at the current time, it might be the least expensive component to examine.

Douglas, I am sorry if I insulted you. I am more interested in science than belief. Science is based on doubt. I was expressing questions I felt where in line with my experience. When I expressed belief in this thread, I was shot down big time, and I apologized for my beliefs and went back to the pursuit of facts.

What does raw footage have to do with editing or workflow? How could I possibly get better footage by editing. Cut out the bad stuff? And in this situation, that's close to 80 to 90 percent. And de-interlacing HDV footage to make it work, seems counter productive. Also, I don't know if de-interlacing the HDV 1080i would help at all and is yet to be proven.

I'm about to make one final statement, then I'm out of here.

My experience says that my camera has a problem that limits it's use to totally vibration free mounts. It seems that some people are having some luck with their Sony HDV's in some applications like mine. Some others besides me are experiencing the same trouble.

Good luck to all of us... Ken E.

Be aware that the video I collected was NOT on any form of isolated mount - it was basically resting on the hood of the vehicle - so I am not surprised that the resulting video showed the effects of vibration.

As I stated in my prior posting, none of the facts presented to date can allow one to conclude that the FX1/Z1U have vibration problems any worse than other camcorders of similar resolution.

The fact that the PD170 did not show the same problem under the same conditions only proves that the PD170 is not as sensitive to vibration as the FX1/Z1U. Nothing else.

Expecting a camcorder with over twice the vertical resolution to respond the same under the same conditions as the lower resolution is not something on which one should rely.

This is certainly an interesting problem to investigate. As time permits I expect to try other forms of isolation to get better hood mount video that that illustrated in my posting.

Carroll Lam

hm
 

it seems like some sorting out is required here, and Heath knew I have both FX1 and Glidecam V8, he asked me to join this thread.

Why not continue the examination here productively. I will offer my time and equipment to overcome this issue if everybody contributes ideas and suggestions.

I have FX1 and HC1, Glidecam V8. I don't have ATV, but I do have the mount for V8 to be mounted on cars and trucks and my company own Honda Stepwagon.

If everybody agree that the cooporation effort can be covered in my magazine articles aside from this thread, I don't mind spending time for this.

I think it would be great if you join in, Kaku. Especially if you can make some independent tests with similar setups.

I commend you to read my two posts at:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....3&postcount=85

and

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....0&postcount=88

for what I believe to be a pretty good summary of the facts as known to date.

We welcome your inputs and any tests you can do to isolate the many variables in this situation.

Carroll Lam

Carroll,

You already had them sorted out to start rolling. Very nice, Thank you.

I guess we can continue discussing about it in one of the threads.