DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/)
-   -   Anyone know what this image is suffering from? (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/145768-anyone-know-what-image-suffering.html)

John Peterson March 13th, 2009 05:02 PM

Anyone know what this image is suffering from?
 
There is horizontal banding in this video in spots.

I shot it with my EX1 at HQ 1920 x 1080 /60i and exported it to Raw DV (4:3 cropped) using Clip Browser. It is to be used in a 4:3 NTSC DV project 720 x 480 along with footage from a VX2000. Several spots have horizontal lines like the orange bedspread in this screenshot from the timeline in Vegas 4:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y40...ech/Image1.png

I tried Avi and several other conversion methods and this is the best I could get it to look. After some conversions I tried the problem looked really pronounced.

Anyone know what is it from and what can I do about it?

John

Vincent Oliver March 14th, 2009 02:06 AM

Maybe my eyes have finally given up, but I can't see any horizontal lines in your jpeg. Perhaps they show up on a movie clip, if so then I would think it is the dreaded rolling shutter effect. This may be due to the stage lights being out of phase with your camera, try using 50mhz or 60mhz next time. (Page 66 of your Operating Instructions book)

Paul Kellett March 14th, 2009 03:46 AM

Are the lines just to the right of the girls left arm ?
The lines there look like interlaced jaggies.

Paul.

Les Wilson March 14th, 2009 04:13 AM

I see what you are talking about. It's a 1/2" horizontal orange/purple/black band midway between her left elbow and the purple furniture. I had to blow it up to see it at first. The artifact looks like its from another part of the frame (from her costume) but it doesn't match the current frame so it could be from a prior frame that did not get updated. It reminds me of the effect of dirty/misaligned heads. Do you see it when you play the footage from the camera on a monitor and bypass your NLE?

BTW, is that from Rogers and Hammerstein's Cinderella?

Vincent Oliver March 14th, 2009 05:20 AM

I had to enlarge the picture to 500% to see the lines. These are artifacts due to the downconversion of HD footage to SD. Do a search on this forum for downconverting techniques.

These only seem to appear on the red blanket (top edge) it looks like your reds are oversaturated, try reducing them in your Profile settings. I also notice your lens seems to have a lot of Chromatic abberations, maybe the colours are not registering correctly.

John Peterson March 14th, 2009 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vincent Oliver (Post 1027468)
I had to enlarge the picture to 500% to see the lines. These are artifacts due to the downconversion of HD footage to SD. Do a search on this forum for downconverting techniques.

These only seem to appear on the red blanket (top edge) it looks like your reds are oversaturated, try reducing them in your Profile settings. I also notice your lens seems to have a lot of Chromatic abberations, maybe the colours are not registering correctly.

I tried a few methods for downconverting. This example produced the least artifacts. Yes, they are on the red blanket. I can desaturate the footage in post to cut down on the red if you think that caused (or helped exaggerate) the horizontal bands.

Someone else suggested that they are from interlacing. I read every post in the archives that I could find and it seems that downconversion is the biggest problem with these cameras and the most often asked question. I couldn't find a consensus.

Any suggestions I may have missed regarding converting to 4:3 interlaced from HQ 1080/60i?

In terms of "a lot of Chromatic abberations", that scares me.

Can you describe them further? It sounds like the camera may need to go in for servicing and I need to be able to describe the problem in a little more detail to them.
Do the others see this as well? Do a lot of you shoot stage productions?

Thanks for the responses. Truly appreciated.

John

Vincent Oliver March 14th, 2009 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Peterson (Post 1027478)
I tried a few methods for downconverting. This example produced the least artifacts. Yes, they are on the red blanket. I can desaturate the footage in post to cut down on the red if you think that caused the horizontal lines.

Someone else suggested that they are from interlacing. I read every post in the archives that I could find and it seems that downconversion is the biggest problem with these cameras and the most often asked question. I couldn't find a consensus.

Any suggestions I may have missed regarding converting to 4:3 interlaced from HQ 1080/60i?

In terms of "a lot of Chromatic abberations", that scares me.

Can you describe them further? It sounds like the camera may need to go in for servicing and I need to be able to describe the problem in a little more detail to them.
Do the others see this as well? Do a lot of you shoot stage productions?

Thanks for the responses. Truly appreciated.

John

John,

The oversaturated red will show up as a "bleeding", you may have noticed this on some poorly set up TV sets, or if you use an out of gamut red on a text caption.

Downconverting footage from the EX3 has also been a headache for me. At present I am using ClipBrowser to output to an AVI (720 x480) and then bringing it in on a NTSC timeline (my project is in NTSC, normally I would use PAL). This has produced very acceptable results, although not as good as I had hoped for from the EX3. I will continue to experiment after I have completed this DVD project.

The Chromatic aberations shows up as a green and purple edge to the edges of objects in your footage. Look at the bottom edge of the bar that runs accross the girls dress. or go to the left edge of the frame and see the book - object edges. Given that this is an elargement from a section, I wouldn't worry too much about this.

Bill Ravens March 14th, 2009 06:58 AM

When delivery is expected to be 720x480 (DV), it is always reommended you shoot 720p. Downconverting from 1080 generally results in these horizontal lines/twitter. This won't help you now, but, may be something to remember in the future.

John Peterson March 14th, 2009 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Ravens (Post 1027489)
When delivery is expected to be 720x480 (DV), it is always reommended you shoot 720p. Downconverting from 1080 generally results in these horizontal lines/twitter. This won't help you know, but, may be something to remember in the future.

Thanks for that Bill. The footage is mostly VX2000 footage. The EX1 footage is only one night's performance that I would like to use in the final edit.

If I shoot in 720p what should I do about putting progressive footage on a timeline with interlaced footage. What do you do?

John

Bill Ravens March 14th, 2009 07:33 AM

Tuff question, John. I avoid shooting interlaced. If in a pinch, my only option would be to deinterlace before mixing. The best way to do this would be with VirtualDub and Donald Graft's deinterlace filter, IMHO.

Olof Ekbergh March 14th, 2009 07:37 AM

Shoot 720 60p it is beautiful, and easily converted to 525 60i or 525 30p, or even 24p.

If you shoot 30p it will work well in a 60i timeline just interpret as i.

I use Macs, mostly M100 but also FCP. I have never had a problem down-converting in software. I can give more specific details if you need them, but my experience is only on Macs.

John Peterson March 14th, 2009 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Ravens (Post 1027497)
Tuff question, John. I avoid shooting interlaced. If in a pinch, my only option would be to deinterlace before mixing. The best way to do this would be with VirtualDub and Donald Graft's deinterlace filter, IMHO.

I guess that is what I was thinking when I chose HQ 1080 /60i for the second camera for that night. I shot 5 shows with the VX2000 and for one show the EX1 was the second camera. Since there was no 720i I figured HQ 1080i was the only real option since everything I have read says that SD mode on the EX1 is really awful looking.

If I shoot another musical with only the EX1 I think I will absolutely take your advice and shoot it in 720p.

John

Simon Wyndham March 14th, 2009 09:05 AM

The only 'banding' that I can see is due to DV style colour sampling issues. That's simply how DV handles colours such as red and blue and the main reason that 4:2:2 colour is preferred over 4:2:0 and 4:1:1.

Noah Kadner March 14th, 2009 09:53 AM

Where does this image come from? If it's the QuickTime Player have you checked the high-quality box in presentation settings? If it's a screen grab from FCP's canvas, don't sweat it that's just a proxy.

Noah

John Peterson March 14th, 2009 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noah Kadner (Post 1027542)
Where does this image come from? If it's the QuickTime Player have you checked the high-quality box in presentation settings? If it's a screen grab from FCP's canvas, don't sweat it that's just a proxy.

Noah

It is an image grab off the timeline from Vegas 4.0 in .Png format

Thanks Noah.

John

John Peterson March 14th, 2009 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vincent Oliver (Post 1027486)
John,

The oversaturated red will show up as a "bleeding", you may have noticed this on some poorly set up TV sets, or if you use an out of gamut red on a text caption.

Downconverting footage from the EX3 has also been a headache for me. At present I am using ClipBrowser to output to an AVI (720 x480) and then bringing it in on a NTSC timeline (my project is in NTSC, normally I would use PAL). This has produced very acceptable results, although not as good as I had hoped for from the EX3. I will continue to experiment after I have completed this DVD project.

The Chromatic aberations shows up as a green and purple edge to the edges of objects in your footage. Look at the bottom edge of the bar that runs accross the girls dress. or go to the left edge of the frame and see the book - object edges. Given that this is an elargement from a section, I wouldn't worry too much about this.

Well that's a relief Vincent. With a camera that has this many adjustments and shooting options it seems difficult to assess when something is working right or not working right. Thank God for forums like this one with so many helpful and sincere people. I know I truly appreciate it.

John

John Peterson March 14th, 2009 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Olof Ekbergh (Post 1027499)
Shoot 720 60p it is beautiful, and easily converted to 525 60i or 525 30p, or even 24p.

If you shoot 30p it will work well in a 60i timeline just interpret as i.

I use Macs, mostly M100 but also FCP. I have never had a problem down-converting in software. I can give more specific details if you need them, but my experience is only on Macs.

I used to climb in the White Mountains when I was younger Olof. I love that place.
Thanks for the suggestion.

John

John Peterson March 14th, 2009 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Les Wilson (Post 1027458)
I see what you are talking about. It's a 1/2" horizontal orange/purple/black band midway between her left elbow and the purple furniture. I had to blow it up to see it at first. The artifact looks like its from another part of the frame (from her costume) but it doesn't match the current frame so it could be from a prior frame that did not get updated. It reminds me of the effect of dirty/misaligned heads. Do you see it when you play the footage from the camera on a monitor and bypass your NLE?

BTW, is that from Rogers and Hammerstein's Cinderella?

It was Beauty and the Beast. The "Wardrobe" is on the right of the "Belle" and the bed with it's back turned. Belle has not yet noticed the wardrobe character. But you can see her in the shots in the next post.
Great show to shoot. Lots of color.

John.

John Peterson March 14th, 2009 04:41 PM

The .png in the original post was done like this:

1. Export original to .avi from Clip Browser
2. Convert to Raw DV using Procoder 3
3. Place on Vegas timeline and apply heavy sharpening in Vegas because it looked way to soft. Much softer than the footage shot with the VX2000.

Note: Exporting to AVI with Clip Browser and trying to put it directly on the Vegas timeline doesn't work because Vegas won't accept the file.

Here is another one:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y40...ech/Image2.png

This frame grab from the timeline was done as follows:

1. Export original to Raw DV using Clip Browser
2. Place on Vegas timeline
3. No effects applied

Here is another one:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y40...ech/Image3.png

This one was done the same as the previous one except that heavy sharpening effect was applied the same way I did in the "original post".

I think you can see the problem of the horizontal bands (interlacing artifacts, color fringing, or whatever you call it)on the bed pillow. I think you can see it more clearly now.

What do you think?

John

Brian Luce March 14th, 2009 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Olof Ekbergh (Post 1027499)
Shoot 720 60p it is beautiful, and easily converted to 525 60i or 525 30p, or even 24p.

Would 720 60p be the best format for content intended for SD distribution throughout PAL and NTSC land? In other words, is it the most adaptable?

Olof Ekbergh March 15th, 2009 08:44 AM

The most adaptable is 24p. And we are all used to seeing it, just remember the 7 second rule (anything moving across the screen should take at least 7 seconds, this applies to pans as well) or you will have a lot of jitter. All rules are made to be broken!

60p or 60i(29.97i) are also easily converted.

It is all a matter of taste. I prefer fast action (sports) to be 60p or 29.97i. 24p is great for interviews scenics (slow pans) etc.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:22 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network