"1) The concept is cool."

The concept is needed, I'm not a kid who's doing this just for fun, I want my short fiction narrative fim to look like one, not like 60i video. The 60i video look is enough to scare any distributor of fiction narrative away. It makes things look cheap, and all this happens without the viewer knowing why. But progressive framerate is important.

"2) This camera was first shipped to resellers around Oct 1, so there aren't that many of them out there."

There will, the excitement surrounding this cam is overwhelming. demand was so high Panasonic shipped early. I assure you not many people will be buying a PD-150 or XL1-s anytime soon. The Dvx-100 will have that market for a long time.

"3) Files shot with the dvx-100 load into Vegas 2 or 3 just fine, full framerate playback, external monitor, no-recompress...no probs. I have tried this myself."

I'm talking about editing at 24p, I want my transitions and fade outs to be at 24p, not 60i. What you described is 24p with pulldown. And yes there is a difference in transitions & fade in/outs that are 24p and 60i.

"5) While SF has lots of experience with HD and 24p (learn more: http://www.sonicfoundry.com/services) the dvx-100 is neither HD nor does it shoot 24p the way that HDCAM does- we've been picking over the field cadence etc. Just to be clear on both of these."

The DVX-100 doesn't shoot 24p the way HD does, but it shoots 24p nonetheless, its ccds are capturing the images at full frames, 24 times per second. These are real progressive scan ccds. The DV format is an interlaced format, so what it does in 24p "advance" mode is place the full frames without having them cut in between fields. It's a custom pulldown technique, and FCP will be able to extract the full 24p frames without any image loss and no recompression, then you will be working with real 24p at a full 480 resolution. Very nice indeed.

"6) I'm betting that Sony and Canon both come out with some 24p-DV variant in the next 6 months, and the only thing you can be sure of is they'll be somehow different from the Panasonic."

So you agree that 24p is here to stay, than what seems to be the problem?
Panasonic worked on the DVX-100 since 1999, and you think Sony/Canon will have it in 6 months? Try minimum 1 year. Remember when the VX1000 was the only dv on the block... for a year without any competition, these things take time. Canon BTW doesn't manufacture there own ccds, Panasonic is the one that makes them. That's right, the famous "frame mode" on the XL-1s and GL-1/2s is all Panasonic.

And Sony/Canon's variant of 24p DV will not use a different standard. Apple has already commited to Panasonic's standard (which is an excellent way to bring native 24p through dv, just genius), and that was a huge blow to Sony/Canon. Remember, Apple is quite important in the world of DV.

Anyways, my main point is:

-24p DV is here to stay.
-The success of this cam means a standard has been created.
-and that's that, market reality and all.

If Vegas Video is not serious about this, than don't do it at all.
Better to NOT do it at all, than to do it with hesitancy and have it go buggy on us.

pomme

You have obviously done your homework. I do have a question:

"Sony/Canon's variant of 24p DV will not use a different standard."

How can you be sure about that? In the course of developing Vegas, we've run into some pretty major variants of OHCI device control, locked/unlocked audio etc between the different makers, even different models from the same maker. It would be nice if all DV cameras and decks worked the same and precisely complied to spec, but the fact is, they don't...or at least haven't in the past. Whenever there's a deviation from spec or standards, that means more custom work for us (the cameras/decks typically can't be changed after they ship).

Anyway, we look forward to any and all feedback from those with 24p gear in hand.

Pomme : did you check the Pana forums on the Cam.
There's a company that does a software for the PC which extracts from the DVX1000 and converts to 24 without recompression. You can then edit it in vegas in 24 p...

If you don,t find it i'll try to check it from the early forum posts
Nat

In between.

This camera doesn'nt rock only for it's 24p capabilities.
It has the best audio features I have seen in a mini-dv camera at this price and the nicest manual controls etc.

I don't understand why people complain about 24p when all in all it's a great camera.

And I also think Vegas is a great program and I love it 10 times more than FCP and it would be so great to have the abilitie to capture at 24p... we're not in a hurry take the time to code, but it would be real nice

"we've run into some pretty major variants of OHCI device control"

All that is asked from Panasonic's "24p advance" standard is that every 5th frame be removed. This is not complicated. And the NLE Blade 2.0 from In-Sync will be able to do this on the fly. Even a small company like DVfilm.com (a video to film transfer house) has software that can do this who's demo is downloadable, it only works with Quicktime unfortunatly. And if Sony/Canon comes out with a new standard, just update to which frame will be removed, but I doubt they will split their frames in separate fields more than once, really doubt it, so just pick a frame. Going from 1 standard (Panasonic) to 3 standards (Pana/Sony/Canon) in this "remove 1 frame from every 5th" world is not complex. It seems you guys have experience in this going from the quote above. But hey, like I said before, do it right or don't do it at all.

pomme

Oh my....

I suspect we've been had by a Panny rep posting here on the forums.

"Anyways, my main point is:

-24p DV is here to stay.
-The success of this cam means a standard has been created.
-and that's that, market reality and all."

Your points are vacuous and completely speculative.

There is no reason to believe that 24p is more aesthetically appealing than 60i de-interlaced. Feel free argue this, but I hope you have your skates on because things will get pretty slippery. Logic and history are at the back of a more open and dexterous understanding of aesthetics.

Of course, this is supposing you're "not a kid" and might be interested in shooting something of artistic vigor and endurance. Though, it reads like you're more interested in "fitting in" with The Big Boys than anything else.

"The success" of this cam has yet to be determined -- or have you been spending time hitting 88mph in your DeLorean lately? Certainly the camera is hyped, and it's likely that many many people will succumb to such empty rhetoric, but popularity is so rarely a good measure of quality.

And...your assertion that people will stop buying Sony's and Canon's?? Whatever it is you're smoking...

- jim

The point is that besides it's 24p capabilities the camera still beats the Xl1s or PD150, because of the audio features, the lens, the progressibe CCDs etc.
People only see this cam as 24p, but it's 60i capabilities are superior to most major cams.

pomme:

Like SonicEPM said, you do know your stuff, as do some others on this topic. With this camera, and Panasonic's magic 24p DV, there are more people who don't than do <g>. I too am familiar with how the system works, in both standard and advanced modes.

DVFilm is not just removing every 5th frame, it's doing adaptive deinterlacing (which has too many flaws for my taste) and other things.

Your are correct that 2:3:3:2 pulldown is easy to remove and re-insert during rendering. This would let FX, transitions and titles all work at 24p. I'm all for it, but we won't deliver a half-way solution. A complete solution would also have to support external monitor and pre-renders.

It's interesting that nobody mentioned that running the engine at 24p instead of 60i would also mean FX and transitions would render 2.5x faster as well <g>.

///d@

"There is no reason to believe that 24p is more aesthetically appealing than 60i de-interlaced."

60i de-interlaced? To what? 30p. Well if you de-interlace anything it loses resolution and becomes too soft. Better to capture them progressively.

And I am pleasantly surprised by the 24p effect. Feels like video transfered to film.

Anyways, your post is all over the place, and I don't think you understood what I said. It also seems like your being a bit too personal, and I think you need to relax.

"Though, it reads like you're more interested in "fitting in" with The Big Boys than anything else."

All I said is that 24p is going to catch on like wild fire. And even according to "SonicEPM" Sony and Canon will have 24p for their future cams if they want to stay competitive. Look, 24p IS making a big splash. Trust me, whether you like 24p or not, this is beyond you, this is the market. It's about supplying a demand, and I had this demand for a long time. Please don't be insulted by this. 24p is more to my taste, so respect that.

And also, 24p staying as 24p for DVD output would make the quality of the mpeg2 better. All DVD players will add the pulldown automatically, this is how hollywood DVDs work, their all at 24p, not 60i.

And yes, you're right, a complete solution is best. Are you working on it? All FCP fans at 2-pop will start paying attention to VV if it has this complete solution. Blade 2.0 is getting attention just because of this, imagine VV.

"60i de-interlaced? To what? 30p. Well if you de-interlace anything it loses resolution and becomes too soft. Better to capture them progressively."

Aesthetically you find it appealing, whereas I don't. Technically, while the image is a sharper, progressive image (which is nice, but not necessary), it's also one with far less frame information (pan quickly with it to see what I mean.) I'd rather shoot at 30p if anything.

"Trust me, whether you like 24p or not, this is beyond you, this is the market."

That's exactly what I said...

"Anyways, your post is all over the place, and I don't think you understood what I said. It also seems like your being a bit too personal, and I think you need to relax."

I just reacted to statements like:

"The concept is needed, I'm not a kid who's doing this just for fun, I want my short fiction narrative fim to look like one, not like 60i video."

"The 60i video look is enough to scare any distributor of fiction narrative away. It makes things look cheap, and all this happens without the viewer knowing why."

"I assure you not many people will be buying a PD-150 or XL1-s anytime soon. The Dvx-100 will have that market for a long time."

Because they are sweeping generalisations and the first is somewhat offensive -- the implication being that those shooting 60i video are kids, or that a film look is the only goal worth attaining.

In a way I agree with you -- 60i, as it stands, is a hack that does cheapen a potentially good looking image, and a progressive capture system is a nice feature. But this idea that 24p is the way to go is, I feel, a mantra that is light on substance and heavy on the hype -- and I'm doing my part to try and keep it in check.

30p video -- whether captured natively or as 60i deinterlaced in post -- can look surprisingly lush, especially when projected as a progressive digital image. It's a shame that few have had the chance to see this, and fewer still aspire to exploiting the DV image for its inherent qualities. Most are looking for an easy way out -- DV as a poor man's 16mm.

No thanks,

- jim

I don't believe I'm getting into an argument... but here goes

I don't think you understood my "kid" comment. I was saying that I KNOW why I'm into 24p, don't look down on me and say that 30p or anything interlaced is better, I know about this, I've seen 30p, (as in: I'm not a stupid kid who needs some fixing). I saw 24p video with my own eyes and I made up my mind. Respect that.

Stop talking to me as if I need more education. I know more than you think. Trust me.
And if you looked at my post more carefully, I was talking from a fiction narrative perspective. If your shooting a sports event, please use 60i. But anyways you completely mistook my comment.

And about my gross generalizations, this 24p for dv IS big. More people are partaking in 2-pop's dvx100 forum than the actual DV forum itself!

And if you think other generalizations bother you, expect them in forums, what's wrong with an opinion. Do I have to start writing "in my opinion" at the beginning of all my sentences.

pomme, don't leave. 24pDV is a very interesting development and your comments are welcome.

Here's something that doesn't get talked about much: Most high-budget spots and episodics seen on TV have been and are still originated on a 24p format (35mm or 24p HD)... but they are posted at 60i, meaning the source footage is transferred to digibeta (or whatever) with 3:2, and all titles and transitions are done in 60i. That's a different look than 24p all the way, or 60i all the way. I personally prefer the look of titles at 60i, composited over 3:2 footage, for TV display anyway. Food for thought-

I've also noticed that scrolling text is much less prevalent with tv shows. The 60i starts to show itself with movement so this is understandable. Text always seems to pop in and out. I personally like the look of having everything 24p, just like a film. It kind of adds to the budget, without adding to the budget for real.

But the mix of both 24p and 60i for spots is an interesting mix. I've also seen this mix in most documentaries, but mainly because they don't have the budget to do it all in 24p. This won't be an issue in the future though, technology is becoming more and more democratic, 24p dv is just another step in a never ending climb. But I must say, I rather watch a documentary at 60i, feels more real that way. But for fiction-narrative, suspension of disbelief is important, 24p makes you forget you're looking at actors.

About 1 second into "shortflight.avi" the bird jumps back for a couple of frames. At first I thought this was due to jittery camera operating but it happens very quickly, and since the video clip's properties show it as running at 29 fps, I began to wonder if this wasn't an artifact caused by missing frames from some conversion process. Do you know? Do you have a sample 24p fps file from this camera?