Frame Mode on GL2 and XL1s interesting results!

shogo wrote on 4/25/2004, 11:01 PM
Hi, all

I just shot a wedding this weekend and I used an XL1s and a GL2 but by accident I forgot to turn off the Frame mode on the GL2. I was going to set them both to standard mode since I have heard of lot's of people saying they did not use Frame mode for weddings.

Anyways when I was going to edit it in Vegas I was looking for flashes to sync the shot's I was pretty amazed at these two shot's at the exact same time during a flash.

Check these out. Here is the XL1s shot in standard mode.

ftp://totalsolutions.bz/pub/XL1s.jpg

and here is the GL2 in frame mode

ftp://totalsolutions.bz/pub/GL2.jpg

Do you see the scan lines?
pretty cool huh?

Believe it or not the XL1s looked great the rest of the shoot it's just here that it looks crappy!

Comments

Nat wrote on 4/25/2004, 11:09 PM
When working with a GL1/2 or an XL1 I use frame mode almost all the time.

I can't stand those interlace artifacts, progressive material is so fun to edit.

The only downside is if you need to do quick movements, the pans will be blurry in frame mode.
Grazie wrote on 4/25/2004, 11:24 PM
Shogo! Can't get at the JPG! - Help . .. XM2 here and would reeeeeally like to see your results - yeah?

Thanks,

Grazie


EDITED: Okay just got in . . great results . . .thank you . ..
MUTTLEY wrote on 4/26/2004, 12:11 AM
Do you make sure to change your project setting to " Field Order None ( progressive scan ) " or do you leave it at the default. I have changed the default to be " None " but am not all to certain I've always done this in the past. Does it make any discernable difference ? And if you are in " None " can that mess up playback for anyone ?

Also, should you have to make any changes during capture ?

I use an XL1 and only shoot in Frame Mode but have never known for sure.

These are the things I wonder.

- Ray
Sol M. wrote on 4/26/2004, 2:44 AM
Keep in mind that Canon's frame mode is not really "progressive" video, you're actually shooting in a lower resolution when in frame mode (compared to normal interlaced).
patreb wrote on 4/26/2004, 2:51 AM
Jive, as far as i know ypu are shooting lover res compared to normal progressive (say of DVX100) but a bit higher (at least opticaly) of regular interlace mode.
Kelure wrote on 4/26/2004, 3:15 AM
The GL2 pic looks amazing. I know that you left it on by accident, but it looks really good. Can't wait for my GL2. More price reductions Canon.....
taliesin wrote on 4/26/2004, 3:22 AM
What XL-1 does in Frame Mode is nothing else than a better kind of deinterlacing. Actually it loses about 12 to 15 percent of resolution compared to its own interlace mode.

Marco
shogo wrote on 4/26/2004, 6:18 AM
"What XL-1 does in Frame Mode is nothing else than a better kind of deinterlacing. Actually it loses about 12 to 15 percent of resolution compared to its own interlace mode"

I'd be hard pressed looking at the pic from the GL2 that any noticable difference exist in resolution between the shooting modes. Technically maybe but to my eye comparing the two I can't tell a bit of difference.
taliesin wrote on 4/26/2004, 6:54 AM
Well, here I'm not sure. But I think the way it works in the GL2 is similar to the way it works in the XL-1.

Marco
NuOmegaAlpha wrote on 4/26/2004, 7:40 AM
I've been a slave of the GL2 for almost two months now and I think it's safe to say that the Frame Mode on that is just as excellent as you'd need to get on a camcorder in its pricerange. I was thinking about paying the extra money for the XL1, but after I spent a few minutes (not very long, though) comparing the camcorders one after the other at a store -- I found that for the extra thousand dollars or two -- the XL1 won't be worth the money for its Frame Mode unless you are filming every day and don't mind lugging that thing around.

With the GL2, I get great picture in Frame Mode with 16:9 ratio, and I can carry that thing around wherever I please. I've done shots where the cameraman is just RUNNING after the actor. I've also done great one-handed shots holding the camcorder high in the air above the actor's head, etc. I even like to spin the camera sometimes during filming for other extra FX...

So basically the bottom line in this rambling, irrelevant comment, is that the two camcorders are very similar in what they'll produce despite what it says on the the camcorder's specs. If you're looking for intensely-high-end professional equipment you'll be afraid to drop and handle incorrectly -- choose the XL1... if you're looking for something you can really dig into -- choose the GL2. But either way, you'll get quality from Canon ;-)

--Noah--