HD capture

netkoala wrote on 12/29/2003, 2:29 AM

Went to store and taped some vid using the JVC HD cam.

Shot using 3 modes - DV, 520 and HD.

VV can capture the DV but does not recognise the 520 or HD stuff off the tape when I play to capture off my DV cam.
Is there an add on that allows VV to capture the 520 and HD mode off the tape ?
At present it just shows as black and no sound.

My cam allows the capture of standard DV mode stuff and the 1/3" chip looks to provide good results.
Of course the camera comes with mpeg2 capture software, so in theory it is possible to capture to disk and then edit and render in VV.

But llike I asked , is there a capture driver add in for VV ?

I'm hoping that once on disk that VV will allow full editing and render.

It gets a bit confusing.
VV has formats
720-24 1280x720
720-30 1280x720
720-60 1280x720

1080-24 1920x1280
1080-30 1920x1280
1080-60 1920x1280

but the specs for the camera suggest that the GRID is
720 H x576V (?) and the pixels placed within is where HD comes into its own.
I did not realise that the H x V was the constant.

Still 720H is better than these smalled DV cams that seem to have some specs at 530H , be it be refering to whatever into whatever.

Comments

PeterWright wrote on 12/29/2003, 3:41 AM

Vegas can edit and render HD but at present not capture or print HD to tape.

There are separate apps which do this - a search for HD on this and other forums should find these.

farss wrote on 12/29/2003, 4:07 AM

There's a plugin coming for Vegas that does the whole thing:

http://www.cineform.com/news/rel-ConnectHD.htm

Should be shipping mid January

JJKizak wrote on 12/29/2003, 6:07 AM

This looks too good to be true. I can't wait and I wonder if Sony is aware of it.

JJK

farss wrote on 12/29/2003, 7:37 AM

Yes,
they are aware of it, seems they helped out with it.

netkoala wrote on 12/29/2003, 8:11 AM

I'm hoping it is worth the expense to buy now a camera now.
Capture vid-age in HD so can always be shown HD later.

I guess a non HD device (monitor/TV/interlaced technology/non progressive display) or non HD DVD player will see NO great difference, but that you will render as HD ONCE and that older players/devices will read at lower quality equal to AVI or standard DVD.

It would be a pain to have to render HD DVD , Standard DVD, and then web formats too.

The idea seems to be to squeeze the quality into your DVD render - objective obtained.

But not that I really know, any guesses as to if standard DVD players will look better or see a real benefit ? Perhaps you only will see an improvement on a HD device or perhaps that 720 size will come across better ?????
If you are going to cut standard DVD in short term, would you start shooting HD now and provide for the future enhancement ? (cost of SonyVX approx = to JVC cam)

JJKizak wrote on 12/29/2003, 8:34 AM

Samsung just came out with a DVD player (Best Buy $300.00) that upconverts from DVD to 720P HD. I wonder if anyone has tried this unit yet and if there is anything to be gained---480P to 720P? And how would this increase resolution if you start with an already recorded 480P? I have seen for instance this week on HD, Sound of Music which I assume was DVD or film to start with and the HD resolution was not as good as a live HD broadcast such as Monday Night Football which is razor sharp (as good as my LCD monitor on the computer). Good HD absolutely blows me away, especially the arial "Vegas" shots on CSI.

JJK

farss wrote on 12/29/2003, 8:46 AM

I've had a pretty good play with that camera and done a fair bit of research into it. In the right hands and in controlled circumstances it can produce pretty amazing footage. To achieve that factor in the cost of HiDef grade ND filters and some way to fit them. Problem is the camera has a lot of pixels in a very small CCD block. That leads to very low exposure latitude. Also because it's encoding on the fly you can get quite serious artifacts.

If you seriously want to shoot something that can be used in a HiDef environment consider the DVX100 and shooting progressive. I'll be buying one as soon as the 'A' version hits these shores along with a 16:9 adaptor. Footage from it will upscale to 720p very nicely. It's still SD but unlike interlaced footage you can keep all the scan lines.

Also keep in mind that shooting HiDef isn't just having a camera. Realistically as you noted you need matching monitors etc On top of that remember that everything that is wrong with an image is far more noticeable in HiDef.

In the near future though Sony, Cannon and JVC should be coming out with cameras using the same technology to shoot HiDef on a budget. Cannon in particular may produce something useable which will change everything. You'd stll need to remember though the limitations. A proper HiDef lens for example will still cost very serious money.

netkoala wrote on 12/29/2003, 11:29 PM

Generally there is 576-p, 720-p and 1080-i.
The JVC cam shoots at 576-p ONLY.

So for this cam it is ALL 720Hx576V, but pixel count can be as high as 1280x659. It does 25 frames per sec at HR or 50 frames per sec at less pixels.

Guess if you are shooting something fast you would sacrifice pixels to get higher frame rate of 50. But actually you are back down near to DV quality re: pixel count.

The DV/AVI specs are 720Hx576V, so 720H is giving good quality + has 1/3" chip.
Also DV is 50 frames per sec.

if that is confusing - another way to say it is - 50 frames interlaced or 50 frames progressive (approx 836x576) but for HD you get only (1280x659) at 25 frames.

Thing is this 576p is NOT 720p and NOT 1080i as found in Vegas.

In fact Vegas supposedly does 1080p too, but the guy in the store said he has seen no hardware that does this.

So perhaps it is a valid question to ask if 576p (720H X 576V - 1280 X 659pixels - 25 frames) vid-age is going to be editable in VV.

Will it map to , or fit in with
720-24-1280x720
720-30-1280x720
720-60-1280x720
1080-24-1920x1280
1080-30-1920x1280
1080-60-1920x1280

perhaps you would need to set to 24 frames.

It is early days yet and I personally do not have the camera, but if you shoot 720Hx576V 839x576 50 frames, would you need to drop this on to the time line as 720-30-1280x720 or get away with 720-60-1280x720 ?

farss wrote on 12/30/2003, 1:35 AM

Netkoala,
I should have realised, you must be a fellow Australian!
So you looked at the PAL version eh?

Well just to confuse the world JVC removed all the HD capability in the PAL model. They just didn't confuse the world, they confused their own people, at IBC half the reps thought the PAL version would shoot HiDef!
Only the NTSC version has the HD modes. To shoot HD it records mpeg-2 TS to tape. You can capture using the supplied software, rename the ,ts file to .mpg and drop onto Vegas TL. Done it myself. Still cannot PTT using vegas.

Anyway all this is kind of irrelevant unless you buy the NTSC version which if you want to shoot HD is fine, becasue 720p or 1080i is the same either PAL or NTSC, just means you cannot use the camera to shoot PAL DV.

If you want to shoot PAL DV I could think of a lot of better cameras, with the PAL version you're stuck with all the compromises that had to be made so it could shoot sort of HiDef but hey you can't shoot HiDef with it. So tell me why the heck would you want the thing?

The camera you looked at is just a standard DV camcorder for all intents, all PAL cameras shoot 720x576, the big difference is what goes into those 720x576 pixels, how is the light handled by the glass, how much control does it give you over the lens, how much noise do the CCDs have at low light, how much exposure latitude does it have, how good is the audio.

If you want a rock solid DV camera buy a PD150, you can get them if you're quick for around 6,500, on special due to arrival of PD170. If you want a native 16:9 camera go for the PDX10. If you want an almost pro camera that you're going to have to learn how to use properly go for the DVX100, it's also about 6,500 pending arrival of the new model here.

Believe me the GR-HD1 in PAL makes absolutely no sense to me at all.
Still it's you're money.

Yoyodyne wrote on 12/30/2003, 1:51 AM

I have the Bravo D1 - which was the first ( I'm pretty sure ) DVI capable, HD upconverting DVD player. It is very similar to the Samsung 931 - although most say the Bravo looks better, anyway it can upconvert to 720p or 1080i but I can't tell the difference between those and regular 480p. Word on the street is the whole upconversion thing is just "hype" (480 by 720 is never gonna be 1080 by 1920 ) - the real story is the DVI output, that does make a noticable difference & many consider the Bravo to be one of the best looking DVD players period. Going throught the digital DVI out into the DVI in of your HDTV eliminates a D/A conversion and I find the DVI picture of the Bravo to be noticably sharper than component.

Also - I recently worked on a job where we had 2 of those little JVC HD camcorders, I wasn't the shooter so I didn't set them up. The shooting conditions were far from ideal and from what I understand everybody was very disappointed with them, the sound guy hated em' because they were having a heck of a time getting clean audio into them and I guess the video turned out horribly. Again the conditions were bad - speaker on stage under a spot light with a black background - but these guys shoot these things all the time and have a decent idea of what to expect - they were just trying em' out & the word I got is they would never use them again.

On the other hand that dvx100 is everywhere and most people love it. I've worked with it a bunch, getting audio to the camera is very easy and it sounds great. Here in NTSC land people love the 24p film look & a lot of producers are asking for it by name, the 24p thing seems to be the big deal as well as it's cinegamma settings. If I was buying a camera I would go for the DVX - plus Vegas loves it.

just my .02

netkoala wrote on 12/30/2003, 4:51 AM

Thought NTSC was the only model they made. Why does this stuff happen to me, standing in a store trying to figure it out.

PD150 (VX2000) I understand. (PDX10 too).
Is the oldest 3CCD model and is the best.
Suppose Sony took a big hit on that one because they never improved upon it, until now so the PD170 and VX2100 will be interesting to see. Perhaps minor changes.

DVX100 - 24p I understand too. 30Frame NTSC has less horizontal lines and is less quality than the 25 frame PAL. Interlaced sux's. Shooting natural progressive, or manually using doubled up track and high low field layover, or using a pulldown to 24p - makes alot of sense.
The cameras modes 480i/60 (NTSC), Cinema-style 480p/24fps, and 480p/30fps image capture all look good.

Wonder if PD170 and VX2100 will do 24 and/or 30 at better than 480p?
Is JVC DV 50f X 576p much different to DVX100 DV 30f x 480p?

Perhaps it is splitting hairs. PD150 or dvx100 fine. Done. Coz 24p is (I hear) damn nice and solid looking. No need to look further for good quality DVD.

Perhaps forget the HD hype because 720p ain't going to be much different from 24p.

Having agreed with all the above posts, apparently a DVC Pro50 camera is what is needed for TV commercial quality, so ......if this were editable on a PC using VV, it could be compared directly to the 24p solution and also the PD150 output with pulldown applied.

I wonder if you can edit on a PC the TV comercial quality camera vid-age, or do you need to use like
http://www.redwooddigitallab.com/Ajd950.htm ????

My guess is pretty much yes, the PD150 and pulldown to 24p is going to produce a DVD as good as a DVC Pro50.

My guess is pretty much yes, the DVX100 24p natural vid-age is going to produce a DVD as good as a DVC Pro50.

But only because you guys know more than me.

My guess is pretty much yes, the JVC(PAL) DV 50f X 576p is pretty much going to give equal quality to the DVX100 DV 30f x 480p and PD150 pulldown to 24p.