Still frames show the results. However, because we tried to set each camera up optimally and arguably we could have done better on the Panasonic; I'll be doing follow-up tests on the HVX and we left color rendering alone, these shots cannot be directly compared for which one is "best"--only for how they differently rendered the scene.
Dynamic range: despite differences in tonal scale rendering, all four cameras were roughly equal in handling extremes of light and darkness. The Canon did the best job of shadow rendering, but depending on how you look at things may sacrifice the highlights slightly at this exposure setting. The flatness of the HVX's cinegamma-D curve, without separate black stretch, left the shadows compressed, though the detail is still there.
Color rendering: As the stills show, the cameras do different things with color. To my eye, the Panasonic and JVC are the most natural, most closely matching actual scene colors. The Canon and Sony are more saturated and "Kodachrome"-like; they match each other fairly well, with the Sony tending more towards orange in the reds.
The stills also show differences in color sampling: The HVX's color pretty much reproduces the scene as it was, albeit a bit softer horizontally than the luma signal. The JVC's progressive chroma shows some coarsening in the vertical direction, most noticeably on the red cloth against the green backdrop, and in the cover of Goodman's Guide.
The Canon and Sony, using interlaced images, show pathologically evil chroma "sawtooths" in the red cloth, Goodman's Guide, the orange pitcher, and the test chart--an artifact of interlaced color.
This sawtoothing can be ameliorated with chroma blur, but it's even more of a nuisance than DV25's sampling. In fairness, FCP's codecs show what's there without chroma smoothing see Codec Differences , whereas playback hardware and other software codecs often provide some sort of smoothing or filtering: 24f images captured from the XL H1's tape via a Kona card to uncompressed files on the Mac do not show sawtoothing: the Canon smooths the image upon output, arguably with a slight drop in chroma resolution.
The XL H1 stands apart in highlight handling. Observe the blue wash on the backdrop, for example. Most of the cameras simply let color components saturate, with hue shifts in areas of incipient overexposure; the blue wash goes cyan as both the blue and green channels reach maximum values.
The Canon desaturates these bright areas, preventing hue shift. While there may be a slight loss of detail in some overexposed areas as a result, many find the resulting image more naturalistic. Different cameras, both SD and HD, handle the abruptness of hue shift in different ways most probably due to differences in knee processing , but the XL H1is the first low-cost camera I've seen that eliminates it entirely.
Noise: All the cameras are clean in the highlights, but show different noise levels in the shadows, mostly noticeable in the wall and the floor at the left side of the picture. The Z1's image is cleanest, followed closely by the XL H1's. The HVX's noise is characteristically colorful, while in the others it's mostly luma noise. We set up the cameras side-by-side, and introduced two models, one blond with pale skin and the other dark-skinned and dark-haired. Both the HD and the XL H1 handled overexposure the best, showing the least blowout and less hue distortion just prior to blowout.
The Z1 also held its chroma the best as gain was boosted, while the others tended to desaturate unevenly. We had our models stand in front of a greenscreen and blew their hair with a fan.
They walked at varying speeds past the set, and danced in it, in medium and closeup framings. They shook patterned blankets to stress codecs. Martial artists sparred in both normal and low-key, side-lit scenes. For the most part, all the cameras behaved perfectly well. However, in normal playback, the long-GOP formats handled these scenes just as well as the HVX, with no noticeable compression artifacts.
Only on the "shaky blanket" tests did the long-GOP cameras show a bit of degradation in the fast-moving detail, with the XL H1 and the F doing the best and the HD and Z1 showing noticeably more compression artifacts on still frames--but all clips, played back at 1x speed, looked fine: it required single-framing or slo-mo playback to notice defects. Our quick 'n' dirty greenscreen setup didn't provide adequate separation between our blonde model and the background, making keying difficult, at least at my level of experience.
We took the cameras outside and had each operator hand-hold each camera while shooting a martial artist practicing his fighting-staff moves, so we could compare handling, image stability, and ease of focusing. As might be expected, the shoulder-mounted HD and XL H1 gave the most stable images, with the JVC capturing the smoothest moves despite its lack of image stabilization.
The HVR-Z1 did very well for a handheld; Sony's excellent optical Steadyshot soaked up whatever tremors the operators imparted to the camera. The HVX fell behind the others; its weight and off-center handgrip clearly reduced everyone's ability to handhold it smoothly. Panasonic's optical image stabilization is less aggressive than Canon's and Sony's, and it appears to operate over a smaller angular deflection, so it was less effective in removing handheld jitters.
None of the four cameras excelled in on-the-fly focusing, with every one showing at least a couple of out-of-focus shots. The JVC and Canon appear to have been shot at smaller apertures deeper depth of field so it's hard to make conclusive statements about focusability. I took each camera in turn and tracked Mike Curtis as he walked and ran twice around me over the course of about 40 seconds, passing areas of shadow and highlight, to get roughly comparable footage of fast motion and typical sunlit-scene contrasts.
I also held a medium telephoto lockdown in the middle of the shot to see how stably I could hold the camera. As in the previous series of shots, all my lockdowns were acceptable aside from the HVX, which I wasn't able to hold sufficiently still.
In motion, though, the HVX footage wasn't substantially worse than the footage from the other cameras. This scene was the most revealing in terms of compression quality, as Mike ran quickly past the shadowed front of Omega's facility. I have re-wrapped the hi-res. It says I can't import the files to a bin. I'm on AXP 5. I've been reading the forums but nobody has really touched on this as far as I can see.
Now I can't even open the project. I really don't want to use FCP - I'm an Avid boy through and through, but I'm losing hope that there are any other options! If the files you have are properly wrapped for the Avid in MXF, then you would not import them. Just drop them into a proper Avid MediaFIles folder structure, open the Application and go to your media tool.
If you sort by date and show just master clips, they should pop to the top. Thank you both for your quick replies. I'm using a clean volume for this film, so I don't have a pre-existing Avid MediaFiles folder on there. Since this is your first time doing this, make it easy and just import something, anything, into your project. This will create the correct Avid folder structure on your drives and you won't have to worry about that in your troubleshooting.
BLKDOG: Since this is your first time doing this, make it easy and just import something, anything, into your project. Sound Advice by Todd. Just importa a still. I think this might be the problem, although I don't know how since Avid can read them if they get imported as a batch to replace the proxy files.
MetaFuze - I'm pretty sure I'm either doing something wrong, screwed or just very confused. I installed it, read the manual at least the relevant bits but here's the problem. When I Scan Folders and point it at the folder with the MXF files in it and tell it to scan for MXF file types, it shows that it sees the files in a brief, progress bar style dialogue box but then nothing happens. Nothing appears in the Group or Detail screens and it's as if nothing has been done.
When I point it at the folder with the hi-res MOV files in it, it reads the MOV files and lists them in the group screen, but the video preview window won't play the files back and when I transcode them, the MXF file is not recognised by the Media Tool in Avid and, when I try to drag and drop, it says the same thing as before about "This file cannot be placed in a bin.
See the documentation regarding transferring media files". I'm completely stumped. MetaCheater - This seemed like my big hope. DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses Your Name.
Remember Me? Mark Forums Read. Buyer's Guides. Thread Tools. March 7th, , AM. March 8th, , AM. March 8th, , PM. March 18th, , AM. March 20th, , AM. March 21st, , AM.
0コメント