Jump to content


Photo

DSR-450WS still life


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Peter J DeCrescenzo

Peter J DeCrescenzo
  • Sustaining Members
  • 620 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR, USA www.peterdv.com Blog: http://herefortheweather.wordpress.com/

Posted 31 August 2005 - 04:31 PM

I hope the following images are helpful.

All of these images are from my NTSC DSR-450WS 2/3" 16:9 DVCAM camcorder, grabbed via Firewire @ DV25 onto my PDX10 camcorder's memory stick which saves them as 640 x 480 JPEG files. Other than resizing them to 640 x 360 and saving them as JPEG files @ 98% quality, I haven't changed them.

For all the images the DSR-450WS was set to 0db gain, 5600K electronic preset color balance, 1/4ND, with the Canon YJ19x9B4-KRS lens focal length at approx. 15mm (which is approx. equiv. to a 50mm focal length for a 35mm photo cam).

In all the images I exposed the MacBeth "skin" color chip (the chip in the top row, 2nd from the left) at 70 IRE using the cam's zebras. As a result, the white color chip was slightly underexposed; in other words, it didn't trigger the cam's 100 IRE zebras unless I opened the iris very slightly. Instead I opted for the skin chip to be at 70 IRE.

The first image is the result of the DSR-450WS being set to its factory default settings, including its detail functions turned on and set at 0 (zero), etc. The cam is in 60i interlaced mode, 1/60th sec. iris at F5.6.
DSR450WS_60i_default_89.jpg

The next image also uses the cam's default settings, except I switched it into 24p progressive mode, with a 1/48th sec. shutter. As a result I had to open the iris to F4 to maintain the skin color chip at 70 IRE.
DSR450WS_24p_default_90.jpg

Next I enabled some of the cam's various film-look features, including one of its film gamma settings, lowered detail level, etc. The values I used are the ones listed at the end of the article on Simon W.'s website. (Neither Simon or I propose that these settings are ideal, but are only an example of what's possible.)
DSR450WS_24p_film_91.jpg
http://www.simonwynd...camerasetup.htm

The final image uses the same settings as the previous one, except I've enabled the MTX LINEAR feature and set all the user values to -55 which results in B&W video.
DSR450WS_24p_BW_film_92.jpg

Those were carrots sticks, a small tomato and a nectarine in the foreground. I'm nibbling on the carrot sticks now. :)

All the best,

- Peter DeCrescenzo
  • 0

#2 Alvin Pingol

Alvin Pingol
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 677 posts
  • Student
  • California

Posted 02 September 2005 - 02:12 AM

Interesting.

The interlaced image almost appears sharper than the 24P version, which upon close inspection appears to have slightly stronger sharpening. I know you kept the other settings identical, so this is a little odd. Were your pulldown settings correct for the 24P frame? I'm seeing heavy aliasing on near-horizontal lines, such as on the edges of the wooden table and plate, which is much less visible on the interlace frame.

The low edge enhancement on the film look frame helps a lot, but I'm not seeing a substantial increase in dynamic range. In fact, it almost seems as if highlights are being sacrificed faster; Highlight detail on the label of the Gerolsteiner bottle is harder to see, compared to the default settings frames.
  • 0

#3 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11944 posts
  • Other

Posted 02 September 2005 - 05:41 AM

Hi,

> I'm seeing heavy aliasing on near-horizontal lines

Hmm, me too - what gives?

Phil
  • 0

#4 Peter J DeCrescenzo

Peter J DeCrescenzo
  • Sustaining Members
  • 620 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR, USA www.peterdv.com Blog: http://herefortheweather.wordpress.com/

Posted 03 September 2005 - 01:15 AM

> I'm seeing heavy aliasing on near-horizontal lines

Hmm, me too - what gives?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Alvin & Phil,

Sorry I did reply sooner; I've been very distracted -- or should I say appalled -- by the news coming out of the US GUlf Coast this week. Heaven help all the folks suffering there. But I'll try to keep this thread about video cameras.

Yes, I see the aliasing you're referring to in the images, too. I just checked the original frame grabs to confirm I presented them here in the correct order. I did, and they exhibit the same issue.

I wonder if the way I'm grabbing these images is causing the aliasing?

I'll do another test soon (this weekend I hope) and I'll pay more attention to what I see "live" on the video monitor compared to what I get in the frame grabs.

Thanks for the heads-up.

- Peter DeCrescenzo
  • 0

#5 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11944 posts
  • Other

Posted 03 September 2005 - 02:26 AM

Hi,

How're you resampling these things for display? Try posting an unadulterated frame grab (yes, we understand it'll be all tall and thin, but for diagnostic purposes...)

Phil
  • 0

#6 Peter J DeCrescenzo

Peter J DeCrescenzo
  • Sustaining Members
  • 620 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR, USA www.peterdv.com Blog: http://herefortheweather.wordpress.com/

Posted 03 September 2005 - 02:43 AM

The original frame grabs have the same artifact. Here's the original "default" 60i image:
DSC00089.JPG

... and here's the original "default" 24p image:
DSC00090.JPG

The PDX10 I'm using to grab the frames might (?) be introducing the aliasing in the progressive frames, but I'll investigate this further.

- Peter
  • 0

#7 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11944 posts
  • Other

Posted 03 September 2005 - 07:59 AM

Hi,

Well clearly something's going on as they're only 640 pixels wide. There's resampling happening somewhere, probably in your memory stick image capture process.

Seems like we really need to be looking at tape grabs, and preferably TIFF files thereof or a single-frame AVI or Quicktime movie.

Phil
  • 0

#8 Alvin Pingol

Alvin Pingol
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 677 posts
  • Student
  • California

Posted 05 September 2005 - 01:44 AM

I agree that there is resampling happening somewhere in the chain, but am still puzzled about the aliasing. While the frame width is smaller than it's supposed to be (which is most likely the capture device rescaling for square PAR), the frame height is correct, and that's what really matters - What's even more confusing to me is that the 60i frame does not suffer from the aliasing, so it can't be the most obvious (and most common) problem of capture software automatially deinterlacing anything it can get its hands on. Perhaps it's the PDX10 not properly interpreting 3:2 pulldown?
  • 0


Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Opal

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Opal

CineLab

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post