Panasonic SD1 SD3 +AVCHD questions
marknocera
just wondering if anyone has a vh04 battery pack for the sd1 etc. if
so I would be very interested to know your feelings about it,
thinking of picking one up, if it works. it is avaible on ebay from
japan for about 90 bucks, wish I could read japanese, the sd1-sd3
info and parts is so much better on their web site fortunately it has
a lot of pictures on it, I would recomend if you own one of these
cameras you check it out, it makes the american site look like a piece
of crap.
I am using pinnacle studio 11 to edit, ulead is really slow compared
to pinnacle, editing in avchd can knock a puter to its knees, I am
going to put a new computer together just for editing avchd, anyone
have any input on what I should build Intel or AMD, no I don't want to
pay a thousand bucks for a chip, looking for a mobo and chip, in the
range of 5 or 6 hundred, I intend to load up the memory to the max if
you have a system that works for you please let me know what you
built.
one rant I feel somewhat violated, that before the dust setteled on my
sd1, after paying top dollar at circut city, they bring out the sd3 I
hope panasonic can do a mod to update my sd1 I would pay to have it
done, I am sure they won't in their gotchya to bad pal arrogance.
Don't get me wrong I love the camera, but that thirty percent more
definition is calling me, and the little voices in my head are saying
sell,buy,sell,buy,sell buy.
any info you could give would be appreaciated
docimian
quality?
i am playing back on my laptop which has a 1920x1200@ 60hz
screen..unless i shoot in bright daylight (which looks very good but
not quite the HD channels on cox)
, i find there are a lot of compression(?) artifacts / noise in the
scene. Am i doing something wrong? maybe i should sit further back
from my laotop?
I am going to buy an hdmi cable and try it out on my tv (13something x
768)...should i expect to see less of the noise on the lower
resolution screen?
thanks!
Dan
David Sommers
however, I find the well lit indoor scenes, nearly as good. I do not see
noise or strange artifacting. This is on my desktop (1920x1200, 24") or my
new notebook (1680x1050, 15.4").
Bye.
"docimian" <daniel...@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185109636.8...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
docimian
this is taken through a window into bright sunlight. the video itself
is reasonably good..
http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=6069345
this is the room the previous picture was taken in...the window was
open and a ceiling light with 3 - 60 watt bulbs was on.
is there a setting i need to turn on? i have the camera recording at
the highest bitrate....
thanks!
Dan
On Jul 22, 3:34 pm, "David Sommers" <dsomm...@ACM.org> wrote:
> That's not my experience. True, the video quality in daylight is quite good,
> however, I find the well lit indoor scenes, nearly as good. I do not see
> noise or strange artifacting. This is on my desktop (1920x1200, 24") or my
> new notebook (1680x1050, 15.4").
>
> Bye.
>
> "docimian" <danieljro...@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1185109636.8...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >i was wondering what everyone's experience is with the SD1's video
> > quality?
> > i am playing back on my laptop which has a 1920x1200@ 60hz
> > screen..unless i shoot in bright daylight (which looks very good but
> > not quite the HD channels on cox)
> > , i find there are a lot of compression(?) artifacts / noise in the
> > scene. Am i doing something wrong? maybe i should sit further back
> > from my laotop?
> > I am going to buy an hdmi cable and try it out on my tv (13something x
> > 768)...should i expect to see less of the noise on the lower
> > resolution screen?
> > thanks!
>
> > Dan- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
David Sommers
the moist leaves outside look much clearer. There are some settings that
might help with the way the room was with the baby. In full automatic mode,
you can try backlight compensation (the sunshine icon) to brighten up the
baby. Switching to manual mode, you can try the low light scene mode (candle
icon).
That room with three 60 Watt bulbs may be just dark enough that noise would
start showing no matter which shooting mode you use. I recently shot some
video of my grandchildren playing indoors. The room was lit with more light
than you had in your case. The results were quite clean.
I have the Panasonic AG-HSC1UP. This is the so-called professional version
of the SD1. The main difference is that it has a semi-gloss black body
finish, and more importantly, that it's tuned to have the true color and
brightness response of the other camcorders in the Panasonic Pro-Line. The
SD1, as all consumer type camcorders, is tuned to be vivid. I don't know if
this makes that much of a difference under these less than ideal conditions.
I also shoot these indoor scenes with an AG-LW4307 Wide Conversion Lens,
which I'd expect to not help with the light level, just get more of the
action when up close.
Bye.
"docimian" <daniel...@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185141790....@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Ken Maltby
Do you see any value/use for the new AVCHD tools that
www.elecard.com have released? The Converter Pro HD
that isn't available to buy looks interesting to me.
Luck;
Ken
P.S. Sorry if I end up hijacking the thread.
Frank
in article <OT: For AVCHD users>,
"Ken Maltby" <kma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Ken, I haven't had the need yet to work with AVCHD, so it doesn't
apply to me, but Elecard offers a downloadable free trial demo version
of their Converter Studio AVC HD Edition product (U.S. $75).
http://www.elecard.com/products/products-pc/consumer/converter-studio-avchd/
As I understand it, the primary purpose of the program is to transcode
1440 by 1080 AVCHD streams into either HDV compliant MPEG-2 Transport
Streams or DVD-Video compatible MPEG-2 Program Streams, thereby
allowing either editing of the footage or simply burning to a DVD. The
input data can also be saved in the form of MPEG-2 Elementary Streams.
The product is based around the use of eleven different DirectShow
filters, and supports the use of Avisynth scripts. I may be wrong
about this, but I don't think that the program supports 1920 by 1080
AVCHD files, such as those produced by the Panasonic HDC-SD3
camcorder, nor am I certain how it handles 5.1-channel Dolby Digital
AC-3 sound tracks.
If you should happen to give the program a try, please be so kind as
to let us know your findings. Thank you.
--
Frank, Independent Consultant, New York, NY
[Please remove 'nojunkmail.' from address to reply via e-mail.]
Read Frank's thoughts on HDV at http://www.humanvalues.net/hdv/
Ken Maltby
"Frank" <fr...@nojunkmail.humanvalues.net> wrote in message
news:uahga3dv73l9a41ur...@4ax.com...
>
> Ken, I haven't had the need yet to work with AVCHD, so it doesn't
> apply to me, but Elecard offers a downloadable free trial demo version
> of their Converter Studio AVC HD Edition product (U.S. $75).
>
> http://www.elecard.com/products/products-pc/consumer/converter-studio-avchd/
>
> As I understand it, the primary purpose of the program is to transcode
> 1440 by 1080 AVCHD streams into either HDV compliant MPEG-2 Transport
> Streams or DVD-Video compatible MPEG-2 Program Streams, thereby
> allowing either editing of the footage or simply burning to a DVD. The
> input data can also be saved in the form of MPEG-2 Elementary Streams.
>
> The product is based around the use of eleven different DirectShow
> filters, and supports the use of Avisynth scripts. I may be wrong
> about this, but I don't think that the program supports 1920 by 1080
> AVCHD files, such as those produced by the Panasonic HDC-SD3
> camcorder, nor am I certain how it handles 5.1-channel Dolby Digital
> AC-3 sound tracks.
>
As a big fan of GraphEdit, I really like having the filters available.
> If you should happen to give the program a try, please be so kind as
> to let us know your findings. Thank you.
>
That isn't the one that really interests me, though. The one I want is
their "Converter Studio ProHD". You might guess why, if this link
works.
http://www.elecard.com/products/compare_table.php?product_id=converter-studio-pro
Oh, and the chart addresses your resolution and audio questions.
Luck;
Ken
Frank
in article <Re: OT: For AVCHD users>,
"Ken Maltby" <kma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Frank" <fr...@nojunkmail.humanvalues.net> wrote in message
>news:uahga3dv73l9a41ur...@4ax.com...
>>
>> Ken, I haven't had the need yet to work with AVCHD, so it doesn't
>> apply to me, but Elecard offers a downloadable free trial demo version
>> of their Converter Studio AVC HD Edition product (U.S. $75).
>>
>> http://www.elecard.com/products/products-pc/consumer/converter-studio-avchd/
>>
>> As I understand it, the primary purpose of the program is to transcode
>> 1440 by 1080 AVCHD streams into either HDV compliant MPEG-2 Transport
>> Streams or DVD-Video compatible MPEG-2 Program Streams, thereby
>> allowing either editing of the footage or simply burning to a DVD. The
>> input data can also be saved in the form of MPEG-2 Elementary Streams.
>>
>> The product is based around the use of eleven different DirectShow
>> filters, and supports the use of Avisynth scripts. I may be wrong
>> about this, but I don't think that the program supports 1920 by 1080
>> AVCHD files, such as those produced by the Panasonic HDC-SD3
>> camcorder, nor am I certain how it handles 5.1-channel Dolby Digital
>> AC-3 sound tracks.
>>
>
> As a big fan of GraphEdit, I really like having the filters available.
I fell in love with GraphEdit the first time I used it. I described it
to my (then current) GF as "pure sex". I'm not certain that she
understood, however.
>> If you should happen to give the program a try, please be so kind as
>> to let us know your findings. Thank you.
>>
>
> That isn't the one that really interests me, though. The one I want is
>their "Converter Studio ProHD".
Figured as much.
>You might guess why, if this link
>works.
>
>http://www.elecard.com/products/compare_table.php?product_id=converter-studio-pro
The link works, although I don't know why you would prefer Converter
Studio ProHD aside from the fact that, being the top of the line
model, it has the most capability.
> Oh, and the chart addresses your resolution and audio questions.
Not that I can see. The chart, which I've previously viewed in the
past, covers the output side of the equation (audio and video encoding
and multiplexing). It doesn't address the input side of the equation.
IOW, whether 1920 by 1080 AVCHD files are acceptable for input to the
program. Same question WRT 5.1 Dolby Digital audio. Or perhaps I'm
misinterpreting something and you're seeing something in the chart
that I'm missing.
>Luck;
> Ken
Ken Maltby
You are right, it only lists for the encoding, you can't tell about
the input from the chart.
I suppose I could get by with the "Converter Studio" package,
the VC-1 filters should be available from MS. The reality is
I probably will stick with TMPGEnc 4.0 XPress, in any case,
as it is doing a good job and includes most of the premium
features listed in the chart.
Luck;
Ken
Frank
Yes, that's how I read it.
> I suppose I could get by with the "Converter Studio" package,
>the VC-1 filters should be available from MS.
I believe that you should be able to encode to VC-1 using free
software from Microsoft, although there are some commercial products
available for doing this. Should you ever find yourself heavily
involved in this, the following Web page may prove to be useful,
especially the WMV9 PowerToy program.
Windows Media Video Tools
http://www.citizeninsomniac.com/WMV/
For a more rigorous description of the registry settings that can
affect WMV encoding, please see the following article by Jay Loomis on
the Microsoft Web site.
Using the Advanced Settings of the Windows Media Video 9 Advanced
Profile Codec
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/howto/articles/codecadvancedsettings.aspx
Most pros these days are using the Sonic Solutions CineVision PSE
(Parallel Stream Encoder) product for their VC-1 encoding needs.
CineVision PSE
http://www.sonic.com/products/Professional/Cinevisionpse/
>The reality is
>I probably will stick with TMPGEnc 4.0 XPress, in any case,
>as it is doing a good job and includes most of the premium
>features listed in the chart.
Understand.
je...@jonesgroup.net
codec ($249).
Here: http://tinyurl.com/249owv
I own a Sony HDR-UX1 AVCHD DVD disc camcorder.
And I'm editing the footage from this AVCHD camcorder on my slow
Gateway laptop:
As you can see, it's just a 2.4 GHz Mobile AMD Athlon 64 notebook
computer.
Yet, I'm cutting AVCHD-originated clips with ease.
Scrubbing is easy... almost as easy as DV .avi.
Previewing is fabulous.
How is this possible?
I convert the AVCHD source files to Cineform .avi files and the
quality is preserved so well I would not have believed it had I not
tried it.
***Note: My Pinnacle Studio Ultimate 11 does not appear to be
compatible with the Cineform .avi files.***
So I'm editing the Cineform .avi files with Corel VideoStudio 11 Plus
and Corel MediaStudio Pro 8.
Now, Corel (formerly Ulead) made a big deal about native editing of
long GOP HDV MPEG-2 here:
http://www.ulead.com/spotlight/hd/runme.htm
Apparently, they didn't know about the bug in their software that
impacts long GOP (MPEG/HDV/AVCHD) native editing.
While they offer a great theory; in practice it doesn't work so well.
And you're right.
Normally, the processor and graphics chip needed to edit AVCHD
*natively* would seem to require a massive upgrade.
But for those who can't spend hundreds (thousands?) on a new editing
system, I would respectfully submit that Cineform .avi files are the
way to go for many of today's average computers.
If you try it, be sure to have an AVCHD decoder on your system that
works in Microsoft Windows Media Player to play AVCHD transport stream
files.
I bought the CyberLink "HD264 Pack" plug-in for Microsoft Windows
Media Player ($39.95).
Here: http://tinyurl.com/yltroq
That installed the CyberLink AVCHD decoder on my system.
Next, I use Cineform's included "HDLink" conversion utility to convert
the AVCHD (.M2TS) files to Cineform (.AVI) files; this "HDLink"
application "sees" the CyberLink decoder and then converts the AVCHD
to Cineform.
Then I edit with ease.
Then I export to whatever format... WMV HD or HD MPEG-2 or AVCHD.
It is a myth that a fast computer is required to edit AVCHD.
Consequently, it is a myth that AVCHD is difficult to edit if the
Cineform method is used.
Once you do the conversion to Cineform, the editing is so easy you
have to see it to believe it.
Jerry Jones
http://www.jonesgroup.net