n0b0 wrote:
I have to agree there. The High 4:4:4 profile is something that I had to look up and even now I\'m still not sure what it\'s for.
4:4:4 means that every pixel has every piece of information needed to process it fully. It means that all the color information is there and you are not relying on stretching a \'squeezed\' color map , i.e. color mapping is 1:1 in stead of 2:1 or 4:1 etc. Anything less than 1:1 makes green screen stuff very hard to do well. Think about (say) the later Star Wars movies that were all shot on massive green screen sets, then the background graphics added later. You would have been pretty unhappy with green streaks down the side of people like you get on the TV when people are presenting the weather, or are giving interviews against a fake background (i.e. the White House). News and weather broadcasts drive me nuts because all I can focus on is the poor green screen lighting, or the subject is too close to the green screen and there is light fall off, or they are using video gear that simply isn\'t up to it and you get a huge green halo around them.
n0b0 wrote:
I\'ve also mentioned in my post prior to yours that the videographers I know also want to shoot at 24fps. I guessing it\'s something to do with not wanting to lose frames which would make the video a bit jerky.
24p is what Hollywood records movies at. This goes back to the time when film was expensive, and 24fps was considered the slowest you could get away with to keep film costs low. It set a standard for movie theaters and it\'s never changed.
Some people cling to 24p as \'the\' standard because it can have a slightly different appearance, especially in scenes with a lot of movement. True 30p will capture movement slightly better, but it has a different \'look\'. Many videographers are (rightly or wrongly) looking for that \'film\' look, instead of it looking like \'video\'. The glass has a lot to do with this too, which is one of the major reasons that people want the 5D2, so they can match the fast optics to the camera (something not possible on most lower end pro camcorders because they have a fixed [zoom] lens system).
In European countries, the TV system is 25 frames per second instead of the 30fps in the USA (Europe has a 50hz instead of 60hz electricity supply). This is why most people outside of the Japan / USA are not as enthusiastic about the 5D2 for \'general\' video. If it had EITHER 24p or 25p it would have probably been OK - but it missed both. Incidentally, Japan uses NTSC @ 30fps, so clearly they saw the Japan and USA as a big enough market for the first cut at this.
In Europe, movies recorded at 24p are simply played back at 25p instead, so movies play something like 4% faster in Europe. In the US, they convert the 24p to 30p to play on the TV, by manipulating the frames. This is one of a number of reasons why the PAL version will often look better than the NTSC version - because it\'s using only the original frames. There are other differences in the TV system that contribute too this too, but lets not get in to that here...
Any one wanting to know more about the 4:4:4, 4:2:0 etc... look here.
n0b0 wrote:
I have to agree there. The High 4:4:4 profile is something that I had to look up and even now I\'m still not sure what it\'s for.
4:4:4 means that every pixel has every piece of information needed to process it fully. It means that all the color information is there and you are not relying on stretching a \'squeezed\' color map , i.e. color mapping is 1:1 in stead of 2:1 or 4:1 etc. Anything less than 1:1 makes green screen stuff very hard to do well. Think about (say) the later Star Wars movies that were all shot on massive green screen sets, then the background graphics added later. You would have been pretty unhappy with green streaks down the side of people like you get on the TV when people are presenting the weather, or are giving interviews against a fake background (i.e. the White House). News and weather broadcasts drive me nuts because all I can focus on is the poor green screen lighting, or the subject is too close to the green screen and there is light fall off, or they are using video gear that simply isn\'t up to it and you get a huge green halo around them.
n0b0 wrote:
I\'ve also mentioned in my post prior to yours that the videographers I know also want to shoot at 24fps. I guessing it\'s something to do with not wanting to lose frames which would make the video a bit jerky.
24p is what Hollywood records movies at. This goes back to the time when film was expensive, and 24fps was considered the slowest you could get away with to keep film costs low. It set a standard for movie theaters and it\'s never changed.
Some people cling to 24p as \'the\' standard because it can have a slightly different appearance, especially in scenes with a lot of movement. True 30p will capture movement slightly better, but it has a different \'look\'. Many videographers are (rightly or wrongly) looking for that \'film\' look, instead of it looking like \'video\'. The glass has a lot to do with this too, which is one of the major reasons that people want the 5D2, so they can match the fast optics to the camera (something not possible on most lower end pro camcorders because they have a fixed [zoom] lens system).
In European countries, the TV system is 25 frames per second instead of the 30fps in the USA (Europe has a 50hz instead of 60mhz electricity supply). This is why most people outside of the Japan / USA are not as enthusiastic about the 5D2 for \'general\' video. If it had EITHER 24p or 25p it would have probably been OK - but it missed both. Incidentally, Japan uses NTSC @ 30fps, so clearly they saw the Japan and USA as a big enough market for the first cut at this.
In Europe, movies recorded at 24p are simply played back at 25p instead, so movies play something like 4% faster in Europe. In the US, they convert the 24p to 30p to play on the TV, by manipulating the frames. This is one of a number of reasons why the PAL version will often look better than the NTSC version - because it\'s using only the original frames. There are other differences in the TV system that contribute too this too, but lets not get in to that here...
Any one wanting to know more about the 4:4:4, 4:2:0 etc... look here.
Nov 28, 2008 at 06:45 AM
Previous versions of DaveEP's message #6427349 « Will we become a video board? »
