Hi-Def download footage

[Dokeman 0]

I looked on skydivingmovies.com and didnt really find anything..

I am looking for some skydiving footage that I can download that was shot in HD. Preferably with and HC3. I found a few on skydivingmovies, but none of them were actual HD.. looking for something that is either raw avi or at least compressed with an HD codec. I am looking at getting one and want to see some sample footage..

[DSE 5]

I can put up some footage if you want, but...:
a: HDV isn't captured/created as avi.
b: avi is a container, and can be many, many different codecs. Think of it as a box that can hold many different things.
c: No one is gonna upload uncompressed HD footage; it's huge. 1.2GB per second, depending on the flavor.
d: There isn't an "HD" codec per se. DVCProHD is merely DVCPro with larger pixel counts available. In other words, it's basically DV.
HDV is always m2t format, based on MPEG 2 as a transport stream, hence "M2'T'"
What is it you're looking for and I'll dig through some footage, and post it on an FTP somewhere? I'm on travel and have limited footage avail.

[Dokeman 0]

I not know much about HD compression as I dont own an HD camera yet, so I haven't done the research but if you can upload some footage using the best quality compression or whatever that best displays the quality of an HC3/Hi-Def that would be greatly appreciated. Something that has various different skydiving scenes would be great.. (exits, free fall, landings, planes, general dz shenanigans)

[snafuhere 0]

enjoy, plays in windows media player

http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/0/9/20907788-993F-4EF6-8D75-F0DD93207FB8/AdrenalineRush_720.exe

https://www.facebook.com/1skydive/

[erikph 0]

Quote

I not know much about HD compression...

if you are interested in high def DVD's (either format, HD DVD or Blue Ray) you have a choice between 3 video formats:

- MPEG2, same as "normal" DVD's, but at a higher resolution
- MPEG4 AVC (aka H.264), a more recent mpeg flavour, that gives better quality for fewer bits
- VC-1, the microsoft codec that is also used in Windows Media Video 9 and for all things X-box

MPEG2 is there for legacy reasons, both H264 and VC-1 can give you very good quality.

blue skies,

http://myjumps.blogspot.com/

[Dokeman 0]

yea, i've seen that..

[Fast 0]

Quote

enjoy, plays in windows media player

http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/0/9/20907788-993F-4EF6-8D75-F0DD93207FB8/AdrenalineRush_720.exe

I think he is looking for footage shot with an HC3. I guess, here is the real question... What are you trying to find out? If you want to know if the video quality is good, then you can just stop wondering, it is. I have shot a couple big ways that my buddy was in with his HC3 and when hooked up to a HDTV it looks awesome.

~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

[Dokeman 0]

yea.. i just want some sample footage shot with an hc3.

[TMPattersonJr 0]

On my myspace homepage (link in sig line) I have footage shot with my HC3 and uploaded in DV and rendered in MP4 format and looks ok (it's on myspace for crying out loud), the original footage, shown on a HD TV is absolutely stunning. I haven't tried to upload in HD yet, but am working towards that very soon....

Edited to add: The same file in Full Screen (DV) AVI format is 525MB, if you have a night to kill downloading it PM me and I will upload it do my company's web site for you to download.

Blue SkiesBlack DeathFacebook
www.PLabsInc.com
www.SkydiveDeLand.com
www.FlyteSkool.ws

[MB38 0]

Quote

1.2GB per second, depending on the flavor.

What the hell flavor are you using? I get uncompressed 12-bit RAW 4K out of our arriscan at about half that data rate...

I really don't know what I'm talking about.

[DSE 5]

Working with Viper and Dalsa at the moment... twin streams (Someone told me that they'd heard tell of Tom Sanders or someone else jumping with this rig to a Filmstream, but I highly doubt it. 35mm would be more sensible. You'd need a tandem canopy to land it)
hence my comment of "up to" 1.2 GB. 4:4:4, not 4:2:2. Genocide/Genesis is 960Mbps using FilmStream, depending on the settin.s, Uncompressed luma HD@12bit, depending on the chroma sample, is around 740MBps, not including audio.
Using a standard storage of 3GB per minute (HDCAM/3:1:1/8bit), you can easily shrink this.
Your 4K images at 1/4 that file size/datarate wouldn't make a lot of sense if I understand your acquisition. UHDV uncompressed 22:11:11 (RAW, 12bit) is 194GB per minute (approx) ,or a value of 3.2GBps. Maybe I'm missing what you're doing with the Arri?
[edit] screw my math, I always suck at it, and forgot to convert bits to bytes re; HD cam. 118MBps

[MB38 0]

I'm ingesting 4:4:4 12-bit 1.85 4K scaled from a 6K scan. Our initial online is massive, but since we're finishing at 2.35, we actually crop to ~2.15 right off the bat and throw out the data that we simply will not use [this is where that data figure came from... sure it's not half of 1.2gb/s but it's certainly close. We're not working with UHDV, but 4K@4096x2160 which is later cropped.]. The online data lives in scratch and we offline to 4:2:2 720.24p choked through an ugly 8-bit full dynamic range LUT for editing. Pass the EDL back through scratch, finalize our timing/curves and set up for one of three finishing options: 12-bit 4K for lasering to a print stock, 10-bit 4K for projection [have you been to any screenings with Sony's 4K projector, by the way? It's gorgeous] or 10-bit 2K for projection [this is most common].

I'd love to hear about the work you're doing right now, PM me! You'll flip when you hear about this workflow I've been trying to leverage for an upcoming feature...

And as for 4K in freefall... I don't expect this to happen until the guys at RED finish their first prototype this month. I believe that Jim Jannard knew Norman "back in the day" and may bring him on to do some tests. I am indescribably jealous.

The only other way I could see it happening right now would be using something like Arri's flash mag for the D-20 and flying it like an imax camera.

I really don't know what I'm talking about.

[jimoke 0]

I have a sony vx 2000. I purchased a sony hc3 months ago
the hc3 is the best quality I have seen. it is also the smallest camera I have jumped to date. keep in mind you need a HD television with a HDMI cable direct to tv and you will be amazed at the crispness and overall picture quality. unfortunately editing for HD seems only available for computers. not ideal for tandem videos.
if you buy one you will be satisfied.......if your not, I will buy it from you for a backup. I also have only used the sony HD minidv tapes which are $17.US each at bestbuy
stay safe,
Jimoke

The ground always, remembers where you are!

[justinb138 0]

Quote

I also have only used the sony HD minidv tapes which are $17.US each at bestbuy

Wow, if you have a Fry's electronics close by, get them there. They run $10-11/tape there. I think you can even get them online at B&H for around 10$/tape.

[vdschoor 0]

Quote

I also have only used the sony HD minidv tapes which are $17.US each at bestbuy
stay safe,
Jimoke

I am still using regular DV tapes in my HC-1
What is the benefit of using the HD tapes?

[MB38 0]

Quote

Quote

I also have only used the sony HD minidv tapes which are $17.US each at bestbuy
stay safe,
Jimoke

I am still using regular DV tapes in my HC-1
What is the benefit of using the HD tapes?

It tops off your lens fluid for you.

I really don't know what I'm talking about.

[vdschoor 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I also have only used the sony HD minidv tapes which are $17.US each at bestbuy
stay safe,
Jimoke

I am still using regular DV tapes in my HC-1
What is the benefit of using the HD tapes?

It tops off your lens fluid for you.

I'm ordering a whole batch right now..

The reason I asked is because I read somewhere that it really doesnt matter what kind of tape you use.
I use the standard Sony miniDV tapes and they work just fine.

[MB38 0]

I've always been told the same. That said, there are people here who are better qualified to answer that question... I could be wrong.

I really don't know what I'm talking about.

[DSE 5]

Sony, Canon, and JVC all recommend AME-II tape as it has two layers of particle vs one. Benefit? Significantly better error correction. +4dB greater carrier signal.
What does that mean to most folks? Not much. If you're shooting ultra critical work, you might want to use the AME-II tape; we do. But for most skydiving events, regular DV tape is just fine, IMO.

[champu 1]

Quote

Sony, Canon, and JVC all recommend AME-II tape as it has two layers of particle vs one. Benefit? Significantly better error correction. +4dB greater carrier signal.

Tape quality doesn't affect error correction it just affects the initial error rate. The DV device doesn't care what tape you use, it's going to employ the same error correction (some crazy interleaved version of a Reed-Solomon code if my memory serves me correctly.)

The reason I mention this is that you have to be careful with that 4dB number. Your final error rate isn't linear vs SNR even without ECC. With ECC, depending on the regime you're operating in, you may not see any meaningful change in final error rate.

/edited to add: I neglected to mention the most important part, so if I may "nerd the thread up" even further...

Errors on digital storage devices (CDs, DVDs, flash media, hard drives, DV tapes, IC registers, etc) are dominated by local non-linear effects such as physical damage like dust and scratches or erasure by exposure to magnetic fields (or, if you happen to be in space, what are called single event effects due to bombardment with high-energy particles like helium nuclei )

Increased SNR does you no good in these situations, which is why storage devices use things like interleaved Reed-Solomon codes (which are really good at correcting bursts of errors) as opposed to something like PCC codes or LDPC codes which are designed to better handle effects of data transmission through a noisy channel.

[DSE 5]

JVC have measured a greater carrier of +6dB, but they don't market it as such. Haven't tested it, but bottom line is with a greater particle density and 1 error correction unit per 16 tracks of data, having a higher density makes sense. The error correct unit does make a difference during playback/decode, that, I'm certain of, based on initial presentations of the AME II format from BASF a couple of years ago at NAB. I'm not an engineer, however, so can't argue whether it does or does not make a difference per various deck. It should, as there is a greater density in the area of parity. But again, I'm not an engineer (BTW, I'm sure you're right, the Reed/Solomon error correction math is the foundation for most all E/C, I believe)
Can you *see* a difference? Nope. You're simply more protected against loss, and at the end of the day, that's really all any of us care about, isn't it?

[jimoke 0]

wow....... after champu's post

Quote

What is the benefit of using the HD tapes?

I was going to say ummmm, this High Def stuff is hard to keep up with, I just thought they were better? the picture quality is impressive.
stay safe,
jimoke

The ground always, remembers where you are!

[champu 1]

Quote

Can you *see* a difference? Nope. You're simply more protected against loss, and at the end of the day, that's really all any of us care about, isn't it?

This may be true, but only if the device were to use a different ECC scheme based on what tape you have inserted. For example, if the higher quality tape allowed you a higher data density than you could get away with on the cheaper tape, you could use a lower rate code (more redundancy) but keep your payload bit density the same (same number of actual bits you care about per a given length of tape) You'd have to keep an eye on how small your bits were physically becoming on the tape and how big of a tape wrinkle, scratch, or spec of dust you expected to encounter, but I suspect you could make things come out to your advantage.

I am under the impression, however, that DV devices don't make use of the higher quality tapes in this way.

[DSE 5]

The picture quality is irrelevant to the type of tape used, it's not like an analog cassette where the image degrades over time. Digital media is 1's and 0's. Either it's there, or it's not. Error correction simply helps keep all that in line, but it has nothing to do with the actual visual image quality, but rather how well the deck can "read" when the information becomes "foggy" if I can use such simple terms.