or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Source Components › Sony HDR-TD10 3D-Capable Camcorder
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sony HDR-TD10 3D-Capable Camcorder - Page 38

post #1111 of 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfgang S. View Post

I think the hint with the device explorer is a great one. Works also fine for other AVCHD camcorders, like my Panasonic 750 (I want to combine the footage with TD10 footage).

Yeah, I can't wait to hear from Mark on this new and better workflow.

What's funny is Sony briefly went over this tool in the class but I forgot all about it until the reminder here. I was about to install PMB on my new computer, now I don't have to. It is obsolete!
post #1112 of 1567
I think the PMB is an interesting product - for user who do not wish to spend a lot of time for editing their footage. And the new AVCHD 2.0 burning possiblity is a great one too.

For me the PMB is of limited interest only - and for you too maybe, because we to edit our footage in Vegas 10e/11a or the PD10 and that is another approach.

The device explorer is not necessry for all user too. If you shoot short clips only, where you do not touch the 4 GB limit of the internals hard disc or the sdhc chips, you simply can copy the files without any tool - it will work. But when you film a longer event - I had to film a concert - then you will fail since you have the well-known audio disruption. And that can be avoided with the PMB, the Sony conctent management tool and also with Vegas (what I prefer since you have a great preview what will be combined - as you said!).
post #1113 of 1567
Wolfgang- I agree that the Device Explorer is a tool that benefits us Vegas users and that not everyone should be into full editing. But I disagree that it is OK to simply click on and drag the camcorder virgin MTS file into the computer. It is not an issue here of whether you break the 2Gb limit but rather one where you get what we call a short term benefit for a long term pain. While the trouble may not be detectible in short clips the audio / video sync problem is still present and as you approach the 2Gb limit the error in audio video becomes worse. IMO, there are only two ways to transfer your files, PMB and Vegas Device Explorer. Both avoid trouble with the clip and both offer many advantages as well. Dragging a clip into the computer should only be done if you don't plan on doing anything with the file except trashing it. Of course why would you waste your time when the clip could be trashed in the camcorder?

Several people have tried the lazy route and avoided the proper procedure only to get into trouble wasting everyone's time as they blamed Sony for their own trouble. When does lip sync begin to cause trouble? And, if you deleted the original clip your stuck with your laziness. Not only that but as you shoot more clips, you will begin to suffer file naming matches and will be required to rename the files. When PMB or Device Explorer renames the clips for your computer, they get a unique number that is never repeated.

Remember- Short term laziness and long term pain!
post #1114 of 1567
Don, I see your point. As usual, we have to know exactly what we do. And yes, you are on the sure side when you use the device explorer!
post #1115 of 1567
Thanks for the response Don. So that others know, the software I was referring to actually is called Content Management Utility - it was described by trevorjharris back on page 35 in this thread. It's from the professional side of the Sony site, has a professional interface, and as you mention, displays the metadata for the video files well.

Wolfgang, f13dfx, and anyone else thinking about the importing files issue, you can do this experiment. Transfer a file using CMU (or I suppose PMB would work as well), so that the .m2ts file is created. Then just connect the camera as a USB device and copy the same .MTS file. Look at both with CMU (or any program that shows the metadata in detail) and you will see something surprising. Video bit rate, video frame rate, audio bit rate and audio sampling rate are all missing from the .MTS file but are present in the .m2ts file. Further, if you look at the concomitantly created .cmuprops file, there is a lot of key frame and codec information in there that, if it is actually missing from the .MTS file, would explain sync problems. And in fairness to people who did a direct transfer from the device rather than use PMB, I actually thought I would preserve more of the original format/information by doing it that way, as I believed I was archiving the most complete version of the file, so it was not because of laziness.

Also, I suppose it didn't come across, but what I was saying about the GTX 580 and previewing in Vegas 11 using 3DVision from NVidia is that yes, a single GTX 580 card probably works fine with two monitors, but if you have a more complex set up, there are still bugs in the system. I use at least 4 monitors at a time, and have a minimum of 2 video cards to drive them. When you have more than one video card, people (with the appropriate motherboard) often have them in SLI configuration. This is more for gaming, but it does allow you to define a 5760x1080 desktop and the multiple cards provide more CUDA processing power, which is useful for some. It is in these modes that Vegas 11 does not work. While it is true they say it works on single-display 3D computers, that in itself is not a clear statement, since we are talking about displaying on a secondary monitor anyway
post #1116 of 1567
Quote:


And in fairness to people who did a direct transfer from the device rather than use PMB, I actually thought I would preserve more of the original format/information by doing it that way, as I believed I was archiving the most complete version of the file, so it was not because of “laziness”.

If you need that kind of additional information to edit then I suppose you have your tool in CMU but the laziness comment referred to those who admitted that using PMB was too much trouble to be bothered with because in their opinion they could just grab the 1234.MTS and begin working. If you followed the threads on this subject last summer, we spent too much time defending claims that Vegas was flawed, when the fact was the user was too lazy to follow the recommended work flow. I stand by my comment!
As for the 580 question, I don't believe I've seen anywhere that Sony claims to support more than primary and secondary monitors. People with more complex systems are obviously in the YOYO world regarding Vegas support so I don't believe it qualifies as a bug.
I sated before I have no problem with experimenting beyond recommended work flow and systems but I do take issue when those who do so claim the product is buggy because they aren't on track with what is supported.
We have enough real bug issues to get fixed without needing to chase after something that is not part of the supported system.

e.g. Last summer when we were working on the DD5.1 noise bug, a poster offered his "discovery" that the audio is also out of sync. That was an unnecessary distraction to the real issue since it was his work flow that generated the problem and not a bug.

BTW you are not alone with the more than 2 monitors and video cards. djamesb also is trying to get his to work too. I think he has 4 monitors.
post #1117 of 1567
Hello TD10 users,

I have just enough budget to change my 3d rig (2 FH1 sanyo).
I would like to have 3D zoom and perfect synchronization.
I think about the TD10 or GS-TD1 as they are nearly the same price.
Not easy to choose...
I think I would read more review ...
post #1118 of 1567
If you wish to edit - then take the Sony TD10. Here you can use Vegas Pro. For the JVC TD1 you have to use the PD10, what is nice too but not compareable to Vegas really.

But that is only one aspect - in terms of other aspects the TD1 looks better (e.g. the stereo extender that is available, maybe also the manuel controlls).
post #1119 of 1567
Advantages of the TD10:
TD10 offers DD5.1 audio, more accessories, especially for the hot shoe, LANC remote control and direct Sony editing support for both amateur and professional editing Has wider angle lens and greater zoom range. Much higher resolution LCD monitor. The street price is now very attractive.

I don't necessarily agree that the JVC automatically gets a better picture, Joe Clark gets some of the best 3D video quality I've seen with these consumer camcorders with his JVC but I think he gets the credit there because he is a really good shooter. I think he would do equally well with the TD10.

Most people got the JVC because it was first on the market by a couple months.
post #1120 of 1567
thanks Don,
I think I will go with the TD10.
More compact and as I used to work with vegas, editing will be easier.
post #1121 of 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

Advantages of the TD10:
TD10 offers DD5.1 audio, more accessories, especially for the hot shoe, LANC remote control and direct Sony editing support for both amateur and professional editing Has wider angle lens and greater zoom range. Much higher resolution LCD monitor. The street price is now very attractive.

I don't necessarily agree that the JVC automatically gets a better picture, Joe Clark gets some of the best 3D video quality I've seen with these consumer camcorders with his JVC but I think he gets the credit there because he is a really good shooter. I think he would do equally well with the TD10.

Most people got the JVC because it was first on the market by a couple months.

Thanks, Don. I appreciate the kind words. I wish I could hack these cameras and combine their best features. I really miss some of the Sony features that you detail above. I have to say, though, that the more I use the JVC, the better I like it. Much of that has to do with the manual/semi-automatic features. I've gotten some of my best footage in the last few weeks, because I stopped shooting in full auto mode most of the time. And the Cyclopital3D adapters I've bought for it (stereo base extender and 77mm adapter) have yielded some incredible footage.

By way of clarification (though I know you understand this), I can and do edit my JVC footage in Sony Vegas, Adobe Premiere and PowerDirector 10. For Vegas and Premiere editing, there's an extra (tedious and hard drive hogging) step (and program) that TD10 users don't have to go through if they choose to edit the original source footage in Vegas, but the results are similar. Honestly, I think for most people, PowerDirector 10 is a fantastic way to edit the JVC footage (and I'm assuming the Sony footage). It works with the original MVC (mp4) files and it's fast and easy.

PD10 is not a heavy duty editor. Don't expect the fine control a Vegas or Premiere offers. It also has serious motion issues converting my 60i JVC footage (which the Sony also shoots in) to 24p when I burn a 3D Blu-ray. I don't expect to be able to use some of that footage (if it's destined for 3D Blu-ray) unless I process the footage first through Yadif (Yet Another De-Interlacing Filter). I've yet to do much with the program, but from what I've seen so far, I'd say PD10 will be a real contender for users of both these camcorders. And it's on sale now for $90.
post #1122 of 1567
I expect Sony TD10 users will have the same motion issues (due to how PD10 de-interlaces 1080i to 24p) as JVC users. If someone knows different, they should speak up. The way around this is to use Yadif to de-interlace, or simply to edit completely in 60i mode and output to a 60i m2ts file. PD10 does this extremely well. When the new AVCHD 2.0 capable 3D Blu-ray players become available, we *should* all be able to use our original footage without converting to 24p. Of course, this will also mean that such discs will not play on older 3D Blu-ray players. This is based on my understanding of what the new AVCHD 2.0 standard will provide. I don't know for sure. What is becoming clear is that the future for 3D editing looks brighter all the time.
post #1123 of 1567
AVCHD 2.0 will be a tough sell if it requires new players. Bad enough anything new requires a firmware upgrade. It took me 5 years before I would trust making and selling productions on DVD due to player compatibility issues. If AVCHD 2.0 requires new players, it will never fly!
For home video, I have no problem working in what renders smooth motion and glitch, judder free 3D. That for me is using 720p60 on BD-R. If I wanted to do this 3D for hire, I'll get professional cameras that shoot in the format that I need natively, i.e. 24p. It is really the best all around solution to profitability. And, when it comes to shooting professionally, profitability is the key factor, the bottom line. In addition, if needing to author 3DBD, I'll author in Blu Print, not PD10.
post #1124 of 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

AVCHD 2.0 will be a tough sell if it requires new players. Bad enough anything new requires a firmware upgrade. It took me 5 years before I would trust making and selling productions on DVD due to player compatibility issues. If AVCHD 2.0 requires new players, it will never fly!
For home video, I have no problem working in what renders smooth motion and glitch, judder free 3D. That for me is using 720p60 on BD-R. If I wanted to do this 3D for hire, I'll get professional cameras that shoot in the format that I need natively, i.e. 24p. It is really the best all around solution to profitability. And, when it comes to shooting professionally, profitability is the key factor, the bottom line. In addition, if needing to author 3DBD, I'll author in Blu Print, not PD10.

Yup - 720p60 works today with old players, but not for average consumer.

Likely all players will become 2.0 in the next model round. Good consumers like icerat4 that want to make a bluray from their TD10 (and 2D 1080p60 camcorder) recordings will buy a new bluray player to view these, and so will their friends / family that want to view the disks.

New 2.0 player likely soon will be under $40.

I just supplied the Oppo engineering with samples and other info about the 2.0 they need to support.

@Joseph Clark- I didn't think PD10 would edit in 1080i60 and output 1080i60 without a recode, so I will have to look at that again.
post #1125 of 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

PD10 is not a heavy duty editor. Don't expect the fine control a Vegas or Premiere offers. It also has serious motion issues converting my 60i JVC footage (which the Sony also shoots in) to 24p when I burn a 3D Blu-ray. I don't expect to be able to use some of that footage (if it's destined for 3D Blu-ray) unless I process the footage first through Yadif (Yet Another De-Interlacing Filter).

Well Joe, I told you exactly that you have a serious motion issue when we discussed your stereo base extender video. But that is not due to the PD10, that is due to your decision to convert 1080 60i footage to 1080 24p. It would happen also with Vegas.

That is why I said that the best way would be to render to 720 60p, regardless if you use Vegas or the PD10. Here the yadif plugin will help in Vegas, since the deinterlacing is better then the deinterlacing in Vegas. But the more important point is that you do not change the frame rate when you convert from 1080 60i to 720 60p - you make an deinterlacing and a downscaling what will still cost some quality, but will still deliver results that can be used. The conversion from 1080 60i to 1080 24p would require that EVERY frame must be calculated new - and that is something that will cost much more quality.

And yes, it is not an issue of the JVC TD1, it is also an issue of the Sony TD10 - since it is not the camcorder but the format conversion from 60i to 24p that drives that problem.

And Richard, for sure 720 60p will work on every 3D Blu Ray player. Simply, because the 3D specification foresees for 3D BD-R only 3 formates - 720 60p, 720 50p and 1080 24p. So if you author a 3D Blu Ray with 720 60p, and if your customer has a 3D Blu Ray player, that will work for him.

For PAL users there is a possible solution, if somebody does not like to convert 1080 50i to 1080 24p - the solution is to strech the timeline by the roughly spoken 4%, so that every frame from 50i fits the new position of the frames in a 23.976 (IVTC film) project. But that cannot be done if you start from 1080 60i. But even for PAL you never ever will be better then if you would render to 720 50p, since your acquisition footage is interlaced.

The best way to overcome that is to shoot during aquisition in 1080 24p - either using the professional version of the TD1 or the TD10, or to use the upcoming Panasonic Z10000.

And yes, the output to 1080 50i or 1080 60i would help if you start with 50i/60i in your camcorder, but only if they extend the 3D Blu Ray specifiation for that footage. What they have not done by now, what I think is a shame - there is no technical reason that would forbid that.

The only charm of AVCHD 2.0 is, that it allows to use 1080 50i/60i in a BVDA structure on BD-R. Well, up to now we only have the PMB 5.8 for that, but maybe tools like the PD10 can incorporate in future a simple authoring for such an "AVCHD-BD", similar to what we had in the past in Ulead authoring tools like the Moviefactory (= Filmbrennerei). That would allow to stay with 1080 50i/60i, allow some simple authoring - but that is still some future thinking.
post #1126 of 1567
Richard,

Right now, PD10 does require a recode to output a 1080/60i file. I was just speculating about what AVCHD 2.0 might bring to the table. That's why I asked for people who know more about the standard than I do to clarify. What I do know is that the m2ts 60i file that PD10 created from my footage looked good and didn't have the 60i to 1080/24p motion problems that the 3D Blu-ray output had.

Wolfgang,

I did the tests with Vegas months ago and decided that 1080/24p 3D Blu-ray is what I want to use. There are some shots that require the Yadif filter, but for most the Vegas 24p output looks great without it. The end result is far better than 720/60p. As you know, both conversions compromise the image, but the loss of resolution (and other artifacting) at 720p is much worse than what happens because of the frame rate conversion. For other types of projects than my Missouri Botanical Garden video, the story would be different. Motion is a problem I can work around, and the Garden comes off best at the higher resolution.

Don,

It can get confusing talking about professional vs consumer gear. For most little stuff I shoot, minimal editing is required. If it's just my nephew's soccer game, I don't spend a mountain of time on it. It's fast and easy, or it doesn't get done. That's where PowerDirector 10 is going to be a tremendous asset for most people. It's so darn fast and easy to pop the SD card out of my JVC, throw the clips on the timeline, add a dissolve or fade here and there, create a simple title and let the program do its thing. Easy peasy. I'll tweak my Garden project(s) to death, and I'll need the fine control a professional editor provides.
post #1127 of 1567
Joe, then I would look for a 1080 24p Camcorder, if possible - maybe the upcoming Panasonic Z10000, or the professional version of the JVC TD1?
post #1128 of 1567
Wolfgang- The interesting thing about Joe's Garden project is that throughout, it has little movement. Therefore he gets away with the 60i to 24p conversion. In my first edit project I was happey with my video until I got to the section where I was riding on a tram ans shooting the scenery as it moved by. The entire section was jerky along the horizontal. When I did move to 720p, the video was just fine in image quality and the motion artifact from the tram was gone.

Old story- years ago, I often heard young newbie videographers beg to shoot that "film look" My comment was if you want film look so much, then go shoot film. Today we can get 24p in a video camcorder and with a bit of color tweaking, make video look like film. So, my comment is the same- Go shoot 24p. It really is the only way to avoid trouble. But, even if you read the SMPTE specs on shooting 24fps, pan and zoom speeds still have speed limitations.
post #1129 of 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfgang S. View Post

Joe, then I would look for a 1080 24p Camcorder, if possible - maybe the upcoming Panasonic Z10000, or the professional version of the JVC TD1?

I like the JVC so much that I'm seriously considering upgrading to the JVC HMZ1 (the pro version of my camera), which shoots at 24p. That would solve the conversion problem. The irony is that it costs about the same as my TD1 did just a few months ago. It also has even more manual control than the TD1, and my stereo base extender and 77mm adapter will work with it. And if things go well in this hobby for me, I'll do what Don just did - build my own dual camera 3D rig with a variable interaxial.
post #1130 of 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

Wolfgang- The interesting thing about Joe's Garden project is that throughout, it has little movement. Therefore he gets away with the 60i to 24p conversion. In my first edit project I was happey with my video until I got to the section where I was riding on a tram ans shooting the scenery as it moved by. The entire section was jerky along the horizontal. When I did move to 720p, the video was just fine in image quality and the motion artifact from the tram was gone.

Old story- years ago, I often heard young newbie videographers beg to shoot that "film look" My comment was if you want film look so much, then go shoot film. Today we can get 24p in a video camcorder and with a bit of color tweaking, make video look like film. So, my comment is the same- Go shoot 24p. It really is the only way to avoid trouble. But, even if you read the SMPTE specs on shooting 24fps, pan and zoom speeds still have speed limitations.

Right. I love movies, but I believe there's nothing "magical" about film technology. I'd shoot 60p video before I'd shoot film any day. I don't like the low frame rate (though it works in my favor with the current project) and I don't like film grain. Give me HD video and smooth motion and I'm a happy camper. If we can do 1080p/60 3D some day, I say the sooner the better.
post #1131 of 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

Wolfgang- The interesting thing about Joe's Garden project is that throughout, it has little movement. Therefore he gets away with the 60i to 24p conversion.

Yes I know that - there was only one small movement in this great footage, a women moved slightly. It need a trained view to see that this movement was not smart.

Unfortunately either Joe sticks with no movement and this imperfect conversion, or switchs to 1080 24p - and I see you see that similar:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

Today we can get 24p in a video camcorder and with a bit of color tweaking, make video look like film. So, my comment is the same- Go shoot 24p. It really is the only way to avoid trouble. But, even if you read the SMPTE specs on shooting 24fps, pan and zoom speeds still have speed limitations.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

I like the JVC so much that I'm seriously considering upgrading to the JVC HMZ1 (the pro version of my camera), which shoots at 24p. That would solve the conversion problem. The irony is that it costs about the same as my TD1 did just a few months ago. It also has even more manual control than the TD1, and my stereo base extender and 77mm adapter will work with it.

Yes, I agree that this woul be a nice solution - and the HMZ1 is a great camera. I miss a lot of manual controll both in the TD1 and the TD10, that is why I am waiting for the Z10000.

I was also investigating the possiblity to go for 2 cameras and a 3d rig. But the disavantage is, that this tends to become heavy and more complex, with the controller and the adjustment and a big steadycam... . I like the capability to move if I shoot people, as Don says!

And for sure I would like to have 1080 50i also as render result - but that is something where you need professional MVC encoders.
post #1132 of 1567
Joe- Does the JVC pro version have Lanc? Having worked with and without it, there is no way I want to go back to not being able to sync the two cams. It can be done but the calibration is a real chore just to get a shot. With Lanc sync its as easy as hitting the switch.
post #1133 of 1567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

Joe- Does the JVC pro version have Lanc? Having worked with and without it, there is no way I want to go back to not being able to sync the two cams. It can be done but the calibration is a real chore just to get a shot. With Lanc sync its as easy as hitting the switch.

Unless I'm badly mistaken, it does not have LANC. From my point of view, that's its biggest weakness. I've gotten around some of the drawbacks of the TD1 with the stereo base extender and 77mm adapter, but that limitation (as far as I know) is not going to change.

Here's the deal for me: to get really satisfying 3D, I'm know I'm going to need to add a dual camera rig to my shooting gear. That means dual Canon or dual Sony camcorders (24p capable) on a variable interaxial bench system like Frank or Don's. And the rig will have to have dual LANC control. That raises the level of complexity and the difficulty of setup/shooting/editing and every other part of the production and post production process. The way I shoot, I just don't want to deal with that right now. I'm absolutely convinced that I can make my Garden project work with the tools I already have. IMO, the JVC TD1 is a phenomenal camcorder, and I'm sure the HMZ1 pro version is even better. I don't see myself selling the TD1 (unless I do it as an upgrade to the HMZ1), because it does so many things well - without a lot of fussing about during setup.

A dual camera/variable interaxial rig, though, will give me the ability to shoot at a much greater wide angle and get the kind of depth I love with the TD1 and Cyclopital3D stereo base extender. Footage from the dual camera rig should also be easier to work with, since I won't have to worry about MVC files in post - just left/right AVCHD streams.

So, that's the tradeoff - to get the most flexibility when shooting, I need a dual camera rig. But that adds considerable weight and hassle to the process. I'll have to see just how successful I am with my Garden project. If it works really well, I may invest the time and money to go dual camera. If it isn't all I hope it will be, I'll probable stand pat for quite a while longer. I'm sure in a couple of years, we'll be looking back on this time and laughing at how primitive it all was.
post #1134 of 1567
Hello,

Just click on the button "ORDER".
Now I should read all your recommendations through several posts about this cam.
... whouah, just realised that I will become a TD10 user ! (and all tha pain that come with !)
post #1135 of 1567
I tried the capture feature in VHS11 (jpg) and the 3D is not correct. How do I cut a single frame from my 3D timeline imported from the TD10?

Thanks
post #1136 of 1567
Pause your timeline to the frame you wish in jpg, (anaglyph or SBS) jpg Then click on the "save snapshot to file" ( icon of a floppy Diskett in the preview window) You'll get what you see in the preview window so if you want the highest quality be sure to set the preview for Best full.
post #1137 of 1567
Don,

I tried that and the 3D view did not look right. I was able to split a frame out of the timeline, duplicate it multiple times and then make a subclip. It looked top quality when placed back in the timeline for rendering. I also had to go to properties-media to turn stereoscopic to SbS.

Thanks for your ongoing help!
post #1138 of 1567
I'm not sure what it is you are trying to do. Thought you needed a jpg image of one place on the timeline but if all you need to do is pause the video as it plays, you can do that by doing what you started, split off the last frame and then grab it on the right side and while holding down the control key drag it out and that will create a still frame. There are other techniques more advanced using a velocity curve too that will allow you to ease to the pause.
post #1139 of 1567
Yes, that is what I want to do and much simpler. I was dragging the frame before but without holding ctrl key.

Thanks
post #1140 of 1567
More tips and tricks-
Use the same technique to create a slomo without using a velocity curve. split off a part of the clip you wish to have in slomotion ( more than one frame) and ctrl drag to stretch it out and it will play in slomo. You will see a zigzag line in the center of the clip that denotes it isn't playing normal but in slomo, also fastmo by squeezing it shorter. Use a velocity curve when you need a smooth ramp of the speed change but a velocity curve applies to the entire timeline which may not be desirable. Also, be careful with how this affects your audio.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 3D Source Components
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Source Components › Sony HDR-TD10 3D-Capable Camcorder