JVC GS-TD1 arrives in the UK
I have just received my JVC GS-TD1 3D camcorder this morning. This may be another UK first for me.I am keeping this post as a placeholder which I will fill out into a rolling mini-review shortly.
The first impressions of this camcorder are that it looks like something invented by the Borg! That is not to say it is bad, but it certainly defies the conventional look of a camcorder and it does this moreso than the forthcoming Sony 3D camcorder. It looks somewhat menacing in its nearly all black trim. One of the main reasons the JVC looks like this, is due to the two lenses that facilitates the 3D capability, and in particular the separation of the two lenses. Ideally the lenses should be spaced around "eye-width" apart. This would make the unit even bigger. However JVC has a wider spacing than the Sony. Lens separation plays a key part in 3D depth. If you imagine that both lenses were in the exact same position (of course this is impossible in reality) they would see the same image, and therefore we would have no 3D at all. As you move the lenses further apart, they will each see a more differing view from each other expanding the 3D depth perception. If the lenses were eye-width apart, then this would approximate to how we see 3D with our own eyes.
So we talked a little about the distance between the two lenses. Just to give some perspective on this, here are some rough measurements for the current 3D camcorders
JVC GS-TD1 = 35 mm
Sony HDR-TD10 = 25 millimeter (best guess)
Panasonic HDC-SDT750 = 19 millimeter
In contrast the Fuji W3 3D camera (which can also do videos), has a distance of 75mm, which is much closer to the human eye distance. So all of these camcorders will be a bit limited in depth and in this specific aspect, not as good as the Fuji. However the JVC does appear to have the best separation of the camcorders.
Professional 3D rigs, normally provide 2 adjustments; interaxial separation and convergence. We have talked about interaxial separation and how it is fixed with these camcorders. So lets talk briefly about convergence. In early 3D rigs, they almost always toed in the lenses towards each other. In other words there was a point at which both lenses converged. This was typically the same point as the focal point in the scene. Later it was realised this was not always right, or appropriate and could cause perception issues when viewing the end result. Later rigs allowed the convergence to be individually adjusted separate from the focal point. Some film directors elected to have no toe in on the lenses at all and position them absolutely parallel. From what I can see, the JVC has both lenses mounted parallel. With convergence you gain another control in providing a sense of depth, essentially creating a trapezoid effect between the lenses. This can create an exaggerated sense of depth which is particular good for live concerts and some sporting events. JVC (or any other 3D camcorder) have not included this capability and it is not a bad thing. Setting convergence correctly especially in dynamic scenes is very very difficult. Instead the best way is to set the lenses parallel.
Okay, so we have gone through a number of terms and now we introduce another one, parallax. Unfortunately this adjustment is often called convergence on some 3D TVs and PCs. Essentially this moves the left and right images either closer or further apart from each other. The end result is not to change the amount of depth as that simply cannot be recreated other than moving the lenses further or closer apart. Instead it changes the reference point at which something in the scene appears level with your TV, monitor or projector screen. Any objects in the scene nearer will appear to "pop out" of the screen. The JVC provide both automatic AND manual control of the parallax.
One of the issues with new formats, is editing them. Unfortunately 3D camcorders are no exception to this problem. The JVC can record in two 3D formats
a) Side-by-side using AVC HD
b) True 1080 3D using MVC
Of course the main problem with side-by-side is that you halve your horizontal resolution. Each full 1080 frame contains both the left and right images. However, you CAN edit this one easily as long as you are not looking for 3D specific editing funcitonality. So for example, you can trim clips, assemble them, apply software filters (e.g. colour or noise reduction), change the backing music etc etc, just like normal. However, you will need 3D aware software if you wanted to alter the parallax, or overlay 3D credits etc. Although I have not looked deeply into it, I understand that there are plug-ins for Adobe Premiere that faciltiate some level of actual 3D manipulation.
The second format here is MVC. This format contains true 1080 separated left and right images. Note that this is 1080i and not 1080p. Right now the ONLY 3D full resolution 1080p format supported over HDMI due to bandwidth constraints in current chipsets is 1080p24 (Frame packed). The JVC does not support that format. Instead it supports 1080i50 or 60 frame sequential. The camera is locked to 50hz for the European version and 60 for the American. Right now, there is no editing software that is compatible with this format. The forthcoming Sony 3D camcorder also uses MVC.
Although MVC is a standard it is unclear whether the new formats are tight enough such that new editing software will arrive that better supports all of these 3D camcorders. One thing to mention is that the firmware on the JVC is updatable. Naturally we do not know to what extent, but this camcorder is unusual in having firmware update capability.
So we started this review talking a bit about the appearance. I should cover a little bit more on this aspect. The camcorder is fairly large but it is not heavy. As I stated, it does look like an invention by the Borg. Oddly there are different plastics used in different parts of the casing. For example, the front section housing the dual lens, has a rubbery feeling coating. But the main body is a mottled effect plastic. The silver parts are also plastic and not metal. And there are also oddly some shiny piano black sections as well. The screen is longer than the side of the camera it folds against. I thought this was really quite odd. The bit of overlap is the border of the screen though, and not the screen itself. The rear of the camera is a cluster of buttons and an adjustment dial that can be used for a multitude of maual options. The wheel is quite small and is difficult to use while filming. I have no idea why JVC did not implement the wheel nearer the front of the camera. The lens door is manual using a level on the side. Overall the strange mixture of materials and amount of plastic do seem a little disappointing compared to its somewhat high price tag. However, it does prevent the camera from being too heavy.
There are connections for AV-out, USB, HDMI (mini), Power, Headphones and microphone. There is a cold shoe for accessories, a tripod mount and of course an SD card slot. There is a microphone positioned on either side of the lenses. The battery goes into a compartment rather than being bolted on the side or back of the camera. There is room for a larger battery in this compartment. The tripod mount is positioned fairly close to the centre of gravity of the unit which makes balancing it on some stabilisation devices a little easier. I understand the 75mm spacing.(Fuji W3 you quoted)....Are you seriously suggesting the lens-separation can be as little as 13mm - this is hardly room enough for holding L R lenses to a panel....?
The convergence at inf is a potential issue and I've read that some in industry suggest it is this that gives some viewers disturbing headaches. Since the Brain uses Eye-divergence and focus to determine the created image. With flat-screens, focus remains fixed. I suspect it will help the brain if the whole image is sharp - this may means for now, cartoons are most successful as they can be created without analogue-light.
I've only viewed (Sony) 3D TV's in a shop-demo . . . . . if it wasn't the high price-tag I'd have one tomorrow.
However, despite believing that 3D is the next "must-have" (being as big a step as say, Colour was from B&W, IMHO).
Yet the problem of Editing Software (and the PC's to run it) is only a short-term issue - - - - - provided early-adopters aren't out-spec'd by a new technology sweeping all before.
3D TV's will become "spec-free" in time IMHO, and it's really refreshing to read one believer's experience with real kit... My apologies I checked back and it was 19mm. I corrected it in the post above. The reason the Panasonic has such a small separation is because fundamentally it is a single lens machine with a bolt-on dual lens adapter stuck on the front. There is only one sensor hence the only recording mode is side-by-side. While limiting the complexity and weight of the optics, it would have been difficult for Panasonic to get a greater separation. As the lenses are so close together, objects need to be fairly close to the camera to achieve a good 3D effect. The image will very quickly flatten out in scenes with more distance objects.
So far I haven't really had any headaches watching 3D material. However this does vary on an individual basis. I have certainly found occasions where by brain has found it hard to resolve what it is seeing. But these are usually scenes that display clear usage of convergence and there is trapezoid distortion visible in the image. As I mentioned earlier, there can be some benefits to converging the lenses but the angle has to change depending on the scene and objects within that scene. That simply isn't viable in a home rig yet. However so far the results of parallel lenses has been good IMO.
Interestingly the cheapest way onto the 3D ladder is with a projector and not a TV. Examples include the ACER H5360 (which currently needs a PC to drive it, but there is a new model coming out). You are right however, that the panel prices are high. The take-up of 3D is not what the manufacturers hoped and I suspect the economy is partly responsible. The number of 3D blu-ray titles is also limited. Which is why the idea of a 3D camcorder appealed to me. I can make more use of my display by making my own 3D content!
As for "spec-free". This is actually a real challenge and I have not yet seen a viable way of doing this in the next few years, but I hope to be corrected. Right now the only "spec-free" way is using a barrier mechanism, such as used on the built-in displays of these camera/camcorders or the Nintendo 3DS. But it requires you to sit in a very specific position. A larger version would require all parties to sit in specific positions. All very interesting, esp the separation- I thought that ugly adaptor was wide enough to create the 70-odd mm separation needed to match adult eyes. I recall a still-camera Adaptor that was just mirors (or prisms?) and that created two half-frame 35mm images side by side, but it's possible it was two separate lens systems...sorry dunno long time ago. The results were quite reasonable - least no-one said they wern't.
The (Ch 5) "Gadget Show" did a video-trial about 6-months ago, using DSLR's in movie-mode - but I think the separation would be greater than 70-odd mm.....they broadcast the clips and using red/blue the results on my CRT-TV were very realistic - at which point I predicted that 3D would be the Next thing after the Recession, as I suspect evenLondon Oylmpics can't pull UK out of recession. A pair of moderate DSLRs would make a great 3D movie set-up, but for some tech issues, which camera makers are unwilling to sort-out, so far. I guess they don't want to queer their Pro-market with really good consumer stuff.
Viewing on the small screens involves your eyes diverging some time so it's not "quite" the same thing as watching a 1.5 hr 3D movie -I'm suspicious we can have glasses-less 3D in a cinema, due to the wide angles of viewers etc. - but then I'm often wrong.
Lens separation distance - may not be "that critical" although as you discovered short is not so good overall, but it might reduce a sliding frame effect (dunno tech name)as an object passes centre, from one field to the other.
Binoculars have separations much greater, indeed those massive naval binos were deliberately made so I think . . . . does anyone know if this affected the distance-perception, which would be quite useful from the bridge of a 20,000 ton monster.
Keep up the Info-stream....it all sounds good so far. Hi guys
so what is your opinion of the actual 3d filming?
is there crosstalk at all or ghosting issues anywhere, i`ve just got mine to play with so any hints and tips would be more than useful.
cheersAllan I am still working on the review...I got held up with work stuff. I will be adding more over the next few days. Crosstalk/ghosting is a factor of the display not the recording. So yes, you will see ghosting on the JVC projectors for example. Switch to the Acer H5360 and it will all disappear, but then its not as clear or as contrasty. For Jon and anyone else who has a TD1, an update of the Everio Media Browser 3D Software is available from Pixela:
Everio MediaBrowser™ 3D - Download | PIXELA CORPORATION Excellent Gary. Thank you. This update was very much needed for the software, especially the frame by frame edit.
Apologies to others for still not completing on this review. I have had a couple of very difficult months with work and other factors and I have had very little time to play as I hoped with the TD1. Hi Guys , I would like to edit some old video from this camera but I lost my original CD. Is there any way to download the original Everio MediaBrowser 3D so I can update as well I'm not sure if this is what you are after as I don't have this camcorder (or any JVC cam) but found it via Google
Everio MediaBrowser™ 3D - Features | PIXELA CORPORATION
Mark.
Pages:
[1]
2