Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JVC Announces 1st High Definition Consumer Camcorder

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JVC Announces 1st High Definition Consumer Camcorder



    JVC Announces World's First HD Consumer Digital Video Camera in Japan

    U.S. launch to follow later this year

    TOKYO (Jan. 22, 2003) -- Victor Company of Japan, Limited (JVC) has announced the Japanese launch in early March of the GR-HD1 high-definition digital video camera, the first consumer digital video camera in the world to record and play back digital high-definition images. Monthly production is scheduled to be 1,000 units, and the suggested retail price is currently open.

    The camera will be announced in the United States later this year.

    Using a newly developed 1/3 inch-type 1.18 million pixel progressive scan CCD and JVC proprietary processing, the new camera records and plays back 750/30p (1280x720/30p viewable) digital high-definition and 525p progressive wide images to mini DV tape. In addition to the traditional "viewing" and "recording" applications, the GR-HD1 offers a new way to enjoy high-definition images through "creating."

    Main Features
    The first* consumer digital video camera in the world to record and play back digital high-definition images (750/30p)
    *As of January 22, 2003

    The GR-HD1 records digital high-definition images (750/30p) to mini DV tapes using MPEG 2 compression, recording and playing back digital high-definition images while maintaining conventional 525i DV standard recording times.


    Newly developed zoom lens with optical image stabilizer and 1.18 million pixel progressive scan CCD

    The "GR-HD1" comes with an optical 10X zoom lens and built-in optical image stabilizer. It also uses a newly developed 1/3 inch-type 1.18 million pixel (1.14 million effective pixels) progressive scan CCD. Because of its JVC original signal processing circuitry and driving system, it can record multi-format high-quality, high-resolution images.


    Three recording modes ("HD mode," "SD mode," and "DV mode"), according to user preference

    "HD Mode" records 750/30p digital high-definition images, "SD Mode" 525p progressive wide images, "DV Mode" at conventional 525i DV standard. Users can freely select between the three modes.


    "Down converter" and "Up converter" functions adapt unit to any monitor

    Up converter functions convert 750/30p digital high-definition images and 525p progressive wide images to the 1125i high-definition standard; Down converter functions convert images to the conventional 525i broadcast standard, enabling images to be enjoyed on any monitor.


    "Rotating grip" for stable filming at all times

    The camera's grip section rotates by up to 90 degrees so camera operators can film at low angles without removing their hand from the grip. The grip adjusts its position to suit the operator during filming, enabling more stable filming.


    Bundled with the first consumer MPEG2-HD editing software; the newly developed MPEG Edit Studio Pro 1.0 LE

    The accessory kit sold separately includes MPEG Edit Studio Pro 1.0 LE, an MPEG2-HD editing software package for digital high-definition images. This is the first consumer MPEG2-TS software to provide frame-accurate editing capabilities.

    Developmental Concept
    Digital high-definition broadcasting and high-definition displays such as PDPs, as well as terrestrial digital broadcasting scheduled to launch in Japan in December 2003 are expected to expand the high-definition market even further.

    In anticipation of these changes in the high-definition environment, JVC has already launched a number of high-definition technologies enabling users to enjoy high-definition video. On the recording side it offers D-VHS high definition VCRs; on the viewing side high-definition televisions and PDPs with DIST (Digital Image Scaling Technology). The GR-HD1 represents the next step forward from "recording and viewing" to "creating" high-definition video.

    JVC's High-Definition World
    JVC's four goals in developing of this product: 1. To create the first high-quality High-definition digital video camera for home users 2. To maintain compatibility with conventional DV standards 3. To provide for a stable filming position no matter the situation 4. To provide an easy-to-use high-definition editing environment

    The GR-HD1 high-definition digital video camera employs a high-performance zoom lens with a newly developed optical image stabilizer and a 1/3 inch-type 1.18 million pixel progressive scan CCD, achieving levels of quality and sharpness never before seen in consumer digital video cameras. The VU-HD1K accessory kit, sold separately, also comes bundled with MPEG Edit Studio Pro 1.0 LE software to enable editing of high-definition images on ordinary personal computers.

    For detailed specifications, go to http://www.jvc.co.jp/english/press/2003/gr-hd1.html.

  • #2
    the suggested retail price is currently open.
    Translated as: You Can't Afford One!

    Kevin

    Comment


    • #3
      "Up converter functions convert 750/30p digital high-definition images and 525p progressive wide images to the 1125i high-definition standard; Down converter functions convert images to the conventional 525i broadcast standard, enabling images to be enjoyed on any monitor."

      So, assuming the world does happen to agree that 1125 lines will become the standard for HDTV (and nothing is less certain) and you buy a HDTV which works on that. How is your converted 750 line MPEG-2, going to look? Bloody awful, I'll be bound. Like it or not, we're still a decade away from HDTV, if it ever arrives. After all, 30 years ago, we were promised it then within a decade!
      Brian (the devil incarnate)

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Brian Ellis

        So, assuming the world does happen to agree that 1125 lines will become the standard for HDTV (and nothing is less certain) and you buy a HDTV which works on that. How is your converted 750 line MPEG-2, going to look? Bloody awful, I'll be bound. Like it or not, we're still a decade away from HDTV, if it ever arrives. After all, 30 years ago, we were promised it then within a decade!
        With all due respect (seriously, since I've followed this forum and your postings for years), this sounds like sour grapes to me.

        As I'm sure you already know, HDTV already has arrived, at least in North America (and Japan?). Even in Canada with (as far as I know) only one HDTV station (CITY-TV in Toronto), it is possible to buy high-definition television sets at major department and electronic stores. Admittedly the current hardware is expensive and programming content is limited but it does exist.

        Since 1280x720/30p is one of the ATSC standards, there is no fundamental reason to believe that the JVC camcorder will look any worse than the current high-definition broadcasts of the American Broadcasting Corporation (also 1280x720/30p).

        I don't own a HDTV but after seeing what they are capable of in department store showrooms, I'm very impressed. Note that many of the ultra-expensive plasma displays are limited to a resolution of around 1280x720 but still look amazingly good.

        Tony

        Comment


        • #5
          Tony

          1280 x 720 is only an intermediate medium definition (and unofficial) standard. Like in many spheres, the manufacturers are trying to force it into a recognised standard simply by being its being there (8 track is another example, which has failed and Digital 8 looks like going the same way). I don't deny that the picture may be a lot better than 480 lines.

          However, the international governing body on TV standards, the CCIR,, is trying desperately (and has been doing so for nigh on 30 years) to define an accepted standard of over 1,000 lines, which would be used world-wide. Reason: to convert HDTV from one standard to another involves degradation. On ordinary TV, this hardly is noticeable, but on HDTV, the artifacts become objectionable.

          Do you know how many International Standards are recognised today? For mono, there are 12, of which two are totally obsolete (the UK 405 line and the French 819 line systems). For colour, there are, in addition, three basic systems (PAL, SECAM and NTSC), each of which is compatible with the native mono systems. This is why, for example, the UK/Irish system (designated I) is not entirely compatible with the rest of Europe (designated B or G, with a higher channel separation): it has a slightly higher luminance bandwidth and consequently the sound channel offset is 500 kHz higher. It is this kind of chaos that the CCIR are trying to avoid with HDTV because it serves no one. The problem is that no country wants to give way to any other and it has become a dialogue between deaf people, each wanting his own way. This is why de facto pseudo-standards like 1280 x 720, based on an upgraded M designation and NTSC encoding, are not likely to be useful in the long run. They are not likely to be acceptable outside of N. America. If, by some miracle, a new true HDTV standard were to be adopted this year, all the material would become obsolete overnight.

          It may interest you to know that some European TV studios have been using HDTV cameras for a number of years and make their recordings in HDTV. Of course, conversion is made to 625 lines for transmission. I'm not sure, but I think they may be using 1920 x 1080 x 50 progressive (non-interlaced). This means that when (if) the fateful day comes, they have a wealth of recordings ready.

          However, it is not as simple as that: VHS will, of course, become obsolete as will DVD, as we know it today. One of the greatest difficulties will be the fact that HDTV broadcasting stations, with their great bandwidth demands, will have to run in parallel with existing standards for, say, 10 years. There may simply not be enough bandwidth available in the recognised TV bands according to the Stockholm Plan for running both HDTV and LDTV in parallel. This problem will be exacerbated (and costly) when it comes to satellite transmissions. Then, once a system has been decided, a studio tape standard will be needed (did you know, for example, that the CCIR recommendations 469 specify that the tape speed for 525 line recording be 15"/sec and, for 625 line, 15-5/8"/sec with head rotation speeds of 240 and 250 rps respectively?).

          The ramifications of all this are stretching to technological limits and I guess that it will be a decade before these problems are all solved and the CCIR will publish a standard. I don't have real knowledge of what is going on, other than what I glean here and there, but I suspect that the MPEG committee are seeking an improvement on MPEG-4 which will allow greater compression of HDTV signals without loss of quality, in order to reduce the transmission bandwidth needed, with multiplexing of several (possibly 8) sound channels. This would be a step in the right direction, without any grapes, sour or sweet.
          Brian (the devil incarnate)

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi Brian,

            Thanks for the detailed reply. As I said, I've been following these forums for years and greatly respect the information provided by you and others such as Doc Mordrid.

            I now see why your simple remark was not the "throw-away" line that I thought it was.

            Tony

            Comment


            • #7
              What I find most interesting about the camcorder is what nobody here has even mentioned... the use of a single CCD.

              The description reads as follows:

              "The GR-HD1 high-definition digital video camera employs a high-performance zoom lens with a newly developed optical image stabilizer and a 1/3 inch-type 1.18 million pixel progressive scan CCD, achieving levels of quality and sharpness never before seen in consumer digital video cameras."

              Isn't it interesting that 3CCD camcorders have been the rage for all these years and now the new kid on the block is touting a single CCD that supposedly "achieves levels of quality and sharpness never before seen?"

              I have to admit I am skeptical about this...

              ...but I have an open mind...

              ...I'm truly curious to actually *SEE* the video shot by this camcorder.

              Jerry Jones
              I found a great domain name for sale on Dan.com. Check it out!

              Comment


              • #8
                Jerry

                Good point. 1.18 megapixels is sufficient, even with optical stabilisation, for the luminance signal at 1280 x 720. If it were to have 3 CCDs of 1.18, then the luminance signal could be derived entirely or mainly from the green CCD (depending on the chrominance coding method). However, full resolution 3-CCD devices can be considered very wasteful as one does not need such a resolution for the red and blue CCDs. Panasonic overcame this problem with their pioneering NV-DX1 camera in 1995 (I have serial #105 and the release ones started at #100, I'm told!). They use partial resolution CCDs (330 kpixels, instead of 415 kpixels) and they stagger each of the 3 CCDs by a third of a pixel width and thus are able to multiplex a new luminance signal of full 720 pixel resolution. I've oscilloscoped the direct analogue o/p and it certainly seems to have achieved this. Of course, recording the signal to mini-DV loses some of this on compression. This camera is why I have the DVCAM drive, because it doesn't have DV in/out.

                Getting back to your JVC, I agree that it would be difficult to composite a 1280 wide luminance signal from a CCD where all three colour pixels are barely more in width. Notwithstanding, it would theoretically be possible with an extremely complex algorithm, but the colour rendering could suffer as a result. I suspect that it is possibly a lot simpler. If you take an ordinary DV camera of 720 pixels width, this will theoretically give you a non-artifacted 360 equivalent horizontal luminance lines (alternate black and white pixels). With jiggery-pokery, such as I describe above, this can actually be increased slightly. However, few TV sets resolve better than 250-280 equivalent lines, say 3/4 of the theory. If a 1280 wide TV set follows the same philosophy, it will resolve about 480 equivalent lines, a great improvement over the current sets. However, it means that the camera can get away with a poorer luminance signal and no one would notice. This would be compensated partially by an improved colour rendering. Compromises and horses for courses. :-) Notwithstanding, for best non-artifacted luminance AND colour rendering, 3 CCDs would be a lot better, I agree.

                However, there is possibly another, very good, reason for a single CCD. It will need a much better lens than the plastic bottle-bottoms they put in the 720-wide cameras. It is much easier to make a good lens with a fairly short distance between the back component zoomed to WA and the CCD (uses less glass) and there may simply not be enough room to house the dichroic prism/filter assembly for 3 CCDs.
                Brian (the devil incarnate)

                Comment


                • #9
                  JVC was actually pushing 1ccd camcorders for quite a long time and claimed equal or better performance than some 3 chipers. But of course market demand (the higher number is better, right) made them switch their pro-summer cameras to 3 chip.
                  In relation to this camera at that price point I see quite a market stir, whether its practicle or not.
                  I mean look at what hype surrounds the Pana DX-100 24p thingy. Every one wants one, but how many people are seriously going to transfer their video to film. Yes everyone thinks they are a hollywood big shot but very few people in the end will need that feature. A lot of it is marketing hype. And JVC seems ready to boldly go where no man has gone befor.
                  funky
                  Oh my god MAGNUM!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I remember reading in one of the Audio-Video mags a few months back that ALL TV's sold in the US will have to have a digital tuner as well as an analog one. I would suppose this is so that broadcasters will not have to transmit two different signals for long.
                    - Mark

                    Core 2 Duo E6400 o/c 3.2GHz - Asus P5B Deluxe - 2048MB Corsair Twinx 6400C4 - ATI AIW X1900 - Seagate 7200.10 SATA 320GB primary - Western Digital SE16 SATA 320GB secondary - Samsung SATA Lightscribe DVD/CDRW- Midiland 4100 Speakers - Presonus Firepod - Dell FP2001 20" LCD - Windows XP Home

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      In Canada our major cable companies will offer only digital cable within one year. You will need a set top box or as you said a TV with built in digital decoder. Although this really has nothing to do with the HDTV debate. Its just a digital form of TV at about DVD res.
                      funky
                      Oh my god MAGNUM!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by funky-d-munky
                        In Canada our major cable companies will offer only digital cable within one year. You will need a set top box or as you said a TV with built in digital decoder. Although this really has nothing to do with the HDTV debate. Its just a digital form of TV at about DVD res.
                        funky
                        Do you have any web links to this information? I've been dreading that something like this would happen.

                        I currently have six independent tuners in the house (two TVs, two VCRs, a combo TV/VCR, and a PC TV tuner) and regular analog cable; in theory, all of them could be tuned to different stations. (In the real world, I've probably only used three recording VCRs plus a TV simultaneously.) Since I'd need a minimum of four set top boxes just to match what I have now, I've been in no rush to switch to digital cable or direct broadcast satellite.

                        Since, unlike the FCC, the CRTC has not mandated a timeframe for switching to digital broadcasting, I'm wondering how the cable companies can get away with this. It's one thing to require customers to switch to digital cable if they want optional programming but quite another to force them to do so for their current station lineup.

                        Tony

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I was told this by our Shaw cable installer about a year ago. Yes I do not like it much myself. Set top boxes should drop in price but it still sucks. My guess is between broadband internet and digital TV they just don't want the analog signal on the pipe. Rogers cable is on the same time frame. So if you live in a remote area and don't use the big 2, you might hang-on for a while.
                          Me, I'm on the coast in Vancouver and it's all Shaw.
                          Ps- I hate regional monopolies!!!
                          funky
                          Oh my god MAGNUM!

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X