I,'m planning on buying either a betacam sp camera or betacam sx, the problem is i'm not sure what the difference is or should I say what is the major difference?
Help? Thank Jeff Denlea

ARe you aware that these formats are now considered obsolete? Lots of them out there, but new cameras designs in these formats are no longer produced.

The SX cameras are much newer, the only one I've used was a top notch cam. I think the SX is a 4:2:2 mpeg format. I assume it's 50mbit, but I'm not sure.

Like I said the cam I used was hands down better than the bvw300 very little noise, incredible low light... on and on.

You may consider a dsr570 though, about the same class and a more widely used format. If you need the 4:2:2 color info SX or d-9 are probably good options to look into.

SX uses it's own compression, 4:2:2P@ML, IP frames, 18MB/s.
It's quite a good quality, only if you need to shoot for example at the sea, where is much movement and pic information, you will see "blocks", compression is quite heavy.
If you do'nt have very tight budget, i would preferre IMX or new XDCAM. Both have exellent camera part.

Margus

Thanks all for the info. One more if you had a budget of $7000.00 what camera would you get for Documentaries or broadcast commericals.

What does the $7,000 cover, just the camera or what?

yeah, not much actually...
it depends on what kind of editing system you will use, what formats are accepted by broadcaster, what level of commercials you want to do.

Just the camera, I work in dvcam,beta sp,mindv, I edit on Avid, FCP 4

Thanks Jeff

Go for panasonic ajdvc200 camera incredible low light performance, light weight, direct dock wit Firestore FS3 with anton mount, sexy professional look at a shoestring cost. the camera should be around 5000USD plus the lens you choose. I have one with fuji 19x for last five months and am very happ with the performance and shall soon be adding one more by the year end. go to

http://www.panasonic.com/pbds/subcat/Products/cams_ccorders/f_ag-dvc200.html

Compare your budget with its output against the higher end no doubt very good piece of equipment ut then look at their price and your budget.

Cheers !

Will the panasonic dv tapes play in a sony dsr-11 or do I have to get another deck

assuming that you have some "heavier" AVID
sx vs sp: sx has far better audio
in most conditions sx gives better picture
with sx you will most probably need also additional desktop player or recorder
when looking for used equipment, do'nt take camera which is out of production for longer than some 3-4 years. Sony provides spare parts for 7 years after ending the product.
check carefully condition of optics, it's hell of expensive thing

if you use editors with dv compression, it's maybe wiser to look for DV or DVCAM camera, that reduces number of decompression-compression cycles.

Margus

I own a cannon xl1s now, will i see a major difference with the panasonic AJDVC 200

Hey Bro,

DSR 11 is a Large or Mini DV/DVCAM player & recorder. it shall very conviniently play both tapes from ur xl1 and dv200. i had a dsr11 which i traded for a DSR25 a more heavy duty player and recorder. You shall not be needing any extra DV player.

As far as your visul comprision between DV200 & XL1 ... Definately YES you shall be getting results showing difference in terms of Pictures sharpness (XL1 has about 500TV Lines & DVC200 has 850 TV Lines of rsolution) Excellent Low light shoots, a Professional feel & look on field with DV200. I own a PD150 which is much like XL1 in output, DV200, FS3, Laptop Firewire Non Linear editor, RTX100extreme witn various softwres.

I used Large DV tapes from Sony & Panasonic running uotp 180 & 276 minutes resopectivly with approp. tape. But with the unavailability of these tapes here I am experimening with DVCAM 184 tapes which run 278 minutes in DV mode recording (becuse of Difference in speed & track width of DV & DVCAM ie, DV records 10micron and DVCAM 15microns) just one doubt inmind fro which i had posted a thread about the head wear & ter if i use DVCAM tapes in DV based camcorders like DV200 ...

But i strongly recommend you a Panasonic DV200 its based on DVCPRO AJD410 hardware..when u look 200 & 40 nyou wouldnt find any difference in features and looks except for the price & recording system.

I look forward to your becoming a Panny Gang Member !!!

Cheers !!!

You can buy a low-hours ( just a few hundred hours) DSR-300A camera with lens and batteries and charger for under $7,000. Great cameras, great low-light capabilities. Will run miniDV or full-sized DVCam cassettes. Good sound.

As high a resolution as the tape can handle.

My last word on this would be that one should always consider buying a new BRAND NEW equipment. As you shall be shooting with full confidence on field and be ssured about the output...god forbid but if using a second hand unit and aything goes wrong cox of any malfunctioning you would regret it once and for all and feel the unit unit woudl b having such problems befoe u bought.

AND there NO such low hours machine...one sells the unit and can play with the hour reading. You can never be rst assured of its genuine reading. Why compromise for a second hand stuff may be like DSR300 which is giving less resolution etc when compared to DV200 camcorder. this is jut to carry on the discussion toward a healthy decision for you.

The best way is to on Sony and panasonic website and get ur self doing apple2apple comparison between 200 vs 300...After all it ur mone HRD EARNED MONEY !!! So better spend it wisely.

Check this link

http://www.globalmediapro.com/av/messages/44462.html

http://www.saferseas.com/vsd/eye/eye8.html

Cheers !

<AND there NO such low hours machine...one sells the unit and can play with the hour reading. You can never be rst assured of its genuine reading.>

Yes, there is possibility to reset hours meters, but also possibility to find out if it is resetted or not. Firstly, it's possible to find out by serial no the age of camera, and look if meter readings are reasonable. Second, dsr-300 has at least one menu level, which can be accessed only by Sony tech stuff, there is held also information about counter resets.

Margus

I have to agreee with Margus, there are good deals out there that can be verified. I purchased a DSR500 on Ebay. I contacted the seller in advance and he agreed to a check up by a authorized Sony service center as a contingency to the sale.

The service center was able to verify the condition as described in Ebay, the actual hours (70 on the head) AND that it was not listed as stolen with Sony. I know that Sony and Fujinon both have lists of gear that has been reported as stolen so it's a good idea to check that too.

In this case, the service center acted as an unofficial escrow. The seller dropped it off, they verified condition and reported it to me, I paid the seller and the service center shipped the cam (+2 chargers and 6 AB Batts) to me.

If a seller refused to let you get it checked in advance, I'd take that as a warning sign and pass.

Of course, I had to pay for the service charges (had it cleaned since it was there) but it's well worth it to know what your're getting.

I would definitely not put any money into Betacam SP or SX. Both are obsolete, and you'd need a deck for either one (although the SX deck will play Betacam tapes too). The suggestions of the Panasonic 200 1/2" chip camera are good. You can probably get one with a useable lens and a couple of batteries for about that amount of money, maybe a little more. It's really not a good idea to buy into an obsolete format, especially Betacam SX because it wasn't out there all that long and I don't know of anyone who actually bought into it except for a few TV stations.

Bankim,

When you thing about it, everyone is shooting with a used camera. Pro cameras are frequently 'pool' cameras and any one shooter will randomly draw cameras from the pool.

If that works OK, the carefully purchasing used cameras is OK too.

I wouldn't be shooting a DSR-300 if I hadn't bought everything used at one time or another. Lens, camera body and batteries and charger came from different sources. All work flawlessly

<<<-- Originally posted by Mike Rehmus : ARe you aware that these formats are now considered obsolete? Lots of them out there, but new cameras designs in these formats are no longer produced. -->>>

BetaCam SP is not necessarily an obsolete format, it's an "older" format. I just bought a 10 year old KY-27B head that directly docks to betacam sp. I already owned a BetaCam SP back so for me it was a great addition.

I bought the JVC camera head for $600.00 and it works quite well. I did a side by side with a Panasonic DVX-100 and it appears they are about equal. However I think the DV format has a touch more color ringing than BetaCam SP when filming thin strands of hair or diagnonal lines. I was watching a KCET interview the other night and I saw color ringing coming from the strands of hair and the fringe style of clothing.

The betacam cameras tend to be 2/3 inch chip design so you tend to get that less depth of field look. No matter what your favorite camera or video format is, it sometimes makes sense to see why others continue to like formats that many newer production people tend to think are obsolete.

The fact that the betacam sp record backs are no longer made is definitely a reason to not invest in the format for field acquisition. I have owned my BetaCam SP back for approximately 7 years and I have never bought it in for servicing because it has been so reliable. Frankly I'm afraid to have someone touch it.

One final note, BetaCam SP studio decks are still being made, and BetaCam SP continues to be the most economical and sturdy archival format for video tape edit masters, and probably is more reliable in the field than the very thin tape used for DV, however you are limited to bigger tapes that only last 30 minutes, a pretty big disadvantage.

You cite the best reason for using 'older' formats. The cost to participate if you own part of the kit can be quite low. The 27 head is a good performer if not quite up to the best of the new cameras. The price you paid makes it a no-brainer.

If I owned a BetaSP setup, I'd use it although I'd cry about the cost of tape.

It hasn't been so long ago that I sold my trusty EVW-300 (Hi-8)camera body and bought a used DSR-300 body for $3500.

Comcast is still BetaSP-centric. I deliver DVCam masters to them for commercials and they immediately transfer that to BetaSP.

<<<--

If I owned a BetaSP setup, I'd use it although I'd cry about the cost of tape. -->>>

For me it's more the length of the tape (30 min loads for field work), and the size of the tape,
the 90 minute tapes are huge that is a disadvantage over the long haul. (Storage becomes an issue).

My PVV-3 Betacam Back, which is no longer made, cost over $9,000. The potential replacement DSR back which I believe would dock to my KY-27B camera that sony makes lists for over $8,000.00!

I hear you. I really like the 3 hour tape-loads along with batteries that will power the camera for longer than that. Used DVCam backs with plenty of hours left on them are around $4K the last I looked.

I forget to mention that the betacam sp tapes actually are quite affordable these days. The 30 minutes tapes sell for around 8-9 dollars each. 90 minutes tapes sell for around 23-25 dollars each.

As for 3 hour loads, I've discovered that using my S-VHS backs with the very high quality playback of the JVC-BRS series of editing decks gives me incredible flexibility.

Now we're talking $10.00 for the 2 hour and 43 minute length tapes and I then edit directly to BetaCam SP. I get XLR in and double redundant audio tracks. One set is analog with dolby C noise reduction, the other set is HI-FI. Gosh Opera sounds great when it's recorded with HI-FI audio.

I've got settable digital picture noise reduction for low light live event shoots that probably give me more "correction" capability than I would get shooting with most mini-dv cameras. I run mu signal through the Panasonic MX-50 and I have my 7.5 minimum IRE set, then I have my Clip set at around 100 IRE. Then I play magician with my TBC remote and I get INSTANT adustment capability for color, hue, set-up and black. No way an all automatic adjustment can do it as well.

As for situations with more lighting, where digital should really excell, I'm no longer surprised at jobs I look at that have blown out the detail in peoples faces that were shot with digital video. As much as I like a color viewfinder, I get better results with my black and white viewfinder and zebras.

I get really good looking BetaCam SP Edit Masters from S-VHS source tapes and my VHS copies look real good.

<<<-- Originally posted by Martin Garrison : The SX cameras are much newer, the only one I've used was a top notch cam. I think the SX is a 4:2:2 mpeg format. I assume it's 50mbit, but I'm not sure.

Like I said the cam I used was hands down better than the bvw300 very little noise, incredible low light... on and on.
-->>>

Isn't the Sony 300 like 12-15 years old? BetaCam SP is a docking format, so theoretically you can put a newer camera head on it and then be presently surprised. The risk comes in whether or not the BetaCam SP record back (PVV-3) is in good condition. They are down to the $2,500 to $3,000 price range now.

<<<-- Originally posted by Margus Kivilaan : assuming that you have some "heavier" AVID
sx vs sp: sx has far better audio.

Margus -->>>

I think this statement needs some clarification. I'm assuming that SX is a digital format, so it probably is easier to transfer into a non-linear enviroment.

BetaCam SP sound is excellent. Incredible dynamic range. I once was given a dat recording that had such huge dynamic range that no matter how I set my analog record decks I was getting distortion. (perhaps I had a bad audio board in one deck, but I think I tried it in two different decks and no luck) The betacam sp deck handled the dynamic range of the dat recording perfectly.

Alessandro, you are correct in that the BVW300 is about 15 years old. I bought mine in 1989 and retired it for a DSR500 in 2000. It was an excellent camera in its day, but required much more light than later models, such as the BVW400. By today's standards it also has a fairly low resolution (only about 50 more lines that a PD150), but it has excellent latitude. You won't find many of them around anymore, but there are still quite a few 400's and 600's in use, and quite a few of the dockable versions. The 300 is a camcorder, not dockable, so you're stuck with Betacam tapes.

Alessandro,
sx uses digital audio 16bit/sample 48kHZ, that gives 20-20 000Hz frequency area and about 80dB dynamics.
sp uses analogue tracks 20-15 000 HZ in longitudinal, about 70dB dynamics.
But more important is multigeneration capability. When you rerecord digital audio, it's virtually lossless, analogue audio gets worse with every generation. And in practical side, sp audio quality depends very much on accuracy of vtr and camera mechanics, as they use separate audio head.
Of course "heavier" sp vtr-s have AFM audio tracks with better characteristics, but you can't find much camcorders with AFM tracks, and you cannot edit in linear with AFM audio.

Margus

Here's what I've noticed in regards to different audio systems. My S-VHS professional decks offer linear stereo audio with Dolby C and are rated in the mid to high 40's for dynamic range. These S-VHS decks also offer stereo HI-FI audio that is in the low 90's.

BetaCam SP offers linear audio with Dolby Noise Reduction in the low to mid 70's.

I'm not convinced that the HI-FI stereo actually is better than my BetaCam SP with dolby C noise reduction even though HI-FI is 15 to 20 points higher. I have gotten wonderful results from VHS linear stereo (the mid to high 40's), so gaining almost 30 more points with BetaCam SP is huge.

If the analog audio is converted to digital from the get go the potential loss by staying analog is avoided.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOPsss !!! In this long discussion I have forgotten the original issue...Ws it the purchase of a new or old camera ! Well i never desie to ofend any one using a Pre-Owned gear. My suggestion to any one considering buying a gear is to..

1. Consider the final output format
2. Budget for purchase
3. Clientele profile
4. Compatibility of the new gear underconsideration with any owned previously with the buyer
5. Compare features of various gear in the market with new ones

I hve a strong feeling after using DVC200 against DSR500 the output of 200 was surpassing that of 500. Before making my purchase i had hired these unit and tried for myself for two full das prallely and than took my desision. Its simply Sony the name which make one gear costlier than Panny. As it is Pannuy DVCPRO format is more widely acptible in TV stations than t DVcam. The DVC200 is based on the DVCPRO 410 Hardware except for the diff i the recording format.


Rest depends on the persons individual concern and choice...

Signing off...!

Any ways do mail me about your purchase it sall mke us feel tat we spent our time for worth.

Cheers !

<<<-- Originally posted by Bill Pryor : I would definitely not put any money into Betacam SP or SX. Both are obsolete, and you'd need a deck for either one (although the SX deck will play Betacam tapes too). It's really not a good idea to buy into an obsolete format, especially Betacam SX because it wasn't out there all that long and I don't know of anyone who actually bought into it except for a few TV stations. -->>>

And yet, BetaCam SP is the BEST format for archive mastering your Digital Video Edit Masters when one considers the cost and quality of the BetaCam SP format and the video decks made for the format.

And I believe the BetaCam SP Video decks are still being made. Remember, you can shoot and edit digitally and still archive master to BetaCam SP, if you can afford the deck.

We're doing the opposite. We're dubbing old Betacam masters to DVCAM via component in and out of the decks. Last I heard, Sony had discontinued most Betacam decks, but I think one model was still being made. If so it won't be long before that is discontinued too. Analog is dying very fast.
We still have Betacam decks in the system, but anytime we have a Betacam tape in, or pull an old one out of the files, it gets transferred to DVCAM. The component-to-component transfer is almost indistinguishable from the original, and once it's digital, we can clone it via firewire with no further quality loss. When DVCAM eventually starts to go away, we can do the same thing from DVCAM to whatever the digital format du jour happens to be.
I would not buy a Betacam deck today, unless I needed to transfer all the masters to another format.

The reason to dub to DV-CAM from BetaCam SP has more to do with being able to then go firewire into Non-Linear, and it does save space.

But if you are dubbing Edit Masters from BetaCam SP and then getting rid of the BetaCam SP Edit Master, the only reason to do that is for space purposes. If you can afford the space allocation, you better off keeping the BetaCam SP Edit Masters until a true, uncompressed DVD Recorder is made.

BetaCam SP is a more robust archival format then any of the lower cost digital formats.

The Sony BetaCam SP UVW-1800 is still being made and is still very popular. The Sony BetaCam SP PVW-2600, PVW-2650, and PVW-2800 are really fine machines. I don't know if they are still being made.

Sony also makes Digital BetaCam. Sony UVW-1800 still sell for at least half of what they were purchased for, the demand is very strong for the decks.

Does anyone know if Cable stations are using DV-CAM for air? That would be the best test as to a formats archiveability is if the Cable stations use it for commercials or for local programming.

Oh I don't believe that any analog tape format is more robust than a digital storage format. Certainly not if you use DVCam tapes. Between the tape quality and the error correction and recovery, the digital tape should outlast the analog version by quite a bit.

And if stored quality is a major goal, then 50Mhz digital, either DVCPro or D-9 should handle that too.

AFAIK, some stations are coming directly off of DVD. Certainly for program material.

My local Comcast tech center will now accept DVCam masters but they dub it over to BetaSP because all of their editing gear is still BetaSP. They claim to be going to a massive change-over in the next few years but I do not know if that includes the program storeage. I'd more readily believe they are going to hard disk storage for program material.

They do say that the Silicon Valley Comcast tech center can accept commercials on CD.

It won't be long before they will start accepting short video clips like commercials as email. Then they can consolidate their tech centers.

Locally, Comcast sends out camera crews with DSR-300's

Analog has a 25 - 30 year head start on DV and those tapes are still fine. I have a 3/4 archive tape that was given to me that is from 1979. It still plays perfectly.

The chemical make-up of BetaCam SP is superior to Digital tape. OK, that's just my opinion.

I've had two BetaCam SP tapes rip in 10 years of BetaCam SP use. Both tapes that ripped were actually operator error, the two tapes fell on top of something that put a rip in them. Something landed inside the protective flap.

Here's the amazing part, one of the two tapes had a rip that spanned 4/5 of the way across the tape. I didn't know the tape was ripped and continued using the tape. I would fast rewind and fast forward. I noticed a funny sound coming from the machine when it got to that part of the tape, but the point is the tape would not rip the rest of the way even though it went over the heads at least a dozen times before I discovered the problem.

I've heard that digital tape is really really thin. Have I heard wrong? If the tape is really really thin, then what overrides this factor that allows for the tape to be more durable than a robust BetaCam SP tape?

Well it seems like WWF

-> THE BIG DADDY DIGITAL v/s the over grown puppy analogue <-

Well lets hve a break. The guys who have old gear like Beta SP etc can do nothing but to continue use their gear and when they wish to ad on more they are left with just one choice CALLED DIGITAL and when they ever will do so they wouldnt ever stop praising about the Digital format which surely have lot os superlatives over its BetaSP. I am not treating BetaSP as country cousin I have grown up playng with my Father's Umatic then Beta SP gear say since 1988. Those who dont buy digital will continue baiting their money on vintage second hand Analogue gear !

Guys we should accept the change gracefully. Digital is to rule the roost and analogue has to give the way to the Digital Brigade... !

The Digital tapes as one mentioned is thin really thin as comparared to BetaSP but one should not forget that the Digital is not developed to be editing in Linear fashion instead they ae to harness the rw beat called Non Liner Editing...so question doesnt arises of it longitivity onshelf. I have had my first digital gear in March'03 and now i am using hard disk recorders like FS3...digital media has given us unlimited flexibility which no one would have ever dreamt of in the Analogue Era (I call t Era cause it is fased out and its the Digital Era !)

If by any way digital is not as good as analogue then why the would the betaSP guys be longing to use D30 or D35 or latest D50 instead of DXC537/37 etc ! Boss Digital is teh ey to development. PERIOD !

Yes one can say i am a very happy Digital platform user...!

I don't see the two formats in conflict with each other. I do see a bit of over exuberance on the part of digital users who never comprehended or got a chance to appreciate the value of INSTANT color correction knobs and buttons both on betacam sp video decks and digital switchers such as the MX-50.

I'm not talking about digital "effects", I'm talking about making a picture look as good as possible and do it in a very fast manner.

I know that Final Cut Pro-4 has taken huge strides in the area of color correction but I'm not convinced it is as fast as using knobs and buttons.

Wouldn't it be something if NLE systems actually created an interface keyboard that allowed instant correction of the NLE image without having to do any mouse clicking.

i'm going quite far off topic now
in theory it is not possible to build a digital system what cannot be exeeded by analogue. digital signal contends always a mistakes because of quantisation and sampling. but that's very theoretical because such a analogue system will cost too much. it's all tied up to money

my fivepenny...
Margus

Perhaps for the first generation this could actually be true. But as I say, Analog Origination, Digital Destination.

So lets put down the curtains shoudlnt we....!

Long days of discussions for no good end result :o(

What did we proove out of these three pages......

<<<-- Originally posted by Alessandro Machi : I don't see the two formats in conflict with each other. I do see a bit of over exuberance on the part of digital users who never comprehended or got a chance to appreciate the value of INSTANT color correction knobs and buttons both on betacam sp video decks and digital switchers such as the MX-50.

I'm not talking about digital "effects", I'm talking about making a picture look as good as possible and do it in a very fast manner.

------------------------
There is nothing limiting color correction to analog signals.
------------------------

I know that Final Cut Pro-4 has taken huge strides in the area of color correction but I'm not convinced it is as fast as using knobs and buttons.

-------------------------
Most NLEs have color correction available and, like audio amplitude controls, can be set for discrete sections of video or the entire timeline. This color correction on real-time systems is in real time—no rendering needed—and can be effected on the video signal as a whole or only on highlights, or mid-tones, or shadows. There are few analog systems that accomplish that.

Furthermore, although some NLEs can do it all in real-time, the operator has the luxury of determining the changes at any speed they wish.

So if you wish, you can Color Time the entire timeline just as they do with Hollywood films.
--------------------------

Wouldn't it be something if NLE systems actually created an interface keyboard that allowed instant correction of the NLE image without having to do any mouse clicking. -->>>

---------------------------
I think that would be a step backward ONLY IN THIS SENSE:

A mouse is a generic tool that can be used to adjust or select anything presented in a soft menu. It is kind of the Crescent-Wrench of user interfaces.

Once you start creating keys and knobs to do the job, you increase the expense and frequently limit the scope of the interface. A mouse has no such limitations as long as one can change the on-screen menus.

That said, I do like having some specialized controls. The Contour Shuttle-Pro is an example.

Bankim, discussion and disagreements are quite good, frequently adding to the knowledge of the participants, and may benefit folks who just read the threads and don't participate.

Ri8 u r Mike !

I do agree that the time line color correction is an excellent tool. So if you shoot an event that has non-changing visuals, or your camera position remains static, or your camera was off in color in a similar manner all the way through, the NLE system is terrific for fixing and changing the color for each camera literally in an instant.

However, for "two-camera shoots" where the cameras are stationary, I get amazingly good results by using my MX-50 and the built in clip and set-up level with additional color wheel adjustment.

My criticism of NLE color adjusting is directly related to shoots where the camera person is running and gunning and virtually every shot is from a new angle and position.

I can adjust those shots faster with knobs and buttons than on an NLE system. The White elephant in the room has less to do with whether digital is better than analog and more to do with how much the editor has to "pee" on the cinematographers work so they can take credit for it.

I prefer to put the majority of my energy into making the shot look the best it can look rather than adding all kinds of effects so that I can remind everyone how much "better" the video is because of post production techniques.

Now, in the name of broadcast and ratings purposes, peeing on the cinematographers work is essential for a television shows survival, and I stay out of that arena.

<<<-- Originally posted by Alessandro Machi :

I prefer to put the majority of my energy into making the shot look the best it can look rather than adding all kinds of effects so that I can remind everyone how much "better" the video is because of post production techniques.
-->>>

As does everyone. But it isn't always possible in real world situations.

And there are needs of a production that cannot be met during the shoot and if they were, would lock in an effect or color balance that later may not work. I speak of, for example, making a scene slightly cold and then tapering off to a warm appearance as the mood transitions.

And and, if you are making changes in the VTRs in the control room during post, how is that any different from doing it in the editing program?

My preference is to always make the best and most neutral footage possible because that then allows choices when editing. That is, I get to change my mind without having to reshoot the footage. I can also re-purpose the video without having to accept prior choices.

Even Hollywood is starting to make a large number of their movies by using Digital Intermediaries to edit off-line and then using the EDL to direct the cutting and processing of the master film. If it weren't more cost-effective and, more importantly, didn't generate better results, they wouldn't do it.

There are differences in the way shots are color corrected. What I have found to be the most effective way of all is to lay down the shot onto the edit master.

I then color correct my source tape footage and I "preview" the identical edit over the already laid down version of the shot. As I preview the shot I hit video insert on and off and the result is a completely in sync method for instantaneously comparing what exists with a new possibility.

Keep in mind the actual color correction that includes clip, set-up, hue, color intensity and brightness all takes between 10-20 seconds.

I totally agree with you about making the footage "neutral". It's scary because sometimes the client expects "more" yet you know that it's best to not lose choices later by over committing on a certain look now.

<<<-- Originally posted by Alessandro Machi : There are differences in the way shots are color corrected. What I have found to be the most effective way of all is to lay down the shot onto the edit master. -->>>

Ah, you are using a Linear Editing System. Now I understand.

I periodically sit in on Final Cut Pro Classes, so I also understand where FCP is at.

This thread is way off topic and needs to be brought back to the original topic of SP vs. SX. New topics need a new thread. Thanks for your understanding and assistance.

Phew.....Thanks GOD ! there is someone watching these ALALOGUies fighting out a survival against the MIGHT CALLED DIGITAL BRIGADE.

Even i was feelig te same of these guys wasting this thread by flushing or Analogue frustrtions...

Well i hope the saga continues in some new thread...May analogue v/s DIGITAL BRIGADE !!!


:o)

<<<-- Originally posted by Jeff Donald : This thread is way off topic and needs to be brought back to the original topic of SP vs. SX. New topics need a new thread. Thanks for your understanding and assistance. -->>>

Since very few people probably own both BetaCam SP and SX, all we can do is tout the benefits and drawbacks of the system we own or have owned.