I have heard various discussions saying it's impossible to put it on 35mm film because it shoots in 30p form.

Like stated here http://www.dvfilm.com/faq.htm (Scroll to the bottom)

So to end all discussions is that true? There is no way to transfer it to film for festival viewing? Or is there a way but it just looks like crap?

If the JVC cannot be transferred to film (thus no festival viewings), it would be pointless to get it for me.

I will then get the Panasonic AG-DVX100a because of the 24p can be transferred more easilly.

I prefer the look of the JVC and prefer it to the Panasonic. But in the end I need something that can be transferred to film or hdcam or some other format that is accepted in film fests.

So if anyone can shed some light on the whole JVC HD to 35mm thing, please do. If it is possible to do a transfer please tell me how, and where it can be done.

Thanks.

anything is transferrable to film, just depends what you are expecting.
35mm is far superior to any video signal, so even HD to film will not match real 35mm.
from the pure quality point of view, a 3CCD 24p will give better results than a HD monochip pulled down from 30p to 24p.

Oh, you could certainly transfer it to film, but it will look horrible. What you cannot do is successfully transfer it to film and have it look good.

(Or, tongue-in-cheek, you could transfer it frame-by-frame and it would look spectacular, but run 20% too slow. If you had everyone in your film act too fast and talk too fast, and then in post you slowed it down 20% (so it's running frame-accurate but 24fps) then you could probably get a great film transfer from it.)

Kind of a moot point though, as most festivals don't *require* a film print anymore. You can get in almost any festival in the world with a videotape. Might require a transfer up to HDCAM or over to BetaSP, but that's no big deal.

I figured it'd look horrible.

Most festivals takes VHS and DVD for entry. But if you get accepted you got to go to something else.

So the JVC can go to HDcam? If so can you give me a link to a transfer place (preferably canada). And the cost to go to HDCam?

And can the JVC go to HDCam and look good... that's the more important question.

actually the HD10 (as the name indicates) is a HD camera. if you select the HD feature on the switch.
it is not real HD (d5 : 1920x1080) but d4 (1280x720p).
it still a lot better than D1 at 720x480
please note that any HD feature implies wide screen 16/9 format.
this could be a problem when screen are set up for 4/3 projection.
despite higher resolution you movie could be projected at smaller size (4/3 with top and bottom black bars) than real 4/3 movies.

I just have to hop in here and correct what was just stated that this this camera is not true HD. It is true HD, 1280x720 is still an HD standard. Sorry, just had to fix that.

Bob,
Why don't you judge for yourself. A lot of super picky film tech geeks will poo poo the idea, but I think that the 30 converted by simple frame blending looks decent. A long time ago, when I first got the camera, I shot some skate board park footage hand held. This is worst case high motion stuff, with hands flailing all over the place, and the BG moving because of the camera motion.

Take a look at the HD10 converted 24 fps 9 meg 5mbps media 9 file I put here:

http://s95439504.onlinehome.us/skater-at-24.wmv

Tell me your opinion of the artifacts from converting 30fps to 24. In motion, like a real audience would see it. Not paused, movies don't pause. I'm curious what you think. Please don't comment on the crappy hand held camera work, I was just testing the camera out !

Just ask yourself the question: Would a 'regular' group of people see anything bothersome?
Remember, you will never see horrid interlace sawing edges, it's progressive to progressive.

-Les

you are right, D4 is HD, but no professional will accept to talk HD if it is not D5

Les Dit: I love the look of the JVC that's why I want to use it. The quality of your skater video was awesome. Did you use that DVFilmMaker program to convert to 24?

--------------

The bottom line is I need a camera that will be able to transfer to a theatrical film festival viewing format (35 or HDCAM).

I have no idea how to transfer to HDCAM or where I can go to do that, or if it's even affordable.

So If someone can let me know how to convert a finished feature using the JVC to HDCam (in Canada). That would solve all my problems.

I would love to skip the 35 mm thing and go to HDCam. I just assumed HDcam was hard to convert to...


Anyone with info on transferring your finished JVC shot movie on the Hdcam (and make it look good). Please tell me the steps and transfer places in Canada that can make this happen.

Thanks.

I do not really understand what you call HDcam.
Either you chose the digital way and make your shot with DV (hd or not) , edit it, and save on digital format (DV for standard video or D-VHS for HD video) or even upgraded to Betacam format.
Or you choose the tape to film way, that could be 16mm or 35mm.
for video, the 16mm should be a lot cheaper and give good result.
You need to know if the target audience is able to provide the equipment to project your media.
16 or 35mm is easy as most of theater have some projector but film festival are sometime limited to video only.
HD video is too new to expect to find D-VHS reader and HD capable video projector easily.

Hdcam is a format by Sony. That most film festivals (sundance, telluride, etc) accept as a medium beside the conventional 35mm.

It's a different format, all I know is the the option is there for viewing format on the Sundance application.

I have no idea or knowledge about the Sony HdCam format besides that. All I know is that it's another format for your film to be shown on instead of 35mm.

There are tools such as Twixtor or Algolith's plugins. People have reported great sucess with those. It does take some experimentation and render time but I have heard the results are nice. Techniques such as shooting low motion scenes help. Or if you are going to do some high motion, shoot in the 60p mode just for those clips. 60p transfers well to 24p and the loss in resolution won't be noticed as much because of the action.

Secondly I would rather overcome the 30p to 24p issue than place 4:3 SD onto the big screen. 720p is not that far from 1080i once it has been deinterlaced, and we all know how well that can look on the big screen. Loosing resolution due to letter boxing a SD 4:3 really cuts the resolution down, or stong aliasing when the pixels are stretched to a 16:9 frame. If you don't think SD looks like crap on the big screen you must have been watching one amazing story.

"Most festivals takes VHS and DVD for entry. But if you get accepted you got to go to something else."

Not necessarily. Many festivals have digital projection. 24p 30p and sometimes even 60p are accomidated. I would estimate that digital projection will be mainstream at festivals soon. It keeps costs down and they get far more submissions. Way more people are shooting on video these days rather than film. Anyone notice?

"you are right, D4 is HD, but no professional will accept to talk HD if it is not D5"

BS.

HDCam is a deck recording format. Any transfer house that supports HDCam would gladly take your digital video in uncompressed format. A firewire drive would be a good way to transfer. Or rent a deck yourself!
If they accept HDCam then that means they have a digital projector. If they have a digital projector that means they can project your HD10 film at 30p. 720p ;>)

Francois, you are mistaken.

Many professionals actually prefer 720p over 1080i because the progressive scan actually provides a more real and lifelike image than the interlaced scan. In fact, with 720p there are more horizontal scan lines on the screen at any one moment than with 1080i. (720 vs 540)

Sports programming, in my opinion, looks unbelievably "life like" in 720p. That's just one of the reasons why ESPN and ABC (my network) have chosen to broadcast in 720p.

-Chris Gordon
Producer
KABC-TV Los Angeles

Bob, in response to your questions, I think you should forget about the filmprint concerns. Most major festivals will take video copies to screen. Some will take HD, some will ask for BetaSp. But only a small few will demand a film print.

"If they accept HDCam then that means they have a digital projector. If they have a digital projector that means they can project your HD10 film at 30p. 720p ;>)"

Isn't HDCam only 1080?
You could have your HD10 film projected at 30p, in upconverted 1080.


-Luis


PS.

I will second Ken's "BS" comment on D4 vs. D5.
Every pro I know considers the Varicam to shoot HD, and that's a 720p format.

And by the way, isn't there more to D1, D4, & D5 than just resolution?
D1 as I understood it was uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2 720x480.
I'll take that over HDV any day.

You could Analog component out from the cam to a SDI convertor to HDCam deck. Or upconvert. No loss there. But I have a feeling that HDCam could probably accept 720p natively.

Bob, just buy the PAL equivalent from a reputable online vendor...

http://www.jvc.co.uk/product.php?id=GR-PD1EK&catid=11&lid=,

I believe it'll shoot at 25p and be easier to convert to 24p.

Most film festivals allow your film to be shown on Digi Beta or even DVD these days... so why spend your retirement money on a 35mm transfer?

In a couple of years time, it'll all be HD anyway, and we'll all wonder why we used film in the first place.

Ta, Doug.

Bob, I used Vegas and just told it to render at 24 fps.
Works for me.
Sometimes the simple method does just fine.
With less camera shake ( the OIS on the JVC is sheer crap, BTW ) the footage would look a lot nicer.

There is no PAL version of the JVC that shoots 1280 x 720 video. They crippled it on purpose, to protect their pro market.
-Les



<<<-- Originally posted by Bob James : Les Dit: I love the look of the JVC that's why I want to use it. The quality of your skater video was awesome. Did you use that DVFilmMaker program to convert to 24?

--------------




Thanks. -->>>

There is no D1 with 10 bit.
D1 is uncompressed 8 bit YUV 4:2:2.
Digital Betacam is 10 bit, but has lossy compression.(although after 5 generations I still can't see an artifact)

Thanks guys. I will be going with the JVC over the Panasonic. I found a place locally to rent a HDCam deck. So I'll transfer to that in the end.


Thanks again.

Originally posted by Les Dit : There is no PAL version of the JVC that shoots 1280 x 720 video. They crippled it on purpose, to protect their pro market.
Er, more likely it's because there's no such thing as HD in Europe and other PAL countries. Not now, and no real appetite for it in the future.

Protect what pro market? JVC makes (or made) D-9 cameras and equipment, but they don't make any HD product. What market would they be protecting? If they were purposefully crippling it to protect their D-9 product, why wouldn't they have crippled it in the US as well?

Barry,
I'm not up to speed on HD in the EU, but I do remember a few years back that pretty much all the TV sets I saw in the dept. stores were wide screen over there.

I think in the US, they felt that the 30 fps and the lack of manual controls for exposure would be crippling enough. Leaving off manual controls is so strategic. It was no blunder.

You do know that JVC ( Victor company of Japan, Ltd ) is mostly owned by Matsushita, that also owns Panasonic. So they do have HD cams to protect, you bet!

-Les

I live in a PAL country. I have a healthy HD appetite... as do millions of others.

I believe the HD DVD format has just been decided, so it's just a matter of time.

I currently shoot SD, as my target distribution channel is DVD... as soon as HD DVDs are commonplace, I'll be jumping on the HD camera bandwagon (and by that time they'll have more than halved in price).

For the record, the Australians are the biggest early adopters of technology. PAL vs NTSC?! PAL wins every time... feel free to sling mud!

it makes no sens to oppose PAL to NTSC when speaking digital video.
DV has no PAL or NTSC, it just differs by the number of vertical lines (480 versus 576) and frame speed (25 versus 30).
so we still refer to PAL or NTSC to make conversation easy but with HD the difference is even smaller as both format share the same size and just differs by the frame rate.
PAL is a big advantage for tape to film , because the frame rate and the better resolution and it is probably why europe is not in a hurry to go HD. Pal is good enough for most consumer.
If you are looking for HD, there is no reason to wait.
JVC has a cheap HD D4 camera and it works.
Anyway if you plan for HD, probably you will use equipment that is in the upper range of prosumer devices. Usually this range of equipement is multistandard and do not really care if you are 25 or 30 fps, as the spectator does not really care either.
for european like us, 30 fps is better than 25, so why should i bother. I will if i need to go on media that are national -standard-aware like vhs but it is unlikely the case. At worse i will distribute on DVD, that is multistandard in europe for must consumer, as we are looking for zone 1 dvd a lot.
Canon announce there will be probably no HD cam before end of life of the new XL2. that means about 1 year and half minimum.
sony will probably follow canon, so do not expect a model before one year.
Panasonic will probably leave it to JVC as they belong to the same group.
Additionally these 3 companies will go for 3 CCD and the camera will cost the hell (probably 3 time the price of the 2000$ jvc).

The only regret for the JVC, it is 720p but a 30fps not 60 as it should be.

"DV has no PAL or NTSC"

Yes it does. It differs by resolutio, frame rate, and colour space. Thats as different as you can get.
HD does not have PAL or NTSC, as it is a global format.

"Anyway if you plan for HD, probably you will use equipment that is in the upper range of prosumer devices."

The JVC HD10 is the only cam in this group which is called HDV. All other HD equipment is fully in the Professional class due to its new car or house price tags.

I'm not up to speed on HD in the EU, but I do remember a few years back that pretty much all the TV sets I saw in the dept. stores were wide screen over there.
Widescreen, yes. Europe loves widescreen and the market penetration of 16:9 sets is something like 50% over there (vs. about 3% in the US). But not HD. There is, last I checked, no HD even on the radar for the EU. Consumers are plenty content with widescreen PAL.


I think in the US, they felt that the 30 fps and the lack of manual controls for exposure would be crippling enough. Leaving off manual controls is so strategic. It was no blunder.
I'm not so sure about that one. Take a look at the Sony HC1000 (or whatever it's called), the new successor to the TRV950. No manual controls of any type actually on the camera, although there's some access to controls through a touchscreen menu. I think it may be just due to a certain marketing mentality over there as to what the "consumer" wants, and the HD1 was clearly aimed only at the consumer. The HD10 was an afterthought because they so thoroughly misjudged the appetite over here (among professionals) for an affordable HD camera.

You do know that JVC ( Victor company of Japan, Ltd ) is mostly owned by Matsushita, that also owns Panasonic. So they do have HD cams to protect, you bet!
Yeah, but... not really. There's almost no product sharing between the two companies. The DV2500 and BR-DV3000 decks are identical, but I don't think anything else is. And Matsushita is so unwieldly huge that I doubt they even *know* they own both companies! :) They did share development of D9/Digital-S and and DVCPRO50, which are the same format... so there is a little collaboration... but that "protect the higher end" philosophy has failed at every company that's ever tried it. Sony's learning the hard way now: not giving the customer what they want is not good for business. And since Panasonic & JVC are owned by the same parent, how would that "protect the high end" philosophy explain the DVX100? There's a camera where the manufacturer is laying it all on the table, giving us everything we could want in a $3500 camera, and it's selling like hotcakes. And so is its big brother the SDX. Heck, Panasonic even revised the DVX to give us even *more* features, even though no new competitor had been released.

The two corporate philosophies ("protect the high end" vs. "give 'em what they want") couldn't be more different. And Panasonic does have a high end to protect, the SDX is 8x as expensive as the DVX, yet there's nothing crippled or artificially hampered about the DVX. I don't think JVC "intentionally" crippled the HD1, I think they just absolutely and completely misjudged the market. And I think that's more evidenced by the announced follow-up camera: three-ccd, 2/3", HDV, interchangeable lenses, 24P, at a price $7,000 below the SDX. They learned, and they are adapting. I think the HD1 was just a mistake on their part, certainly not evidence of some evil corporate conspiracy to keep the good stuff out of the hands of the little guy.

<<<-- Originally posted by Barry Green : Er, more likely it's because there's no such thing as HD in Europe and other PAL countries. Not now, and no real appetite for it in the future.
-->>>

You may notice from my member location that I'm from a PAL country....so why in God's name did I buy a HD10?
Maybe it's because for the last 2 years I've been watching HD (1080i and 720p) broadcasts on FTA TV!!!! I have done so via STB and Visionplus DVB-t PCI. Australia was incidentally the first country to receive the Visionplus, due to the high HD take-up rate for such a relatively small population.

When JVC announced a PAL version of the cam I was excited at the prospect of 720p 25fps HD, until I saw the specs. What a letdown. I'm sure semi-professional videographers in Europe felt the same sinking feeling I did over the PD1.

The simple fact is that HD is not just a North American phenomenon....although I'm sure there may be a few parochial individuals who would want others to believe so.

As for JVC's attitude in 'knobbling' the PD1....I can only wonder. The cam is fundamentally identical to it's NTSC antecedants, so shooting 720p at 25fps should have presented few technical difficulties.

There is obviously a lot of corporate handshaking going on behind the scenes. No 720p on the PAL model is/was deliberate. Some may say that 25p is not part of the HDV spec, true but not technically a barrier. 24p is/was available. And don't give me the JVC didn't expect such responce. Really? Every indie filmaker across the planet has been screaming for this. Do ya think it missed the focus group?
Why limited manual controls? Why no competing cams in the market place?
Deals have been made. Market segments discussed. Because Pana and JVC don't have the same products does not mean they are not directed by a higher body. Different market segments for each means more money and devided corporate loyaties. And cam purchases have to be among the most corporate centic purchasers in the world.
HD has to be protected. Its a cash cow. HDV is crippled for a reason. There are a lot of oil companies, but why does gas always cost the same? You don't think they co-operate on the market palce? Wake up and smell the 21st 20th/19th/18th ect..century.
The HD10 is the cat out of the bag. It's a smelly beaten cat, but it is also the best dam cat around.
Sorry for the rant but I've just had enough of this naive corporate acceptance. You will get the cam you dream of when and only when they want to give it to you. Take what you can get and make it work ;>)

Originally posted by Ken Hodson : Some may say that 25p is not part of the HDV spec, true but not technically a barrier. 24p is/was available.
Actually, 720/25p IS part of the HDV spec. 24P is not, but 25P is.

And don't give me the JVC didn't expect such responce. Really? Every indie filmaker across the planet has been screaming for this. Do ya think it missed the focus group?
JVC may or may not know what indie filmmakers want, but they certainly didn't design THIS camera to fill that market niche.

They did design this cam to fill a market niche. If they didn't the HD10 would not exist. Why it isn't the full featured cam we all dreamed of? Read my above post.

Let's please get back on track here about HD10 footage to 35 mm film. Talking about HD in Europe would best be done at our TOTEM forum. (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=3)

heath

hi everybody. first of all, thanks a lot for the useful information and tips that usually i find here. i have learned so much great things that helped me a lot in my projects! i am a documentaries filmmaker that is planning right now his first movie that is something in between a fiction film and a documentary. it touches our recently history of violence, corruption, inequity and have strong social issues that certainly will do very dificulty the distribution process. i am sure about it. for that reason i am trying to take another way. i have one hd10 and would love transfer to 35mm for teatrical exhibition (things here sometimes are harder but in other ways are easier)... with a first 35mm copy you can find for sure a group of theathers and market your movie.
i have a lot of concerns for the 30p to 24p issue. whatever my budget is so small so i will try a home-made kinetoscopy. i will rent the best plasma hd monitor that can be found, and film directly the finished movie with a 35mm camera and maybe an 80mm lens. i have a lot of questions and i am really scared about throw my money with an experiment that could be a completly disaster! in the other hand i feel so much passion for this history in particular and you know guys that everybody here love the things that we do. any comments? i am trying to find as much information as is possible about this process. PLEASE HELP ME WITH YOUR KNOWLEDGE!!!

Thanks in advance,

Alberto Suarez
asuarez2001@yahoo.com

(i just began to study english some months ago so please excuse me for grammar mistakes, spelling, etcetera, ok?)

Alberto,

I merged your post into this thread. Check out some of the replies here.

hwm