Is HDV pointless unless you have an HDTV?

[Roland Gatto]

is there no point in taping in hdv unless you have a hd-enabled monitor/screen to watch the footage on?

[David Garvin]

Originally Posted by Roland Gatto

is there no point in taping in hdv unless you have a hd-enabled monitor/screen to watch the footage on?

I know that people say or imply things like that, but I disagree. I don't have an HD enabled screen and I can tell you that I can definitely see the amazing clarity and resolution difference between HDV and DV footage.

[Wes Vasher]

I'm using my HV20 for effects shots... I have no HD capable display.

[Joe Busch]

Not really, most computer monitors today can display 1280x720 no problem... 1920 x 1080 is slightly harder to get...

[Oliver Reik]

Hi!

Originally Posted by Roland Gatto

is there no point in taping in hdv unless you have a hd-enabled monitor/screen to watch the footage on?

I have a 21" monitor, set to a resolution of 1280 x 1024. As I do many, but very short movies of about 2 to 5 minutes, I usually watch them on my computer. For this reason I render all footage to 1280 x 720 and receive a absolutely outstanding quality. HDV is also great to downconvert it to PAL / NTSC with a great output quality. And - If you have your stuff recorderd in HDV you can always downconvert it, if you have no device to watch it on and still have the source material in full resolution for the future.

If SD is all you have, you will never be able to make HDV out of it. ;-)

I record and edit everything in HDV, afterwards I render it in the original size with 25 mbps for my archive for future use and to the formats I need right now, what usually is 1280 x 720 or PAL.

Regards,

Oliver

[Pieter Jongerius]

Because of the much higher original resolution you suffer much less from imperfections on pixel level such as noise, charge bleeding, maybe fringing, but most of all color resolution decrease because of the primary color filter and YUV 4:2:0 color compression, etc. That is provided you shoot in HD and go SD in post. My guess is you will see the difference!

[Roland Gatto]

Oliver, you make a good point about being able to downgrade to SD, but not upgrade to HD.

Thanks for the responses, folks!

[Ken Ross]

I can't begin to explain the difference between seeing the output of an HV20 on a non-HDTV and a true HDTV. To say the difference is dramatic is an understatement. You can't begin to see the power of this tiny tool until you see its output on a nice sized HDTV.

[David Garvin]

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

I can't begin to explain the difference between seeing the output of an HV20 on a non-HDTV and a true HDTV. To say the difference is dramatic is an understatement.

When you say "non-HDTV", are you meaning an SDTV? Or are you referring to any kind of screen that's not an HDTV.

My computer monitor falls into the non-HDTV category and, as I said in my initial post here, I disagree with the assertion that there's no point in shooting HDV unless you own an HD monitor because the difference between HDV and SD images on my computer monitor are extremely obvious.

[Wes Vasher]

Originally Posted by Joe Busch

Not really, most computer monitors today can display 1280x720 no problem... 1920 x 1080 is slightly harder to get...

That's true of course. I work at 1600x1200 on my CRT and that is more than enough to play the native 1440x1080 HDV files.

[Bill Ritter]

My video shot in HDV (Canon XH A1) edited in Prem Pro 2 and then exported at DV is definitely superior to the video shot in DV by my GL-2 and XL-1s. I am now spoiled by HD, all DV shot by any of my camcorders just seem less vivid. However, the DV product is definitely better starting at a resolution better than a studio cam and downscaled in Post gives max SD resolution vs DV at only 500 vs 700 max SD.


Bill in Ohio

[Tom Roper]

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

I can't begin to explain the difference between seeing the output of an HV20 on a non-HDTV and a true HDTV. To say the difference is dramatic is an understatement. You can't begin to see the power of this tiny tool until you see its output on a nice sized HDTV.

Ken's right. Displaying HDV on a high resolution computer monitor is far less satisfying than on a proper HDTV. Yes, you can see it in full resolution, but a larger screen HDTV with home entertainment quality deinterlacing makes HDV a stunning presentation. And if you have an HV20 with its HDMI output, even better.

[Joe Busch]

Originally Posted by Wes Vasher

That's true of course. I work at 1600x1200 on my CRT and that is more than enough to play the native 1440x1080 HDV files.

Psh...

I run at 2048 x 1280 and my second screen at 1280 x 1024...

I used to run at 1920 x 1200... but went a bit higher :)

Highest my monitor can do is like 2330 x 1440

24" Widescreen CRT ;)

[Ken Ross]

Originally Posted by David Garvin

When you say "non-HDTV", are you meaning an SDTV? Or are you referring to any kind of screen that's not an HDTV.

My computer monitor falls into the non-HDTV category and, as I said in my initial post here, I disagree with the assertion that there's no point in shooting HDV unless you own an HD monitor because the difference between HDV and SD images on my computer monitor are extremely obvious.

Yes David, I'm talking about a typical NTSC standard definition TV. I'm not saying there's no point in buy an HDV camcorder if you don't have an HDTV, but I am saying that you can't begin to see the power of the tool until you have one.

I am all for shooting your memories in HD even if you don't have an HDTV since that HD tape will always be ready to expose its full glory when you do buy an HDTV. And let's face it, you eventually will have an HDTV. :)

[Wes Vasher]

Originally Posted by Joe Busch

Psh...

I run at 2048 x 1280 and my second screen at 1280 x 1024...

I used to run at 1920 x 1200... but went a bit higher :)

Highest my monitor can do is like 2330 x 1440

24" Widescreen CRT ;)

Yeah... well... I have a mouse with blinky lights! So there. :)