25mb/s is it dvcam quality ? at DVinfo.net

Mark Moreve · January 28th, 2011, 02:58 PM

A quick question. I'm shooting a job in China which is going directly to web and the editor I'm working with has said that it takes a long time to render the XF305 files @ 1920 x 1080 50mb/s so I thought as it's going direct to web and I want to make his life easier that it would be better to shoot 1920 x 1080 25 mb/s which I'm pretty sure is still better quality than PAL dvcam which is 625 lines @ 25mb/s am I wrong ? Or would it be better to go down the 1920 x 720 35mb/s route. Not that the client has asked for better quality than dvcam I just wanted to be able to give a bench mark that the client would understand.
We are going to need a quick turnaround on this shoot as I will be shooting during the day and then the editor is going to have to edit and post it on the web that night. hence why I want to help with his render times.
Thanks
Mark

Chris Hurd · January 28th, 2011, 04:09 PM

Actually it's significantly better than DVCAM quality...

Nick Wilcox-Brown · January 28th, 2011, 04:47 PM

I think I might be inclined towards 720p if it is web only?

Robin Davies-Rollinson · January 28th, 2011, 05:10 PM

Agreed.
He'd get more recording time as well as battery time too.
The quality is more than enough for the web - in fact, it would look excellent...

Jeff Anselmo · January 28th, 2011, 05:20 PM

Hi Mark,

Just curious what PC or Mac specs your editor in China will be running?

As you mentioned that a fast turnaround time will be an issue, I hope that your editor has enough power to grind through Canon's MXF files.

And if your final distro/output will be for the web, then I do agree with Nick and Robin that 720p should be good enough. Although for archiving purposes, I'm always inclined to shoot with the highest resolution you can with any camera, and downconvert for specific delivery purposes (DVD, BluRay, web, etc.)

Good luck,

Mark Moreve · January 29th, 2011, 03:30 PM

Great Thanks I'll suggest we go 720 @ 35 mb/s. The editor is using a fairly new Mac Book Pro with FCP.
Thanks
Mark

Nick Wilcox-Brown · February 2nd, 2011, 02:44 AM

Jeff,

Totally agree with you - I'm a believer in capturing the maximum quality, editing and then choosing the delivery format. In this case though I think the 720 / 35Mbs is a good choice.

January 28th, 2011, 02:58 PM	#1
Mark Moreve Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: london Posts: 125	25mb/s is it dvcam quality ? A quick question. I'm shooting a job in China which is going directly to web and the editor I'm working with has said that it takes a long time to render the XF305 files @ 1920 x 1080 50mb/s so I thought as it's going direct to web and I want to make his life easier that it would be better to shoot 1920 x 1080 25 mb/s which I'm pretty sure is still better quality than PAL dvcam which is 625 lines @ 25mb/s am I wrong ? Or would it be better to go down the 1920 x 720 35mb/s route. Not that the client has asked for better quality than dvcam I just wanted to be able to give a bench mark that the client would understand. We are going to need a quick turnaround on this shoot as I will be shooting during the day and then the editor is going to have to edit and post it on the web that night. hence why I want to help with his render times. Thanks Mark

January 28th, 2011, 04:09 PM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Actually it's significantly better than DVCAM quality... __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

January 28th, 2011, 04:47 PM	#3
Nick Wilcox-Brown Major Player Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Bristol, UK Posts: 231	I think I might be inclined towards 720p if it is web only? __________________ Nick Wilcox-Brown, Film-maker and Photographer https://nickwb.com https://wildphotographer.co.uk

January 28th, 2011, 05:10 PM	#4
Robin Davies-Rollinson Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Gwaelod-y-garth, Cardiff, CYMRU/WALES Posts: 1,215	Agreed. He'd get more recording time as well as battery time too. The quality is more than enough for the web - in fact, it would look excellent... __________________ TV Director / Cameraman

January 28th, 2011, 05:20 PM	#5
Jeff Anselmo Major Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 566	Hi Mark, Just curious what PC or Mac specs your editor in China will be running? As you mentioned that a fast turnaround time will be an issue, I hope that your editor has enough power to grind through Canon's MXF files. And if your final distro/output will be for the web, then I do agree with Nick and Robin that 720p should be good enough. Although for archiving purposes, I'm always inclined to shoot with the highest resolution you can with any camera, and downconvert for specific delivery purposes (DVD, BluRay, web, etc.) Good luck, __________________ --JA

January 29th, 2011, 03:30 PM	#6
Mark Moreve Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: london Posts: 125	Great Thanks I'll suggest we go 720 @ 35 mb/s. The editor is using a fairly new Mac Book Pro with FCP. Thanks Mark

February 2nd, 2011, 02:44 AM	#7
Nick Wilcox-Brown Major Player Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Bristol, UK Posts: 231	Jeff, Totally agree with you - I'm a believer in capturing the maximum quality, editing and then choosing the delivery format. In this case though I think the 720 / 35Mbs is a good choice. __________________ Nick Wilcox-Brown, Film-maker and Photographer https://nickwb.com https://wildphotographer.co.uk