Reality raises it's ugly head.

[Mike Tiffee]

Originally Posted by Richard Alvarez

HD is, for the present, a very very small percentage of home sets. Bears remembering.

The latest "official" figure in the US is 15%- but many estimate that it's closer to 20% as HDTV sets have been flying off the shelves since November. The forecast is for 26% by the end of this year - 1 in 4. The demand for HD content is forecast to triple in the next year.

Originally Posted by Tony Davies-Patrick

Ask a million households across USA and Europe if they own HD TV sets, and most will answer that they do not.

At least in the US, most would answer that they know someone who does and over 85% have seen HDTV.

Many broadcasters, especially in the sports world, are beginning to realize how "short-sighted" they're being by still producing in 4x3. One of the biggest issues we face (I'm a technical director for ABC Sports) when broadcasting live HD events is integrating pre-recorded (4x3) material into our show and making sure the aspect ratios are all correct. Consumers currently "tolerate" seeing 4x3 SD material mixed in with 16x9 HD material because the majority of what they can get is 4x3 SD, but as the ratio of SD to HD content improves, seeing SD material will become "unacceptable." The biggest consumer complaint regarding HDTV is how ugly SD looks on an HD set - and it's not just worse than HD, it's worse than SD on an SD set. I'm not saying SD content produced today will become obsolete in the future, but producing in HD certainly secures your content's longevity and value.

[Steve Rosen]

I've been shooting super16 for over 20 years and letterboxing the transfer to video.. the broadcasters were reluctant at first to air black bands - PBS actually rejected one of my films, said there were blanking issues and it didn't meet their boradcast standards - it took many heated phone conversations to get the show on the air.

But then in the mid-90's it became "cool", and shows that were shot on BetaSP were boxed in an effort to make them look more like film...

Then this year GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK was released in 1:66 (because of stock footage primarily) , and looks nearly 4x3 in some theaters.. go figure...

Yes, I am shooting HDV and keeping the 4x3 frame safe, something I've done for most of my professional life anyway...

The problem, in the case of the film that is intended for schools, is that it isn't fair to force kids to squint at a letterboxed program on an 18" (bad) SD TV just because I prefer the 16x9 shape... That's the part where reality gets ugly...

I'll sure be happy when I can place the subject on the extreme edge of the frame again... Steve Rosen

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

"...I'm not saying SD content produced today will become obsolete in the future, but producing in HD certainly secures your content's longevity and value..."

I would agree with that Mike. That is why I'm so interested in the H1.

The XL2 is probably the last of the DV models.

I'm not so concerned with 'live' sport, or news, etc, but more on hour slots on TV programs. There is some fear that a feature made with SD today may not be wanted in 2007 (and some finished projects can take 1-3 years or more just to get a place on a program schedule) - but I'm sure that a very well made project made on, say, an XL1 or XL2, would be taken in preference to one filmed badly on the H1, or edited badly.
Any completed project that excites the public viewer will win against a perfectly exposed but boring feature filmed using HD. But, I guess in a couple of years time, if two similar projects were filmed using both XL2 and H1, most potential buyers would opt to use the H1 material for their next prime viewing slot.

Another problem that has already been mentioned by Mike Teutsch, is that "...There are no readily available HD DVD players..."

[Mike Tiffee]

Originally Posted by Steve Rosen

I'll sure be happy when I can place the subject on the extreme edge of the frame again... Steve Rosen

Yes, that will be a great day. I notice that shows on PBS like NOVA frame on the extremes- they letterbox for SD and it looks fantastic on HD. So does primetime on the networks- more and more you're seeing letterboxed shows on SD.

A lot of people have produced shows in SD and letterboxed them for that widescreen effect- those shows are the ones that are going to look the worst in HD. You either air it 4:3 with black bars on the sides (which makes it look like a pip box in the middle of the screen since you have black bars on all sides- top,bottom,left,right) or you zoom the video. SD video on HD sets already looks terrible, now you're taking sub-SD resolution video and displaying it on an HD set. Now your show looks like an internet download.

2006 promises to be the year of HD-DVD and Blu-ray so hopefully by the end of 2006 we can start delivering HD content via disc. In 2007 a huge amount of content will become available and consumers will start grabbing these HD-DVD or Blu-ray players- especially the 25-30% of the population who has HD sets and have been dying for more HD material to watch. It costs $25-30 for two people to go to the movies now days, I know I'll pay $20-$25 to buy a 1080p copy of the movie to enjoy at home on my large screen and surround sound with a cold beer - and nobody kicking my seat.

[Kevin Wild]

Steve, I've been researching the HD workflow of late and the one that works best for me is a balance between file size for storage & throughput and quality. To me, for most of the coporate type work I do, I don't feel I have to go uncompressed HD. I think the quality of HDV native would be fine for them. However, I'm still not sold on editing using the HDV codec. (It's looked pretty good to me, but I haven't really pushed it yet with effects, layers, etc.)

So, the best codec for me that is very high quality HD but also decent file sizes is DVCProHD. This also enables me to capture and playback from off the shelf (hight end) firewire drives for a layer or two. It seems like a decent compromise and from what I've seen so far, looks incredible.

Hope this helps.

KW

[Steve Rosen]

Kevin: have you posted your process anywhere, like on the post-production forum? I'd be very interested, and I'm sure others would as well, in learning from your research... I researched the card you mentioned, and I want to be sure I need/want it before I pop $1600 for it.. Thanks for your comments...

Mike: Interestingly enough I myself made a film (ACCIDENTAL HERO - ROOM 408) that I shot 4X3 with my DSR 300 and put a letterbox on for effect. The film has been carried on the PBS National Program Schedule for the past few years, usually during Black History Month (it's about an African-American teacher near Oakland)...

Funny thing is, last month I screened (projected in a large theater, very good projector) a portion of that film (using the ZOOM mode) along with several others including a commercial shot with the new Sony (played directly from the Sony HDV deck)... this was for a film class at a university... I asked the students to evaluate the clips for visual effectiveness... more than 80% of the students thought the footage from the DSR 300 looked the best... Made me think, that's for sure... Didn't have my Canon yet, though... Steve Rosen

[Kristian Indrehus]

Originally Posted by Kevin Wild

Hey, Steve. If I were you, I would still shoot in HDV. I did some tests and I thought it looked great shooting in 16 x 9 HDV and then after editing, on the final pass scaling clips to 4 x 3. It looked better, KW

I agree with Kevin. My initial tests showed a clear improvement when downrezed to SD. Some of the quality will find it´s way all the way down to the VHS.

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Richard Alvarez

If you CAN'T make money with it now, then you are buying it for the thrill of being on the leading edge.. or should I say ''bleeding edge"?

Fair enough from a business perspective, but my point is that if you want the videos you shoot today to have maximum longetivity and the greatest future potential value, then it's time to start shooting in HD. Anything you shoot in SD (especially 4x3 SD) is going to look dated to anyone watching it a few years from now on a widescreen HDTV. Plus if you start shooting HD now, you'll have some material to show people when the time comes that they expect you to have HD samples. Nothing wrong with waiting if that's what fits your business plan, but don't wait too long...

[Mike Tiffee]

Originally Posted by Mike Teutsch

There are no readily available HD DVD players and when they do come out they are going to initially cost as much as their HDTV does, and very few will have them.

This DVD-HD player is due out at the end of next month, along with 20 DVD-HD movies, 200 movies will be available by year end- and almost certainly every movie released from now on beginning in 2007. Twice the cost? Show me that $250.00 HDTV! :-)

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....cat80500050007

[Jemore Santos]

Steve you use FCP right? well you know about DVD studio pro? well after you have encoded your film to mpeg2 you can have the settings on 4:3 when you export to DVD. Not too sure if they crop or stretch the pic. But have a look

[Steve Rosen]

Jemore: Thanks and, yes, I've tried that. I've also tried something a little wierd, and maybe it's a stupid way to do it, but it seems to work.

I import all my HDV files as downconverted, to either letterbox or 4x3 as I see fit. I edit the show in DV, with full use of the external monitors for picture and audio.

When I'm done with the edit, I export the final SD timeline with the mixed sound track as a QT movie for DVD and I Print to Tape, to DVCAM.

Then, and here's the weird part - I go back to the Browser and select all the clips I've actually used in the show - I reset my Sony deck from "Down Convert" to "HDV" - I reset my Preferences in FCP to HDV (using the Easy Setup) - I then recapture those original clips in HDV -

I then copy the edited timeline and past it into a new HDV Sequence. I import the mixed soundtrack from my SD file and paste it at the bottom of the timeline, turning off the original tracks.

Now, futzing around with image size of the 4x3 SD material and titles is needed, re-rendering is necessary, and there may be (I'm not sure of this yet) some minor TC issues with the Sony deck - but in the short tests I've done, I have basically replaced all of my downcoverted footage with HDV in an HDV timeline.. I then Print to Tape to the HDV recorder.

I end up with an SD master and an HDV master. If I need to, I can then go to a posthouse and Xfer to a more robust HD format using the picture from the HDV and the audio from the SD.

There probably is an easier way to do this, and if there is I'd like to know it... But with the software/hardware (FCP only, no other video card) I currrently have in my computer, this seems the best "lossless" way to end up with both an SD master and an HDV master - and a higher quality soundtrack... Steve Rosen

[Rob Lohman]

Why not bundle a $50 DVD player with the delivery of your project? At least it
will be a lot better than VHS.

[Steve Rosen]

Rob, I've thought about it actually, and am writing a grant to that effect... Steve Rosen

[Mike Teutsch]

I was actually thinking the other day, no jokes, while I was reading an article on a new HDDVD deck form Toshiba.

How about those who do the very high-end wedding videos and corporate videos include a new HD DVD player with their delivered product! Simply add the price of the player, $500.00 or $800.00 depending on the model right now.

Do you know how many cars a sold because they offer a new TV, vacation, or whatever in the advertisements? It is ridiculous, but people buy it!

So you have a wedding videographer who does a $6,000.00 wedding, and you simply change the price to $6500.00 and throw in a new HD DVD player. Great sales point!

Same for corporate and others, people are always looking for something free, or at least they think it is free! Of course it is never free.

The Toshiba is expected to be available in March, so not too long a wait now.

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/tech...tion-DVDs.html

Sounds interesting, so get your new advertising started.

Mike