Photo JPEG codec vs. HDV codec vs. Cineform HD

[Tyson Persall]

This is my understanding... I would like to know more...
So I have read that the Photo JPEG codec is superior to HDV.
Photo JPEG is used by blackmagic in the Intensity card and others. (?)
Photo JPEG is almost indestiguishable from uncompressed HD, yet it only requires a bit rate of 12mb/s compared to Uncompressed HD which is 115mb/s.
I read elsewhere that there is only a 3% difference in the visual quality of photo JPEG vs. uncompresed HD. Also, photo JPEG has better color than HDV.

So... Whats the story behind Photo JPEG codec? IF its so good why dont we have Photo JPEG cameras instead of HDV? And how does it compare to cineform HD? I know there is a camera in the works that is suposed to capture to cineform HD codec (right?). What are the downsides to photo JPEG> Every codec seems to have a down side. Is there any benifit to convert HDV footage to photo JPEG?

[David Tamés]

Originally Posted by Tyson Persall

IF its so good why dont we have Photo JPEG cameras instead of HDV?

Photo JPEG would take up more storage than HDV. HDV was developed as a tape format with the design criteria of (a) use existing DV tape (b) use MPEG compression in order to maintain the same data rate as DV codec. And, of course, HDV was developed by manufacturers with a vested interest in selling tape. HDV extends the life of DV tape manufacturing plants.