|
|||||||||
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#16 |
Major Player
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
|
That's true DVD Studio Pro 3 is outstanding, much better than Encore.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 444
|
So now that Final Cut Pro HDV has come out what do we all think? Is HDV editing better with Apple or is it still better to convert to HD? Or are PCs still the way to go?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 2,488
|
Sounds to me like Apple has done a respectable job of implementing native HDV editing, but as predicted that's limited by the inherent problems of using HDV as an editing codec. In particular, you need a lot of processing power to edit HDV directly without rendering or compromising preview quality, and I've already seen at least one report of visible editing artifacts. So if you have a fast G5 Mac then the new FCP solution is definitely worth a look, but if you have a PC you have a wider range of HDV solutions which should suit most people's needs just fine. Nothing's really changed much, except Apple can finally say they have a decent HDV solution.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Katoomba NSW Australia
Posts: 635
|
Quote:
HDV is a 'sub-set' of HD. So much confusing stuff for people who really do want to discern the truth about what they face with this 'new' video format, it doesn't help to muddy the waters even further. Don't confuse the codecs used for the carriage of the digital data for the standard itself. MPEG2 is used for HD transport and transmission. Are you suggesting that the current 'Over-the-Air' broadcasters are providing sub-standard HD because they too use MPEG2; just like HDV does? Sometimes gotta wonder how much HD/HDV material people who make such sweeping statements of condemnation have actually seen on true HD capable equipment. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 444
|
Well, Kevin in answer to your question, I got a new credit card just to buy an editing computer and I'm trying to decide between Mac an PC for HD/HDV editing with my FX1. Even though I hate how expensive Apples are I'm slightly leaning to them so that I can get good at a marketable skill like Final Cut.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 842
|
Quote:
Until then we're just speculating and going by 'reports we've heard'. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 607
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 2,488
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 2,488
|
Quote:
The FX1 costs about $3000 and can record one hour of 1080i video on a $3 miniDV tape. The HVX200 will cost $6000 and can record eight minutes of 720p video on a $1700 memory card, plus you need some way to offload the data from those cards to a more affordable storage device and someone to manage that process while another person runs the camera. Clearly these are not comparable in terms of either price or workflow. And although most of us here will probably be able to spot the difference between HDV and DVCProHD, that difference won't be as noticeable to most people as the difference between HDV and DV on a good HDTV display. So HDV will definitely have a place for affordable high-definition videography, and people who can afford $1700 memory cards will enjoy using the Panny. Which is more desirable depends on your budget and intended audience. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| ||||||
|
|