HDV 25mbps Im confused

[Robert Silvers]

Let me rephrase that to say you will need to be creating content for HD-DVD or BluRay starting next year, but yes -- also putting stuff on DVDs for compatibility.

But do you really want to ONLY be putting stuff out on DVDs in 2 years?

[Robert Silvers]

Then again, I know a wedding videographer still using an AG465 S-VHS camera. His web page describes it as 'state of the art industrial video equipment.'

[Ken Hodson]

"HDV approaches it differently, encoding entire groups of 15 frames in one block, by encoding only one frame discretely, and encoding the following 14 frames as variations/differences from the first frame in the group."

Is that how it works on the Sony? The HD10 uses a 6 frame GOP in 30p or a 12 frame GOP when shooting 60p.

Barry "If you're going to be distributing on DVD, no, the FX1 is a step backwards for that."

Why do you say that? It has been my experience that Downsampling from a higher rez source (eg. film/HD) will always give a better final product than a SD souced one, especially if it is DV based.

[Barry Green]

But do you really want to ONLY be putting stuff out on DVDs in 2 years?

As a producer, I want to be putting my product on whatever format will sell, and that which will reach the customer. It will be many years before HD-DVD/blu-ray will be much more than a niche market, whereas DVD is a worldwide standard.

It's like the conversion to digital projection in theaters -- people have been talking about it, predicting it, trying to force it, yet it remains completely non-viable. If you want to release a film on this planet, to show in theaters, it has to be on 35mm film. 35mm film will play in basically every theater in the world, whereas digital projection as a distribution medium occupies -- what, 1/10 of 1% of the theaters out there? People may love the idea of digital projection, but it is not reality, and doesn't look to become reality any time soon.

So it will be with HD-DVD and blu-ray... may be promising new technology, but it's not a realistic distribution medium yet, nor will it be a substantial distribution medium for years to come.

[Barry Green]

Is that how it works on the Sony? The HD10 uses a 6 frame GOP in 30p or a 12 frame GOP when shooting 60p.

Yes, the Sony uses much longer GOP's, 15 frames at a time. It's not a Sony vs. JVC thing, it's part of the HDV standard, so any camera that employs 1080i HDV will use a GOP of 15, any camera that employs HDV 720/30P will use a GOP of 6.

Barry "If you're going to be distributing on DVD, no, the FX1 is a step backwards for that."

Why do you say that? It has been my experience that Downsampling from a higher rez source (eg. film/HD) will always give a better final product than a SD souced one, especially if it is DV based.

I base it on direct observation, having shot with the three cameras side-by-side, all three mounted on the same tripod shooting the same scene under the same lighting conditions, then split-screening the footage and making DVD's of the footage.

I then watched that footage on a computer DVD player, on a conventional interlaced television, and finally on a 10' screen projected by an LCD projector using component inputs from the DVD player.

I've posted a number of pictures and commentary on another site, and I've talked with Chris about publishing the full camera comparison review article here on DVInfo.

In my observation, there is no benefit to added HDV resolution when the image is resized to DVD resolution, yet the HDV camera still exhibits much less light sensitivity (a good two to three stops slower than the DVX, about 1 to 1.5 stops slower than an XL2) with less latitude as well. You get no additional benefit of image sharpness, but you take steps backward in low light performance, overall sensitivity, filmlike motion rendition, audio connectivity, etc. The FX1 can put out a great picture on an interlaced HD 1080i monitor, that's for sure... but by the time you make a DVD out of it, you could make a better-looking DVD from the DVX or XL2.

If your intended distribution medium is HD broadcast, or HD-DVD to the portion of the market who can play that, or on a private display system (such as a corporation's own HDTV system in their lobby, etc) then the FX1 makes wonderful high-res footage. But if it's for distribution to the mass market through DVD, the DVX and XL2 do a better job.

[Ken Hodson]

Interesting. That is not my experience at all. My one worry was that HDV wouldn't help when converted to standard DVD, but this is not proven to be the case. The higher resolution has allowed much more detail even when downsampled as well as eliminating aliasing that is so obvious from DV cams.
If increased resolution wasn't a benefit than film put on DVD wouldn't look much better than those shot on SD. This clearly isn't the case.