A technologists view of HDV

[Paul Doherty]

At the start of this thread John said that one flaw of HDV is that your camerawork has to be done with the disadvantages of MPEG compression in mind. I suspect that many of us working with DV are already doing that because the final viewing format is DVD (and obviously with a much lower data rate than HDV).

It will be interesting to see what Panasonic do. Bill says they're
"already making noises about a 100 MBps fixed lens tapeless acquistion model". That sounds significantly better than the FX1/Z1, but if it's comparably priced to the Z1 it will knock a hole in Panasonics Pro sales. Still if Panasonic don't do something in the fairly near future this particular market segment will go to HDV.

[Rhett Allen]

Hey, didn't we already have this discussion before with VHS/Beta and then again with SVHS/Hi8 for consumers anyway (the pro market was dealing more with 3/4", 1" and Betacam, DigiBeta and BetacamSX)

It's pretty funny to think about what we will look back at in a few years and call crap. One day soon, you will all agree that both DV and HDV suck and aren't worthy anymore. But what will that image look like then? Hmmmm what's next?

[Alexander Benesch]

HDV in its present form would strongly limit me in terms of what I can shoot with it. With the sony I can shoot "talking heads" in supreme sharpness but as soon as I want slightly "quicker" pans or I shoot action I'll get disappointing results. Mini DV tapes?? This medium limits the whole technology, a 25 mbit/s MPEG2 capturing of what I shoot is supposed to handle the high resolution?!?

So when Sony goes blue-ray with the cameras, will it still be 25 mbit/s despite the better suited medium?

Panasonic has built incredibly accomplished SD DV cams and I trust they'll come up with a better standard of their own. The average consumer of course gets nervous when there is more than one available system but nowadays it shouldn't be such an issue anymore, material shot with a sony HDV camcorder can be edited on the same computer and displayed on the same HD screen as what you've shot with a future Panasonic HD camcorder that uses a different technology.

I wanna shoot my movies in high definition, period.
And I'll choose the best HD camcorder I can get, regardless of the system or manufacturer.

[Bill Anderson]

Heath, you misunderstand, I posit no argument but simply my observations. I am already impressed by HDV, DV, and HiDef- not to mention film-technologies. I am indeed speculating and I made that quite clear. However, these speculations are based upon very reliable sources within the camera manufacturing industry, even then I am hesitant. The mistake you are making is in the belief that my speculation is my desire. Not so. If I see a lame duck waddling over a busy highway I may predict that it's going to get flattened, but at the same time not desire this. The more formats the better, as far as I'm concerned because I choose formats for their unique qualities, relevant to a given film project.

[Heath McKnight]

Bill,

No sweat.

Alexander,

I would recommend grabbing the camera if you can, and give it a test run. I had very little issues, though ripples in a lake was a bit weird with the compression. Also, it's 25 mbps to get onto mini-dv tapes so we won't have to buy an all new tape format. More money for the companies because they have DV and HDV formats using the same tapes and no R&D for said companies to develop new tapes. But here's a question: why is JVC's HD10 and HD1 19mbps?!

heath

[Toke Lahti]

<<<-- Originally posted by Rhett Allen: It's pretty funny to think about what we will look back at in a few years and call crap. One day soon, you will all agree that both DV and HDV suck and aren't worthy anymore. -->>>

Well, digibeta has been around more than decade and it's still the only cameratape that has 10bit colors.
And I wouldn't call even analog beta a bad quality.
Their prices just never dropped. Lack of competition...

But how many p2 cards you can stick inside that pana's small hd100 camera and how many seconds you can shoot with them?

[Bill Anderson]

"But how many p2 cards you can stick inside that pana's small hd100 camera and how many seconds you can shoot with them? "

Toke, that's the million dollar question isn't it. But "seconds" I can't imagine
an outfit as capable as Panasonic compromising sales with something as silly as lack of storage space. But how much is this storage space going to cost?
However, a prosumer true HD camera that can deliver to an editing system
without wear and tear on the camera due to the P2 card aquisition is going to be quite desirable. Also I think the data can be captured to the NLE on the fly.

[Steve Crisdale]

<<<-- Originally posted by Bill Anderson : "But how many p2 cards you can stick inside that pana's small hd100 camera and how many seconds you can shoot with them? "

Toke, that's the million dollar question isn't it. But "seconds" I can't imagine
an outfit as capable as Panasonic compromising sales with something as silly as lack of storage space. But how much is this storage space going to cost?
However, a prosumer true HD camera that can deliver to an editing system
without wear and tear on the camera due to the P2 card aquisition is going to be quite desirable. Also I think the data can be captured to the NLE on the fly. -->>>

So ultimately, the current position for anyone wanting to have personal low-cost access to technology that's capable of providing High Definition content of (at the very least) broadcast quality at the highest form factor of 1080i would be to take the Sony FX-1/Z1 HDV route.

If anyone feels that the ability to create video straight from the cam that could be broadcast alongside any other 1080i material from any other source without anyone being any the wiser is a decidedly poor return for the monetary investment, they have the right to do so.

For those who feel that being able to provide broadcast standard High Definition from a lower cost perspective than any previously available option has no future; well......you're entitled to your opinion.

If you decide that you would prefer to shoot HD video that's well beyond the highest level currently available (and for many, many years to come), then you do the right thing to steer clear of HDV.

Perhaps one of the major Corporations will, one day, provide the equipment you feel will satisfy your requirements.

Normally I prefer sitting on the fence - but not when the fence gets so high my feet can't touch the ground.....

So, yeah; I do have an FX-1.......

BTW Do you have to be a technologist to see the writing on the wall, or a linguist to determine what's actually written?

[Steven White]

Obviously the FX1 isn't perfect, but I like what Steve Crisdale pointed out:

The fact of the matter is that the FX1 is a higher quality (less compressed at least) source of High Definition content than broadcast HD.

The only feature I really wish was different at this point in time is a true progressive mode - but in my mind the Cineframe modes, or the possibility of adaptive de-interlace from 1080i are sufficiently good to perform better than the DV-only offerings from other companies.

I'm glad that Sony chose to use the miniDV tape system for this camera. It greatly reduces the cost of shooting, and provides cheap and easy storage of my video. I didn't buy this $5000 camera so that I could dump more money into every other aspect of my production. As a stand-alone product (w/ a little software) the FX1 is an amazing piece of hardware.

-Steve

[Alexander Benesch]

Quote by Heath McKnight: "I would recommend grabbing the camera if you can, and give it a test run. I had very little issues, though ripples in a lake was a bit weird with the compression."

I saw the clip from the sony of this guy who fires various automatic rifles and I was of course blown away by the level of detail and the color reproduction. However, when the cameraman pans around rifle-man I saw a quite notable jitter . The sky is clouded in the video so it's hard to judge how the sony can handle a bigger latitude, or true low-light situations.

I'm glad that we got the possibility to shoot high definition video for such a killer price but I'm getting a little nervous when I think about shooting fast motion and scenes in low-light with the sony. That's torture......

[Bob Zimmerman]

All the talk about the F1/Z1 seems to be about the HD. The Z1 will also do SD, DVCam at 60i, 50i, 30, 25 and 24 frames(I know not real 24), SMPTE, XLR inputs. Plus its real 16:9 and 4:3 (maybe it crops that). It seems like it has alot of choices and options.

I have read from two video to film transfer houses that they say to shoot 16:9 at 60i for best results. If so do you even need the 24P?

I think the HDV is still a few years off but at least the Sony gives you the choice. Not sure if its better than the DVX or the XL2, but I would guess it's going to be a nice camera to use.

My choice between the 3 cameras is not getting any easier!!

[Darrell Essex]

Alexander Benesch, i think the video your talking about was posted by rsilvers. i too, saw the jitter you were talking about. now check this out. the video was mpeg4, so i took it into after effects and rerendered it as a regular quicktime mov. wa la. most of the jitter was gone except for the jitter that was naturaly caused from the kick back of the gun. even when i play it back at 1920x1080 it still looks sharp and clear. this just goes to show you what you can do when you have high quality video to work with. i can't wait to see the first movie in a theater that is shot with this camera.
(hope it's mine_

[Alexander Benesch]

Darrell Essex wrote: "Alexander Benesch, i think the video your talking about was posted by rsilvers. i too, saw the jitter you were talking about. now check this out. the video was mpeg4, so i took it into after effects and rerendered it as a regular quicktime mov. wa la. most of the jitter was gone except for the jitter that was naturaly caused from the kick back of the gun. even when i play it back at 1920x1080 it still looks sharp and clear. this just goes to show you what you can do when you have high quality video to work with"

True, that video was about 2 minutes long and compressed down to just a meager 100 mb in size.
I'm in pre-production of a movie that contains some very fast motion scenes, low light situations and a scene that even has strobe lighting. I ask a freakin' lot of a HD cam under 5000 Euros but I'm too fascinated by HD to reconsider the format.
I'm currently editing on a triple-head system with AvidExpress pro and I'll upgrade it to handle either HDV or Panasonic's format.

I intend to rent a sony unit and shoot some test-footage with it; maybe I'll be happy with the results.

[Toke Lahti]

<<<-- Originally posted by Bill Anderson: But "seconds" I can't imagine -->>>

If pana's eng camera has room for 4 cards + 1 for offline quality, the small camera might have room for 2 cards.
4GB each means 687 seconds of dvcpro100.
If we get 8GB cards in 2006, then it's still less than 23 minits.
But you could change cards on the fly, so I would take that kind of system.

[Kevin Dooley]

Even at 8 Gigs a card--the cost to have enough cards to continously shoot all day is going to be astronomical. Everyone keeps saying the flash media is dropping in price, but it hasn't happened enough, not yet anyway.