How soon before SD dies?

[Rick Steele]

I only shoot in standard definition right now (wedding videography). Any guesses as to how long I've got?. I know it's a subjective call and it's been discussed a lot.

Will DVD players eventually be able to play all the formats? (single layer, double layer, Blu-ray, HD-DVD)

For under $100? In lets say 3 years?

Does HD editing require tons of drive space (at 1Gb per minute?) Will a 3.0ghz system be adequate?

Me head is spinnin' already.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Gonna be a long time before SD dies. SD production is dying already, but there are billions of hours of SD footage out there.

Yes, in 3 years all players will likely play all formats in some fashion. You'll see a buncha consumer BD players in 3 weeks at CES.

Depending on the type of HD acquisition you choose and NLE you use, it can run from 13 GB an hour to 600 GB an hour for storage. Figure around 40-100 GB for various median compression formats.

[Ash Greyson]

A decade.... seriously... look at all the channels that exist. There is just not the bandwidth to deliver that much HD. New compressions are being worked on and it will be solved but it will take a while. Then the cost of production will have to come down as HD is prohibitively expensive for the down the dial networks. Honest, what does one have to gain from watching Dog the Bounty Hunter in HD?

I live in the 40th ranked US market and we have 200+ channels on digital cable but only 12 stations in HD. Half those stations are only HD in prime time, about 10% - 15% of their broadcast day. Right now if you totaled up all the programing hours, less than 3% is broadcast in HD. I say it is a decade before that number gets to 50%


ash =o)

[Ken Hodson]

HD is now at the breaking point. It will not be a decade to get to %50. Everything is switching to HD for production, as it is no longer dramatically cost prohibitive. We are at the point now where, if you recall seeing the first DVD's for rent in the video store then suddenly within two years they dominated, HD is now in this possition. The slow uptake for HD will be due to people not wanting to buy a new TV when the old one works well. But for anyone buying a new TV a year from now it will be unheard of to buy SD. The major networks will have all their programing in HD.

[Rick Steele]

The slow uptake for HD will be due to people not wanting to buy a new TV when the old one works well.

Good point here. Even though DVD's took off there is a big difference in trashing an old VCR and buying a $250 DVD player. (vs. swapping the good TV for $1500 HD).

I also read that the average person replaces their TV about every 7 years.

[Kevin Shaw]

For wedding videos you should start migrating to HD soon if you have high-end clientele, and whenever you can make it economically feasible otherwise. I personally think wedding videos are a good use of affordable HD technology, and that customers can/will appreciate it if you can figure out how to market it to them. For now the most practical way to distribute video shot in HD is on widescreen SD DVDs, which will look good on widescreen HDTVs and decent on standard SD TVs. You can also put HD video in compressed form on a DVD which someone can play on their computer, so they can get a look at the HD version of the footage while waiting for proper players to arrive.

In effect, SD is already dying for purposes of professional video production, and it's just a matter of time and economics now before most of us upgrade to HD. Given a choice it would be silly not to shoot in HD, but making the practical decision of when to buy new equipment is something you have to assess for yourself.

[Leigh Wanstead]

I agree with ash.

Regards
Leigh

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Read the original post; it's about viewing HD on the consumer side, not broadcast. As far as broadcast, the channel space is indeed there, whether it's being implemented or not. As far as HD viewing from DVD...that'll be common in the next 3 years, and quite possible in the next 5 months.
The consumer move to HD is very rapid in comparison, and you can't use the move from broadcast only to VCR, from VCR to DVD as gauges.
The BIGGEST crop of HD television buyers haven't yet purchased a television, but they're urging their parents to do so. With XBox and PlayStation being one of the most powerful points of impetus, you'll continue to see HD displays moving forward very quickly. Some manufacturers have already announced their intent to completely kill SD production. Walmart has almost overnight gone from selling dozens of SD models and one or two HD displays to virtually all HD displays. Saturation of HD in the consumer home may not take place overnight (it certainly won't) but the market is driven by what end users perceive to be the "gotta have" device, toy, display, or whatever else. And with all HD stations making huge marketing statements, coupled with consumer informatives from Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, etc...the move to HD will be substantially faster than any prior technology move.
At least, that's what every manufacturer and production company that's actively working are gambling on....

[Pierre Barberis]

We are speaking of the general public, of course. My bet is : 50% of sales Next year will be "HD ready" screens ( mostly LCDs) ( US and Western Europe)
Two years later, 80% or more. This will bring more than 50% of the existing park to be HDready in 2009 - or before.

Out of these, 50% will buy a HDV camera to "run the show" for their family, vacation, birthday parties, trips, etc.

My personal experience is that when you have seen it once, you want it and get it - if you can afford- immediately.

So IF
a/ We do not enter into one of these stupid format wars
b/ Displays are not bogged with yet another input format (HDMI for the poor, or GoodBye Component,etc..who knows)
c/ The next version of the HC1 ( or equivalent ) sells street price for 1100/1200$

my bet is that 33% or more of the camcorders sold in the west (and Japan, of course) will be HD by 2008, 50% by 2009.

I initialy thought that want you needed also was a "cheap and easy to learn" editing software, but nevertheless only 10% of amateurs do edit their footage...Of course a simple "cut and paste" (MPEG2 ??) editor would help...if appropriately popularized, without all the bells and whisles of the Adobe, Canopus, Vegas, even Ulead, etc. REAL simple.

So i think that 10 years is a far too long horizon. I would bet for five.

[Robert J. Wolff]

Good day, Rick & Company.

I think I will stick this old Wolff's neck out, and disagree with the group.

The days of SD are over, NOW!!

What format of HD that is going to replace it, I do not know. Nor, do I particulary care. I am sure that them that sell me my equipment, will do a good job of taking care of my needs, to insure their future.

But, I would opinion that the broadcast/cable days have been numbered, by the new phenom, the Podcast.

It is here, NOW, not next year.

It is going to destroy the old antiquated systems that we have used for so many years. Ease of use, great bandwidth, etc., will take over media within @ 2-3 years. Look at what Apple and 2 of the networks are doing. And today, NBC announed their net news is now on the web, 7 days a week. You are looking at the bycycle pedal being replaced by the "pedal to the metal", at this time 100 years ago.

The only major expense that your client/consumer will incur, will be that 65'' wall screen……, cheap! Probably in the range of $20/inch, and probably less.

Rick. I am not an event shooter. You know your business better than me. I would only suggest to you that you sell those buggy whip stocks (SD) now, and not next year.

[Keith Wakeham]

I think that HD is unfortunately a technology where people will have to be force feed and told "you like it because its better". Why? IMHO its the same reason Joe average buys LCD tvs. The "Cool" factor and that it does look better than their 20 year old Zenith or broken Walmart TV. Most of these people could care less about HD because DVD is the best thing since sliced bread but they think a disc is a disc. (If I had a nickel for everyone who asked me to explain how to copy a dvd and found out they only had a CD burner - I'd have a few dollars).

So we use HD because we see all the advantages but they just see the end result. A lot of the RF bandwidth is getting freed up and that means in one analog channel you can divide it up to about 5 HD signals or 10 or more SD digital. So plenty of available space for digital channels. If you can fit 125 Analog channels in the bandwidth you can have lots and lots of HD and SD digital.

[Ash Greyson]

With the proliferation of MP3 players while DVD Audio and Super Audio CD die a slow death, the public has spoken loud and clear that CONVENIENCE is much more important than quality. At some point it is "good enough." Myself, who owns 4 HDTVs, and other in forums like this lack the objectivity to comment as average Joe. Are you guys aware that a whopping HALF the people who OWN HDTVs have never seen a FRAME of HD on them? Read this article:

http://webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?SESSIONID=&aId=6521

For blueray or HD-DVD to succeed it must NOT focus on an image upgrade but other things like having and entire season on ONE disc, not 5 or 7. DO you really think average Joe wants to buy another version of 5th Element when his 480P suberbit already looks amazing to him?

I will bet anyone any amount of money that there will not be more HD broadcast than SD within the next 5 years. For every ABC there are FORTY Outdoor Channels. HD has become cheaper but it will remain prohibitive for most who want to keep their current workflow.

What if tomorrow there were 100 HD channels running 24/7??? Currently the tech does not exist to get that much bandwidth of HD over satellite/cable....MAYBE over fibre but that will require a build in most areas of the country. You see, it is not as simple as a $6000 Panny HD cam....




ash =o)

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Ash Greyson

I will bet anyone any amount of money that there will not be more HD broadcast than SD within the next 5 years.

Maybe not, but it would be an equally safe bet that five years from now almost no professional video projects will be recorded on SD cameras. If nothing else more and more broadcast and independent video will migrate to widescreen SD delivery, which will require native widescreen cameras for best results. This will be the death knell for 99% of current SD cameras, which are primarily designed to shoot 4x3 video.

[Ash Greyson]

Actually Kevin, you hit on the bigger concern for Joe Average... filling his screen! Most people with 4:3 TVs HATE 16:9 but as we see more 16:9 TVs we see they hate watching 4:3 on it so much they are willing to stretch or zoom the image. I do believe you will see more content being delivered in 16:9 as the slow migration to HD happens.


ash =o)

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Ash Greyson

Most people with 4:3 TVs HATE 16:9 but as we see more 16:9 TVs we see they hate watching 4:3 on it so much they are willing to stretch or zoom the image.

I personally find letterboxed 16x9 footage on a 4x3 TV to be much less distracting than "pillarboxed" 4x3 video on widescreen HDTV. I'm starting to notice some TV shows being broadcast as 16x9, or even 4x3 footage mixed with 16x9! This will apparently be a gradual transition, but eventually the trend appears to be toward widescreen recording and distribution of all video material. SD is on its last breaths now at the recording end, and will start to die next year at the distribution end.