Pixlet and JVC HD1OU editing on Mac

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

> I'm right there on the edge to get this JVC but something's telling
> me Canon is gonna come out with an HD cam with a better feature
> set- they seem to set high standards within prosumer video equip
> at modest prices...

Oh don't worry about that. ALL of our favorite manufacterers will be offering HDV (or HDVC or whatever it will be called) as soon as they have sold as much SD DV equipments as they can possibly sell. I think this is more or less as soon as we all stop buying new equipment while waiting for the HD stuff. Since this is happening already, my guess is that before six months we will have HD products in the MiniDV price range which will begin to replace current MiniDV offerings. Especially considering that in many cases all they have to do is rewrite the camera's firmware. Many current MiniDV camcorders already have megapixel CCD arrays and powerfull onboard processing, so it basically becomes a programmer's proplem to teach the camera to encode MPEG. It will be VERY fast.

[Paul Mogg]

I'm not so sure about that. As you said, the manufacturers will continue to milk the DV market as long as it's commercially viable, and Panasonic certainly aren't going to kill the Varicam milk cow by offering a version of the DVX100 cam with 24p HDV and professional controls any time soon, at least not one that's not partially crippled. Nothing happens by accident in this biz. Having used the HD1OU for a bit I have no doubt that the HDV format is a complete DV killer and competitor to the high end HD cams, IF implemented properly. (Note that I didn't say that the quality is the same!) I have no doubt that the HD1OU was deliberately crippled in many ways, of course you'll never hear that from the manufacturers. It's a great deal more than a software change for the existing megapixel cams to be made to do HDV, you need 16:9 imagers and MPEG2 compression chips for a start. I think they'll drag out the transition as long as possible, but there's no doubt it's coming. I wouldn't hold your breath for a massive and sudden influx of HDV cams, I hope it will happen, but it won't until everyone out there with a current DV cam realizes that HDV is a WAY superior format, or I should say, has the POTENTIAL of being so, which will take time.

[Steve Mullen]

<<<-- Originally posted by Paul Mogg : I have no doubt that the HD1OU was deliberately crippled in many ways, of course you'll never hear that from the manufacturers. -->>>

The CONSUMER group took an off-the-shelf MPEG-2 encoder from NTT and grafted into a JVC consumer camcorder.

It has every typical JVC consumer camcorder feature. It did not need to be crippled. It was never intended to be other than a DV+HDV camcorder.

From there it became a prosumer product that was uncrippled to a large degree by efforts in the USA. What's not clear was whether factory politics inn Japan resisted efforts to make it better--or there was no time to do it once Japan shoved it into the USA. (Or no budget!)

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

> you need 16:9 imagers and MPEG2 compression chips for a start.

My PDX10 does native 16:9 and some pretty impressive real-time image resampling, not to mention simultanous multiresolution output to DV and USB and at least MPEG1 compression, so I guess MPEG2 at 720p is not a long way to go for the onboard circuitry. You are right though, perhaps they need to change the ROM and and ad a stronger DSP... but that is really not expensive. If they have not done it yet it's because of the decision to not do it, not because of a technological problem. I think it is important that we all realize that and make it very clear publically so they don't fool us around.

> I think they'll drag out the transition as long as possible, but there's
> no doubt it's coming. I wouldn't hold your breath for a massive
> and sudden influx of HDV cams, I hope it will happen, but it
> won't until everyone out there with a current DV cam realizes
> that HDV is a WAY superior format, or I should say, has the
> POTENTIAL of being so, which will take time.

Well it seems to be happening. Have WE not realized it? :D

Peace,

--
i.

[Eric Bilodeau]

In most cases, the fact that you will or not buy the HD10 is based on two compromises possibilities: I want HD capabilities at an affordable price right now by any means or I want HD capabilities at an affordable price but I am willing to wait for better machines. It is all a question of perspective but remember, the future is now and it IS the HD10, when the others will go out in the market, the pioneers will have already paved the way with this camera. It has begun, you either trip on the hard wave or wait for some other less tricky ones.

[Steve Mullen]

<<<-- Originally posted by Ignacio Rodriguez : > you need 16:9 imagers and MPEG2 compression chips for a start.

My PDX10 does native 16:9 and some pretty impressive real-time image resampling, not to mention simultanous multiresolution output to DV and USB and at least MPEG1 compression, so I guess MPEG2 at 720p is not a long way to go for the onboard circuitry. You are right though, perhaps they need to change the ROM and and ad a stronger DSP... but that is really not expensive. -->>>

Clearly have no grasp of either MPEG-2 nor HD technology. That's right "change the ROM and ad (sic) a stronger DSP." And you have a Engineering degree in what? Why don't you tell Sony how to fix the terrible vertical smear in your PDX10. And, maybe you can engineer the light sensitivity down to 2 lux like the PD150.

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

> And you have a Engineering degree in what?

I am a sound engineer, and even though I have worked with Terran on Media Cleaner and have been a beta tester for QuickTime codecs and other stuff, I have not made any claims about being able to program the DSP. Perhaps that is something you can do. Anyway, I write from a user's point of view. It is us, the users, who actually drive the market by choosing the tools we want. Nothing wrong with talking about what we want and speculating about how it will be done. I do think it will be done very soon. For your benefit and mine, we will be able to choose among several manufacterers for HDV, just like we do now for DV.

And since you mention it, I paid a lot less for the PDX10 than I would have had to pay for the DVX100, and got native 16:9 too, so I happily deal with the vertical smear and make sure there is enough light, knowing that I saved some cash for my next camera ;-)

Peace,

--
i.

[Steve Mullen]

<<<-- Originally posted by Ignacio Rodriguez : > And you have a Engineering degree in what?

I am a sound engineer, and even though I have worked with Terran on Media Cleaner and have been a beta tester for QuickTime codecs and other stuff -->>>

I ment a real graduate Electronics Engineer from a University. Since you aren't one, how do you presume to say HOW electronics can be improved?

I've got no problem with anyone saying they want improvements, but when they say HOW it should be done, %$^%$^$!

And, if you think a megapixel PDX10 is as good as a DVX100? You just bought a cheaper camera. No problem.

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

Steve I have done some reading around. Of course you are right, the feat of encoding MPEG2 in realtime, even at the not-so-high resolution and 30 fps, is quite an accomplishmentr by JVC, so to make a camera like the PDX10 do something similar Sony would have to toss in one of those NTT DSP's, not just reprogram the camera, effectively building a totally new camera in the process. BTW I read your articles on NAB 2003 and the HD10 and found them very informative. Thanks for being around and helpung us newbies get it.