a way to make money NOW at DVinfo.net

Lynne Whelden · September 2nd, 2003, 06:44 PM

A football coach just approached me about shooting his high school football games. At $75 per hour this could be a nice job. Normally I'd haul my DV500U camcorder with its monster zoom lens and do the usual zoom in, zoom out stuff while following the ball. But I just got an idea....why not use the HD10? I could keep the shots wide and not worry so much about following the ball (I never claimed to be a sports photog.) I could then dump the unedited tape onto the D-VHS deck and distribute VHS tapes to all interested parties. (Maybe the coach would jump for his own D-VHS deck and a plasma.)
Does anyone see any flaw in this proposal? Would the HD10 shoot under the lights ok for a night game? Would the VHS distribution tapes lose most of the resolution gained in HD? I don't know....it seems to me this could be one of the killer aps for the HD10.

Peter Moore · September 2nd, 2003, 07:12 PM

> Would the HD10 shoot under the lights ok for a night game?

Hard to say - it is definitely not going to have as good low light performance as a PD150. That camera kicks ass when it comes to spot-lit night shots. I shot a stageplay with it and the lighting was very low but the shots looked like they could have been filmed in a well lit studio.

> Would the VHS distribution tapes lose most of
> the resolution gained in HD?

Without a doubt! VHS is NTSC, which means 480 / 60i. The HD10 is 720 / 30p, so you lose 33% of your resolution by going to VHS.

Steve Mullen · September 2nd, 2003, 07:30 PM

Lynn,

My 4HDV package will let you burn letterboxed DVDs without buying Toast.

You could ship DVDs to those that had DVD players, and dub DVD to VHS for those that don't.

DVDs look VERY good from HD!

Frank Granovski · September 2nd, 2003, 08:04 PM

You go do a test run to see if the HD10 will perform "under the lights ok for a night game." The 1/2" CCDs coupled with a good lens on that DV500 is pretty hard to beat in low light. I've used the now discontinued---I think---DV500 a few times and thought it was an excellent cam. It even worked just fine on my Manfrotto 136/075b tripod.

Eric Bilodeau · September 4th, 2003, 08:38 AM

About low light you might be impressed by this camera. I tested it head to head with the DVX100 (review to come later on) and it was equally sensitive in low light but produced much less grain. The only thing is the loss of saturation in very low light situations (like one neon tube in a large room). but the loss of saturation helped in producing much less compression noise. Wait for the clips I will post in night shots to come in the coming week, I contacted Chris Hurd on that subject.

Lynne Whelden · September 4th, 2003, 08:42 PM

Frank--the DV500 is not a discontinued camera. Regarding the HD10, I hope you make the plunge soon and get one. I've been following your posts for a long time here and at dv.com and you're about as non-committed as they come! Come on in, the water's fine.

Gints Klimanis · September 4th, 2003, 08:53 PM

>I could keep the shots wide and not worry so much about following the ball

You'll still have to follow the ball if you want interesting sports footage. If you distribute on DVD-R (which can be a chore unless you do a totally simplified production), then the coaches can zoom around on plyback with some of the newer DVD players.

Hmmmm. Has anyone heard of a DVD player with smooth zooming and pan controls? My Sony and Apex players have basic zoom, but not much more.

September 2nd, 2003, 06:44 PM	#1
Lynne Whelden Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: williamsport, pa Posts: 604	a way to make money NOW A football coach just approached me about shooting his high school football games. At $75 per hour this could be a nice job. Normally I'd haul my DV500U camcorder with its monster zoom lens and do the usual zoom in, zoom out stuff while following the ball. But I just got an idea....why not use the HD10? I could keep the shots wide and not worry so much about following the ball (I never claimed to be a sports photog.) I could then dump the unedited tape onto the D-VHS deck and distribute VHS tapes to all interested parties. (Maybe the coach would jump for his own D-VHS deck and a plasma.) Does anyone see any flaw in this proposal? Would the HD10 shoot under the lights ok for a night game? Would the VHS distribution tapes lose most of the resolution gained in HD? I don't know....it seems to me this could be one of the killer aps for the HD10.

September 2nd, 2003, 07:30 PM	#3
Steve Mullen HDV Cinema Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 4,007	Lynn, My 4HDV package will let you burn letterboxed DVDs without buying Toast. You could ship DVDs to those that had DVD players, and dub DVD to VHS for those that don't. DVDs look VERY good from HD! __________________ Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

September 4th, 2003, 08:38 AM	#5
Eric Bilodeau Major Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chicoutimi, Canada Posts: 334	About low light you might be impressed by this camera. I tested it head to head with the DVX100 (review to come later on) and it was equally sensitive in low light but produced much less grain. The only thing is the loss of saturation in very low light situations (like one neon tube in a large room). but the loss of saturation helped in producing much less compression noise. Wait for the clips I will post in night shots to come in the coming week, I contacted Chris Hurd on that subject. __________________ Eric Bilodeau video SFX,DOP ___________________ http://www.fictis.net info@fictis.net

September 2nd, 2003, 07:12 PM	#2
Peter Moore Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Arlington VA Posts: 1,034	> Would the HD10 shoot under the lights ok for a night game? Hard to say - it is definitely not going to have as good low light performance as a PD150. That camera kicks ass when it comes to spot-lit night shots. I shot a stageplay with it and the lighting was very low but the shots looked like they could have been filmed in a well lit studio. > Would the VHS distribution tapes lose most of > the resolution gained in HD? Without a doubt! VHS is NTSC, which means 480 / 60i. The HD10 is 720 / 30p, so you lose 33% of your resolution by going to VHS.

September 2nd, 2003, 08:04 PM	#4
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	You go do a test run to see if the HD10 will perform "under the lights ok for a night game." The 1/2" CCDs coupled with a good lens on that DV500 is pretty hard to beat in low light. I've used the now discontinued---I think---DV500 a few times and thought it was an excellent cam. It even worked just fine on my Manfrotto 136/075b tripod.

September 4th, 2003, 08:42 PM	#6
Lynne Whelden Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: williamsport, pa Posts: 604	Frank--the DV500 is not a discontinued camera. Regarding the HD10, I hope you make the plunge soon and get one. I've been following your posts for a long time here and at dv.com and you're about as non-committed as they come! Come on in, the water's fine.

September 4th, 2003, 08:53 PM	#7
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	>I could keep the shots wide and not worry so much about following the ball You'll still have to follow the ball if you want interesting sports footage. If you distribute on DVD-R (which can be a chore unless you do a totally simplified production), then the coaches can zoom around on plyback with some of the newer DVD players. Hmmmm. Has anyone heard of a DVD player with smooth zooming and pan controls? My Sony and Apex players have basic zoom, but not much more.