New article on HD100 at DVinfo.net

Warren Shultz · March 8th, 2006, 02:55 PM

Nice little article. The camera continues to pick up momentum.

http://www.studiodaily.com/filmandvi...ssue/6088.html

John Vincent · March 8th, 2006, 03:06 PM

Thanks for the link - the video that's w/ the article is nice too!

John

Tim Holtermann · March 8th, 2006, 04:36 PM

Good read but another example of a poorly written article. Why don't these authors do their homework a bit and add some substance to the article. At the time this was released they could have added a paragraph at the end explaining that there ARE other native editing solutions that don't require the $2000 card. passing on.

Stephen L. Noe · March 8th, 2006, 05:00 PM

Man we should invite him over here to this forum to swap stories and help with his workflow. Anybody know the guy in question?

Paolo Ciccone · March 8th, 2006, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen L. Noe

Man we should invite him over here to this forum to swap stories and help with his workflow.

Yeah, like the $80.00 HDVxDV :)
BTW, I was puzzled by his continuos mention of MiniDV as a limiting factor, the weakness of red etc. Is he assuming that the encoding is the same of SD cameras? I thought that the transport mechanism wasn't the issue in color loss. The codec is the main responsible. Unless I misunderstood what he means.
I know that MPEG2 compression is not as good as capturing from the component output, I'm just curious about the MiniDV-specific issues.
Anybody can elaborate on this?

--
Paolo

Tim Holtermann · March 8th, 2006, 11:08 PM

Right. Just another example (no offense to the author) of a misinformed unqualified person publishing an article.

Always take what you read with a grain of salt and find other articles (data) to support it before running with it.

Tim Dashwood · March 8th, 2006, 11:10 PM

I was looking for a "page 2" but I guess that's it. It seems a bit more like a press release than an article.

Joel Aaron · March 9th, 2006, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Dashwood

I was looking for a "page 2" but I guess that's it. It seems a bit more like a press release than an article.

I think he may have had a point about the post software solutions being a giant pain in the butt compared to using an AJA card and importing that way. He clearly mentions that he tried Lumiere - I'd assume he looked into the other software solutions too.

Is there evidence that the software solutions degrade quality or cause other issues as opposed to coming in via AJA?

Ian E. Pearson · March 9th, 2006, 10:02 AM

with that workflow wouldn't HDSDI be even more degrading to the image? If it were recorded to tape first then output through analog component video converted to HDSDI isnt that unneccesary recompression right off the bat. It would only be advantagous if it were captured live off the cam and not recorded to tape first. Sounds like this guy just needed a little help with his flow.

Joel Aaron · March 9th, 2006, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian E. Pearson

Sounds like this guy just needed a little help with his flow.

I do too.

My impression from a couple people I've spoken with is capturing via the component out into a card to get into another more "Post Friendly" codec is a good solution. That's obviously what this guy decided to do and he said he tried Lumiere... which appears from what I've read to be the better of the software routes.

I don't think we really want to be in HDV when we start color correcting and doing composites - so the question I have is what codec do you want to be in and what's the highest quality way of getting there in Final Cut?

Joe Carney · March 9th, 2006, 01:30 PM

Had he used Vegas and ConnectHD he wouldn't have those workflow problems. He made FCP issues sound like camera issues, unless you check out the video you get the wrong impression about things. (Not attacking FCP here, just one persons ignorance).

Paolo Ciccone · March 9th, 2006, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Carney

Had he used Vegas and ConnectHD he wouldn't have those workflow problems. He made FCP issues sound like camera issues, unless you check out the video you get the wrong impression about things.

What is most surprising is that he didn't test this before beginning shooting. Can't blame anybody but yourself if you didn't verify all the steps before. Just reading the product specs is not enough.

--
Paolo

Joel Aaron · March 9th, 2006, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Carney

Had he used Vegas and ConnectHD he wouldn't have those workflow problems. He made FCP issues sound like camera issues

I didn't take it that way. I took it that he was told one thing and found out another later and was a little frustrated. The reality is this camera doesn't appear to meld with the Mac very well right now... it's a workflow issue that relates to the codec this camera uses. I think that's a fair consideration. I'm not sure asking someone to switch platforms is a better idea than just plugging a card into their Mac.

I'm still waiting for some wise person to answer my questions on the topic... so I'm not sure this DP could have posted here and gotten a quick solution. He may have found the highest quality solution on his own - and AJA card. Or not. I've seen no one here say they've test both and Lumiere is better because... etc.

Ian E. Pearson · March 10th, 2006, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Carney

Had he used Vegas and ConnectHD he wouldn't have those workflow problems..

I agree fully Joe. Aside from a couple minor capture issues in ConnectHD, this combo has worked near flawlessly. Ive also tried a trial of Premiere Pro and Aspect 4. Also flawless. Ive always been a PC man. In this business though, tons of people use Macs. A Mac has usually been the better way to go for most. It seems like just not for this camera yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joel Aaron

I'm not sure this DP could have posted here and gotten a quick solution.

There are plenty of people in these forums who have their workflow figured out on the Mac for the time being and dont use HDSDI. But you would think Apple would have a fix by now man. They eventually will.

Joel Aaron · March 10th, 2006, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian E. Pearson

But you would think Apple would have a fix by now man. They eventually will.

Yeah - I'd actually put the blame on Apple more than JVC. They've had forever to figure this out. Maybe Apple believed all the Panasonic hype and thought it would be a category killer. Hopefully they know better now.

Maybe Panasonic paid Apple to support P2 and the HVX so quickly. If so, hats off to them for getting their camera supported. I don't think the HVX works very well on PC's quite yet though... almost the reverse situation of HD-100's.

March 8th, 2006, 02:55 PM	#1
Warren Shultz Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 248	New article on HD100 Nice little article. The camera continues to pick up momentum. http://www.studiodaily.com/filmandvi...ssue/6088.html

March 8th, 2006, 11:10 PM	#7
Tim Dashwood Wrangler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Posts: 3,637	I was looking for a "page 2" but I guess that's it. It seems a bit more like a press release than an article. __________________ Tim Dashwood

March 8th, 2006, 03:06 PM	#2
John Vincent Trustee Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,065	Thanks for the link - the video that's w/ the article is nice too! John

March 8th, 2006, 04:36 PM	#3
Tim Holtermann Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 184	Good read but another example of a poorly written article. Why don't these authors do their homework a bit and add some substance to the article. At the time this was released they could have added a paragraph at the end explaining that there ARE other native editing solutions that don't require the $2000 card. passing on.

March 8th, 2006, 05:00 PM	#4
Stephen L. Noe Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,214	Man we should invite him over here to this forum to swap stories and help with his workflow. Anybody know the guy in question?

March 8th, 2006, 11:08 PM	#6
Tim Holtermann Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 184	Right. Just another example (no offense to the author) of a misinformed unqualified person publishing an article. Always take what you read with a grain of salt and find other articles (data) to support it before running with it.

March 9th, 2006, 10:02 AM	#9
Ian E. Pearson Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Greeley, CO Posts: 52	with that workflow wouldn't HDSDI be even more degrading to the image? If it were recorded to tape first then output through analog component video converted to HDSDI isnt that unneccesary recompression right off the bat. It would only be advantagous if it were captured live off the cam and not recorded to tape first. Sounds like this guy just needed a little help with his flow.

March 9th, 2006, 01:30 PM	#11
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	Had he used Vegas and ConnectHD he wouldn't have those workflow problems. He made FCP issues sound like camera issues, unless you check out the video you get the wrong impression about things. (Not attacking FCP here, just one persons ignorance).