Is standard definition outdated?

[Dave Blackhurst]

Gotcha -
HDV can be a horsepower hog - shoot HDV, downconvert as you download is your best workflow - then when you upgrade the computer, HDV footage of anything important is available.

ALSO, you might look at software updates - vegas 6 for instance was pretty sluggish with HDV, 7 mucho improved, 8 looks even faster and smoother... seems as though it's taken a while for the software code to catch up with the new format.

[Michael Jouravlev]

Originally Posted by Martin Mayer

The iPod Touch is 16:9 widescreen, isn't it?

Nope, it is not. iPod Touch appears to have screen with 1.5 AR. Apple's video presentation says: "tap the screen to see video in theatrical presentation". The screen grab below shows 2.35 AR in 'scope format. I suppose that if theatrical presentation were 1.78 AR, it would be shown properly too. In either case, it will be letterboxed because the display has 1.5 AR. Seems that Apple decided to borrow this stupid idea from Brits, who use 14:9 AR as a transitional format.

At least one good thing about Touch is that it CAN properly display widescreen content though in letterboxed format. Also seems that by default it does center cut. I bet that 95% of users won't even notice that something is wrong, but Apple lost me as a prospective client. Archos seems like a better choice.

[Glenn Chan]

P.S. Why this forum creates thumbnails despite that attached images are already pretty small? This is a bug.

Your images are actually very big... about 1200 pixels wide.

And the forum always creates thumbnails.

[Michael Jouravlev]

Originally Posted by Glenn Chan

Your images are actually very big... about 1200 pixels wide.

Oops... fixed.

[Brendan Marnell]

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

.......... Point is, we are all working with this new medium, learning the craft of editing and working with HDV and HD. This is invaluable training that will carry into the future. This is not something you learn just for a new job someone hires you for coming up. As you learned with DV, there are certain ways of doing things, ways of editing peculiar to your NLE. Anything you do in HD, will tranlate beautifully to a nicer DV.

About your comment on the HV20. If you haven't shot it, then you don't know what it has to offer. Its obviously designed for the consumer, but it shoots a better image the GL2 and the VX2000, period. ..... Problem with it is the short 10x zoom that will require an extender for your purposes.

Recently my wife using HV20 and I using XM2 (GL2) shot exactly the same sequence from steady tripods of a take-off, 2 landings & a 2 take-offs by griffon vultures at 70 yards both of us using about x 10 zoom. Lasting about 25 seconds the clips have to be seen to be believed; so I brought them to a TV store and viewed them repeatedly on 26" Walker screen via HDMI for HV20 & round 5-pin for XM2. The image sharpness from HV20 was IMO perfectly true all the time whether the birds were in flight or otherwise; from XM2 the background cliffs were sharp but whenever a bird moved the edges of the moving image showed the slightest bubbling for most of the sequence.

I am now in the market for an XLH1 or a lighter equivalent.

[Chris Barcellos]

Here is some more handwriting on the wall about the future of video production and tv:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=105882

[Richard Alvarez]

Yup, SUPPOSED to be going digital in two years. But not necessarily HD. A lot of consumers are confused by that. Then again, I've seen people with HD wide screen sets watching 4:3 stretched out, and claiming it looks 'fantastic'! Go figure.

[Chris Barcellos]

Originally Posted by Richard Alvarez

Yup, SUPPOSED to be going digital in two years. But not necessarily HD. A lot of consumers are confused by that. Then again, I've seen people with HD wide screen sets watching 4:3 stretched out, and claiming it looks 'fantastic'! Go figure.

My brother in law came home one day with a 52 inch Sony Bravia. He had previously hooked up cable with HD content, so he hooked up his new TV. For a couple of days didn't hear much, so I called him. He sounded dissapointed. I went to visit, and he showed me the TV, and the HD channels. He was depressed, it looked not as good as he expected, for all the money spent.

I said, that can't be HD, and we turned channel to over air broadcast to show him. I told him to call cable provider. He did, and twenty minutes later, the gave him directions on how to set the Cable box for his new HD TV. Beautiful at that point.

[Michael Jouravlev]

Originally Posted by Richard Alvarez

Yup, SUPPOSED to be going digital in two years. But not necessarily HD. A lot of consumers are confused by that.

Right, but all new TVs are widescreen, so who would want to watch 4:3 on a widescreen set? While future TV programming will not necessarily be in HD, it will definitely be in digital widescreen.

P.S. Following up recent talk about iPods, I just bought Archos 504 that has 4.3" 16:9 screen. Beautiful thing, Apple has nothing similar to offer.

[Jeff Chandler]

Interesting discussion. Besides teaching an Emmy award winning high school broadcast class, I have a video business on the side specializing in event video. I sell thousands of dollars of SD DVD's every year. When the first Sony HDV cam came out I was told by many people that I needed to jump in or I would lose business. Here I am all this time later and I have yet to get a request for 16x9 or HD. But I do still get requests for VHS tapes! For me, and I suspect many others, HD is not yet a necessity. I'm glad I didn't jump in at the beginning. I would have an aging camera that would have served me no better than my SD cams and that offered my business no economic advantage. When HD does become a requirement (and I suspect for me that's still at least 2-3 years off) I will have the advantage of the latest technology at a lower price than I would have gotten had I jumped in at the beginning. And, meanwhile, I've made tons of money from my seven year old VX2000 and nearly four year old PD170. And they're not done yet! I do a lot of low light events and the cheaper HD cams won't touch my SD Sonys for low-light capabilities.
The bottom line is to determine what YOUR market demands and invest accordingly. It's never good business to invest in what you don't need, unless it's just a hobby and you have cash to burn.

Oh, and one last thing, in spite of the fact that more and more widescreen HD tv's are being sold, there are millions of 4x3 TV's still being viewed in millions of homes.

[Andrew Kimery]

Originally Posted by Michael Jouravlev

Right, but all new TVs are widescreen, so who would want to watch 4:3 on a widescreen set? While future TV programming will not necessarily be in HD, it will definitely be in digital widescreen.

Future TV programming will be widescreen, but the decades of content made previously that will be rebroadcast for years to come is by and large 4:3. The "Age of Pillar Boxing" has just begun. ;)


-A

[Brennan Callahan]

thank you for all the replies

[Michael Jouravlev]

Originally Posted by Jeff Chandler

Here I am all this time later and I have yet to get a request for 16x9 or HD.

You haven't got requests for 16x9/HD, or you asked your customers specifically whether they wanted 16x9 or HD and they told you "definetely, we do not need that"?

Originally Posted by Jeff Chandler

Oh, and one last thing, in spite of the fact that more and more widescreen HD tv's are being sold, there are millions of 4x3 TV's still being viewed in millions of homes.

They will be either thrown away or sold for $50 to poor students or will be used as a second/third/fourth set. "Do you have a TV?" - "Yes, we have two." - "Two? You must be rich!" - "He is joking, no one has two TVs".

This January I had trouble selling a 27" CRT TV, I bought it three years ago for $360, it still looked like new. Sold it for $120 after it was offered for sale for two weeks. The electronics section on Craigslist is full of ads that read "CRT TV for sale, mint; upgrading to HD".

[Richard Alvarez]

This is a question every BUSINESS must decide for itself. Is it the time for me NOW? Am I making money NOW with the gear I have NOW? If I upgrade NOW will I be using those features to make money NOW? HOW LONG will I make money with the gear I have NOW?

Is RENTAL a viable option to achieve a particular booking on a particular project?

In terms of the future... HOW FAR do you look? One year? Two? Five? What will be the 'new technology' in 12 months? Tapeless? Some NEW form of card acquisition? A new codec? Who knows.

Each business has it's own cash flow problems. Will an upgrade pay for itself IMMEDIATELY? Or will I have to wait two years to use those features? In the meantime, what NEW technologies will arise in those two years, that will make my 'upgrade' obsolete by the time I thought I'd need it? OR allow me to purchase the same 'upgrade' I am considering now, for half price later when I need it?

As I said before, it's a tough decision, hence the thread. There is no simple answer for everyone.

A real life example on the advantages to waiting -

I am negotiating a doc shoot to take place in April of next year in Ireland. I MIGHT need to shoot in HD, it's not clear at this point. IF I do, it will probably be an XLH-1 because I've already got money invested in my XL2 gear... so that choice for me, would be most cost effective. IF I had been convinced at THE BEGINNING OF THIS THREAD to upgrade at the time the UPGRADE NOW arguments were being posted, I would have missed the wonderful deal Cannon is now offering, of the FREE FIRESTORE WITH XLH-1 purchase! See, waiting to buy untill I know I need it, is already (potentially) paying off for me.

Just one example of how each person has their own business needs, and concerns that will influence the WHEN decision.

[Petri Kaipiainen]

For me (and the company I shoot for) the desicion was easy: XH-A1 is a killer camera HD or no HD. Most shoots are done 16:9 SD, best quality for the price I think. For chroma key work HDV. And for personal travell stuff HDV naturally.