|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 14th, 2003, 03:56 PM | #1 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London, England
Posts: 126
|
changing from PQ to MQ tape
I have been using PQ tapes since I bought my DVX100. MQ were unobtainable in the UK. I can get MQ tapes now. Is it worth changing? I don't mind the extra cost, but is the quality of MQ visibly better? Are there problems with head clogging, if I do change? Presumably, if I need to playback my old PQ tapes, I will need to use a different machine.
|
July 14th, 2003, 04:23 PM | #2 |
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
Yes, MQ tapes will give a brighter picture, deeper colors, richer blacks. Don't miss out the subtle details that lower quality tapes miss. MQ tapes have the fine particle engineering to sharply capture those fine wisps of hair, the ripple of wind across a golden field of grain and the shimmer of candlelight in a rosy glass of wine...
And, if you order by midnight tonight, we'll include a $20 discount on Western Digital drive, which improves the quality of your rendered video by up to 20%! :) The only difference between these tapes is lubrication. The MQ tape dry lube supposedly extends head life and reduces head clogs. Cheap tape in LP mode will capture the same pixels as MQ tapes. Visual "differences" don't exist unless a error in the medium (dropouts, head clogs etc.) interferes with recording. Tape quality no more affects image quality than hard drive brand affect render quality. However, to avoid problems with cams, running the same formulation of tape is recommended as changing can cause head clogs and dropouts. If the PQ tapes are working fine, stick with them. You generally have to run a head cleaner when you switch tape formulations which wears the heads slightly. |
July 15th, 2003, 09:11 PM | #3 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Wilmington DE
Posts: 98
|
Stephen, I loved comments about the MQ tapes, got a good laugh about the brightness, richer blacks, etc. Rob
|
July 15th, 2003, 09:33 PM | #4 |
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
Thanks, I hope Patrick did not take it too seriously, all in good fun. It's a legitmate question because the myth persists on. Almost an urban legend at this point.
|
July 15th, 2003, 10:42 PM | #5 |
Slash Rules!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 5,472
|
I was told by a well respected DP that DVCAM tapes in a miniDV camera would yield a slightly higher resolution.
|
July 15th, 2003, 10:54 PM | #6 |
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
I assume DP stands for "Dumb Photographer"... :)
Tell your respected DP he may want to read these: http://adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-tech.html#DVformats Or if he does not believe that, maybe he should take it from the inventors of DVCAM, a little outfit called Sony: http://www.sonyusadvcam.com/content/article_6.shtml |
July 16th, 2003, 06:12 AM | #7 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London, England
Posts: 126
|
OK. No visible difference, just head wear.
So what do these specifications from the description of MQ tapes mean: +1db C/N and 1db OUTPUT vs. Pro Standard PQ series. |
| ||||||
|
|