hacking DVC80, make it 24p

[John Britt]

Stephen

I am fully aware of all those points you mention. My point was that if you can't afford a DVX100 there are better ways to try and achieve a film look than cannibalizing your DVC80 with some $500 hack-- you might notice that lighting and audio took priority in my list over the plug-in.

You are correct that if you want 24p, then buy the DVX. As I stated earlier in this thread: "If I want a DVX instead of my DVC, I'll just sell the 80, put together the rest of the money on my own and simply buy a 100."

I'll make it clear, though: If you want 24p/30p/etc, buy a DVX100. If you want to get the most out of your DVC80, then lighting, audio, and yes, even a plug-in, will serve you better than paying $500 to have your camera torn apart and "hacked" (even if said hack is imaginary).

[Stephen van Vuuren]

I agree John - hacking the DVC80 for 24p does not go on the list of "great ideas", especially since no one has actually posted information on how...

Of course, "imaginary hack" is a pretty good band name...

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

I think it's more likely that Pana will lower the price of the DVX100A to US$500 more than the '80.

[Aaron J.H. Walker]

Stephen;
We are all aware of the differences of true 24 p as opposed to a software plug-in but he/she was asking about hacking a DVC-80 (a camera I happen to love for its 60i and would never consider altering for 24p) to get a film look.

It still begs the question, as others have said, if he/she can't wait to get a DVX 100A and absolutely MUST make the film NOW, a viable and cost effective comprimise would be a software plug in saving him time, effort and money.

[Stephen van Vuuren]

Aaron:

Unless the film is very simple and short, I fail to see how a film look plugin in will save time, effort and money. I've used most of them (only used DigiEffects demo) and sold the ones I had except for Revision FX's Fields Kit.

Effort and time is much greater with a plugin than selling and upgrading the cam (or renting a DVX100 for that matter). Money is iffy. Extra storage, cost of plugin and big increase in post-production could end up costing much more

[Aaron J.H. Walker]

<<<-- Originally posted by Stephen van Vuuren : Aaron:

Unless the film is very simple and short, I fail to see how a film look plugin in will save time, effort and money. -->>>

Stephen: I hear you, but Lov Mov seemed to be in a real hurry to make his film NOW!

You and I probably know about patience, waiting, the sun really will come up tomorrow, taking our time to get what we really want, etc. but this guy doesn't. So for him, to get his movie made immediately with what he has and then do the 24p thing in post might be the cure for his impatience.

Besides, I can remember being young (back in the time of the dinosaurs;) and feeling like if I didn't do whatever right then and there, I might as well stop living.

So why not do his film now with the DVC-80, get a film like look in post, then he can still sell it later for the DVC- 100A for his next film that he is just going to have to make like right NOW or just die.

[Stephen van Vuuren]

Aaron:

You have a point - if my choice between hacking a DVC80 for 24p and running a 24p plugin, the 24p plugin would be my choice everytime.

[Joe Lloyd]

I bought my DVX100 hoping to hack it until i cam turn it into a varicam

:P