What DVCPRO HD really needs ...

[Mark Donnell]

I have been reading, studying and awaiting the availability of the HVX-200 for more than six months, but have decided at this time to stick with my DVX-100 and standard DV. The money isn't the issue. What keeps me from going to DVCPRO HD is the inability to supply this format to customers or friends. What will solve this problem is when the DVCPRO HD data stream can be encoded into something that is viewable on HD DVD or Blu-ray DVD players. Until that happens, I don't see how I can make this format work for me. Other comments ?

[Frederic Segard]

In the meantime, there's always shooting in DVCPro50 with native 16x9. That sounds like a good enough reason... I mean if money is not in question.

But for me, I'd rather wait for the CinePorter or FS-100 hard drive recorder instead of using the currently expensive P2 cards.

[Dean Harrington]

is the way to go with the HVX, me thinks! 16.9/DV pro 50 is the way to go for awhile anyway. The cam is a serious step-up from the DVX. I love my DVX as well and will keep it as a B role cam. I've got a documentary on the roll that I've been involved with for 4 years. Main features of the docu will be re-shot on the HVX with interviews already done coming from the DVX.

[Philip Williams]

Originally Posted by Mark Donnell

<snip>What keeps me from going to DVCPRO HD is the inability to supply this format to customers or friends. What will solve this problem is when the DVCPRO HD data stream can be encoded into something that is viewable on HD DVD or Blu-ray DVD players. Until that happens, I don't see how I can make this format work for me. Other comments ?

Well Mark, the distribution of HD to friends, family and clients is by no means a problem unique to the HVX. This is something that has been discussed at length on many forums in regards to all the HD cams that have come out in the last year or so. Its also the reason that some working videographers have chosen, like you, to stick with standard definition video for now.

Here are two semi-workable solutions I'm aware of:
1. Encode to WMV HD standard and use one of the currently available DVD players that supports that format. The WMV files will of course also play on people's PCs (Mac too? Not sure..)
2. Encode your finished video to HDV or H.264 MPEG4 and deliver on DVD for playback on computers only.

As a side note, the Toshiba HD DVD player should be out in the next month or so. You'd want to research it, but I think its based on the H.264 standard, not sure about HDV (though I believe Blueray will support it natively for sure).

I think as we get into the third or fourth quarter of this year things will be looking up. Hopefully we'll have some solid deliver options and full software support for the HVX across the line.

www.philipwilliams.com

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by Mark Donnell

but have decided at this time to stick with my DVX-100 and standard DV. ... What keeps me from going to DVCPRO HD is the inability to supply this format to customers or friends.

Do you currently distribute your DV data to customers or friends? Most of us distribute on DVD. So even though you shot on DV, you transcode to DVD for delivery.

Same with HD -- whether you shoot on HDCAM, DVCPRO-HD, HDV, XDCAM-HD, or any other format, you don't deliver on that format. You output in a delivery codec, such as WMV9-HD. Author a windows media high-def DVD and your customers or friends will be able to play it on any PC-compatible computer.

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Mark Donnell

What will solve this problem is when the DVCPRO HD data stream can be encoded into something that is viewable on HD DVD or Blu-ray DVD players. Until that happens, I don't see how I can make this format work for me.

As others have mentioned this shouldn't be an over-riding concern since we don't use DV distribution now, but it's worth noting that HDV footage can be directly archived and played on HD DVDs while DVCProHD will have to be transcoded. The bigger problem here is that the spread of HD players is likely to be sluggish due to high cost and concern over the two competing formats, so the main way to distribute HD output will continue to be to downsample to widescreen DVDs. If you don't think that's worth the investment in new HD equipment, just bide your time until customer demand increases.

[Nate Weaver]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Same with HD -- whether you shoot on HDCAM, DVCPRO-HD, HDV, XDCAM-HD, or any other format, you don't deliver on that format.

Barry, you know I wouldn't pick a bone with you just for the sake of doing so, but you know the vast majority of professional HD work delivers on HDCAM or D5.

For the sake of this discussion (the low-budget videomaker), I know this is pie-in-the-sky, but just because the average Joe DV guy can't afford $20k for the HD1200 DVCPRO HD deck, doesn't mean he can't find one in his nearest metro area and get a few hours on one for $300 (which you directly bill back to your customer).

[Cassidy Bisher]

Originally Posted by Mark Donnell

What will solve this problem is when the DVCPRO HD data stream can be encoded into something that is viewable on HD DVD or Blu-ray DVD players. Until that happens, I don't see how I can make this format work for me. Other comments ?

After seeing HVX footage encoded to a DVD and watching it on a TV, and noticing how much better it looks than dvx100 or xl2 footage, that alone was justifiable enough for me. If your doing work for a client and your shooting high def and planning on outputting to a DVD... it looks very nice. Yea it's not native DVCPro HD, but it's pretty with less artifacts. Just what I have noticed.

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by Nate Weaver

Barry, you know I wouldn't pick a bone with you just for the sake of doing so, but you know the vast majority of professional HD work delivers on HDCAM or D5.

To a production house or broadcaster, but not typically to the end client (the end viewer), which was what the original question was about.

If someone is delivering high-def on tape to someone for post work or broadcast, Nate's absolutely right, it's HDCAM or D-5 or maybe DVCPRO-HD.

What I was pointing out is that the origination format, and the end deliverable format to the end customer, are rarely the same (if it were, none of us would be shooting on DV or HDV cameras, we'd be shooting DVD cameras!) Remember that the original poster was talking about blu-ray or HD-DVD delivery. To me that means delivering to the end customer/home user, and nobody hands over an HDCAM or DVCPRO-HD or D-5 tape to a home user; nor do we hand over DV or HDV tapes to the home user; we author the product in a deliverable format (typically DVD or VHS) and deliver that.

I'm saying that the workflow in the high-def arena will be the same -- you'll acquire in whatever codec or whatever format you use, and that will likely be different than the end product's delivered format (being blu-ray or HD-DVD or WMV9 DVD or whatever).

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

I'm saying that the workflow in the high-def arena will be the same -- you'll acquire in whatever codec or whatever format you use, and that will likely be different than the end product's delivered format (being blu-ray or HD-DVD or WMV9 DVD or whatever).

So far we see at least three lines of HD cameras developing whose footage should be directly playable on consumer discs and players: HDV, XDCAM HD and MPEG4/AVC. No big deal that DVCProHD isn't on this list; just transcode to one of the others for consumer distribution.

[Jethro Senger]

When you shoot 35mm, you don't give everyone a 35mm print.

Shoot the highest format possible, unless you want a lower quality look (super8, DV).

Not getting the HVX becuase blue-ray isn't out yet? Doesn't make sense if you are trying to give clients a good looking product. We finally have a very high quality, affordable HD 'digital film camera'. Look at the list of high end directors buying it. This thing is what many people have been dreaming about.

[Peter Jefferson]

i think the priorities here are a little disjointed.. IMO what DVCPro/HD needs is a DECENT and efficient NLE workflow

Weve got the P2 HW, the camera kicks butt, the codec kicks butt, the workflow takes some getting used to but with time it too will make us wonder why we stayed with tape for so long...
BUT

irrespective of delivery options, we still need to be able to edit in a way where were not rendering for 20hours or having to jump ship to a G5 with FCP

[Mark Donnell]

I read with interest all of the comments above. I have seen comments about the H.264 codec before but am not familiar with it. Could someone briefly explain, or point me to a thread or an article ?

I realize that most commercial video is recorded at a much higher level than it is ever delivered. Standard TV is so poor a quality as to be disgraceful, and digital TV is being compressed so much that its not much better. One of the reasons that I became interested in shooting video is because of the better-than-TV quality that is possible. For me, shooting high and blurring the final product isn't worthwhile, although perhaps archiving high-quality material now with the intent of waiting for better delivery means does make sense.

I just got my packet from the NAB. Among other interesting demos, someone will be showing a ultra-HD system with a reported 4000 lines per inch. Think about processing that data stream !

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Peter Jefferson

irrespective of delivery options, we still need to be able to edit in a way where were not rendering for 20hours or having to jump ship to a G5 with FCP

Peter: what's your current editing setup? I'm editing HDV in Edius and using the MPEG2 encoder in my DVStorm card to generate SD output in real time; the same should work with footage from the HVX200. You have to switch to a widescreen DV project setting to use the DVStorm option, but that works. For HD output long render times appear to be inevitable on all currently popular solutions, but hopefully sometime in the next year or so we'll start to see real-time encoders for that too.

[Peter Jefferson]

I have an Edius SP for HDV on the office system but i dont like it. i just dont like edius, although it is one of he cheapeast RT HD devices i cant stand Eidus. Thast jsut me though, as i have many clients who are using this system for HD delivery
There are obviosuly the DVCProHD upgrade options, but again, i jsut dont liek the way Edius works.
At this time, for PC, im using Vegas 6 and Avid Express Pro HD, and for avid to really crank out DVCProHD, i ned to use Intermediate files..

it seems to me that my decision to jump ship to stills photography was a smart one.. the extra work required to manage these formats is ridiculous and i dont see clients willing to pay for this extra work as in their eyes, it shoudl be standard (ie standard to offer the same price for a HD product as it's only an evolution of what we already do... )