Toke
Forum Replies Created
-
And another one:
https://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10731
Even bigger & fw-bus powered, amazing! -
What sony hdv camera your friend has?
Or do they give analog component output only with hd? -
Maybe Brian does not want to buy a video card with analog component output to betacam and would like to use hvx200 as a da-converter.
-
He doesn’t have component output in sony’s hdv?
-
Ok, we know that it is possible, but will it happen?
When is the first firmware update due? -
[Frank Nolan] “When was the Z1 ever considered a broadcast camera?”
When was vx1000 or any miniDV-camera considered as broadcast camera?
But eventually all broadcasters accept it.Quality isn’t usually what it used to be with betacam, but there’s lots of reasons other than tape format for that.
A couple of years ago today’s reality-tv series wouldn’t met the required content quality level either.
So who knows what is mainstream also in technical view in couple of years, anything accepted perhaps? 😉 -
No worries as long as your american client specifically wants 30fps for the footage to match with other footage shot in 30fps.
Let’s not forget that most of video footage used in tv is not shot 24p. -
I don’t see vcr’s so important anymore. Sony’s hdv deck is just a camera without camera head and it costs about the same amount than the camera, so it’s better idea to buy 2 cameras than one and vcr.
One difference between hdv and dvcprohd will remain and no talent can remove that: datarate.
1080i60hdv has only 0.54 bits per pixel when dvcprohd has 2.4 bits per pixel. Even if hdv’s interframe compression is a bit more efficient, it also produces “movement error” artifacts when motion estimation in a GOP fails.This leads to that some new technology narrows down the artistic choises we are used to have.
It makes me a bit angry and sad, but it seems to be that camera design engineers have never understood what creative professionals really want out of their camera. In the past when design aimed to best possible “technical quality” it rarely restricted the creative use. Nowadays when camera design aims to lowest cost and highest profits, “technical quality” is designed to be just above “acceptable level”. This is good enough in optimal sircumstances, but not in any other.In technical history point of view, hdv is a sad example of a format that is cheapest solution for consumers but adopted also by professionals. It uses tape technology used by consumer cameras for whole decade. It uses compression method that was designed over a decade ago. It uses interlaced picture which is just compression method for analog television.
For example using handheld camera with high shutter speed with lots of movement in the picture and rapid changes in the lights (= regular music video) is too much for hdv datarate. I’ve seen examples of this.
But of course, most of the time hdv can give “acceptable quality”. It really depends what you are shooting and how.But hey, happy new year to everybody in creativecows!
May your new year be unique! -
[Michael Brennan] “couldn’t it do 4:2:2 though?”
With 1080p60@100Mbps there would be too much compression. Or maybe with jpeg2000…
And where do we need better vertical resolution than horizontal?
Square pixels sound logical to me.