Question on SD vs HD for amateur videographer

[Empty V]

So what recording mechanism does the DVX100 have ? I thought it was P2 cards, no ?

It shoots to MiniDV. HVX200 uses the P2 cards or streams it to an HDD.

Billy

 

[limeyx]

It shoots to MiniDV. HVX200 uses the P2 cards or streams it to an HDD.

Billy

OK, that's my mistake then (I am, not that familiar with the panasonic cam naming)
Since MiniDV is 25Mbps (just like my old PC350) I'd be interested to see in reality how much better the footage could be within the MiniDV/DV constraints.

Recording full signal, I can definitely see could give a significant quality improvement.

 

[limeyx]

No you won't. You'll just have to play with it like the big boys do. And like I do when I work with your 1080p stuff. Use proxy files. Cut an SD proxy, edit and color correct that, then replace that with the original file come render time. It's clean and fast. You will need to jump out of FCE though.



Yea, shooting true 2k or better will be lovely. BUT depending on lens size, that thing is going to need a ton of light. You'll be set with your new ones. I just hope it shoots RAW. If it does, it'll be exciting times for prosumers.

Yes, I will -- I have a PowerPC mac and I dont think I can edit any RED footage on a PPC, it's Intel only -- anyone want to buy a (almost) useless Mac ?

RED confirmed it will shoot RED RAW I think, and this is (IMO) what is really enabling the revolution (although the attitude of RED as a company is a key factor, esp regarding pricing)

Definitely exciting times ...

 

[PerroneFord]

Since MiniDV is 25Mbps (just like my old PC350) I'd be interested to see in reality how much better the footage could be within the MiniDV/DV constraints.

WIth 72mm of Leica Glass in front of it, it's gonna be a major difference to the PC350.

 

[limeyx]

WIth 72mm of Leica Glass in front of it, it's gonna be a major difference to the PC350.

Interchangeable lenses can I am sure definitely help with some quality lenses, but the fact is that MiniDV limits out at 25Mbps and has less efficient coding than HDV, so the question really becomes how much are you able to really take advantage of those excellent lenses ?

 

[PerroneFord]

The lens is not interchangable. It came standard with 72mm of Leica Glass. It's also why it retailed at over $5k new. Well, that and it was the first ever true 24p camera released to the masses.

The coding of DV is not less efficient. It simply does not throw as much information away. DV does not use a GOP structure, so each frame can stand on it's own. This is why it's motion is so much cleaner than HDV, and why it can be edited frame for frame in it's native format unlike HDV.

HDV gives far more resolution than DV. That is certain and it is easily observed. DV gives less motion artifacting than HDV. That is it's advantage. That and it needs less light to give an optimal image given the same size sensor(s).

Really, it comes down to what you need.

I want you to take a close look at something:

Apple - Trailers - Iraq In Fragments - Trailer

Or Select an HD one:

Apple - Trailers - Iraq In Fragments - HD


Tell me what you think of it.

 

[Empty V]

The lens is not interchangable. It came standard with 72mm of Leica Glass. It's also why it retailed at over $5k new. Well, that and it was the first ever true 24p camera released to the masses.

The coding of DV is not less efficient. It simply does not throw as much information away. DV does not use a GOP structure, so each frame can stand on it's own. This is why it's motion is so much cleaner than HDV, and why it can be edited frame for frame in it's native format unlike HDV.

HDV gives far more resolution than DV. That is certain and it is easily observed. DV gives less motion artifacting than HDV. That is it's advantage. That and it needs less light to give an optimal image given the same size sensor(s).

Really, it comes down to what you need.

I want you to take a close look at something:

Apple - Trailers - Iraq In Fragments - Trailer

Tell me what you think of it.

Very well put. IMO This is one of those things that isn't spoken about enough and why HDV is extremely misleading. The market is so flooded with resolution and under educated with the other contributing factors behind video creation.

I believe that Panasonic is still the only company that has mastered the 24P look in the prosumer world. Canon comes close but still can't beat em out and Sony is ages away.

Billy

 

[limeyx]

The lens is not interchangable. It came standard with 72mm of Leica Glass. It's also why it retailed at over $5k new. Well, that and it was the first ever true 24p camera released to the masses.

The coding of DV is not less efficient. It simply does not throw as much information away. DV does not use a GOP structure, so each frame can stand on it's own. This is why it's motion is so much cleaner than HDV, and why it can be edited frame for frame in it's native format unlike HDV.

HDV gives far more resolution than DV. That is certain and it is easily observed. DV gives less motion artifacting than HDV. That is it's advantage. That and it needs less light to give an optimal image given the same size sensor(s).

Really, it comes down to what you need.

I want you to take a close look at something:

Apple - Trailers - Iraq In Fragments - Trailer

Or Select an HD one:

Apple - Trailers - Iraq In Fragments - HD


Tell me what you think of it.

Sure, it does come down to what you need. My HDV efficiency comment was probably misleading, since it's I guess comparing two things that are very different.

My point I guess is, are you really getting the benefit of that kind of lens when MiniDV has a relatively small resolution? Simply saying that because there is a better lens on there, therefore it's "better than the crap fake HD that is HDV" may not be accurate (and I appreciate that those aren't yours or Billy's exact words, but thats the jist of what seem to be saying)

I do agree that the GOP in HDV is not ideal, and that HDV is a compromise to get HD onto the same tapes as MiniDV since when it was invented, realistically some kind of tape was mostly inevitable for the lower-end markets, and making bigger tapes I guess was out of the question.

Yes, HDV is reliant on "not that much stuff" changing frame to frame, and if "too much stuff changes" then it will start to break down, and breakdowns can potentially affect multiple frames.

Ideally we'd be recording all this stuff in some uncompressed format, but realistically we are not, and simply saying HDV is crappy and MiniDV with a big-arse lens on it is better isn't really that logical (to me)

Also, I am not sure what the point on the trailers is as the small version I dont think is even DVD resolution, right ? (or is it just that it looks so small on my monitor ?) and isnt the small version just a scaled version of the HD ?

Actually, going to the web page, it was shot on the DVX100 as I am guessing you knew, and then scaled up. I am not sure what point that is really trying to prove as there is no HDV source to compare to.

I am not saying that HDV is great by any means, I fully admit it is full of compromises. I would love to see how footage from a DVX100 compared in Final Cut to HDV, as the only DV stuff I have worked with is from the PC350 which yes, has a worse lens, worse encoder worse worse worse everything, and that becomes painfully obvious for underwater footage.

Lowlight is as you say mostly a function of pixel density, and here it's clear that the HDV cameras would (and usually do not) need to have a larger sensor than a DV camera for the same lowlight performance.

 

[PerroneFord]

I guess what I am getting at is that I don't think miniDV is all that bad. It can't compete with the HDV coming out of YOUR camera, but compared to some of the smaller HDV cameras.

In terms of the lens, I think that miniDV with good glass is as good as a basic HDV camera. Once you get to the level of the FX1 and certainly the EX1, then miniDV is always going to fall down.

The thing behind the trailer was to simply say that minDV, when shot well, can look pretty darn good. That movie was blown up to 35mm and played in theatres around the country. HDV has the advantage of better resolution and probably would have looked "cleaner" but miniDV got the job done.

I wish there was someone near me who I could do a A/B test with using a good HDV camera and my DVX. I'd lose badly on resolution, but if there was motion, I think that would level things out a bit.

Both technologies right now I think have advantages. But with AVCHD and AVCam (Panasonic flavor) on the horizon, I think the days are numbered for them both. And if Scarlet does what everyone expects, we could see wavelet compression move down in the the sub $5k market and then all bets are off. RAW video in the hands of prosumers or consumers will change everything, just as it did in digital SLR.

 

[limeyx]

I guess what I am getting at is that I don't think miniDV is all that bad. It can't compete with the HDV coming out of YOUR camera, but compared to some of the smaller HDV cameras.

In terms of the lens, I think that miniDV with good glass is as good as a basic HDV camera. Once you get to the level of the FX1 and certainly the EX1, then miniDV is always going to fall down.

The thing behind the trailer was to simply say that minDV, when shot well, can look pretty darn good. That movie was blown up to 35mm and played in theatres around the country. HDV has the advantage of better resolution and probably would have looked "cleaner" but miniDV got the job done.

I wish there was someone near me who I could do a A/B test with using a good HDV camera and my DVX. I'd lose badly on resolution, but if there was motion, I think that would level things out a bit.

Both technologies right now I think have advantages. But with AVCHD and AVCam (Panasonic flavor) on the horizon, I think the days are numbered for them both. And if Scarlet does what everyone expects, we could see wavelet compression move down in the the sub $5k market and then all bets are off. RAW video in the hands of prosumers or consumers will change everything, just as it did in digital SLR.

I am (mostly) agreeing with you, HDV was inevitably a stop-gap measure.
I haven't really edited any HDV from consumer cams or MiniDV from good DV cams though honestly.

Playing that trailer full-size seems a bit beyond my mac unfortunately, so the larger one did not seem to play at full speed.