Question on SD vs HD for amateur videographer

[wcj786]

WCJ, I made the switch from SD to HDV and can assure you that buying the camera is just the tip of the iceberg. When to go 'HD', everything involved must be HD.. (If you want a true 1080, HD picture to view and share). You must have an HD camera, a housing, computer software that can handle HD [such as Adobe Premier Elements], a computer that can handle the software [at least a dual-core processor], a Blu-ray HD burner, Blu-ray disks, a Blu-ray player, and an HDTV. The biggest mistake people make is that they get an HD camera, but then they burn the video to a standard DVD. It'll work, but your resulting pictures will be worse than SD video. (Believe me, I speak from experience!) As I see replies from people in this forum, who aren't that pleased with their HD cameras, I strongly suspect that not ALL of their equipment is HD. Thus, their resulting video is garbage. For some people, editing video and burning it to disk isn't important. But, for us divers, editing and burning to disk is nearly a requirement. Unfortunately, the sellers of HD camera housings aren't telling purchasers all they need to know... so that they can get really good video from their setup. If you can't make the investment in ALL that it takes to take, edit, and burn true HD, then you should stay with SD. Pictures from SD cameras are phenomenal, and editing and burning to disk are straightforward. And, you probably won't need a new computer for the editing software. (By the way, I recommend Adobe Premier Elements for editing either SD or HD).
Good Luck, Kent

I am a bit of a nerd in that I am VERY into computers. I have 4 that all have quad core processors, SLI, Audigy Sound Card (I know, not the best), and Blu-Ray burners. I have 2 2560x1600 monitors attached , with single 2560x1600 monitors attache to the other 2. The necessary above water equipment is no problem for me, as well as the software.

That said, I plan on using SD after editing, because not everyone who will want to get a copy of the shots will have HDTVs or players. I started this thread mainly concerned about the QUALITY of the footage as the basis for going HD vs SD.

I don't know of a consumer HD camera that will not also shoot in SD, so I decided that I might as well go for an HD camera, even if I decide to shoot in SD. Any comments on this? Will this SD setup still have more problems than a camera that ONLY shoots SD? Or, is it just that the HD requires more light to get good pictures, so the SD shooting through the same camera will turn out fine?

EDIT: I am trying to future-proof my U/W setup for the next 5 years. I have also decided to change my camera selection from the Canon HV30 to the Sony SR12. From what I have been reading on it, the SR12 performs as well in low light as any HD consumer camera until it gets to about 15 lux. Then it is the second best out there at this time.

 

[PerroneFord]

I don't know of a consumer HD camera that will not also shoot in SD, so I decided that I might as well go for an HD camera, even if I decide to shoot in SD. Any comments on this? Will this SD setup still have more problems than a camera that ONLY shoots SD? Or, is it just that the HD reqauires more light to get good pictures, so the SD shooting through the same camera will turn out fine?

The light gathering ability is tied to the sensor(s). If the camera shoots HD, then the sensor array is very densely packed compared to one that only shoots SD. This will affect everything shot with the camera regardless if it's being shot in HD or not. This will not affect the QUALITY of the recording, but will affect the ability of the camera to work well in low light. There is just really no way around the physics of it.

 

[wcj786]

Thanks PF. I was having a goofball moment and did not even think of this. That might not be obvious to some, but I know better. Thanks for knocking the sense back into me.

 

[Empty V]

Possibly, although I've never edited anything from that cam. If it's recording the full signal to the P2 cards, then yes, it will surely look way better than my PC350 did

You're thinking of a diff cam, the HVX200. PF when are you gonna get yours wet?

Billy

 

[PerroneFord]

The DVX? Never. It's a topside cam only. I'm thinking REAL hard about a Scarlet though.

 

[limeyx]

You're thinking of a diff cam, the HVX200. PF when are you gonna get yours wet?

Billy

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

 

[limeyx]

The DVX? Never. It's a topside cam only. I'm thinking REAL hard about a Scarlet though.

Yah, me too, even though I have put way too much $ into my current setup, and I would have to get a decent Windows machine, or a whole new Mac to edit the footage. I think it will give awesome footage, and likely be smaller or at worst same size as my current setup.

 

[limeyx]

That said, I plan on using SD after editing, because not everyone who will want to get a copy of the shots will have HDTVs or players. I started this thread mainly concerned about the QUALITY of the footage as the basis for going HD vs SD.

I don't know of a consumer HD camera that will not also shoot in SD, so I decided that I might as well go for an HD camera, even if I decide to shoot in SD. Any comments on this? Will this SD setup still have more problems than a camera that ONLY shoots SD? Or, is it just that the HD requires more light to get good pictures, so the SD shooting through the same camera will turn out fine?

EDIT: I am trying to future-proof my U/W setup for the next 5 years. I have also decided to change my camera selection from the Canon HV30 to the Sony SR12. From what I have been reading on it, the SR12 performs as well in low light as any HD consumer camera until it gets to about 15 lux. Then it is the second best out there at this time.

My recommendation is, assuming you get the HDV cam. Shoot *everything* in HD
Edit in HD. Then export to the format you want -- that makes it easy to go back later and re-export in higher resolutions.

HDV scaled down to DV sizes looks really (really) nice.
Some people say that recording HDV in cam (Or AVCHD for your SR12) and then having the camera convert to DV when you export to the NLE is better than downscaling in the NLE, but I dont have any hard knowledge there.

Regarding low-light -- the SR12 does start to break down with noise in a room with "reasonable" light conditions (i.e. that a human can easily see in but a camera less so). The noise starts to get very visible.

If you shoot mainly clear water, you might be happy with it (although if you cannot manual white-balance, you may not be as happy).

 

[PerroneFord]

Yah, me too, even though I have put way too much $ into my current setup, and I would have to get a decent Windows machine, or a whole new Mac to edit the footage.

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.

I think it will give awesome footage, and likely be smaller or at worst same size as my current setup.

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.

 

[Empty V]

The DVX? Never. It's a topside cam only. I'm thinking REAL hard about a Scarlet though.

I don't know too much about the Scarlet and missed NAB last week due to work in DC. On and off for the last few months I've been working on a RED project that was shot in Dubai and it's been very frustrating. From what I understand they also had some serious shooting issues on set. Hopefully they will work out all these bugs on Scarlet, right now I'm weary.

Billy