DVCPro 50 vs HDV

[Angelcyk]

Most people would agree that HDV is not quite as good as DVCPro HD yet obviously higher quality than SD. But the same can said for DVCPro 50. In terms of resolution, which one would you say is a higher quality between the two?

[PerroneFord]

HDV has higher resolution than either DVCProHD or DVCPro 50. But clearly, that's not the entire story.

[AwakenedFilms]

Not sure what you mean about HDV having a higher resolution, PerroneFord?? DVCPRO HD is a codec that records at a roughly 100 mbps data rate, with a 4:2:2 color sampling. The resolution can be 1280x720 or 1920x1080. HDV is a codec that records at a roughly 25 mbps data rate, with a 4:2:0 color sampling.

It is my understanding that DVCPRO HD is compressed, but not nearly as compressed at HDV.

DVCPRO 50 is 720x480 at a roughly 25mbps data rate with a 4:2:2 color sampling. Bottom line: HDV is higher resolution than DVCPRO 50, but employs a much higher compression rate and there for end up with larger compression artifacts. HDV wins in resolution over DVCPRO 50, but not color reproduction nor clean compression.


Jason

[adamr316]

DVCPro HD may expand to 1280x720 or 1920x1080 but they are stored as squeezed resolutions. I forget the spec but they are not native 1920x1080 et al but then again neither is HDCam. HDV is squeezed as well but has a higher recorded resolutions (pixel count), so that's what PerroneFord is saying.

[PerroneFord]

DVCProHD is not 1920x1080. It's 1280x1080. HDV is 1440x1080.

I am not saying that HDV is a better codec than either DVCProHD or DVCPro50. All I am saying is that the resolution of HDV happens to be higher.



Not sure what you mean about HDV having a higher resolution, PerroneFord?? DVCPRO HD is a codec that records at a roughly 100 mbps data rate, with a 4:2:2 color sampling. The resolution can be 1280x720 or 1920x1080. HDV is a codec that records at a roughly 25 mbps data rate, with a 4:2:0 color sampling.

[ProfessorU]

DVCPRO 50 is 720x480 at a roughly 25mbps data rate with a 4:2:2 color sampling.

Actually, it's 50Mbps. That's why it's called DVCPro50.

HDV records at roughly 19Mbps (the audio rounds it out to 25).

[mrbrycel]

DVCPRO-50 better than DVCAM right?

[seunosewa]

Yeah. I think DVCAM is essentially DV. It just happens to waste more tape.

[PerroneFord]

It also locks audio unlike DV, which is important to some people.

Yeah. I think DVCAM is essentially DV. It just
happens to waste more tape.

[jrmiller_entertainment]

you're comparing a high def resolution to a standard def resolution. obviously the high def one is better but if you're going straight to dvd record in dvcpro50...better color sampling and less compression.

[seunosewa]

@jrmmiller: DVCPRO50 does not have better color sampling than downsampled HDV. Downsampled HDV is practically 4:4:4 which is better than 4:2:2. And it generally has less noise. However, HDV might suffer from more motion-related more compression artifacts.

[Angelcyk]

So your saying, theoretically speaking, that if HDV is compressed at the same rate as DVCPro HD (at 100mbps) then it would be a better format than DVCPro HD?

[Angelcyk]

I shouldn't say "better" format but instead a "higher quality" format.

[jcoxshooter]

@jrmmiller: DVCPRO50 does not have better color sampling than downsampled HDV. Downsampled HDV is practically 4:4:4 which is better than 4:2:2. And it generally has less noise. However, HDV might suffer from more motion-related more compression artifacts.

what do you meand by downsampled hdv is 4:4:4?

[Aroon_Narayanan]

So your saying, theoretically speaking, that if HDV is compressed at the same rate as DVCPro HD (at 100mbps) then it would be a better format than DVCPro HD?

Not necessarily. DVCPRO HD is intraframe, that is, it only compresses within each individual frame. HDV is long-GOP, and it compresses between different frames. This can create issues with motion, editing, and tape dropouts, and these issues can plague long-GOP codecs, like XDCAM EX, AVC HD, and HDV, regardless of bitrate. (Needless to say, 35mbps XDCAM EX is going to have a whole lot less issues than 6mbps AVC HD.) Yes, HDV may have a higher resolution, but it has half the color sampling and the issues of a long-GOP format. The advantage is that it's incredibly cheap to shoot with.

[Aroon_Narayanan]

what do you meand by downsampled hdv is 4:4:4?
That would all depend on how you downsample it. Seeing as the color resolution of 1440x1080 HDV is 720x540, if you convert the HDV footage to a 4:4:4 codec and then downsample, the fact that the color res is higher than DV resolution means that you'll technically get 4:4:4 color.

[ProfessorU]

That would all depend on how you downsample it. Seeing as the color resolution of 1440x1080 HDV is 720x540, if you convert the HDV footage to a 4:4:4 codec and then downsample, the fact that the color res is higher than DV resolution means that you'll technically get 4:4:4 color.

This thread is becoming filled with misinformation and worse, accurate information that is misleading.

HDV uses 4:2:0 chroma subsampling. So if chroma subsampling were perfect and you were shooting progressive, it would be comparable to 4:4:4 in Widescreen SD, but in images with high contrast, fine detail, or motion, you still could have out of gamut colors and other artifacts that creep into your final. Also, if you're going to 4:3, you'll need to lose some of that horizontal resolution to cropping, which you wouldn't have to do with DVCPro50. SoHDV makes for pretty decent SD and web videos, but calling it 4:4:4 is an oversimplification.

HDV is usually considered an acceptable capture format for SD broadcast by most networks, but DVCPro50 is (I think) accepted by everyone for SD broadcast.

The real benefits to DVCPro50 on P2 are
no interframe compression ( more detail in moving shots or subjects and errors, if present, affect a single frame)
Choice of 4x3 or 16x9 aspect ratio without losing resolution
more reliable solid state recording
significantly better audio on four audio channels
faster-than-realtime transfer to the NLE
No need for software downconversion

[Huy Vu]

Choice of 4x3 or 16x9 aspect ratio without losing resolution


How would this be possible? The camera's chip aspect ratio determines how well it handles 4:3 or 16:9, and it's either one or the other. If the camera is native 16:9, then it has to crop its sensor to get 4:3, and if it's 4:3 then it goes through an electronic squeeze mode, resulting in a lower resolution.

[seunosewa]

So your saying, theoretically speaking, that if HDV is compressed at the same rate as DVCPro HD (at 100mbps) then it would be a better format than DVCPro HD?
Yes. HDV at 100mbps will be sharper, less noisy, and exhibit fewer compression artifacts than DVCProHD. It's like using a bitrate of 25mbps for a standard def DVD. It's just too much. XDCAM has a maximum bitrate of 35mbps.

However, it has less color information vertically which can make a difference if and only if (1) you have to do heavy color correction or green screen work and (2) the resulting video will be played back in high definition. Otherwise, your eyes can't tell the difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 (trust me, I have tried!).

So HDV makes for pretty decent SD and web videos, but calling it 4:4:4 is an oversimplification.
Usually when people say "4:4:4" they mean "4:4:4 uncompressed" but downsampled HDV is "4:4:4 compressed" in the same way that DvcProHD is not the same as "4:2:2 uncompressed". They are all compressed. And here's the way I see the compression: In low motion scenes, HDV is definitely better (sharper, less noisy). In extreme high motion scenes, such as sports, DVCProHD is definitely better (no motion artifacts). In between the two extremes, it depends on the cam you're using. That's comparing the two HD formats.

[AJ101]

HDV at 100mbps will not be HDV, but will be an idea for SONY's next format.......

[Spartacus]

This thread is more confusing things than clarifying them...

[ProfessorU]

How would this be possible? The camera's chip aspect ratio determines how well it handles 4:3 or 16:9, and it's either one or the other. If the camera is native 16:9, then it has to crop its sensor to get 4:3, and if it's 4:3 then it goes through an electronic squeeze mode, resulting in a lower resolution.

The DVCPro50 codec allows you to encode at a pixel aspect ratio of .9 or 1.2. So your resolution is 720x480 even in 4:3 format. This means DVCProHD has a chroma resolution of 360x480 in 4:3 and 16:9.

I hope anyone reading this who is trying to choose between formats isn't misled. HDV is an impressive engineering feat designed for consumer cams. DVCPro codecs are designed for broadcast material, and you will have a more pleasant workflow and more consistent product if you shoot DVCPro50.

[Aroon_Narayanan]

This thread is becoming filled with misinformation and worse, accurate information that is misleading.
My mistake. I didn't mean to oversimplify/mislead.

[Angelcyk]

So to sum things up, the three things that are against HDV is that it has artifacts during fast motion, it is compressed to 25Mbps and it has a lower color sampling compared to DVCPro HD. But it has better noise ratio and it even has more lines of resolution compared to DVCPro HD. So really, in terms of quality, how big of a gap is there between DVCPro HD and HDV? Is real much there at all?

[Aroon_Narayanan]

It depends on what you do with the codecs (what you shoot, how you use it, etc.). DVCPRO HD is more robust for fast motion and editing. HDV is cheaper and more resolute, but has issues. The quality gap is variable, depending on what you are doing.

[John Caballero]

Mr. Barry Green where are thou?

[Barry_Green]

DVCPRO50 is a top-level professional format, according to the EBU it's directly comparable to DigiBeta. HDV is a bottom-level consumer format. Not really sure where there's a need for a comparison.

If you want to shoot HD, DVCPRO50 won't do it. If you want standard-def, DVCPRO50 is better. If you want to take the time to downconvert in post, HDV downconverted can sometimes look really good, depending on whether you're starting with 60i footage (not so good) or 30P/24P footage (looks much better than downconverted 60i).

[John Caballero]

Thank you again Mr. Green.

[seunosewa]

Yeah, that was pretty conclusive.

In other words:
(1) DVCPro50 is more 'user-friendly' for SD work.
(2) Quality difference is insignificant or variable.

[Mac]

I've made numerous documentaries in HDV, using an XL H1 - I was very impressed with the quality of the image in spite of the compression issues mentioned above.. the picture is really amazing when you consider that it actually takes up less room on drives than standard DV.

For the last year I've been shooting DVCPRO HD @ 720/24pn (sorry, I haven't worked with 50). The resolution out of the camera is slightly less than 1080i HDV, really only noticeable with a side-by-side comparison on a large screen... However, as I've said numerous times, resolution isn't the only consideration. The image from the Panasonic cameras just is more pleasing looking...

Plus - Recently I've been updating a couple of client docs and intercutting DVCPRO HD shot at 1080i with the original HDV material. Out of the camera they are very close (Panasonic is "meatier", I don't speak in tech). Where the difference comes is when you start putting effects, color correction or graphics on the image in post. DVCPRO HD appears virtually unchanged, but there is noticeable degradation in the HDV footage... That is where the HDV compression rears it's ugly head...

[Justyn]

Mac.. that's a great post there. Informed and savy. The other thing about HDV is that it may use up less space, but it's way way more processor intensive. It really pushes my G5 way beyond what DVCPRO does.. both in render time, timeline options, and displaying the 1080 HDV. I believe that Barry had said that's it's 7 times more processor intensive.


I'm in line to get another Mac next year, but the G5 at 4 years old, has really handled the jump to DVCPRO HD quite well.