What's the difference between DV and DVCPro in 480?

As far as the format goes they are identical. DVC Pro, like DV Cam uses slightly higher quality tape (Metal Particle tape, instead of Metal Evaporated). It also records to tape slightly faster (I believe, though i am not positive of this, I know for certain DV CAM records to tape faster and thus DV CAM tapes have their capacity reduced by 1/3)

So the reason why the seem the same to you, is because indeed they are basically the same codec, one is just stored in a more robust manner (making it less prone to errors) and if it is like its DVCAM counterpart has a locked audio track, avoiding audio sync problems that can happen in Mini DV over longer takes.

So the long answer to your question? Umm there shouldnt be a difference quality wise if you're going to p2 media, but there is a reliability difference when going to tape media.

This leads to my own question:
I haven't had the need to do this yet (Since i've been using my p2 card) but I am not very familiar with the DVC-Pro family (having come from a Sony DV CAM background) but:
can you use DVC-Pro tapes in the HVX?
I have only been able to find "medium" size tapes, and the tapes the manual refers to for purchasing are both MiniDV type tapes. I know DV CAM tapes come in mini format, and might be inclined to use those instead (being more robust and better for archiving) but I still cant find an option to switch between DVC Pro or Mini DV options in the TAPE side of the camera.

On sony models the camera would automatically use DVCAM mode if you inserted a DVCam tape, so this is why I am wondering if the reason i can't find a way to switch the camera to DVCpro mode is because i havent used an actual DVC-pro tape (Since I havent found a mini version of said tape!)

The reason I ask is i sometimes do some freelance editing for a local TV station and they exclusively work on DVC-Pro, with older panasonic VCRs (The older type that only take medium/large DVC-Pro tapes and can't read DV Cam or mini DV...they have an adapter for adapting Mini sized tapes, but last time they tried using it with my MiniDV imported footage it didnt work) now sometimes I get footage to edit on an extremely tight deadline and would like to be able to in those (rare) circumstances use my HVX to print out to DVC-Pro format.

Is this just not possible in the Tape side? I was a disappointed that there was no DVC-Pro 50 support on the tape side, but I thought it is possible to record DVC-pro on it.

Sorry about the long post!

Daniel Colmenares
 
Thanks but I'm still a bit confused.

The HVX200 only takes mini-DV tapes (as far as I know). The 480i recording options are thus only for P2 so, if the codec is the same, I don't get why we can do either DV or DVCPro.
 
I agree with you on that one. The difference between the formats as far as i am aware (And its only me speaking so take it with a grain of salt) is that DVC-Pro would record an analog audio cue track and use a slightly wider track pitch (18mm or 15mm instead of mini dv's 10mm) and like DVCam is probably (but not sure on this point) runs the tape at a faster speed, thus placing less information per inch of tape, helping prevent errors and artifacting, but other than that they're identical in the bit level.

With the p2 recording audio digitaly I think the biggest advantage of DVC-pro is lost (audio sync fidelity).

My question to you is: why are you using a P2 card to store 480i footage? why not go directly to tape?
 
Well, I was actually just testing some of the different formats.

Because of the cost and time issues, I do plan to use tape for most 480i stuff.

However, if I get a Cineporter, I'll most likely do all 480i on it. Aside from the obvious benefit of DVCPro50 (which is huge), digital is just so much better than tape. No more worrying if a dirty head will hurt my footage. No more degrading the footage simply by looking through it before I capture. No more slight loss of quality in capturing. NO MORE FREAKING CAPTURING!!! No more having to get a friend's cheap little camcorder to capture on so I don't run down the head of my expensive one. No more dust and scratches. The ability to jump to any shot I want at the touch of a button. The ability to delete the shots I don't want easily without earasing the whole thing. P2 is just bliss (but so damn expensive!)
 
Ok I can kind of see it with the Cineporter. I got my HVX through them so I am also looking very hard at the Cineporter (specially since i get a 10% discount hehe!)

Slight loss of quality in captures? I had not heard of that. Its technically a digital stream transported through firewire (or USB 2) onto the NLE of your choice, no?

While i agree with you on the greatness of a tapeless system, don't ignore that digital has its own downfalls. Corrupted data, more sensitive equipment (I know the p2 is supposed to be extremely robust...but what would you rather drop from 10 feet: a Tape (Which even if you break the case and manage to scratch up 3" of tape can still place into another tape and loose what? a second at most?) or a p2 card?

Personally I dont plan on testing just how durable this solid technology is (I already have a tiny pelican case i was using for a laptop harddrive that will carry my P2 cards)

It also requires a higher working knowledge of computers in general than before (something that might be a considerable disadvantage to an older DP). Hell I'm a about as young as they come and still having to play catch up.

Having a good, solid, working knowledge of computers, operating systems, networking hardware and standards are becoming requirements for the job.
 
VenezuelanD said:
Slight loss of quality in captures? I had not heard of that. Its technically a digital stream transported through firewire (or USB 2) onto the NLE of your choice, no?
Click to expand...

Any running through of the footage will degrade it a bit. Also, even if you are keeping with the DV codec, I still see losses just from uncompressing then recompressing. I capture a mini-DV in it's own 4:1:1 and then immediatly output it from Avid as a quicktime also in typical DV 4:1:1, it still doesn't look as good if I just exported the 4:1:1 origional uncompressed (even though theoretically they should be the same) and that uncompressed still doesn't look quite as good (to my eye) as strait from the camera. I've done comparisons and there are loses.

While i agree with you on the greatness of a tapeless system, don't ignore that digital has its own downfalls.
Click to expand...

Yeah but I find them more manigible.

Corrupted data, more sensitive equipment (I know the p2 is supposed to be extremely robust...but what would you rather drop from 10 feet: a Tape (Which even if you break the case and manage to scratch up 3" of tape can still place into another tape and loose what? a second at most?) or a p2 card?
Click to expand...

I don't drop my media from 10 feet. For that matter, I'd actually feel better since, if someone stepped on it, I think P2 would have a better chance of survival.

It also requires a higher working knowledge of computers in general than before (something that might be a considerable disadvantage to an older DP). Hell I'm a about as young as they come and still having to play catch up.
Click to expand...

I'm 22. I look at having a knowladge of computers as part of what is needed to deal with being the one man filmmaking guru I want to be. I wore a number of hats in my last movie and it required me to do a lot of research and bone up on a lot of things but it was worth it and the only way to get the control I wanted.

That said, I don't think P2 requires more of a computer knowladge. HD certainly adds hassels since you now have a bunch of different images sizes instead of just 720 by 480 as well as other issues.

P2 on the other hand strikes me as much simpler than tape HD options like HDV. All I have to do in Avid (which is what I use) is take the MXF files off the P2 and put them in the Avid Media Folder. Then I open them with the media tool and I'm good.

If I used HDV tapes, I'd first have to figure out what method of capture and coding to use. Then, upon spending hours capturing, I wouldn't know which MXF files corresponded to which shots since they'd all be in 2 gig chunks. I'd also need a more powerful computer to deal with the HDV codec as well as having more trouble editing because of fake frames and redundant DV fields (only P2 can do native recording).

P2 or Hard disk is just much more flexible and easier.

Having a good, solid, working knowledge of computers, operating systems, networking hardware and standards are becoming requirements for the job.[/quote]
 
In NTSC, DV and DVCPRO are indeed identical in codec and quality; the main difference on the HVX would be that the DVCPRO version includes some data flags that make the firewire stream compatible with earlier DVCPRO gear.

In PAL, DV uses 4:2:0 and DVCPRO uses 4:1:1, so there is a noticeable difference between the two.
 
ahh yes I had forgotten about the 4:1:1 in PAL part.

Hey Barry, is it possible to record DVC pro to the tape side of the camera?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top