Answer to why HVX vs. HDV

[DC]

. . . and I know there will be lots of productions shot with 25mbs MPEG2 with those cameras that will air in HD and hold up just fine. It's efficient, but has its limitations, although I would argue that in most scenarios it HDV works quite well. Sure, it ain't for everyone, but it's turned out to be much better than most honestly anticipated so give it its due.

I understand your points. I do give it its due for what it is. However, my personal opinion is that I wouldn't choose HDV as an acquisition format when I have other choices like DVCProHD. Please forgive my cynicism toward this. Some people act as if I am trash talking their mothers. We're only talking about geeky, techie video junk!

Nobody's harder on HDV than I am; I just don't like the format at all. But, I have always said that it is of course an HD recording format.
Remember, DigiBeta and VHS are both SD recording formats, even though there's a world of difference between them. HDV and HDCAM-SR are both HD recording formats, even though there's a world of difference between them.

And actually, lesser formats are on the way -- I haven't spent any time with Sanyo's 9mbps MPEG-4 HD recording format, but I would expect HDV should look better than that. And then there's Sony's XDCAM HD in its low-quality 18-megabit rate; I don't know if the variable-bitrate recording lets it match HDV's 25-megabit rate or not. So it's possible that while HDV is currently the entry-level recording format for HD, there may be new entries that actually fit in below it.

Yeah, and it's that low-end entry into HD through HDV (or whatever else) that I don't personally like. I prefer DVCProHD (or higher) in terms of specifications.

Well Spice and the big booty network are allowing pixelvision and VHS-C... in response to Discovery channel's ultimatium. I don't think I'd be using them as a standard to compare quality.. but would be more inclined to check out HBO and others for that kind of qualification. I know several HBO shows have been using HDV.. and I'm sure a few will use the HVX. Personally, HDV seems like a baby step into HD . . . this camera loves colors. Reds and any primary color. I have told the talent to wear primary bright colors and it loooks fabulous. I think even Carrot Top would look alright on the HVX . . .

I agree.

I can guarantee that DV as well as HDV doesn't do chromakey well without 3rd party keying software. It just doesn't have the color info.Even my HVX isn't going to compare to a 2/3" camera. But with equal lighting and talent, the HVX IS a step above HDV.

4:2:2 will beat out 4:2:0 & 4:1:1 plain and simple. HDV is highly compressed. DVCPro50 IS a better format. Still compressed though. Now stack up a 2/3 camera shooting in HDV and you might have an argument.

That's pretty much where I stand too. It's those types of compromises that are unsettling to me.

I have the exact same complaint with the Viper camera. some of the footage shot with it might be fine, BUT! (and this is where it gets tricky....) some might not be. I've decided it's better to play it safe and not use the Viper.

Seriously? If so, very interesting comment. I don't know a whole lot about the Viper cam.

. . . dvcprohd is still the more robust and professional format.

Compared to DV, BetaSP and HDV - yes, I agree.

. . . if your footage is going to eventually be distributed via HD-DVD, or DVD, or broadcast on TV as HD, it will be highly MPEG compressed.

Of course. And it will come at a price (the artifacting). But I'm speaking strictly of acquisition formats.

DV is better for DVD work completely. Look at the poo poo quality of Beta when it gets on DVD... Just doesn't look at good as DV, IMHO. Beta also comes with a whole crapload of headaches and back-breaking problems. Along with all that added expense.

And I also agree with that assessment.

Hey anyone see the South Park with the Hybrid cars. Maybe us HDers have a higher smug factor going on

LOL! Yes! The smug cloud is choking us all on DVXUser.com! rogar-BigGrin(DBG)

 

[zoostory]

lordy. i wish people would quit focusin on HD and the camera and start focusing on some stories and performances that are High Def. mostly i see some seriously SD directing going on. actually, it's worse than Hi-8, or regular 8. vhs looks good compared to the quality of performances and stories.

make your creativity HD, then worry about your camera.


otherwise, i will give you a fortune telling, some lines from the future:

you [ the filmmaker] are showing your film at a crappy festival and someone will ask you this:

"what did you shoot it on and how much did it cost?"

they could care less about anything else.

you [the filmmaker] at one point will say
-"well it was a really great learning experience."

translate that to mean: i know it sucks but i learned what i will never do again.

you [the filmmaker] will find that your DP will strip all horrid dialog audio from the final cut and recut it to some rock song for their reel. they're reel will rock. they didn't pay a cent. you paid for their fancy reel.

of course, you may be the DP and director. awesome. just remember the actor won't perform better if they understand that 4:2:2 is better than 4:2:0

-just some rumblings from my cave.

peace.

 

[Elton]

However, my personal opinion is that I wouldn't choose HDV as an acquisition format when I have other choices like DVCProHD.

This I understand. I shoot SDI to PhotoJPEG and DVCProHD here and there and I certainly prefer working in these formats when given a choice too. (will definitely go this route full time when portable SDI arrives) BUT! The image coming out of the camera is what's most important not just the recording format.

 

[DC]

. . . The image coming out of the camera is what's most important not just the recording format.

I completely agree. I think the HDV cameras produce incredible images (though I still prefer that "magic" Panny cinema look) when you're recording to an external deck. It is only what is being recorded to MiniDV in the HDV format that I object to. And for me, I prefer the P2/Laptop route as opposed to an external deck/tape. Because in all honesty, if I had a budget for a deck like that, I'd likely just shoot on a VariCam or CineAlta.

We all must use the tools that are important to us - to tell that compelling story, etc.

 

[xray]

HDV is an evolved form of MPEG2, which although 12 years old, has been improved greatly over the years. We are all beneficiaries of it with the latest encoding tools for DVD and HD DVD.

Age is not so important, intelligence is. How clever is a codec and what brings us most in the converging industries like the cinema and television and the IT world. On the moment tens of billions of $ are invested in MPEG-2, and MPEG-4 is more scalable and intelligent and can even be implemented into a MPEG-2 stream.

You want multiple alpha channels and bitrate room for pixels? I frames only?, Digital rights management, full scalable, interaction with animation? Go MPEG-4 with room for bitrates to almost 2 Gigabit p/s.

In that light, yes DV codec is old.

 

[Stevet]

I guess HDV would be a tough argue in an HVX200 DVCPRO-HD forum.

They both look and good and they both have their faults.

I truely believe neither codec is up to where it needs to be.

Things will only get better.