DVXuser.com exclusive hands on with the HVX200

vanguy said:
Once I've got the footage on an editing system somewhere, I have to archive it, or lose it forever (no filmmaker would even consider losing ANY of his footage).
.
Click to expand...

This seems to come up quite a lot when talking about the long term archieving of footage, and it is just not true. If you look at the high cost of digital storage, just think of the high cost of physical storage for film. The average movie shoots between 5ook and a million feet of film. For the vast majority of films, only the finally edited elements, cut negative and sound track and maybe some intermediate elements are given full archieve treatment. The vast majority of footage shot is tossed into boxes to be eventally be tossed out when space gets short.

Of course we have gotten spoiled by mini-DV, with it's low cost tape where we keep everything we shoot. However, to work with a higher quality format, at the prices we are talking about, some comprmises are to be made. If I do not keep take 7 of 14 of scene 116a, where the lead actress coughed over the leading mans lines, so what.
 
I think that's where a major crux of the issue lies - compromises - a lot of people don't want to make them for the HVX. I think that a lot of people want "HiDef"; what that specifically means they don't care about. They want some good images at a high resolution 720 or preferably 1080. Now, since a lot of them are coming from DV25 they want the least amount of hassle *for their wallet* and *for their time* because as you said, we're spoiled with miniDV and other tape acquisition. So long as someone feels the images are "on par", I think most people will consider the HVX and an HDV camera to be *about the same* so they then look at the other aspects - Archive issues (And I think vanguy raised some good points about long term archive), initial cost, hassle of transfer during a shoot (At present when cards are small). This is where Panasonic's sell gets hard. I know they need to try and convince people that the P2 problems aren't really that bad, but I'm not sold on any of the hype - it sounds like a pain in the arse, expensive, and a waste of extra time to archive. But I'm still going to look at getting an HVX, because I do not, from what I've tried to learn about this, believe that DVCPro and HDV *are on par* quality wise and I also hate capturing footage!. So I will put up with these issue.

Most of the problems will go away when cards get bigger anyway, the archive one will still remain a problem but I think we'll find a way around it with DLT tape or something that at least works, even if it's not ideal.

I don't think people should be defending P2, simply because I don't think you can really defend a lot of the criticisms (At this point in time) but I also think that people who want to try and moan about it and complain are also wasting their time - they just shouldn't buy this camera and stick with a miniDV mechanism.

Aaron
 
comprimise I think is the wrong word.. its 2 different worlds, HDV just kinda sidetracked everyone into thinking that HD aquasition should be just as easy (well HDV isnt easy) and just as cheap as shooting SD. In the real world today, we still gotta shoot with $100,000 HD cameras and Record on $100per hour tapes (that we cant resuse).. and bring the video into our $50,000 editing systems with $10,000 HD-SDI cards and $20,000 Raid arrays. Sure thats changing, the Varicam introduced us to Firewire capture and you can cut 720p on a laptop, just not very fast.

Everything "real" HD is expensive, and thats the way it will be for at least a couple years. Just be glad we get to "play" in the HD world with these $6000 cameras. the HVX is bringing things close to us normal folks, by letting us swim in the HD pond with reusable media so we dont go broke buying tapes.
 
Sorry for multiple posts

Sorry for multiple posts

Can I tell you my dream?

I'd like to see one-hour P2 cards selling for $70, and some sort of rack that holds fifty of them during editing so there's no digitizing, archiving, or fiddling around on set with P2 Store boxes or laptops. THAT would be a coup. But I don't see it getting close to that for many years.

I think a new technology should make things easier, be higher quality, faster, and cheaper in some combination. But right now, P2 only does the higher quality part, while asking for IMHO significant compromises in the other areas. (before you get startet, it's only cheaper when compared with top-end Cinema class cameras).

Jarred, you talk about being "allowed to play" in HD land, so we should put up with compromises. If I'm going to drop $13K+ on a camera package, I'm not playing. Even if I'm dropping $6K, I'm hoping someone will take me seriously.

This is the thing; I'd like to shoot a feature with this puppy. And I'd like some of the benefits cheap media offers over film, including long rolls (sorry guys, you can swap out P2 cards for days, but try using the footage where you're pulling a card out of the camera, or shoving another one in. Every 8 minutes, it's gonna get real shaky.)

Originally, I was emailing Jan at Panasonic, because I'd hoped (call me a dreamer) that Panasonic might consider some other option that would make my knees go all weak (like DVCPRO-HD recording to DV tape at 4x speed or something), and build a camera that would be an obvious Sony and JVC killer. I was referred here, and got all drawn into this debate. Which has been fun, don't get me wrong.

I dream of a higher quality codec than HDV. I dream of being able to shoot slow-motion. But the idea of downloading data on set, then again to edit, then again to archive makes my teeth itch.

One thing I did get out of all this is the idea to use hard drives as storage instead of tape, since, for professional formats at least, the cost is less.

But to make my opus, I think maybe I ought to go back to the old model of digital production, renting a VariCam or F900. The only compromise there is the price.

I can't believe I just said "old model of digital production".
 
Your needs:
Camera with higher quality Codec than HDV
Camera that records nonstop so you don't have to change cards/tapes
Sixteen video heads and tape chassis that fit inside a handheld camcorder
40GB solid state media for same price as 40GB HDD

Sounds like the HVX200 is probably not the right camera for you, then.
 
Thanks, wells for clearing that up. Obviously, no matter how inconvenient it is, or how much extra time you spend transferring on set and later archiving, you're going to use this camera, and I commend your single-mindedness. Forgive me for wanting something that's at least as easy to use as current technology, and at a reasonable price.

I don't need unrealistic craziness. What I want is a reasonable replacement for tape. Have a look at what Sony is doing with XDCam using Blue-Ray disks. Although it's only SD (so far), it's a practical, economical replacement for tape that actually makes things easier on set. I've used it. It's nice. It's a little pricey for indie SD (19K for the base-model camera), but it does 24p and takes amazing pictures.

You're right. The HVX200 is probably not the right camera. Unless some changes are made. I think you'll find it frustrating to work with too, once the honeymoon is over.
 
VariCam isn't 1080p and I see little reason to shoot at 1080p... 720p is plenty for me.

At 720p24, two 8GB cards will handle about 40 minutes of video.
Of course, less at higher framerates, but the majority of shooting for me would be at 24Fps.

40 Minute loads look good in my book. I don't think I'll be hurting too much.
 
XDcam Version 2 spec is being finalized at the moment to bump up to 70Mbps.

The next round after "V2" is purported to be "over 100Mbps" which would indicate the possibility
of XDCAM discs comfortably burning 140Mbps HDCAM.. but that's pretty far off in the future.
 
vanguy said:
Can I tell you my dream?


Jarred, you talk about being "allowed to play" in HD land, so we should put up with compromises. If I'm going to drop $13K+ on a camera package, I'm not playing. Even if I'm dropping $6K, I'm hoping someone will take me seriously.
Click to expand...


Thats just it.. a year ago if you told someone you where dropping 6k on HD gear they would think you where talking about a 7" HD monitor to put on your $100,000 camera... The price point we are entering HD right now was just unrealistic at that time. Even the JVC HD cameras, man editing that Mpg stuff is a nightmare.. most people's computers cant even cut that stuff together, they gotta make an offline down-proxy and then assemble it later.

In October I thought I was jumping ahead of the curve when I bought myself a Dual Xeon and HD-SDI capture card and a massive raid drive array to attempt to online a HD feature we just finished shooting with the Sony 900s. I spent 20k on that system just to handle the uncompressed HDCAM.. (HDCAM is so inefficent.. you gotta take the compressed HDCAM off a compressed tape Uncompressed, which is a nightmare, and a little retarded) Anyways.. after spending 2k to rent a $50,000 HDCAM deck for two weeks and stumbling through even the capture process, I gave up, and realized my comprimise.. more my mistake, that somewhere in my mind i thought; er dreamt; that working in HD would be just like working with SD. It's not. Its important to understand that HD is a beast, not a scary beast, but a beast. I bet a majority of people that purchase the HVX have never worked with HD before, and may have a little surprise. Its very nice that you can use the HVX in SD mode to kinda get comfortable with the whole process.

However, DVCAM HD is only 4x the width of DV, so it will be easier, but i am still prepared to realize that there will be additional expenses in my workflow, and the $2000 P2 cards arnt what i am worried about.

I love HD, and am ready to leave SD behind, but I now undertand the limitations, not of the format but of the rest of my chain. Its amazing that we can soon spend less than 10k and get something that would of cost us 100k now to get... even 50k with the Varicam.

Im starting to rambleon here... but I kinda got the same feeling when I bought my canon digital rebel.. 1000 bucks for a Digital SLR with 8 megapixels.. wow. Then I soon realized all the other parts in the chain havn't come down yet.. I still had to pay 700 bucks for a stabilized lens. And those 1gb memory cards that the 5k cameras use dont cost cheaper for my Rebel.. And jesus I never honestly thought opening up a 8megapixel image file for editing would be as fast as my 3megapixel camera.. boy was i wrong. its a cross-breeding world for us right now, so we gotta just gotta be happy right now that we can even enter it, and companies like panasonic are giving us this opportunity.
 
Okay, point taken.

Here's mine: if HD is a beast, why make it more beastly with cards you have to transfer at least twice or jury-rigged capture systems?

I'm told a DVCPRO-HD drive would add weight and quite a bit of cost to the camera. But I'd already have to add an intermediate storage device (P2 Store or Firestore) and/or use really expensive P2 cards. Why not lose all the clutter and build a camera for around $16-20K that uses real DVCPRO-HD tape?

Because Panasonic wants to appear like it's competing with HDV. Plus, they want to try out solid state media. It's a noble experiment, but not a real production solution for HD. Yet.

That's really the sum total of my part of the debate; it's not ripe yet. Too expensive to be a DV camera, too many extra bits and added workflow to be professional. Probably will take amazing pictures, for 8 minutes at a time.



I haven't had your experience working with uncompressed HD in post; all my projects have been downconverted, although some of them were uncompressed SD. Sympathies on your troubles.

But I hear what you're saying. HD is not as simple as it sounds.

Three years ago, people were paying $700 AN HOUR to online HD. So I agree, to be able to buy a system that even pretends to edit HD for around ten grand is pretty amazing.

I'm probably asking too much to think that Panasonic, for a bit more money than other camera manufacturers, could do it with a better codec and a workflow that wasn't any more complex than HDV.

So, if I'm just playing around with HD, I'll play around with the simpler, cheaper, and yes, lower quality HDV. It'll still blow away any DV machine. If I want to get serious about image quality, I think I'll save up and rent a VariCam or F900. Or maybe someone will come out with some intermediately-priced camera by that time.

Anyway, I've spent way too much time on this. I'll have a close look at the JVC this summer, and another close look at the HDX in fall. Maybe by then things will have changed.

BTW, I still think the DVX kicks butt. I've shot three short films with it, and one of them just won its fourth award.
 
vanguy said:
Why not lose all the clutter and build a camera for around $16-20K that uses real DVCPRO-HD tape?
Click to expand...

Well the transport and the heads would cost that much, then how do we fund the rest of the camera?

Because Panasonic wants to appear like it's competing with HDV. Plus, they want to try out solid state media. It's a noble experiment, but not a real production solution for HD. Yet.
Click to expand...

I know you are being rehtorical here but I have to respond to the "try out" comment. We have been delivering Solid State for a year with the SPX800. This will be the first camera that does it with HD, but it is not some noble experiment. It is why we went with Solid State. DVCPRO, DVCPRO50 and DVCPRO HD have always been united by virtue of the recording medium. In the case of tap, and now in the case of solid state. It is really a matter of how you manage your resources. It may not make it for you but for many I believe it will.

Best regards,

Jan
 
No doubt that getting true frame independant HD codec in a low cost camcorder is a major Revolution.

I did not have the time to read all articles about the HVX...
But based on the info i have, i can't wait to use it.
It is on my equipment list as soon as it is available.
I just LOVE the lightweight and flexible concept of the HVX.
Panasonic kept all the good things that were in the DVX.

I'm trying to figure how i could use 2 or 4 P2 cards and transfer the data into a lightweight HD because i like to shoot A LOT of footage with my DVX100A, and then archive the footage.

I surely need to read more about that.
 
I don't see why people are so against the P2 workflow? If you need to shoot HD in your line of work, the P@ cards will certainly pay for it self!!!

My workflow, as database, web, and IT tech for the Mac:
1- Dual 2.5 with 600gig raid, 3 gigs of memory,GeForce 6800, dual 23 inch cinema displays.
2- Xserve Dual 2.3, with 1.2 terabyte of HDD, 4 gig ECC memory, 19 inch sony CRT.
3- My answering and faxing machine: G4 400mhz, with 512mb, 120 gig HDD.

Total cost? Worth over $20,000.00!!

The thing is, it all paid for it self, so I don't complain, and live happy with the investment made.
People who complain about the HVX, and the P2 workflow, seem to me like people who are not earning a good living with their Video or Filming careers!

Sure you can shoot lots of short films, and claim you are the greatest authority in what you're doing, but if you are; why are you complaining so much!

A commercial shot in HD 1080 24p, can make you well over $5,000. If you are working with the sales person in the network, you can get commission and make even more!

I will make the investment once the cameras are out, the return is not only a matter of the the camera, but rather, a good business plan, talent, and hard work.
 
Yes, you have a point. Business users aren't the problem. Its the indies that are worried.

However having said that, as I live in the UK I will still wait until someone asks me for HD. In my country if someone asked me for a HD commercial the only outlet for it would be in cinemas, or internationally. In this case I would imagine that the company is fairly large and would want me to shoot on something better than a 1/3" ccd fixed lense camera in the first place.

At the moment the HVX may be useful for people in the US for low budget HD commercials as you mentioned. Over here and in other European countries that kind of use isn't as prevelant. Dramas that are shot on HD over here are usually high end, and since our low budget dramas never go anywhere where HD is in use it doesn't make sense to shoot them on a 1/3" camera as they are currently shot on Digibeta.

At the moment because of the way the market is I believe that the HVX will mainly be of use to the US and Japanese markets, and only rich indies in places like the UK.
 
jnolla said:
I don't see why people are so against the P2 workflow? If you need to shoot HD in your line of work, the P@ cards will certainly pay for it self!!!

A commercial shot in HD 1080 24p, can make you well over $5,000. If you are working with the sales person in the network, you can get commission and make even more!

I will make the investment once the cameras are out, the return is not only a matter of the the camera, but rather, a good business plan, talent, and hard work.
Click to expand...

Never ever had any problem to charge the cost of rental if the customer wanted a more expensive production. The problem is allways the formfactor. The HVX200 is an indy camcorder. You can use it to make whatever you like but it is first of all an indy camcorder. It you put mattebox, fallowfocus on it , and it cost you not more than 15 000,- it is still cheap but I'm not sure you can impress a customer paying 40-60 000,- for your production if you can't show up with more.

I don't think it is so important how much you can charge for your service if you have an HVX200 because it won't make you earn much more but it will help you staying alive or produce your indy film.
 
Awsome forum!

Awsome forum!

I have been reading for quite some time now and even as I unsuccesfully try to grasp all that's posted, I find myself learning at a fast pace. Thank you all! :thumbup: :thumbup:


Hope I'm not multilpe-posting/asking dumb questions:
_ Will there be disadvantages to recording HD to tape?
_ If so, what will they be?
_ Could there be loss of quality?
 
The HVX could record to DVCPRO-HD tape, if you chose to get a deck and cable it to the deck with the firewire. The disadvantages would be only that the deck costs $25,000. Other than that, you would have high-def footage on tape. (That $25,000 cost is one of the main reasons Panasonic implemented P2 recording, rather than tape recording, in the HVX).

There would be no loss of video quality between DVCPRO-HD tape and DVCPRO-HD stored on a P2 card.
 
It's always interesting to me to read suggestions like, "Why doesn't Panasonic record DVCPRO-HD to tape instead of a P2 card on this camera?" Next, someone chimes in with the fact that the least expensive deck is $25K. Then, invariably original poster returns to say, "I don't care how much that deck costs, I don't even need a deck... What I need is a DVCPRO-HD camera that records to tape and I'm willing to pay XXX (hundreds of dollars) more for that feature."

To all the folks who believe this, allow me to propose the following question:
Why would they make an entire camcorder for less than the price of the tape transport alone?
 
The Indie? The Indie needs to also have a good business plan! If you are not getting more than $20,000.00 out of your production, then here is an idea, "RENT", or better yet get a DVX-100. I'm pretty sure they will include 16*9 in their next revision.
 
16:9...OK, OK - is this just FUD or what? I'm pretty much set to purchase a DVX100 but if a rev comes out with actual enhancements (Other than Lead Free, and new colour) I may reconsider. Do you have anything to back up why you think this way?

Aaron
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top