HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

V

Voytek_Stitko

Well-known member
When I read about new HD cam here I got excited for a second. Than, I realized that even if HD would cost same as DVX100A and have 16:9 and same great looking footage as DVX IT WOULD NOT CHANGE ANYTING.

I am making features and I realized that even if you gave me the best camera available for free - it is not going to make my movie great. If I dont have a story and dont know how to tell this story - just having better equipment will not help.

So, now I cooled down and just like everybody here (I hope) listen to the news. If there is a new toy available I will look at it. And maybe get one if it is worth changing from DVX. But in the meantime I am going to keep working on my filmmaking craft. Without searching web for an hour a day looking for NEWS. I will use this time to actually making my movies.

Yeah.

So, what? Any news about this new HD panny? ;D
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

See I disagree..

its all about mindset... a great piece of equipment going unused is a shame...

a piece of **** equipment going un-used.. well... not too many people will get sad about that.

a good camera can definately help you... it can motivate.. of course if there is nothing that needs motivating then that camera ain't helping ;)
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

I just used a crusty ancient history standard definition TV camera for a production and it will be spectacular because the material, acting, and set were kick ass.

If you have a DVX100a, you can do very cool things with it.

If you have an XL2, you can do very cool things with it.

If you have a DVX200 or an XL3, you will be able to do very cool things with it. :)
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

Just another tool. If it fits in your toolbox good. Think of it this way as well. There will be the early adopters, the people who just have to have the newest tool on the block. Some of those people will use it and others will let the camera sit in their closets for months. Sooner or later the closet buyers willl realize that it's too much camera for them or perhaps they were just pretending and they'll sell their camera for much less than 10,000.

It happened with the DVX, people who thought a great camera would fill the void of storytelling, and it will definitely happen with this camera as well. I'm excited about this camera, but it really comes down to need. Does this camera do more than what my DVX does? Are there features I absolutely need?

I'm pretty pumped that this camera is coming out. Now I'm just pissed because we won't hear anything tangible for weeks and we've all been whipped up into a frenzy like a pack of dogs.
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

Hence the reason the DVX isn't going to be discontinued :)

HD will definitely do good. It's just not for everyone and that's fine.
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

To me, an HD camera will do a lot of good for my future productions. Why? Future proofing. One day, in the distant future, people will eventually have HD sets, and HD players, and that will mean a re-release of my movies in HD. Which means more royalties, which means….you get the point. And then there is always that remote possibility of a 35mm blow up....Finally, a DVCPRO HD 4:2:2 camera is going to have far better dynamic range then a DVX100, which allows for better lighting and compositional options.
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

[quote author=Glenn_Gipson link=board=HDV;num=1108359684;start=0#6 date=02/14/05 at 10:39:35]....Finally, a DVCPRO HD 4:2:2 camera is going to have far better dynamic range then a DVX100, which allows for better lighting and compositional options.[/quote]

I hadn't even thought of that. Just the increased latitude and native 16x9 make this a worthy follow-up!

I'm sure it would depend on the specifics of the CCDs and circuitry, so we won't know for sure until it's here... But how much of an increase in dynamic range do any of you guess something like this would have?
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

Is it just a given that if it is a higher res format it will have better dynamic range? I thought that was based more on the CCD design. I use the Xl2 and think few would argue that it samples more pixels on the CCD to obtain a "perceived" increase in resolution but that comes at the cost of losing dynamic range. It us much less sensitive to light than the DVX and requires a few extra stops to obtain the same exposure.

If Panasonic has to stick with 1/3 inch chips to keep the price in the "prosumer" range I am not so sure that it is a given that the dynamic range will automatically be better. But it might be. Perhaps Barry could comment on this issue. Not directly on the new Pana as we don;t know the CCD specs but on the issue of latitude and dynamic range of 1/3 chips in general.....especially how they are implemented for 16x9 use and higher pixel density.

There is surely a benefit of sampling say x number of pixels from a 2/3 camera and then encoding to DVX-PRO HD over sampling x numbers of pixels off of a 1/3 inch CCD... X being the same number for both in this case.
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

I don't think glen was refering to higher resolution= more dynamic range. Higher res does not mean more latititude, in most cases it means less, look at the fx1 and z1 for example. however, with 4:2:2 compression, it is very likely that more of the originally sampled latitude will remain to work with.
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

So the assumption of more latitude is based on lower compression rate and better color sampling? I guess that might be true. I hope so. The more information you can retain the better. I just never thought of that as a major factor in dynamic range or latitude. I would definitely expect better color rendition though that is for sure.

If your output source is currently DVD and you do not need a master for film blowup or for "longevity" then is there a huge benefit to DVCPRO-HD over say, the XL2? I am only asking as with the FX1 when downsampled to standard def, Barry saw no significant increase in picture quality. Would it be the same, at least similar, with DVCPRO-HD? I have absolutely no need for HD as of now but I do need high quality SD 16x9.

I invested in the XL2 based on the "maturity" of the DV format and its good 16x9 and all of the money I have invested in the software and decks. This new Pana camera sounds likes it is going to be the cats a** as far as resolution and color clarity in the electronics but if there is no need for HD "yet" I feel I will be better served holding out and waiting for the entire process to be perfected.

By the time I am ready to actually author HD projects I will probably be better off buying then as the prices will have fallen a lot. Or is there already proof that DVCPRO-HD downsampled to SD for DVD output is definitively better? Just asking...

(by the word "definitively" I mean overwelmingly better not a little better or a tad better. Because obviously film downsampled is phenomenal!)
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

I LOVE THIS TALK OF A NEW PANNY!
Do you realize what this will do to the resale value of the dvx-100a? LIKE A BRICK...then I can pick one up on feeBay for less than two grand!
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

I get the point being made; everyone seems to get caught up in the technology as in "I just NEED this camera..." when in reality the tools available today and at thier prospective price points are more than enough for the struggling indiependent filmmaker. It of course will go back to content being king but having the right tool for the job is inmportant. When I bought the DVX100, there were no other options; it was hands down the DVX (24p).

HD? Doesn't excite me; I can't afford an HD set, no one I know can, it's not future proof as there is always inevetibally a newer 'better' format so I'm not buying everyones hurry to get into HD at this particular time. If I dream up and start production on a project that requires the best bang I'll rent. IN the meantime, I'm shooting as much as I can with my DVX; which by the way won last years DP Award at Sundance (Yeah, I know you knew that).
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

John,

I agree with you, but for me 4:2:2 is at least as important as HD and certainly a big improvement.
And if native 16/9 is included too, it's makes this camera very interesting.

edit : (Even certainly for downconverting to SD ?)
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

New technology could definitely inspire you to try something you might not ordinarily try. And that's a good thing. ;D
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

[quote author=Zig_Zigman link=board=HDV;num=1108359684;start=0#14 date=02/14/05 at 13:34:42]New technology could definitely inspire you to try something you might not ordinarily try. And that's a good thing. ;D[/quote]

What the HDX100 will inspire you to try that a 'good old dvx' won't ?
I'm just curious ! ;)
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

This thread is going the way of timeless tech talk. Of course the camera doesn't make a good film. All a camera can do is afford you the ability to achieve a look very similar in many aspects as big budget professional productions.

This is such a cyclical and pointless argument.

Will a camera make you a filmmaker...NO

Will a more expensive, High Def camera have a better image all things being shot equal....YES

If you suck ass at making films, no camera will help, but of those with talent (many on this board) have a tool that brings them even closer to an established look that CAN give them the potential of credibility, then why nay say. Some of us enjoy wild speculation...it's fun.
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

As far as the dynamic range issue goes, I'd tend to agree with icicle22... if all other things are equal, denser pixels on the CCD are going to lead to lower light-level response and less latitude/dynamic range.  We've seen this with the XL2, and to a bigger degree (because of twice the pixel density) on the FX1/Z1.  I would expect that the new Panasonic would have to obey those laws of physics, unless there's some technological breakthrough being employed. Or, if it's using larger CCDs, then that could offset the density issue (larger CCD would mean larger pixels). I'm not expecting 1/2" CCDs in the new camera, but I'm just saying that's one way that they could get higher res and also deliver the same or better dynamic range and light sensitivity.

So, and this is only wildly unsubstantiated speculation, but I would expect the new camera to be maybe a stop less light-sensitive, with about a stop less latitude/dynamic range, than the DVX, IF ALL OTHER THINGS ARE EQUAL.  Maybe it'll have a better DSP that somehow extends the range, or some innovation in CCD design that overcomes/offsets the limitations that have been typically observed in denser pixel designs.

As for whether it'll make for better DVD manufacturing, as always, that remains to be seen.  I think you will be able to get higher resolution DVDs than the FX1, because you'll be dealing with progressive-scan footage that won't have to be converted down from interlaced footage... but it will be quite interesting to pit the DVX against the HDX (I wish we could confirm that name... but hey, that's what everyone's calling it, so I guess I will too...)  I tend to think that the HDX would be able to preserve some color resolution advantage as compared to a DVX or XL2, because you can shoot in DVCPRO50 with 4:2:2 color space, and 4:2:2 should convert to DVD's 4:2:0 better than XL2/DVX 4:1:1 does.  But that's speculation, the proof will be in the actual testing.
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

Ok, i´m sorry to make another guess, but here it goes anyway...

Probably Pana guys care about the light and latitude problem of getting more pixels in the CCDs and the way they want to make a better product in other step from the DVX to beat Sony out of the map, so (maybe is just a dream), talking about the 10,000 $ price range and P2 HD store. Is there any other camera with 1/2 CCds and fixed lens?

This will take everything to the right place? sure it´s just my opinion. And Pana can make it, sure they can. Don´t look at me like fever man. I´m just new in all of this and i don´t know if it´s possible in that price range... Please, correct me if im wrong. :-[
 
Re: HD Camera WON'T DO ANY GOOD

Anyway, this is the good point of being naive, goodwilling and unexperience. Dreams are bigger and not full of bad reality... ;D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top