HD distribution

alpi69

alpi69

Veteran
ometimes i think we are crazy even dreaming of HD. it will be steep steep steep to go there.

we got a film in pre-production right now. 50.000 DVDs to be distributed. so we asked the copyhouse for a price per DVD with 4c print on it and in a papercover. fine. no problem till here, but wait....we want to use the HVX....so HD (720/50p to be exact). so shouldn´t we distribute HD-DVD or BluRay?

ok I call the copy house again. after all I am the producer ;-)
get to sales...."HD-DVD....uhm...just a sec", get to head of sales ...."HD-DVD....uhm...just a sec" so they switch me to the CEO (!). and here comes the interesting part of my post: "H-DVD, whatever that will be?! no we have no clou on any prices yet. will they be 10%, 50%, 100% or 1000% more expensive? i really cannot tell you. but i can tell you this: DVD prices are down to the minimum. i expect the industry to co-ordinate their pricepolicy and go way way up with HD for a few years. they have a chance to make profits and they probably will. the DVDs, the copying and the needed devices to play them will be way overpriced for years to come. that´s my guess!!!"

this is a guy who runs one of germany´s bigger copystreets and he definitely knows "the industry". so we can expect a format war since they have no clue who will win and the first who goes down in price will win IMO. for me the HD distribution just died and i will definitely go SD in the the next couple of years. i will still try to budget for the HVX, but my partner just urged me to come to my senses and realize HD is not ready yet :( long discussions to come in my office for sure.....
 
This is but one more work flow snafu that has yet to be ironed our regarding HD. I have spoken to a few editors here in NYC and it seems that many producers don't fully comprehend the requirements of HD (and for that matter HDV) from beginning to end.

Although this might not be the proper thread or forum for this thought, would it be possible to begin assembling a flow chart that provides a comprehensive (from recoring format to distribution considerations) overview of the myriad HD options/requirements along the way? You know, one of those things with the circles, squares, diamonds and arrows.

Thanks
Octavio
 
alpi69 said:
i will still try to budget for the HVX, but my partner just urged me to come to my senses and realize HD is not ready yet :( long discussions to come in my office for sure.....
Click to expand...


I think it's all a matter of what you're trying to produce. We're gearing up for our 4th film, and I want to the best possible image quality vs. cost - and right now, that's looking like HD via the HVX200.

Does it mean we'll ever have a 35 mm blow-up, or that it will be distributed on HD dvds? There's just no way to be sure now. But, I don't want to be in a position 3 years from now saying to myself, "Why oh why didn't I shoot it HD?"

I was an early adapter of DV, and yeah, there were some real growing pains having come from a pure film background - but thank God I did go through those pains (and costs).

From what I've on this board, the cost to up grade to HD does not have to be ridiculous (at least to get started).

It is a little scary right now, but I'm guessing that a year from now, all the major editing systems will have upgrades, and that the work flow will have been figured out, by in no small part, people like us.
John
 
If HD distribution isn't ready yet, then why don't all indie films just shoot on DV? After all, why shoot in a superior format whan you're going to end up encoding to a really lossy format like MPEG-2?

Because it will look better, that's why. Feature films shoot on 35mm, even though more people will pay to see the movie on DVD (or even lossier digital cable) than will see it in the theaters. Yet filmmakers worldwide still push for shooting on 35mm if they can afford it, Super-16mm as a less-expensive alternate, HD when they can and DV as a last resort. By shooting a well-produced HD film, by the time it gets to DVD, it can be practically indistiguishable from a 35mm film. Well-shot HD just looks better than the exact same footage shot on SD, period.

And don't forget that pushing DV footage in post is much more problematic than HD. If you want to do the types of image manipulation that film-based filmmakers take for granted, you'll need at least an HD-quality image to do that. I'm talking color-correction, exposure adjustments, sky replacements and the like. It's a nice thought that you'll be able to capture everything perfectly on-set, but that's just not reality: Things won't always match perfectly. You'll lose light at the end of the day and have to tweak it in post. You'll have to do pickups at a location days or weeks later and have to match that footage. Any number of small adjustments will need to be made when you're finishing the film, and you have to go with the best quality image you can possibly afford.

DVD became the fastest-growth consumer format, ever. I expect the adoption of HD-DVD, in whatever form it finally takes, to mirror the success of DVD. The phenomenal growth of "Home Theater", and all the technologies that come with it (HD television, flat-screen displays, 5.1 surround sound, digital audio and video, etc.) has set the stage for HD programming to become commonplace. It's not a question of IF, it's a question of HOW SOON. And don't forget, it's not just video that will be driving the adoption of larger-capacity optical media. The computer industry is pushing for a unified standard as hard as Hollywood is. And we all know how fast the pace of innovation happens when it's tied to computing.

The cost difference between, say, shooting on an DVX-100 and an HVX-200 are really minimal. If you have a reasonably powerful editing system, you can edit DVCProHD just as easily as DV. Although the storage requirements are much larger, off-the-shelf hard-drives will still work, especially for 720p, and the price of hard-drives is now one of the least expensive components of the system.

The largest hidden cost in shooting HD will be to elevate your production quality to equal an HD image. If you are really looking to have a viable film with lots of potential, you're probably already doing that. And don't forget that no SD camera today will allow you to do variable frame rates. The ability to do REAL slo-mo in 720p cannot be overstated for a filmmaker.

As an indie filmmaker, you have 2 choices: shoot in Standard Definition, and be locked into a limited market today. Within 5 years or so, your SD film will be hopelessly outdated and will have much less potential value. Or, shoot HD and have the potential to not only distribute a DVD, but also distribute to HD cable or broadcast, get into more and better film festivals, and if your film is at all successful, double-dip with an HD-DVD "Special Edition" when HD-DVD becomes a reality. Even if you are only looking at a home video release, it seems to make much more sense to shoot with the HVX-200.

I'm assuming you are shooting a feature, here. Obviously, the economies change if you're talking about a short. But with 50,000 copies, I'm assuming you're looking at a reasonably-budgeted indie feature. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 
You want to shoot HD so that your movie is "future proofed" and 5 to 10 years from now is still a pleasure to view when HD is in every home. An SD DVD is the medium of choice for today's market, so simply master your show in HD and do a down-convert in software for the DVD run. Reap SD benefits now and HD later.

The incremental additional cost to shoot with the HVX and post will be trivial to the long-term benefits of shooting HD, IMO.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs
 
I don't think we will see HD-DVD or Blueray as a viable dist method for the masses for a very long time. Even when the discs and players are available who would risk printing those formats in any numbers.

I do see a use in the short term for corporate work where the client can buy a player for their presentation stuff.

Just my two cents (Canadian money at that)

Chris
 
I agree with Jim + AZscott 100% on this (and they said it better than I could!).

I guess what we're all saying is - don't worry about the HD DVD/Blue ray war now, just produce the best image for the money. And that seems to be HD via a camera like the HVX....
John
 
Once the formats are locked, I don't think it'll take long to reach the indie level. Dupe houses will market HD-DVD/Blu-Ray Discs like crazy, to everyone they can.

-CJ
 
I think at least 2 years or more. But I'm talking specifically at the mass big-box retail level. If they get the format war done by next June, then even after 1 Christmas I still don't think you will see a large amount of HD delivered content on the shelf. Maybe by the second Christmas the numbers will be there. These technology implementations are measured in Christmas seasons. :)

An indie may be able to target smaller runs through the net in the beginning.

Believe me, I hope it's quicker!

Chris
 
HD is already being distributed on a limited basis using WMV HD.
It can played back on an HDTV using a $250 player. I can play back WMV HD through my computer as well to my HDTV. I have many clients who are on the HD bandwagon. These CEO's and Presidents of companies want HD for meetings, events and tradeshows. Hollywood is slow to adopt HD for the home because of piracy concerns. They are not going to stop pirates but look at the cost of DVD now. It is almost not worth the pirates efforts to make a few buck per DVD. Hollywood must embrace HD for the home and make it affordable enough so that pirates cannot make money from there efforts. In a few years, HD will be the norm and SD will find a place in web production.
 
AZ, FYI it is a sportsfilm we will make, not a "feature". I fully agree with you and the 50p alone will "force us" to use the HVX. we do have a budget plan and our problem right now are the 20.000 for two HVX as opposed to 3000 for one additional DVX, or maybe even a XL2 (a long lens would help you know).

Now what we do is still feeding our families. I do not consider myself an artist who can live of air and love. it helps, but it doesn´t feed. so getting the HVXs, getting a HD-lipstickcam (which is not developped yet and we are just in negotiations with a guy who makes stuff for Fujinon), the archivation, Firestores etc etc. Shooting is one thing, but going HD all the way is another league, be it on HVX or not.
We have the budget discussion and it is viable to ask: why HD when going SD in the end? why not BetaSP or even DigiBeta 2/3´´ and use magic bullet in the end? why not 16mm?
I don´t want to get the answer here, but I want everyone to be aware of the implications the HVX will bring and that in that budget league there are many other options suddenly. In DV there was no choice in price-value. But a 2/3´´ DigiBeta (with a wide and a tele) and Magic Bullet will be tough to be beaten by the HVX imagewise. I hope it does, but it will be a fight. and you can rent them fairly cheap now.

P.S.: Don´t forget i am PAL, so 24fps as opposed to 30fps is no argument for me!
 
alpi69 said:
ok I call the copy house again. after all I am the producer ;-)
get to sales...."HD-DVD....uhm...just a sec", get to head of sales ...."HD-DVD....uhm...just a sec" so they switch me to the CEO (!). and here comes the interesting part of my post: "H-DVD, whatever that will be?! no we have no clou on any prices yet. will they be 10%, 50%, 100% or 1000% more expensive? i really cannot tell you. but i can tell you this: DVD prices are down to the minimum.
Click to expand...
Many people have already made the most important point - even if you are still only going to distribute SD DVDs, there's little to be lost originating in HD nowadays, and a huge amount to be potentially gained in a future proofing sense.

If you have an HD master you can always rerelease an HD version when the technology has matured. If the master is SD, you can only ever produce an SD version.

It's also worth saying that even if it was 1000% dearer to make an Hd DVD, that doesn't mean that it need be 1000% dearer to the consumer. Say a DVD costs £1 to make, and sells for £10. If an HD DVD did cost 1000% extra to make, selling each for £19 would be neutral - same other fixed costs, and same profit.

The distribution side will become a lot clearer in the next year or so. In the meantime all the arguments are in favour of HD production at least, where possible.
 
HVXguy said:
HD is already being distributed on a limited basis using WMV HD.
It can played back on an HDTV using a $250 player. I can play back WMV HD through my computer as well to my HDTV. I have many clients who are on the HD bandwagon. These CEO's and Presidents of companies want HD for meetings, events and tradeshows. Hollywood is slow to adopt HD for the home because of piracy concerns. They are not going to stop pirates but look at the cost of DVD now. It is almost not worth the pirates efforts to make a few buck per DVD. Hollywood must embrace HD for the home and make it affordable enough so that pirates cannot make money from there efforts. In a few years, HD will be the norm and SD will find a place in web production.
Click to expand...

to be honest: i think WMVHD and internet distribution will overtake HD-DVD and BluRay. DVD players and tuners already have harddrives included; PS2 and XBox are networked. But what shall a consumer buy: DVD, HDplayer, BluRayplayer or a harddisk player? what Hollywqood (and we!!) needs to do is inventing a manageable system like iTunes for films. then they earn again and everyone is happy.
 
harddrive said:
It's also worth saying that even if it was 1000% dearer to make an Hd DVD, that doesn't mean that it need be 1000% dearer to the consumer. Say a DVD costs £1 to make, and sells for £10. If an HD DVD did cost 1000% extra to make, selling each for £19 would be neutral - same other fixed costs, and same profit.
.
Click to expand...

true, but times 50.000 phew...in your arithmetics that means 500.000 extra only for reproduction of the DVD. I am sure nobody will feel the difference but me.
But as I said before: we go SD (with the improved HD image in it) and WMVHD through a sponsors mediaserver hopefully.
 
AZScott said:
Because it will look better, that's why. Feature films shoot on 35mm, even though more people will pay to see the movie on DVD (or even lossier digital cable)...
Click to expand...
Heck, even TV commercials are shot on 35mm, and those are only for broadcast and cable.
 
Neopics said:
Heck, even TV commercials are shot on 35mm, and those are only for broadcast and cable.
Click to expand...

Not for long. The agencies I work with are already lining up to do shoots with my HVX200. Now I can raise my day rate over what I could get with the DVX100. You gotta upsell the potential of HD. Now you can shoot and edit and deliver spots for cinema playback. That will be one of my first shoots next spring.
 
Neopics said:
Heck, even TV commercials are shot on 35mm, and those are only for broadcast and cable.
Click to expand...

Lot's of big budget commercials are shot with a DVX 100. Not saying that some are not shot on 35mm just there is no 35mm monopoly. I personally worked on several commercials for big deep pocket companies and it's all been shot with the DVX.

Back to the original question there is no clear path. Reality check there is still a very real market for VHS. DVD worked (fastest adopted technology ever in history) because there was not a Betamax v. VHS war. HD can be delivered as WMV-HD, H.264 MOV or MPEG4 today on existing DVD technology. Next year in addition to the huge Blu-Ray v HD-DVD war there is the holographic long shot dark horse sneaking up from the rear. That's 6 HD delivery options with no winner I'm willing to bet on.

Octaboy is dead on with the lack of workflow info. HDV while inferior on paper to DVproHD is a more mature technology. Yet the HDV workflow while much better supported is still full of holes.
 
alpi69:

Okay, so you're making a sportsfilm. Got it. There are different economies at work in a niche film as opposed to a feature. What kind of sport?

You spoke about possibly renting a high-end 2/3' Digibeta with perhaps 2 lenses. Now, rental prices are based mainly on the original cost of the equipment, minus depreciation. When that 2/3' Digibeta camera was purchased, it was probably in the range of $40-50,000, not including the lens. Each lens costs $10-20,000. That's a minimum of $60,000 worth of camera equipment. Will a rental facility charge less for that camera package than the $10,000 HVX? I don't know. Maybe for a very, very old camera that has already earned it's price many times over. The point is that you might even save money by renting the HVX-200's and accessories.

As for archiving costs, for the price of 2 Digibeta 120's, you can buy a 300GB hard drive and an external enclosure to put it in. Digibeta tape is still mighty expensive. But Dollar for Dollar (or Schilling for Schilling, or Euro for Euro) you can store as much 720p footage on Hard Drive as you can on Digibeta tape.

I'm not very familiar with HD Lipstick cameras, or what your intended use is: body-mounted, sideline, vehicle mounted, etc., but you may find the following links interesting:

http://www.iconixvideo.com/products.htm

http://www.boom-audio.com/coolcampro.htm

http://www.ikegami.co.jp/en/products/broadcast/camera/pdf/hdl_20.pdf

And, for a sports film, why not shoot 16mm, or even Super16? I know the initial processing and telecine may be much too expensive, but the advantages can be many: super-cheap camera rentals, a wide variety of (mature) equipment to choose from, SERIOUS over- and under-cranking possibilities, very wide exposure latitude, wide choices in post manipulation, portable, rugged equipment.

Everyone who is carefully watching this camera is already thinking about distribution options. Your C.E.O. of the duplication facility is (justifiably) pessimistic. Big dupe houses don't want to spend large amounts of money on equipment, just to find out they bet on the wrong horse. They want a universal standard. I think that some sort of HD version of DVD's will sort themselves out soon enough. And when they do, I can't see it being 1000% more expensive than current DVD's. It's not as if any of this is really new technology - it just needs to be standardized.

I really think you need to look at the rental options for the HVX-200. You may be surprised at what your local rental facilities are planning to offer.
 
Neopics said:
Heck, even TV commercials are shot on 35mm, and those are only for broadcast and cable.
Click to expand...
No, commercials shot on 35 mm are ´good budget´ commercials and are also shown in the cinema. But shooting a 20 s commercial, film is a real possibillity it is not that expensive and the viewing with the clients is amazing.

Shooting HD and downconvert to SD brings the question why not shoot clean SD
in the first place? The quallity is about the same. How many people think they actually can sell their programm again in 6 years, how many think they shoot 24p SD and dream for filmoutput but never realy get the funds for that?

Living today (specially in Europe where HD is still academic) and shooting for a broadcaster or DVD is bringing material what people can pay for and want to see NOW. We are talking 10 years now that HD is coming...

What is real is 16:9 format. That is norm today. The broadcast industry is looking for cheaper ways to produce, thats why you see the DV cams coming in.
 
Konrad said:
HD can be delivered as WMV-HD, H.264 MOV or MPEG4 today on existing DVD technology. Next year in addition to the huge Blu-Ray v HD-DVD war there is the holographic long shot dark horse sneaking up from the rear. That's 6 HD delivery options with no winner I'm willing to bet on.
Click to expand...

People just bought their widesceen ( but not HD) tv set. It will stay there for 5 years.

But as I mentioned before, if I stay SD, and I want to buy a good DV camcorder (like the DVX100b) and with the posibillity to shoot DVC-Pro 50 (on expensive P2 cards...)
I take a look at the new HVX200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top