hdv v dvcpro hd

If we insist on ccontinuing to compare Panny and Sony palmcorder cams cmpare it to the right cam
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...-Camcorder.htm

HDV, come on. Get with the program. In the end it is a solid pro-sumer format that is sure to linger on for a while longer for the low end stuff. If I were back in college doing a project I would love HDV. Of course when I was in college we were shooting on 3/4" tape. As for the HVX it uses a superior codec to hdv but with its configuration does not take full advantage of it. Now that hdv is being phased out there will certainly be great deals on those cams, which will make them much more attractive for pro-sumers.
 
Studiodaily has a great panel discussion from the alphadog crew on HDV. Yes, you can get stunning imagery from HDV, but it takes a lot of skill to deal with the compression, AND if you want good clean audio, you probably want DAT or something seperate. That kills the sync advantage the digital video generally has in this respect.

Intraframe is ALWAYS better than interframe compression, especially with editing in mind. With HDV, it is imperative that you get out of that codec into an intermediate. Since the intermediate codec is not going to be nearly as compressed as HDV, the space issue is kind of lost in post, unless you wait until final out to convert, which has its own problems.

Newer NLEs are getting better at handling native HDV, but there are still problems, and it is very taxing on the system.

What it all comes down to is the application you'll be using it for. Cheap miniDV tape, and high compression benefit many, but DVCPRO HD does give you more options.

With a true pro codec like HDCAM or DVCPRO HD, you can scale down to any need, but you also have the quality for a film out. Borat was shot on the varicam, and I saw in the theater, on a gigantic screen (cinerama size), and it looked fantastic. I thought it was 35mm, but one shot outdoors looked a little harsh on the highlights and I got curious. When I got home I looked it up and my jaw dropped when I saw that it was the varicam for the "planned" shots for the film. Simply stunning.

if 99% of your work is bound for broadcast or web the HDV is probably fine, it just limits your options. But for saving space, cheap tape, and if you're very skilled at dealing with its limitations it can produce some great images.

It's all a question of who you are, what aesthetic is okay with you, and so on. It's a personal preference. When push comes to shove, yes DVCPRO HD is a better codec for aquisition, but that doesn't mean it's right for you.

Uncompressed is better than DVCPRO HD by far, but for the vast majority of what I do it makes no sense. It's better, but it's not right for me. Same thing with HDV vs. DVCPRO HD. It's climbing up the ladder and finding where you're comfortable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top