HPX500 on big screen

Seeing as an HVX200 looks pretty amazing on the big screen, an HPX500 would only be better.

Discovery HD rates the HPX500 "silver" meaning it's good enough for unlimited HD acquisition.
 
links?

links?

Quick question.... I often see posts such as "BBC certifies this camera as silver/gold..." or "Discovery HD rates it silver"....

Do you (or anyone else) have any specific links to the various Nets as to their specs or ratings on production equipment? It would be useful to have a list, perhaps as a sticky.....



Barry_Green said:
Seeing as an HVX200 looks pretty amazing on the big screen, an HPX500 would only be better.

Discovery HD rates the HPX500 "silver" meaning it's good enough for unlimited HD acquisition.
Click to expand...
 
Discovery doesn't publish it. The BBC released their general requirements once upon a time, I don't remember exactly where but I posted it here. Some things they considered "not" HD were HDV, any 1/3" camera, any long-GoP codec of less than 50 megabits, any 720p unless it was from a VariCam, and 16mm or Super16 film. So to be classified as HD, you had to have better specs than all of that. But the specs change and are subject to revision too.
 
I saw Chasing Kangaroos (I shot on HPX500) on screen at the downtown independant in LA. Along with a few other dvxuser films, most of which looked rather good. Id never seen a lot of these cameras on screen before at one time. One thing it taught me was Id been wasting a lot of time over postulating on pixels.

SO how did the 500 look to me? Great. It played right into the hands of the large screen. Loved it.
 
I was under the impression that the ex1/3 is not considered for HD because of the XDcam 35mb restriction is to low, and the 370 is a 1/3'' chip and not considered rated for HD because of its chip size.

I have the BBC charts, I'll post them up, just gotta figure out how to do it.
 
http://thebrownings.name/WHP034/

But both Discovery and maybe especially bbc's strict specs also is very visible in what's airing and available on blu ray. Whether it's Life or Topgear, BBC delivers some of the best HD programming in the world at the moment. Ofcourse that's not just down to what gear you're using, what's behind the camera is the most important, but having the right tool also helps....

But appart from BBC and Discovery specs, the 500 will probably look good on a big screen. I've only screened dvcprohd on smaller screens with projectors, but it looks just fine to me. It's not an HPX3000, but it's not a small hvx200 either...
 
Giuseppe Pugliese said:
I was under the impression that the ex1/3 is not considered for HD because of the XDcam 35mb restriction is to low, and the 370 is a 1/3'' chip and not considered rated for HD because of its chip size.
Click to expand...

True, I think there are also some specs for sensor pixels too, so ruling out the 600,000 pixel HPX500.
All these things are open to discussion though of course based on the type of project and its intended use.
I get the feeling that the codec is more strict than the chip, most blue chip wildlife is 720 Varicam for insatance.
Steve
 
Just as a side note I am off to a premiere screening of a feature I did on a 301 last November, its on Monday at the Odeon cinema in Harrogate so it will be interesting to see what the 301 looks like on a big screen.
 
I've seen a couple things I shot on the HPX500 projected on the big screen and they looked great. Just last week a music video I shot was in the "Dances With Films Festival" in Los Angeles and screened on a BlueRay. Super sharp and big. And a few years ago I shot THIS MOVIE and it's has screened in several festivals and looks very nice. The 500 is a great camera.
 
I shot a feature Doc and played it at the Tiburon Intnl Film Fest. Projected with a Christi 12K Digital HD projector.

George Lucas was in the audience and said it looked great. Only input that I have got.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top