Image quality overrides codec???

smelni

smelni

Veteran
Form the initial results of the camera shootout it appears that the HVX and the JVC have "comparable" pictures. If this is true then are there really benefits of the dvc codec over the HDV in this particular case?

Of course there is the var frames rates and other things - but at 720p on both, in the image is similar then isnt the codec difference irrelevant?
 
Barry said his opinions were based on live ouput and not the image recorded to tape (P2, Hard disk,etc.). Even if they look remarkably close live the HDV codec is going to knock the color resolution down more than the HVX DVCPRO-HD will. I would be very surprised if the HVX isn't noticably better after compression. However depending on the shot it may not be that bad.
 
I would certainly wait for the full results to make that judgement. Based on specs alone, each one has tradeoffs. HDV is heavily compressed and can show significant motion artifacts in certain situations. Its GOP format makes it difficult to edit without an intermediate codec. It also only uses a 4:2:0 colour space. DVCPRO-HD, on the other hand uses a non-square aspect ratio of less-than-full HD resolution, 960 x 720. This also takes back some of the benefit from its 4:2:2 sampling.

But again, lets not jump the gun. The full shootout results will enlighten everyone.
 
ok - i didnt understand that LIVE footage is independent of the codec - i thought the live footage as after the codec

so what you see on the monitor is not what goes to tape?
 
does this hold true for the dvx - is what you see through the composite out not what gets put on tape?
 
Not 100% sure. Once upon the time someone on DV-L traced the schematics on a Sony VX1000 and concluded that the s-video was indeed after the codec, but that doesn't necessarily have any relationship/bearing on a product introduced five years later.

Maybe Spec-Comm could figure this out?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top