Inexpensive hi-def woes

While i think the HVX is a great piece of kit, you guys forget a few things in the big transfer-to-P2 scheme.

1) People have been using a tapebased workflow for years now, and simply changing habits and working more 'professionally' isn't as easy as everybody makes out to be. People in general hold on to there shooting habits like grim death, and might even be labeled as being a bit lazy/ and/or can't be bothered to adjust.
Working with P2 asks a lot of a small production crew used to tape.

2) The extra time won over in tapeless environment in post, is offset by the fact that you still have to transfer to harddrive on set. Whatever electronic medium you use, you ALWAYS have to have someone present to do the offloading. Doing it all by yourself is not being realistic, so this will cost you money.


I'm very much in the market for something like this, but i don't think the time is right yet. This wonderfull camera system is not competitive enough yet, and my gut feeling is, it will still take some time.
In the end of the day, the only thing that matters is footage/$$.
The target market (me: indie producer/director/editor, using a small team shooting guerilla) is mainly people who won't bother with this kind of setup, especially in a Sony dominated part of the world called Europe, where stagnation of this kind of technology will it's own downfall, because the base price for large quantities of footage is too high.
Let's be realistic here: this is becoming an Ad-Hoc medium with lots of filmmakers that have NEVER in their lifetime even touched film, let alone be around to witness the painstaking planning that goes into organizing a shoot. They have been, and still are, making money in a tapebased environment, using a fast paced shooting style, never looking back.
P2's 'adjustment curve' if you will, is rather steep.

Will Panasonic have enough time to get the foot in the door with P2?
 
Panasonic could implement HDV in the HVX200 in simple firmware update, but they wont. By doing this, they will make a point, you dont need tape for HD, and it preferable not to use tape.

Now some people had trouble moving away from film and use a computer... Well it will be the same thing for P2. Like Barry said, the HVX200 is Back order at pretty high amount to so many store world wide. So I am happy people see it benifit, and sorry for the people who can't see it now.
 
You seem to be missing the point. I and others need a system now, and that system needs to be as easy and as foolproof as pointing and shooting can be.
No if's, no but's, no futureproofing.
Especially in the fast-paced, high turn around industry this is turning into.
You simply can't expect people changing their workflow because there happens to be a new piece of hardware available. People don't change, except for a small minority, the so-called early adopters, who always happen to pay a premium for unproven tech.

For all the things the panny got going for it, as it is a marvelous camera, it simply adds an extra step in the field right now. That extra step is cumbersome compared to popping out a tape.
 
Well, obviously this isn't the right camera for you. You have other choices to choose from. To say that the HVX won't work for people out there is a little ridiculous though. Many people are and will adjust to this workflow and will do it quite easily. If you want an example of people successfully using a P2 workflow look at these two threads for people using the cam and making the workflow work.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=43725

http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=44160

Maybe you're not aware of this, but shooting HDV isn't just a matter of handing over a tape to a client or capturing footage. There are incompatbilities between all the HDV cameras which require you to invest in several cameras or decks to be able to ingest the footage. I'd describe the incompatibility issues as being "cumbersome." Just think of the post houses that need to change their workflow because three variations of HDV come walking through their doors.
 
parallax said:
You seem to be missing the point. I and others need a system now, and that system needs to be as easy and as foolproof as pointing and shooting can be.
No if's, no but's, no futureproofing.
Especially in the fast-paced, high turn around industry this is turning into.
You simply can't expect people changing their workflow because there happens to be a new piece of hardware available. People don't change, except for a small minority, the so-called early adopters, who always happen to pay a premium for unproven tech.

For all the things the panny got going for it, as it is a marvelous camera, it simply adds an extra step in the field right now. That extra step is cumbersome compared to popping out a tape.
Click to expand...
P2 is proven, it not the first camera that support it. Like I said before, get ennuf P2 card to last 1 day of shooting. And like we said, you can delete bad shoot on the fly, so you dont need that much P2 card as you need tape. And ofcourse dump P2 to Hard disk as 'first/last' resort

I dont know why people can't get that simple concept. I might be too much computer oriented for some people who can hardly handle it rightnow, who knows, but dont denigrate something that you dont understand... Tape workflow is flawed already, it alot more risky and fragile media than using P2 but people still live with it because of lack of options.

Anyway, like I said, HVX200 is over booked already, and it because people saw it advantages, not just as a DVX HD replacement, but because of it P2 media.

Now please list the pro and con for each available media, and you will understand like I did.

I did not buy the hvx200 to last 1 year, I bought the camera to last 10+ year. it like the XDCAM is not even interesting to me because of it mpeg format and 23.3gig forever limitation on a camera, same for Tape (especially add the were on tape and laser interface). But different people have different need, and it why there is multiple option on the market.

Anyway I am gone....
 
Some of this forums subjects keep going around in circles.


who always happen to pay a premium for unproven tech
Click to expand...


P2 is not unproven technology and is not introduced with the HVX, other higher end cameras from Panasonic have it for quite some time. It was used in the Olympic Games in Athens and I know at least one major TV station here that is about to switch to full P2 workflow for ENG.

That extra step is cumbersome compared to popping out a tape
Click to expand...

This is subjective. For alot of people having variable frame rates, higher definition, better color space and no tapes is miles better than dv tapes and editing HDV material....


People don't change
Click to expand...

I think they do, given the right circumstances...
 
I sort of understand the arguments against P2 by some people. To me it's alot like moving from flatbeds to online systems. I never would bother with video when it was A&B tape editing. Why go from a true nonlinear film cut to a stupid, tedious video edit? NEVER!

Of course when non linear became a reality, that changed everything. Safe, nondestructive editing. Now everything is cut online...regardless of format.

Trust me, once you experience P2...you'll truly understand why tape is obsolete. every single shot is a clip....just transfer and your done. I don't buy this whole argument against mxf file storage. You can just transfer the files to multiple storage formats...P2, ext hardrive, internal harddrive, DVD etc. And it saves so much time in logging and post.

The big question is, do you want optical or solid state? Like it or not...here we are.
 
@ mochouinard

You would be amazed how computer literate i am, and how much i want this to succeed. I grew up using this kind of tech, but i was more or less putting myself in a metaposition if you will. Playing the devil's advocate.

I get the P2 concept.

While you and i might be computer literate, believe me, the majority of the film industry isn't. It took ages for DV to become the defacto format it has been for the last few years, and while P2 has been proven in camera systems, it has hardly been around for decades to prove itself, unlike videotape. Let alone been in the hands of the small army of producers/shooters that are popping up like rabbits every day of the week.

@ Isaac_Brody

I didn't say the concept is ridiculous, i said it's hard. Especially harder than you are led to believe when reading the majority of the posts on this board. Panasonic will simply have a fight on it's hands with P2. I wish them the best, and WILL probably buy into their technology when i see the time is right, wich for me isn't right now.

Concerning the HDV comparison: I'm not comparing P2 with HDV, but with DV/Beta if you will. HDV is as cumbersome as P2 when i see the lack of proper suppport, like DV is supported these days.

Don't assume this system is not for me because i have an opinion on things that might not agree with the defacto opinion on this board. I think the DVX/HVX camera's are marvelous, and the footage is utterly gorgeous, but i'm trying to put things into perspective.
 
The people complaining about the p2 cards are the people whom probably don't own the camera or a camera with p2 capabilities, and can't afford the camera to begin with. We can all say "i'd jump on this camera if it weren't p2", but there about two out of ten people that have the six grand lying around to actually back that up.

I understand this stuff on a very basic level. Meaning, I don't know enough about p2 to say that it sucks NOR do I know enough to say that it's great. But, after reading about it throught he panasonic manual thats online (There's like a PDF manual dedicated to p2, its GREAT for those of us whom came in on this late), and after reading forum posts in regards to the p2 format... I think that's really the issue; people haven't used it and are only speculating how bad it'll be.

Nobody said you HAD to buy p2, first of all. Most of you won't even be creating enough HD content from the get go for this to be an issue. And if it comes to feature presentations, I hope you would've pre-planned MONTHS in advanced and raised enough money to RENT a couple of p2 cards and all other necessary items.

I say RENT because there'll be a few equipment houses stocking p2 cards who'll be more than happy to let you rent them to pay for the cost. Until the prices come down, you'd might as well if you're not going to shoot LOADS of HD material.

I'm going to get the chance to handle some p2 cards this week with the HVX200, and as a newbie, I'll be happy to share my experiences with the medium.

I personally, after reading, think that it won't be that much of an issue... though I still want to know what the problem is with using firewire to laptop methods with DVXproHD... why don't people just do this?
 
I think the people worried about P2 are not the target market for this camera. This camera was built (IMHO) to satisfy a burgeoning market -- indie filmmakers who want near Varicam quality and features in an under 10K camera. The only way to do that at this moment in time is P2.

As a bonus, Panasonic included a MiniDV deck so that people transitioning -- those currently shooting events, corporate training videos, weddings, etc... on MiniDV, could continue to do so with this camera. But the feature set of this camera makes it obvious that Panasonic was not targeting event videographers.

The people whining about P2 are correct, this camera sucks for HD event videography. And if that's how I were making my living, I would not be considering this camera. But for those of us looking to make near "film quality" shorts, features, and commercials, P2 makes this camera a dream come true.
 
Barry_Green said:
How can you say this? Dude, I think you're bordering on trolling.

Nine months ago a 4GB card was $1750. Today it's $650. Those are documentable facts, and you would be well advised to stick to 'em rather than making baseless and incendiary claims please.


It *is* just like shooting film. You may want longer record times, but that doesn't change what it *is*.

Nobody wants to go back in time. Nobody said they wanted to go back in time. But that doesn't change that the workflow is entirely useable, it's been used in movies for 100 years and it works, and today's cards can provide the same workflow, and it's only going to get better.
Click to expand...

Barry, with all do respect I don't appreciate the Troll comment. You don't know me so please refrain from personal attacks. 4GB cards are useless. I was talking about the 8. It's no where near where it needs to be to be usable. Does panasonic want to sell 10 of these cameras or 10,000?

I am free to have my opinion about the product and having a different one than yours makes me NOT a troll. I've always respected your posts and thought you were a huge asset to the community. However, after that comment I'll have to take you down a notch. I'm sure you will meet me in person one day as I'm very involved in indie film making and I'm bound to turn up in a film out, or an event somewhere. Maybe then you will see that I'm far from a troll.
 
Barry_Green said:
Wrong answer. DAT's pretty much extinct. Pro audio recording is pretty much all hard disk or solid state nowadays.
Click to expand...

How many film shoots have you been on lately Barry? They use DAT in the field and move to hard drive for editing and post. Come on now.
 
I am looking forward in purchasing a HVX200 and greatly appreciate this site. And I enjoy the straight forward and professional comments -- No BS.

Previously in my career, I worked with DV, DVCAM and HDCAM systems from Sony. After about 300 to 400 hours in 3 years, we had to ship the dockables for head maintenance and belt replacement. Each dockable typically cost about $500 to $700 for basic repairs, and most of the time we didn't have basic work done. Being in Oregon, we shot on the Pacific Ocean coastline, to the Cascade Mountains, and Eastern Oregon plateaus and deserts. These environments hammer the interior components of any tape camera. I recall $700 repair bill for the Sony VX1000 for example. Just in one year, we invested...invested putting it mildly... $3000 for repairs and normal maintenance and one $10000 DVCAM Dockable was scraped do to sand damage. Poor video heads, wished the gaffers tape had held.

And I haven't even touched the video decks for editing.

My point I am making is that the P2 solution eliminates a great deal of maintenance costs. My PCMCIA slot on my Dell laptop has been banged up in the field and still working well. And being able to immediately transfer the footage in a digital format in which I can burn to a DVD for archival purposes will save me time and overall costs.

Currently, I am a IT and support analyst and I enjoy the MXF capabilities. I can apply the files to a SAN well easily and could have many editors cut the footage. And of course, I can save the time to digitize the footage, it’s not needed. Also, I can manage and assess my footage for preliminary editing within the camera. This is extremely valuable for continuity help.

Granted, I have my concerns about the P2 costs, it is a big investment. But with Murphy’s Law always biting field crews, I believe the P2 solution is a long term investment that will save so much heartache.
 
I think P2 is a solid format, I think solid state media is by far THE most proven of all acquistion outside of tape which is eventually on the way out. My issue has never been with the format, it is with the workflow. Saying that it is film like is really spin-doctoring IMHO, sure you have to load a reel every 20 min or so but that is not a POSITIVE. It is something we have learned to workaround. Again, it is also non-destructive. Imagine if every reel had to be dumped, erased and re-used. Scary.

What if you used the P2 workflow with tape? Shoot a 30 min tape, hand it to your assistant, who loads it in real time to a HDD/laptop/etc. There you go, every 30 minutes, wash rinse repeat. You have all your footage on HDD PLUS an achival back-up so that if you HDD dies, no big deal.

I have done that on a project before and it worked like a charm. The difference with P2 is that it forces this workflow.

All that being said, I am loving the HVX... I am going to be messing next week with shooting footage direct to an HD1200A deck...



ash =o)
 
Let me clarify some things so we can all co-exist on these forums in peace and in a supportive nature.

I've used computers since a personal computer was obtainable, hmm maybe about 20 years now. I'm very much an advocate of working smarter and love technology. Having also worked as an editor for years I spent the first part of my career editing on tap based online systems (AB roll, etc). When NLE surfaced I was the first to jump ship and edit on the computer.

There is a huge cost in tape based systems after a few years of constant use. The heads wear out, the transports fail, etc. This new way of shooting on P2 will reduct this drasticaly and cameras will live a lot longer. So there is a plus to where we are going and I've never said I don't support it. However, I'm also trying to be realistic and point out that there are flaws to the system too.

Maybe "Devils advocate" is the best way to put it. For all of the potential buyers of the HVX there are important factors to consider. The workflow is not for everyone and every situation. Even for film based people they will see that they can't just hand the film roll to the loader and have a new one put right in. They will need to wait while the material is first offloaded. How secure this is can cost time and money. So my point of bringing up these things is not to troll or to sway others from buying. It is just that one doesn't need to be loyal to the death to still be a welcomed assest to a community. Think about it, if Panasonic only read or heard good things about their products would they ever upgrade or fix them? They need to see where problems exist to improve the product for all of us. Even the brand loyalist.

I will buy this camera (when I can get one). I'm going to live with the P2 price and small recording time by offloading it to my lap top. It's just a matter of factoring in the time and updating workfows. I just think we need to also be honest and see that it will some amount of time for P2 to be at a reasonable price point and who knows what the competition will have by then. Of course if we just sit on the sideline and wait then we will never have anything.

As far as what appears as the camera flying off the shelves...If you produce 1000 units and there is a waiting list then I wouldn't call that in demand. If you produce 100,000 and there is a waiting list then now you have something. Since there are so few available we will need to see what the deman is like in several months from now before we can determine if everyone is snatching up this camera. My guess is that this will be a popular camera, even for those that just want to shoot SD DV. Then in a year they can move up to HD at a much more affordabe P2 price. I'm excited about it, but also realistc. Please no one fault me for that.
 
First, there is NO RISK FREE system! Sooner or later everything fails. Anyone who thinks that by using tape they are risk free are fooling themselves. When someone says, "Hard drives are more likely to fail than tape." misses the point. With hard drives I can copy to two different drives OR use RAID-5. With either system the chance of a failure is VERY small compaired to tape.

Second, every system has its own list of potential issues and potential problems. Each system comes as a package deal; that is you get the good with the bad. Anyone who thinks that they can take the good WITHOUT the bad is fooling themselves.

Third, I believe strongly in freedom of choice. If you think P2 is a good system, great. If you think P2 is a bad system, that's great too, BUT just because another person does not agree with your choice does not make them a bad person who will enter the pit of Video Hell to forever use old tube type cameras on old 3/4" tape systems... :evil:

OK, back to the real point... Here in the HVX200 Forum, we can privode all sorts of ideas as to how to work with P2. My question is, After saying that one does not like P2 (or the HVX-200) and would rather use another system; Why go on and on? It's as if some people need to convert others away from P2 to justify their position.



Bob Diaz
 
hey, just a storage-solution-compromise thought:

what about taking a series of HVX200 shots you've dumped to HD to a transfer place and having them transferred to DVCPRO tape? Is that even possible?

it would be an added expense, but for those who can't sleep at night for fear that their HD will crash and burn, perhaps it's worth it? And you could deliver it to the client, as well.

So you'd get the benefits of recording DVCPRO-HD on a $6000 camera and the option to "rent" the seriously expensive DVCPRO-HD tape drive just for archive, task-specific, as a redundancy to hard drive archiving.

ok, i haven't read anything about this in any forums, so i must be missing something. enlighten me?

:beer:
 
FullRez said:
How many film shoots have you been on lately Barry? They use DAT in the field and move to hard drive for editing and post. Come on now.
Click to expand...

Depends on where you are shooting. The move from DAT to data recording with sound is a good blueprint for what we can expect from the video side. Zaxcom introduced the Deva 10 years ago now. It has taking some time for the industry to switch, but now you will be hard pressed to find an sound guy who doesn't have some NL recorder in his bag. Yet some still record on DAT as either the primary or as a backup, why? Sync during telecine. While pretty much all sound guys appreciate the simplicity and mutlitrack of NL recording, getting post houses to invest in a DV40 or INDAW's system for playback was like getting blood from a stone. Long story short, the industry changed. Let's look at what that opened up; 24 bit, higher sampling rate, >2 track recording, simplier and more stable workflow, instant uploading. Tape limited all these aspects. The move away from tape has vastly improved the quality and speed of what is done with sound. It's not 100% universal but the statement, "DAT is dead" is certainly accurate now.

The same will happen with video, it's just a question of how long it will take. What makes this the perfect time for the industry to switch to NL video recording is it can coincide with the move to HD. How many years have we heard, this is the year of HD? It has made plenty of us jaded to the concept of it ever happening but let's face it, it is happening now. Slower then some would like but it is happening.

So if you are a production house moving to HD, do you want to invest in an intermediate format that no one thinks will be around professionally in 5 years or skip that step and move to a format that is more future-proofed? My bet in on the future-proofed direction. There are no guarentees and we all take our chances when getting in the lead position of a technology change. Considering how realitively cheap getting into the P2 workflow is, most of us can be fairly assured of making our investment in P2 back in a short amount of time.

No one is saying the shift will be seamless but no change is. It's fine that some people want to sit back and wait to see how this all sorts itself out but don't sit on the sidelines and ridicule the players if you won't even get in the game.

The vast majority of us can see P2 for all it's strengths and weaknesses. Announcing that P2 is expensive, needs a backup solution, and involves short record times for HD right now is not exactly a news flash. It has been beaten to death since the HVX annoucement last NAB. Please browse around this and EVERY other video forum before annoucing you have discovered this new flaw in the P2 workflow. It's old news and those who keep bringing up again like they were Newton sitting under an apple tree come off sounding like trolls or someone who is too busy talking (writing) to bother listening (reading older posts).

If you don't take the time to read what has already been said, don't be surprised when people roll their eyes and say, "Been there, done that" to your comments.

Cheers
 
I agree with Bob. I'm sold on the HVX for what I want to do. But I don't spend my time on XLH1 or HD100 forums dumping on HVD or 24f. Everything has it's compromises and at this point in time none of us will be entirely, 100% satisfied with the smaller HD camera we choose. We're either going to have to live with the current limitations or spend a lot more money on something else. Grown-ups understand this. So, pick your poison and shut up about it already!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top