Its not HD its HDV

after_effects

after_effects

Carbonite Member
Something that kind of bothers me is when people keep talking about how they are filming their new short or commercial in HD, when really its HDV. There is a big difference between the two. I know because i use to work at a post house and I transfered a lot of HDCAM footage.

Thanks
 
But HDV is HD.

Its just another format of HD.

XDCAM HD, for example, can be set to shoot at 25mbps (which essentially makes it HDV). Does that suddenly invalidate it as an HD format?

I really don't get why people can't understand or accept that HDV is HD. It makes no sense. It may not be your format of choice, but that doesn't invalidate it technically as an HD format.
 
HDV is a recording format. HD is not a recording format, it's a picture standard.

HD can be recorded in a variety of formats, including DVCPRO-HD, AVC-HD, HDV, XDCAM-HD, HDCAM, HD-D5, HDCAM-SR, AVC-Intra, and XDCAM-EX. There are varying levels of quality available with these recording formats.

SD is not a recording format either, it's a picture standard. There are a myriad of SD recording formats, including VHS, S-VHS, 8MM, Hi-8, DV, MPEG-IMX, DVCAM, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, BetaSP, Digital-S, DigiBeta, and D1. There are, of course, varying quality levels here too.

Is DigiBeta SD? Yes it is. Is VHS SD? Yes it is. Is VHS equivalent to DigiBeta? Of course not, not by a million miles.

Is HDV HD? Yes it is. Is HDCAM-SR HD? Yes it is. Is HDV equivalent to HDCAM-SR? Of course not, not by a million miles.

You can no more say that "HDV isn't HD" than you could say "VHS isn't SD". But you can easily say "VHS SLP is the lowest-quality SD recording system ever devised" and you'd be right. So, you could also say "HDV is the lowest-quality HD recording system ever devised" and you'd be right -- mostly (I'd say 6mbps AVC-HD would be worse, but 24mbps AVC-HD will be much better, so you can't just lump AVC-HD in there with HDV).
 
Well, if this is something that is brought up a lot. I think it should also be mentioned Panasonic does not equal a panny camera. "Panny" is used for Panavision. :D

Then again, Toe-ma-toe or toe-mah-toe?

Jag-u-ah, or Jag-wire.
 
is not "SD" NTSD standard, if so then vhs does not meet this standard, or is SD and HD simply a frame size standard rather than quality standard?
 
it's kinda like language. Sometimes you read from left to right, others you read right to left. Up to down is also one way of doing it.

.sentence a makes always it end the in
 
Jason Miller said:
is not "SD" NTSD standard, if so then vhs does not meet this standard, or is SD and HD simply a frame size standard rather than quality standard?
Click to expand...
Standard-def, and high-def.

NTSC is analog, so no pixels matter, it's all expressed in frequency bandwidth. People frequently want to equate SD with "720x480" or "720x486" but that's kind of backwards, that's like saying film is 4096x2304 or something. 720x486 was a digital way of saying that that's how many pixels you'd need to accurately represent what was in an NTSC image, but VHS is an analog recording medium so it doesn't have pixels at all.
 
ATSC. Yeah, Panasonic makes a very nice $500 HD camera that uses AVCHD. This is an HD camera just like the Sony and Canons and all the rest.

Kinda sucks that HD is now in the hands of the consumer, huh?

HDC-SD1 even has a lot of manual functionality. Nice rig and the image stabilizer does a better job of it than the HVX200.

e
 
yes I know, but within the home video area, vhs and 8mm were not NTSC standard, it did not reach it untill hi 8. I was under the understanding that SD ment Ntsc quality. but I am probably wrong.
 
NTSC was meant to conform a standard of broadcast within Standard Definition media. If SD means NTSC, then Europe wouldn't have any SD at all, would they?
 
Yap. Most of Europe never "achieved" the NTSC standard.

They were too busy enjoying PAL (and some, the lovely SECAM) for a few dozen years.

Also, Japan had successful delivery of what was effectively NTSC analog HD (HiVision) for quite some time as well (early 1990s).

e
 
Yap. Most of Europe never "achieved" the NTSC standard.
Click to expand...

That is ironic, right? Because PAL is basically just ntsc with the advancement of the "Phase Alternating Line" which prevents the color from changing due to bad transmission. The difference 50Hz/625 or 60Hz/525 doesn't have to do anything with PAL (which is a color encoding system). There are countries that use PAL 60Hz/525 (I think Brazil? I'm not sure)
 
****************************************************************************************
Something that kind of bothers me is when people keep talking about how they are filming their new short or commercial in HD, when really its HDV. There is a big difference between the two. I know because i use to work at a post house and I transfered a lot of HDCAM footage.
*************************************************************************************

Haha! The real irony is that nobody is "filming" anything. It's all VIDEO.

I too used to get irritated when people would strut around bragging about making these great "films" when they had never filmed a darned thing, and 20 years ago the difference between making a film and and shooting a video was huge. It's not much of an issue any more at the low-budget level.

Relax. You can't educate everyone; just do the best work you can.
 
Erik Olson said:
ATSC. Yeah, Panasonic makes a very nice $500 HD camera that uses AVCHD. This is an HD camera just like the Sony and Canons and all the rest.

Kinda sucks that HD is now in the hands of the consumer, huh?

e
Click to expand...

Do you really mean that? or are you being sarcastic
It comes across a bit elitist.

I think it's good you don't have to be mega rich to make a good looking "film"
 
FBAS said:
That is ironic, right? Because PAL is basically just ntsc with the advancement of the "Phase Alternating Line" which prevents the color from changing due to bad transmission. The difference 50Hz/625 or 60Hz/525 doesn't have to do anything with PAL (which is a color encoding system). There are countries that use PAL 60Hz/525 (I think Brazil? I'm not sure)
Click to expand...

The other advantage of PAL is the lack of the need for 3:2 pulldown/up/around madness to get real film to play correctly... ok, bump the film speed up to 25 rather than 24 fps... but still that's a cheaper shot than doing the 3:2 hodown step...
 
after_effects said:
Something that kind of bothers me is when people keep talking about how they are filming their new short or commercial in HD, when really its HDV. There is a big difference between the two. I know because i use to work at a post house and I transfered a lot of HDCAM footage.

Thanks
Click to expand...

HDV is the recording format... it mangles HD, but still produces a video that conforms to some HD standard format. The underlying format of HDV is MPEG2, and so depending on the compression parameters, one can have problems if there are dropped frames, as in, many frames get dropped... Any timewise compression technique has this fault, but in order to get HDV on to DV tapes, I think they had to compress timewise even more than typical DVD compression, and since DV does not do 'timewise' compression, a dropped frame in DV only looses that frame (provided the hardware/software can resync to the tape data...).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top