jlames
Well-known member
I posted an answer to your question before but I didn't see it poseted here. So here goes again.
The short answer is yes, we considered all of the others including the HVX. For us, there were a number of determining factors. We shoot for television exclusively so the transition from SD to HD can occur via HDV. The two cable and one network we have deals with go from bird to the home at 19/20 Mbs so even if we shoot and archive and edit in true 100 Mbs, we're still delivering at 20 Mbs for the broadcasters and they're still delivering to the home at 19/20 MBS. So we can put three times the number of cameras in the field and drastically reduce our expenditure in editing and other post systems right now until true HD is in demand.
As for the HVX, it's no doubt a great camera but the storage and worklflow issues with the cards, the fact that they're having extreme issues with the 8 Gig cards and Focus and CitiDick are also having their own issues, the HVX simnply isn't ready for prime time as far as we're concerned and the Sony was simply too far off the mark for our needs as well.
My suggestion is to look carefully at what you're particular prodiction needs are, listen to the very knowlegable and learned people on this and other Boards like Rush and Barry and then mnake the decision based on your real-world needs.
We're extremely fortunate. I'm a producer and executive producer who has a great team of camera and sound people working with me. In the end, it's my money and my rear end on the line accountable to three networks to provide them with exactly what they need and buit the real talent lies with my team and as they or any of the people I've used from this Board like Jun Tang or Mike Pellagatti at Wildvisions will tell you, I listen to my guys when it comes to what they would prefer to work with. If I want the results I and the networks expect, I remind myself that I'm just the ringmaster. The real talent is in the rings with camera and sound guys. Mike, Barry, Rush and people like that, they've forgoitten more than I'll ever know. But after listening to them and evaluationg all the information I had, when I committed $200k to new equipment, in the end, for video, it was JVC for us. For you, it may be something different.
Listen all you can to people like Rush and Barry on these Boards, consider your own needs, read all you can, see what other filmmakers like Andrew Young who's show at the Director's Guild last night was, from a technical and results standpoint, amazing and then make your decision. There's little difference between me who's committing to 5 JVCs for my team and you who's committing to one camera for your own professional use. In the end, it's the results that your audience is expecting that counts. No one sitting in the seats is going to say, "Hey, that JVC looks great but I'da used an HVX". They shouldn't notice anything but the feelings you wanted to evoke in them when they're leaving the theatre or heading to the fridge for a beer before the next "Lost" episode comes on. Do that and you know you picked the right camera.
The short answer is yes, we considered all of the others including the HVX. For us, there were a number of determining factors. We shoot for television exclusively so the transition from SD to HD can occur via HDV. The two cable and one network we have deals with go from bird to the home at 19/20 Mbs so even if we shoot and archive and edit in true 100 Mbs, we're still delivering at 20 Mbs for the broadcasters and they're still delivering to the home at 19/20 MBS. So we can put three times the number of cameras in the field and drastically reduce our expenditure in editing and other post systems right now until true HD is in demand.
As for the HVX, it's no doubt a great camera but the storage and worklflow issues with the cards, the fact that they're having extreme issues with the 8 Gig cards and Focus and CitiDick are also having their own issues, the HVX simnply isn't ready for prime time as far as we're concerned and the Sony was simply too far off the mark for our needs as well.
My suggestion is to look carefully at what you're particular prodiction needs are, listen to the very knowlegable and learned people on this and other Boards like Rush and Barry and then mnake the decision based on your real-world needs.
We're extremely fortunate. I'm a producer and executive producer who has a great team of camera and sound people working with me. In the end, it's my money and my rear end on the line accountable to three networks to provide them with exactly what they need and buit the real talent lies with my team and as they or any of the people I've used from this Board like Jun Tang or Mike Pellagatti at Wildvisions will tell you, I listen to my guys when it comes to what they would prefer to work with. If I want the results I and the networks expect, I remind myself that I'm just the ringmaster. The real talent is in the rings with camera and sound guys. Mike, Barry, Rush and people like that, they've forgoitten more than I'll ever know. But after listening to them and evaluationg all the information I had, when I committed $200k to new equipment, in the end, for video, it was JVC for us. For you, it may be something different.
Listen all you can to people like Rush and Barry on these Boards, consider your own needs, read all you can, see what other filmmakers like Andrew Young who's show at the Director's Guild last night was, from a technical and results standpoint, amazing and then make your decision. There's little difference between me who's committing to 5 JVCs for my team and you who's committing to one camera for your own professional use. In the end, it's the results that your audience is expecting that counts. No one sitting in the seats is going to say, "Hey, that JVC looks great but I'da used an HVX". They shouldn't notice anything but the feelings you wanted to evoke in them when they're leaving the theatre or heading to the fridge for a beer before the next "Lost" episode comes on. Do that and you know you picked the right camera.
