Which is more efficient HDMI or SD-HDI?

[rc444]

Two quick questions:

Which is a more efficient, HDMI or SD-HDI? What should I choose HDMI or SD-UHI if I'm digitising footage.

Don't these cables perform the same job as firewire? I thought firewire transfers material at no generation loss anyway. What advantage would HDMI or SD-HDI then have over firewire?

The wikipedia explanations on these formats don't really answer my questions.

Maybe some of you guys might know the answers.

Regards,
rc444

 

[Spartacus]

No quick answers...
What do you want to do?
If you have a DigiBeta Player firewire won´t help you with digitising...
If you have a DV cam, SDI won´t be available...

And I guess "SD-HDI" and "SD-UHI" are typos or weak memory...

 

[Barry_Green]

Firewire, HDMI, SDI, and HD-SDI are all digital data transport protocols.

HDMI and HD-SDI are much fatter pipes than firewire and can handle a lot more bandwidth, over longer distances.

Firewire has become linked with compressed digital video (DV/HDV/DVCPRO-HD). Firewire is not those formats, it's a data transfer system -- which is why it can be used for hard disks. But it's kind of become inseparable from the formats it transmits.

Firewire always transmits compressed data, because the pipe isn't fat enough to handle uncompressed data streams. HDMI and HD-SDI transmit uncompressed high-definition data streams.

HDMI is the "consumer" format, and includes the ability to have HDCP copy protection. HDMI is found on televisions and inexpensive camcorders. HD-SDI is used on professional broadcast equipment. Both transmit uncompressed high-def digital signals, so in that sense one could argue that there's not really a quality advantage for one over the other. But there is definite market segmentation between them.