Barry_Green
Moderator
If you have FCP-HD and it's a fast-enough system to handle live DVCPRO-HD capture, then yes that should work.
Worth it without P2 Cards?
- Thread starter MLCinema
- Start date
abeljerrod
Active member
The next generation of cards will be the 16GB cards (4 - 4GB SD cards).
(I know this is posted in numerous threads but here goes again...)
Currently with the 8GB that will be shipping with the camera you get:
DVCProHD (1080/60i) 8 min per card
DVCProHD (720/24P) 20 min per card
DVCPro50 (Audio 4ch) 16 min per card
based on those numbers you would assume that a 16GB card would be twice those times.
(I know this is posted in numerous threads but here goes again...)
Currently with the 8GB that will be shipping with the camera you get:
DVCProHD (1080/60i) 8 min per card
DVCProHD (720/24P) 20 min per card
DVCPro50 (Audio 4ch) 16 min per card
based on those numbers you would assume that a 16GB card would be twice those times.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Right -- those times I was discussing was assuming both cards in the camera; i.e., you'd have an hour of continuous recording in DV if you had the camera loaded with two 8gb cards. You'd have over an hour's worth of continuous recording in DV50 or 720/24p if you had two 16gb cards, as would be possible in April (presuming the 16gb card does actually get announced at NAB 2006).
Zig_Zigman
Well-known member
Hmm the cam holds two cards at once? Well that helps out a bit.
I am still curious about the hard drive options in development. I can't see how they could be more expensive than this.
I am still curious about the hard drive options in development. I can't see how they could be more expensive than this.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Hard drives won't be more expensive. They will be much cheaper, per gigabyte, than a P2 card.
However, a hard drive is not a P2 card. P2 cards are indestructible, heatproof, vibration-proof, dustproof, condensation-proof, moisture-proof, crash-proof, tiny, don't need a power supply, silent, etc. A hard drive is, by comparison, a very, very, very fragile device. Dust, heat, vibration, shock, moisture, wind, etc. all can affect a hard drive. Hard drives require power, and they make noise, and they require cooling fans that also make noise.
The P2 card is infinitely superior to a hard drive in every possible way except one: cost per gigabyte. And that will probably always be true -- as P2 cards come down in price, so will hard disks.
I'm not saying hard disks are bad, I'm saying they're not the same. And shouldn't be thought of as a direct substitute. I mean, both will do the job of recording (and the camera lets you use both options) but there are some very real, very significant advantages to the P2 approach. But, there's no denying that hard disks are way less expensive per gigabyte than P2 is.
However, a hard drive is not a P2 card. P2 cards are indestructible, heatproof, vibration-proof, dustproof, condensation-proof, moisture-proof, crash-proof, tiny, don't need a power supply, silent, etc. A hard drive is, by comparison, a very, very, very fragile device. Dust, heat, vibration, shock, moisture, wind, etc. all can affect a hard drive. Hard drives require power, and they make noise, and they require cooling fans that also make noise.
The P2 card is infinitely superior to a hard drive in every possible way except one: cost per gigabyte. And that will probably always be true -- as P2 cards come down in price, so will hard disks.
I'm not saying hard disks are bad, I'm saying they're not the same. And shouldn't be thought of as a direct substitute. I mean, both will do the job of recording (and the camera lets you use both options) but there are some very real, very significant advantages to the P2 approach. But, there's no denying that hard disks are way less expensive per gigabyte than P2 is.
Zig_Zigman
Well-known member
I'd rather use p2 cards, frankly. I guess I'll have to bite the bullet and get 2 8gb cards off the bat, and rent if I need more.
Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
Barry_Green said:
Give me two 30 GB P2 Cards for $500 - $1000 each then we can talk. Slam both those suckers in and shoot for one hour then dump to drive. But if I shoot anything on HD it will be 1080i at 24p to slam on to film. 8 or 16 minutes per one P2 card? That's foolishness. If it don't make dollars it don't make sense. For news gathering that stuff sounds great but I can't see shooting 1080i/24p for 8 minutes then dumping it on to a harddrive. At this point something like Sony's XD Cam sounds great. Shoot right to disk then pop that disk in a computer then dump everything to a drive.
If I'm going to buy one of these, it would be upon knowing a firestore or something comparable is coming out. Until then the DVX100 and maybe XL2 look good enough. Even the JVC has gotten more attention from me because of this problem alone. I can go through one to two DV tapes a shoot. While I'm directing and telling people how to set up the next scene I now have to be dumping footage every eight minutes. Not practical and certainly puts a dent in run and gun shooting. Oddly enough, I would've prefered HD tape.
Also I would love to see something like this in a Panasonic DV60 body, making a firestore style device easy to pop in a hot shoe and shoot. It would only cost a couple of hundred more to do this. The DV60 is a great design, someone should smack the guy that designed it without 24p. Why do you hurt us Panasonic with these kinds of decisions. A shoulder mounted 24p cam in it's time would've gutted the competition except for those needing removeable lens. But that's okay, you're trying harder to please than Sony at least.
-Nate
Barry_Green
Moderator
That'll take a few years, but yes that will be a reality. Probably around 2007-2008.Nathyn said:
If you're willing to shoot 720/24p you can almost do that already, when the camera ships. The two cards on board will give you around 40 minutes of shooting time.
Okay, but let's put it in context -- you're talking about shooting 1080/24p! With any other camera it's not just "foolishness," it's I M P O S S I B L E. At least it's impossible for under $160,000.
So within that context, and having shot plenty of spots on an Eyemo (where an entire load of film gets you 60 seconds of footage), 16 minutes is flat-out luxurious. Especially with the ability to delete bad takes immediately -- you may find that your actual, usable runtime with 16 minutes may be more like 25 or 30 minutes of raw running time on tape.
Agreed. Anyone considering buying a $6,000 to $10,000 camera "for fun" is not making a whole lot of sense. This is a tool to be put to work.
And shooting 1080/24p, I expect my HVX will pay for itself within the first 60 days. And that's with the two 8gb cards.
It's a workflow issue, certainly. It's exactly the same workflow as working with film -- shoot for 10 minutes, then stop and unload and swap magazines. And, keep in mind you've got two cards, you can shoot for 16 minutes. If you had three cards, you could theoretically shoot *forever* -- just have someone offloading the third card while you continue to shoot and hot-swap two cards. You'd never have to stop shooting.
That's exactly the same workflow as on the P2 system. Instead of an optical disk it's a card, but you pop that card in a computer and dump everything to a drive. Same thing. Except that XDCAM is standard-def only, whereas P2 provides for both flavors of high-def. And obviously XDCAM has longer record times (but, again, it's recording standard-def. In SD mode on the HVX you double your record times, or quadruple them, so comparing apples to apples it's a lot more comparable).
A FireStore, and other comparable products, are coming out.
In fact, alternative long-form recording already exists -- there are at least three different long-form recording systems already available: laptop or desktop to FCP-HD, laptop or desktop to Avid HD, and direct to HD tape with the AJ-HD1200A. P2 is there for those who want it, but it's not a requirement. And there are more choices coming -- two that have been mentioned are HD Rack from Serious Magic, and the FireStore. And I know of at least two other alternatives that are being worked on right now and may be ready upon the camera's release, or shortly thereafter.
But the JVC is only 720p. So if you're considering the JVC, then I should remind you that the HVX will give you over 40 minutes (okay, not quite an hour, but close) of 720/24p immediately (and with 60p, and variable frame rates, and while it's 25% less luma res, it's 50% more chroma resolution). If you're willing to accept 720p resolution (as you'd be forced to with the JVC) then you can use the HVX and get 40+ minute recording immediately. Plus you'll have the ability to go 1080/24p onboard as well, something the JVC will never do. And you'll never have a dropout either.
Well, no... first, you get 16 minutes per "load". And you don't stop every 8 minutes, you stop when 16 minutes of footage has been shot (and kept). Even if you were shooting two full tapes per day, that means you'd go around two hours before the cards were full. If you delete useless material as you go, you might be able to stretch that to three hours before needing to offload the cards. So when you call "cut" to set up the next scene, an assistant pulls out the cards and offloads them -- it'll take about six minutes. The cards will be fresh and loaded and ready for the next session before you even have your actors ready for the next shot. As director you'll never even notice it happened.
It is a different workflow, I will grant you that. Some of us will find the prospect of 1080/24p to be well worth the minor inconvenience. Others won't. That's why there are multiple cameras out there -- so we can choose among them.
Well, for run and gun, yes. But that's the odd thing -- has anyone ever shot anything run 'n' gun on HD? I don't know that that's ever even happened... or that it will need to be happening soon. And even if it is, let's say you were run 'n' gun with a $70,000 VariCam. How long does a VariCam tape last? Longest camera load is 46 minutes ( i.e., about the same as one load of two 8gb cards shooting 720/24p). How long is an HDCAM tape load? 40 minutes. Same as the HVX shooting 720/24p.
Which means, as a practical matter (depending on which format you're shooting) the HVX really isn't that far off the mark at all, even for something like run 'n' gun.
That would be killer. If Panasonic would design an HD100-style HVX, even if it cost a few thousand more, I think they'd sell every one they make. Kind of like a DSR250-to-PD150; they could call it an HVX300 or something. That would utterly rock.
stephenlnoe
Well-known member
I agree in that this camera will likely not make it off the tripod or steadycam. It is big, too big for POV.
dmitriandsnow
Well-known member
I don't mind the weight/size... I think having a camera of these dimensions will offer much more respect from the crew and cast. If you do POV i think the weight might even contribute to smoother shots...
I think it was Barry who said Final Cut Pro HD will be able to acquire capture from hvx at 1080/24 but i just don't know because even the most "upgraded" powermac runs at 5400rpm... Is that really possible? Maybe we should wait until they change to Intel?
I think it was Barry who said Final Cut Pro HD will be able to acquire capture from hvx at 1080/24 but i just don't know because even the most "upgraded" powermac runs at 5400rpm... Is that really possible? Maybe we should wait until they change to Intel?
ullanta
Veteran
All this talk about hard drive rotational speed is a bit off, if you properly maintain your hard drives. A 5400 RPM, or even 4200 RPM drive should be more than adequate for capture. Rotational speed becomes really important when access time is an issue... that is, when either 1) the drive is fragmented and the capture software must search around for where to put data, or 2) when the drive is writing/reading multiple files at once. That's why a SEPERATE capture drive is important: the system drive is generally engaged in other activities as well. If you have a cheap, slow external drive (like a nice bus-powered 4200 RPM 80GB Firefly), and manage it well, it should be fine. These drives will easily handle AT LEAST a sustained 20MBps...
What's "manage it well?" Basically, the best thing you can do is never delete/trash/recycle anything... that's what fragments the drive. Just erase/reformat the whole drive (or at least a whole capture partition) every recording or two.
What's "manage it well?" Basically, the best thing you can do is never delete/trash/recycle anything... that's what fragments the drive. Just erase/reformat the whole drive (or at least a whole capture partition) every recording or two.
Jaime Valles
Veteran
Yeah, I wouldn't really want to use this camera without P2. I mean, if I'm shooting narrative fiction film, all I really need is one 4GB P2 card. That's all. Shoot 1080/24p for about 4 minutes, then plug in a cheap off the shelf external Firewire hard disk, and dump the footage directly to the drive, bypassing a laptop altogether. I wouldn't trust direct acquisition into a laptop, because too much can go wrong. Dropped frames, cables getting tripped over, drive not being fast enough... P2 eliminates all these problems. And I can get the $5999 HVX200, and buy only one 4GB P2 card and be set.
Ernest_Acosta
Well-known member
My angle is to get the camera, rent P2 cards or firewire directly to a G4 or G5 or a Firestore device. Purchasing P2 cards is not an option for me right now. I'm considering may be the 4gb card for steadicam shots or action shots. When the price goes down, then I will get into purchasing them. Once the camera comes out, I will pass the rental of the cards to the client. No problem, no hassle.
Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
Barry_Green said:
If that's the case I'll look into it then. Right now it hardly seems like a viable option for me based on what I want to do.
Barry_Green said:
Can't argue there.
Barry_Green said:
Problem is I shoot digital to avoid the problems of film (such as an entire load of film giving you 60 seconds of footage). And in narrative storytelling we keep all the takes because you never know what may actually save a scene in editing including bad stuff.
Barry_Green said:
Hey if they got it like that it's cool but I have to agree, I don't see it. Especially not for me.
Barry_Green said:
Then that's makes you a camera pimp.
Barry_Green said:
Right but I was mostly using it as an example because of the recording time plus the workflow.
Barry_Green said:
Then I'll see how these workout. Still JVC is still wooing me. I would probably get the Panasonic eventually anyway.
Barry_Green said:
Now that makes sense.
Barry_Green said:
Some really good points but the JVC makes up for it by being a compact shoulder mount unit with interchangeable lens. I love Pana but they won't give you a decked out compact shoulder mount cam for nothing. At least not one with the functions we want. It's always a trade off with these guys. Believe it or not but myself and a lot of others will give up 1080i/24p for a pro-looking cam that can do 720/24p. Again what's wrong with Panna. They don't risk their proline by doing this.
Barry_Green said:
I don't know about that. I'm having dreams about busting that JVC out on someone's ass and being like "now what". I know it sounds crazy but the shoulder mounted cams get the respect. If I have the money I'm getting both, but until the P2 cards get better time I'm going with a drive system of some type. By the way they're offering $300 cash back on the DVX100a. You know what that means.
Barry_Green said:
But my thing with 1080/24p is that type of resolution would be perfect for film. That's the one thing keeping my eye on Pana. But I wouldn't touch JVC unless I knew what the footage looked like, another thing about Pana is the footage is on point no matter what.
Barry_Green said:
All good points.
Barry_Green said:
I think you're right. I believe the same thing but obviously Pana doesn't.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Here's another thing to keep in mind, when considering JVC vs. Panasonic -- I just shot a bit with the JVC, and the footage has, yes, dead pixels. Every report I've heard about the JVC has mentioned dead pixels. I even have an HD1 here, borrowed, and it has (you guessed it) a great big glaring dead pixel.
Second thing -- I used their camera, and I put in a brand-new, freshly-unwrapped MQ tape. Now, I couldn't clean the heads on their camera, I didn't have a head cleaner, but I doubt it'd even had a tape through it. And, you guessed it -- dropouts galore. Interestingly, they usually didn't seize the whole GOP, instead they'd make a big band, probably 24 or 32 pixels high and 1/8 to 3/4 of the width of the screen. I hate dropouts. Hate 'em. Which is why I hate tape. Hate dropouts.
When digitizing I cleaned the heads of the HD1 before putting in the MQ tape. So I did about all one could be expected to do to avoid dropouts. But if you're recording tape, it's gonna happen, it always does, especially when you can least afford to have it happen (thanks to Mr. Murphy, of course.)
The HVX will never, under any circumstances, at any time or place, ever have a dropout, of any kind, when using P2. After using the HD100 briefly, I'm now convinced: I wouldn't shoot on the HD100 without a firestore backing up the footage. No way, no thanks. I'll still get an HD100, but I'm adding the FS-4 as the first accessory.
And they better have a great warranty/replacement policy regarding dead pixels. If they don't, I will skip the HD100 and recommend to everyone to do the same -- that dead pixel thing is ugly. Even their demo footage, their own demos that they shot and edited, had dead pixels in it on every frame.
Not liking the dead pixels, I gotta say... hopefully they can mask them (but there was no indication of how to do so in the menus) and they'd better have a good repair warranty for that issue.
Second thing -- I used their camera, and I put in a brand-new, freshly-unwrapped MQ tape. Now, I couldn't clean the heads on their camera, I didn't have a head cleaner, but I doubt it'd even had a tape through it. And, you guessed it -- dropouts galore. Interestingly, they usually didn't seize the whole GOP, instead they'd make a big band, probably 24 or 32 pixels high and 1/8 to 3/4 of the width of the screen. I hate dropouts. Hate 'em. Which is why I hate tape. Hate dropouts.
When digitizing I cleaned the heads of the HD1 before putting in the MQ tape. So I did about all one could be expected to do to avoid dropouts. But if you're recording tape, it's gonna happen, it always does, especially when you can least afford to have it happen (thanks to Mr. Murphy, of course.)
The HVX will never, under any circumstances, at any time or place, ever have a dropout, of any kind, when using P2. After using the HD100 briefly, I'm now convinced: I wouldn't shoot on the HD100 without a firestore backing up the footage. No way, no thanks. I'll still get an HD100, but I'm adding the FS-4 as the first accessory.
And they better have a great warranty/replacement policy regarding dead pixels. If they don't, I will skip the HD100 and recommend to everyone to do the same -- that dead pixel thing is ugly. Even their demo footage, their own demos that they shot and edited, had dead pixels in it on every frame.
Not liking the dead pixels, I gotta say... hopefully they can mask them (but there was no indication of how to do so in the menus) and they'd better have a good repair warranty for that issue.
safarijoe
Well-known member
With a Firestore instead of the P2 cards, I could see it being worth the extra money. You're getting HD, 16:9, a better zoom and three more formats. Once the price comes down, it's really going to be a bargain. Of course an interchangeable lense would be nice.:thumbsup: