|
|
Posted by Nappy on 10/03/95 11:34
"Specs" <No.Spam@Thanks.com> wrote in message
news:439da791$0$27194$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net...
>
> "Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:gv-dnSnNyv1r4gDeRVn-vw@comcast.com...
> > On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 00:48:21 -0500, Will wrote
> > (in article <5cednRuEk6S5kgDeRVn-og@giganews.com>):
> >
> > > Can someone summarize key differences between the entry-level Sony
HDTV
> > > camcorder, model HDR-HC1 and the higher end professional model
HDR-FX1?
> > > The FX1 has removable lenses, but what about the native resolution,
> storage
> > > capacity, etc? We would be using this to make instructional videos
for
> > > operating on complex machinery. The production values would not need
> to be
> > > extremely high, but we do need the highest possible resolution, and at
> least
> > > decent rendering of detail in shadow areas. Both cameras seem to
> sport
> > > 1080i horizontal lines.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > FX1 high end professional? That would be the CineAlta; a totally
different
> > device.
> >
> > The FX1 is not an HDTV camera, it HDV which is VERY different form HD,
and
> > not as good.
> >
> > As for 10801, well yes, but compare the compression ratios.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Ty Ford
> >
>
> Will
>
> You'd be well advised to ignore the above. HDV is HD BTW. The only thing
I
> would worry about with HDV is the low light sensitivity. This can easily
be
> overcome by using additional lighting or judicious use of the camera gain
> control.
>
> A detailed comparison can be found here:
> http://www.sonyhdvinfo.com/
>
> Let me draw your attention to the HDV production in Ghana thread. It is
> written by someone, John Lubran, who has actually used the format in
> production. Listen to these people not the urban mythmakers....
>
> Spex
I have also used HDV in productions. Currently being broadcast on MTV, FUSE,
etc..
I disagree with the honorable Specs in that HDV differs from HD in numerous
ways. Most notably the MPEG compression, low data rate and mid scale
resolution. Also the compressed audio is possibly its weaked point.
HDV is an appropriate label in that it does distinguish between HD and HDV.
If HD were HDV then there would be no need to call it HDV.
I have to add that HDV has thrown the software developers a curve they would
rather have circumvented.
Some editing programs now run very poorly while editing HDV because of the
complexity of editing MPEG formats. It is not all working perfectly yet ...
.. SO performance issues that were not a problem with uncompressed or
frame-compressed formats are back to plague us as they did in the early
90's. Generation errors caused by re-encoding , which has to happen more
often in HDV land, are also a problem. In my world at least, it does
require extra planning.
Then there is the little problem of no live transcoding though cameras..
FWIW DV is a more fleixble format in my world. I wish they had simply
expanded the DV format instead of MPEG.
>
>
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|