|
|
Posted by Specs on 01/30/06 16:38
> > You see, I wouldn't think compression would have anything
> > to do with it either, but I think it is the compression that make
> > Ty reject it as an HD format.
>
> That and Spec's particularly abusive style of communication. :)
> I'm writing that last post off Spec. I'm going to take it that you were
> having a bad day.
>
I won't be writing off any of your posts. I want you to substantiate your
claims that HDV is not HD. You won't simply be able to not answer the
question.
> But seriously folks....There's a whole nother aspect of the compression
game
> and that's what happens when you shoot highly compressed anything. Say you
> finish your piece, it may get sent to who knows where..maybe a TV station
or
> satellite uplink. The TV station may have a STL (Studio to Transmitter
link)
> that uses some form of compression. Maybe the TV station stores everything
on
> a hard drive and uses some compression there as well. (With storage
getting
> cheaper, this will be less likely, but it happens now and broadcasters are
> known for their economy.)
But seriously folks, why would you take anything this jokers says as fact?
This is the same old diatribe that he spouted about HDV audio compression.
The world has changed, the viewing public have decided more channels is what
they want and without infinite bandwidth compression is a necessary evil.
Get over it.
In reality the broadcaster will usually be only too willing to advise on the
technical requirements for programme delivery. They will let you know if
HDV is acceptable to them. The broadcaster will generally put the programme
through the quality control department to ensure it is technically fit for
broadcast and if it passes their tests then job done. What happens down
stream is not in your control as a programme maker and impossible to second
guess.
>
> Now you have a string of different compression algorithms, called
concantated
> compression. It can look pretty nasty pretty fast.
Its concatenated! Jeez.
>
> One in our midst mentioned to me that Sony and Canon HDV are actually
> different than JVC. So there's HDV1 and HDV2? What happens if you play a
tape
> recorded in a JVC HDV camera in a Sony or Canon deck?
>
Is this research for a new article? There is just HDV a trademark in the
same way DV was before it. Didn't mean Dv tapes necesssarily played in
other manufacturers equipment.
Sorry you took my direct style of writing to be abusive. Let me say this
directly to you. Ty, I think you talk out of your arse and you are not
convincing in the slightest.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|