|
|
Posted by Martin Heffels on 01/30/06 16:37
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 18:50:08 GMT, "David McCall" <david.mccall@comcast.net>
wrote:
>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.
Also in reference to Ty's answer to you, his worry is the stacking of
compression-errors, which indeed can happen very quickly on a highly
compressed format. But that doesn't make HDV not a HD-format. HDV is in my
opinion (YMMV) perfect for ENG-work, documentaries, simple short/long
features, these kind of things which don't have a long post-production
path, and go straight to DVD or broadcast (no film-outs).
Of course, with treating the material well, you can push HDV further, but I
reckon this will take so much time that it might work out cheaper to rent a
decent HDcam.
cheers
-martin-
--
Never be afraid to try something new.
Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark.
A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|