|
|
Posted by mv on 02/17/06 11:51
There's no doubting the superiority of these megabuck HDCAM types over
even the best HDV's, but the law of diminishing returns has put many
producers and broadcasters into a bit of a tizzy. The bean counters
bosses have traditionally relied upon the advice of retained techno
geeks, who though on the brink of obsolescence (remember the days when
one could earn a very good living as a computer operator), can still
recite specifications and algorithm equations ad nauseum. Trouble is
though that the human eye, being the most advanced HD system available
to our industry, is starting to question the very high cost of the
emperor's new cloths; i.e. TV viewers don't detect the difference when
their favourite episode of JAG or what ever cuts between a Z1 and a 950
(sic). The fact that experts can go squinty eyed whilst searching
intensely for evidence to the contrary is, in the real world, irrelevant
to the business of TV. Expect manufactures to develop new market
dynamics, with 1080 and 720 HD dropping in price like a stone, so don't
go out and buy that HDCAM 950 just yet, even if only because the better
HDCAM 750 is available significantly cheaper. The wonderfulness of 24p
for film transfer, is only an NTSC reality issue. 25p PAL cameras have
been doing an excellent job of this for years. The Arriflex-Locheed
Martin 5,000 line (same as 35mm film) 'Super HD' has already been
invented, OK so the recorder still has to be truck mounted, but then I
worked with Sony's original HD format in the early 90's and that was
truck mounted too. Now I have an HVR-A1(amongst other types) that nearly
fits into a large pocket and produces 1080i images that are only a
wafers width less astonishing, profoundly, it cost me considerably less
than a couple of days rental of an HDCAM.
--
John Lubran
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|