|
|
Posted by Bible John on 04/16/06 15:43
--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in
you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
news:wgn0g.2086$Lm5.1864@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1243gm86l5v78cb@corp.supernews.com...
>>I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700
>>back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video than
>>any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C
>>tapes,
>
> VHS is limited to around 250 lines of resolution. MiniDV tops out at 525
> lines. Sorry, but a VHS camera doesn't begin to approach the video
> quality of middle-of-the-line miniDV machine.
I know that. But since I am low on funds a VHS-C camera will do. I see
tapes being sold nearly everywhere, so obviously there are millions of
others who are using analog cameras.
A trip to any Walmart, Target, Kmart, or many other places will prove my
story true. Have you ever been in one of these stores and not been able to
buy tapes of all types? For audio, standard audio tapes are useful for me,
since they can record radio, which cannot be "easily" done with a CD. But I
await the day of a CD-R boombox. But then again the tapes are small, and I
could care less about editing them. Its just when I want to duplicate them,
I find it hard fidning 2 tape boomboxes anymore. They used to sell 2 tape
and CD boomboxes, but know such decks are only available in the more
expensive stereo machines.
>
>> which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS tapes
>> are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather
>> than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the
>> VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in
>> many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?
>
> Tape consists of particles attached by a binder to a plastic tape.
> Repeated use of a tape causes the particles to flake off. This causes
> drop outs. If you care about the quality of your video, you should avoid
> re-use of tapes.
>
Is it different with video than audio? With my Microcassette recorder, I
have taped over a tape dozens of times, and the audio still sounds clear.
>
>> Can it play full frame video on your Mac?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "full frame." DV-25 (the standard used for
> miniDV) provides a frame that is 720 x 480 pixels (NTSC). If your Mac's
> screen has that much resolution (and it's hard to imagine any computer
> that doesn't at this point), then it will display the full frame.
I bought my ibook in May of 2005.
>
>> I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,
>
> 13.7 gigabytes per hour.
>
How about per minute? My Kodak Digital still camera cant even compare to my
analog JVC camcorder. But anyways files are about 20 megs a minute with
that at 320x240 pixels.
>>
>> With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
>> over without a lowering of quality?
>
> DVDs are write-once devices (and a poor choice for digital video,
> particularly if you want to edit). Hard drive - based camcorders can
> rewrite data until the drive dies. However, they, too, are a poor choice
> if you care about quality and want to edit. MiniDV tapes can be recorded
> over, but the more they are used, the more likely you are to experience
> dropout.
They used to make VHS camcorders, and I believe that newspeople still use
them. Perhaps this was a better format than DVD. I used one of these
camcorders once in 1999 to film a trip to New York. It worked okay, but the
video was not as clear nor the audio as loud as the Sony 8mm camcorder I
purchased in 2001 for $700.
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>> PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace it,
>> but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital camcorder.
>> I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital camcorders, is
>> camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video quality. My JVC will
>> floor my Kodak anyday for video.
>
> Your JVC won't approach my VX2000, which is better-than-broadcast quality.
> Your JVC also won't approach my old TRV-20, which is just a middling
> miniDV machine. If, by "digital camera video quality," you mean the video
> put out by still cameras, then, yes, just about any digital camcorder will
> do better.
I know that. But my point was that my JVC camcorder produces MANY MANY MANY
times superior video and audio than my Palm Zire 72, or any digital camera I
have used. And this includes my old Vivitar, my current Kodak, my fathers
Sony, the Mavica, and another Vivitar that I used.
Of all these cameras, no question my current Kodak is the best, since the
videos are stored in the .mov format. But for whatever reason digital
cameras cant produce videos beyond 320x240.
John
>
>
>>
>> --
>> 1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
>> ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
>> that is in you, with meekness and fear
>> CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
>> Founder and director
>> http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
>>
>
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|