|
|
Posted by Richard Crowley on 04/16/06 15:49
"Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1244p70dmk4sc6f@corp.supernews.com...
> --
> 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]
|