|
|
Posted by Rick Merrill on 07/11/06 16:22
Steve King wrote:
> "Rick Merrill" <rick0.merrill@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:PbGdnejwY-tTMC7ZnZ2dnUVZ_tudnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>>PTravel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Richard Crowley" <richard.7.crowley@intel.com> wrote in message
>>>news:e8ui3p$bkc$1@news01.intel.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>"PTravel" wrote ...
>>>>
>>>>>From Adobe:
>>>>
>>>>>"This digital format has many benefits, including excellent picture
>>>>>resolution, relatively low camera and tape cost, and no generational
>>>>>loss during the duplication and editing process. It is a format that is
>>>>>being rapidly adopted throughout the video industry."
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/199904/19990419.prequicktm.html
>>>>>
>>>>>A google search revealed scads of similar statements from other sources.
>>>>>So, you'll forgive me, but I'll take Adobe's word over yours.
>>>>
>>>>Indeed at the marketing level that is an accurate statement.
>>>>At the engineering/technology level is is a gross oversimiplification.
>>>>But then most marketing verbiage is a gross oversimplification, so
>>>>why should Adobe (or Sony) be any different?
>>>>
>>>>If we want to just leave this discussion at the marketingspeak level
>>>>then we are in violent agreement. But to say that it is 100% perfect
>>>>and that the 100th (or 20th) generation will be bit-perfect with the
>>>>original is something that would likely get no support from the
>>>>engineers who designed the technology.
>>>>
>>>>If you really want to know the remarkably complex technology
>>>>behind DV, here is as good an explanation as you can get for free...
>>>>http://www.sony.ca/dvcam/pdfs/dvcam%20format%20overview.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>>I don't deny the complexity of digital technology, or that the site I
>>>quoted is a marketing piece (though federal law strictly prohibits false
>>>statements in advertising). Right now, it's just you and Martin saying
>>>there is generational loss in DV duping. ...
>>
>>
>>There is potential generational loss in dup of DV25 tape, but not if the
>>data has been stored in files (on disk).
>
>
> Why would that be? Are you considering what was called 'drop-out' in
> analogue days? If so, I would not consider that 'generational loss', which
> seems to me to be more concerned with the noise floor and frequency response
> limitations of analogue tape. Data files stored on disks are also
> susceptible to imperfections in the media, which might be compared to tape
> drop out.
>
> Steve King
>
>
Very true. But, in the abstract, copying from one camcorder (tape or
DVD) to another the drop-outs become part of the recording - hence a
virtual generational loss. Older camcorders actually went through an
analog (gasp!) stage. Disk files on the other hand have error
correction of one kind and another and buffering which gives the system
time to make corrections, but a disk file is either a true copy or a
complete failure.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|