Posted by edwardchick@mac.com on 08/29/06 15:52

Richard Crowley wrote:
> "Rayne" wrote ...
> > So, DVCAM doesnt give higher quality images?
> > Why dont pros just shoot on mini Dv then?
>
> 1) Higher reliability. The same data is spread over a
> larger tape surface. This results in fewer dropouts and
> more tollerant interchange between equipment. (And
> remember that pro equipment gets more wear-n-tear
> than consumer gadgets)
> 2) Larger cassette size = longer running time (up to 3 hours)
> 3) Other secondary factors such as sample-locked audio,
> etc.
>
> Note that DVCAM camcorders virtually always have
> better *camera sections*, from the lenses (which are
> frequently interchangable) to the image pickup chips
> (which are almost always larger = lower noise), to
> better signal processing (DSP correction for back
> light, skin tone correction, etc.) Also provision for
> external input/output connections for timecode and
> genlock, etc. etc. etc.
>
> OTOH, for cases were you need a lot of cameras for
> special situations (like so-called "reality" productions)
> likely some of what you see on TV *was* shot on DV.


Not necessarly true. I work/have worked on quite a few reality shows.
The formats are all pro-BetacamSP, HDCam, DVCPRO HD, XDCAM, PaL
digibeta, and HDV. Beleive it or not, producers want high quality for
crappy content!
ed

[Back to original message]