HD craze

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

paulpost

Contributor
Messages
241
Reaction score
0
Location
south Florida
Hi to everybody, I've been watching all the hype regarding the new Sony HD camcorders and all pro and cons around this new format (MPG 2).
In the beginning everybody was against this format because not much editing was possible, now looks that all the problems are gone (are they?).
On the othher hand I'd like to ask all the HDcamcorder owners that have HDvideo footage to find a way to share it .
Thank you:lol: :lol:
 
paulpost:
Hi to everybody, I've been watching all the hype regarding the new Sony HD camcorders and all pro and cons around this new format (MPG 2).
In the beginning everybody was against this format because not much editing was possible, now looks that all the problems are gone (are they?).
On the othher hand I'd like to ask all the HDcamcorder owners that have HDvideo footage to find a way to share it .
Thank you:lol: :lol:

This is more along the lines of some perspective on video and technological break throughs.

First of all, HD is here to stay obviously. No real question about that. Sony has done a nice job with theirs, as has Canon and a few other companies. If you shoot video, at least if you shoot more than just the occasional birthday party, chances are you will eventually own a HD camera. The output is stunning and it can clearly take you to places you have never gone before.

Having made that prediction, the chances are also pretty good that you won't really need to shoot HD for the vast majority of applications. I am a professional photographer and producer. The fact is, even for broadcast purposes HD is still in its infancy. No doubt, it is being used more and more. Standard digital video and mini-DV can still handle many if not most professional applications. And for the non-broadcast stuff, there are plenty of analog formats that will fit the bill.

Some of the downside of HD video is, it takes a lot of power to edit. Along with that HD camera, you really need a dual processor computer with a ton of RAM. IT also takes a lot of storage capacity to hand onto the video, unless you are just going to store it on tape, something I don't advise. These aren't really problems, per se, but they are considerations and worth noting.

When I am producing for broadcast, I still use motion picture film for the warmest, highest quality output. My second choice is HD and then down to BETA, all depending on variables such as time, budget and desired effect.

This is sort of different than still photography. I can't figure out why anyone would still shoot film. Even cost is not a factor, the costs of film and processing pretty quickly even out the cost of a new digital camera.

For motion picture, no question, HD is here and it's great, but for most shooters, the time still has not arrived where they need HD, nor the benefits fit the cost.

Just an opinion.

Jeff
 
Try this site:

hd

It's the website of one of the video moderators on the wetpixel board.

Wetpixel

Just about the whole video section is about HD. A lot of pros and semi-pros over there and a TON of good reading on HD.
 
jtoorish:
I can't figure out why anyone would still shoot film. Even cost is not a factor, the costs of film and processing pretty quickly even out the cost of a new digital camera.
Kinda off topic, but my mom works for a publication company that does corporate annual reports, and that sort of thing. She claims they still use film and not digital because the "quality is not there yet." I claim her company is nuts.
 
Of the requests for stock video footage I have received during this year, almost all have asked for HD footage only, not mini-DV.
 
Okay, I shoot and edit HD underwater. HD Looks phenomenal and thats the way the broadcast industry is going. Problem is...not everyone has an HD dvd player and HD TV. You are also dealing with an ENORMOUS FILE! It is an art to dealing with codecs and certain compression with HD. I have played with it for hours and it has taken many of them to learn it.
 
anotherscubavideo:
Okay, I shoot and edit HD underwater. HD Looks phenomenal and thats the way the broadcast industry is going. Problem is...not everyone has an HD dvd player and HD TV. You are also dealing with an ENORMOUS FILE! It is an art to dealing with codecs and certain compression with HD. I have played with it for hours and it has taken many of them to learn it.


What setup do you have ? Camcorder, housing, PC, software, etc. ?

I will be making the HD plunge to the Sony FX-7. I currently use Vegas s/w, and will probably upgrade to their latest version which does HD. I will also upgrade my PC to the most powerfull I can afford, most likely a Dell. Does this sound good to you ?
 
aloha from maui.

it still to soon to go HD. FCC said the Broadcast industry still has until 2009 to comply with all native HD specifications for broadcasting anywhere in the nation.

So, it depends on the market you're into.

High end stock footage. Unfortunately, start shooting all over again in HDV.

MiniDV is still alive & well. There are many stock houses recieving MiniDV footage, just depends on the shots or material you have.

Regardless, the new HDV cameras are not Native HD, so we still have room to grow slowly into the new HD format.

But, if we are talking workstations, its definitely not worth the dollar, yet.

Aloha & Mahalo,

MAui Diver
 

Back
Top Bottom