Hd and HD to SD from camcorder or Focus HDD
 

What is the best method/solution/workflow? I posted a thread in the NLE PC forum but did not realize that it was not for HD.

So I will try not to make this a cross post.

For HD to computer and editing what is the best, lossles solution/method/equipment?

For HD to SD, is it better if the camcorder, i.e. the A1 downrezzes it there than doing it on the PC?

IF not then what is the best lossless solution/method/equipment for putting it to computer and editing it there for dvd?

I just read the thread done a while back by Jason in July on his test. But was wondering if there was new technology since then that makes it better quality and more lossless going to SD from HD on the computer if that is better than doing it in camera.

Thanks
Jerry

Hey Jerry,
Digital video is all 0's and 1's. A transfer is a transfer, whether or not you use a deck or your own camcorder to play the tape, or a gold-braided cord versus a radioshack firewire cable. The data's either there or it's not.

Asking the best setup for HD might be opening a can of worms--are you referring to HDV, or real actual HD? The requirements of each are quite different. I'm assuming you mean HDV, in which case I find the Cineform workflow to be the easiest and most lossless.

I actually just did that method today using VirtualDub and TMPGenc. I must say I really don't think there is anything better. I doubt camcorder manufacturers put a whole lot of thought in their camera for downrezzing, especially something like the A1. You're much better off leaving things like that to tried-and-true algorithms that programmers have spent good time on. Besides, in order to use the camcorder to downres you must first recompress your video to HDV codec which will submit your video to whatever harsh compression artifacts may appear in the process. I would avoid that as much as possible.

Just my 2 cents. Take the plunge and buy Cineform's solution, and don't mess around with your camera's potentially shoddy downres capability.

A couple of clarifications.

HDV is real HD. Uncompressed HD does have tremendously greater requirements than HD compressed within any of the common formats and codecs (HDV, DVCProHD, etc).

People vary in their opinions about whether it is better to down-rez to SD in-camera, or capture HD and down-rez in post. I'm not aware of any info that says cameras do a poor job of it (DV codecs are pretty mature and for hardware reside on cheap chips these days), although my personal style is to shoot, edit, and archive in HD and do a down-rez export only when burning a DVD. A good reason to down-rez in-camera is if one doesn't have a pretty fast computer, which can make editing too painful for polite society.

Thanks Ben and Pete.

I guess I need to research first the difference between HD and HDV. If I go that route I would probably be using a Canon A1, with an FS-4, for what that is worth.

I think HDV means on tape, but I will research that and then re-digest what you folks advised.

I had heard that there was not much difference in downrezzing in camera vs on computer, but I did not know which way that difference went.

thank you
Jerry

I will look at that Cineform solution, it sounds like it may be better than Canopus?

I am trying to combine the post for two different things so I don't need two diff solutions for HD post. the other I will be using is HD from Satellite TV, i.e. HD football games, that will need to be post processed too and would like to be able to use the same software and hardware for that AND the camcorder stuff.

Ben I understand that the video is 0's and 1's, at least in SD.
From what I have learned about HD from TV, you have to stream it to your computer for capture which is more involved and complicated than just plugging into a dv in port and playing back a minidv for SD.
does that make any sense?

Thanks
Jerry.

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound belittling. I meant it shouldn't matter what hardware you use as in it won't reflect in the quality of your capture, but I suppose you already knew that.

I'm not sure I get what you mean. You have to stream SD too when capturing..."plugging into a dv in port and playing back a minidv" is exactly what I do to capture HDV.

In common terms, HD simply refers to resolution and HDV is one way of recording HD content. It's generally better to capture and edit any HD footage at full resolution and downsample to widescreen SD at the end of the project, but that requires more powerful computers and sometimes bigger hard drives than working in DV.

No need to apologize...you were not belittling.

I thought that with HD was a differrent type of streaming than SD and took special software. SO maybe I am just mixed up and got the wrong idea..
thanks
Jerry

So would it be right to say that HDV is HD recorded to tape? If I record HD to something like an FS-4 then I would have the HD at full resolution? Or will tape provide it at full resolution also?

I have a 3.2 ghz computer and hard drive space is no probem..thanks.
Jerry

HD is a broad term which encompasses a variety of specific High Definition videoformats. One of those specific formats is HDV. Other specific HD formats include AVCHD, DVCPRO HD, XDCAM HD, HDCAM and HDCAM SR. HDV is just as "real" as any of the other HD formats. Think of it like this:

HD: is an all-encompassing term equivalent to: automobiles

HDV, HDCAM, XDCAM HD etc. : are specific terms equivalent to: car, truck, sport utility vehicle etc.

Thanks Chris, that helps explain it thoroughly...great comparison...thanks
Jerry