JVC HDcam offers "true" 16:9
 

There are two interesting modes when shooting DV.

One, called Squeeze Wide uses a wider area on the CCD to create the 16:9 image (941x483 pixels). This is then fit into the regular NTSC signal to make an electronic anamorphic "squeezed" image. This is at 60fps.

The other, called Digital Wide, or D.WIDE uses a greater number of 4:3 pixels (941x646) to generate a wide angle image, roughly equivalent to using a 0.7x wide conversion lens. (This is 16:9.) The frame rate in this mode is 30fps. This mode also doubles sensitivity.

The Squeeze Wide mode is like that of the PDX10 -- and something not available on the DVX100.

The D.WIDE will give a "filmlook" and help sensitivity.

The 60fps mode - that's 60 full frames of 941X483 pixels per second compressed down to what data rate in MPEG-2?

Seems like you would have to bump to another format to avoid compression artififacts even during dissolves or title overlays.

The D. Wide sound more interested due to the lower frame rate and lower pixel count. The 60fps would do great slo-mo unless compression artificacts become a problem.

Still, JVC seems to be marketing this as an "indie" cam now, not just a consumer cam, but without 24p (both for look, lower data rates and for film transfer) it does not seem to qualify.

<<<-- Originally posted by Stephen van Vuuren : The 60fps mode - that's 60 full frames of 941X483 pixels per second compressed down to what data rate in MPEG-2?

Still, JVC seems to be marketing this as an "indie" cam now, not just a consumer cam, but without 24p (both for look, lower data rates and for film transfer) it does not seem to qualify. -->>>

Both SD and HD are 19Mbps. Same as HDTV.

Nothing to support your claim. It's consumer (for those with HDTVs) and for corporate HD, and for DVD creation.

Of course, many others will use for "film look" HD. And that's a far larger market than those able to affor $50K to $100K to really make a film. And filmlook is much better done at 30p than 24p.

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Mullen Both SD and HD are 19Mbps. Same as HDTV.

Nothing to support your claim. It's consumer (for those with HDTVs) and for corporate HD, and for DVD creation.

Of course, many others will use for "film look" HD. And that's a far larger market than those able to affor $50K to $100K to really make a film. And filmlook is much better done at 30p than 24p. -->>>

Well, according to JVC NAB release, it's not for consumers, it's for pros:

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/Attributes/press_res.jsp?model_id=MDL101394&feature_id=08

So I stand by my claim it's not a consumer cam (the XLR connectors are dead give aways, they were not in the early design mockup).

Secondly, since film is 24 frames a second, how in the world is 30p better for filmlook than 24p? I'd like to hear that answer :)

And the other thing with this cam is editing - I don't want to change editing system when changing cams, not many pros do. Plus, no Mac support at all.

I just don't see it fitting into the right niche. Remove the pro features, drop the price, autoeverything, with still and wireless and forget editing, that would be a consumer cam.

Drop tape, put in a 2.5" 80 GB drive that writes avi & mov that are compatible, I see pro.

Otherwise, it's a fence sitting showcase proof of concept cam with limited applicability.

The images I've seen so far don't blow me away either.

You are looking at the PRO model not the consumer model. The consumer is HD1.
 

<<<-- Originally posted by Stephen van Vuuren : <<<-- Well, according to JVC NAB release, it's not for consumers, it's for pros: -->>>

You are looking at the PRO model not the consumer model. The consumer is HD1.

The presence of XLR jacks does not mean it's for the indie crowd as you claimed.

There is a much larger group who wants HD for video. The number of folks actually shooting 24PADV to make films is very small. Of course, I suspect there are a large number who have no idea what mode to use. One should use either 30p or 24PADV. You are either making a video with filmlook or a film. If neither, use 60i.

Contrary to your suggestion, 30fps is a far better a choice for a true film look than 24p. You want the low temporal rate -- not the telecine judder look! Plus 30p is much easier to edit than 24p nonADV.

As far as editing -- a whole difference esthetic is required for HD. The Windows editor should do this fine. And since there are far more PC systems out there -- it makes sense to support them first. I've got both, so it makes no difference to me.

If you seriously plan to work in HD -- or even SD -- you need to make some investments. Like an HDTV. A D-VHS deck or Blu-ray DVD recorder to make HD DVDs.

For the consumer, they've got the HDTV and maybe a D-VHS deck.

This "film look" term seems to be tossed about frequently (and with ease), often as an attempt to strengthen a lame argument rather than to describe a particular look associated with film. 24P miniDV, by far, comes much closer to "the look" or one of the looks than MPEG2, 1 CCD shot footage, I would think.

Steve:

My bad - is there a comparison chart between the consumer and the pro?

Per filmlook, I could not disagree more. I don't use the 30p mode on my AG-DVX100, I only use 24p. I love the look, I love the higher quality in DVD/Web (lower frame rate). I especially love the temporal feel.

30P, even with cinegamma leaves me lukewarm as did frame mode on the XL1.

Plus, if you do go to film or 24P HD (people seem to forget about that), 24 fps is the ONLY rate you want to be at (see the posts on film output in this forum and American Cinematographer).

<<<-- Originally posted by Stephen van Vuuren : Steve:

Plus, if you do go to film or 24P HD (people seem to forget about that), 24 fps is the ONLY rate you want to be at (see the posts on film output in this forum and American Cinematographer). -->>>

Hey, I wrote the first book on the DVX100 so I know how to use the camera. :)

1) If you are going to HD you want 30 or 60 -- not 24.

2) If you are going to film you want 24PADV. And you must edit on only a few NLEs.

3) When you talk about video, I'm assuming you are using 24P not 24PADV. I hope!

But you have to edit 24P to avoid cutting to judder frames. Curious how you do that?

The difference in temporal rate between 24 and 30 is very small. What you like are the slightly slower shutter-speed and the addition of judder frames. This makes a nice "mess" of video which can look very nice!

Head to:
http://home.earthlink.net/~dvcnyc/HD1_HD10.htm
for full details on both JVC camcorders.

(1) If I wanted HD, I would want 24P HD for film transfer, not 30 or 60. Only broadcast would want 30/60 and I would rather control my own telecine, so to speak.

(2) I realize that, but I don't mind the look of Advanced for NTSC. If you exercise care with pans, tilts, it's pretty nice as well. I really ignore NTSC until I'm ready to output. This cam captures better than NTSC data I downgrade at the final output stage.

(3) So, I do everything film style at 24 fps (not 23.97) and shoot ADVANCED all the time.

DVFilmmaker, Vegas Video and AfterEffects all seem happy so far. I'm very aware you're not "supposed" to do it this way, but it works.

That's why the DVX100 is an indie cam in spirit - you make you own recipe.

In all honesty, I would never want another 1 chip cam with half-backed prosumer controls. And I certainly wouldn't consider paying 4X the cost these JVC cams are worth. I had another look at the DVX100 yesterday, by the way, and I think overall it is the best prosumer, "Indie" cam made. My second pick would be between the GL2 and PV-DV953---depending on what I wanted to do with the cam. "Film look?" Heck, I get all sorts of film looks with my 1 chippers, but I never tagged the film look logo on these effects.

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : In all honesty, I would never want another 1 chip cam with half-backed prosumer controls. And I certainly wouldn't consider paying 4X the cost these JVC cams are worth. I had another look at the DVX100 yesterday, by the way, and I think overall it is the best prosumer, "Indie" cam made. My second pick would be between the GL2 and PV-DV953---depending on what I wanted to do with the cam. "Film look?" Heck, I get all sorts of film looks with my 1 chippers, but I never tagged the film look logo on these effects. -->>>

But let's say you were taking a week long sailing vacation. Would you really want to shoot anything but HD if you have an HDTV?

Or, would you spend money on a product that is to HD what Hi8 was to DV? That's like buying a Hi8 camcorder after the VX1000 was announced.

Or, do you think Sony et al will invest any more in DV when their limited R&D will have to go into HD?

Japan is getting OTA HD by the end of 2003. It's Blu-ray, optical HD camcorders, and D-VHS from now on.

Of course DV will continue to be sold. Hi8 is still be sold.

But the world is going optical and SD/HD at the same time.

"But let's say you were taking a week long sailing vacation. Would you really want to shoot anything but HD if you have an HDTV?"

You mean a HD-ready TV, right?

Yeah, but if I wanted good 16:9 NTSC for those HD-ready TV's, and right now, for sure I'd spend far less on a Leica lensed 3-chip PV-DV953 (MX5000). I think they're going for about $1400 US.

http://www.dvfreak.com/pana_mx5.htm

http://www.dvfreak.com/mx500.ppt


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll gladly have a MX5000 today, than spend a year's salary on something that will be obsolete tomorrow.

You mean a [B]HD-ready TV,[/B] right? NO
 

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : "But let's say you were taking a week long sailing vacation. Would you really want to shoot anything but HD if you have an HDTV?"

You mean a HD-ready TV, right?

-->>>

No I mean an HDTV fed by by TWC cable box or Echostar or Direct TV or any of a number of ATSC boxes. There's no place in the USA (and many cities in Canada) that you can't be watching HDTV.

In NY we can get cable (2 cable companys), DBS (from 2 providers) plus all the network stations.

There is far more HD than I have time to watch -- and I don't watch sports. The Mets opener for example was HD. As were many home games last year. And because of 9/11 wein NYC are behind other areas. So if you aren't watching it's your choice -- not a limitation of technology. Nor is price any longer an issue. A great SD/HD projector can be had for under $1,500.

So, would you rather watch your sailing adventure shot on DV blown-up to a 6- to 9-foot screen -- or watching HD you shot?

Also this cam is not to DV what DV is to Hi8. DV offers far more features, etc and was a step forward in camera design etc.

This is more akin to quadrophic stereo. It's squeezing extra information in the same space in a proprietary system.

Also, 24fps is 20% difference from 30 fps. 20% is signifigant in most things in life, especially things related to time.

Why are you diminishing this feature just because the JVC does not offer it (nor does any other cam that cost less than a new SUV?

24P is the reason the AG-DVX100 has become a legendary cam. This JVC may fly off the shelves as well, but that does not diminish the importance of 24p true progressive scan for the many of us that would not consider ANY cam without the feature.