Next Wedding with new Z5

Marcus Martell · February 7th, 2009, 05:33 AM

Hey Stelios,i don't want 2 hijack the conversation but if you record on hdv then you downconvert to SD you will gain the standard quality of the SD!
Is it right guys?
Peace

Jo Ouwejan · February 7th, 2009, 05:57 AM

So far I have never read anywhere, that someone found a camera, that performed the downconvert better than can be done by your NLE.

Ken Ross · February 7th, 2009, 07:53 AM

I will tell you that the SD quality of the Z5, with the camera set to "SD", is better than my VX2100. In my mind that's very good.

Jo Ouwejan · February 7th, 2009, 08:08 AM

That is not what I ment. Recording can be done in HD as well as in SD, but you can export HD footage as SD, by changing the play settings to DV. That is down converting.

Ron Evans · February 7th, 2009, 08:36 AM

The real advantage for Stelios would be to have a HDV master to keep for the future as well as deliver in SD now. Unless he likes shooting in DV LP the tape times are the same so there is no real downside in shooting HDV. Downconverting from my FX1 or exporting SD from an HDV timeline I can't see a noticeable difference. Before the NLE's got faster at editing HDV I would downconvert and edit in SD DV. Today I would stay HDV and export SD from the timeline.

Ron Evans

Ken Ross · February 7th, 2009, 08:38 AM

I'm very familiar with downconversion Jo, but I'm simply stating that the normal DV quality of the Z5 is already excellent and better than my 2100. So I see no need to shoot in HDV and downconvert. In fact, I've not seen any better quality by downconverting HDV in Edius Pro (known for some outstanding conversion codecs) than what the cam is already doing when it's set to SD.

My feeling is if you need SD out of the Z5, shoot in SD...unless of course you need the HD footage too. The great thing about the CF Card Recorder is that it allows you to shoot in HDV on tape and downconvert on the fly to SD on the card. Although I haven't tried it, my friend who has a Z5 says the quality is the same as when the cam is set to shoot in SD.

Stelios Christofides · February 7th, 2009, 11:28 AM

I also don't see the point in recording in HDV if I am not going to deliver in HDV. And for those people who say that if you record in HDV now so in the in the future your customers might ask you to deliver to them in HDV, I doubt that. Who knows what the format will be in 3 to 5 years time?

Stelios

Stelios Christofides · February 7th, 2009, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

...Unless he likes shooting in DV LP the tape times are the same so there is no real downside in shooting HDV

Ron

What do you mean that I like shooting in DV LP? I though I I shoot in DV SP.
Is LP=Long Play?

Stelios

Khoi Pham · February 7th, 2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stelios Christofides

I also don't see the point in recording in HDV if I am not going to deliver in HDV. And for those people who say that if you record in HDV now so in the in the future your customers might ask you to deliver to them in HDV, I doubt that. Who knows what the format will be in 3 to 5 years time?

Stelios

Then you have no idea what you could do with HD footage on a SD timeline.

Ron Evans · February 7th, 2009, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stelios Christofides

What do you mean that I like shooting in DV LP? I though I I shoot in DV SP.
Is LP=Long Play?

Stelios

When I shot in DV I often used LP because it gave me 90mins record time which for the theater shows that I shoot is important as they often go more than 75mins before a break. I now use 80min tapes and shoot HDV as well as using a SR11 AVCHD for the full stage camera that could shoot for 7 hours!!!. SD was with us for over 50years I do not think the current change to HD is going to change any sooner. That means your HDV tapes will be able to be edited to whatever the deliver format may be and will be viewable in true HD. I assure you that once you have seen HD on a good display you will not want to watch SD anymore. To expand on something Khoi hinted at you have more editing flexibility using HD on a SD timeline to pan and zoom within the image to get a better framing for the SD output as just one example.

Ron Evans

Jon McGuffin · February 7th, 2009, 12:42 PM

I agree with Ron here 100%...

Everytime I see a post about somebody buying a $3000 - $5000 HD cam so they can continue to shoot in SD I'm just beside myself. It doesn't make any sense as you might as well ingest in the best possible quality you can to give you the most flexability during the editing process. A decent computer edits HDV as though it were DV, the tapes don't record any less time with HDV, and even though HDV is GOP, the recording quality of it is superior to that of DV. Heaven forbid you should ever need to do any color correction, masking, compositing, anything as the HDV footage is going to perform far superior than DV.

The footage you capture, create and deliver also can extend beyond what you hand to the client. What about HD footage you would need to present your work down the line? If a potential client a nice new 52" 1080p LCD monitor on hand, why not show them a demo in the full resolution that device is capable of playing back in? The footage looks stunning and when I client can see that you can shoot and playback in the same quality they pay big bucks for either Blu-Ray or their HD channels from their cable/sattellite supplier, it adds credability. This is just one of a few reasons why I strongly believe capture and edit in HD, deliver to whatever format your client requires and move on..

Jon

Stelios Christofides · February 7th, 2009, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Khoi Pham

Then you have no idea what you could do with HD footage on a SD timeline.

Tell me then Khoi? What can I do? You are the expert!

Stelios

Ken Ross · February 7th, 2009, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

When I shot in DV I often used LP because it gave me 90mins record time which for the theater shows that I shoot is important as they often go more than 75mins before a break. I now use 80min tapes and shoot HDV as well as using a SR11 AVCHD for the full stage camera that could shoot for 7 hours!!!. SD was with us for over 50years I do not think the current change to HD is going to change any sooner. That means your HDV tapes will be able to be edited to whatever the deliver format may be and will be viewable in true HD. I assure you that once you have seen HD on a good display you will not want to watch SD anymore. To expand on something Khoi hinted at you have more editing flexibility using HD on a SD timeline to pan and zoom within the image to get a better framing for the SD output as just one example.

Ron Evans

This is why the ideal scenerio is using the CF Reader while recording to tape in HD and downconverting on the fly to the CF card in SD. Best of both worlds.

February 7th, 2009, 11:28 AM	#22
Stelios Christofides Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Nicosia, CYPRUS Posts: 1,080	I also don't see the point in recording in HDV if I am not going to deliver in HDV. And for those people who say that if you record in HDV now so in the in the future your customers might ask you to deliver to them in HDV, I doubt that. Who knows what the format will be in 3 to 5 years time? Stelios __________________ My Blog: http://steliosc.blogspot.com "I hope for nothing, I fear nothing, I am free" Nikos Kazantzakis

February 7th, 2009, 05:33 AM	#16
Marcus Martell Trustee Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: spain Posts: 1,202	Hey Stelios,i don't want 2 hijack the conversation but if you record on hdv then you downconvert to SD you will gain the standard quality of the SD! Is it right guys? Peace

February 7th, 2009, 05:57 AM	#17
Jo Ouwejan Major Player Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Veenendaal, Holland Posts: 225	So far I have never read anywhere, that someone found a camera, that performed the downconvert better than can be done by your NLE.

February 7th, 2009, 07:53 AM	#18
Ken Ross Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New York Posts: 1,945	I will tell you that the SD quality of the Z5, with the camera set to "SD", is better than my VX2100. In my mind that's very good.

February 7th, 2009, 08:08 AM	#19
Jo Ouwejan Major Player Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Veenendaal, Holland Posts: 225	That is not what I ment. Recording can be done in HD as well as in SD, but you can export HD footage as SD, by changing the play settings to DV. That is down converting.

February 7th, 2009, 08:36 AM	#20
Ron Evans Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,220	The real advantage for Stelios would be to have a HDV master to keep for the future as well as deliver in SD now. Unless he likes shooting in DV LP the tape times are the same so there is no real downside in shooting HDV. Downconverting from my FX1 or exporting SD from an HDV timeline I can't see a noticeable difference. Before the NLE's got faster at editing HDV I would downconvert and edit in SD DV. Today I would stay HDV and export SD from the timeline. Ron Evans

February 7th, 2009, 08:38 AM	#21
Ken Ross Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New York Posts: 1,945	I'm very familiar with downconversion Jo, but I'm simply stating that the normal DV quality of the Z5 is already excellent and better than my 2100. So I see no need to shoot in HDV and downconvert. In fact, I've not seen any better quality by downconverting HDV in Edius Pro (known for some outstanding conversion codecs) than what the cam is already doing when it's set to SD. My feeling is if you need SD out of the Z5, shoot in SD...unless of course you need the HD footage too. The great thing about the CF Card Recorder is that it allows you to shoot in HDV on tape and downconvert on the fly to SD on the card. Although I haven't tried it, my friend who has a Z5 says the quality is the same as when the cam is set to shoot in SD.

February 7th, 2009, 12:42 PM	#26
Jon McGuffin Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Carlsbad, CA Posts: 634	I agree with Ron here 100%... Everytime I see a post about somebody buying a $3000 - $5000 HD cam so they can continue to shoot in SD I'm just beside myself. It doesn't make any sense as you might as well ingest in the best possible quality you can to give you the most flexability during the editing process. A decent computer edits HDV as though it were DV, the tapes don't record any less time with HDV, and even though HDV is GOP, the recording quality of it is superior to that of DV. Heaven forbid you should ever need to do any color correction, masking, compositing, anything as the HDV footage is going to perform far superior than DV. The footage you capture, create and deliver also can extend beyond what you hand to the client. What about HD footage you would need to present your work down the line? If a potential client a nice new 52" 1080p LCD monitor on hand, why not show them a demo in the full resolution that device is capable of playing back in? The footage looks stunning and when I client can see that you can shoot and playback in the same quality they pay big bucks for either Blu-Ray or their HD channels from their cable/sattellite supplier, it adds credability. This is just one of a few reasons why I strongly believe capture and edit in HD, deliver to whatever format your client requires and move on.. Jon