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.

<<<-- 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.

<<<-- 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.

Steve, sorry, but what I get is mainly NTSC 4:3, with a few shows that are cropped. I'm not going to spend a year's salary on something that is niche---especially on a 1 chip MPEG2 cam. HD is not here yet for the masses, and besides, content sucks these days.

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Steve, sorry, but what I get is mainly NTSC 4:3, with a few shows that are cropped. I'm not going to spend a year's salary on something that is niche---especially on a 1 chip MPEG2 cam. HD is not here yet for the masses, and besides, content sucks these days. -->>>

I believe your Rogers cable carries HD. If so, you can get HD.

But, it's possible Canada will go the way of Europe and stay with NTSC/PAL.

Actually, SHAW Cable bought out Roger's here some time ago. Also, I think you can get HD via satelite. But getting the HD stuff is VERY EXPENSIVE WITH POOR CONTENT - no better than "regular TV." Unless content improves, I'll stick with basic cable to watch the puppet heads on CNN, although I prefer the CBC.

HD has been legislated by Big Brother. Canada has about the same services in the larger population centers.

You cross the border and the only difference is the beer gets stronger, the money looks funny and we say Eh a lot. We get all of the US networks and in every major market area as well as specialty and home grown TV.

Frank still uses a coat hanger for a TV antenna and runs windows 3.1 on his puter. Rumour is it's a 386.

(Frank and I were friends until this little blurb)
I love ya Frank

My opinion is that I haven't really used all of the capabilities of my VX2K. On an HD ready TV good mini DV footage looks stunning.

In a few years when a system is standardized and good cameras , decks and commonly accepted media is available Ill migrate. But not until. all of the arguing and dreamin in the world will not change my mind.

If I had listen to all of the "now' trends that have been published on the various DV threads i'd be a poor man by now. I recall a highly vocal supports of the 24 P revolution selling his XL1S's and buying the first of the DVX100's. He sold them within the first month.

Look to the future but concentrate on what's available now, otherwise you'll do nothing but dream and no video will ever be recorded.

"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."

These statements are the opinions of a few, the minority of the population that are driven to buy what technology offers, the minute it is released and whether or not it a standardized product. This doesn't mean I have to accept what they tell me.

<<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?>>

If the picture quality looked as bad as what I saw at NAB, then yes, I would rather shoot in high quality DV or progressive DV than shoot with the JVC cam! But like you said in an earlier post, it's only a "work in progress" model...So I won't pass judgement on the camera yet. I just hope they improve it because so far, in my humble opinion, it's a disapointement.

Here's something from left field but interesting:

David Mullen wrote:

"Since the government legislated switch to HDTV programming and broadcast

Could someone else confirm this? I always thought that the government mandated a switch to DTV, not HDTV, of which broadcasters had the option of using the extra bandwidth given to them for more SD channels or for fewer HD channels."

Bruce A. Johnson responds:

"Exactly correct. There is NO government mandate for hi-def, just digital over-the-air broadcast. and cable and satellite companies aren't even required to do that.

Standard def is here for the long haul. HD may be nice-looking, but it isn't going to be the standard in broadcasting or reception for easily a decade and probably longer.

BAJ"

How are David and Stve Mullen related?

They both work in video, that's about the extent. I've met both of them and believe me, there's not much physical resemblance!

David is 1/2 Japanese. I heard he's Steve's son or is somehow else related.

NTSC is getting converted to DTV which is either SDTV or HDTV. No one makes SDTV sets; they are all HDTV ready -- and become HDTV sets with the addition of a digital tuner, sold separately. HDTV is being introduced a lot faster than people reaize. Go to FCC.gov and search HDTV.

If I remember my history correctly the original mandate was for HDTV, but before a standard could be agreed upon DTV snuck up on the industry and regulating bodies. DTV was agreed upon as an intermediate step. However, people lost interest in HDTV and DTV will be it for a while, as Steve says. HDTV is certainly coming but without the full force of a legislative mandate.

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Bell : David is 1/2 Japanese. I heard he's Steve's son or is somehow else related. -->>>

It would be a huge surprise to me if David were my son. And, a big surprize to David's mother -- and real father.

It is true there is no legal mandate for HDTV -- only DTV. However, at an earlier time Congess claims it believed it was moving HDTV forward.

But it history doesn't matter now. The programs that make sense to be in HD are mostly already in HD. (Except for FOX -- but, 35mm/24pHD sent as 480p60 looks very good.) It turns out we didn't need the government to push HD.

And even without Must Carry, many cable companies are carrying HD OTA plus HBO and Showtime. The big deal now is getting cable to carry Discover, ESPN, National Geo, and HDnet. And that's purely an matter of negotiations -- not a technical issue.

I think this fall we will see most all prime-time to be HD. Plus HD On-Demand is coming plus PayperView HD.

Since there is no legal requirement HD, of course it can't be a "standard" but it will be the "norm" for all major networks.