Question: what will give better results? shooting in DVCProHD then downconverting to SD for SD DVD Delivery or Shooting in DVCPro50 and staying in SD?

Shoot DVCPRO 50...stay SD all the way. Save yourself from the need to downconvert.

If you plan on making HD DVD/ Blu-Ray discs in the future than you may want to stick with DVCPRO-HD but as far as picture quality is concerned for SD DVDs, your best bet is DVCPRO-50.

But isn't the SD version limited to interlace? (I'm not sure.) If you're doing effects or processing, progressive is often desirable.

Brian, neither one is "better" so much as "better for your purpose"...I myself shoot DVCPro50 as much as possible because most of my clients can't tell the difference from HD...and between the milder compression when compared to HD and the noticeable jump in color resolution from DV, it really is bang for the buck.

SD is always interlaced but you can still shoot true progressive 24fps with the advanced pulldown. If you shot 1080i you'd be dealing with that as well...

One thing to note is that if you shoot DVCProHD, down-res in camera to DV tape, you'll have lower color resolution to work with in post (though you will ostensibly be starting out with a "bigger" picture). IF that's important to you personally...

barry green did an extensive test of this a year or two ago which i think is over on the dvxuser site. dvcpro50 looked best out of all the options when the end product is sd.

If you shot 1080i you'd be dealing with that as well...
Not entirely true. If you shoot at 24 or 30 you can do progressive but can't do 60p in 1080.

Brian,

This has always been a hotly debated topic however, I can tell you from months of testing this very scenario that based on our test results we decided to always shoot HD 720p24P or 30p , edit in HD then down to SD-widescreen for DVD output. We always retain the original HD projects so that we have the option for HD-DVD, Blu-Ray or HD broadcast in the future.

The only major benefit to shooting in DV50 (DVCPRO-50) and is specific to the HVX; there is less visible noise since the chips are not using spatial-offset to get to HD resolution, so the image will appear cleaner, but at lower res which means more edge artifacts typical to SD.

The other implication of DV50 is that the data rate is actually higher than DV100 (strange, but true) so you'll end up with less time on the cards and, rendering in any NLE will take more horsepower. DV50 is 50Mb/s in the timeline; DV100 (DVCPRO-HD) is 15Mb/s on the timeline requiring less work from the CPU in edits.

So which way to go will ultimately depend on both what you prefer for look and feel in your productions, whether or not you ever plan to use true HD output in the future and, whether or not the extra horsepower for DV50 would ever become an issue in editing.

DV50: Lower-res, cleaner image, no downconvert for SD output, higher data rate for editing.

DV100: HD-res, more visible noise from HVX, downconvert for DVD, lower data rate than DV50 in timeline, retain original HD content for the future.

It's all about which compromise works best for you.

Not entirely true. If you shoot at 24 or 30 you can do progressive but can't do 60p in 1080.

I didn't say you can do 60P in 1080. I said if you wanted true progressive 24fps in 1080i, you could get that the same way you would from SD video, using advanced pulldown.

Always shoot DVCProHD 720/24pn and use Compressor or BitVice to convert for SD DVDs.

Looks fabulous

I don't see much if any difference from DVCPro50.

Also, you future proof footage.

Hey Guys thanks so much for the info, I don't have an HVX....but in late May i will be getting an HPX500, it is basically the same camera with some really nice improvements. As for future proofing, i think that it would be a good idea to shoot in 720pN. My NLE is Premiere Pro, and i will be getting Raylight, and i think i will also get the matrox rt.x2 w/ the upgrade option to the latest Adobe Production Suite (for cheap monitoring options) ...what is a good compressor for PC? I heard good things about Vegas, but thats another $700. anyaways, I was thinking since my Documentaries were basically destined to be SD DVDs... I figured I'd ask to find out what the best options were.

Always shoot DVCProHD 720/24pn and use Compressor or BitVice to convert for SD DVDs.

Looks fabulous

I don't see much if any difference from DVCPro50.

Also, you future proof footage.


I dont agree at all. Future proofing is a marketing term, not a practical reality. You can uprezz progressive DV50 and it looks terrific. If you are delivering on SD and dont need the extra frame rates, DV50 will look much cleaner and let you push it more in post. DVCproHD is a decent codec but it can fall apart much faster than DV50 with serious color correction or tweaking.



ash =o)

The other implication of DV50 is that the data rate is actually higher than DV100 (strange, but true) so you'll end up with less time on the cards and, rendering in any NLE will take more horsepower. DV50 is 50Mb/s in the timeline; DV100 (DVCPRO-HD) is 15Mb/s on the timeline requiring less work from the CPU in edits.

I don't understand how DVCPro HD is 15Mbps on the timeline. DVCPro HD is 100Mbps. If what you are ending up with is 15Mbps, then it must be an MPEG2 variant (e.g., HDV).

DVCPro HD is just like its 50Mbps and 25Mbps - no interframe compression.

John,

DVCPRO-HD is 100Mbps in-camera; when it gets to the timeline it's 15Mbs. If you want all 100Mps straight out of the camera you'd have to use the modification now available for the HVX or, choose the HPX500 and come out HD-SDI to get the full bandwidth.

If you're using FCP, read the supplied manuals about data rates for every codec FCP supports or, goto http://www.adamwilt.com and read up on codec data rates.

DVCPRO-HD is 100Mbps in-camera; when it gets to the timeline it's 15Mbs.
Not sure what you're saying here; DVCPRO-HD is always 100 megabits. It's about 14 megaBytes, which is about the same as 100 megaBits.

If you shoot 1080 or 720 "over 60" the files are 100 megabits on the card and on the hard disk and on the timeline.

I'm guessing there's just a confusion between megabits and megabytes here?

I'm guessing there's just a confusion between megabits and megabytes here?

Yep, your'e right. Silly me for trying to mult-task multiple emails while still dealing with PNLOSS (Post-NAB-lack-of-sleep-syndrome). (laughs)