DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Canon VIXIA Series AVCHD and HDV Camcorders (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-vixia-series-avchd-hdv-camcorders/)
-   -   Is HDV pointless unless you have an HDTV? (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-vixia-series-avchd-hdv-camcorders/91745-hdv-pointless-unless-you-have-hdtv.html)

Roland Gatto April 17th, 2007 03:32 PM

Is HDV pointless unless you have an HDTV?
 
is there no point in taping in hdv unless you have a hd-enabled monitor/screen to watch the footage on?

David Garvin April 17th, 2007 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland Gatto (Post 662128)
is there no point in taping in hdv unless you have a hd-enabled monitor/screen to watch the footage on?

I know that people say or imply things like that, but I disagree. I don't have an HD enabled screen and I can tell you that I can definitely see the amazing clarity and resolution difference between HDV and DV footage.

Wes Vasher April 17th, 2007 04:04 PM

I'm using my HV20 for effects shots... I have no HD capable display.

Joe Busch April 17th, 2007 04:05 PM

Not really, most computer monitors today can display 1280x720 no problem... 1920 x 1080 is slightly harder to get...

Oliver Reik April 17th, 2007 04:05 PM

Hi!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland Gatto (Post 662128)
is there no point in taping in hdv unless you have a hd-enabled monitor/screen to watch the footage on?

I have a 21" monitor, set to a resolution of 1280 x 1024. As I do many, but very short movies of about 2 to 5 minutes, I usually watch them on my computer. For this reason I render all footage to 1280 x 720 and receive a absolutely outstanding quality. HDV is also great to downconvert it to PAL / NTSC with a great output quality. And - If you have your stuff recorderd in HDV you can always downconvert it, if you have no device to watch it on and still have the source material in full resolution for the future.

If SD is all you have, you will never be able to make HDV out of it. ;-)

I record and edit everything in HDV, afterwards I render it in the original size with 25 mbps for my archive for future use and to the formats I need right now, what usually is 1280 x 720 or PAL.

Regards,

Oliver

Pieter Jongerius April 17th, 2007 04:14 PM

Because of the much higher original resolution you suffer much less from imperfections on pixel level such as noise, charge bleeding, maybe fringing, but most of all color resolution decrease because of the primary color filter and YUV 4:2:0 color compression, etc. That is provided you shoot in HD and go SD in post. My guess is you will see the difference!

Roland Gatto April 17th, 2007 04:24 PM

Oliver, you make a good point about being able to downgrade to SD, but not upgrade to HD.

Thanks for the responses, folks!

Ken Ross April 17th, 2007 07:11 PM

I can't begin to explain the difference between seeing the output of an HV20 on a non-HDTV and a true HDTV. To say the difference is dramatic is an understatement. You can't begin to see the power of this tiny tool until you see its output on a nice sized HDTV.

David Garvin April 17th, 2007 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Ross (Post 662272)
I can't begin to explain the difference between seeing the output of an HV20 on a non-HDTV and a true HDTV. To say the difference is dramatic is an understatement.

When you say "non-HDTV", are you meaning an SDTV? Or are you referring to any kind of screen that's not an HDTV.

My computer monitor falls into the non-HDTV category and, as I said in my initial post here, I disagree with the assertion that there's no point in shooting HDV unless you own an HD monitor because the difference between HDV and SD images on my computer monitor are extremely obvious.

Wes Vasher April 17th, 2007 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Busch (Post 662167)
Not really, most computer monitors today can display 1280x720 no problem... 1920 x 1080 is slightly harder to get...

That's true of course. I work at 1600x1200 on my CRT and that is more than enough to play the native 1440x1080 HDV files.

Bill Ritter April 17th, 2007 09:30 PM

My video shot in HDV (Canon XH A1) edited in Prem Pro 2 and then exported at DV is definitely superior to the video shot in DV by my GL-2 and XL-1s. I am now spoiled by HD, all DV shot by any of my camcorders just seem less vivid. However, the DV product is definitely better starting at a resolution better than a studio cam and downscaled in Post gives max SD resolution vs DV at only 500 vs 700 max SD.


Bill in Ohio

Tom Roper April 17th, 2007 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Ross (Post 662272)
I can't begin to explain the difference between seeing the output of an HV20 on a non-HDTV and a true HDTV. To say the difference is dramatic is an understatement. You can't begin to see the power of this tiny tool until you see its output on a nice sized HDTV.

Ken's right. Displaying HDV on a high resolution computer monitor is far less satisfying than on a proper HDTV. Yes, you can see it in full resolution, but a larger screen HDTV with home entertainment quality deinterlacing makes HDV a stunning presentation. And if you have an HV20 with its HDMI output, even better.

Joe Busch April 18th, 2007 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wes Vasher (Post 662325)
That's true of course. I work at 1600x1200 on my CRT and that is more than enough to play the native 1440x1080 HDV files.

Psh...

I run at 2048 x 1280 and my second screen at 1280 x 1024...

I used to run at 1920 x 1200... but went a bit higher :)

Highest my monitor can do is like 2330 x 1440

24" Widescreen CRT ;)

Ken Ross April 18th, 2007 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Garvin (Post 662323)
When you say "non-HDTV", are you meaning an SDTV? Or are you referring to any kind of screen that's not an HDTV.

My computer monitor falls into the non-HDTV category and, as I said in my initial post here, I disagree with the assertion that there's no point in shooting HDV unless you own an HD monitor because the difference between HDV and SD images on my computer monitor are extremely obvious.

Yes David, I'm talking about a typical NTSC standard definition TV. I'm not saying there's no point in buy an HDV camcorder if you don't have an HDTV, but I am saying that you can't begin to see the power of the tool until you have one.

I am all for shooting your memories in HD even if you don't have an HDTV since that HD tape will always be ready to expose its full glory when you do buy an HDTV. And let's face it, you eventually will have an HDTV. :)

Wes Vasher April 18th, 2007 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Busch (Post 662399)
Psh...

I run at 2048 x 1280 and my second screen at 1280 x 1024...

I used to run at 1920 x 1200... but went a bit higher :)

Highest my monitor can do is like 2330 x 1440

24" Widescreen CRT ;)

Yeah... well... I have a mouse with blinky lights! So there. :)

Stu Holmes April 18th, 2007 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Ross (Post 662460)
I am all for shooting your memories in HD even if you don't have an HDTV since that HD tape will always be ready to expose its full glory when you do buy an HDTV. And let's face it, you eventually will have an HDTV. :)

Thats exactly it - perfect summary of why to shoot in HDV Ken.

David Garvin April 18th, 2007 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Ross (Post 662460)
Yes David, I'm talking about a typical NTSC standard definition TV.

Yeah, I can't imagine watching this HV20 footage on an SD television. It'd be like having a beautiful girlfriend and putting her in a potato sack.... uh, or something like that...

Mike Horrigan April 18th, 2007 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Busch (Post 662399)
Psh...

I run at 2048 x 1280 and my second screen at 1280 x 1024...

I used to run at 1920 x 1200... but went a bit higher :)

Highest my monitor can do is like 2330 x 1440

24" Widescreen CRT ;)

LOL! I can point you to some CRT Front Projector users displaying images in 1080p at a screen-size of >100 inches.

24"... ;P

All in good fun btw...

:)

Tom Roper April 18th, 2007 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Garvin (Post 662564)
Yeah, I can't imagine watching this HV20 footage on an SD television. It'd be like having a beautiful girlfriend and putting her in a potato sack.

...if that's what it takes to get her in the sack, then I'd watch it on SD ;-)

Fergus Anderson April 18th, 2007 12:23 PM

I use a 24 inch CRT at 1920x1200 and its great ;)

Joe Busch April 18th, 2007 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Horrigan (Post 662575)
LOL! I can point you to some CRT Front Projector users displaying images in 1080p at a screen-size of >100 inches.

24"... ;P

All in good fun btw...

:)

Hah.... nothing will look better than an FW900 :P

It's amazing watching raw footage on this screen... and it doesn't even fill up the entire screen :P

Mike Horrigan April 18th, 2007 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Busch (Post 662714)
Hah.... nothing will look better than an FW900 :P

It's amazing watching raw footage on this screen... and it doesn't even fill up the entire screen :P

LOL! Too small... ;)

You may want to look here... http://gallery.avsforum.com/showfull.php?photo=17676
and here... http://gallery.avsforum.com/showfull.php?photo=17675
9 foot, 8" wide screen. Sony G90 CRT 9" Front Projector.

;)

Gavin Ouckama April 18th, 2007 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland Gatto (Post 662184)
Oliver, you make a good point about being able to downgrade to SD, but not upgrade to HD.

Thanks for the responses, folks!

You hit the nail on the head. You may not have HD equipment now, but you will one day. At that time, you can go back to your recorded HDV and create HD if you wish. Unfortunately, if you only record in SD, that's it.

Joe Busch April 20th, 2007 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Horrigan (Post 662720)
LOL! Too small... ;)

You may want to look here... http://gallery.avsforum.com/showfull.php?photo=17676
and here... http://gallery.avsforum.com/showfull.php?photo=17675
9 foot, 8" wide screen. Sony G90 CRT 9" Front Projector.

;)

That would not be fun editing on :) Very enjoyable to watch though... haha...

Fw900 = $200...
G90 = $15,000 ?

Mike Horrigan April 20th, 2007 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Busch (Post 663669)
That would not be fun editing on :) Very enjoyable to watch though... haha...

LOL! You're right about that! :)


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:14 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network