You don't have to blow all your money on hardware. That's a common PC myth about Macs. I don't want this to turn into a Mac vs. PC war, but used and refurbished Macs are available for very reasonable sums. The savings in the software (FCP vs. Avid Xpress DV) will make up for price differences in hardware. So, the next time your upgrading hardware consider a Mac and the advantages it offers. All things considered a switch might be in order.

Jeff

We have both systems here at The U of M Media Union.
Avid XpressDV and Final Cut Pro are both great IMO.
You can't go wrong running either of these two programs.

I learned on Avid, so I prefer XpressDV over Final Cut, BUT Final Cut
has an incredible array of tools and capabilities. Apple isn't
holding any features back, whereas Avid sells $150K systems, and
therefore doesn't want to kill that market by giving XpressDV
90% of a Symphony's function.

We had a demo of Avid DS (Softimage digital studio) a couple
of weeks ago. Now THAT, is da BOMB!

Yeah. The Avid DS is what? $350 000? That will buy you 35 uncompressed FCP setups...

Yes. Avid|DS is expensive beyond most setups. And question is if you really make any progress since for that money you get one impressive Uncompressed FCP + AFX setup which technically can rival most of the stuff you can do with the DS system. And if you are fleshing out $350k (not even sure this is enough) for a DS (which btw is for the base system, you need some additional hardware to get the system fast and easy to use). And if you are looking at that kinda system why not start looking at a Flame or Smoke.

You need some serious clients with serious money to afford that kinda system. I worked on one for 2 years and was laid off due to lack of clients.

/Henrik

Your point is taken, Jeff. I should have explained that I teach video production at a high school, and because of budget concerns they are not purchasing any new equipment for me. I build my own PC's and I had one that I had been running Premiere on, so I bought the the academic version of XDV3 for $500. As far as I know, Apple doesn't offer academic pricing on software. I wanted my more advanced students to have have the opportunity to edit on something other than Premiere, to help prepare them for the next level. I would like to offer FCP to them too, but my personal budget won't allow it. Unfortunately, with the heavy emphasis on increasing academic performance, many schools are cutting back on expensive technology classes. It's a shame (and I think very shortsighted), because I have a girl that is a Junior that has been making money editing event videos. And I have others that are getting close to that level. I need about 10 more editing stations with any editing software right now, but I won't get them. If funds become available though, I will keep your sggestion in mind.

I thought Apple offered FCP at an educational rate.

Jeff, you might want to look into Pinnacle Edition:

http://www.pinnaclesys.com/ProductPage.asp?Product_ID=561&Langue_ID=7

and also the Canopus products:

http://www.canopus.com

I know for a fact that Canopus has an academic sales channel. Hope this helps,

Hi Jeff,

What a coincedence, I teach also (digital photography and photography). Apple sells FCP for $299 (educational discount). In your situation I would look at several year old iMacs. My 9 year old son edits on his iMac (mostly movies about his hamster) that is 2 years old. I bought it on ebay for $500.

Apple has educational discounts on their hardware also. Take a look here http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/243/wo/IO5KQ1Pny1lYpQE9zj/0.3.0.3.16.4.0?44,7 for educational discounts. This also might help http://www.apple.com/education/

Jeff

Thanks for the responses, Chris and Jeff. I knew that Apple offered academic discounts on their hardware, but I hadn't found that info about their software. I should have asked here sooner! Your suggestions are very helpful. I may have to check that credit card balance!
Jeff, is your school cutting back on technical and vocational classes? I have talked to technology teachers in other districts in Arizona, and it seems to be a growing problem here. What concerns me is that, although I think raising academic standards is a worthy goal, I'm afraid that we are beginning to treat all students as if they are going to a four year college, when many would be better served by going on to technology schools where they can get training specific to their career goals. It's hard for them to discover that, though, if we end up eliminating technology classes.

I don't teach in Public Education at this time (I teach at a Fine Arts school). However, I did briefly teach Video Production at a Vocational High School in Ohio several years ago. The cut backs in Florida are not good. But lots of money for constuction because of the ever increasing student enrollment. I've only lived in Florida a little over a year and the education system down here is way behind education in the more northern states.

It seems to me this whole vocational education issue runs in cycles. I remember back in the '70s vocational education was thought to be the wave of the future and huge sums of money went into building seperate vocational buildings to teach the trades. The problem was that for the most part they didn't teach technology. They taught printing, auto mechanics, carpentry etc. Cutting edge technology, like computer science, was taught at the main high school because CS was a college program. Now, much of CS can be taught at a vocational level. But no money for the equipment.

Jeff

Nice review of XpressDV 3.5 in this months dDV magazine by Frank Capria. He rates Avid XPressDVover FCP...

"Xpress DV 3.5 is the best software-only NLE I have ever used. For facilities that do a significant amount of DV editing, it's worth the $500 difference in street price over Apple's Final Cut Pro. This is getting to be fun. I can hardly wait to seee how Apple counters."

That's why there are reviews....

Frank and I have crossed swords many times on the Avid L
in the past four years. He has always been a big Avid supporter
and user, so like everyone, he most likely has his bias.

As I said in my previous post, I prefer XpressDV
to FCP because I am intimate with Avid, and I would guess
the same goes for Frank. Avid's interface is still more elegant
and easy than FCP, but . . .

Restating my position, BOTH of these programs are great!
If you are way into PC, that makes the choice easy.
I would also say that FCP does much more for a grand than
XpressDV "base" program. The cool stuff doesn't
really begin until you get the $3500 "loaded" xpressdv.

JVC HM-DH3000 D-VHS HDTV recorder for under $1000
 

This summer, JVC very quietly introduced the JVC HM-DH3000 D-VHS recorder for a list price of $1999.00, with a retail price of $1299.00. D-VHS/ D-Theatre (dvhs.com) is advertising the unit for $999.00, and I am also seeing this unit being advertised elsewhere on the web between $769 - $899. That's assuming that they have them in stock of course, which many sites are claiming that they do. hmmmmmmmmmmm,,,

I would like to know if anyone here has yet invested in D-VHS and what their experiences have been so far? I know the video inputs are either composite or S-Video, but the JVC HM-DH3000 DOES offer IEEE1394 I/O, so how about using the DataVideo DAC-2 Bi-Directional DV to Y.U.V. Convertor to input component video?
http://www.datavideo-tek.com/content/product_info/dvformatconverters/dac2/dac2_specifications.htm

Does anyone in here know of a better solution in this price range?

Also, if you have seen and/ or used this unit, or if you have any experience with D-VHS/ D-Theatre equipment, please do add your input below.

Looking forward to some good responses!

JVC HM-DH3000 links:
http://www.jvc.com/product.jsp?modelId=MODL026758&page=2

More from dvhsmovie.com:
http://www.dvhsmovie.com/hardware/hardware-detail.asp?hid=1

CNET REVIEW:
http://electronics.cnet.com/electronics/0-6342375-1305-9718907.html?tag=rev-rev

BuyDig.com: (supposedly in stock for $769)
http://www.buydig.com/cgi-local/shop/web_store.cgi?cart_id=6596177133.1034124376&page=outlet_frontpage_db.html&details=yes&exact_match=on &pro_id=JVCMDH30000U&search_request_button=yes&accy=&as=

- don

This may be stupid, but why invest in DVHS, you have no compatability with anyone else. Why not output to DVD. I assume the attraction is DVHS has larger capacity, but I think they are late to the game making DVHS affordable, had they dropped it in 2 years ago at say $500 I think plenty of preople would have hopped on board. My guess is there is a niche for it, but a shrinking one at that.

Hi Keith,

Not a dumb question at all Keith. Certainly, this technology format will probably be replaced in a few years by some form of HD DVD player/ recorder. Don't forget that this is a stand-alone unit with multiple analog and digital I/O. I'm hearing about some editors who are picking up these units to create a DV tape "master" of projects with timelines that exceed the 80-minute tape length of miniDV or the 3-hour tape length of DVCam for that matter. I'm sure that any good video dub/ transfer house is capable of handling a D-VHS tape.

It also makes one very sweet "VHS" recorder to have around the house, if you are into recording high-quality digital video and do not want to stock up on multiple hard drives. I'm sure that the cost of one D-VHS tape that allows you to record a good 4 hours at the highest level of 1080i HDTV quailty is still a lot cheaper than a 60GB or higher hard drive to record -and- store that same 4 hours of 1080i HDTV quality video.

As JVC puts it for those who want "a recorder capable of recording capturing HDTV broadcasts in their original, full high-definition quality, D-VHS is capable of recording 50 GigaBytes on a single tape.

That's approximately 4 hours of 1080i HD broadcast, 8 hours of standard television definition (STD), or 24 hours of LS3, digitally recorded in MPEG-2 format (the same compression used in mastering DVDs) — great for digital archiving.

Now users can record and playback in analog VHS, Super VHS and Super VHS ET, as well as high definition digital D-VHS — all on one deck"

Still contemplating the idea myself, but for certain applications it does seem to make a lot of sense. It sure seems to be a lot cheaper than any standalone HD DVD player/ recorder solution that may (or may not) exist in the here and now.

- don

There are actually a few movies released in this format. HiDef stuff, but it supports Dolby 5.1 only, none for DTS. Still it does sound like a cheap way to go HD.

Heres another link for this camera.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/hd_recording_camcorder_jvc_ceatec_japan_10_02_02.htm

don't know how dependable she is, basically saying the camera may be here by late next year for under 3K (according to her sources at JVC).
I seriously doubt that, considering what it would to to the rest of the JVC line up.

More info.

Ken Freed, an official JVC sales rep, says over at the cow forum that this camera is strictly a concept camera designed to generate discussion. There are currently no plans to make this cam for the general public. Or even produce it at all.
Of course they started out saying that with the dy300u also.

Hm.. im wondering about one thing here.. does this mean it records the HD in Mpeg-2 compression? Wouldn't that mean it will hurt the image quality even more than DV? im especially thinking about adding noise to the image when either capturing gradients or making the green/blue screen compositors life a nightmare.

Even DV in its 1.st generation can be a real problem with compositing due to the introduced noise in the compression.

Just curious... "coz i shure wanna HD cam :)"

/Henrik

docuwild, what officials at JVC are saying is this camera is nothing more than a non functioning prototype put together by some engineers in a lab. It is not a demo of an actual product to be sold.
Turns out this is just like those prototype cars you see at autoshows.
Doesn't mean something won't come out of it, but don't expect to see this camera anywhere anytime in the near future.

In other words, further speculation about this camera is a total waste of bandwidth. in fact this is the last post I'll make about it.

hahaha, then you can sue me for patent infringement peter

SAY IT LOUD, SAY IT PROUD
PNG, open source, patent free. PNG

hehehe

>>docuwild, what officials at JVC are saying
>>is this camera is nothing more than a non
>>functioning prototype

This camera was displayed on CEATEC and produced a picture. That means it has working optics and CCD, focusing.

Balazs

Hmm, then someone needs to figure out whats going on. JVC over hear says this camera will not be for sale. It's just a prototype. I'll ask Ken Freed again what's going on.

News: IEEE 1394b (aka FireWire 2.0)
 

With USB 2.0 just starting to become a standard feature on new PC motherboards, the 1394 Trade Association has announced specifications for IEEE 1394b (aka FireWire 2.0). IEEE 1394a supported serial transfer speeds of 400 Mbps; USB 2.0 topped that with speeds of up to 480 Mbps. Whereas 1394a thrived in the domain of digital video camera data transfer, 1394b is intended to be a networking standard with speeds of 800 Mbps for starters and, within one and five years, respectively, 1.6 Gbps and 3.2 Gbps; and maximum cable lengths of up to 50 meters (or 100 m using plastic optical fiber). Industry adoption may be even slower than USB 2.0, however, because whereas USB 2.0 capability is generally built into the chipset, FireWire standards require an additional chip.

Here's the English press release
 

Tokyo, JP - Reports from CEATEC Japan, the Image, Information and Communications trade show held near Tokyo, say JVC is displaying a new consumer camcorder capable of recording high definition (HD) signals.

The camcorder is reported to record high definition 720 x 480 progressive scan mode in a 16:9 aspect ratio (480p) and 1280 x 720 progressive in a 16:9 aspect ratio (720p), as well as standard 720 x 480 mini-DV interlaced video (480i). The new camcorder records the video as MPEG-2 onto new, special mini-DV tapes, it is described.

The camcorder uses a 1 1/3" megapixel CCD, and includes a special high definition lens as well as optical image stabilization. The lens has both zoom and focus rings, but apparently no markings are available, as it is a fully automatic lens, like the Sony VX2000 and many others.

The camcorder has a hand grip that rotates, allowing the body of the camcorder to be positioned for low- and high-angle shots easily; however the camcorder itself is a standard horizontal format, similar in shape and size to the Sony VX2000 or the Canon GL2.

The camcorder can transfer the digital video to a computer, although it was not specified if this was done through a standard FireWire port. The camcorder does have an SD card slot, often used for digital stills and Web movies.

Reports cite the manufacturer as saying the camcorder will be available next year, for 200,000 - 300,000 yen or approximately $1,623.38 to $2,435.06 dollars.

What's the downside?
 

Yeah, I focused in on that MPEG-2 compression too. You have got to ask how are they producing HD? In order to make use of MPEG-2 you really need VBR (Variable Bit Rate). One has to wonder how high do they have the VBR on this machine cranked?

If JVC has pulled this off close to perfect, then they might have the machine to beat and it ought to kill everything out there.

However, if its only a 'vaporcam' (a cam that does not really exist) then who cares what the price may be?

News posts from 2003Q1
 

Here comes the fourth Instant Films, special Halloween edition!

Instant Films presents the latest cycle of the 48-hour filmmaking project. 8 writers are given randomly selected words on Friday night; on Saturday morning they turn in their completed 5-8 page scripts; 8 directors pick a script and their cast out of a hat and then have 36 hours to complete their films!

Come see the results at the screening this Sunday the 20th at the LA Center Studios--for more information and to check out the great films from previous festivals, go to www.instantfilms.com.

If you are a DV filmmaker in the LA area, I strongly recommend checking it out. It's an exciting evening, partly because of the adrenaline-fueled almost-live-TV nature of the festival, also because we are always looking for new talent to participate in future festivals.

Bill,

"Nice review of XpressDV 3.5 in this months dDV magazine by Frank Capria."

Not that Frank Capria is wrong. He might very well be right - but DV Magazine always acompany their reviews with a full page ad of the product they are reviewing. Come to think of it; I don't think I've ever seen a bad review in that magazine. And never a review of a product that did not sponsor the magazine. I think DV Mag is a little bit too fishy for my taste...

Sponsors are great if the relationship is honest. This forum is a great example.

;)

Can't wait to see the results Charlers.... as always keep up
the nice work! Truly a nice concept!

QuickTime 6.0.2 AVAILABLE
 

Mac users can do the install over the net here

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/

The standalone installer is here

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/standalone/


Jeff

Hi Ken,

What's your take on the actual real world gain of using a firewire RAID 0 drive config versus one that connects via SCSI?

Do you use any RAID's at all?

Thanks for your input Ken!

- don

Hi Don,
I do not currently use any RAID configuration although I have used, and directed the use of, RAID levels 0 and 1 configurations for very large system implementations.

For clarity's sake it's important to note that "RAID Level 0" is not really RAID (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Devices) at all because none of the drives are redundant in such a configuration. RAID 0 is essentially a pact with the devil; you're betting on the reliability of each drive in the array in exchange for a theoretical i/o performance increase. Data is allocated across all drives in the arrray ("striped") and the loss of any drive in such an array effectively destroys the entire array's contents.

My opinion is that RAID 0 is an unnecessary bet for DV and, in fact, probably produces little if any gain in exchange for the additional inherent risk. This is especially true if the array is connected to the system via a moderate bandwidth medium such as FireWire. The dirty little secret is that "RAID 0" doesn't perform well with small arrays (ex: 2 spindles) and large file transfers (such as those found with video footage). The overhead imposed by the controller and RAID software actually erodes performance as compared to single drive performance. RAID 0 is best implemented on systems where (a) the performance of the single system is more important that its reliability, (b) the array can be implemented largely enough, and closely enough to the system's main bus, to truly boost performance, and (c) where the average i/o size is small to moderate.

Of course in the case of high-bandwidth video applications such as HD RAID 0 may be the only practical choice to meet the application's demands. I would bet, however, that looking at such a production's installation would reveal the use of 10,000 rpm SCSI drives in arrays of no less than 4 elements connected to systems via very hi-band buses.

InfoWorld Special Report: Apple Unpeeled
 

Infoworld has put together a series of articles about Apple Computer, Macs and emerging technologies from Cupertino.

http://www.infoworld.com/features/feapple.html

Jeff

Thanks for your input Ken. Very informative.

I'm gonna go for it and ask you a *dumb question* hehe

Am I to assume that the Wiebetech FW Raid is not a Raid 0, but some other form of Raid? They claim up transfer rates in excess of 60MB/ sec write and around 52MB/ sec read, using their included PCI FW card. That's a lot faster than the Super Desktop GB, isn't it?

I'm torn between the two. I need another external soon, mainly for digital video and imaging and audio. I use OS X Jaguar with FCP 3.

Do you ever browse into xlr8yourmac.com?

- don

Here's some interesting news from Charles F. McConathy of Promax.com
____
We just got in a couple of the brand new IBM 180 GB ATA drives and have
tested them in the new G4/1000 and G4/1.25 GB DP DDR computers.

In these two computers we see the full unfomatted capacity of 172.5 GB.
Also we see the full capacity with our TurboMAX ATA-66, 100, and 133 PCI
ATA card. However in some of the older G3 and G4's you will see only
about 128 GB.

In the new G4's you can install 4 ATA drives, move the boot drive to the
lower optical bay, which means you will have 690 GB of useable storage
space. Stripe the four drives with OSX and you will get about 95 MB/sec
sustained which is capable of doing uncompressed SD/RT using the AJA Kona
card and will store 7.91 hours of 8-bit SD uncompressed.

Four 180 GB drives will store 48.36 hours of DV Video - or about 12 hours
on each drive - in this case no need to stripe as RAID-0.

Like always IBM gets premium at first for new technology so the new 180
GB drives are a bit pricey right now - $349 each. Once they start to
deliver in quantity I think they will drop in price quickly. These new
drives employ 60 GB per platter technology...the 120 GB drives employed
40 GB per platter. The new drives will come in 60, 120, and 180 GB's
being 1, 2, 3 platters respectively.

I like IBM drives since they have the best zone technology - meaning the
inter zones do not fall off radically in performance - have one of the
lowest fail rates - and their electronics/firmware offers the lowest
error rates, etc.

You noticed that too eh? I don't know if DV mag is "fishy,"
but they don't review anything that doesn't place a nice
big ad. Hey, that's business. Two hands wash each other.

Most products don't get thrashed in their reviews, but
let's face it, most of the stuff out there is pretty good, and
nothing is perfect. DV mag. is one of my favorites, maybe my
most favorite video magazine. They seem to cover the topics
I'm thinking about.

I beg to differ with this thread. In one of my machines, I am using a Promise TX2000 RAID controller card in the RAID 0 configuration, with two older 5400 RPM Maxtor hard drives. The measured thruput on this config is about 39 Mb/sec. I agree that there is an inherent risk of data loss due to HD failure, however, in 8 years of using RAID arrays, I have yet to experience a failure. I suppose the odds are now running against me...;-). That's why I use the RAID 0 array as a working HD, used only for captures and edits. The final editted AVI always gets stored elsewhere. My point is, I would NOT give up my RAID 0 array for anything except cheaper SCSI HD's.

Bill,
You actually aren't "differing" from my remarks, at least not much. You're using an -internal- 2-channel RAID controller on your IDE bus which is a different proposition than connecting an array to a Firewire port.

Nor do I doubt that your array seems zippy. But I do doubt that it features markedly better sustained performance than, say, today's single 7200rpm 120-180Gb drive. Just as with financial investments, pc configuration is often a balance of risk and reward. If you were configuring a from-scratch personal computer computer today it would be impossible to rationally justify a small (2-drive) striped array for the added expense and ongoing (2x) risk of failure.

So I still stand by my opinion that "RAID" level 0 is a completely unnecessary deal with the devil for dv work.

can't argue with that, Ken. However, I have read test reports of internal RAID 0 arrays featuring WD1000JB HD's that test at a thruput of 45-50 Mb/sec.....at least at the outer edge of the HD platter.

Hello Ken, Jacques, Bill,

So what would your opinion be of the new Wiebetch FW Raid with the included PCI FW card? Isn't the 60MB. sec wirite and 52MB/ sec read times a significant advantage over a single drive's throughput? Especially for a program like FCP, which is always creating thumbnails, caches, etc.?

Is it worth the cost over the Wiebetech SuperDescktop GB?

- don

<<<-- Originally posted by Don Berube : Thanks for your input Ken. Very informative.

I'm gonna go for it and ask you a *dumb question* hehe

Am I to assume that the Wiebetech FW Raid is not a Raid 0, but some other form of Raid? They claim up transfer rates in excess of 60MB/ sec write and around 52MB/ sec read, using their included PCI FW card. That's a lot faster than the Super Desktop GB, isn't it?

I'm torn between the two. I need another external soon, mainly for digital video and imaging and audio. I use OS X Jaguar with FCP 3.

Do you ever browse into xlr8yourmac.com?

- don -->>>