Why? Uncompressed or HDV / DVCProHD
 

I know that uncompressed and HDV / DVCProHD has been discussed. But, as I have searched through the threads extensively, I haven't found an answer.

Why would one want to go uncomressed vs. HDV / DVCProHD / Firewire types of compression?

The reason I ask is that I am considering an HD card of some sort. Mainly so that I can monitor HD out of my system. I do not have a raid. I am interesed in Shane's raid on a budget idea. I think it was Shane. But why do I need to go to this?

What are the advantages? I understand that you eat up more HDD space, I also understand that it takes more power to play back, etc. etc. But in the final product, DVD, Web Delivery, etc, do you gain quality by going uncompressed.

Or is this just a cool way to get extra money from a client? Which I can understand as well.

I guess this question would go for SD as well.

thanks so much in advance. This board has been uber helpful in the expansion of my knowledge and the shrinking of my checkbook :)

Tim

If you have a camera that can SHOOT uncompressed (like a CineAlta F950) the images do start out with higher quality and are especially useful if you're doing visual effects like greenscreen compositing.

If the camera itself is only generating 4:2:2 output to begin with, then capturing uncompressed doesn't really improve that signal.

Yeah, it was me who has the inexpensive RAID ideas:

http://lfhd.blogspot.com/2006/12/dar...sata-raid.html

And I just added a new component:

http://lfhd.blogspot.com/2007/01/mod...iet-tower.html

The only reason to go UNCOMPRESSED HD is if you shoot with it, like the HDCAM SR or Cine Alta. But only for ONLINING. Offlining I'd suggest the DVCPRO HD codec. And I will ALWAYS recommend DVCPRO HD codec and camera above the HDV stuff. Far superior...in every way.

Now..why raid? Well, for HDV or DVCPRO HD you don't really need it. But the faster drives you have, the more RT effects and more streams of video you can do. With a FW400 drive you can do only 1 stream of DVCPRO HD. With a 5 drive raid that runs 230MB/s...you can get 6 or so streams.

Depends on what you are doing.

Far superior...in every way.

Does that include raw data rate? ;-)

You mean direct from camera into the editing app via a capture card? I don't have first hand experience. But ADAM WILT did tests. I believe that the CCDs are better on the HVX than most, but that the Canon HDV camera performed the best.

It is the recording format that is the achilles heel...Mr. MAN OF TOMORROW

only yesterday's man of tomorrow, but that will do!

So I guess what I am reading here is that I will not see a significant increase in quality, if at all.

So my $1000 to $2000 dollars will be better spent elsewhere.

I hope I understood that.

thanks for the help, once again great advice and this time I get to save some money.

Tim

sorry to hijack, but i am in a similar boat. My next project will have a lot of green screening. I figured shooting HD is the best way to go for keying and such. What would you suggest for editing purposes. Can I edit lower quality offline and key effectively? Or should I be editing HD to key, then must it all be online editing?

BTW planned on using Shake to key and composite

Thanks

YOu can edit at a lower quality if you have storage issues. Just know that your key at lower res will be temporary and when you capture the footage at full res you'll need to do the keying properly.

Or, if you know the parts you are going to key, capture those elements at high res, perform the key, then export a master clip, then downconvert that clip for the offline cut, and relink to the full res version when you online.

Shane
Thanks for this little tip. I've just ordered one. I'm sick of slicing my fingers on the PC case when moving the cables!!

Some one would make a load of money if they marketed the PC case external SATA store...

Andrew

Great Drew.

Yeah, that was a good find.

Technically that's not an accurate statement, since DVCProHD is more compressed horizontally than HDV is. Plus not all cameras are created equal, so you're not going to get as sharp an image from an HVX200 with 960x540 sensors as you would from Canon HDV cameras with 1440x1080 sensors. That said, it seems to be generally agreed that DVCProHD is preferable for some purposes, and HDV has some practical limitations.

Just FYI - i don't think shake supports HDV so you have to transcode to DVCPRO HD or the Apple Intermediate Codec or something else before shake can look at it.

Thanks Pete.. I will double check that before shooting :P