DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   General HD (720 / 1080) Acquisition (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/general-hd-720-1080-acquisition/)
-   -   great interview about the equipment-z1-hvx-xl h1 , etc. (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/general-hd-720-1080-acquisition/61357-great-interview-about-equipment-z1-hvx-xl-h1-etc.html)

Kurth Bousman February 23rd, 2006 11:41 AM

great interview about the equipment-z1-hvx-xl h1 , etc.
 
http://www.freshdv.com/2006/02/fresh...w-with_18.html

looks like others feel the z1 is still THE camera to buy ! Kurth

Les Dit February 23rd, 2006 12:36 PM

I don't have much respect for an article that uses the F word within the first few sentences.
The guy dosn't like 720P because it's 'medium definition'? He may be the type of guy that buys a car based on how high the spedometer is labeled in MPH.
-Les



Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurth Bousman
http://www.freshdv.com/2006/02/fresh...w-with_18.html

looks like others feel the z1 is still THE camera to buy ! Kurth


Ash Greyson February 23rd, 2006 01:24 PM

Not a very credible source... just one guys opinion, not an expert or anything. No hits on IMDB and the title of his current production loses all cred with me.



ash =o)

David Saraceno February 23rd, 2006 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Les Dit
I don't have much respect for an article that uses the F word within the first few sentences.

I agree with you there.

But I won't dismiss the meat of the comments because of one word.

Dylan Couper February 23rd, 2006 08:42 PM

Quote:

720p is f--king retarded"
Ah, good technical feedback. I wasn't sure about 720p until the author put it in those terms for me. :)

Kurth Bousman February 23rd, 2006 09:33 PM

Hey guys -his language is colorful and the man appears to have used the cameras. I can't believe in 2006 that language would be an issue. If he wasn't a credible user I don't believe he would have been interviewed on the site. Kurth

Dylan Couper February 23rd, 2006 10:04 PM

Unprofessional language does not lend credibility to one's opinion.

Jack D. Hubbard February 23rd, 2006 10:21 PM

Content
 
Exclusive of the language, he does make some important point that are worth thinking about, particularly the P2 storage issue.

Ash Greyson February 23rd, 2006 11:53 PM

He has valid points and opinions... he has some experience but he is not the authority on such matters. I am not a fan of the P2 workflow myself but he is a little abrasive for me.


ash =o)

Philip Williams February 24th, 2006 06:52 AM

We've had some discussions with Josh about his interview over at dvxuser. Seems like a nice enough fellow and you gotta respect him for showing up at the forum.

Frankly, I just didn't like the interview because he is talking about his particular workflow and projects. For his work, the Z1 is the best choice. That's certainly fine, but he then goes on to poo-poo EVERY other camera and/or format. Is 720P really "retarded"? For EVERYONE??

I asked him why he felt that adding a Firestore to the HVX was too cumbersome for a one man crew. He replied that its too heavy and that even hand holding a 5 pound camera becomes tiring after a while (some paraphrasing from memory there, dvxuser thread has exact quotes). Alright, again, that's all very true for his style of work. But what about people that want the HVX feature set and work on tripods 90% of the time? That's more typical for my workflow, so I'd have no problem with the HVX and an external drive.

Anyway, its funny, there are a lot of people that don't like P2 and they seem to be pointing to this interview to back up their opinions. Not liking P2 is certainly fine. But trashing the HVX/P2/Firestore product and every other camcorder out there is pointless. Can't people just say "it doesn't work for my needs". Do we have to call formats we don't like "retarded"? Is the XLH1 really "stupid"? Should Shannon Rawls, Michael Pappas, Barry Green and the countless other professionals on this board immediatly trade in their "stupid", "retarded" and "asinine" camcorders for Z1s?

I like the Z1, XLH1, HD100 and HVX. Regardless of your project style, there's almost certainly an excellent camera to cover it in that group. And at prices that mere mortals can even justify. What's to complain about? If you don't like one of them, just don't buy it. Its really, really just that simple.

www.philipwilliams.com

Steven Thomas February 24th, 2006 08:19 AM

What a joke that was....

I'm amazed how anyone can post anything on a website and have people read it as gospel.

Thomas Smet February 24th, 2006 09:56 AM

what an idiot this guy is. This guy must think he is some kind of god.

He talks about 720p as only medium definition and that 1080i is high definition. If he only knew that in most cases 720p offers more detail than his Z1 that shoots 1080i.

Based on his article to me it sounds like he really has no proof to his theories since he doesn't own all of the cameras. He just happens to own a Z1 and is just shooting his mouth off based on the specs of the other cameras.

Yes in a perfect world a perfect 1080i might have more detail than a perfect 720p but the fact is that most 1/3" 1080i cameras do not have any more detail than the HD100.

One interesting thing he mentions is how his station shoots HDCAM but edits DVCPRO HD. This means he is getting 1280x1080i worth of detail in the end. On digital displays this equals to 1280x540 compared to his @%&*! 720p which is at 1280x720 with no aliasing artifacts.

In a perfect world (to this guy) everybody would use a CRT HDTV and then he may have a point.

I personally don't really care if him and his TV station think 1080i is better and offers more true HD resolution. At the end of the day 1080i is harder to compress and I would rather have a slightly softer but clean image compared to an image with more detail(which it doesn't have) and compression blocks all over the place. I would love to know which bitrate his station uses for broadcast.

This whole article seems to be more of an excuse for "him" buying his Z1.

David Saraceno February 24th, 2006 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurth Bousman
Hey guys -his language is colorful and the man appears to have used the cameras. I can't believe in 2006 that language would be an issue. If he wasn't a credible user I don't believe he would have been interviewed on the site. Kurth

Profanity is profanity.

Not only that, the words describe absolutely nothing. If you articulate your views without profanity, you loose credibility.

More than that, you communicate nothing.

Kurth Bousman February 24th, 2006 12:11 PM

I guess I should have discounted Catcher in the Rye , Catch 22 , Dostoevsky and countless other masterpieces and authors that use " profanity". Oops , guess I can't see 3/4 of modern cinema either. People that take issue with his opinion based on technical reasons , good for you. That's an argument I can get into. People that are voicing their opinion based on his language...
thank god for the freedom of the internet. Kurth

Kurth Bousman February 24th, 2006 12:19 PM

I guess I should have discounted Catcher in the Rye , Catch 22 , Dostoevsky and countless other masterpieces and authors that use " profanity". Oops , guess I can't see 3/4 of modern cinema either. People that take issue with his opinion based on technical reasons , good for you. That's an argument I can get into. People that are voicing their opinion based on his language...
thank god for the freedom of the internet. Kurth


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:05 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2021 The Digital Video Information Network