Newbie Question on HD(V).
 

Hi all. I was wondering, if my video is almost all ended up on DVD will I get a better result shooting in HDV?

Okay, let say
- I shoot with HDV Camera such as Sony Z1 in HDV format.
- I edit in HD (Premiere Pro, Final Cut Pro).
- I got the HDTV.

Then what to do after that? How am I going to watch my video on my HDTV? There's is no HD-DVD Player for now.

I have to down convert HD to SD. Why not just shoot the video in SD at the first place? Is there any difference if I shoot in "SD DV" comparing to "HDV (which later down convert to SD)" anyway?

Thank you all.

Shoot in HDV, capture in HDV to PPro, You can then output back to camera in edited HDV, and play by component to your HDTV.

You can also down convert edited HD film to a DVD compatible file to burn as DVD, and you will get a nicer video to boot.

Thank You for your reply Chris. But if my finish video will be on DVD is it worth to invest on HD system? I mean, is the result really that different between HDV (down convert) comparing to SD? In what way?
Sorry to ask the qustion again.

Thanks

That is the $ 1,000 question. You have an HD monitor already, I put my
$ 1,000 in upgrading my system to handling HDV. I had already put $3,000 into FX1. I can view edited HDV on my Windows system.. but somehow it is just not the same as a larger screen full definition monitor. In meantime, most of my out put for clients is still DVD, and that means non-HDV output.

Now if you put video on a 1 to 10 scale. With full HDV at 10 and regular MiniDV from a standard three chip camera at 5., the inprovement using a properly edited down converted HDV project might be at 5.5 to 6.

We're starting to see top end TV programmes (ie drama) produced in HD, and the SD output (all that's available here so far) is noticeably improved. I can't give you a definitive "why", but suspect it may be due to the fine detail not needing to be forced out of the imaging system by edge enhancement etc - it is just "there" in HD.

But whilst at the moment your end product may be a DVD, the expectation must be that in the future the norm will be a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. Having an HD master gives you the chance to reburn the disc. Since DVDs themselves are only about 10 years old, the "future" may be not far away.

Watch this vid, decide for yourself.
http://www.vasst.com/streaming/HDV_downconvert.mpg

It's not that large, and it's MPG2, so you'll see even at low bitrate, the difference.
Additionally, you'll likely want to get a jump on shooting in widescreen, which alone is another talent that needs to be developed if you've been shooting 4:3

One of the big differences for now is that HDV is a native widescreen format, while most SD cameras are primarily designed to shoot 4x3 footage. There are various ways to get widescreen output from a 4x3 camera, but none which will look as good as downsampling HDV to widescreen SD. Plus with HDV you can render both widescreen and 4x3 output and have each look sharp; with SD you have to compromise something if you want both aspect ratios at the end of a project.

Sometime in the next few weeks, Toshiba will begin shipping mainstream HD DVD players. Once those become available, there will be no excuse not to offer HD videography for those customers willing to pay for it. It's time to stop wondering whether HD makes sense and start planning how to pay for HD equipment upgrades.

was it shot with hdv cameras?

desmond, you have to look at your business model and see if your clients are willing to pay for hd overhead... or perhaps you are shooting evergreen content that can be re-purposed for hd delivery later down the road? that's why i've been looking really hard at these new hd cameras.

used widescreen sd cameras are going to be plentiful and cheap in the very near future, we've already seen a few killer deals selling here on dvinfo... but the way that the pricing has dropped in just the last month for entry-level hdv gear makes it very interesting, because you can still shoot dv with it as well.

Future Proofing
 

If you are going to shoot in places you may not get back to, overseas, or one of a kind events, HD is very important. Lots of clients haven't made the distinction between 4:3 and 16:9 format or SD and HD. But they will, and soon.

There are going to a lot of HD televisions sold this year, probably millions. That is going to start driving attention and appetite for the high resolution that comes with high def.

I want to be in position when a client comes to me a year from now and asks for an HD version of what has already been produced. Future proofing, and having that HD material on hand, is a big deal.

The acquistion is easier than the post production. The images are absolutely great, but there are a lot of moving parts when it comes to editing and there are lots of opinions about what works and doesn't.

And there a lot of opinions about taking HDV down to SD. There doesn't seem to be any argument about the quality of HDV, and when converted to SD is great, and better shooting in SD

For me, shooting in HDV, editing in HDV and mastering in HDV and downconverting to SD really gives me some insurance. Having a leg up in the coming years because I have HD archived is more than worth the adjustments I have to make to shoot and edit in the format now.

AFAIK, no. Most top end drama is being shot here now with 2/3" cameras on HDCAM, as opposed to Digibeta which was norm until recently. The point was that HD acquisition has produced a noticeable improvement in downconverted output. Here the comparison is HDCAM v Digibeta, but I suspect it will be true with 1/3" cameras and HDV v DV/DVCAM as well.