What's next after HDV?...
 

I have a question I would be interested in collecting some "pro" insights:

Since HDV's specs are set at 1440x1080 and, though AVCHD can do 1920x1080 initial image quality impressions seem both less than enthusiastic and that it is targeting specifically the consumer marker only, what are realistically the future options for a next-gen prosumer format that can register true 1920x1080p?... something like an HDV-II or Super-HDV using the same basic blueprint of HDV, but as larger size/bandwidth format?... surely in some solid state form, not tape...

I personally believe this is the only time for HDV to exist. The technology to produce high definition video is in the consumer price range, but the technology to capture it isn't. Hard drive or even large scale flash drive technology will make it's way to the point where shooting compressed video won't have to be an option. The only thing we'll read about HDV is how it's equiped standard on cell phones!

my .02

I love how people keep trying to write obituaries for HDV when it's just reaching full stride with widespread support for capture, editing and now distribution. It may be that professional AVCHD cameras will eventually transcend HDV at a similar cost of ownership and operation, but that will likely take a minimum of 2-3 years yet and possibly longer. Until then HDV works fine for what it is and will continue to be useful for years to come, because it's a practical compromise of price versus performance.

Bravo!!!!!!!!!!

Hey, don't misunderstand me! I love HDV and has given me the ability to obtain HD footage at a reasonable price. I'm also not trying to write off the prosumer market here, but just stating that the need for compression is only a problem for this generation (or 2 at most) for cameras. The digital storage industry is booming now and showing huge advances in short periods of time. I am just pointing out that storage, a few years from now, will not be a problem and hence, the lack of need for HDV's compression - not the lack of a prosumer market.

We laugh about it now, but when I give my kid a cell phone (when i have one) 10 years from now he will be asking for the 20 gig model.

There's always going to be something new. Better compression formats, cheaper storage, etc., will continue to happen. If there's one thing you can count on in the video world these days, it's that the day you buy a new camera, they will usually announce a new format or camera; and before you get your camera paid for, that new format or camera will probably be on the market.

That's annoying, but the good part is that it doesn't matter what format you shoot on as long as it looks good. There was a time when format mattered. Everybody used to want Betacam because that's what everybody used. You could take your original tapes to almost editing facility in the country and they would have Betacam decks in their system.

Today, that's irrelevant. As long as you have a means to provide a finished program in whatever format is necessary for whatever it is you want to do with it, you're OK. Going to 35mm film? Cool, send the hard drive with the uncompressed QT to the lab--don't need no steenkin' tape. Releasing in DVD? Cool, send your authored DVD to the replication house--don't need no steenkin' tape. Going to Sundance or Tribeca? Well...you'll need to get an HDCAM copy made, so that's a little more complicated but you can find a dub house that will do it from whatever format you have. I'd guess that in the next couple of years we'll start seeing festivals accepting Blu-ray DVDs (or the other one, whichever wins). For TV spots, you'll probably put them up on a server for download.

Format isn't relevant as long as you've got one that works for you.

Some level of compression will always be useful because storage and transmission bandwidth will never be free, and most people would rather be able to store more images than store them uncompressed. It's pretty well set now that HD distribution will be heavily compressed for the foreseeable future, so there isn't much point in 'prosumer' cameras recording uncompressed data. Even 'Red' only requires 200 Mbps or so to capture an excellent HD image, so anything beyond that would be silly unless you're making a major motion picture. Full uncompressed HD at 1.5 Gbps makes no sense for most people.

I'd love to see a reasonably priced video camera recording HD resolution at something higher than HDV bit rates, but for my purposes 50 Mbps would be plenty for the next decade or two at least.

I agree completely that compression at the acquisition level isn't going anywhere, but I would definitely like to see an affordable HD format that uses intraframe compression.