|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 26th, 2006, 05:48 PM | #16 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 2,488
|
Quote:
|
|
November 26th, 2006, 08:14 PM | #17 |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 1,315
|
HD lens's seem to carry a large price premium over an SD lens so it is hard to factor in an equal comparison on price alone.
__________________
Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech. |
November 27th, 2006, 10:41 AM | #18 | |
Trustee
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
|
Quote:
The Letus, as all 35mm adapters do, will soften the image a little, as the XL2 is generallly very sharp it is not that big a deal. You might look into renting an XLH, it is terrific with the Letus. I have moved up to a different set-up now and use an SDX900 with adapter for SD 35mm DOF work and an HVX with adapter for 355mm DOF work (when a Vari is out of the budget) ash =o) |
|
November 28th, 2006, 09:26 AM | #19 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Natal, RN, Brasil
Posts: 900
|
Blu-ray storage
Quote:
As to the dual core machine, you'd be surprised at how many people on this forum DON'T HAVE dual core machines yet! My old dual XEON (3.06Ghz) editor has 2 GB of memory and two RAID's (one a 10K Cheetah 320 SCSI array, the other a fast SATA RAID). I have to use Cineform Aspect to even be able to edit HDV. The issue for decently editing HDV boils down to needing at least a fast dualcore machine, really. Anything less is pretty much a joke. The question I was addressing was the cost-benefit for going to HDV from existing DV investment. The bottom line is, DV done in letterbox format looks pretty much the same as HDV on non-HD TV, or even "panned and scanned" output. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_and_scan). In many other (non-European/North American) countries, it will be a very long time (if every?) before HD TV takes over. The cost for upgrading existing facilities is astronomical, and many people just don't care to make the jump. Since this forum addresses users in many countries, it would seem appropriate to consider their reality as well. I stand by what I said (minus the blu-ray part). Stephen Armour - Brazil |
|
November 28th, 2006, 05:26 PM | #20 | |
Trustee
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posts: 1,562
|
Quote:
I'll say that I still prefer HDV/Black Stretch/Underscan over my old PD150 footage, and that I can get faux 16mm footage from HDV that's edited natively, exported to a far less lossy codec, deinterlaced and made into SD. I'll also say that most camera folks will spot HDV->SD simply because of lens artifacts (DoF, sharpening, etc). I love my Z1 and I love HDV for what it's done for my business, but I'm switching to XDCAM-HD, 35mbps, and good glass as soon as my business can square the numbers. Right now, a DSR-570 with a 13k Fujinon continues to 'express water' all over my Z1's footage, HDV or not. I won't debate the fact that a DSR-570 may not get Z1 footage because it's big, heavy, obvious, It's the lens. PS: Acutally, it's also the format - I've been shooting chromakey at HDV then scaling down the composite to SD, which gives me really clean DigiBeta style keys, and it has to be said: PD150 chromakey sucks. DSR-570 chromakey with DoP lighting isn't bad so long as you've got top-of-the-line plug ins. But HDV via KeyLight to SD is in-the-zone. Awesome. |
|
December 18th, 2006, 05:29 PM | #21 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Natal, RN, Brasil
Posts: 900
|
Tnx Matt! You answered a question I've had!
Quote:
What do you use for your chromakey work? Stephen Armour Lion Cub Productions (ABE - Brazil) |
|
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|