DR HD 100 versus tape

[Geoffrey Smith]

Sorry if this has been covered in another post but I could not find it using search. When using the DR HD100 is there any gain to be had in picture quality over using tape? Is there less compression going onto the DR HD100 than tape?

Regards,

Geoffrey Smith

[Chris Hurd]

Hi Geoffrey, welcome to DV Info Net, in case nobody else has said it yet. There is no difference in image quality and no change in compression between tape recording and disk recording in this case. The primary advantages of the DR-HD100 are two-fold: first, you can record several hours in one stretch without having to change out every sixty minutes; and second, it completely bypasses the video capture process (hence the term "edit ready" recording). Just drag the files from the disk to your timeline and start editing... it's an incredible time saver. Hope this helps,

[Geoffrey Smith]

Thanks very much Chris. Edit ready is certainly a big advantage. One more question. If I record 720 25p (we are in PAL land) to the disk, is there any intermediate step which I can use so that this file will be usable in Avid Xpress pro.

Geoffrey Smith

[Richard Jolly]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

The primary advantages of the DR-HD100 are ...second, it completely bypasses the video capture process (hence the term "edit ready" recording).

I understood that editing the M2T (MPEG2) files directly was very clunky and to be avoided; that, with Premiere Pro 2 in this case, it makes for easier and faster editing to convert via Cineform Aspect HD first to their proprietary Digital intermediate AVI format. Sadly that seems to remove the advantage of DTE.

Has anyone experienced any tape dropout with the HD100? Is that an HDD advantage?

Mind you, I did also hear from JVC UK that they might put the Aspect HD codec on the DR-HD100 so that it could record the HD pics directly to the Digital Intermediate file format, though at a file size of 21GB/hour it would reduce the capacity by a third.

[Joe Carney]

>>Mind you, I did also hear from JVC UK that they might put the Aspect HD codec on the DR-HD100 so that it could record the HD pics directly to the Digital Intermediate file format, though at a file size of 21GB/hour it would reduce the capacity by a third.<<

Don't play with us like that Richard. You have no ideas how happy that would make a lot of Premier and Vegas users.
(Just kidding btw).

[Nate Weaver]

Originally Posted by Richard Jolly

Mind you, I did also hear from JVC UK that they might put the Aspect HD codec on the DR-HD100 so that it could record the HD pics directly to the Digital Intermediate file format

That would likely require processing power beyond the current abilities of the DR-HD100. Takes CPU horsepower to do transcoding like that.

[Steve Benner]

I just emailed Focus this question:

In SD mode, when in Quicktime 24 and the HD100 in 24PA, is pulldown removed when recorded to the drive?

In another thread someone told me yes, but Focus said no. Can anyone answer this?

They also were not giving any timeframe on the .Mov support for HDV.

[Richard Jolly]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

The primary advantages of the DR-HD100 are ...second, it completely bypasses the video capture process (hence the term "edit ready" recording).

I understood that editing the M2T (MPEG2) files directly was very clunky and to be avoided; that, with Premiere Pro 2 in this case, it makes for easier and faster editing to convert via Cineform Aspect HD first to their proprietary Digital intermediate AVI format. Sadly that seems to remove the advantage of DTE.

Has anyone experienced any tape dropout with the HD100? Is that an HDD advantage?

Mind you, I did also hear from JVC UK that they might put the Aspect HD codec on the DR-HD100 so that it could record the HD pics directly to the Digital Intermediate file format, though at a file size of 21GB/hour it would reduce the capacity by a third.

[Brian Luce]

Originally Posted by Richard Jolly

I understood that editing the M2T (MPEG2) files directly was very clunky and to be avoided; that, with Premiere Pro 2 in this case, it makes for easier and faster editing to convert via Cineform Aspect HD first to their proprietary Digital intermediate AVI format. Sadly that seems to remove the advantage of DTE.

Has anyone experienced any tape dropout with the HD100? Is that an HDD advantage?

Mind you, I did also hear from JVC UK that they might put the Aspect HD codec on the DR-HD100 so that it could record the HD pics directly to the Digital Intermediate file format, though at a file size of 21GB/hour it would reduce the capacity by a third.

One thing is it'll reduce wear and tear on your tape drive when you capture.

it's also a great back up/redundancy feature when you're on that big shoot with all the make up and actors there. so that's two great reason right there.
A third reason is that it makes the camera look really cool.

[Robert Jackson]

Originally Posted by Brian Luce

A third reason is that it makes the camera look really cool.

I've been using one for a couple of months now. It's a dream when you're shooting on a tripod, but it gets pretty clumsy for shoulder-mounted ENG-style stuff. It throws the weight of the camera off in a strange way and it's a fairly hefty little device, so its weight can eventually work the mount loose from the shoe unless you use a wrench or something to tighten it down when you mount it (which I don't). I was shooting outdoors a couple of days ago and mine came loose and was swinging from the Firewire cable for a second before I caught it. Next week I've got several long days of shooting outside in rough terrain coming up and I'm not going to take the drive. It just isn't practical for that kind of shooting, IMO. I'm really looking forward to eventually owning a camera with an internal drive. The concept is great, but the idea of shoe-mounting one on top of the camera isn't so great, IMO.

[Daniel Patton]

Re: dropout due to tape.

It happens more than I think it should, even though we only use Master Quality tapes and clean the heads regular. So that alone is good reason for the drive IMO. The only thing stopping us from owning one is that we need the direct to Aspect HD format for PPro also, and I agree it's not DTE otherwise. As soon as they work it out (if that is) we will buy one.

[Tom Chaney]

Hi Robert,

I just ordered one.

Can you tell me if you are shooting 24p?

Do you use FCP and, if so, could you share your workflow with us?

Thanks,

Tom Chaney

[Robert Jackson]

Originally Posted by Tom Chaney

Hi Robert,

I just ordered one.

Can you tell me if you are shooting 24p?

Do you use FCP and, if so, could you share your workflow with us?

Thanks,

Tom Chaney

I am shooting 24P. Normally I use FCP, but for this project I put together a Windows machine and I'm using Vegas because it seemed like the most practical choice. However, I'm on location right now and the machine I'm using on the road is a 20" iMac. It's not really that much more to lug around than a Powerbook and it's a lot more powerful. I bought a Gator mixer case that it fits in for transportation. Of course, I can't use the Mac to capture 24P, so having the DR-HD100 allows me to simply drag the files across and I review them on VLC and then back them up via DVD and a Firewire hard drive for redundancy. The things I've shot on tape without the DR-HD100 are stored in a lead-lined film pouch until I get home. So while I'm out on the road that's pretty much all I'm doing. I've been doing this location work since mid-March and I expect to be back in California in early July. I'm shooting exteriors on 16mm, so at that point I'll have the film transfer done and start seriously editing.

[Daniel Patton]

Robert,

If you are going with a Windows based machine and want 24P now, why Vegas when PPro 2.0 has this supported? Add in the fact that any additional compositing can be done simply bridged to After Effects, (not to mention DVD Authoring with Encore, etc. with the suite). It always surprises me that it's overlooked as a solution.

[Robert Jackson]

Originally Posted by Daniel Patton

Robert,

If you are going with a Windows based machine and want 24P now, why Vegas when PPro 2.0 has this supported? Add in the fact that any additional compositing can be done simply bridged to After Effects, (not to mention DVD Authoring with Encore, etc. with the suite). It always surprises me that it's overlooked as a solution.

Well, I could go that route. I've worked with both Vegas and Premiere before. It's been awhile since I used either because I've been using FCP since 3.0 came out. I mainly went with Vegas this time because someone whose band I'm shooting while I'm here has it and I could trade files with him once I get back to California and work on the footage, but I could just as easily send him rendered stuff from Premiere. That way I'm locked into the editing choices I've made and there's no room for argument. ;-)

I'm not editing yet, anyway. I'll start in earnest sometime in July and finish after the last shoot is done in the UK in August.