HDV to XDHD
 

Doing my best to make a check list to be able to show what I would be gaining from switching from HDV to XDHD. These are some issues I would like to make sure I am correct on
1) XDHD faster digitizing
2) XDHD better audio capabilities
3) XDHD better zoom, lens capabilities
4) Non Linear aquisition
5) XDHD higher resolution
6) XDHD footage from pre through post internet ready quicker
7) XDHD disk shelf life much longer
8) Shoulder mount camera
9) XDHD better in extreme conditions
10) ENG lens
11) XDHD better in low light
12) XDHD Proxies

Please if you could add to this list from Pre-Post I would very much appreciate it.

What, the list isn't already long enough?

Add any more bullet points and your boss will fall asleep reading it.

I agree, I need all the ammo I can get especially the time we would save in the editing process. I want the list as long as i can get it. Any help much appreciated. THX

35 Mbps VBR codec means far superior picture quality with little or none of the fast movement issues associated with the HDV format

The list is only accurate under specific circumstances. It depends on which cameras and capture format you are comparing.

Compare for example the JVC HD-200. It is sholder mount and has detachable ENG lens so XDHD has no advantage there, they are equal. Compare it the the new XDCAM EX camera and these advantages actually reverse and become advantages of HDV (3,8,10).

Capture HDV to one of the many HDD solutions and it eliminates 1,4,6.

Sony's new DSR-250 replacement will eliminate 3,from your list and add longer recording times as an advantage to HDV.

As for 5, both HDV and XDCAM HD (and XDCAM EX) in 1080i are 1440x1080 so technically the resolution is the same.

These are the only ones that I see to stand up to all current options:

2) XDHD better audio capabilities
7) XDHD disk shelf life much longer [although this is very debatable]
11) XDHD better in low light
12) XDHD Proxies

I see the most important advantage of XDCAM is shallower depth of field than HDV (as they use 1/2 inch or 2/3 inch sensors, instead of HDV's 1/3 inch sensors, at best). Hence more professional appearance of the footage.

Who knows, with the new XDCAM EX comming out we could see a move to 1/2" HDV by Canon, JVC and Panasonic (well 1/2" DVCPRO HD) over the next 24months to try to compete.

One can only hope...

Nothing against the new Sony EX camera or the P2 cameras, but the ability to archive footage in a library is a huge issue for some people including myself. how in the world are people going to archive/ build a library of all footage shot with these small card based cameras. Lets say they have 10 people on the road shooting average of 10,000 hours a year. And they want to archive every second of the footage. Seems to me XDHDcam would be the only logical way to go concerning aquiring HD.

John, forgive me if i'm misunderstanding, but its fairly obvious that one is not intended to archive using the aquisition media itself. One can archive the data to any number of alternative medium, including xdcam discs.
Andy

Thanks Andy, with time being a huge concern with many also, why I like XDHDcam is that once Ive shot it I can put the disk on the shelf and thats my archived footage. Digitize it into ISIS and thats my editing media with the disk on the shelf. With the card based cameras, once you shoot then you must worry about archiving it(extra step which takes time) copaired to the XDHDcam. All im saying is that extra step with card based aquisition is a time killer.

true enough John, point taken.
for many tho, its still a necessary step (not all of us can afford to indefinately store the original discs!)
for us its a shoot, edit, consolidate footage for archive and then reuse scenario, so the archive process lives to fight another day!

It won't be long before BluRay media are only a few $ each. There is also the HDD option, as capacities are still increasing quickly and prices dropping. When you compare the cost of high end tape and XDCAM media these options arn't too bad at all. Compare the cost of 13 XDCAM disks to one 320GB HDD in an external chassis, then compare the space consumed by one of these drives and 13 XDCAM disks in their caddies (different shape but quite similar).

The new XDCAM EX camera is intended to acquire on flash media, then have it archived to a more permanent optical media like XDCAM HD. Archiving to HDD is also an option, but some folks don't feel comfortable yet with the longevity of hard drives. Newer technologies are always on the horizon though, so there's no telling what we'll have available for archival in the not too distant future.

-gb-

I am not sure where this issue longevity of HDDs come from. HDDs don't fail just by sitting on the shelf, they fail with long periods of use. The longevity of XDCAM/HD itself certainly hasn't been prooven by anyone.

In 10 years you will be able to take a mass of your archived footage and copy it to a single new generation media. How many CDs can be archived on a BlueRay disk?

Sorry but tell that to the "working" hard drive I put on the shelf 6 months ago which now won't spin up.

K

One example a trend does not make. It is very very rare for such an occurance and I'll bet there is such examples of media failure for every media under the sun.

Sony has done accelerated environmental testing on the Professional Disc in their labs. This is where the 50 year archival number comes from. Keep in mind, Professional Disc is not the same as Blu-Ray, only based on it. PD has a lower capacity for better data integrity and is fully enclosed which protects the disc.

The other aspect of the HDD solution is that if you do put the equivalent of several PD's onto a single hard drive and it does happen to fail, you're losing a lot more. Not always a good idea to have all your eggs in one basket.

There's a lot more that 'can' go wrong with an HD sitting on the shelf for years in the electro/mechanical sense. The PD, on the other hand, is nothing more than a disc in a protective shell. No electrical parts, and very little in the way of mechanics.

My thoughts are that none of these media storage solutions will be in actual use for that long. The stuff will get moved to newer media at some point if it's really important.

-gb-

There is accelerated testing and then there is reality. Hard drives undergo accelerated testing to come up with the MTBF yet they seem to fail in a much shorter time frame. Inkjet printers use accelerated testing to claim their fade resistance, yet we all know how accurate those results are...

When HDDs fail it is normally an electronic failure, not magnetic. If the data is worth it, there are certainly data recovery services around to do the job.

On the capacity, yes it is more eggs in one basket, but in your case there is much more chance of having one of many baskets fail. Smaller loss, but much more chance of it happening.

There are many things that can kill a hard drive. Damp can destroy the platters and electronics, cause bearings to fail or seize. Static electricity can destroy the electronics, shock can damage the heads or platters. Over voltage can wreck the whole drive. Over the years I have had at least a dozen hard drive failures, I wouldn't trust my valuable material to a single hard drive with no backup. If hard drives were truly reliable there wouldn't be so many redundant raid array options or companies making large amounts of money for data recovery.

The difference, and there is a big difference, is you are talking about drives in use, often very heavy contineous use. I am sure if you had your XDCAM media in your drive and you were reading and writing to it all the time it would fail a lot quicker than your HDDs have (and the reader would fail even faster). The polycarbonate of the disk would likely just disintegrate with the stress from spinning up and down (and around) much quicker than you would like this imagine it would.

Yup, I had a drive develop a nice little banging/rattling sound after leaving it sitting for a few years. Thankfully I was able to do a low level copy and retrieve everything from it, but it is a definite possiblity.

Eric

I never denied it was a possibility, just unlikley. I often fire up old HDDs and never have had any problems.

I used to think hard drives only crashed for other people. Since 1996, I've had at least 10, maybe 12 drives go bad in various ways, from grinding, rattling, squeaking to just plain motor and circuit board failure.

It's the same as car accidents.. You've never been in one til it happens to you. Then you are glad you had your seatbelt on, etc, etc.

Hard drives are no fun at all sometimes :(

Eric

I think this thread has just about run its course. Obviously, some folks are very happy using HD as an archival media, while others prefer something different. Everyone should use whatever makes them feel comfortable.

-gb-