|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 14th, 2007, 08:03 PM | #16 | |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
Quote:
I've got some footage captured via DR60 vs HDMI; I'll post a couple of stills when return home. At full rez, you cannot detect a difference on a full-screen monitor view. However, you can see a difference when you zoom in by 300%. Color is *slightly* deeper, and contrasted edges slightly smoother. This is due to the codec and management. But it's a whopping difference in HDD space.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
|
May 14th, 2007, 08:07 PM | #17 |
MPS Digital Studios
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Posts: 8,531
|
Spot,
Ultimately, aside from space, would you even recommend getting the Intensity Card to capture HDMI vs. native HDV? heath
__________________
My Final Cut Pro X blog |
May 14th, 2007, 08:15 PM | #18 |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
For non-live capture?
Nope. I got the Intensity to go along with other HDMI products we're working with, so it was a no-brainer for us. But if all I had was a V1, a computer, and unlimited HDD...I'd probably consider it twice. Bear in mind, we're constantly interfacing with XDCAM and HDCAM source, so it's actually a greater workload on the system to have native HDV on the timeline vs BMD or Sony YUV, simply for speed of edit/render. The content you saw for ESPN was captured both ways, and neither they nor the client was the wiser. Then again, ESPN isn't real-world. IMO, the benefit of the HDMI capture has far less to do with the camera output than it does the access to the better codec.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
May 14th, 2007, 08:19 PM | #19 |
MPS Digital Studios
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Posts: 8,531
|
So, for a filmmaker like me, stick with just Firewire I/O.
Thanks! heath
__________________
My Final Cut Pro X blog |
May 14th, 2007, 08:43 PM | #20 |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Las Vegas, NV United States
Posts: 361
|
Thanks all - most helpful thread replies!
Lonnie
__________________
Lonnie Bell mamas boy productions Las Vegas, NV |
May 14th, 2007, 10:36 PM | #21 | |
HDV Cinema
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,007
|
Quote:
The long render/export is shocking to many because they have never done HD exports before they had HDV.
__________________
Switcher's Quick Guide to the Avid Media Composer >>> http://home.mindspring.com/~d-v-c |
|
May 14th, 2007, 10:57 PM | #22 |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
Try this:
Take an HDCAM stream, render to DV. Using uncompressed HDCAM source, of course. Unlike HDV or AVCHD, there are several codecs that may be used for HDCAM on ingest over HD/SDI. HDV stream, render to DV AVCHD stream, render to DV. Then render HDCAM to HDCAM HDV to HDV AVCHD to AVCHD Now render HDCAM to CineForm or most any other HDI codec. HDCAM to HDCAM will win in all renders, all things being equal at the proc side.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
May 15th, 2007, 06:30 AM | #23 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: WestChazy, NY
Posts: 291
|
Heath,
If you're making a film and can control the situation, then I would think using an HDMI card and going direct from camera to computer would be the best option. A lot of extra requirements but the quality would be better. Unless you're shooting a road picture with a lot of remote locations! |
May 15th, 2007, 08:07 AM | #24 |
MPS Digital Studios
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Posts: 8,531
|
I'm talking about capturing in post, not live.
heath
__________________
My Final Cut Pro X blog |
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|