From what I've read, the difference between DV cam and DV is a tape difference only, so once it's in Vegas it's all the same.

With DV Cam, the tape goes faster and the pitch is wider, but it's all DV.

Absolutely correct, the track is wider hence giving less risk of dropout. This means the write speed is also higher, hence less recording time.
As for tape formulation, well the ones Sony call DVCAM are probably better quality, just what that translates into in reality depends on what you're using it for. You can certainly record DV onto DVCAM stock and vice versa.
In PAL there is no difference with anything else, in NTSC I suspect the compression maybe less as than DV but I've never been able to confirm this.
So from Vegas's point of view it doesn't see any difference.

Digital 8, DV, MiniDV and DVCAM all use the exact same video compression method. Other than the tape speed, track width and the ability to set the starting timecode and user bits on DVCAM, they are all identical. Vegas will not know the difference. Go to www.adamwilt.com for more information. (Curiously, Digital8 has a faster tape speed and wider track width than any of the DV formats, so it is actually the most robust tape format.)

John

Geez, John, where ya been lately?

Tors, for more info on DVCam/DV and how it works, Jon Fauer: ASC wrote an excellent book entitled "DVCAM: A Practical Guide to the Professional System."

The fact that Vegas can deal with DVCAM comes as no big surprise. Especially when - in a computer, as a file, it isn't a distinguishable format at all. And I imagine the camera detects a DVCAM recording by reading the timecode and adjusting the playback speed accordingly.
But I know very little about what goes on in the dialogue between Vegas capture and the camera. My fear, and the fine point of my question was: Can Vegas - having established I suppose, that at the other end of the 1394 cable is indeed a mini DV camera - be trusted to not interfere with the camera's own interpretation of how the cassette was recorded - namely as DVCAM?

I know. It suddenly dawned on me. It doesn't matter at what speed the camera plays during capture because the timecode from the original recording remains unchanged. Of course.

I see no benefit to me from using DVCAM, but I wanted to be certain I can recieve such material and make use of it.
Tor

"I see no benefit to me from using DVCAM, but I wanted to be certain I can recieve such material and make use of it"

I was sent 2 DVcam tapes last week. The film I'm working on (sound and music: sound in Vegas, music in Sonar) was split over two tapes as it wouldn't fit onto one. They played and captured quite happily using my new TRV80E.

I used a Canopus AceDVIO card for capturing.

Anyway, I placed the two AVIs on the Vegas timeline, replacing my bitc VHS capture, and then was able to write a low rezz version to work on in Sonar.

Hope that helps.

(new camera: damn, now I've got to go out and make a film!)

Alistair

We use DVCAM for long shoots such as meetings. PD-150 > DSR-11 with a DVCAM tape.

Longest meeting we have done so far is about 3 1/2 hours. All on one tape, ya-hoo!!

Capture the whole thing on Vegas, add a title for the whole length, fire it off on a Friday night, ready on Monday when I get to work.

The key to this whole operation is the time that I spent in front of the computer. Only about 5 minutes total. 1 min to set up and start the capture (tape was already rewound) and about 4 min to add the title, fade to and from black and start PTT.

With out being to obvious here, why don't you add the title on the front of the tape, place in camera line at end of title fade in picture with camera. Fade out with camera, add tiles at end from Vegas and then copy tape to VHS.
I do it all the time for plays and gala's helps keep costs down.

Top & Tail, as we call it over here in the UK.

Hi zcheema-

The answer is because our titles play for the entire program. Basically, a lower 3rd at all times so anyone switching on the program knows what meeting is playing right away.

All of which is about to change when we start recording MPEG-2 directly to a laptop. Sadly, Vegas will have to go then because of the way it treats MPEG-2 files...

"when we start recording MPEG-2 directly to a laptop"

just curious- are you capturing as MPEG-2 for eventual delivery on DVD?

Primarily for an mpeg-2 cablecast server due to the length & media cost. However, public officials also want to buy DVD's for their records so it will probably end up being both.

Just out of curiousity - someone recomended VV on the ACM list plus there has been talk about MPEG servers - would that be you swarrine?

Hi Filmy-

Don't think it was me although I do recommend Vegas and the station also has a 3 channel mpeg server.