DUH ,Down converting HDV

winrockpost wrote on 2/8/2006, 10:08 AM
page 236 of the V6 manual, it says "if you will be delivering your project in standard definition via DVD or DV tape, you can use the cameras built in down-conversion..................................capture and edit the same way you normally use DV........no need for intermediate files"
It does not say this is the best way, but I read it as the way they suggest.
True or False for delivery of SD DVD ?

Thanks

Comments

johnmeyer wrote on 2/8/2006, 10:20 AM
There are dozens of posts on this. Bottom line: Vegas does a better job of down conversion. Spot even posted a sample about a week ago, showing the difference. The difference is not subtle. See this thread: Downconvert
winrockpost wrote on 2/8/2006, 10:24 AM
yep, sorry, heads a bit spinnin , info overload, retaining tiny tiny bits.
winrockpost wrote on 2/9/2006, 3:25 PM
Ok, doin my own simple tests, downconverting from cam thru firewire, vs. downconverting with Vegas,, I get nothing close to the stairstepping in the duck video. The pic is about the same , a little better colors with the Vegas,which I expected, but no stairstepping ,jaggies at all.
Spot|DSE wrote on 2/9/2006, 4:26 PM
Remember, in that demo there is a 3x digital zoom.
gdstaples wrote on 2/9/2006, 5:41 PM
I have done many tests with the FX1/Z1U and the in-camera conversion essentially sucks when compared with Vegas conversion. I found many interlace and tearing problems with the in-camera conversion.

Duncan
Laurence wrote on 2/9/2006, 7:54 PM
I thought the duck video was supposed to start with no zoom and zoom in at the end to 3x.
johnmeyer wrote on 2/9/2006, 7:58 PM
I thought the duck video was supposed to start with no zoom and zoom in at the end to 3x.

I think that's correct.
Laurence wrote on 2/9/2006, 8:48 PM
Before the zoom there are already jaggies though on the the "in camera" sample that I don't seem to get when I do it this way.