HDV to HDCAM?

caferu wrote on 10/18/2004, 11:58 AM
The new HDV seems to be a good solutions (after I watch the edited results) to those of us that can´t afford DIGIBETA or HDCAM.
I´ve been asking (no luck in getting a response) about the compatibility of producing in HDV, getting a master on it and then making an up conversion to HDCAM.
How would it compare to original HDCAM?
Would it be worth the effort?
How much would cost the hour of transfer?
Thanks
Carlo

Comments

JJKizak wrote on 10/18/2004, 12:54 PM
HDV is 4.2.0. and HD is 4.4.4. and the Hd guy's on the HD forums will probably rip you apart on this one. I can't help you because I think the HDV looks great and the technical aspects are like in the teeth pulling stage at this time.

JJK
BrianStanding wrote on 10/18/2004, 2:16 PM
What about a simple analog dub from HDV to HDCAM? If you had component connections, would you lose much?
farss wrote on 10/18/2004, 3:39 PM
I'm looking into this myself. To get the best possible result I'll need some very expensive kit but we can fund that.
Still some questions to get answers to but by finalising in 4:4:4 should be able to get a passable result, this will not be done in Vegas however. Plan is to offer this as a service to Vegas users.
But before anyone gets too excited firstly please bear in mind that even one hour of time on our planned system is going to have to cost a fair amount and secondly we still don't know for certain just how well this camera will hold up in real world shooting situations, fast motion is still an unknown.
The signs are good so far. Just need to get the guys over at the XPRI forum talking.

Bob.
bowman01 wrote on 10/18/2004, 9:27 PM
I would imagine that it would upsample ok considering people get away with upsampleing SD footage to HD
farss wrote on 10/19/2004, 1:31 AM
If it's well shot then yes, bear in mind it's only the color sampling that's being upscaled, that's why finalising on a true HD system has many advantages. Running the FXs and CC in HD will help as will doing any graphics work there.
Bob.
caferu wrote on 10/19/2004, 4:41 AM
The conversion I am talking about shoul be in a Post-Conversion House from a HDV deck to HDCAM deck via SDI protocoll. If DIGIBETA conversions work fine, I do not seewhy it wouldn´t work. The only issues I see could be the movement factor but the compatibilty should be there. Of course I am talking of Broadcasting quality productions, with all the paremeters on limits, not precisely what is now called "reality shows" or the news bussiness, where everything is accepted under the umbrella of "what the audiences like or wish".
David_Kuznicki wrote on 10/19/2004, 4:59 AM
--HDV deck to HDCAM deck via SDI protocoll

I don't know if it's that simple-- HDCAM uses HD-SDI, while I'm not sure what will eventually come out of the HDV decks. I guess I have to ask the obvious question-- why finish on HDCAM if you're just shooting on HDV in the first place?

We're grappling with similar questions here at work, actually-- specifically, finding the easiest way for us to edit HDCAM footage with limited resources. That's the joke of getting grant money sometimes-- we have an HDCAM, but we have no way to capture it, edit it... hell, the other day we had to RENT an HD field montior for a shoot, as we don't HAVE one!

*sigh* I Love Technology!

David.
farss wrote on 10/19/2004, 5:04 AM
That would be one approach and certainly one that would be accomodated in the scenario we're looking at. However I feel much better results could be achieved without a large increase in cost.
BASically what I'm suggesting is doing an 'offline' edit on Vegas, cheap way to work as there's no expensvie gear involved.
Once you've got everything as you want you move the entire project onto a HDCam capable system, all the FXs etc are applied in a 4:4:4 colorspace, then you print that to HDCAM.
It's still not going to be as good as shooting native HDCAM or CineAlta, no question there, just how far off it's going to be I really don't know, how well the HDV was shot in the first place would be a very big factor.

Bob.
caferu wrote on 10/19/2004, 7:39 AM
David:
If your bussiness is Footage, the best is to produce in HDCAM because that is wher the future will be. Meanwhile use a down converter and work in SD whatever your format is needed
caferu wrote on 10/19/2004, 7:42 AM
If the format allows a decent transfer of a HDV master that would still be the cheapest alternative, even at 1000$/hour. Of course you can´t expect similar results than shooting in DVCAM but with good footage you can make miracles. I can say something about it.
Lets wait sometime to see good shooting samples and then we can decide what to do
David_Kuznicki wrote on 10/19/2004, 9:38 AM
If your bussiness is Footage, the best is to produce in HDCAM because that is wher the future will be. Meanwhile use a down converter and work in SD whatever your format is needed

Agreed! And that's why we have an HDCAM, although we're not downconverting from it at the moment... none of our editing bays (older Media 100's) can handle the footage. We ultimately WILL figure out how best to store and cut it, but it's an ugly situation to try and sort out right now. Especially on a PBS budget!
Just an example of how screwy this is,-- we shoot digitally on HDCAM, DVC50 & miniDV (a PDX-10). For our analog shooting, we shoot on M2. How many people even know what M2 is?

David.
JJKizak wrote on 10/19/2004, 10:36 AM
OK, I give up, what is M2?

JJK
apit34356 wrote on 10/19/2004, 10:58 AM
Panasonic designed the M-II format for NHK, Japan's major television network. this product line has not put a dent into Sony pro line recorders.