I play back HDV family shorts from the computer HD to the HDTV (wm9 format)and knock the socks of the unsuspecting. I also "practice" with it so when Blue-ray comes I'm ready. For DVD oc course I down-sample to DV

You can also print it back to tape and play it from the camera in full res HDV. The m2t files take up the same room as dv avi, so they are not that huge. You could hold about 15 minutes worth on a single layer dvd for archival purposes.

I have been seriously considering buying a HDV camera, but I've decided to leave HVD along until it's more stable. I think I'll just stay with dv for awhile.

What's "unstable" about HDV?

For DVD of course I down-sample to DV.

Why go from the 4:2:0 of HDV through the chroma-halving conversion to 4:1:1 of NTSC DV followed by another cutting of the chroma resolution in half when converting to 4:2:0 MPEG-2 for DVD?

Can you render directly to MPEG-2? If so, it will be a heck of a lot better.

There are also colorspace issues (Rec. 709 for HDV and Rec. 601 for SD). Reality there though is that you won't find too many people complaining if the MPEG-2 rendering doesn't handle this correctly, as it tends to err on the "rich-looking" side.

Maybe I said that wrong about "downsampleing". What I do with my edited HDV other than making WMV9 files, is to render it to MainConcept mpeg wide-screen NTSC and AC3 into DVDA.

Makes for great looking PAL DVDs too, and rendered to the Sony YUV codec in SD and then PTT to Digital Betacam for broadcast. Doesn't look too shabby up against cameras costing over 10 times as much under the right conditions.
Bob.

I PTT to D-VHS, also use the m2t file in the MY-HD 120 HDTV computer card by changing the file ending to tp then putting it into the MY-HD file folder for viewing on my HDTV in the living room or the computer room LCD HDTV panel. In either case the quality is absolutely outstanding. Also render to NTSC Widescreen. I can play HD-WMV but not create them yet.

JJK

It just seems to be too much uncertainity about it. I'm referring to the media, players and recorders. I've read about some problems with capturing it through Vegas and so forth. I'm comfortable with DV now and just don't see HDV taking over for awhile. I've been gassing for the Sony HDV camera lately, but I'm just not ready to spend 3K for a camera which will drop when the format becomes more accessable.

I look at it a little differently. HDV is an even bigger jump in quality than DV was to VHS. The way I see it, pretty much anything shot SD will be unwatchable in a few years after HD and an appropriate delivery system take off. Shooting HDV now means that my current stuff will be relevant when the new format takes off shortly. I don't want to waste my time doing stuff that nobody will want to see in just a couple of years.

Laurence is correct.
HDV isn't unstable, the delivery isn't unstable, the mechanisms for delivery isn't unstable. As far as capturing in Vegas, it's only because some folks don't know how. I've captured HDV on at least 30 machines in the past year, ranging from junker shelf computers to high end custom builds. It's not rocket science, it's knowing which app to capture with. There are two capture apps with Vegas 6.
What you don't have is a way to deliver HD easily right now, that's changing in a couple months. However, two things occur right now, to benefit you right now.
1. Shoot in native widescreen
2. Deliver substantially higher quality SD than you could remotely begin to dream of without spending at least 4 times the price of an HDV camcorder.

You can deliver the project now in SD, and deliver again later in HD, and your media is future proofed. Not to mention the better latitude, and ability to zoom in deeply for SD delivery. Those factors alone make it worthwhile, IMO. Then again, I'm pretty much an HDV'ophite, having 4 cams and a deck now.

With only the greatest respect to Spot and his knowledge and experience, I would offer a slight amendment:

"You can deliver the project now in SD, and deliver again later in HD, and your media is future proofed."

I'd amend that to say your media is BRIEFLY future proofed----only until the Next Big Video Format Nobody Can Live Without comes along. Then, HD will be passe. Then, open thy wallet yet further.

I may come across in these posts as anti-HD, which I'm certainly not. Life marches on. I'm just anti-rapid obsolescence. Frankly, it's discouraging to invest thousands of dollars in gear (when thousands is A LOT of money, not chump change, to guys like me) only to find out three years later you'll only be able to use that gear another couple of years before it's considered worthless crap. I mean, imagine buying a nice Porsche only to find that, in order to continue driving, you're now gonna have to buy a Ferrari F1. WTF?

I was kinda hoping I'd have ten years to use my gear before the Next Big Thing. Got fooled. Ah, well, that's how it goes.

If you're new to video, by all means I'd suggest forgoing SD altogether and plunging into the HDV camp. Just don't expect too many years out of your gear before it's time to buy something lots more expensive. Again.

The benefit of SD now / HD tomorrow is that we are working in the gray area of overlap of the two formats. Has their ever been a time when a new format was introduced with such a dramatic improvement and it did NOT cause us to totally revamp all our gear to take advantage of it? (maybe there has, I'm kinda new....)

Point is, here's a format that gets you to HD(V) whenever your customers are ready AND provides you benefits in SD now.

I plan on waiting to jump into any form of HD myself, but I will be listening to my customer base, prospective clients, and competitors. I may be going to HDV sooner rather than later.

PossibilityX - I'm right there with ya. I bought a VX-2000 and 2100 in the last two years, and don't relish the thought of buying new cams so soon. But....I certainly will be charging more on those projects (business would have to warrant it, in other words).

Well...might as well make that same argument about Hi8, Super8, VHS, SVHS, Betamax, etc. DV has lasted for 10 years, HDV is expected to last 7-10 years. So...
in 10 years, we'll probably all be looking back and laughing at the days we used tape, and the days we used MPEG 2 on DVDs.

I havent made the HDV jump yet, but I will,
The thing is we arent talkin about a 100K here, we are looking at the same dollars we spent on an XL1 or pd150 . So if it is a bust worst case is we have a cam capable of more than we really need.

OK by me.

Yes, obsolescence is in the nature of digital. The affordable convenience of video was gained through a compromise in capabilities, so people are constantly working to reduce those deficiencies and so video cameras and other hardware have the same sort of half-life as computers. If you want to keep out of the generational obsolescence race then go for film, which gives results notably superior to video in most respects. You bring your 30 year old film camera up to current technology when you load a new film. But there you encounter the matter of "affordable".

I hate the culture of obsolescence too, but the quicker things become obsolete and are replaced the cheaper they get. That's the nature of a disposable society and that is why this style of economy works so well. I love my village store and I hate WalMart. I shop at WalMart.

If film making technology was somehow fixed and a pro camera would last twenty years like a quality film camera, you would be back to paying $50,000 for it. For what you get compared to what was available three years ago, the F1/Z1's are dirt, dirt, dirt cheap.

Mike S

I have the HVR-A1 and I'm thrilled with that. For people like me that do mostly outdoor stuff it is a great option.

Another thing some people seem to miss is that the current crop of HDV cameras doesn't make use of the full potential of the HDV specification. There are still plenty of unused pixels that can be made use of in the coming years by new and improved HDV cameras. I agree that this spec is going to be around for a good ten years or so. I wouldn't worry about the next big thing just yet!

Well computers and non HDMI/HDCP Monitors/HDTVs will be obsolete next year. I'm not speding money on new computer hardware that can not play commercial HD content.

Not true.

Please see this thread for the discussion on this topic.
http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=417043

My Sony FX1 will continue to talk to my computer and I will still be able to generate distributable media in HD/HDV format. Saying computers will be obsolete next year, and implying everyone's computer is obsolete, is short sighted or shields an ulterior motive.

Can you please provide specifics regarding your comments?

You bring your 30 year old film camera up to current technology when you load a new film.

Hmm, so you have a 1970s lens on your camera?

Lenses have improved a lot: new exotic glass materials, vastly better coatings, aspherically ground elements, and much faster computers to do the raytracing.

Unfortunately cine lenses have also become much heavier for some reason.

1970s lens? Easy-peasy - attach new lens. Nevertheless there were a lot of excellent prime lenses even in those ancient days that will beat the pants off lenses now on videos. However I think you've missed the point. Obviously the film camera you would buy now for production work will have a lot a features that are missing on your 30 or 20 year old camera and the price will be accordingly higher. If you really want to get down to a religious debate that video is superior to film, well, have fun. The point is that a film camera is designed as a precision modular system and uses a sensor system that is whatever you load. There are many advantages in the video production chain, but neither that or the relative merits of film or video were at issue.