OK, just got back from watching HD from CineAlta, HDV from Sony cam and SD intercut and projected on 2K system.
SD looks OK until you cut to HDV and then you'd wonder how you ever watched SD, then you cut to CIneAlta and the jump isn't as big but it's still pretty big. Depending on the scence HDV can look stunning or it can look like you wish you'd shot it in SD.
Two things really stick out, this is the first time I can say I could see the difference the color sampling / optics makes but you pay one hell of a lot more to get that difference. Point the HDV cam at the wrong thing and it starts to look pretty bad, the telling shot had the frame full of heat shimmer which would have really stressed the encoder. Locked down shots of waterfalls etc not a problem but then not that much of the frame is moving.
The other telling shot was of a market in Asia, bright clothes amongst large dull areas, the colours looked way, way too hot and had lost detail.
Projection systems that run at 2K seem to be getting affordable, AUD 35K isn't that much, I don't know what a 35mm projector costs but I'd guess around the same amount and $35K only buys a few release prints off 35mm anyway. And oh yeah, you aren't stuck at 24fps either!
So I'm with SPOT, I think we'll be get to see the end of film in our lifetime.
Bob.

Bob,

Did you see the HDV from an FX1 or a ZR1? I hear from a reliable source that, unlike the PD170 merely being a "better" version of the VX2100, the ZR1 is significantly better image-wise as well as feature-wise than the FX1.

John

When you said you saw SD material projected and then HDV, did you mean uncompressed SD like digibeta, or DV? I may be confused, but it seeems to me that these terms get used with different meanings in different places.

Just the FX1 at 1080i, I'm doubting if the image quality from the pro version is going to be different, more gadgets and more modes like 720p but at 720p the bitrate drops.
I'd pay the extra dollars just for XLR audio. Which reminds me, another thing no one has commented on, HDV records audio as 384K MP3 I seem to recall.

Bob

To start with DigiBeta is compressed, I think it actually has more compression than DV25, it just starts out with a higher sampling rate. I cannot say for certain but I'd say it was DB. Bear in mind the actual resolution is exactly the same though.
Either way comparing 720x480 against 1080x1440 and projected at 1080x1920 the difference is staggering. That shouldn't be that surprising though. It's not until you see it on a big screen projected at native res though do you see the difference.
Just how much difference is all this going to make if you're delivering content for broadcast, it's anyones guess. The fact though that the HDV downconverted to SD looks as good as anything is interesting, limitations I mentioned above need to be considered though.
Also on show were the new JVC LCDs that use LCD on silicon, very nice pictures, at last true blacks and these things are pretty cheap.
Bob.

From the pictures I've now seen of the Z1, it looks like it has both a shotgun and a stereo omni mic on it. That really is terrific! You could use the shotgun or an external boom for interviews, then switch to the stereo omni for general ambience! I suppose I'll have to wait for the pro version after all!

HDV audio is MPEG1 Audio Layer II compression at 48 kHz sample rate, with 16-bit samples, stereo (2-channel) at 384 kbps data rate. This is a lossy format unlike that of PCM. This should only prove to be a problem when multiple renders of audio take place, and staying in this format during the rendering/editing process. To avoid this, what I've been doing is transcoding to .wav format during the edit. You can always re-render to the original format when you're done editing.

At the moment, progressive certainly is debateable, because of where it's going to be delivered. Television. Where does it get interlaced? In the authoring stage? DVD player? Television? On-air broadcast? It's gonna be much longer.
That said...even if progressive IS the answer (and I'm not suggesting it is or isn't) keep in mind that you've yet to see what is coming off the Sony camera shot by a pro in professional circumstances, with good lighting. In fact, NO one in this forum (that I'm aware of) has seen footage from the professional camera, or even seen it yet. To my knowledge, the only place it's been seen is a very secure, invitation only display at Government Expo. Chris Hurd over on the DVinfo.net forum got in there, he's not under NDA, read what he has to say, and even then...don't pass judgement until you actually see it. Everything else is just a guess.

Thanx,
you've put my mind at rest, curious though why they chose that and not layer 3.
Bob.

probably due to licensing issues.

Thanks for the clarification. I admit I've never really understood some of the terms that get thrown around. I thought digibeta was called uncompressed b/c it was 'visually lossless' compression and it was refered to as SD where as DV was the same 720x480 resolution but with less information.
Am I wrong?