I think the term "professional" is being misused here.

Video making has been my full time profession for 12 years. I used Super VHS for several years as a professional format, in fact if I was still doing so now, I wonder if some of my clients would know the difference. Since then I have moved through DV and now HDV as a shooting medium, and really the main difference has been how pleased and confident "I" am about the quality of my results.

Let's face it, even the term "broadcast" has become very rubbery. It's much more realistic to talk about whether a particular format is preferred by particular people for particular purposes than saying THIS is professional and THAT is not.

And what is a "REAL" post house - another term hijacked for pejorative purposes?

Interestingly enough...if you have Discovery HD, watch and capture/record the re-runs of last weeks episode, which is "Behind the Scenes" of American Chopper. Additionally, just prior to that is Monster Garage, where Jesse James builds an aerocar, that has a Z1 mounted to the back of it as their crash cam. I was very surprised to see how the crash cam managed the takeoff and landing of the aerocar, because I'd expected to see nasty artifacts when it hit. The FAA inspector talked about how the car would vibrate really badly on initial landing due to lack of a rudder. Cam footage looked pretty darn good.

Anyway, there is one scene in AC where they put up 4 cams. 3 Varicams and 1 Z1U. Only you can decide which one is which if you hide the words "Mikey Cam." And if you can tell the diff....more power to you. I just wish they'd all have been the same shot, because the reds in the Z1 simply pop beautifully, so do the whites, but the Varicams obviously weren't set up for the shot because the reds are very muted and the walls are slightly yellow.

sorry, totally missed the TIC at the bottom there.. accept my apology

I agree about the miss use of the word, and bad Jarred for using professional incorrectly, , You guys are right, by definition if it makes you money its professional, but I assume you know what I mean by the use of the world... i.e. the level of quality.

I see lots of Behind the Scenes stuff with HDV.. but BTS stuff usually is shot on an inferior camera than the main production. I will try to catch that show in re-run Spot as i would love to see the HDV stand up in high speed action like that. Its good it held up to the 720 Varicams.

LOL, Jarred, you've missed all the fun posts in the past about the use of the word "professional." Is it a noun, an adjective, or vulgarity? In some circles like other words, it's gone from being the 'polite' to vulgar slang. Search the word here, you'll find some fun threads.

BTW, it's not all just BTS being shot on HDV. "House Arrest" is shot with HDV cams (HBO) and so is much/most of "Real World" on MTV. All of the "Massacre" footage for 50Cent/GUnit was shot on HDV and edited in Vegas. Nearly all of the VanCliburn competition for PBS was done on HDV, and PBS is nasty hard to please, especially with their HD approval committee.
I'm not saying it's the best format in the world, but hell...it's a GREAT choice, and right now it's the only choice for sub 50k HD. Once the HVX is shipping, if it ships as a working cam...then there's a choice, but that's still a 10K plus hit for just a few minutes of storage. Many folks here aren't going to be going that route, I don't think. You can have 2 Z1's for the cost of an HVX and 16 minutes worth of storage. (Until the Firestore comes out)

I don't know if Jarred was here when the word "professional" was the topic of the day (and being flung around like a weapon), but I think it was in that context that "threadcrapping" entered our lexicon (and such a brilliant word it is!) I don't miss those days at all!

It's no secret that I'm no fan of interlaced video, or of HDV, so yes I'm jazzed about the HVX arriving soon. Obviously HDV is the only sub-$30k choice right now, so it's getting used, but I think Jarred's right, as soon as there's a better choice then the people doing professional-level work will look for a better, more rugged, more professional format. Heck, I'm sure Hi8 got used for some insert shots on some series here and there because of the camera size, but that didn't make Hi8 a valid and viable choice for ongoing work. I can't imagine that HDV will have any "legs" at all -- even Canon's new HDV XLH1 marketing department is acting as if it's practically ashamed of the format, barely mentioning it, instead emphasizing the whole HD-SDI aspect of it.

As of right now the Z1 is enjoying some success, sure. The Z1 is the only "professional" HDV camera out right now that someone could actually consider working with -- having bought and returned an HD100, I don't count it as professional until they solve the split-screen issue once and for all, and come up with a way to focus it in low-light conditions, and they get a lens that doesn't breathe like a pervert making an obscene phone call. But the whole Z1 thing reminds me of the JVC HD10 -- remember how many professionals said they couldn't work with it (I mean, you didn't even have manual control over the iris and shutter at the same time!) And the owners would say "oh, you just don't know how to shoot with it" and "I don't know about YOU, but *I* get great results and my clients are oh so happy and blah blah"... sounds exactly like Z1 owners now. But the minute something better came along (in the case of the HD10, that "something better" was the FX1/Z1, and infinitely bettery they are), HD10's were tossed by the wayside and now we have ex-owners confessing that yes, the HD10 was awful, and they're glad to be rid of it.

I suspect that when an affordable, quality, and yes: more-professional high-def format becomes available, a lot of HDV users who are tired of dropouts, timecode issues, mpeg artifacting, low color sampling, and all the other HDV compromises are going to gladly leave it behind. I don't know whether the succeeding format will be XDCAM HD, DVCPRO-HD on P2, or Infinity Rev, or in-camera H.264 or something else entirely but I have no doubt that those currently convincing themselves that "HDV is good enough" will have no hesitation to abandon it for a genuine professional format. As soon as one's available, that is.

Until then, some nice work is getting done on HDV, and because of the low cost of entry, it'll continue to happen, although the incompatibility among HDV formats is going to limit its adoption. But I'd bet that tape-based HDV is going to be one of the shortest-lived formats in history. The Z1's only been on the market 9 months; the FX1 just over one year, and Sony's already announced a more-professional mid-level format, and so has JVC (they're planning a 1920x1080 4:2:2 MPEG-2 recording format to hard disk for their next shoulder-mount camera). HDV was designed for the consumer market, and it's a decent fit there. It was never intended for the uses that pros are putting it to. When there's a format that is designed for the uses that pros need, I suspect strongly that we'll see them flock to it, and HDV will be relegated to the same niche that Hi8 used to occupy in a BetaSP world -- niche shooting due to small size, or "crash cam" use due to low cost, etc.

Getting back to the topic at hand -- Vegas support. Can we at least get a statement regarding MXF Op-Atom? Their insistence that they're only supporting Sony MXF sounds dangerously like what we non-Sony users were afraid of when Sony bought the product from Sonic Foundry. Op-Atom is the SMPTE-codified standard used and supported by Avid, Pinnacle, Canopus, Ikegami, Panasonic, Thomson/Grass Valley, etc... if Vegas is going to remain an open-platform, edit-anything application, they're going to have to support Op-Atom.

I'll add my voice to the call for Op Atom not only because one of the cameras we're very interested in is from Thomson but also because I'd hate to see Vegas become 'Sonified'.
Let's not forget that the first (perhaps still the only?) NLE that handled 24p from the DVX100 was Vegas, did that hurt sales of Sony cameras, well heck yes but that wasn't the fault of Vegas. I'd bet it sold a lot of copies of Vegas though.
Same goes for DVCPRO, I could have made serious money on two jobs in the last week, one of them shot on Varicam with speed ramps and not even those who the crew had hired the gear from had a clue how to handle it in post.
Same goes for audio, why no BWF support, I know we can fudge it like we can DVCPRO but when a job come your way it's kind of daunting putting your hand up to handle it knowing that well yes it sort of, kind of, can be made to work.

Bob.

This is why i started using Vegas full time.. because of its 24p support.

It's definitely why I converted to Vegas. Its 24p support for the DVX/XL2 is simply unparalleled!

I did for a few reasons - this being one of them.

Workflow, audio support, and compositing being the others.

Dave

you changed for composite work? wow i have always found that to be one of vegas's only weaknesses. Maybe just cause it is the opposite that my brain works.

But regardless of all of the above posts that strayed the topic,, I have my fingers and toes crossed that some magic from above will announce support for the HVX. I tried messing around with avid xpress the last couple days and im just not diggin it.

Have you looked at Canopus? They have MXF and DV100 support...

> A potential solution will be coming from DVFilm; Marcus is
> updating his Maker program so that it will convert P2 MXF files
> into .AVI or .MOV files.

Any news on this?

I'm trying to decide between the Z1, P2 HVX, or whatever else pops up in the next two months. As a longtime Vegas user, Sony's lack of public commitment to DVCPRO HD is the only reason I'm considering anything but the HVX.

I used Maker to convert the files we shot on the HVX. It works, but... well, it's a workaround. Maker converts the file, but then you lose the metadata, and you have to edit in Quicktime mode. Unless you have an exorbitantly fast computer, that means slow, slow going in Vegas. I get less than 4 frames per second when the video preview window is in draft/auto mode.

Compare that with a two-year-old 1.33ghz Mac Powerbook, which could play full-screen, full-res, full-frame-rate DVCPRO-HD from its internal hard disk. It was a real eye-opener. I've been a dyed-in-the-wool rabid Vegas supporter since 4.0b with its superb DVX100/24p integration, but -- unless they add native full (not Sony-only) MXF support with native DirectShow DV100, I just don't think Vegas is going to be a viable editing platform for the HVX or VariCam. And that breaks my heart. I'm looking at trying the Canopus Edius Broadcast trial version -- it seems the most Vegas-like, although I already know it doesn't have the audio support or bezier masking that Vegas has. On the other hand, it can support multiple streams of DV100 and it supports direct .MXF input (for both Sony and non-Sony variants of MXF). And FCP looks like it has excellent P2/MXF/DV100 integration, but it's a big expense to shift over to another hardware platform.

Seems to me like a turning point for Vegas. Vegas really staked out an excellent niche with the DVX and probably added thousands of new Vegas users to its base by providing by far the best DVX support of any of the NLE's (including FCP). But by actively choosing to not support this new HVX, they run the risk of doing the opposite -- driving users to other platforms. Many of us DVXers chose Vegas because it supported our chosen camera. I suspect that may happen again in reverse: that many HVXers will end up going Canopus or FCP because they support our chosen camera.

Very few things would make me happier, software-wise, than to hear Vegas announce that not only will they be supporting the HVX, but they'll be doing so wholeheartedly, with gusto, like they did for the DVX. That they will implement native .MXF support. That they will offer full DV100 support. And that they will offer an integrated capture application. Right now the attitude seems to be "well, if someone else will make a codec, and someone else will supply a capture application, and if you find some other way to convert your files to .AVI, well, then Vegas will let you edit the footage." No thanks. Canopus and FCP are going out of their way to make sure they have world-class support and tight integration. I expect no less from Vegas, or will have little choice but to switch platforms, painful as that will be.

Sony is probably trying to weigh the costs/benefits of supporting the HVX within Vegas. If providing native HVX support costs them more in lost sales of their HDV cameras than is offset by new purchases of Vegas software, they may decide not to support it. I noted with interest an earlier post in this thread that suggested an HVX vs. HDV purchase decision would be influenced by whether Vegas support is there.

Beyond the financial costs/benefits there's also that image thing. I don' t recall Sony ever trying to create the "all things for all people" image, or "if we don't have it here at Macey's then please try Gimble's". In fact, Sony, like too many companies, has tended to opt for proprietary solutions that it hopes will lead the pack and dominate the market rather than join the crowd. How long did it take them to manufacture a VHS recorder?

I truly hope Sony thinks more broadly and builds in HVX support. But for a company that prides itself on being "like.no.other" I won't be holding my breath.

I love my Z1 and Vegas/Cineform/VASST combo by the way.

If providing native HVX support costs them more in lost sales of their HDV cameras than is offset by new purchases of Vegas software, they may decide not to support it.

So you are assuming that the different divisions of Sony actually talk to each other?
There seems to be plenty of reasons to argue that this is not the case.

More likely it's the normal, "How did your division perform last year?"

The response could be, "Oh, we decided to give up our bonuses for you Z1 guys by not supporting the HVX." "Thanks, appreciate it, we'll send you a gift box from Harry & David."

NOT!

I don't see clear evidence that the HVX camera is so great at all, but it's already got a lot of Mac users salivating at the thought of yet more Holy Cool Aid being squirted their way.

Salivating PC users will just buy another NLE to do their editing, and it it likely that regardless of whether the HVX is great or not, Panny will sell a lot of them.

The thing about the HVX is that it's a prosumer camera. It's not a Digibeta, SP, Varicam or even an SDX900 that a shooter buys to shoot for clients with no intention of self-editing. The people who buy prosumer cameras very often want to be able to edit their own stuff at home (Win or Mac).

The guy who shoots for a network doesn't care how the camera's format is supported by an NLE. He just hands the tape of t the end of the day and goes home. NLE's and prosumer cameras go hand-in-hand though.

I'm bummed that Sony hasn't announced support for P2. I know the developers at Sonic Foundry would have been all over that sh*t months ago. I've been very happy with Vegas from v2 till now, but if the HVX proves a good solution, and Sony doesn't announce support by the end of January, I'm going to find somebody who does.

I think the HVX at $6000 takes us out of the prosumer category.

Whether Sony software does or doesn't support the HVX has zero to do with Sony's Broadcast division which distributes the HDV offerings.
It's more about cooperation from Panasonic, cost of SDK, and "how many more copies of Vegas will be sold if Vegas supports the HVX."
P2 is a ridiculous workflow anyway, (IMO) so support may wait until Firestore starts shipping. I'd expect at some point that there will be support, but the cam hasn't even started shipping and folks are already freaking out. What if Sony spends tens of thousands developing for a flop or flawed product? Who pays for that? As users, we do.
I'd rather have useful features until the format actually shakes out.
BTW, it took Vegas 5 months to be totally HDV supported, after the release of the cams.

I agree. HVX support would be nice but its all irrelevant at this point. No cams out and ridiculously high prices for P2 memory. Sorry but if I had $5k for the cam, and another $5K for P2 cards, Id grab a Z1 and invest $5k somewhere else in my business. No need to worry about support as its already here.

Heck, I wouldnt mind picking up a used HC-1 before I would ever consider the expensive price tag of HVX.

> P2 is a ridiculous workflow anyway

Really? You like to digitize that much? I see it as a step in the right direction. I think when cards are cheaper and hold more data it'll be a no-brainer. Would you buy a digital still camera that recorded to tape and not a memory card.

> What if Sony spends tens of thousands developing for a flop
> or flawed product? Who pays for that?

Tens of thousands is nothing for Sony. One thousand copies of Vegas retail for $600,000.

> it took Vegas 5 months to be totally HDV supported,
> after the release of the cams.

Is that something to be proud of? I respect the points you're trying to make. It would be one thing if Sony was promising support, or even leaked their unofficial intention to support P2, but it seems like they have 'no comment' and that's not very reassuring.

"Is that something to be proud of? I respect the points you're trying to make. It would be one thing if Sony was promising support, or even leaked their unofficial intention to support P2, but it seems like they have 'no comment' and that's not very reassuring."

I would say yes. Adobe announced support and it came a FULL YEAR after the announcement. Avid announced support and it was over a FULL YEAR later. Five months is nothing.

It has always been most companies policy not to discuss upcoming features or support until it has been implemented and any/all license issues are addressed. Would you like Sony to announce support now only to come back six months from now and say "Well Panasonic has been a bunch of pricks and have hi-balled us on license costs so now we have decided not to support HVX." You would be irate that Sony would announce support and then change directions even if it were out of their control.

This is what I'd like to see:
- - - - -
Sony announce plans today to support Panasonic's new P2 format in an upcoming version of their professional editing software, Sony Vegas. "We're still working on the fine print" remarked Mr. Sony Spokesman, "but we're excited to offer our large user base of video editors the tools to work with this promising tapeless format."
- - - - -

No firm commitment. No real details. But it would be enough for me to hold off switching to FCP for six months or so.