WAY OT: Hi-Def percentage questions...

Jessariah67 wrote on 4/5/2005, 1:56 PM
Not even sure how to search this one...

We recently lost a bid for a b-roll job from our visitor's bureau and their issue was that one of the other biddrs really pushed the hi-def angle.

Short of the long is, how "important" is hi-def at this stage of technology? Can you deliver hi-def on Beta with no loss? I HAVE a hi-def TV and NEVER watch hi-def because it's so limited - and most of the time, it seems I'm watching standard that has been converted. My argument is that, at this point - not two years from now, but TODAY -- hi-def is not as crucial as it will be in a few years. The percentage of native HD programming and HD TVs out there make it less of an issue at this point. Maybe I'm completely off-base. Any light that anyone can shed would be appreciated.

Kevin

Comments

Chienworks wrote on 4/5/2005, 2:02 PM
I'd help, but i'm not even sure what you're searching for.

(edit)
Ahhhh, you posted the rest of your message after i replied. Ignore me. ;)
Jessariah67 wrote on 4/5/2005, 2:25 PM
Yeah. I hit TAB by mistake before hitting enter and it posted the message prematurely.
farss wrote on 4/5/2005, 2:29 PM
I don't really know what the situation is in the US so I can only offer an opinion from afar but remember we pretty much live in a global village these days.
If you want to sell programs it at the very least has to be 16:9, if it's a serious sale to a major network it has to be HD. Where things are at this moment in time with regards to what's going to air doesn't matter, no one buys a car that use fuel that you can't but in 2 years time. Content for broadcast is the same, from the date of signing a contract or making a purchase it may be quite a while before it goes to air so the purchaser is not only looking at it's value 1 or 2 years down the track but a decade down the track.

What they don't have is enough HD content, they've got 20 years woth of SD and most of it 4:3, 4:3 SD doesn't scale well to HD, 16:9 SD is maybe passable.

I met a crew 18 months ago, this is an Australian crew btw. Made a very interesting program about a famous road in the US. Discovery were very interested but wouldn't buy because it was SD but they loved the show and were prepared to pay 10 times the asking price for them to go back and reshoot in HD.

I've read one post from a F900 owner about how he lost a client to a guy with a Z1.
We've nearly completed replacing all our SD gear with HDV. I'd estimate within 12 months all prosummer SD kit will be very hard to sell, the market is already forcing the price down dramatically. Psot NAB I'd say things will accelerate even faster.
Bob.
Jessariah67 wrote on 4/5/2005, 2:50 PM
I guess a further angle on my question is the whole Beta issue. All we heard in this RFP process was that ALL the networks wanted the b-roll in Beta format. Can you deliver hi-def in Beta?
farss wrote on 4/5/2005, 3:08 PM
No. But HDV downconverted to DB or SP looks pretty damn good, by all accounts doing it in Vegas looks the best way at the moment.
vicmilt wrote on 4/6/2005, 5:02 PM
Jessariah -

I'm going to be blunt and don't want to offend but...

if you are going to succeed in this business (survival IS success) - you've got to learn from these situations...

you were NOT out-TECH-ed - you were out SOLD.

They had the prettier girl holding up the showcard.

Learn the lesson, and from now on, ask, in every job you bid..."would you like hi-def?"

"Do we recommend it - not just yet - but we can do it better than anyone else around here".

Then if someone takes you up on the Hi-def stiuation - rent a hi-def camera - even hire a hi-def techie to set it up, etc. After that job, I guiess you'll know hi-def, too.

Don't fight fad with logic - out fad the competion.
If they're using tape - forget film and learn tape.
If they're editing with a computer - forget online tape to tape and learn computer.
If they're shooting it all on greenscreen - well you get the idea.

You don't have to be the FIRST guy on the block with the new technolgoy (in fact those guys generally get Killed, financially)
but you DO have to face the facts - someone else got this one - don't let the next one get away.

Sorry - but that's the "business" part of "Show Business"

best,
v
apit34356 wrote on 4/6/2005, 5:39 PM
Farss and vicmilt are on the money! Don't be out marketed with buzz words, but networks want the best return on the buy. Most Cable networks want to be able to reboadcast the show a large number of times to fill the 24 hr demand of programming and with sister networks, just increases the demand. A lot of people are being told that SD is still the major market. A lot of people said digital would not displace 35mm SLR in the professional field, like for sporting events,..etc..

The key advice is know your market well and your competitors better. An old saying, "The Golden Rule, the ones with the gold, make the rules." Outdated knowledge, outdated equipment, usually does not make the client what to part with the gold.
Liam_Vegas wrote on 4/6/2005, 8:10 PM
It occurred to me that programs captured on 35mm over the years actually are likely to be more future proof than other programs only captured in SD. At least with 35mm you can go back to the source and re-capture at HD res.

Not saying anythign earth shattering here... but that concept did make me pause and think for at least a second anyway.
Yoyodyne wrote on 4/6/2005, 8:25 PM
I think the 16 by 9 thing is gonna be a bigger deal than HD - at least in the short term.
David_Kuznicki wrote on 4/7/2005, 4:02 AM
I think the 16 by 9 thing is gonna be a bigger deal than HD - at least in the short term.

You're absolutely correct. But you'd still be surprised at just how few clients actually know the difference between 16x9 and HD even. They assume that, just because it's not 4x3, it MUST be HD!

Trust me, things like this have been happening more and more lately...

David.
JJKizak wrote on 4/7/2005, 6:06 AM
Maybe these formulas could help people understand the complex laws and physical constants that exist in our High Definition Galazy:

Source Aspect Media Stream = High Definition

8mm 4 x 3 film all = no
super 8mm 4 x 3 film all = no
16mm 4 x 3 film all = no
super 16mm 4 x 3 film all = no
16mm 2.5 x 1 film all = maybe
super 16mm 2.5 x 1 film all = maybe
35mm 4 x 3 film all = no
35mm 2.5 x 1 film all = maybe
HI 8mm 4 x 3 tape all = no
8mm 4 x 3 tape all = no
Digital 4 x 3 8 mm tape all = no
Digital 4 x 3 mini-dv tape all = no
Digital 16 x 9 mini-dv tape all = no
incomplete
There are so many combinations even I'm confused. I should have added "kind of HDTV viewing method", and "which zoom the tv is in" and "what is the broadcaster sending"---letterbox 2.5 x 1 to 16 x 9---

JJK
Yoyodyne wrote on 4/7/2005, 10:18 AM
JJK - great point about the zoom mode!!!! If you go into any Best Buy, etc I guarantee you at least 20 percent of the sets are in some super bizarre squeeze or stretch mode. If the store can't even get it right what hope does the average consumer have....
Liam_Vegas wrote on 4/7/2005, 10:38 AM
Yoyodyne... I'm in agreement also... it sort of makes a mockery of all the efforts we go to make our work as perfect as it can be. In the end... the solution seems to be to produce everything in wide-screen format.

The "problems" I have seen are all about trying to stretch out a 4:3 formatted program to fill all that wonderful space available on the TV. I guess people feel cheated if it remains unused.

On some wide-screen TV's they have a "panoramic" mode which streches the 4:3 picture in a non-linear way. The center stays normal and the edges get gradully more stretched. The talking heads in the center then look pretty normal but out to the edges you see evidence of the stretch. If you have someone frame left or right you end up seeing one side of their body is deformed. Their left shoulder will be wider than their right.
JJKizak wrote on 4/7/2005, 10:48 AM
It's amazing how the lens manufacturers are spending millions to keep the linearity distortion down to .5% and the tv people purposely distort it about 10,000 % without even a yo ho ho. Reminds me of kids playing with a playstation game. My good friend bought a new Samsung 50" DLP and I asked him why the people were short and fat. I took the remote and put it into 4 x 3 and he got real upset and said he would not have purchased the tv had he known that. My my my.

JJK
BillyBoy wrote on 4/7/2005, 10:52 AM
Lots of interesting viewpoints. Like with many new things some people just have to have it as soon as its available.That's true with the latest HD cameras, TV's or hybrid cars and typically for the females some just have to have the latest shoes or the "right" skirt length before anyone else does.

I'm not like that. I rather do it right then do it first. As others have already said a BIG part of running a successful business isn't your technical skills, but how your market your services. Funny example. Where I live SpringGreen does a lot of scheduled lawn care. Scotts is just entering the area. I got a doorknob hanger from SpringGreen saying yea Scotts will give you a green lawn, but we can give you a thick green lawn. M A R K E T I N G!

Its still early in the HiDef game. If history is any indicator, things will change. They also do. Once something "new" hits the streets some consumers will be just like those ladies that just have to have the right shoes or skirt length and right now to be in fashion. If or not it makes sense to pay a premium to have what now it s the latest and greatest HD TV or camera should be weighted against what will the same money get me six or twelve months down the road. As far as competing with your competiors, offering HD services or any other "new" thing just because they do is something you should weight carefully. Frequently the first company to offer something new is surpassed by more seasoned companies that were smarter to wait.
BillyBoy wrote on 4/7/2005, 11:13 AM
As far as stretch modes, pillar bars and all that YES my guess is your typical consumer will feel cheated if he pays two, three, five grand or more for a wide screen TV and half the time the picture doesn't fill the screen.

Would you feel "cheated" if you went to Krispy Kreme or Dunkin Donuts and ordered a half dozen donuts and they put it in a box designed for a dozen, leaving empty space on either side where only half the box's width was filled? Probably not, but none the less it wouldn't look right.

A 4/3 picture looks like crap on a wide screen tv because of the unfilled space on either side. A wide screen picture with both pillar bars on the sides and black bars on top and bottom (how they look if not viewed on a HD channel) looks like dog s....

Many here are TOO CLOSE to the issue. You see the slightly flaw. I can be a "videographer" and nitpick what I've done to death. I also can switch off and simply ENJOY watching my new giant sized plasma tv. My guess, the typical consumer isn't bothered by a slightly stretched picture. The same consumer may go ape when he's forced to see nearly half the screen on the set he's paid thousands for have either black or gray borders or sometimes a butt ugly combination surrounding the picture.
Spot|DSE wrote on 4/7/2005, 11:14 AM
Yup. All good points, Farss. DVInfo.net, HDVInfo.net, DMN, 2pop, and the magazines, plus the shooter newsgroups are all saying this now. One of our major clients (Nero) won't accept anything in SD any more. Microsoft is the same, and for NAB, we'll have 7 booths with our HD media in them. Many corporate clients want HD NOW! and even if it's delivered in SD, they want it to be repurposeable in the very near future.
Discovery is only HD now, same with A&E, National Geo says they'll have their HD specification book done at NAB. Mom and pop clients are going to be fine with SD for weddings and such for a while, but that too, will change. Look how fast VHS or High 8 was replaced with DV for acquisition....it was almost overnight.
Bottom line is, for the relatively small investment in an HD cam of less than 5K, and with what's on the horizon for monitoring, editing, and delivery, you're gonna want to get your feet wet. 4K is a lot of money if you're doing casual video work, but it's pennies if you're really doing much work. Having HD as a bullet is a big deal. Even if you're renting a Z1 for a day at 150.00 per day, it's still an option that isn't too expensive even for casual, weekend shooters. Another interesting facet is that at NAB, you'll see all sorts of HD stock footage being used/delivered. Artbeats has been in the HD camp for 3 years, but now Digital Juice (super consumer oriented) and Videometry (semi-consumer oriented) have added HD, and HDV stock footage.
The only question you should really be asking yourself, IMO, is what the shelf life of your project is going to be. If it's gonna be around for a while, HD is the safe choice. If it's a short life project, such as a :30 spot that will air on a 25 part rotation, then it dies....SD is likely the answer. The beauty of HDV is that it's cheap, and can be either SD or HD, and looks great either way.
And remember, even SD you're getting a full 960 pixels from the Z1 or FX1. No stretching happening there.
BillyBoy wrote on 4/7/2005, 12:11 PM
Maybe only HD as far as accepting new source meterial but not what's actually broadcast. On WOW cable and I'm assuming others, the norm is to have a network on a one channel in "old" 4/3 format and a similar but different channel broadcast in HD or at least wide format. That's true with Discovery and A&E, public televison and others. Sometmes they broadcast the same exact programming, other times the channels are different. For example local public television in Chicago, WTTW, channel 11 broadcasts one lineup on this ther broadcast channel and offers totally dffferent but really very high quality HD broadcast on WTTWD for cable and satellite subscribers which is mostly a feed from PBS, with little if any local content.

One show that they repeat often, even at 11 PM which is curious is a funny kiddie cartoon called Jakers. The animation is good and the detail in HD is stunning for a cartoon, but not exactly what you bought a plasma tv for.

http://pbskids.org/jakers/

The important but subtle point I'm making is if a power house station like WTTW needs to rebroadcast a pig cartoon several times during the day, then HD as a concept is still very early in the game.
craftech wrote on 4/7/2005, 2:24 PM
Sometimes we get a bit lost in the science and technology and forget the artistic part of shooting. That's the part people notice the most. Conveying the message in a creative way is what video and film are about. CGI can often ruin a movie rather than enhance it.

"Hey, we could get Butthead to sit on a glass and fart." "What's so scientific about that?" "Nothin' until you light it." Beavis & Butthead

John