Oh, please. Sony is not your only choice. There are Canon and JVC. Upscale standard miniDV cameras have been used to film major motion pictures. HDV cameras leverage the bodies and lenses developed for the older cameras. To produce less expensive models, you can't use cheaper image elements as you can in the case of regular miniDV. You can't use cheaper lenses because you lose the image quality that the higher resolution imaging element gives you. You can't use cheaper ports because they can't handle the data stream. The bottomline is that the vendors don't produce a lot of HDV models because the spectrum of required features is fairly narrow.
I'm not talking pro stuff, I'm talking consumer. I'm well aware of the pro offerings, but what of the stuff average people plug into iMovie HD? It's somewhat scarce.
I'm not talking pro stuff, I'm talking consumer. ...
Nowhere in my previous post did I mention professional offerings. However, an unbiased reading of my analysis would indicate that a consumer-oriented HDV camcorder would be an oxymoron.
Well, one thing's for sure. Because Apple is in bed with Sony and, especially, Panasonic, you can guarantee full support for AVCHD in FCP and iMovie within short order.
It's a good thing that Canon or JVC didn't propose the format. Otherwise you'd be waiting a VERY long time to get support for FCP. Use the fact that Canon's 24F HDV format and JVC's 24P HDV format STILL have not seen any official support from Apple. And these cameras have been out for a YEAR!
But, boy did Apple jump through hoops to release an update to FCP for Panasonic's P2 media and are now on a roadshow to demonstrate XDCAM support too.
Nowhere in my previous post did I mention professional offerings. However, an unbiased reading of my analysis would indicate that a consumer-oriented HDV camcorder would be an oxymoron.
The Canon, JVC (both of which you linked to) and Sony FX1 are in no way consumer camcorders. They are expensive complex machines. Sony now has just 2 HDV models, that seems to be it for consumer HDV.
Apple is working with the market leaders. Panasonic and most especially Sony outsell and have far more influence on the direction of the video industry than JVC or Canon.
If Sony had not signed on to HDV its unlikely JVC would have been able to successfully push the format alone. JVC has its own 24P codec from what I hear is pretty good but will not likely see wide use.
Canon's Frame mode is a lame 24P knock off. Canon should have just licensed Panasonic's 24P technology. I can't blame Apple for not supporting it.
What pray tell part of the professional video industry uses miniDV?
...
Many of the television commercials, both local and national, are shot on miniDV. In preparation for one of its telecasts, NBC-TV sent a camera crew with a Canon XL 1 to get shots of a committee meeting I was attending. This same model camera was used in the George Clooney film Ocean's Twelve. The newer model XL 1s was the exclusive model camera used in the film 28 Days Later. Read and be wise. Also, the Digital Video Information Network has created a community of professionals and aspiring professionals who use miniDV and HDV.
Many of the television commercials, both local and national, are shot on miniDV.
At rare times national spot have been shot on miniDV. Mostly because they wanted a specific look but this is rare. As far as local spots I suppose it can depend on the size of the market and the expectation of the people paying for the commercial. Here in New York I don't know of anyone shooting local spots on mini DV.
Quote:
NBC-TV sent a camera crew with a Canon XL 1 to get shots of a committee meeting I was attending.
Its possible the local NBC affiliate may have hired a small production company to shoot the meeting. I have seen miniDV cameras used as 2nd Unit specialty cameras, B cameras, and crash cameras but I don't see well funded productions using it as their main camera with any regularity.
DVC-Pro is the lowest cheapest format I have seen local network affiliates shoot. NBC national is shooting Beta SX, Digital Betacam, and Sony HDCAM. CBS has made a major transition to Panasonic P2 and CNN has transitioned to Sony XDCAM which records on Blu-ray discs.
Quote:
This same model camera was used in the George Clooney film Ocean's Twelve.
Oceans Twelve was shot on 35mm film. Steven Soderbergh shot most of Full Frontal with the XL-1. But this was more of an art experiment than a norm.
Quote:
The newer model XL 1s was the exclusive model camera used in the film 28 Days Later.
This was also a specific art use, it is not the norm. Also certain shots such as some wide shots were in 35mm because mini DV did not have sufficient resolution.
Quote:
the Digital Video Information Network has created a community of professionals and aspiring professionals who use miniDV and HDV.
I have seen small organizations with small budgets or little funding use mini DV. Community television and public access television for example.
Its possible I work in such big markets that I am disconnected from smaller communities and markets that don't have as much money. But by and large major production companies and major broadcast companies are not using mini DV as a main production format.
Quote:
And another thing, don't knock porn.
I've met guys who work at porn companies. They are not geniuses by any stretch and would not be able to work at a top production company.
Its possible I work in such big markets that I am disconnected from smaller communities and markets that don't have as much money. But by and large major production companies and major broadcast companies are not using mini DV as a main production format.
MiniDV and even HDV are good formats for basic recording but if time and quality are important then you're going to see production done on formats with less compression and an avoidance of Long GOP codecs (HDV)
MiniDV is a handy format but the 8-bit 4:2:0 color isn't going to win you any Cinematography awards. Even with 3 CCD cams you can easily tell the difference between MiniDV and a camera with 4:2:2 colorspace.
Film is eyepopping. I was watching the Spike Lee movie Bamboozled and Spike uses MiniDV for most of the movies but the performances of Savion Glover and Tommy Davidson were on film and there is a HUGE difference in color.
MiniDV is like draing the color out of your video.
What I'm excited to see is Panasonics AVC-Intra which will be the DVCPRO sister codec using AVC in an Intraframe manner so that compression only happens within the frame preserving the frame and accurate cuts and edits of the frame without eating up a bunch of horsepower. I've heard that 50Mbps AVC-Intra should give the same or superior results as 100Mbps DVCPRO. We'll see about that when it ships.
At rare times national spot have been shot on miniDV. Mostly because they wanted a specific look but this is rare. As far as local spots I suppose it can depend on the size of the market and the expectation of the people paying for the commercial. Here in New York I don't know of anyone shooting local spots on mini DV.
So we have changed abandoned the assertion that professionals don't use miniDV for the new assertion that they use it only in special circumstances. I never claimed that miniDV is used by professionals exclusively.
Quote:
Originally posted by TenoBell
Its possible the local NBC affiliate may have hired a small production company to shoot the meeting.
If it were our local NBC affiliate, I would have said so. The XL-1 crew was shooting background footage for a national NBC-TV broadcast.
Quote:
Originally posted by TenoBell
Oceans Twelve was shot on 35mm film. Steven Soderbergh shot most of Full Frontal with the XL-1. But this was more of an art experiment than a norm.
The XL-1 even had an onscreen part in Oceans 12. Whether or not Steven Soderbergh used the XL-1 as an experiment is irrelevant, he used it. That is the point.
Let us be clear, there is no question that pedestal-mounted studio cameras are the standard for resolution and color fidelity. Portable digicams with prices of $75k-$100k have far superior specifications to a $5k Canon XL-2. However, the Canon XL-2 is good enough for many professional applications. I bet that before you read the links in my previous post, you had no idea that the Jerry Seinfeld-Superman desert commercial for American Express was shot on miniDV with a Canon XL-1s. If you can't tell the difference, then it makes no sense to pay the difference.
miniDV, HDV, and other low-cost formats allow those of modest means to produce professional-quality videos and films. They enable traditional cinematographers and videographers to go places where they cannot take their more expensive equipment.
So we have changed abandoned the assertion that professionals don't use miniDV for the new assertion that they use it only in special circumstances. I never claimed that miniDV is used by professionals exclusively.
I didn't say no professional has ever touched or ever used mini DV. Even though I do know pro video guys who scoff at mini DV as being toy cameras.
Your original statement said mini DV is more widely used than HDV. What I meant is that neither format are widely used for national broadcast shows, both are likely used under special circumstances.
For example The Apprentice is shot primarily with Digitbeta cameras. But they do carry small DV cameras for certain situations. Such as in cars when the Digibeta camera might be too big to fit and get a good shot. Overall 99% of what you are watching is Digibeta.
Sony's DVCam (the professional variant of mini DV) with its DSR line of cameras actually did make some headway into the pro world some years ago but nothing overly significant.
Quote:
What about cable broadcast?
Cable hour long dramas and half hour comedies are shot on 35mm, 16mm, or HD.
Reality shows can be a mixed bag as it depends on the budget of the show. If the show is fairly elaborate with sets and lighting then it is shot with high end ENG cameras. Which is the case with most reality shows.
There can be the case where some shows have really modest budgets, with no sets and no elaborate lighting, and the producer trying to shave as much cost as possible. The VH-1 show about Danny Bonaduce was this type of show, I believe that was shot with the DVX-1000. But this is not the norm.
Quote:
If it were our local NBC affiliate, I would have said so. The XL-1 crew was shooting background footage for a national NBC-TV broadcast.
You are being a bit cryptic as to who exactly shot the footage and what it was used for. But I wasn't there so I cannot really comment on it.
Quote:
Whether or not Steven Soderbergh used the XL-1 as an experiment is irrelevant, he used it. That is the point.
Lots of different formats are used in films to portray different looks for various artistic reasons. Super 8, Hi-8, Pixel Vision. A few years ago a toy camera made for kids called the Fisher Price Pixel Vision camera was in vogue. The camera recorded video to audio cassette tapes. From a pure picture standpoint it looked like crap. But it had its own unique look that some used for artistic purposes. 35mm is the gold standard as these are all considered alternative looks to 35mm being normal.
Quote:
I bet that before you read the links in my previous post, you had no idea that the Jerry Seinfeld-Superman desert commercial for American Express was shot on miniDV with a Canon XL-1s. If you can't tell the difference, then it makes no sense to pay the difference.
Yes I know all about that Seinfeld/ Superman commercial. I've spoken to the Director of Photography who shot it. He had several advantages stacked in his favor that most people won't have. For one the commercial was shot primarily in close ups and medium shots. So that did not force the camera to have to resolve great detail in wide shots.
The XL-1 used an adaptor that allowed 35mm cinema lenses to be mounted. So the camera was using expensive lenses that most people could not afford. The DP also had a full crew and a large lighting package which most people could not afford. He was able to use large lights and large black over heads to add light and subtract light where he needed to work within DV's limited dynamic range.
The spot also went through rather costly post production color grading to give it its final polish.
Quote:
miniDV, HDV, and other low-cost formats allow those of modest means to produce professional-quality videos and films. They enable traditional cinematographers and videographers to go places where they cannot take their more expensive equipment.
The high end ENG cameras offer many things that are just not possible with the small mini DV cameras. ENG cameras use better lenses with much higher resolving power than mini DV, in fact many of the lenses cost 3 to 4 times the whole mini DV camera costs. ENG cameras have larger sensors which allow for more sensitivity. ENG cameras use better electronics for more bandwidth and signal processing. ENG cameras are able to be color matched with multiple cameras in ways small DV are unable. ENG cameras connect to field trucks, microwave transmitters, and satellite feeds, which small DV cams are unable. mini DV cameras are also quite fragile and are not built to work under extreme conditions that ENG cameras have endured all over the world.
Its great that mini DV has opened possibilities to people who otherwise could not afford to express themselves. But don't confuse that for wide acceptance by professional world.
Sony's DVCam (the professional variant of mini DV) with its DSR line of cameras actually did make some headway into the pro world some years ago but nothing overly significant
I don't know about the cameras, but I can tell you that DVCam decks are pretty common in broadcast edit suites.
Comments
Originally posted by Mr. Me
Oh, please. Sony is not your only choice. There are Canon and JVC. Upscale standard miniDV cameras have been used to film major motion pictures. HDV cameras leverage the bodies and lenses developed for the older cameras. To produce less expensive models, you can't use cheaper image elements as you can in the case of regular miniDV. You can't use cheaper lenses because you lose the image quality that the higher resolution imaging element gives you. You can't use cheaper ports because they can't handle the data stream. The bottomline is that the vendors don't produce a lot of HDV models because the spectrum of required features is fairly narrow.
I'm not talking pro stuff, I'm talking consumer. I'm well aware of the pro offerings, but what of the stuff average people plug into iMovie HD? It's somewhat scarce.
Originally posted by Blackcat
I'm not talking pro stuff, I'm talking consumer. ...
Nowhere in my previous post did I mention professional offerings. However, an unbiased reading of my analysis would indicate that a consumer-oriented HDV camcorder would be an oxymoron.
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTE...efinitionVideo
It's a good thing that Canon or JVC didn't propose the format. Otherwise you'd be waiting a VERY long time to get support for FCP. Use the fact that Canon's 24F HDV format and JVC's 24P HDV format STILL have not seen any official support from Apple. And these cameras have been out for a YEAR!
But, boy did Apple jump through hoops to release an update to FCP for Panasonic's P2 media and are now on a roadshow to demonstrate XDCAM support too.
Originally posted by Mr. Me
Nowhere in my previous post did I mention professional offerings. However, an unbiased reading of my analysis would indicate that a consumer-oriented HDV camcorder would be an oxymoron.
The Canon, JVC (both of which you linked to) and Sony FX1 are in no way consumer camcorders. They are expensive complex machines. Sony now has just 2 HDV models, that seems to be it for consumer HDV.
Originally posted by TenoBell
HDV is essentially a consumer product. There is no significant or large use of HDV in the professional video world.
And yet 3 of the 5 HDV cameras out there are pro. I don't think it caught on like JVC hoped.
If Sony had not signed on to HDV its unlikely JVC would have been able to successfully push the format alone. JVC has its own 24P codec from what I hear is pretty good but will not likely see wide use.
Canon's Frame mode is a lame 24P knock off. Canon should have just licensed Panasonic's 24P technology. I can't blame Apple for not supporting it.
I think it makes people feel better who cannot afford the $50,000 - $100,00 camera that the pros are really using.
Originally posted by TenoBell
Just because they label pro on the side of a camera doesn't mean pros use it.
I think it makes people feel better who cannot afford the $50,000 - $100,00 camera that the pros are really using.
I imagine it depends on what you're filming. The 'pro' HDVs certainly aren't aimed at home use.
It's probably porn
New HDV camera announced to go along with their two new 200 series cams announced at NAB.
No need to wait until tomorrow. Here are Sony's newest AVCHD cameras the HDR-UX1 and HDR-SR1
The plot thickens.
Yeah baby! HD HDD lovin'.
Price is fair as well at $1500.
Originally posted by TenoBell
HDV is essentially a consumer product. There is no significant or large use of HDV in the professional video world.
...
This is a meaningless statement. miniDV is still much more widely used by professionals than its HD younger sibling. But miniDV's days are numbered.
I know what cameras professional video organizations place dozens or hundreds of orders for and they are not the PD-150 or DVX-1000.
Porn does not qualify as professional video.
Originally posted by TenoBell
What pray tell part of the professional video industry uses miniDV?
...
Many of the television commercials, both local and national, are shot on miniDV. In preparation for one of its telecasts, NBC-TV sent a camera crew with a Canon XL 1 to get shots of a committee meeting I was attending. This same model camera was used in the George Clooney film Ocean's Twelve. The newer model XL 1s was the exclusive model camera used in the film 28 Days Later. Read and be wise. Also, the Digital Video Information Network has created a community of professionals and aspiring professionals who use miniDV and HDV.
And another thing, don't knock porn.
Many of the television commercials, both local and national, are shot on miniDV.
At rare times national spot have been shot on miniDV. Mostly because they wanted a specific look but this is rare. As far as local spots I suppose it can depend on the size of the market and the expectation of the people paying for the commercial. Here in New York I don't know of anyone shooting local spots on mini DV.
NBC-TV sent a camera crew with a Canon XL 1 to get shots of a committee meeting I was attending.
Its possible the local NBC affiliate may have hired a small production company to shoot the meeting. I have seen miniDV cameras used as 2nd Unit specialty cameras, B cameras, and crash cameras but I don't see well funded productions using it as their main camera with any regularity.
DVC-Pro is the lowest cheapest format I have seen local network affiliates shoot. NBC national is shooting Beta SX, Digital Betacam, and Sony HDCAM. CBS has made a major transition to Panasonic P2 and CNN has transitioned to Sony XDCAM which records on Blu-ray discs.
This same model camera was used in the George Clooney film Ocean's Twelve.
Oceans Twelve was shot on 35mm film. Steven Soderbergh shot most of Full Frontal with the XL-1. But this was more of an art experiment than a norm.
The newer model XL 1s was the exclusive model camera used in the film 28 Days Later.
This was also a specific art use, it is not the norm. Also certain shots such as some wide shots were in 35mm because mini DV did not have sufficient resolution.
the Digital Video Information Network has created a community of professionals and aspiring professionals who use miniDV and HDV.
I have seen small organizations with small budgets or little funding use mini DV. Community television and public access television for example.
Its possible I work in such big markets that I am disconnected from smaller communities and markets that don't have as much money. But by and large major production companies and major broadcast companies are not using mini DV as a main production format.
And another thing, don't knock porn.
I've met guys who work at porn companies. They are not geniuses by any stretch and would not be able to work at a top production company.
Its possible I work in such big markets that I am disconnected from smaller communities and markets that don't have as much money. But by and large major production companies and major broadcast companies are not using mini DV as a main production format.
What about cable broadcast?
MiniDV and even HDV are good formats for basic recording but if time and quality are important then you're going to see production done on formats with less compression and an avoidance of Long GOP codecs (HDV)
MiniDV is a handy format but the 8-bit 4:2:0 color isn't going to win you any Cinematography awards. Even with 3 CCD cams you can easily tell the difference between MiniDV and a camera with 4:2:2 colorspace.
Film is eyepopping. I was watching the Spike Lee movie Bamboozled and Spike uses MiniDV for most of the movies but the performances of Savion Glover and Tommy Davidson were on film and there is a HUGE difference in color.
MiniDV is like draing the color out of your video.
What I'm excited to see is Panasonics AVC-Intra which will be the DVCPRO sister codec using AVC in an Intraframe manner so that compression only happens within the frame preserving the frame and accurate cuts and edits of the frame without eating up a bunch of horsepower. I've heard that 50Mbps AVC-Intra should give the same or superior results as 100Mbps DVCPRO. We'll see about that when it ships.
Originally posted by TenoBell
At rare times national spot have been shot on miniDV. Mostly because they wanted a specific look but this is rare. As far as local spots I suppose it can depend on the size of the market and the expectation of the people paying for the commercial. Here in New York I don't know of anyone shooting local spots on mini DV.
So we have changed abandoned the assertion that professionals don't use miniDV for the new assertion that they use it only in special circumstances. I never claimed that miniDV is used by professionals exclusively.
Originally posted by TenoBell
Its possible the local NBC affiliate may have hired a small production company to shoot the meeting.
If it were our local NBC affiliate, I would have said so. The XL-1 crew was shooting background footage for a national NBC-TV broadcast.
Originally posted by TenoBell
Oceans Twelve was shot on 35mm film. Steven Soderbergh shot most of Full Frontal with the XL-1. But this was more of an art experiment than a norm.
The XL-1 even had an onscreen part in Oceans 12. Whether or not Steven Soderbergh used the XL-1 as an experiment is irrelevant, he used it. That is the point.
Let us be clear, there is no question that pedestal-mounted studio cameras are the standard for resolution and color fidelity. Portable digicams with prices of $75k-$100k have far superior specifications to a $5k Canon XL-2. However, the Canon XL-2 is good enough for many professional applications. I bet that before you read the links in my previous post, you had no idea that the Jerry Seinfeld-Superman desert commercial for American Express was shot on miniDV with a Canon XL-1s. If you can't tell the difference, then it makes no sense to pay the difference.
miniDV, HDV, and other low-cost formats allow those of modest means to produce professional-quality videos and films. They enable traditional cinematographers and videographers to go places where they cannot take their more expensive equipment.
So we have changed abandoned the assertion that professionals don't use miniDV for the new assertion that they use it only in special circumstances. I never claimed that miniDV is used by professionals exclusively.
I didn't say no professional has ever touched or ever used mini DV. Even though I do know pro video guys who scoff at mini DV as being toy cameras.
Your original statement said mini DV is more widely used than HDV. What I meant is that neither format are widely used for national broadcast shows, both are likely used under special circumstances.
For example The Apprentice is shot primarily with Digitbeta cameras. But they do carry small DV cameras for certain situations. Such as in cars when the Digibeta camera might be too big to fit and get a good shot. Overall 99% of what you are watching is Digibeta.
Sony's DVCam (the professional variant of mini DV) with its DSR line of cameras actually did make some headway into the pro world some years ago but nothing overly significant.
What about cable broadcast?
Cable hour long dramas and half hour comedies are shot on 35mm, 16mm, or HD.
Reality shows can be a mixed bag as it depends on the budget of the show. If the show is fairly elaborate with sets and lighting then it is shot with high end ENG cameras. Which is the case with most reality shows.
There can be the case where some shows have really modest budgets, with no sets and no elaborate lighting, and the producer trying to shave as much cost as possible. The VH-1 show about Danny Bonaduce was this type of show, I believe that was shot with the DVX-1000. But this is not the norm.
If it were our local NBC affiliate, I would have said so. The XL-1 crew was shooting background footage for a national NBC-TV broadcast.
You are being a bit cryptic as to who exactly shot the footage and what it was used for. But I wasn't there so I cannot really comment on it.
Whether or not Steven Soderbergh used the XL-1 as an experiment is irrelevant, he used it. That is the point.
Lots of different formats are used in films to portray different looks for various artistic reasons. Super 8, Hi-8, Pixel Vision. A few years ago a toy camera made for kids called the Fisher Price Pixel Vision camera was in vogue. The camera recorded video to audio cassette tapes. From a pure picture standpoint it looked like crap. But it had its own unique look that some used for artistic purposes. 35mm is the gold standard as these are all considered alternative looks to 35mm being normal.
I bet that before you read the links in my previous post, you had no idea that the Jerry Seinfeld-Superman desert commercial for American Express was shot on miniDV with a Canon XL-1s. If you can't tell the difference, then it makes no sense to pay the difference.
Yes I know all about that Seinfeld/ Superman commercial. I've spoken to the Director of Photography who shot it. He had several advantages stacked in his favor that most people won't have. For one the commercial was shot primarily in close ups and medium shots. So that did not force the camera to have to resolve great detail in wide shots.
The XL-1 used an adaptor that allowed 35mm cinema lenses to be mounted. So the camera was using expensive lenses that most people could not afford. The DP also had a full crew and a large lighting package which most people could not afford. He was able to use large lights and large black over heads to add light and subtract light where he needed to work within DV's limited dynamic range.
The spot also went through rather costly post production color grading to give it its final polish.
miniDV, HDV, and other low-cost formats allow those of modest means to produce professional-quality videos and films. They enable traditional cinematographers and videographers to go places where they cannot take their more expensive equipment.
The high end ENG cameras offer many things that are just not possible with the small mini DV cameras. ENG cameras use better lenses with much higher resolving power than mini DV, in fact many of the lenses cost 3 to 4 times the whole mini DV camera costs. ENG cameras have larger sensors which allow for more sensitivity. ENG cameras use better electronics for more bandwidth and signal processing. ENG cameras are able to be color matched with multiple cameras in ways small DV are unable. ENG cameras connect to field trucks, microwave transmitters, and satellite feeds, which small DV cams are unable. mini DV cameras are also quite fragile and are not built to work under extreme conditions that ENG cameras have endured all over the world.
Its great that mini DV has opened possibilities to people who otherwise could not afford to express themselves. But don't confuse that for wide acceptance by professional world.
Sony's DVCam (the professional variant of mini DV) with its DSR line of cameras actually did make some headway into the pro world some years ago but nothing overly significant
I don't know about the cameras, but I can tell you that DVCam decks are pretty common in broadcast edit suites.