DVL-Digest 691 - Postings: Index Canon XL1 or Sony VX 2000 or DSR 200? HOME key doesn't work/SOUND ad Maintaining quality throughout Need for a TBC New to DV Please help PAL to NTSC firewire transfer stills on VHS What camcorder for a DV newbie? Canon XL1 or Sony VX 2000 or DSR 200? - Adam Wilt Each of these cameras has particular strengths that the other lack. I think you will likely be happiest overall with the VX2000. Of the three it has (IMHO) the best *combination* of ergonomics, image quality, and useful features. > I know that pinnacle uses a Sony codec on there capture cards, would It > be better to stick with a Sony DV camera? Even if it were true, there's no need to stick with Sony. But last I saw, Pinnacle was using the C-Cube DVxpress codec on its cards. Am I mistaken? HOME key doesn't work/SOUND ad - Adam Wilt --When using FCP, my HOME and END keys only beep (not > taking me to the start or end of a clip). Is this a > system problem or a FCP one? ((Config: G4, OS904, FCP > 125, "new" keyboard and Logitech MarbleMouse)) Sounds like a system problem. I use 1.2.5 on a PB G3/266 and on a G4/450 with 9.0.4 and the older keyboard (one with a power key), and the keys work as advertised. > --Is there an adapter/cable to convert the "out" sound > from my Sony NTSC monitor's RF connection to > multi-media type speakers that usually plug into the > back of the Mac, or do I have to get some sort of > different speakers? The RF connection is an antenna input, not an output. You can't use it to drive any kind of speakers. What is it you're trying do do, that you need to hook up speakers to the TV? Can't you take the line out from your DV deck, and patch it into an amplifier or a set of self-powered speakers? Cheers, Adam Wilt Maintaining quality throughout - Adam Wilt My footage and the regular Digital-S looked much the same, or maybe mine > was a little bit sharper. The guy who was using the dockable camera (so > with the same camera head as my DSR500, but with a D9 VTR) had some of the > most beautiful pictures I ever saw. They were superior in just about any > aspect. Color depth, definition you name it, it was better. I understand > that D9 has 4:2:2 sampling Vs. 4:2:0 of DVCAM, but my footage stayed > digital right till the end, whereas this guy had to go through S-VIDEO... > > Any explanations? Thanks! Well, the other D-9 shooter had pix that looked like yours, so it's probably not the tape format. And as you say, you and the D35 guy had essentially the same camera section. As the D-9 came in through Y/C, which has a more limited horizontal chroma bandwidth than DV's 4:2:0, I'd assume that any inherent chroma performance superiority of D-9 was neutralized. And in any case both DVCAM and D-9 have the same color gamut (same ability to record range and variation of color); the differing chroma sample rates and compression levels don't change the ability to render any particular shade of color. The difference between the 4:3 D35's CCD images and the DSR-500WS's 4:3 images *are* visible -- on very fine detail in component monitoring on a high quality monitor, *if* you know what to look for and know what to shoot to make the difference clear! In other words, I doubt that this was the determining factor. So what are we left with? 1) Lenses, as someone else mentioned. Good glass makes a difference. 2) Camera setup: detail settings, gamma, color saturation and color balance, matrixing, etc. This is one of the more likely suspects. I can do at least as much to make a picture look good (or bad) by changing the setups of the camera as by changing the camera itself! 3) Position/lighting: Any chance the D35 guy just had the most photogenic angle on the action? This is another likely suspect: a shot from head on in typical theater lighting will look horrible, compared to a shot made of the same person at the same time, but from a 3/4 or profile view. Cheers, Adam Wilt Need for a TBC - Adam Wilt > can improve VHS dubs from a DV source. Actually, the TBC itself will do *nothing* to improve image quality from an already time-base-stable source like DV. What *is* helpful is the ability to bring up the black levels a bit, perhaps clip or lower the whites, and desaturate chroma. While almost all TBCs have proc amp controls to do this, a simple analog proc amp (processing amplifier) is all you need, and such things are less expensive than TBCs are. And as you're not adding another round trip from analog to digital to analog as you are with a TBC, you'll wind up with less image degradation along the way. Cheers, Adam Wilt New to DV Please help - Adam Wilt Am I the only one who thinks that would be better > spent hiring someone else who knows what they're doing > to at least shoot the documentary? It might be, or it might not -- and we all have to start somewhere. I've worked with supposedly experienced shooters who simply lack either the knack for storytelling or the basic technical competence to wring the requisite quality (both artistic and technical) from their subjects. Assuming the chap in question is the least bit competent, and has a degree of visual literacy and the ability to tell a story, he may very well be able to learn enough to do a pretty good job. The technical hurdles he has to face are no more demanding than the technical hurdles in good web design or in installing and working with a DV500 capture card. Equally important, he knows that he doesn't know what he needs to know, and is asking for help -- I'll take an open-minded neophyte over a know-it-all self-described expert any day of the week! Also, he's established a good working rapport with the client, which is half the battle on any collaborative project. Cheers, AJW PAL to NTSC firewire transfer - "Perry" Charles Krezell posted: >Has anyone tried to transfer PAL dv to to NTSC dv via firewire camera to camera? thanks.< Surprisingly enough, if you poke PAL DV into a Firewire cable, it comes out PAL DV at the other end. NTSC DV cameras don't record PAL DV. There are one or two devices that play both standards (I've just tried the excellent little DSR-11) but it still comes out the same as it went in! Perry Mitchell Video Facilities http://www.perrybits.co.uk/ stills on VHS - Adam Wilt > ]There is no reason why sending whole frames is a ton better than > >interlacing, except for still screen grabs of moving objects on a > >computer. MB replies: > OK, progressive scanning will produce better vertical resolution. Yes, between 30% and 50% depending on the quality of the equipment used. Also, for digital compression and transmission, proscan pix are much easier to compress than interlaced, since all the lines are time-coherent. And since proscan pix are of inherently higher vertical resolution, it takes less lines to make a picture of comparable visual quality. Most people (myself included) rate 720p HDTV to be visually comparable to 1080i HDTV on static pix. Add in the lack of 30 Hz line twitter, no half-resolution vertical motion losses, and the fact that ANY temporal or spatial image processing doesn't have to hassle with two non-time-coherent interlaced fields, and proscan looks mighty nice! > I'm guessing that the camcorder records odd/even fields at 60 fps. > This would mean that there's a very slight difference (only noticeable > when there's motion) between an odd field and an even field, and so > when the TV tries to reproduce the frame by alternating these two > fields, it flickers. Quite correct. The second field is captured 1/60 of a second after the first. Instead of having 30 solid frames per second, you have 60 "half frames" per second, all evenly spaced in time. Cheers, Adam Wilt What camcorder for a DV newbie? - Perry Mitchell Enrico offers good advice about wide screen and then spoils it by saying the Sony DSR-500 is the entry for real widescreen cameras. The excellent JVC GY-DV700 is considerably cheaper, but still way over . Several posts mention audio capability but I would suspect there is a very good chance that you will be shooting mute video to go with the recorded music. This is a whole different ball park and you need to think of on-site playback with very accurate speed (MiniDisk is excellent) to get lip sync. Don't worry too much about the technical quality, as a beginner you need to be far more concerned with what you feel comfortable with and what fits in with your shooting ideas. All very recent DV camcorders give acceptable pictures, but some are much easier to use than others and some are much smaller than others. This may be crucial if for instance you wanted to shoot in a car. All consumer camcorders have inadequate wide angle coverage unless you are going to shoot entirely in the open or in large studios. The Sony VX-2000 is a very nice consumer camera, but even that may be overkill in terms of manual control options. Try the new Canon consumer cameras, they are tiny and very ergonomic. Don't be sidelined by lots of still facilities you don't need. Don't forget you'll probably need some lights. (diese posts stammen von der DV-L Mailingliste - THX to Adam Wilt and Perry Mitchell :-) [up] |
 slashCAM  News HD Camcorder database One-on-One Cam comparison About our tests About us |
|
|
