The Pro's and Con's...

[Mike Downey]

I do not want this to turn into an arguement at all but there are many folks trying to decide what to do in the very near future.

What are the Pro's and Con's about going HD today.

Please keep this as factual as possible and if you disagree with somebody that is ok... just be respectful :)


Mike

[D4rK F0CuS]

Erm, HD is rushing up fast, no point denying the inevitable. Doubtful anyone wants to rehash the pro and con's of HD. Doing a search for this topic on ** will make your head explode. Everyone's got a valid point, and everyone is wrong. But that's just my opinion.

[Mathew]

Hasn't this been debated to death over on the VU? :hanged:

Seriously, the only benefits I see as of right now for going HD is a nicer looking DVD from the down sampled footage. Again I have had hardly any interest shown from brides in widescreen or HD.

A lot of this will change over the next couple of years. However I see no reason to sell off my existing SD cameras nor invest in any of the latest HD models at this juncture.

It's still the content, content, content. That will never really change.

[Dee Boz]

I do not want this to turn into an arguement at all but there are many folks trying to decide what to do in the very near future.

What are the Pro's and Con's about going HD today.

Please keep this as factual as possible and if you disagree with somebody that is ok... just be respectful :)


Mike


Pros:

- Depending on where you live....Competitive edge..at least for me. It has "won" me a couple of corporate projects and has helped me get a couple of weddings (mostly when the groom is involved)

- Better looking product. It is better..no question..either downconverted or not.

- 16 x 9

Cons:

- No real HD delivery yet
- Difficulties on some machines (mostly PCs :kiss: ) editing HD. Not an issue for me.

[Mike Downey]

I realize that it has been discussed over at VU but not here really. We will have users that do not go to VU that might like to to see what folks are feeling about it.

That is why I wanted to give a balanced look for them on the subject.

Such as...

I feel that there are a few Pro's to going now.

1. The learning curve of shooting with an HD Cam is better early than when everyone already is doing it.

2. Down Sampled DVD's do look great if shot correctly

3. I have a sales tool that shows I am looking to the future.

4. I have a GREAT reason to contact old customers when HD delivery is much more commom place that could lead to addition sales and leads.

Con's

1. Cost- if you are not looking for new equipment this a very large overhead cost.

2. Delivery options are at almost zero (although it is starting to happen)


Any views or information that is expressed here will help those trying to decide what to do make good choices is all :)


Mike

[Mathew]

1. The learning curve of shooting with an HD Cam is better early than when everyone already is doing it.

4. I have a GREAT reason to contact old customers when HD delivery is much more commom place that could lead to addition sales and leads.


These two I'm just not buying into. Any new camera requires has a learning curve. The only learning curve with HD is in the difficulty in staying in focus especially in low light. However that's a limitation of the camera and not the user. With future camera revisions I assume we'll have better low light sensitivty and more accurate focusing controls.

Regarding number 4, I've talked to quite a few "old pros" in the field and hardly any talk about previous clients wanting their VHS weddings dumped to DVD. Not to say it won't happen but I expect it to be more generational ie their kids having it done. I don't see DVD going anywhere anytime soon and I think the format will be compatible on future 'HD' formats for years to come. Any profits you're talking about won't happen for years to come and even then do you really want to fool with someone's wedding video that you shot ten years ago?

[Mike Downey]

My experience has been that the learning curve is a little different than just new cameras. HDV Cameras are different beasts and it is not as easy to go from an VX2100 to a Z1 as it is to go from a XL1 to a VX2100.

As I talk with the broadcast folks They seem to agree with this.

I can only attest to what I have done here but I contacted all of my VHS customers and only about 10% of then did NOT want it on DVD.

I shoot and edit in HD so the project is already done. I save the project to a REV drive and save it away. So when the time comes All I have to do is create the file needed for the HD delivery and deliver it.

I view it as a great opportunity to contact old clients and make a little more money as well as getting new leads! :)


Now do I think that everyone should jump now if they can't afford it? NOPE! But I do feel it should be planned for in the near future :)


Mike



Mike

[Maureen]

The question for me isn't HD, but which HD. HDV or the panny now or wait and see if there are better options (red, anyone). As much as I was convinced to buy the Panasonic, I am about to pick up a Sony Z1U so right now it is about getting the best price I can. Dave Williams really impressed me with how well that thing shoots in low light, but I am a bit squeamish about editing on FCP in HDV.

[vegas06]

I shoot and edit in HD so the project is already done. I save the project to a REV drive and save it away. So when the time comes All I have to do is create the file needed for the HD delivery and deliver it.

Mike
Mike a bit off topic, how do you like using your REV drives?
I'm always looking for better ways to archive, and the REV disks seemed like a decent option, as storing hard drives takes up a lot of space, and you can't store a completed project with video on (1) DVD disc.

[Mike Downey]

I have to tell ya I really like it. It is a nice size for storing full projects and at a cost of around $35 it is a good deal.

The other noce thing about it is that you can drop them, kick them, freeze them, or cook them and they still work... it is a pretty cool technology and it keeps projects as safe as they can be! :)


Mike

[ppatton]

I have to tell ya I really like it. It is a nice size for storing full projects and at a cost of around $35 it is a good deal.

The other noce thing about it is that you can drop them, kick them, freeze them, or cook them and they still work... it is a pretty cool technology and it keeps projects as safe as they can be! :)


Mike

where are you finding the disks for $35

paul

[MediaConcepts]

I do not want this to turn into an arguement at all but there are many folks trying to decide what to do in the very near future.

What are the Pro's and Con's about going HD today.

Please keep this as factual as possible and if you disagree with somebody that is ok... just be respectful :)


Mike

Hi Mike,

First of all you shouldn't have to start your thread by saying you don't want to start an argurment. The whole HD subject is one of the most important and least understood subjects out there. I've been following the progress of HD/HDV for over a year and still can't make up my mind.

In fact, yesterday I was ready to drive to my favorite pro video store to buy two Sony Z1 camcorders but the sales guy talked me out of it. (They sell Sony, JVC & Panasonic). We had a long talk about the various camcorders and he really likes the Panasonic HVX200 as do I. The reason why I wanted to buy the Z1 is because I saw wedding footage from a friend's Sony FX1. It was beautiful. I wouldn't have believed it good be so good without seeing it with my own eyes.

Two weeks ago I was ready to buy the JVC HD100 because it's a shoulder mount, has a real lens, takes pro batteries and I can mount my two wireless receivers to the camera just like I do with my Sony390.

What I'm trying to say is, each camera has it's pros and cons. The Sony has a great reputation, has sold lots of the Z1 & FX1, but the camera shoots only 1080i.

The JVC is bigger, shall I say more professional? But it only shoots in 720p and JVC's reputation over the years hasn't been too great.

This brings us to the Panasonic HVX200. In my opinion the best camera. It shoots in real HD not HDV. It also shoots in DVCPRO 50 with a 4.2.2 color space - great for keying. But, (why is there always a but?) it uses those damn P2 cards or you have to buy a hard drive recorder and attach it to the camera to record more that 16 minutes of HD.

How you do hand hold this monster with a hard drive, an anton bauer battery and a light on it?

So this is where I at now. Still undecided. I'm renting two JVC HD100's for a wedding later this month so that will be helpful.

It's not an easy decision but I think we all should be shooting HD sooner and not later. It doesn't matter that the client can't watch it now, give them as SD DVD now and sell them a HD DVD when they buy a HD DVD player in a year or two. I compare this to the days of color TV. (I'm that old.) Once you got a color TV you hated to watch "old fashioned" b&w programs on it. HD is going to be the same.

Here's a link to a great article about the Panny camera. http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/HVX200/

Joe

[Dave Williams]

Dave Williams really impressed me with how well that thing shoots in low light.

That was supposed to be our little secret, Maureen. ;)

[Billy]

For me, Media Concepts hit the nail on the head. I'm underwhelmed by Sony's offerings in HDV. The XD cam is sorta interesting but I don't know enough about it. If the Panny cam could record longer I would definitely go in that direction. The Grass Valley cams look interesting too.

We still have about another year or 2 here in this area before we'll be buying into HD. The only thing I'm pretty sure of is that it won't be HDV.

[Mike Downey]

where are you finding the disks for $35

paul


I spoke to soon! I do not think they are out yet. I was told by the Rep that they would be around the $35.00 range but we will have to wait and see.

I can't find them anywhere. I will update as soon as I can :)


Mike

[Dee Boz]

For me, Media Concepts hit the nail on the head. I'm underwhelmed by Sony's offerings in HDV. The XD cam is sorta interesting but I don't know enough about it. If the Panny cam could record longer I would definitely go in that direction. The Grass Valley cams look interesting too.

We still have about another year or 2 here in this area before we'll be buying into HD. The only thing I'm pretty sure of is that it won't be HDV.

Interesting.

How much have you shot with these cams? :sodapopcorn: :sodapopcorn:

[Mike Downey]

Hi Mike,

First of all you shouldn't have to start your thread by saying you don't want to start an argurment. The whole HD subject is one of the most important and least understood subjects out there. I've been following the progress of HD/HDV for over a year and still can't make up my mind.



I agree, but people get tired of hearing it and it makes some testy :)



This brings us to the Panasonic HVX200. In my opinion the best camera. It shoots in real HD not HDV. It also shoots in DVCPRO 50 with a 4.2.2 color space - great for keying. But, (why is there always a but?) it uses those damn P2 cards or you have to buy a hard drive recorder and attach it to the camera to record more that 16 minutes of HD.



This really irks me. If they had cards that would capture 3 hours they would cost 5 times what the camera does!

I work with these cameras all of the time on the editing end as that the TV stations I train are using them.

The work flow is nice, Canopus Edius reads, edits, and writes back in the native format so it is a very fast work flow.


Mike

[Maureen]

In Edius, can you put the 1080i Sony footage right next to the 720p Panny footage? How is it output? As far as I know, this cannot be done in Final Cut, but I was thinking of having a Sony (low light) just for receptions and editing on its own timeline. It would be bummer not to be able to mix the two.

[Dee Boz]

In Edius, can you put the 1080i Sony footage right next to the 720p Panny footage? How is it output? As far as I know, this cannot be done in Final Cut, but I was thinking of having a Sony (low light) just for receptions and editing on its own timeline. It would be bummer not to be able to mix the two.


You would have to render but you can do it.

[Mike Downey]

In Edius, can you put the 1080i Sony footage right next to the 720p Panny footage? How is it output? As far as I know, this cannot be done in Final Cut, but I was thinking of having a Sony (low light) just for receptions and editing on its own timeline. It would be bummer not to be able to mix the two.


Actually, this is one Canopus's greatest strengths! Whatever you picked as your project settings is what you will see played back.

If you picked 1080i then all of the footage will come out 1080i.

I will even take you a bit further... I had a guy from Harris come to me at NAB and asked me about this very subject.

I had some footage from a Panny in a card reader and I had other footage on the HD.

He asked me to place a clip from the reader (And keep it on the reader) on the timeline and then place an different format from the harddrive bext to it.

I placed the two clips and played it through. He even made me do it twice so he could watch the reader to make sure I wasn't cheating. :)

Then he made me place a transition between the two and play it back.

I did. Then he made me place another clip from the reader on top and place a PiP on it.

I played it back.

Now... all of this was in realtime and playing back to a HD Monitor.

Needless to say he was just a little impressed! :)


Mike

[Dee Boz]

I agree, but people get tired of hearing it and it makes some testy :)

Good!

This is one of the reasons I liked VU.


Mathew you are a no good..:jumpgrab:

:icon_biggrin:

[RatVega]

HD is so overhyped that it currently includes radio, water, and I think shaving soap... it's the buzzword of the decade.

"HD is the future" - all the big kids are doing it and everyone is getting a TV for it.

"HD is IN the future" - There isn't a standardized, widespread distribution system for event /wedding videographers. There are ways, I use several of them, but in the main you can't deliver the stuff.

We will all be doing some variant of HD within a couple of years, so there isn't a decent good/bad arguement, only a timing arguement where everyone is right and wrong.

My Words of Caution to those considering the plunge:

Format: It's all beautiful. HDV is gorgeous, "real" HD is even more gorgeous. In reality, anything over 720x480 is HD so there's a huge area for misrepresentation and error. People are working with everything from 800x600 to 4520x2540. Make sure you know what you're getting into.

Cameras: (pretty much) Everyone has a camera, and everyone will have a better one soon. This is a fast-moving environment without a lot of conventions, so early adoption could mean either early success or getting burned by rapid obsolescense depending on choices and usage.

Support systems: This is a much more important area than you're probably used to; the "standard" HD formats can involve a complex (and expensive) storage and editing systems. One size probably doesn't fit all. Your current system may be able to cut some HDV (depending on who's HDV you're shooting), but this isn't like SD - going a step further may mean a totally different editing system. And because the images are much larger, fast disk arrays, very fast processors, killer video boards, etc. are the rule of the day.

Client expectation: Virtually no one knows what HD really is; the vast majority class it with "better sex" - if everyone's talking about it, it must be something I want. Most potential clients don't even want to know what it is or why it's better, they just want it and hopefully it costs about the same as the "old fashioned" stuff...

It goes on and on... The point is, make sure you're reacting to a tangible demand (not just "hype pressure") before you invest. The best time to get in is when you can make money at it. If you're shooting in HD and not delivering HD, you probably spent too much for gear that may be obsolete when you can deliver HD.

Just my 2¢...

[chriswatson]

Hey Joel,

I went through the same process. I finally went wiith the Sonys because of their long track record in quality and because the FX 1 provided the best bang for the buck. Now if they offered 720P or 1080P I'd be over the moon about it. At the end of the day, even my dinky HC-1 blows SD cams out of the water in their native resolutions so no matter what you get, it's going to be miles ahead of what you're shooting with today.

I'm really curious about the HD100. Especially the 24P in 720P resolution. I can only imagine how awesome it looks.

Chris Watson
Watson Videography
www.dallasweddingfilms.com

Hi Mike,

First of all you shouldn't have to start your thread by saying you don't want to start an argurment. The whole HD subject is one of the most important and least understood subjects out there. I've been following the progress of HD/HDV for over a year and still can't make up my mind.

In fact, yesterday I was ready to drive to my favorite pro video store to buy two Sony Z1 camcorders but the sales guy talked me out of it. (They sell Sony, JVC & Panasonic). We had a long talk about the various camcorders and he really likes the Panasonic HVX200 as do I. The reason why I wanted to buy the Z1 is because I saw wedding footage from a friend's Sony FX1. It was beautiful. I wouldn't have believed it good be so good without seeing it with my own eyes.

Two weeks ago I was ready to buy the JVC HD100 because it's a shoulder mount, has a real lens, takes pro batteries and I can mount my two wireless receivers to the camera just like I do with my Sony390.

What I'm trying to say is, each camera has it's pros and cons. The Sony has a great reputation, has sold lots of the Z1 & FX1, but the camera shoots only 1080i.

The JVC is bigger, shall I say more professional? But it only shoots in 720p and JVC's reputation over the years hasn't been too great.

This brings us to the Panasonic HVX200. In my opinion the best camera. It shoots in real HD not HDV. It also shoots in DVCPRO 50 with a 4.2.2 color space - great for keying. But, (why is there always a but?) it uses those damn P2 cards or you have to buy a hard drive recorder and attach it to the camera to record more that 16 minutes of HD.

How you do hand hold this monster with a hard drive, an anton bauer battery and a light on it?

So this is where I at now. Still undecided. I'm renting two JVC HD100's for a wedding later this month so that will be helpful.

It's not an easy decision but I think we all should be shooting HD sooner and not later. It doesn't matter that the client can't watch it now, give them as SD DVD now and sell them a HD DVD when they buy a HD DVD player in a year or two. I compare this to the days of color TV. (I'm that old.) Once you got a color TV you hated to watch "old fashioned" b&w programs on it. HD is going to be the same.

Here's a link to a great article about the Panny camera. http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/HVX200/

Joe

[Dee Boz]

HD is so overhyped that it currently includes radio, water, and I think shaving soap... it's the buzzword of the decade.

"HD is the future" - all the big kids are doing it and everyone is getting a TV for it.

"HD is IN the future" - There isn't a standardized, widespread distribution system for event /wedding videographers. There are ways, I use several of them, but in the main you can't deliver the stuff.

We will all be doing some variant of HD within a couple of years, so there isn't a decent good/bad arguement, only a timing arguement where everyone is right and wrong.

My Words of Caution to those considering the plunge:

Format: It's all beautiful. HDV is gorgeous, "real" HD is even more gorgeous. In reality, anything over 720x480 is HD so there's a huge area for misrepresentation and error. People are working with everything from 800x600 to 4520x2540. Make sure you know what you're getting into.

Cameras: (pretty much) Everyone has a camera, and everyone will have a better one soon. This is a fast-moving environment without a lot of conventions, so early adoption could mean either early success or getting burned by rapid obsolescense depending on choices and usage.

Support systems: This is a much more important area than you're probably used to; the "standard" HD formats can involve a complex (and expensive) storage and editing systems. One size probably doesn't fit all. Your current system may be able to cut some HDV (depending on who's HDV you're shooting), but this isn't like SD - going a step further may mean a totally different editing system. And because the images are much larger, fast disk arrays, very fast processors, killer video boards, etc. are the rule of the day.

Client expectation: Virtually no one knows what HD really is; the vast majority class it with "better sex" - if everyone's talking about it, it must be something I want. Most potential clients don't even want to know what it is or why it's better, they just want it and hopefully it costs about the same as the "old fashioned" stuff...

It goes on and on... The point is, make sure you're reacting to a tangible demand (not just "hype pressure") before you invest. The best time to get in is when you can make money at it. If you're shooting in HD and not delivering HD, you probably spent too much for gear that may be obsolete when you can deliver HD.

Just my 2¢...


More like 63 cents. :icon_biggrin:

[Bonsai]

HD is so overhyped that it currently includes radio, water, and I think shaving soap... it's the buzzword of the decade.


There you have it, in a nut shell. (When I heard a local radio station say you could listen to then in high def, I thought it was some joke they were playing for an advertising campaign).

My mom always said "you always want what you can't have..." So let's wait and see if everybody still wants high def once it's widely available to the masses. I'm patient... I can wait.

[Maureen]

Actually what can't wait is 16x9. The new TV's are all that way. I figure that a young couple getting married and combining households are probably gonna have at least 1 newer 16x9 TV. Now here is my poor people argument. Years ago, when my husband was just starting out in his business he had an accident and needed me to come with him and help him. He goes into other people's houses for a living and because he was the low man on the totem pole he got a lot of scud work so we were spending a lot of time in Compton and Watts and San Bernadino. The thing that surprised me is that these were people who couldn't afford furniture, the roof would be falling in, there might not even be carpeting, but they all had really big screen TV's. We didn't have one, we still had the one TV that I had been given by my family for my 21st birthday (a long time before). I think that maybe the middle income people wait, but the people in the lowest and highest income brackets are gonna have the newest best and brightest in home entertainment. I saw a young couple in the home store the other day being very cosey and holding hands, they were spending all their time shopping the 52 inch DLP's. I want to create a product that is gonna hold up to a showing on that technology.

Ask me some other time about the homes in Mexico that didn't have running water, flush toilets, or heating, but did have satellite TV.

[Billy]

Ask me some other time about the homes in Mexico that didn't have running water, flush toilets, or heating, but did have satellite TV.
I just had to comment on this. In a lot of those places there is no infrastructure for utilities. But people want to know what the hell is going on around them and in the world.

After Katrina there was absolutely no communications with anyone. We had no idea exactly what had happened and that was the one thing that bothered me the most. Luckily I was with the only cell phone provider in this area that didn't go down, so my sister in SLC called me and started filling me in on what was going on. It was weird talking to someone over 1000 miles away so I could find out what was going on across town.

[videochicke]

PRO for HD--when your husband comes along as a second shooter is frames things way too loose, I could have used just a portion of the shot and it would have looked good.

Con for HD--I don't like the jutter when objects in the frame move from side to side. Another con is the expense. Not just new cameras, but my current computer would gag.

[Dave Williams]

Con for HD--I don't like the jutter when objects in the frame move from side to side.

I don't see that at all in the downconverted footage. And it's barely noticeable in HD.

[Mike Downey]

Not just new cameras, but my current computer would gag.


That is a big consideration. I get people asking me all of the time what they should upgrade to. They do not want to do HD at the moment so they don't need a huge machine.

I always disagree with them because they may have a camera go out and find themselves buying an HD camera and then they are stuck.

If the time comes for a new computer buy for the future. I don't see a need to buy a new computer just for HD at this time but if you are in the market for one I would absolutely make sure I would buy one that is ready. :)


Mike

[RatVega]

Actually what can't wait is 16x9. The new TV's are all that way. I figure that a young couple getting married and combining households are probably gonna have at least 1 newer 16x9 TV. Now here is my poor people argument. Years ago, when my husband was just starting out in his business he had an accident and needed me to come with him and help him. He goes into other people's houses for a living and because he was the low man on the totem pole he got a lot of scud work so we were spending a lot of time in Compton and Watts and San Bernadino. The thing that surprised me is that these were people who couldn't afford furniture, the roof would be falling in, there might not even be carpeting, but they all had really big screen TV's. We didn't have one, we still had the one TV that I had been given by my family for my 21st birthday (a long time before). I think that maybe the middle income people wait, but the people in the lowest and highest income brackets are gonna have the newest best and brightest in home entertainment. I saw a young couple in the home store the other day being very cosey and holding hands, they were spending all their time shopping the 52 inch DLP's. I want to create a product that is gonna hold up to a showing on that technology.

I think you may have your cause and effect mixed up here...

The majority of US homes still have SD, 4:3 sets. What will change this is the "digital mandate" that was supposed to kick in this year but probably won't for a year or two since the politicos who will make it happen really don't want to p*ss off the majority of their constituants who will be forced to scrap their analog (SD, 4:3) sets and buy a new digital one just to see the news. When this actully happens, you can bet that pretty much all the manufacturers will have the latest and greatest features (HD-capable, widescreen, etc.) built into their cheap models.

People want a big picture more than they specifically want "widescreen". Wide just comes with the newer, bigger sets. We've never had a request for a widescreen SD DVD. I do a lot of wide HD for special delivery, but there's still a problem with DVD-like delivery.

Since the 16:9 format is part of most HD, it'll come with the territory. From that point, maybe 16:9 SD will finally see some demand. If I hade to choose to day I'd either stick to 4:3 or do both. A letterboxed movie on an already too small TV tends to irritate...