Another nail in the coffin to HDV

Discussion in 'Professional Video Production' started by Kill Bill, May 10, 2007.

  1. Kill Bill

    Kill Bill Guest

    Well this is official.. Canon has introduced their first AVCHD camcorder.

    http://www.usa.canon.com/html/templatedata/pressrelease/20070507_hr10.html

    I'm not a big fan of straight to DVD, however, the DVDs this creates are
    AVCHD dics, and not regular DVDs. It's more of a storage medium
    actually. But either way HDD, flash, or DVD.

    But either way.. This makes 3 major brands now supporting AVCHD. Hello
    Apple, Avid, and Adobe.. The writing is on the walls.. They need to
    start supporting AVCHD now!

    -bill
     
    Kill Bill, May 10, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Kill Bill

    ushere Guest

    why, out of curiosity?

    it's by far from being a professional format.

    leslie
     
    ushere, May 11, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Kill Bill

    Ken Maltby Guest

    Both of these Newsgroups begin with rec.video
    not all video needs to be "professional" to be valid,
    useful, enjoyable, worth while, to those of us with
    ""only"" a recreational interest in video.

    Luck;
    Ken
     
    Ken Maltby, May 11, 2007
    #3
  4. Kill Bill

    Bill Fright Guest

    Sure that's true. But the point is that if you buy into a tinker toy
    format why would you expect the world to support it.

    It cracks me up when I see all these "HD" camcorders that shoot through
    wee glass and use wee sized imaging chips. This AVCHD is just another
    example of humor.
     
    Bill Fright, May 11, 2007
    #4
  5. Kill Bill

    mmaker Guest

    But Avid pretty much only care about the pro market, and Premiere and
    Final Cut lean that way too. So why would they worry about making
    systems for editing Joe Sixpack's home video?

    Personally the only AVCHD footage I've seen looked awful on a
    1920x1080 display. I've no idea whether that was because it was a tiny
    camera with a cheap lens, or whether it's a limitation of the format.

    Mark
     
    mmaker, May 11, 2007
    #5
  6. Kill Bill

    Kill Bill Guest

    Well.. lets weight the options here.

    On one hand we have Panasonic.. A reputable camera company, loved by
    many aspiring film makers, as well as professionals in the industry.
    They have their AG-HSC1U PROLINE Camcorder, listed underneath their pro
    camcorder line of products.. And they are touting it as a pro camera on
    their website, as well as a showing to Professionals a NAB last month..

    On the other hand, we have joe blow newsgroup poster. Who has no
    experience making cameras, and no worth wild achievements that are notable.

    Humm.. Let me think about this..

    -bill
     
    Kill Bill, May 11, 2007
    #6
  7. Kill Bill

    ushere Guest

    wasn't intended to be a put-down - simply questioning the op's thought that:

    why? there's a plethora of relatively cheap software out there that will
    handle avchd,
    if someone is going to invest in any of those programs (i use vegas
    which DOES support avchd), then why would they spend $500+ on a program
    and then use a crappy camera. and yes, i did say crappy camera because
    at the moment, it looks like all the avchd cameras are built like
    fisher-price toys, with awful lens', and and little thought as to sound,
    etc.,

    leslie.
     
    ushere, May 12, 2007
    #7
  8. This is why we have Final Cut Express HD. This is probably where we
    can expect to get the support later this year when an upgrade comes
    out.

    It is the consumer version of FCP.
    The problem with the format is the low bandwidth and compression,
    and you should be able to spot these problems apart from the camera
    probs.
     
    Povl H. Pedersen, May 12, 2007
    #8
  9. Kill Bill

    nappy Guest

    Agreed. Seems off-topic here to discuss these toys.
     
    nappy, May 12, 2007
    #9
  10. Kill Bill

    Spex Guest

    LOL.

    Harsh..

    But Fair...
     
    Spex, May 13, 2007
    #10
  11. Kill Bill

    ushere Guest

    i didn't mean it to sound harsh - i'm all for the spread of home-grown
    program making - as with filmakers - everyone has to start off somewhere
    and learn their skills. and there's no point investing money in what
    might only be a passing fad. however, if it's more than a fad, then
    you'll invest relatively to the possibility of earning an income. of
    course, there are some who must have a bigger one than their neighbours.
    well, i'm sure that sony, panasonic will just love your attitude, and
    your credit card, but boasting here isn't going to impress anyone...

    ..... however, there's an ever increasing number of people (i also teach,
    high-school, uni,and adults, along with being a full time video
    producer) who believe that.

    a. the more expensive the tool, the better the product. in general,
    we're in the digital age, so you can produce pretty good looking
    material with a achvd camera and, say, magix movie edit. it won't
    necessarily be broadcast standard, but if it's good enough, it will be
    broadcasterble.

    b. that 'cracked / pirated' software should do what the amateur wants.
    professionals who buy 'serious' nle software buy it because it does what
    they need. if i want to edit mpeg2, i don't use avid, vegas, ppro, i use
    a great, affordable program called womble, which unlike most of the
    former software, offers smart rendering. if you don't know what 'smart
    rendering' is, then magix and womble are your best tools.

    c. any professional will know that the quality of any mpeg acquisition
    format is severely compromised by it's initial compression

    the world, or rather these ng's are divided between those who make a
    living out of producing video (and whose input in these forums is of
    genuine help to both other pros and aspiring video makers), those
    seeking to learn the art of video production (for whatever purpose), and
    ask sensible, unanswered questions (as opposed to those that have
    already been done to death and would be easily answerable by a simple
    search of the forums), the technophiles, who will give pretty serious
    technical answers that, in general, mean little to most readers, but
    sure as hell impress me - not that as a working producer they mean
    anything tangible either, and finally, those that either complain about
    soft / hardware not doing what THEY want, or need to reinforce their
    belief in their investment in equipment / software is the best. just
    look at the mac / pc debate.

    i think it's fair to ask about achvd, but not to demand professionals to
    pay attention to it's lack of 'acceptance', or it's shortcomings. the
    old adage hold true - you get what you pay for.

    as you might gather, i'm having a lazy afternoon ;-}

    leslie
     
    ushere, May 13, 2007
    #11
  12. Kill Bill

    Ken Maltby Guest

    Again your assumption that the only valid approach is towards
    a professional position. Not everyone working with video is
    getting paid to, or working towards that as a goal.
    Not all video need be produced for broadcast. Are you saying
    it would be inaccurate to believe "you get what you pay for" now?
    "the more expensive the tool, the better the product"
    Now amateurs are thieves as well?
    I would suggest Ulead's offerings as well. But you should take
    a closer look at the current offerings such as Avid Liquid, Vegas,
    and even the die-hard Adobe products. That is, if your budget is
    as high as your opinion for the value of being a professional.

    There are now a number of professionals that make regular
    use of HDV (MPEG2), and seem to find it acceptable.
    I find your arrogance, and insistence that the only posters
    that provide useful information are "those who make a living
    out of producing video", to be most annoying. No one has
    asked "professionals" to do anything. The OP was pointing
    out that, with the spread of the format, it is time the more
    traditional developers of editing software should include it
    in their offerings. Just as they came to include HDV.

    I may even agree that it would be appropriate for this
    format to be supported in the amateur/consumer versions
    of their products. Also, that there are technical limitations
    with the current implementation of AVCHD, that put it at
    a disadvantage compared to HDV. There was a
    disadvantage to 8mm film for home movies compared to
    16mm film, in my father's day. 8mm cameras were most
    often somewhat inferior, in many ways, to the 16mm
    cameras (Although, they were usually smaller and lighter.)
    But 8mm was a viable format for a large number of families.

    Luck;
    Ken

    P.S. Don't High Schools require an understanding of
    capitalization, anymore?
     
    Ken Maltby, May 13, 2007
    #12
  13. Kill Bill

    ushere Guest

    ah, that's what happens when i have time on my hands - i get myself into
    trouble...
    my assumption is simply that if you're doing anything you should do it
    properly, or to the best of your ability. if i'm cooking a meal (that i
    intend to share with other people, not a cold can of beans and a peanut
    butter sandwich), my aim would be to have them leave the table satisfied
    with the experience, if not wanting another invitation.

    i did not mean to imply video must be broadcastable, simply that the
    quality would be broadcastable - and by that i also mean it would hold
    up well on a large tv / lcd screen. the get what you pay for should
    have been pointed towards the acquistion, ie., the camera - and that i
    certainly stand by.
    i did not mean to imply that all amateurs are thieves, but listening to
    a large number of 'enthusiastic amateurs', i was quite shocked by how
    many were using pirated copies of software, photoshop ranking highest....
    sorry forgot ulead. my only observation is that if you want more than
    the basics, there's a relatively orderly progression in most software -
    elements, movie studio, express, etc.,
    i should have been more specific obviously. i shoot hdv, and edit it -
    but any pro will tell you that if you're looking to do more than simple
    cut to cut, you'd be better off working with cineform...
    arrogance? it's simply my pov gained from over 30+ years in the
    industry. and yes, it's generally professionals who give the clearest,
    most concise answers here - since they, in general, have much more
    experience. you don't actually have to make a living out of video to be
    professional at producing it...
    and i am not disagreeing with you. in fact, i'm surprised that software
    vendors are not rushing to fill the obvious market created by avchd,
    rather like the cart before the horse.
    the schools might, but since i'm generally sought out to lecture / teach
    / whathaveyou, i do as i like, and they've never complained - only that
    i wont work with the students more often..

    anyway, i think i'll go back to reading a manual - it's apparently much
    safer than writing here ;-)

    leslie
     
    ushere, May 13, 2007
    #13
  14. Kill Bill

    Ken Maltby Guest

    So they bought Pinnacle to acquire their share of the "pro
    market"?

    and Premiere ?Elements? Why did they come out with
    Elements?

    and Final Cut lean that way too. Except that they offer
    "Express HD" now as well. (Not to mention that Apple
    also sells Quicktime software.)

    So why would they worry about making
    There are a lot more "Joe Sixpacks" with camcorders
    than there are your typical effeminate NYC or Left Coast
    Videographers.
    It is true that the current marketing for cameras using AVCHD
    results in them offering cameras with cheaper components, there
    are exceptions and time tends to provide for upgraded offerings.

    I have no way of knowing the history of this AVCHD footage
    you saw that "looked awful". There are any number of ways to
    mess-up video, this includes operator error, as well as the more
    technical issues. AVC can provide some additional opportunities
    to either improve of degrade the video. There are also features
    that are implemented, or not, on playback. Were you looking
    at video shot at 1920x1080, or was it scaled up? What are
    you comparing it too? DV-50? HDV?

    While I personally wouldn't be using such a camera, I am
    sure it can provide exactly the compromise some people
    will find best meets their needs.

    Luck;
    Ken
     
    Ken Maltby, May 13, 2007
    #14
  15. Kill Bill

    mmaker Guest

    Well, I don't regard Pinnacle as Avid :).
    And there's a much bigger margin in selling $50k professional systems
    than in selling cheapo systems to Joe Sixpack. You might make a couple
    of dollars (or less) on each Sixpack system vs tens of thousands on
    one pro system.
    Shot 1920x1080 on the camera, played back on a 1920x1080 LCD TV from
    the camera. Compared to HDV from a Z1, there was a huge amount of
    color bleed and a noticeably lower resolution.

    I'm not sure what the TV does with interlaced footage, but it does a
    good simulation of interlace flicker when I feed interlaced video with
    thin horizontal lines into it :).

    Mark
     
    mmaker, May 14, 2007
    #15
  16. Kill Bill

    Kill Bill Guest

    name two. Vegas would not be on that list at the moment either.

    -bill
     
    Kill Bill, May 14, 2007
    #16
  17. Kill Bill

    Kill Bill Guest

    ushere wrote:

    LOL.. Claims he's not arrogant, but yet in the very next sentence is
    touting his years and years in the industry.. If the "industry" were
    exactly the same in those 30 years, that experience might count for
    something, unfortunately, much has changed in just the last 7, so all
    those years you claim don't really add up much.

    -bill
     
    Kill Bill, May 14, 2007
    #17
  18. Kill Bill

    Frank Guest


    Aside from Sony Vegas 7.0e, there's...

    * Avid Technology/Pinnacle Systems Studio Plus 11

    * Avid Technology/Pinnacle Systems Studio Ultimate 11

    * Corel Corporation/Ulead Systems DVD MovieFactory 6 Plus

    * Corel Corporation/Ulead Systems VideoStudio 11 Plus

    Also, existing users of Thomson/Grass Valley/Canopus Edius 3 for HDV
    and Edius Pro 4 can download a free program called Canopus AVCHD
    Converter that will transcode AVCHD footage to the Canopus HQ Codec so
    that it can be edited.

    And there may be others that I don't know of.

    One would expect that Adobe Systems might add AVCHD support to the
    next version of Premiere Elements. Additionally, even though they're
    not currently listed as an official AVCHD supporter, it would seem
    likely that Apple might add AVCHD support to the next version of
    iMovie.
     
    Frank, May 14, 2007
    #18
  19. Kill Bill

    nappy Guest

    Only the tools have changed. Did you actually post some concern about a
    kiddie camera and then denegrate someone who says he's got 30 years of
    experience?
     
    nappy, May 14, 2007
    #19
  20. Kill Bill

    ushere Guest

    thanks nappy.
    do i detect a resurrection of bill conduit in here? i
    think i will take kill bill's tag seriously.
     
    ushere, May 14, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.