Buy dv tapes in UK

Discussion in 'Video Cameras' started by Thur, Feb 19, 2004.

  1. Thur

    Jerry. Guest

    Why is it that some people on this group think that expanding one knowledge
    is such a dirty thing to do, perhaps it's because they themselves can't
    grasp the theory etc. behind DV and wish other to stay as ignorant as they
    are.....

    <snip more crap from Mr Morgan>
     
    Jerry., Feb 24, 2004
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Thur

    SjT Guest

    I don't need to read any webpages Jerry, i'm discussing miniDV,
    nothing else, i claimed that it is possible to have recordings made
    using miniDV equipment to be broadcast on national TV.

    And you denied it.

    I never claimed that it was broadcast direct from a miniDV tape as you
    are now suggesting as we spent a week or so discussing what
    conversions it goes through.

    I'm not arguing about who's right and who's wrong i just think you
    shouldn't write off miniDV as easily as those who use other formats
    do.
     
    SjT, Feb 25, 2004
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Thur

    SjT Guest

    Yeah, sure i am, i don't feel the need to boast about what i have
    done/been involved with as i feel it has no bearings on my beleif.
    I said that miniDV footage can be broadcast, i never said it was a
    broadcast format and you know this.
    It's funny how i've resorted from personal comments about you isn't
    it? Makes me think someones getting irrate.

    Let me clear this up once and for all, just tell me which of these
    statements you beleive to be true, no if's or but's just true or
    false:

    1. It is possible to record something on a miniDV tape and have it
    broadcast on national TV.

    2. Digital recordings are better than Analogue.

    3. The final output (That which appears in our homes) of digitally
    broadcast TV (Such as the mpeg streams from sky digital/freeview etc)
    is of less quality than a native miniDV format recording.

    4. The final output (That which appears in our homes) of digitally
    broadcast TV (Such as the mpeg streams from sky digital/freeview etc)
    is of less quality than a native 'pro' digital format recording.

    5. There would be a very large noticeable difference in quality
    between broadcast mpeg streams that have been converted from MiniDV/DV
    than that which has been converted from other 'Pro' formats.

    6. There would be a very minor difference in quality between broadcast
    mpeg streams that have been converted from MiniDV/DV than that which
    has been converted from other 'Pro' formats that most viewers would
    not notice.

    7. Malcolm's single-handedly keeping tape manufacturers in business ;)
     
    SjT, Feb 25, 2004
    #43
  4. Thur

    Jerry. Guest

    Yes you do, if you did you would know that miniDV is not a broadcast format
    and the reasons why it is not. QED.
    No I didn't you total fuckwit, I said that miniDV is NOT A BROADCAST FORMAT,
    if you don't know what is mean by that phrase then you have no bloody righ
    in tryingf to agrue the sodding toss about this

    Go and find out what is meant by the phrase BROADCAST FORMAT FFS.
    If you say it is a broadcast format that is EXACTLY what you are suggesting.
    So you admit that I am correct and you have been talking total BS.
     
    Jerry., Feb 25, 2004
    #44
  5. Your original posts implied to me that you could just bung a DV tape
    in any old playback device and feed it down the line to the
    transmitter. Jerry said the output would have to be 'legalised' first.
    He was right. Maybe we both read something into your post that you
    didn't intend.
    I remember having to remind you of that when you appeared to be
    suggesting otherwise. Maybe I got hold of the wrong end of the stick
    but I could have sworn it was Jerry who argued that 'conversions' were
    required and it was you who took some persuading of that. Nice to see
    that he has 'converted' you too to his ideas. :)
    Seems a bit silly to continue an argument now that everyone's views
    are so closely aligned. Non-broadcast formats are broadcast. It cannot
    be denied and I don't think Jerry argues otherwise. Doesn't help in
    the quality stakes but that's the way this country is now. Everywhere
    you look, nothing works properly any more.
     
    Malcolm Knight, Feb 25, 2004
    #45
  6. If we're talking formats that are broadcast, how's about satellite
    phones? Hardly "broadcast quality" - some of the best examples of
    JPEG/MPEG compression ever seen, I guess, but still happily broadcast on
    occasions. I gather than when the "ghost ships" arrived in the NE, the
    BBC even went as far as broadcasting from the camera in a mobile phone
    ("to show it could be done").
     
    David Pearson, Feb 25, 2004
    #46
  7. Thur

    Jerry. Guest

    And all those devices come under the heading of special cases, in other
    words, if they were not used there would be no other way of obtaining (just
    about) moving images from the given location. All set out in plain English
    in the pdf document I cited.
     
    Jerry., Feb 25, 2004
    #47
  8. Thur

    SjT Guest

    I never once claimed it was a broadcast format, i said that you can
    record using miniDV and have it broadcast, two totally different
    things.
    Jaysus you get annoyed easily, you bought the Broadcast format crap
    up, i never claimed that miniDV was a broadcast format, all i've been
    saying is that footage from miniDV can be broadcast.
    Why be such a kid about this? you're swearing and getting so irrate
    and we're discussing video formats it's ridiculous.

    If i was in the wrong i would hold my hands up and say so, it's no
    skin of my nose.
     
    SjT, Feb 26, 2004
    #48
  9. Thur

    SjT Guest

    Look i've worked with miniDV conversion to mpeg broadcast i know they
    require a conversion i never said this was anything but the case, the
    same as digi-beta needs to be converted.

    The moment i joined this argument was when someone made the 'I get fed
    up when people are led to beleive they can have their movies broadcast
    on tv using minidv cams' and i made the point that you can, and it's
    escalated due to Jerroogle getting over-excited as usual.

    If you're bothered which i am sure you are not, just check the thread
    history and you will see that i have said the same thing from the very
    start.
    You both certainly got the wrong end of the stick if you really
    thought i didn't realise there were conversions to be made.
    Jerry did deny it at the beginning, he said that the only show on TV
    that broadcasts MiniDV footage was 'You've been framed' I then
    provided links to many shows that uses it as well as films that have
    been broadcast on uk TV.

    At which point he began talking about specs and crap like that, and i
    explained that when it's broadcast it's all the same format, i likened
    it to a cutting machine chopping the original footage, and that
    whether DV is as good as any of the pro formats it all goes through
    the cutter and ends up as less format i.e. mpeg2 (for sky digital
    etc).

    He's done a massive U-Turn and if i am the only one who can see this
    then i'm very surprised, but that's life. I'm just surprised to see
    him get so upset it's not a life/death issue is it?
     
    SjT, Feb 26, 2004
    #49
  10. Thur

    Tony Morgan Guest

    Hasn't the penny dropped yet? Jerry is nothing more than a foot-stomping
    little boy who, by taking things completely out of context, massages his
    ego by going into another of his rages.

    Next thing he'll be doing is inventing things that you have said simply
    to sustain his tantrums..
    Because he's an infantile idiot who simply enjoys confrontation. God
    knows what he was like as a child.
    What's new? Haven't you noticed how many threads have been tail-ended by
    Jerry - clearly because so many folk make the wise choice and simply
    kill-file him. Problem is he'll simple change his nick/addy (as he has
    often done in the past) to get around it - which sort of says it all.
    Just ignore the prat. He's clearly one of those people who's ego thrives
    on conflict
    --
    Tony Morgan
    "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice,
    there is." - Yogi Berra
    http://www.camcord.info
    http://www.rhylonline.com
     
    Tony Morgan, Feb 26, 2004
    #50
  11. Thur

    Tony Morgan Guest

    At which point he began talking about specs and crap like that, and i
    explained that when it's broadcast it's all the same format, i likened
    it to a cutting machine chopping the original footage, and that whether
    DV is as good as any of the pro formats it all goes through the cutter
    and ends up as less format i.e. mpeg2 (for sky digital etc).

    He's done a massive U-Turn[/QUOTE]

    Of course he will do so. That's his style - but in doing so he'll start
    quoting you out of context and/or inventing things that you have said
    (or at least mis-quoting you - as in this particular instance).
    You're not. A lot of folk have simply kill-filed him. Be prepared though
    for him changing his nick/addy (again) when he's realised that an
    appreciable number of people have done so.
    Don't be. He's one of these sad people who's ego is sustained by
    conflict which he endeavours to generate and sustain.
    To Jerry's ego it is.
    --
    Tony Morgan
    "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice,
    there is." - Yogi Berra
    http://www.camcord.info
    http://www.rhylonline.com
     
    Tony Morgan, Feb 26, 2004
    #51
  12. Thur

    SjT Guest

    Good advice which i shall take on this particular thread.
     
    SjT, Feb 26, 2004
    #52
  13. I had really decided not to get any further involved in this thread
    but..........

    VJs are now a permanent post in broadcasting (starting at around 28K per annum),
    they research, shoot on miniDV (150/170s), script, edit (Final Cut Pro) and,
    depending on the newsroom, feed direct to transmission with any tweaking being
    done automatically.

    Discuss the meaning of special cases :)

    Stuart

    www.mckears.com
     
    Stuart McKears, Feb 26, 2004
    #53
  14. I don't actually see much of a U turn by Jerry but as you rightly
    said, was it something worth following that closely? And Jerry sure
    went right over the top at the end.

    BTW, how is it that you can call everyone names and not attract
    criticism from you know who? Baron Von Jerry may have a certain ring
    about it but the others don't seem to have much appeal. Surely you
    aren't associating all of us with the Gestapo? :)
     
    Malcolm Knight, Feb 26, 2004
    #54
  15. Thur

    Jerry. Guest

     
    Jerry., Feb 26, 2004
    #55
  16. Thur

    Jerry. Guest

    Not when someone is calling you a liar, I bet you would soon get annoyed if
    someone was to first twist what you said and then call you a liar....
    The only 'Gestapo' in this group are the ignorant idiots who, when proved
    wrong, twist, lie, and troll those who know more than they (and will
    probably ever) know.
     
    Jerry., Feb 26, 2004
    #56
  17. liar....

    Are you reminding me of Patricia's comments? Yes I did on one level
    find her twisting and lying annoying but I was consoled by the fact
    she could not substantiate her claim that I had made (technical)
    mistakes for which I should apologise. Neither, by the standards of
    newsgroup abuse, does calling someone Patricia amount to much. The
    more she pushed her single complaint the more she had to exaggerate
    and eventually lie. Wouldn't be surprised if the so called holiday was
    just an excuse to duck out of a lost argument.

    After she resorted to calling us both 'suckers' (apparently that isn't
    abuse) I likened her to candy floss and the only four letters I might
    put before the word wit is 'half'. :) Your version does however sum
    up the situation admirably on occasions but it's not one I'd be likely
    to use myself.
    I suspect many of us can work out for ourselves who these people are
    and maybe it would be best to leave it at that - but sometimes the
    temptation to highlight their sins proves irresistable. If it's any
    consolation I didn't think you put a foot wrong technically and the
    gradually drifting goalposts were none of your doing.
     
    Malcolm Knight, Feb 26, 2004
    #57
  18. Thur

    Thur Guest

    Thanks, I bought Sonys at just less than 3 pounds plus points from
    Boots.
    And thanks to all for the advice.
    T.
     
    Thur, Feb 27, 2004
    #58
    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.