JVC direct to hard disk

Discussion in 'Video Cameras' started by Beemer, Jan 8, 2006.

  1. Beemer

    Beemer Guest

    Anyone got a pro and con comparison on on direct to hard disk camcorder?

    Beemer
     
    Beemer, Jan 8, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Beemer

    Tony Morgan Guest

    PROS
    You won't have to buy and change miniDV tapes. A tape will cost you
    about £3 and give one hour's recording at high-quality (SP).

    Video transfer from camcorder to PC is faster.


    CONS
    The format used is lossy. This means that if you do any editing, you may
    lose quality which is cumulative (edit-by-edit).

    You'll have to do disk housekeeping to ensure that you always have
    sufficient free-space on your camcorder's hard drive. At the highest
    quality setting, you'll be able to record between 4.5 and 7 hours
    (depending on the particular model) before transferring/deleting. At
    lower quality settings you can record up to 25 hours before
    housekeeping. Currently, when comparing features/facilities,
    like-with-like with miniDV, they are about £100 more expensive.

    They are heavier and a little larger than the equivalent miniDV
    camcorder.

    AFAIK none of the current models provide analogue-in, or pass-through -
    though not all miniDV camcorders provide this facility.
     
    Tony Morgan, Jan 9, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Beemer

    Beemer Guest

    | In message <QNewf.22804$>, Beemer
    | >Anyone got a pro and con comparison on on direct to hard disk camcorder?
    | >
    | PROS
    | You won't have to buy and change miniDV tapes. A tape will cost you
    | about £3 and give one hour's recording at high-quality (SP).
    |
    | Video transfer from camcorder to PC is faster.
    |
    |
    | CONS
    | The format used is lossy. This means that if you do any editing, you may
    | lose quality which is cumulative (edit-by-edit).
    |
    | You'll have to do disk housekeeping to ensure that you always have
    | sufficient free-space on your camcorder's hard drive. At the highest
    | quality setting, you'll be able to record between 4.5 and 7 hours
    | (depending on the particular model) before transferring/deleting. At
    | lower quality settings you can record up to 25 hours before
    | housekeeping. Currently, when comparing features/facilities,
    | like-with-like with miniDV, they are about £100 more expensive.
    |
    | They are heavier and a little larger than the equivalent miniDV
    | camcorder.
    |
    | AFAIK none of the current models provide analogue-in, or pass-through -
    | though not all miniDV camcorders provide this facility.
    |
    | --
    | Tony Morgan
    | http://www.camcord.info

    Thanks.

    Beemer
     
    Beemer, Jan 9, 2006
    #3
  4. Beemer

    :::Jerry:::: Guest

    <mode=pedantic>
    Assuming that the OP is talking about consumer gear, I would hardly
    call a DV5000 docked to a Firestore HDD unit (for example) as lossy!
    </mode>
     
    :::Jerry::::, Jan 9, 2006
    #4
  5. Beemer

    Tony Morgan Guest

    <Mode=incontext : uk.rec.video.digital : rec=recreational> :)
     
    Tony Morgan, Jan 9, 2006
    #5
  6. What has recreational to do with the type of camera?

    What is Michael Schumacher up to when takes his kids out in one of his Ferraris

    What is Jamie Oliver doing when he gives a dinner party for his friends.

    etc etc.



    regards

    Stuart

    www.mckears.com
     
    Stuart McKears, Jan 9, 2006
    #6
  7. Beemer

    Tony Morgan Guest

    Not difficult (even for you Stuart).

    'Recreation' : "activities that you do for enjoyment when you are not
    working"

    or (across the pond) : "something done for pleasure or relaxation, or
    such activities generally"
     
    Tony Morgan, Jan 9, 2006
    #7
  8. So what.

    AFAICS, you trying to imply that if you get paid for some activity that you
    can't get pleasure or relaxation from the same activity when not being paid for
    it.

    Almost (actually can't think off hand of the exceptions) all the people I know
    in the creative sphere are just the same as you or I - they make films about
    their kids, their weddings, their parties, their holidays, etc, etc and they
    make them on whatever kit is available at the time.

    I, also, know people who own far more exotic kit that I've ever owned and who've
    never been paid, and never wanted to paid, to use it.

    As I said before, what has recreational to do with a type of camera?









    regards

    Stuart

    www.mckears.com
     
    Stuart McKears, Jan 9, 2006
    #8
  9. Beemer

    :::Jerry:::: Guest

    message
    Reverse snobbery, I suspect...
     
    :::Jerry::::, Jan 10, 2006
    #9
  10. Beemer

    G Hardy Guest

    I think Tony was trying to suggest that recreational users do not have high
    end kit.

    Try telling that to the two or three wedding guests we see every week with a
    huge still camera (and often no idea how to use it).

    Even if it _were_ true, I would have thought that anything that uses a lossy
    format such as DV would be non-professional (at least non-broadcast) by its
    very nature, whether it's the camera or the storage medium.

    If he _was_ intending to suggest that professionals do not get pleasure from
    unpaid work, that's plainly ridiculous. A professional videographer wouldn't
    video (for example) his own child's nativity? Or do you think he'll have an
    el cheapo camera for when he's not working?

    So you need to elaborate, Tony. Obtuse "context" references are no good if
    they don't actually mean anything.
     
    G Hardy, Jan 10, 2006
    #10
  11. Sure. He'll probably have a small consumer-grade camera for personal
    use. That Steadicam gets in the way in the delivery room :)
     
    Laurence Payne, Jan 10, 2006
    #11
  12. Beemer

    Tony Morgan Guest

    I really do think you should read the OP, then my response, and then see
    Beemer's response to my "pros and cons". His response seems to suggest
    that my interpretation of the context of his question was spot-on.

    Seems to me that the context is pretty obvious - other than to those
    who seem to get a hard-on from taking things out of context and making
    issues of anything I say.
     
    Tony Morgan, Jan 10, 2006
    #12
  13. Beemer

    :::Jerry:::: Guest

    Or something like a Sony PD170, like most of the TV 'Fly on the Wall'
    docusoap's use(d)...
     
    :::Jerry::::, Jan 10, 2006
    #13
  14. Beemer

    :::Jerry:::: Guest

    Before you make a complete plank out of yourself, consider than many
    dedicated hobbyists buy ex pro gear, I suspect that in another year
    or two we might start getting questions regarding the use of BetaSP
    gear (it wasn't so long ago that people were asking about U-matic!).

    Also, the OP could have hired a JVC pro camera and Firestore set-up,
    although you guessed correctly, you gave an incomplete answer without
    you or I knowing which set-up the OP actually meant (his reply showed
    up after I posted my reply to you).
     
    :::Jerry::::, Jan 10, 2006
    #14
  15. For the record, the BBC is going down the DVCAM route and is intending to be
    tapeless by 2008. AIUI, BBC transmission is already tapeless.


    regards

    Stuart

    www.mckears.com
     
    Stuart McKears, Jan 10, 2006
    #15
  16. Quite a few now own a Z1 or similar which they use both professionally and
    recreationally.

    There is only a thin or no dividing line between the "professional" and the
    "amateur" and equipment is not one of the distinguishing criteria and never has
    been.




    regards

    Stuart

    www.mckears.com
     
    Stuart McKears, Jan 10, 2006
    #16
  17. Beemer

    John Russell Guest

    I presume these things use similer hard drive to mp3 players. In which case
    the drive is very quiet, a lot quieter than the a typical DV VCR mechanism
    in a DV camcorder. That should improve the quality of the audio recordings.
    Also even at best quality I would suspect the max speed of the drive is not
    being reached. In which case you should be able to transfer video to a PC
    just as a data tansfer from an external hard drive to the internal drive as
    faster than video recording speeds. That is essential if youv'e recorded
    several hours of video on the disk. A DV camcorder is stuck at transferring
    video at video speed.
     
    John Russell, Jan 11, 2006
    #17
  18. Beemer

    Beemer Guest

    |
    | | <snip>
    | >
    | > CONS
    | > The format used is lossy.
    |
    | <mode=pedantic>
    | Assuming that the OP is talking about consumer gear, I would hardly
    | call a DV5000 docked to a Firestore HDD unit (for example) as lossy!
    | </mode>
    |
    |
    Jerry,

    You mena lossy as in "jpg lossy"? The camera in which I am interested is
    one of the JVC Everio G range. Nothing in the literature mentions the
    file format. Spec is 1/3.6" ccd, 720x480 x 60i, 8.5Mbps cbr, 384Kbps audio
    and that playpack on a TV is MPEG2.

    I would be uploading to my computer for editing in Encore so the files being
    edited would be AVI so no loss.

    Instant FFWD and FRWD is attractive as is not running out of tape.

    Beemer
     
    Beemer, Jan 11, 2006
    #18
  19. Beemer

    G Hardy Guest

    The solution Jerry was talking about uses a DV stream which is 28mbps. If
    that's lossy - then it's a logical step that 8.5mbps is lossy.

    It sounds like the camera is saving the video as a DVD-compatible file,
    which (for all but the most simple of cuts) should not really be used as a
    basis for editing.

    AVI is a red herring - it means nothing more than the format the data is
    stored on the hard drive. In itself, it says nothing about the format of the
    video stream. That data is stored at a consistent location within the AVI,
    and tells the registered playback program (or editor, or whatever) which
    codec to use*. The codec can be lossless (such as uncompressed or HuffYUV)
    or lossy (DV, DivX, XVID etc).

    With a sensible workflow, loss occurs in three places - in the digital
    camera when the video is stored, in the video editing suite when the video
    has to be recompressed (for example if you add titles, filter the colour
    etc) and when you burn to DVD. In this respect, working with a DV AVI source
    is not really any different to working with MPG source. It's just that the
    DV file has a lower initial "loss" because it starts at a higher bitrate.

    The middle one of those three can be removed by an intermediate render to an
    uncompressed AVI format. However, this is impractical for most users, and
    takes up more time and a lot of hard drive space.

    Loss can occur in other parts of the workflow, but these are the main ones.

    * Deliberately simplified - I _know_ a system-wide DLL applies the codec,
    not the application itself.
     
    G Hardy, Jan 11, 2006
    #19
  20. Beemer

    John Russell Guest

    I checked the JVC site and they are making a big thing of having the worlds
    smallest MPEG-2 codec chip in these camcorders. It should be noted that Sony
    have has to use MPEG-2 to record HDTV onto a standard DV tape.

    If you end point is to produce DVD then you will be introducing loss at some
    point in the production process no matter how good the recorded format is.
    You should avoid introducing any further loss than that created by the
    camera when recording to mpeg-2. You.should use an editor optimised for
    MPEG-2 files. By that I mean one that can set up the Project Properties to
    match the input MPEG-2 file, thus avoiding recompression of the output. I
    would reccommend the Womble MPEG Video wizard.
     
    John Russell, Jan 11, 2006
    #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.