why do professional cameras still use dv tape

I was taking a look at some Sony professional cameras to find out what
features professional cameras have and was surprised to learn that they
still use DV Tape rather than flash memory.
Is there a reason for this?

 

i shoot for abc tv rural, and a number of other clients around the
country. they ALL DEMAND tape.

until broadband gets bandwidth / cost affordability reasonable, and / or
cards become as cheap as chips, tape is the easiest, most reliable,
archival format available.

 

What "ushere" said, plus at least one prosumer Sony camera
can shoot the HDV format to both a card and a Mini-DV tape.
Too bad the card version of HDV didn't appear earlier and
more commonly - it has the ENORMOUS advantage of being FAR
easier to edit efficiently than high data-rate MP4 formats.
28Mbps 1920x1080-60P AVCHD or 100-140Mbps 1920x1080-60I may
look better than 25Mbps 1440x1080-60I HDV, but it is FAR more
difficult to edit and it requires considerable hardware and
software "horsepower" to do it, so HDV still serves a purpose
when editing resources are more limited (which they are for
many with limited finances).
--DR

 

Inertia and a certain degree of snootiness. While DV is better than AVCHD,
it's often hard to tell the difference ... especially after all the other
post-production that the video goes through.

 

Well, some ad agencies used to demand 6x6 for still photography, and that was
just as useless, since no magazine could do justice to 6x6, anyway. And
digital broadcast after compression isn't likely to show much difference
between tape and memory cards, either.

 

HUH??? SD Mini-DV footage is by no means, under ANY circumstances,
better than good-quality HD AVCHD material (the former format's
flaws are legion: see --
http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/vid_pict_characts.htm ), and
HD HDV material can be quite good, but beaten by the very best
AVCHD material (although HDV handily beats "AVCHD-Lite" material).
--DR

 

I'll take your word for it. I haven't used DV at all. Some have told me that
DV is supposed to be better. Since I consider anything using tape to be
obsolete (at least for my purposes), I haven't looked into it.

Frankly, I'm tired of storage methods that require moving parts on devices
that are themselves portable and moving. It's just too much trouble.

 

We send out spots to two different relatively decent sized markets and there
is at least one TV station in each that still demands tape... well one of
those will take digital formats archived on flash drives or DVDs but they
charge you extra. Of course these are the stations that have yet to make the
conversion to HD....

 

In the days of SD, Beta-SP was used for pro work, and while it was
relatively free of the many image flaws that Mini-DV was subject
to (and it was as a result much more pleasant to view), it was of
slightly lower resolution than Mini-DV, and it did not hold up as
well as Mini-DV did to multiple generations of copying. SVHS was
the next quality level down, and regular VHS was below that. Ugh!;-)

Then you have missed easy archiving and easy editing (and also the
occasional dropout...;-).

Tsk, tsk, tsk...;-)

I'm still amazed by how many advertisers waste their money and
time with SD ads, since the production costs for HD should be
similar these days, and HD (if necessary) can be "dumbed down"
for SD presentation, if necessary...
--DR

 

It is a matter of perspective. If one is making videos for one's own
amusement, documenting family life, and recording the occasional school
concert a certain set of criteria might likely apply, simplicity and light
weight falling high on the list I imagine. However, if one is making a
living in video, the tools requirements become much different. Shoulder
mount cameras, expensive lenses and lens accessories, tri-pods with heads
smooth as silk, thousand dollar plus microphones, audio mixers and external
recorders, and a truckload of lighting kit is not only NOT too much trouble
it may be the price of admission for maintaining an ongoing business. And,
like Chuck said, depending on one's client list one camera may not be
enough. I have clients who still want digital beta; others who prefer P2
cards, and others who are still quite content with DV. I consider each of
these clients to be making pretty rational decsions on format based on their
individual needs and archiving practices. So, to say something is 'too much
trouble' without qualifying the statement suggests to me a very limited
experience with video production. I mean no disrespect. If one hasn't
experienced a film or video shoot with a crew of five, or ten, or more
skilled people, one probably can't imagine why in the world anyone would
need that many people or that much equipment. But, when the script says,
"Travelling Shot. Jack appears out of the fog, pauses under a street lamp
to light a cigarette....." Give me as many people as the budget will allow,
four or five prime lenses, a truck-load of dolly track, and another truck
load of lights, and crank up the gennie. It's all a matter of perspective.
Horses for courses. And, generalities usually don't apply.

Steve King

 

well said....

 

Thanks for your replies.

I can see more disadvantages in using tape compared to using flash memory
(sdhd memory card and memory built into the camera.

Disadvantages of using tape (such as DV tape)
Battery length is shorter as it has to power the motor for the tape.
A problem when reviewing what you have recorded and want the tape to move
forward to the place where you last recorded.
You need to rewind the tape to view the first shot.
You can accidentally record over a recorded tape.
Tape can get tangled.
Tape can be distorted if near a magnetic field.
Tape has a limited recording length.
Tape can wore out if used many times.
Tape is slower to change than plugging in an Sd card.
There is no indexing so finding a certain scene can take time.
More moving parts in the camera to wear out.
You need to rewind the tape each time you want view what you have recorded
You can't delete certain scenes from he tape and leave the wanted scenes
undeleted if you run short of recording time.
You can't split a scene to delete a small part of the scene in the camera.
You can't protect certain scenes from being accidentally deleted.
There is a longer delay before you can record as the tape needs to load and
get up to speed.
Drop outs can occur when using tape.

Well there seems to be a lot of disadvantages when using tape as a video
recording media.

I have been using mini DV tape for 10 years and have recently upgraded to a
flash memory camera. I am enjoying the advantages of flash memory.

 

if you have to worry about battery life you're using the wrong batteries.

i have never 'reviewed' what i've shot in camera.

ditto card - and the record tabs on tape are very easy to lock.

only if you don't maintain your equipment

cards are subject to electrostatic shorts

ditto card

ditto cards - and who the hell uses tapes more than once!?

a new slant on run 'n' gun?

boy, you have to be a pretty average cameraman to have to need to review
what you've shot.

bad planning

well, if you want to edit in camera....

never mind framing the shot, just press record....

wait till you get a duff card

served many people very well for a very long time. maybe that time has
passed, but tell that to broadcasters and major corporations

me too. but i still shoot tape at the same time. never look at it but
instant archiving.

 

Yes, although that is less and less true nowadays.

One of the side effects of advancing audio and video technology is that it is
highly democratizing, allowing even parties with tiny budgets to produce
results that are comparable to what used to cost huge amounts of money.

The net effect is that ultimately talent and technique are what separate the
pros from the amateurs, rather than how much money they've spent on equipment.

Anyway, moving parts are just as much of a problem for the pros with big
budgets as they are for anyone else. There are inherent risks in having a
slanted head spinning on contact with a thin strip of tape continuously.
Dropouts and jammed tapes can ruin anyone's production, no matter how much
money is being spent on it. I'm not sure why pros would stick with tape
insofar as they can obtain comparable results with non-moving media.

I don't currently do video production for money, so my only metric is the
amount I must spend to produce something, keeping in mind that it's always a
100% loss (none of the cost will ever be recovered).

I've experienced it. Some productions require it, some don't. When you a large
budget, you also have a tendency to end up with lots of people standing
around. This is especially true if it's a union production.

Why? Who is going to see the difference in the final result? Will there even
be a difference? If you replace all that track with a Steadicam and a good
operator, what do you lose? If you replace the primes with a single zoom, who
notices? And do you really need to light the set like a stadium?

Blowing through huge sums of money just because your producer has given you
huge sums of money isn't a guarantee of a quality result.

 

If you have an important scene or recorded something while on holiday then
its a good idea to check to make sure you have a good recording else it may
not be possible to record it again.
The common mistake is in thinking that the camera is recording when you
still have the camera in standby mode.

If the card is full then you need to delete recordings on a card before you
can record on the card. I have heard of cases where people had forgotten
that they had recorded to a tape and have overwritten valuable recordings.
The record tabs is a good idea but if you have forgotten the you had
rewinded the tape and want to add more recording to the tape then it's
goodbye to current recordings on the tape.

But this is rare.

I get one hour of recording on a tape in standard recording mode but I can
record for several hours on an SDHC card.

It gets expensive to have to buy tapes if you use them once.

Some camera allow you find a scene by the date. So scenes are grouped
together by the date they were recorded.

Good we agree on something

Most people are keen to watch what they had recorded at the end of the day
on a TV.

Some cameras allow you to select a scene and mark it protected.

I have lost a few great shots because the camera was too slow starting up.
By the time the camera was recording the moment was over.

There should not br any problems with a well known card brand. I have had
drop outs when recording on tape at LP speed.

Equipment is expensive to upgrade so I can understand not wanting to
upgrade to the latest camera if the current tape camera is still working
ok.

There are some advantages in using tapes such as the cost of tape is cheap
compared to the cost of fast SDHD cards.

There are some disadvantages in using cards
A common disadvantage with cards is that they are so small that they can be
lost. If you accidentally drop a card they are hard to find.
Cards are too small to write titles on.
They are expensive buy.
Cards from unknown manufactures may not hold the full capacity stated on
the card.

Two more disadvantage in using tape is that you can't plug the tape into a
computer or some other playback device. It takes longer to transfer the
recording as it is done in real time.

Thanks for your reply ushere. I have written a few comments between your
text above.

 

An experienced video photographer can make a great video with a simple
camera and a amateur can make a dull video using the latest high tech
camera.
The old saying is "if I owned a expensive camera then I could make great
movies" is not true.
However many special effects that were expensive to make in movies can be
made with todays software for the home user.

 

Ummm...., tell me about it...:-(
I was following two blue herons with the video camera (they are
large birds that resemble pterodactyls, and they are surprisingly
common [but shy] here) as they unexpectedly flew very low directly
over where I was standing. I quickly "started" recording, only to
(UGH!!!!!!!!!) discover later that I had instead stopped recording!
Ugh, ugh, ugh, ugh, DARN!!!!! (I'm substituting "polite" words for
the originals...)
--DR

 

An unfortunate mistake that is totally independent of recording medium.

Steve King

 

Inertia, I believe. Some operations, including many broadcast stations,
still live in a tape world. Those of us who supply program material to them
have to supply what they want to buy. Of course, this is becoming less and
less true.

Archiving is a big fear for many. Tape is what is used to archive almost
all the financial records of the world, even today. Video tapes from 50
years ago still play. Data stored on hard drives has to be refreshed, which
requires maintaining a backup schedule. Data on cards? No one is certain
what the decades long ramifications of data maintenance are.

It might seem that way, and sometimes it is. However, if you have thousands
of dollars of celebrity talent on the set a few extra bodies at $400 per day
are insignificant compared to the overtime or reshoot issues if something
goes wrong. My point... it all depends.

I will. Usually, my client will.

Will there even be a difference?

Yes

If you replace all that track with a Steadicam and a good

Depends on the precision and complexity of the move. Sometimes nothing.
Sometimes a steady cam simply can't do what a dolly shot can do.

If you replace the primes with a single zoom, who

Often low key lighting takes longer than 'light(ing) the set like a
stadium.'

True. However, in my world production considerations determine budget, not
the other way around. Sometimes I go out with a camera alone. Sometimes
with a crew of two. Sometimes with a larger crew and more technical
resources. It depends. You seem to have a very narrow view of how things
should be done. But, maybe I am misinterpreting what you say. I have a
whole different view of making video if I'm taking pictures of a family
vacation, or Christmas morning, or of my dog playing with my grandchildren,
a view much like yours, than I do of my professional work.

Why do you seem to believe that the professionals who comment in this
newsgroup don't know what they are doing? And, that you know better how
they should conduct their business? Amazing.

Steve King

 

That, in fact, is how I bolixed my separate sound channel on that
first-in-years documentary project (which was entirely experimental so
it doesn't "matter", but sheesh).

I think I have a clearer idea of *which* red light on the sound recorder
means it's recording now. Also, I have reserved a special spot in hell
for the designer who thought a red light in a prominent location was a
good way to indicate something *other* than "recording".