What about HD Camcorders

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by pantsonfire, Mar 28, 2008.

  1. pantsonfire

    pantsonfire Guest

    What exactly to you do with what you record on an HD camcorder? I know
    you can play it on an HD TV. But there is no HD DVD recorder or can you
    use a Blu-Ray DVD recorder? That seems expensive especially the blank
    discs. Or can you transfer your video to a PC and burn HD DVDs? I don't
    think that's possible.

    Wo for those of you with HD camcorders, how do you save your media?

    ______________________________________________________________________ 
    : the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
    pantsonfire, Mar 28, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "pantsonfire" <> wrote in message news:...

    > What exactly to you do with what you record on an HD camcorder? I know
    > you can play it on an HD TV. But there is no HD DVD recorder or can you
    > use a Blu-Ray DVD recorder? That seems expensive especially the blank
    > discs. Or can you transfer your video to a PC and burn HD DVDs? I don't
    > think that's possible.
    >
    > Wo for those of you with HD camcorders, how do you save your media?


    Off topic (try rec.video.desktop or rec.video.production), but since I'm
    also into video, and lately into HD video, here goes. One of the reasons for
    buying a tape-based HDV HD camcorder (other than for the superior image
    quality compared with DVD/HD/memory-chip recording systems) is that you
    can easily record back to tape your edited HD video - and tape is also the
    most reliable and convenient long term storage medium for video. HD-DVD
    is a dying format, but you can, using some inexpensive video editing programs
    save the edited video to Blu-Ray disk (and/or back to tape - or in reduced
    resolution, to any other video format you want, even Flash). For a review
    of my favorite HD camcorder (a cheap "little wonder"!), see --
    www.donferrario.com/ruether/canon_hv20.htm, and for more on editing
    programs, see -- www.donferrario.com/ruether/hdv-editing.htm
    --
    David Ruether

    www.donferrario.com/ruether
    David Ruether, Mar 28, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. pantsonfire

    pantsonfire Guest

    On Mar 28 2008 2:44 PM, David Ruether wrote:

    > "pantsonfire" <> wrote in message

    news:...
    >
    > > What exactly to you do with what you record on an HD camcorder? I know
    > > you can play it on an HD TV. But there is no HD DVD recorder or can you
    > > use a Blu-Ray DVD recorder? That seems expensive especially the blank
    > > discs. Or can you transfer your video to a PC and burn HD DVDs? I don't
    > > think that's possible.
    > >
    > > Wo for those of you with HD camcorders, how do you save your media?

    >
    > Off topic (try rec.video.desktop or rec.video.production), but since I'm
    > also into video, and lately into HD video, here goes. One of the reasons for
    > buying a tape-based HDV HD camcorder (other than for the superior image
    > quality compared with DVD/HD/memory-chip recording systems) is that you
    > can easily record back to tape your edited HD video - and tape is also the
    > most reliable and convenient long term storage medium for video. HD-DVD
    > is a dying format, but you can, using some inexpensive video editing programs
    > save the edited video to Blu-Ray disk (and/or back to tape - or in reduced
    > resolution, to any other video format you want, even Flash). For a review
    > of my favorite HD camcorder (a cheap "little wonder"!), see --
    > www.donferrario.com/ruether/canon_hv20.htm, and for more on editing
    > programs, see -- www.donferrario.com/ruether/hdv-editing.htm
    > --
    > David Ruether
    >
    > www.donferrario.com/ruether

    You're right about the OT comment. This was the closest thing on my
    group list (I use recgroups.com).

    I am basically trying to know how to get HD video stored on a DVD for
    archiving and/or viewing. It doesn't sound cheap or easy at this time.

    ____________________________________________________________________ 
    : the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
    pantsonfire, Mar 28, 2008
    #3
  4. pantsonfire

    dullpain Guest

    There are a number of programs that can down convert the HD to a 16:9
    regular DVD format compatible with standard DVD players once you dump your
    camera contents into your computer.
    Seek/Google and ye shall find.
    Unfortunately the conversion process does not always go smoothly, e.g.
    picture and sound unsynch, and can take forever depending on the length of
    your video.
    Otherwise you have to pony up for a Blu-Ray recorder or be content to watch
    the videos you download to your computer on your computer monitor. Which is
    not necessarily a bad option.
    Blu-ray recorders will likely approach the $200 mark very soon. However
    recordable media is likely to remain ungodly expensive for the foreseeable
    future.
    dullpain, Mar 28, 2008
    #4
  5. pantsonfire

    dmaster Guest

    On Mar 28, 11:43 am, "dullpain" <> wrote:
    > There are a number of programs that can down convert the HD to a 16:9
    > regular DVD format compatible with standard DVD players once you dump your
    > camera contents into your computer.
    > Seek/Google and ye shall find.
    > Unfortunately the conversion process does not always go smoothly, e.g.
    > picture and sound unsynch, and can take forever depending on the length of
    > your video.
    > Otherwise you have to pony up for a Blu-Ray recorder or be content to watch
    > the videos you download to your computer on your computer monitor. Which is
    > not necessarily a bad option.
    > Blu-ray recorders will likely approach the $200 mark very soon. However
    > recordable media is likely to remain ungodly expensive for the foreseeable
    > future.


    Let's not overlook the option of a Home Theatre PC. In that case, all
    your videos can be stored on disk and watched in their HD glory on
    your HDTV.

    Dan (Woj...)
    dmaster, Mar 28, 2008
    #5
  6. "pantsonfire" <> wrote in message news:...
    > On Mar 28 2008 2:44 PM, David Ruether wrote:
    >> "pantsonfire" <> wrote in message

    > news:...


    >> > What exactly to you do with what you record on an HD camcorder? I know
    >> > you can play it on an HD TV. But there is no HD DVD recorder or can you
    >> > use a Blu-Ray DVD recorder? That seems expensive especially the blank
    >> > discs. Or can you transfer your video to a PC and burn HD DVDs? I don't
    >> > think that's possible.
    >> >
    >> > Wo for those of you with HD camcorders, how do you save your media?


    >> Off topic (try rec.video.desktop or rec.video.production), but since I'm
    >> also into video, and lately into HD video, here goes. One of the reasons for
    >> buying a tape-based HDV HD camcorder (other than for the superior image
    >> quality compared with DVD/HD/memory-chip recording systems) is that you
    >> can easily record back to tape your edited HD video - and tape is also the
    >> most reliable and convenient long term storage medium for video. HD-DVD
    >> is a dying format, but you can, using some inexpensive video editing programs
    >> save the edited video to Blu-Ray disk (and/or back to tape - or in reduced
    >> resolution, to any other video format you want, even Flash). For a review
    >> of my favorite HD camcorder (a cheap "little wonder"!), see --
    >> www.donferrario.com/ruether/canon_hv20.htm, and for more on editing
    >> programs, see -- www.donferrario.com/ruether/hdv-editing.htm
    >> --
    >> David Ruether


    > You're right about the OT comment. This was the closest thing on my
    > group list (I use recgroups.com).


    If you use Outlook Express, or similar, they have newsreaders built in...

    > I am basically trying to know how to get HD video stored on a DVD for
    > archiving and/or viewing. It doesn't sound cheap or easy at this time.


    DVDs should not be regarded as a good archiving medium - the homemade
    ones use dye, with all that that implies (dark, cool, dry storage, with the
    disks upright - but their life is still unfortunately limited...). Blu-Ray is the
    only option for HD disks, now that HD-DVD is going away, though you
    can downconvert to standard definition (bleah!) and write DVDs in that (or
    write the edit back to a couple of tapes for safety and for showing from
    the camcorder, keeping one or two for archiving - or show the edit from
    a computer...). I prefer to make multiple copies of edited videos and play
    to the TV from the camcorder for showing. If you keep a simple log of
    where on the tape each video is, this method is quick and easy...
    --
    David Ruether

    www.donferrario.com/ruether
    David Ruether, Mar 28, 2008
    #6
  7. pantsonfire

    pantsonfire Guest

    On Mar 28 2008 3:48 PM, dmaster wrote:

    > On Mar 28, 11:43 am, "dullpain" <> wrote:
    > > There are a number of programs that can down convert the HD to a 16:9
    > > regular DVD format compatible with standard DVD players once you dump your
    > > camera contents into your computer.
    > > Seek/Google and ye shall find.
    > > Unfortunately the conversion process does not always go smoothly, e.g.
    > > picture and sound unsynch, and can take forever depending on the length of
    > > your video.
    > > Otherwise you have to pony up for a Blu-Ray recorder or be content to watch
    > > the videos you download to your computer on your computer monitor. Which is
    > > not necessarily a bad option.
    > > Blu-ray recorders will likely approach the $200 mark very soon. However
    > > recordable media is likely to remain ungodly expensive for the foreseeable
    > > future.

    >
    > Let's not overlook the option of a Home Theatre PC. In that case, all
    > your videos can be stored on disk and watched in their HD glory on
    > your HDTV.
    >
    > Dan (Woj...)


    I like that a lot and it appears that HDD drive cost is cheaper (than
    Blu-Ray) right now by the GB. Just need a camcorder with HDD and firewire
    and I'm set. Thanks for the ideas guys and sorry to intrude on a still
    camera forum.

    Just a sidenote, I had a Coolpix 880 and the lens stayed stuck out. Now
    it doesn't power on without an error message. I can hear the cheap
    plastic gears grinding over themselves. Back to Canon for me (love the
    swivel screen).

    --- 
    : the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
    pantsonfire, Mar 28, 2008
    #7
  8. "pantsonfire" <> writes:
    >What exactly to you do with what you record on an HD camcorder? I know
    >you can play it on an HD TV. But there is no HD DVD recorder or can you
    >use a Blu-Ray DVD recorder? That seems expensive especially the blank
    >discs. Or can you transfer your video to a PC and burn HD DVDs? I don't
    >think that's possible.


    Is there any reason you can't create HD-resolution video in a suitable
    format (using whatever codec is normally used for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD
    content) but write the files on an ordinary DVD? You'll get something
    like 20 minutes of playing time instead of a couple of hours, but if
    that's enough for your content, why not?

    For playback on a computer, both DVD and HD-DVD/Blu-Ray discs are just
    data containers, and the player software shouldn't care about seeing HD
    content on a DVD any more than it would object to HD content on the
    local hard disk. And DVD data drives should have enough bandwidth to
    handle the higher bit rate of HD, at least most of the time.

    A commercial HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player might be surprised to find
    HD-resolution content on DVD media, or it might work too...

    I haven't tried the above; I don't have either HDDV camera or HD player.
    But it's worth a try.

    Dave
    Dave Martindale, Mar 28, 2008
    #8
  9. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    pantsonfire
    <>], who wrote in article <>:
    > What exactly to you do with what you record on an HD camcorder? I know
    > you can play it on an HD TV. But there is no HD DVD recorder or can you
    > use a Blu-Ray DVD recorder? That seems expensive especially the blank
    > discs. Or can you transfer your video to a PC and burn HD DVDs? I don't
    > think that's possible.


    [Disclaimer: I do not own a camcorder myself.]

    As far as I understand, the current generation HD camcorders (those
    below $10K) cannot resolve more than 600 single lines in vertical
    direction. Which, essentially, means that downconverting to the DVD
    (e.g. 720x576) format would lose only a minuscule amount of video quality.

    Judging by what you wrote, your video playback hardware does not
    support playing higher-than-DVD-resolution MPEG4. So, for the time
    being, you better store the original contents (until you upgrade your
    MPEG4 player), AND store the downconverted DVD for playback NOW.

    Hope this helps,
    Ilya
    Ilya Zakharevich, Mar 28, 2008
    #9
  10. "pantsonfire" <> wrote in message news:...
    > On Mar 28 2008 3:48 PM, dmaster wrote:


    >> On Mar 28, 11:43 am, "dullpain" <> wrote:
    >> > There are a number of programs that can down convert the HD to a 16:9
    >> > regular DVD format compatible with standard DVD players once you dump your
    >> > camera contents into your computer.
    >> > Seek/Google and ye shall find.
    >> > Unfortunately the conversion process does not always go smoothly, e.g.
    >> > picture and sound unsynch, and can take forever depending on the length of
    >> > your video.
    >> > Otherwise you have to pony up for a Blu-Ray recorder or be content to watch
    >> > the videos you download to your computer on your computer monitor. Which is
    >> > not necessarily a bad option.


    Um, not as good as seeing them on a good HD TV, since computer
    monitor screens are non-interlaced, if 1080i the HD is, and then there
    are the gamma and size differences. Viewing edited tapes directly from
    the camcorder hooked to the HDTV (or from Blu-Ray disks in a player
    hooked to the HDTV - or from a computer through FireWire and then
    on to the HDTV) is still the best way to go.

    >> > Blu-ray recorders will likely approach the $200 mark very soon. However
    >> > recordable media is likely to remain ungodly expensive for the foreseeable
    >> > future.


    >> Let's not overlook the option of a Home Theatre PC. In that case, all
    >> your videos can be stored on disk and watched in their HD glory on
    >> your HDTV.
    >>
    >> Dan (Woj...)


    > I like that a lot and it appears that HDD drive cost is cheaper (than
    > Blu-Ray) right now by the GB. Just need a camcorder with HDD and firewire
    > and I'm set.


    I would rethink anything but tape for HD camcorders if you care
    about best image quality and best archival durability, lowest expense,
    and greatest convenience (the Canon HV20/30 appears to be the
    best of these in the low price range - see my review of this "gem",
    at -- www.donferrario.com/ruether/canon_hv20.htm).

    > Thanks for the ideas guys and sorry to intrude on a still camera
    > forum.


    Ah, some of us have more than one "mania"...;-)

    --DR
    David Ruether, Mar 29, 2008
    #10
  11. Ï "Dave Martindale" <> Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
    news:fsjkd3$46a$...
    > "pantsonfire" <> writes:
    > >What exactly to you do with what you record on an HD camcorder? I know
    > >you can play it on an HD TV. But there is no HD DVD recorder or can you
    > >use a Blu-Ray DVD recorder? That seems expensive especially the blank
    > >discs. Or can you transfer your video to a PC and burn HD DVDs? I don't
    > >think that's possible.

    >
    > Is there any reason you can't create HD-resolution video in a suitable
    > format (using whatever codec is normally used for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD
    > content) but write the files on an ordinary DVD? You'll get something
    > like 20 minutes of playing time instead of a couple of hours, but if
    > that's enough for your content, why not?
    >
    > For playback on a computer, both DVD and HD-DVD/Blu-Ray discs are just
    > data containers, and the player software shouldn't care about seeing HD
    > content on a DVD any more than it would object to HD content on the
    > local hard disk. And DVD data drives should have enough bandwidth to
    > handle the higher bit rate of HD, at least most of the time.
    >
    > A commercial HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player might be surprised to find
    > HD-resolution content on DVD media, or it might work too...
    >
    > I haven't tried the above; I don't have either HDDV camera or HD player.
    > But it's worth a try.
    >

    I have done exactly the same with SD video. It's called a mini DVD. It's a
    regular cd burned with the DVD standard. Its duration is 10 mins. Would be a
    waste to use a dvd for just 10 mins...


    --
    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
    major in electrical engineering
    mechanized infantry reservist
    hordad AT otenet DOT gr
    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios, Mar 29, 2008
    #11
  12. "Tzortzakakis Dimitrios" <> wrote in message news:fslrdm$c1m$...
    > Ï "Dave Martindale" <> Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
    > news:fsjkd3$46a$...
    >> "pantsonfire" <> writes:


    >> >What exactly to you do with what you record on an HD camcorder? I know
    >> >you can play it on an HD TV. But there is no HD DVD recorder or can you
    >> >use a Blu-Ray DVD recorder? That seems expensive especially the blank
    >> >discs. Or can you transfer your video to a PC and burn HD DVDs? I don't
    >> >think that's possible.


    >> Is there any reason you can't create HD-resolution video in a suitable
    >> format (using whatever codec is normally used for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD
    >> content) but write the files on an ordinary DVD? You'll get something
    >> like 20 minutes of playing time instead of a couple of hours, but if
    >> that's enough for your content, why not?
    >>
    >> For playback on a computer, both DVD and HD-DVD/Blu-Ray discs are just
    >> data containers, and the player software shouldn't care about seeing HD
    >> content on a DVD any more than it would object to HD content on the
    >> local hard disk. And DVD data drives should have enough bandwidth to
    >> handle the higher bit rate of HD, at least most of the time.
    >>
    >> A commercial HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player might be surprised to find
    >> HD-resolution content on DVD media, or it might work too...
    >>
    >> I haven't tried the above; I don't have either HDDV camera or HD player.
    >> But it's worth a try.


    > I have done exactly the same with SD video. It's called a mini DVD. It's a
    > regular cd burned with the DVD standard. Its duration is 10 mins. Would be a
    > waste to use a dvd for just 10 mins...
    > --
    > Tzortzakakis Dimitrios


    I tried writing a short video in Blu-Ray format to a standard DVD
    blank, but it didn't work. I gather that it can be done with the HD-DVD
    format, but that is a dying "breed"...
    --DR
    David Ruether, Mar 29, 2008
    #12
  13. pantsonfire

    pantsonfire Guest

    On Mar 28 2008 8:41 PM, Ilya Zakharevich wrote:

    > [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    > pantsonfire
    > <>], who wrote in article

    <>:
    > > What exactly to you do with what you record on an HD camcorder? I know
    > > you can play it on an HD TV. But there is no HD DVD recorder or can you
    > > use a Blu-Ray DVD recorder? That seems expensive especially the blank
    > > discs. Or can you transfer your video to a PC and burn HD DVDs? I don't
    > > think that's possible.

    >
    > [Disclaimer: I do not own a camcorder myself.]
    >
    > As far as I understand, the current generation HD camcorders (those
    > below $10K) cannot resolve more than 600 single lines in vertical
    > direction. Which, essentially, means that downconverting to the DVD
    > (e.g. 720x576) format would lose only a minuscule amount of video quality.
    >
    > Judging by what you wrote, your video playback hardware does not
    > support playing higher-than-DVD-resolution MPEG4. So, for the time
    > being, you better store the original contents (until you upgrade your
    > MPEG4 player), AND store the downconverted DVD for playback NOW.
    >
    > Hope this helps,
    > Ilya


    The ones I have been looking at have 2M pixels still picture and a claimed
    1920x1080 CCd. I had presumed that this type of camera is a true HD
    camera. A 40G HDD has around 2 hours of HD recording. This seems to fit
    with real HD. Am I wrong here?

    ------- 
    RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
    pantsonfire, Mar 29, 2008
    #13
  14. pantsonfire

    dj_nme Guest

    pantsonfire wrote:
    <snip>
    >
    >
    > The ones I have been looking at have 2M pixels still picture and a claimed
    > 1920x1080 CCd. I had presumed that this type of camera is a true HD
    > camera. A 40G HDD has around 2 hours of HD recording. This seems to fit
    > with real HD. Am I wrong here?


    The resolution of the recorded footage may very well be HD in terms of
    pixels recorded.
    The problem is that if it's got a dinky little fixed-focus (or two-step
    macro/normal) lens (like the Aiptek and Mustek digicams) your video
    footage will look fuzzy at full resolution and the still pictures will
    look horrible.
    dj_nme, Mar 30, 2008
    #14
  15. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    pantsonfire
    <>], who wrote in article <>:
    > > As far as I understand, the current generation HD camcorders (those
    > > below $10K) cannot resolve more than 600 single lines in vertical
    > > direction. Which, essentially, means that downconverting to the DVD
    > > (e.g. 720x576) format would lose only a minuscule amount of video quality.
    > >
    > > Judging by what you wrote, your video playback hardware does not
    > > support playing higher-than-DVD-resolution MPEG4. So, for the time
    > > being, you better store the original contents (until you upgrade your
    > > MPEG4 player), AND store the downconverted DVD for playback NOW.
    > >
    > > Hope this helps,
    > > Ilya

    >
    > The ones I have been looking at have 2M pixels still picture and a claimed
    > 1920x1080 CCd. I had presumed that this type of camera is a true HD
    > camera.


    A "true HD" prosumer camera of today STILL produces images only
    slightly better than what a DVD can store. As you know, the sensor
    size gives no information about the image quality. The data point of
    resolving 600 single lines per picture height is what matters (I took
    it from the reviews of below-$10K cameras of 2007).

    Remember that with a good up-converting a DVD image may "look
    extremely good" (whatever this means ;-). And yesterday, inspired by
    this thread, I found that "Planet Earth" (which everybody is raving
    about as a reference point on "how good HD could be") was shot mostly
    with 1280x720 and 1024x576 sensors (but they were 3ccd 2/3").

    Hope this helps,
    Ilya
    Ilya Zakharevich, Mar 30, 2008
    #15
  16. pantsonfire

    pantsonfire Guest

    On Mar 30 2008 2:39 AM, Ilya Zakharevich wrote:

    > [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    > pantsonfire
    > <>], who wrote in article

    <>:
    > > > As far as I understand, the current generation HUD camcorders (those
    > > > below $10K) cannot resolve more than 600 single lines in vertical
    > > > direction. Which, essentially, means that downconverting to the DVD
    > > > (e.g. 720x576) format would lose only a minuscule amount of video

    quality.
    > > >
    > > > Judging by what you wrote, your video playback hardware does not
    > > > support playing higher-than-DVD-resolution MPEG4. So, for the time
    > > > being, you better store the original contents (until you upgrade your
    > > > MPEG4 player), AND store the downconverted DVD for playback NOW.
    > > >
    > > > Hope this helps,
    > > > Ilya

    > >
    > > The ones I have been looking at have 2M pixels still picture and a claimed
    > > 1920x1080 CCd. I had presumed that this type of camera is a true HUD
    > > camera.

    >
    > A "true HUD" prosumer camera of today STILL produces images only
    > slightly better than what a DVD can store. As you know, the sensor
    > size gives no information about the image quality. The data point of
    > resolving 600 single lines per picture height is what matters (I took
    > it from the reviews of below-$10K cameras of 2007).
    >
    > Remember that with a good up-converting a DVD image may "look
    > extremely good" (whatever this means ;-). And yesterday, inspired by
    > this thread, I found that "Planet Earth" (which everybody is raving
    > about as a reference point on "how good HUD could be") was shot mostly
    > with 1280x720 and 1024x576 sensors (but they were 3ccd 2/3").
    >
    > Hope this helps,
    > Ilya


    Thanks, I guess the best thing to do is try to actually capture some video
    (eg. at the store) and and bring it home on media to see how it looks on
    my TV or even better yet, get the camera I want home for a test drive
    before buying.

    In the end, I suppose that DVD quality 720x480 if shot well should be just
    fine for most home video situations.

    ____________________________________________________________________ 
    : the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
    pantsonfire, Mar 30, 2008
    #16
  17. "pantsonfire" <> wrote in message news:...

    > Thanks, I guess the best thing to do is try to actually capture some video
    > (eg. at the store) and and bring it home on media to see how it looks on
    > my TV or even better yet, get the camera I want home for a test drive
    > before buying.
    >
    > In the end, I suppose that DVD quality 720x480 if shot well should be just
    > fine for most home video situations.


    There are standard DVDs and then there are standard DVDs...
    (and differences in upsamplers, too...). You are right that well-shot
    Mini-DV (preferably with something as good as a 3-chip Sony
    VX2000 rather than a cheap mediocre 1-chipper), output to SD
    DVD can suffice for casual shooting where image quality may not
    matter much - but it will look NO WHERE NEAR as good as
    commercially made SD DVD movies upsampled well for viewing,
    or the output of the Canon HV20 HD camcorder which will look
    better than any of those. 720x480 Mini-DV has inherent image
    problems that you can't get around (mainly aliasing with motion)
    that can look quite ugly. Oddly, the softening effect of transferring
    Mini-DV to DVD can reduce this - but this process can introduce
    its own problems (mainly compression artifacts), and home-made
    SD DVDs don't look as good as commercial ones. The best
    broadcast HD and commercially made Blu-Ray disks can look
    consistently better, and the HDV Canon looks very close to these
    (in other words, quite a bit better than anything in SD). There is
    MUCH more to what video actually looks like than just the
    resolution numbers. For examples of image problems you can have
    with Mini-DV, see some examples at --
    www.donferrario.com/ruether/vid_pict_characts.htm
    --
    David Ruether

    www.donferrario.com/ruether
    David Ruether, Mar 30, 2008
    #17
  18. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    David Ruether
    <>], who wrote in article <47efd3cb$0$30673$>:
    > its own problems (mainly compression artifacts), and home-made
    > SD DVDs don't look as good as commercial ones.


    Could you explain what do mean exactly by the last phrase?

    I take a blu-ray disk, and downsample it to 720x576 mpeg2 AT HOME
    (using, e.g., mencoder). Did you say it is going to look worse than a
    "commercially made DVD"?

    Puzzled,
    Ilya
    Ilya Zakharevich, Mar 30, 2008
    #18
  19. "Ilya Zakharevich" <> wrote in message news:fsos8c$1a1m$...
    > <>], who wrote in article <47efd3cb$0$30673$>:


    > [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    > David Ruether


    [I used to do this, but found some people were annoyed when
    I did it - but I never understood why, and I still don't...;-]

    >> its own problems (mainly compression artifacts), and home-made
    >> SD DVDs don't look as good as commercial ones.


    > Could you explain what do mean exactly by the last phrase?
    >
    > I take a blu-ray disk, and downsample it to 720x576 mpeg2 AT HOME
    > (using, e.g., mencoder). Did you say it is going to look worse than a
    > "commercially made DVD"?
    >
    > Puzzled,
    > Ilya


    Sorry - I was thinking of the case of taking "normal" SD (even very
    good SD, but short of the quality of professionally shot movies) and
    transferring it to SD DVDs, which never look "pro", but are always
    somewhat soft and often have other visible shortcomings, unlike
    commercial SD DVDs. Studio-made SD DVDs are usually quite
    good, but these are still noticeably short of good HD, even with
    good upsampling for viewing on an HD display. If you improve the
    input quality in any imaging system, though, you almost always
    improve the quality of the output product (the concept that one of
    two resolutions involved is a limiting resolution is false - with an input
    resolution and an output resolution, the resulting quality will always
    be lower than either, but improving either will improve the quality
    of the output quality - so a Blu-Ray source (or good HD broadcast,
    or of the Canon HV20 HD camcorder output) transferred to SD
    DVD will generally look better than regular SD transferred to SD
    DVD (and maybe quite good) - but of course, HD transferred to
    HD tape or Blu-Ray will look much better yet. As for transferring
    Blu-Ray to SD DVD, I have not tried it (maybe you can tell us the
    result?), but my guess is that its image quality will not be up to that
    of commercially made SD DVD movie disks...
    --
    David Ruether

    www.donferrario.com/ruether
    David Ruether, Mar 30, 2008
    #19
  20. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    David Ruether
    <>], who wrote in article <47f0137e$0$16656$>:
    > good upsampling for viewing on an HD display. If you improve the
    > input quality in any imaging system, though, you almost always
    > improve the quality of the output product (the concept that one of
    > two resolutions involved is a limiting resolution is false


    Could not agree less.

    > - with an input
    > resolution and an output resolution, the resulting quality will always
    > be lower than either, but improving either will improve the quality
    > of the output quality


    This is not what I observe. When the resolution of the source is the
    same or better than the resolution of the destination, the only thing
    which matters is the ratio of MTF to the spectrum of noise - INSIDE
    the range of spacial frequencies representatable by the target.

    If you improve the input resolution without improving that ratio, this
    is not going to be seen after downscaling.

    (Quite often an increase in resolution ALSO improves the MTF at
    lower spacial frequencies; ONLY if this holds your reasoning works.
    But it will also hold if one improves MTF without improving the
    resolution. In short, AFAIU, when your observation is applicable,
    it is applicable by DIFFERENT reasons than what you state.)

    > Blu-Ray to SD DVD, I have not tried it (maybe you can tell us the
    > result?), but my guess is that its image quality will not be up to that
    > of commercially made SD DVD movie disks...


    All I know is that when I transcode DVD to MPEG4, starting from some
    level of compression I do not see ANY visible decrease in quality.
    (For my viewing skills, the threshold is somewhere about 1Mb/sec
    vbitrate.) From this I deduce that (with yet lower bitrate!) a better
    source will produce as good a result as the original DVD.

    [Most of the hardware in this house is not good enough to show
    2MP/30fps without serious degradation, so I did not try transcoding
    the HD input (especially since, AFAIK, it is hard to find
    non-mediocre stuff in HD; a lot of good films are STILL not available
    in reasonable-quality DVD). Judging by the "Planet Earth"
    observation, I do not expect that a lot of HD material deserves more
    than 1MP for storage. Please! - proof me wrong. ;-]

    Yours,
    Ilya
    Ilya Zakharevich, Mar 31, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

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

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Steve Freides

    Difference between cheapie and 'real' digital camcorders

    Steve Freides, Jun 8, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    471
    Dominic
    Jun 8, 2004
  2. Daniel

    Cheap underwater housing for digital camcorders?

    Daniel, Sep 5, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    466
    Jeff the Dentist
    Sep 6, 2003
  3. daboo

    what newsgroup deals with Digital Camcorders? TIA

    daboo, Sep 26, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    303
    Howard McCollister
    Sep 26, 2003
  4. Richard Blaine

    Camcorders?

    Richard Blaine, Oct 23, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    405
  5. Shopping India

    Camcorders: Know more about camcorders

    Shopping India, Sep 26, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    317
    Shopping India
    Sep 26, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page