Over a year ago I posted a (non-OS news) article about this new geeky & underground, grass-root movement in videography -- similar to the artistic explosion digital photography saw a few years ago. We call ourselves "DV Rebels". Given a slow weekend, I decided to revisit the topic today with some newer videos shot with the Canon HV20/HV30 cameras, these $500 gems that have been the catalysts in the said movement. The HV lines of cameras are so popular that over 220 official music videos were shot with them, among other kinds of art. In the old article there has been criticism about the "motion photography without a story" nature of the videos that were sampled, but I think that since then these hobbyist videographers have come a long way. Have a look inside for some of my favorite HV20/30 videos available today, while you can check even more here.
Member since:2005-06-28
Yup, this is why the HV20/30 cameras (and all new Canon AVCHD non-tape cameras too), support PF24, PF25 and PF30 recording in addition to plain 50i/60i. The HV series became popular opiginally not only because of their superior quality at the time, but mostly because of its 24p-like (PF24) ability.
These PF files are progressive recordings wrapped around an interlaced stream for compatibility reasons (e.g. iMovie and even Final Cut Express don't support native 24p editing), but a capable video editor is able to remove pulldown (for PF24) or drop a field (for PF25/PF30) and edit the native progressive stream.
Member since:2005-07-06
I've got a really old Canon ZR10. It's 480i only, but it does do 16:9. I've been thinking about the HVs if I'm in the market again.
The interlacing strikes me as somewhat amusing, especially since it a solution to a problem that hasn't been around in at least 30 years (phosphorous after-glow). Especially since it wipes out 30% of the apparent resolution. Like hooking a 640x480 computer screen up to a regular TV. It looks awful.
That's great that the HVs are still able to handle the 24p though.
Sensors are getting to the point where it's no longer a question of sensors, but of the lenses themselves. A great time for DV.
Member since:2005-08-29
well, interlacing is a pretty effective way to reduce bandwidth, and we never have enough bandwidth... cable, broadcast, fiberoptics, doesn't matter. You cut the bitrate of the stream nearly in half and you definitely don't lose half the video quality by doing so.
edit: put another way, which would you choose: 720p or 1080i? For almost anything but sports, I'd choose 1080i. They use roughly the same bandwidth.
Edited 2009-04-05 05:13 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
edit: put another way, which would you choose: 720p or 1080i? For almost anything but sports, I'd choose 1080i. They use roughly the same bandwidth.
I'm not sure that interlace reduces bandwidth. 1080i/30fps does half of each frame every 1/60th of a second. So you're still transmitting 30 frames per second, just in 1/60th halves.
However, 780p and 1080i are roughly the same resolution. Interlacing, through the optical effect of interlacing loses about 30% in real resolution, making them roughly the same.
But, most HDTVs are LCD or plasma, which is only progressive, so 1080i gets converted to 1080p anyway. If it's a 24p movie, the 4:3 pulldown converts it to full 1080p, the same way progressive scan DVD players look about 30% better on a progressive TV.
Member since:2005-06-28
BTW, you gotta watch the HD trailer for the new "Crank" movie! It was shot with the $3500 Canon XH-A1, and they also used the $800 HF-100 models as "crash cams".
http://www.apple.com/trailers/lions_gate/crank2/hd/
It just shows that it's the director & crew who make the film and not the camera. Heck, most 2k digital cinemas in the US today don't have a better quality than an LCD TV, so pretty much any prosumer camera can deliver good enough quality for cinema quality.
However, quality still maters. These consumer HD cameras (especially from Canon, as they have more manual controls) have liberated a lot of people who wanted to express themselves in a better visual way.
Edited 2009-04-05 04:21 UTC
Member since:
2008-08-26
Surely this is a "Page 2" article?
Member since:2005-07-24
Eugenia swoops in whenever she feels like it to post her stuff. Relevance of topic does not matter to her.
Edited 2009-04-05 18:32 UTC
Member since:2005-09-21
I think they mentioned this before, if its a full out article (eg theres a read more section) its going to be on page 1. If its a snippet then page 2. Not too hard to understand.
Maybe topic wise, but not everything on here has been OSnews for a while..
Edited 2009-04-05 18:45 UTC
Member since:
2005-07-06
I'm really enjoying some of the new 24p video cameras/DLSRs coming out. A lot of shows are being shot digitally now, especially in the sci-fi realm. Galactica's mini-series was shot with film, but when it got picked up as a series it was done in DV.
Which brings me to a question. Why do we even bother with interlaced standards now? Computer displays, LCD, and plasma all convert everything to progressive anyway.
Edited 2009-04-05 04:05 UTC