VideoUniversity.com
Home Free Library Store
Free Catalog

Please support VU by making your B&H purchases and links through this B&H ad. Doesn't cost a penny more. <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com?BI=603&KBID=1017"><IMG src="/images/flash_ads/videoUniv2_revised_conv.jpg" alt="B&H Photo" width="260" height="70"></a>
Video University Sponsor
Advertisement

See The New VU Postcard Catalog

To post in the forums see the Forum Guidelines.

Join or Renew Today.
New Benefits for all VU Members
Forum Guidelines and FAQ
Main Index Search Posts
Who's Online Log In


Home: Video University Forums: HDV:
Changes in HDV Spec

 
 


DSE
Veteran


Apr 7, 2006, 11:07 PM

Post #1 of 11 (2313 views)
Shortcut
Changes in HDV Spec Can't Post
Kinda surprised no one has said anything about recent changes in the HDV specification...
24p/24f is now an officially supported format, which means that many of the NLE's will probably soon support 24p in HDV modes
Also, and bigger, is that the format now supports 4 channels of audio, and PCM has been accepted as a spec, but still needs a supportive transfer mode. Future cameras will offer two channels of MPEG 1/layer II audio, or four channels of MPEG 2/layer II audio.
While this will be a "notice me" announcement at NAB, it's actually been a spec for almost two months now. Or maybe it's a "yawn" update to the spec?

Douglas Spotted Eagle
Author, producer, composer
www.vasst.com
"I enjoy music, long walks at sunset on the beach, and poking dead things with a sharp stick."


MSDowney
Veteran


Apr 8, 2006, 12:16 AM

Post #2 of 11 (2306 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Changes in HDV Spec [In reply to] Can't Post
This is nice news ans should makesome folks very happy... :)



Mike

Thomson/GrassValley


backfocus
User


Apr 8, 2006, 6:39 AM

Post #3 of 11 (2296 views)
Shortcut
Post deleted by backfocus [In reply to]
 


adtr
Veteran


Apr 8, 2006, 7:08 AM

Post #4 of 11 (2293 views)
Shortcut
Re: [backfocus] Changes in HDV Spec [In reply to] Can't Post
That is a point they should address, even if they have to call it hdv3 or something. Otherwise hdv will be in the same position early adopter broadcasters are in now with hd decoder set-top boxes. The main Europen broadcaster, used to be 1080 HD but changed its name, is in a right pickle about how to introduce new mpg4 boxes to replace the old stock and even Sky are having a bit of bother with the mpg 2 /4 transition.


Colvin Eccleston
manchesterweddingstudio.co.uk


DSE
Veteran


Apr 8, 2006, 9:43 AM

Post #5 of 11 (2287 views)
Shortcut
Re: [backfocus] Changes in HDV Spec [In reply to] Can't Post
In Reply To
They might as well go straight to an MPEG4 flavor of HDV instead of the crap MPEG2 spec. HDV sucks for everyone except the rank amateurs!

No foolin'. Those guys that produce for HBO, Showtime, Discovery, PBS, FoodNetwork, Military Channel, CourtTV, Sundance Channel, KingKong, Miami Vice, 24, are all rank amateurs. One of these days they'll figure it out, I'm sure.
Til then, they can live in blind ignorance, I guess.

Colvin, I don't understand what you're talking about? How does HDV relate to early buyers of HD displays without MP4 decoders? There weren't even MPEG 2 decoder chips for displays available until late last year. The MP4 chips still aren't available, so why worry about something that doesn't exist.
that said, acquisition and delivery are two totally different animals. One really doesn't care much about the other. HDV will always be MPEG 2. The only reason they'd even examine an MP4 variant is if they went tapeless. That's entirely possible, but then it wouldn't be HDV. It's also unlikely you'll see MP4 down in the lower bitrates. J2K is much more intelligent.
HDV is the DV of this generation. 5-7 years of life span in it....

Douglas Spotted Eagle
Author, producer, composer
www.vasst.com
"I enjoy music, long walks at sunset on the beach, and poking dead things with a sharp stick."


KevinShaw
Veteran

Apr 9, 2006, 4:28 PM

Post #6 of 11 (2196 views)
Shortcut
Re: [backfocus] Changes in HDV Spec [In reply to] Can't Post
In Reply To
They might as well go straight to an MPEG4 flavor of HDV instead of the crap MPEG2 spec. HDV sucks for everyone except the rank amateurs!
C'mon now, if you want to pick a fight you should at least try to make it intellectually interesting. Like you could try explaining why MPEG4 is being relegated for now to consumer-priced video cameras with cheap lenses and other limitations, while MPEG2 is being used in camears costing upward of $20,000. Or why the most expensive HD cameras use higher recording bit rates than HDV, not lower bit rates like MPEG4. Or why HDV has already surpassed all other HD recording formats combined in terms of the number of professional videographers using it, while MPEG4 has yet to get any serious attention for professional purposes. Or why the first batch of HD movies to be released on Blu-ray discs will be encoded in MPEG2 format, not MPEG4, even though both codecs are reportedly supported by the players. Dang, you'd think the whole world had gone nuts or something and concluded that MPEG2 is actually a pretty useful video codec. Imagine that.


DSE
Veteran


Apr 9, 2006, 9:03 PM

Post #7 of 11 (2192 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kwshaw1] Changes in HDV Spec [In reply to] Can't Post
Quote
while MPEG2 is being used in camears costing upward of $20,000

Actually, cameras costing double that amount not including good glass use MPEG 2. MPEG 2 has been used in broadcast for over a decade (since 1993), it's one of the standards of the industry and will continue to be so for a long, long time. MPEG 4 is great for delivery. For editing, acquisition, and archiving, hardware support, MPEG2 still has benefits superior to anything in mp4, and will be so for a while yet.

Douglas Spotted Eagle
Author, producer, composer
www.vasst.com
"I enjoy music, long walks at sunset on the beach, and poking dead things with a sharp stick."


adtr
Veteran


Apr 10, 2006, 5:22 AM

Post #8 of 11 (2155 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Changes in HDV Spec [In reply to] Can't Post
Thanks for picking me up on that. I forgot I was hearing the mpg4 argument from the delivvery side.


Colvin Eccleston
manchesterweddingstudio.co.uk


KevinShaw
Veteran

Apr 10, 2006, 10:58 AM

Post #9 of 11 (2147 views)
Shortcut
Re: [adtr] Changes in HDV Spec [In reply to] Can't Post
In Reply To
Thanks for picking me up on that. I forgot I was hearing the mpg4 argument from the delivvery side.
And the main advantage there is that MPEG4 is more compact than MPEG2, which makes it easier to store or transmit video content. The notion that MPEG4 is inherently better than MPEG2 is misleading at best, since they're both just mathematical techniques for compressing video using fewer bits than raw video data would require.


backfocus
User


Apr 10, 2006, 7:35 PM

Post #10 of 11 (2128 views)
Shortcut
Post deleted by backfocus [In reply to]
 


KevinShaw
Veteran

Apr 11, 2006, 3:30 AM

Post #11 of 11 (2101 views)
Shortcut
Re: [backfocus] Changes in HDV Spec [In reply to] Can't Post
In Reply To
Congratulations. You've just contradicted yourself.
You're right, that wasn't a well-worded comment. The point is that MPEG2 is a fine video codec which has worked well for many years, and a camera based on MPEG4 won't necessarily be better just because it's based on MPEG4.