Video University: Video University Forums: HDV: Confused about quality of HDV

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.

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:
Confused about quality of HDV

Multimedia me!
Novice

Aug 15, 2005, 7:09 AM

Post #1 of 20 (4508 views)
Shortcut

Confused about quality of HDV	Can't Post

I have a feeling I'm opening a can of worms with my first ever post on this forum, but here it goes:
HDV is being praised for its quality, both for video and to take stills of the footage. As a multimedia user this sounds brilliant to me. However when I search the web I see such a variety of quality I don't know who or what to believe. Based in the Uk I did a google search for HDV examples and ended up here : [link deleted at site owner's request]. Is this representative for HDV quality or are the glossy examples I've seen here more accurate. Please bare in mind I'm not someone with great camera skills or knowledge and just want to find out what these cameras do out of the box. Many thanks for any help.

Yours sincerely,

James

(This post was edited by videobear on Aug 19, 2005, 12:20 PM)

adtr
Veteran

Aug 15, 2005, 7:22 AM

Post #2 of 20 (4501 views)
Shortcut

Post deleted by adtr [In reply to]

Multimedia me!
Novice

Aug 15, 2005, 7:30 AM

Post #3 of 20 (4497 views)
Shortcut

Re: [adtr] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

Hi there,

Thanks for the swift reply. I didn't know you were a member of this forum. Hope you don't mind me posting the link. Thanks also for letting me know this is the result 'out of the box'. I guess I can be wrong, but my current dv camera does not seem to be in a different league. I guess I was hoping for a holy grale and HDV does not seem to be it.

James

adtr
Veteran

Aug 15, 2005, 7:35 AM

Post #4 of 20 (4493 views)
Shortcut

Post deleted by adtr [In reply to]

Multimedia me!
Novice

Aug 15, 2005, 7:55 AM

Post #5 of 20 (4489 views)
Shortcut

Re: [adtr] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

It's not so much that I don't like the clips, but that the difference with DV seems smaller than I would have expected. I guess I thought HDV would always have that wow factor even straight out of the box. Granted the clips have a higher resolution, but that is lost on a current TV set. I guess I'll wait until HD screens are starting to retail at a decent price.
The frame grabs (which was one of the reasons I started looking at HDV) are just disappointing. If I would have guessed how the pics were made, I'd have said a mobile phone. Sorry, don't mean to be harsh, just my humble opinion. I guess the time that 'one does it all' is just not there yet.

James

videobear
Veteran

Aug 15, 2005, 8:42 AM

Post #6 of 20 (4481 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Multimedia me!] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

I agree, it's confusing. Not only are there several "flavors" of HDV, but there are also various intermediate codecs that are better or worse, there are a lot of users who don't know how to optimize their cameras, and the display medium (the Web, and your monitor) are not really able to transmit HDV images without compromise.

What I'm relying on, more than the posted images, is the opinion of shooters I trust...and most of those are saying that HDV is a definite improvement over DV, well worth the price to upgrade.

Regards,
Doug Graham
Panda Productions

KevinShaw
Veteran

Aug 15, 2005, 2:36 PM

Post #7 of 20 (4444 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Multimedia me!] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

You can't judge HDV quality by looking at highly compressed samples on the internet. In terms of generating still images, HDV isn't quite as good as today's entry-level digital photo cameras, but it's way better than DV for this purpose. If you get video of something on an HDV camera which no one captured on a still camera, you could make a usable print which most people would appreciate. This could open up some new options for videographers in terms of marketing their output to clients, especially via the internet and also perhaps in printed form.

Multimedia me!
Novice

Aug 17, 2005, 8:23 AM

Post #8 of 20 (4398 views)
Shortcut

Re: [kwshaw1] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

Thanks for all comments! Very much appreciated.

James

djtoltz
User

Aug 17, 2005, 2:54 PM

Post #9 of 20 (4383 views)
Shortcut

Re: [videobear] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

Doug,

I'm skeptical about HDV for several reasons. None of this is to say that the image quality isn't better than [prosumer] DV25, but here are my thoughts;

Disclaimer: I don't own an HDV camcorder, and I don't have experience using one.

1) low bit-rate must result from compromises in compression
I just don't believe you get something for nothing. I've always considered MPEG2 as a delivery format, and areas of high motion suffer with inter-frame vectorized compression.

2) video quality is as much a function of high quality, in-camera processing of video information as it is actual resolution. For example, the AJ-SDX900 2/3" 3-CCD 16:9/4:3 24P/30P/60i DVCPRO Cinema Camera with CineSwitch will likely produce better images at 720x480 than any consumer HDV camera. Of course, it's an unfair comparison, but my point is that the image sensor's ability to capture shadow and highlight detail, and the ability of the camera's electonics to process that detail and allow you to squeeze or stretch the dynamic range of the image are as critical as actual pixel counts. Of course, lens quality also plays into the picture.
The higher resolution of HDV requires that the electronics be that much better, because of the high bandwidth of image data that must be processed.

3) The current set of HDV cameras seem targeted towards the consumer, with poor low-light handling, small CCDs or CMOS sensors, non-interchangable lenses, etc.

4) I see real HD right around the corner, and HDV as just an intermediate step; especially as HD DVDs become available and the market for HD starts to expand.

I've probably missed a few points. I'm a natural cynic; especially after being in the computer business for 25 years, and having seen so many new technologies get over-hyped and eventually eclipsed. Based on the specification of the cameras I've reseached and what I know about low bit-rate MPEG2, I would expect poor shadow detail (from at least some models), and degradation in high motion clips.

---
Douglas Toltzman
Hubert, NC

videobear
Veteran

Aug 17, 2005, 3:27 PM

Post #10 of 20 (4381 views)
Shortcut

Re: [djtoltz] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

Every bit of what you say is true, except the part about current HDV cameras being aimed at the consumer. Some are, but the Sony ZiU and the JVC HD100, in particular, are squarely aimed at the professional market...and the market is buying the Sony as fast as they can build them, and will probably do the same with the JVC when it's more widely available.

The faults and shortcomings of HDV are known. But even with those shortcomings, early adopters are telling us that the pictures look better than the DV they were shooting before with comparable cameras, like the XL2 and PD-170. (Disclaimer: I don't own an HDV camera either, and haven't used one yet. Ain't that something? We're the Blind Men and the Elephant.) Crazy

Regards,
Doug Graham
Panda Productions

djtoltz
User

Aug 17, 2005, 3:37 PM

Post #11 of 20 (4378 views)
Shortcut

Re: [videobear] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

I should probably exempted the high end Sony HDV from my comment, but I thought the new JVC with interchangable lenses was not yet available. At least, not to mere mortals like myself. I've got some independant movie making friends in Wilmington who are supposed to get a demo model soon, but even they haven't seen it, yet.

When they do get it, I'll head over there and give it a go, and report back on what I find. The JVC definitely has potential, but I'm holding out for 2/3 inch sensors and interchangeable lenses on my next camera. It's hard to call a camera "professional", when the price, with lens, is lower than the price I intend to pay for just the lens.
---
Douglas Toltzman
Hubert, NC

KevinShaw
Veteran

Aug 17, 2005, 3:42 PM

Post #12 of 20 (4377 views)
Shortcut

Re: [djtoltz] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

Douglas: the thing here is that since you haven't actually tried HDV for yourself, you're just guessing how it might look based on technical considerations. This reminds me of the old saying, "The difference between theory and practice is bigger in practice than it is theory." In this case, what you seem to expect HDV to look like based on theory underestimates its actual quality in practice. A relevant observation here is that in the ten years since the DV format was introduced, there have been many improvements in the efficiency of compression algorighthms -- which provides a plausible explanation for how HDV can look so good using the same bit rate as DV.

At WEVA Expo last week we saw real-world HDV videos which were simply breath-taking, and probably settled once and for all whether HDV is going to be a successful professional format. Once we get mainstream HD DVD players next year, HDV will likely take over as the preferred recording format of choice for many videographers. I'm a cynic by nature myself, but once you see HDV displayed at full quality it's hard not to be a believer.

videobear
Veteran

Aug 17, 2005, 3:43 PM

Post #13 of 20 (4377 views)
Shortcut

Re: [djtoltz] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

The Europeans are starting to see first deliveries of the JVC; nothing here in the States yet.

I saw the specs on JVC's flagship HDV camcorder: 2/3" CCDs, 720p, full size or mini format tapes, will do either 720p or 1080i to the optional hard disk recorder. List is $28K, without the lens.

That ought to be professional enough for anyone! Wink

Regards,
Doug Graham
Panda Productions

djtoltz
User

Aug 17, 2005, 3:51 PM

Post #14 of 20 (4376 views)
Shortcut

Re: [kwshaw1] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

Thank you, for those observations. I agree that compression technologies have improved. I am also aware that a hardware compression chip can out-peform software compression in several areas; especially speed.

However, I also know that I can shoot a demo that displays the strengths of any format, and avoid showing the weaknesses by selecting my subject matter, lighting, camera angles, etc. carefully.

I am happy to hear that you've seen some excellent examples of HDV at work. I would like to believe that I'll be happy with HDV, when and if I adopt it. I am still thinking, though, that I may bypass HDV for actual HD. It's also not fair of me to peg these criticisms to the format, as I'm speaking as much about the current models, and their limitations, as I am the format itself.
---
Douglas Toltzman
Hubert, NC

KevinShaw
Veteran

Aug 17, 2005, 5:49 PM

Post #15 of 20 (4362 views)
Shortcut

Re: [djtoltz] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

I would like to believe that I'll be happy with HDV, when and if I adopt it. I am still thinking, though, that I may bypass HDV for actual HD.

Sorry, but I just have to laugh when I hear such comments now after seeing what I saw at WEVA plus what I'm seeing with my own work using a Sony FX1. No doubt higher-end HD cameras will be capable of generating better image quality than current HDV models, but the irony there is that the best distribution format to be available next year will be...HDV video! That's right, future blue-laser HD DVD players are slated to be capable of playing full-quality HDV files, and that's the best option you'll be able to use if you want to deliver maximum quality directly to end users. (Unless you happen to have customers who plan to play their videos on a DVCProHD deck.) I can't wait to see how steamed "real HD" producers get when they find out they have to tell their customers that HDV is a viable format after all...

djtoltz
User

Aug 17, 2005, 7:30 PM

Post #16 of 20 (4351 views)
Shortcut

Re: [kwshaw1] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

I'm not sure you understand where I'm coming from, and maybe it's just a difference in our experience. I've worked with cameras that cost $25K for the body alone. There is a big difference in image quality, even at the same resolution. Even if the final delivery is compressed to MPEG2 as "HDV", that does not mean that shadow detail, highlight detail, lens quality, selective focus achieved with larger sensors, precise dynamic control, sensor noise levels, etc., etc., don't make any difference.

I will be looking at the higher end HDV cameras, but if the features I am seeking aren't available in HDV, then I'm jumping to the next tier. I'm sorry, if I'm not being clear. I've always thought that MPEG2 was an adequate delivery format. I am just not sure about it as a source format, and the quality of the current crop of cameras leaves something to be desired.

This will be my last post on this topic, because I'm afraid this will degrade into a silly argument. It is possible that we have different backgrounds and different expectations. Obviously, there wouldn't be the range of camcorders (from $300 to $300,000), if there weren't a wide range of requirements, shooting conditions, etc. I'm sure if I were dragging my camera through a jungle on foot, I'd want something like the Sony HDR-HC1.

Be that as it may. It would appear you are a staunch supporter of HDV, and you are definitely not alone. I will probably be using it soon enough; if for no other reason than to evaluate it.

Thank you, for your insights.
---
Douglas Toltzman
Hubert, NC

KevinShaw
Veteran

Aug 17, 2005, 10:39 PM

Post #17 of 20 (4344 views)
Shortcut

Re: [djtoltz] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

Doug: that makes sense, so thanks for clarifying. I don't doubt that a $25-50K HD camera will yield better output than a $3-5K HDV camera, but it's just odd to refer to one as "real HD" and the other not when both look good and will be delivered to end users in HDV or lesser format. If you can afford to use the more expensive cameras in a way which makes sense to your customers, by all means go for it. I expect my client base will be thrilled to get HDV source/output quality at prices not too far out of line with DV production costs. Good news for everyone here...

Multimedia me!
Novice

Aug 19, 2005, 6:30 AM

Post #18 of 20 (4272 views)
Shortcut

Re: [kwshaw1] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

This thread is giving me a wealth of info! Thanks!
After reading some remarks and doing some research I've got a few more questions. Since HDV ia a highly compressed format artefacts do happen. I've heard some horror stories that when filming fast motion (or having quite a bit of camera movement) blocks and even horizontal stripes might occur (much like bad attempts at encoding mpeg for dvd's at low bitrates) . This seems to be made worse in editing when you cut a non-keyframes. Has anyone had occurences like this? Is it possible to fix this or do you have to drop that footage?

James

KevinShaw
Veteran

Aug 19, 2005, 1:54 PM

Post #19 of 20 (4227 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Multimedia me!] Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

James: I haven't encountered anything yet in shooting with HDV that made me want to toss any footage due to glaring motion artifacts, but HDV does get "softer" when it has to process a lot of motion -- and video viewed on a large HDTV may make you seasick if the camera is waving all over the place. If you plan to be filming a lot of material with high amounts of motion you would want to evaluate HDV carefully before buying any cameras, but for general videography it's fine.

RichA
Novice

Aug 23, 2005, 3:34 PM

Post #20 of 20 (4009 views)
Shortcut

Re: Confused about quality of HDV [In reply to]	Can't Post

Hi James. This is previously posted, but I did put up approximately side by side comparisons
of JVC HD and JVC DV of a basketball game snippet. This shows high motion for sure.
Take a look at: http://www.sportsflashtech.com/video/

And in terms of compression, be sure to see my compression sample material at
http://www.sportsflashtech.com/video/workflow-divx.htm

Hope this is helpful,
Rich