What is better hdv or avchd?

I am about to be a reporter for my school's morning
news program and am not sure whether to get hdv or
avchd? I have a 1 year old Macbook Pro (not current
generation but siliver one with 2.4 ghz 2gb ram and
200 gb hard drive) with imovie 08 and will probably
also be editing in final cut express 4. If you had to
choose between the hv40 and hf s100/hf s10/hf s11
for reporting in the field, which would you chose? I
have heard that avchd has had some problems. Is one
easier to edit than the other? We still broadcast in sd
but have lots of hd cameras. Does the video ever skip
when imported? What about rendering and capturing
video? I am looking for the best video quality possible
and something that is future-proof, but need to edit
this video a lot, and probably will be needing to shoot
about 40 60 minutes of video at a time. My school has
pro and prosumer hdv cameras. Would I run into any
probelms when broadcasting avchd for my case? Please
help me out and I thank you in advance.
Message was edited by: 12mill

12mill wrote:
.. I assumed that the HD cameras were just better in terms of quality even though they we broadcast in standard definition. Is this true?..
this is a very complex issue, when you leave your living room at home = work only with one camera, one computer, one delivery device ..
integration into a structure of editors, rooms, delivery-chains, etc.. a diff. cup of tea..
can others handle your files and hardware?
what about archiving?
what about indexing?
technically, for sure a better input results in better output.
but..
HD is 4-6 more data than SD
HD isn't handled 'natively', you have always add conversion-times on input + render times on ouput
there are diff. standards for HD
no-tripod looks in HD/70" TFT even more worse than SD..
the main assets of each format imho:
• HDV allows easy storage of raws AND of final edits => excellent long-term storage
• SDcard is small and ultra-fast in preview, some models allow 2-8Mpixel-stills WHILE video recording
pic quality is defined by camera (optics, chip size and number, bitrate).
and handling.. a 1/4000 shutter speed in a candle lighted room could result in bad pics..

Similar Messages

What should I get, HDV or AVCHD camera.

I'm looking to get a new camera and I'm looking at most likely getting a Sony camera. I'm wondering which will work better and easier with Final Cut. I'm just stuck in deciding between a Hard disk drive camera that will record in AVCHD or one that records on mini DV tape in HDV. Im mainly looking for which has higher quality and greater ease of use.
Thanks

What version of FCP are you running? AVCHD support is officially limited to FCP 6.0.1 and I'd be wary until the accepted wisdom is that this is a straightforward workflow with no quality loss.
You state that your primary objectives are output to the web as video podcast or to DVD. As such I believe you're wasting your time looking at both proposed formats.
AVCHD workflow is unproven IMHO, HDV is wasted on video podcast/web output and you'll struggle to find a Blu Ray burner to output BluRay DVDs and the red dye HD DVDs you can output will only work in 1 player.
HDV editing brings it's own difficulties as stated and suggesting the HVX-200 with its associated P2 cost is plainly ridiculous for your budget.
I ain't impressed with 3 x 1/5" CCDs either - whatever the camera.
Get a 3 x 1/4.7" CCD Panasonic PV-GS500 (or GS400 if you can find one) or Sony DCR-HC96 for straightforward Standard Def workflow unless you want no inexpensive external monitoring or long render times (without converting to a more editing friendly codec via capture card = more expense).
There's life left in Standard Def and you'll still get decent quality if you're on a tight budget and wait till HDV/HD/AVCHD or whatever becomes cheaper/easier to work with in the future.
Camera technique is more important than format - don't forget, if you're shooting hi-def for large screen viewing (and it's pretty pointless if you aren't), focus is so much more critical for one thing - I'd much rather work with and watch stuff shot by someone who knows one end of their DVX100 from the other, rather than some eejit who knows nowt but is using an expensive all-singing, all-dancing Hi-Def offering.
IMHO, of course.

HDV or AVCHD

Posting this question here although I'll probably be using both im08 and imHD. I was horrified when I first saw im08, but after giving it a whirl and finishing 6 10 minute movies in a day, I was fairly impressed by im08.
I'm taking the plunge and going for a new HD cam, my current cam is a canon xm2, it's given me good service but it's mainly home movies and it's so bulky I miss many shooting opportunities just because I leave it at home most of the time. So I'm going for a compact consumer type cam instead this time only I'm not sure if it should be HDV or AVCHD.
I'm tending to the AVCHD models at this time based on a couple of assumptions I've made, I'd be grateful for any comments about my assumptions before I actually make a choice.
1. I'm assuming HDV is recorded around 40 Mbps and from what I've seen the better quality AVCHD settings record at 15 Mbps. So that's 40 Mbps MPEG2 GOP vs 15 Mbps MPEG4/10, so I imagine that's pretty much a draw in a contest for quality.
2. I can store my original material on the mini DV tapes if I go for HDV. I assume I don't need to 'capture' AVCHD in the sense that I do with HDV and can effectively just copy the AVC files from the cams HD to the HD on my mac, in which case I can archive the original material to DVD at the rate of about 30 minutes per DVD.
Additionally, should I be aware of any importing issues with either of these formats in respect of both im08 and imHD.
Finally, whether I go for HDV or AVCHD, my choice already seems to be Canon or Sony. Two areas of interest divide me between these companies. Digital stills: Sony win hands down - 6MP to Canons 3MP, on the other hand I believe Canon's image stabiliser is vastly superior, which is a big thing for me, anyone know whether this is true or maybe just exaggerated.
In addition to that which I've raised, any other comments would be gratefully received.

OK. Had my camera an hour or so now. Here's what I've found so far.
im08 imports from the camera in AIC, which is anamorphic 1440 x 1080 at about 80 Mbps, so I'm not sure where everyone is getting their 960 x 540 from. This intermediate format also drops right into imHD with no problem at all.
I've got easy access to the original files on the camera via USB, but haven't yet got around to figuring how to archive these transport streams which is something I would like to do since they are considerably smaller than the AIC files obtained through im08.
I have a couple of tv's which will be my target for export for the foreseeable future. My simplest export option is export to QT using the tv preset, which gives me a file of 960 x 540 at 4+ Mbps. This resolution is clearly less than the maximum tv resolution of 720p but the tv won't support this resolution at 30 fps.
Being a PAL user my frame rate is 25 not 30, which will play on the tv at 720p, I've carried out a few trials and managed to get the tv to play 720/25p at 8 Mbps without a problem by exporting using QT to mpeg-4, it fails to play if I increase the bitrate further to 10 Mbps.
Of note I have not been able to detect any difference in quality between the 960 x 540 4 Mbps export and the 720p 8 Mbps export when I watch them on my 50" HD plasma. So unless further trials reveal any difference, I'll simply use the QT tv preset for exporting from both im08 and imHD.

Better playback of AVCHD in CS 5.5?

Hi
Are still running CS 5.03 on my two year old i7-920, and are stille experiencing some stutter and issues during playback while editting AVCHD - especially crossdissolves etc. between to different clips from same AVCHD file (a known bug/iussue in CS 5.0).
I have been wondering if it had anything to do with my system - and that might also be the cvase, but I have read about folks here in the forum having same issues a while back running PPro CS 5 on much better PCs than my own.
I have also lately read about a few that had some issues with playing back AVCHD, but after upgrading to 5.5 it seems to have dissapeared? So I wonder if these issues are solved in CS 5.5? Anyone who have had better experiences with AVCHD editting - both playback and overall - with PPro CS 5.5 compared to CS 5.0?
Cheers,
Morten

Nope - I have the Nvidia FX3800 and latest driver. It plays nice raw, but if you take a clip - divide it into two parts and make a crossdisolve between them - it stutters during playback - even without effects or anything. If I add just a simple effect it does not playback smoothly.
Wonder if a Blackmagic device could help in any way? Not sure I really understand what these BM gizmos are capable of? One could get the impression that they make it possible to playback smoothly AVCHD in 19020x1080 50/60P realtime with lots of effects etc. - am I wrong?
Morten

HDV or AVCHD editing = processor utilization = import/exp. quality loss

Hello,
my question about processability of HDV/AVCHD Movies with iMovie. I have learned that HDV and AVCHD files are transfered in the AIC format. That should mean editig a movie would be always in the AIC format and I assume no difference whether I come from HDV or AVCHD format it should be similar demanding to the core2duo processor except initial transcoding from H264 to AIC - is this right?. When I save a movie out of iMovie do I save it in AIC or in HDV/AVCHD? Is there a quality loss transferring a movie back and forth from/to HDV/AVCHD to AIC since HDV employs mpeg2 and AVCHD employs H264 which are both compressed formats? Practically does this also mean that AIC can work as a bridge to between both formats?
Thanks for your replies to my several questions!

I have cut/pasted this from another thread where I posted it following a question from a Canon HV20 owner. The info applies to all HDV and AVCHD cams though. Might help you decide.
This comes from www.camcorderinfo.com
Compression (7.0)
The Canon HV20 (Review, Specs, Recent News, $903) uses HDV compression, a very efficient MPEG-2 codec with a fixed data rate of 25Mbps, identical to the data rate of standard definition DV compression. HDV excels in capturing stunningly high-resolution video, but it is inferior to DV in terms of rendering motion realistically, due to its dependence on interframe compression. This means that at 1080i, only one in fifteen frames is a full-frame picture, while the intervening frames are compressed in relation to each full I frame. Interframe compression is much more efficient than intraframe compression, and allows HDV to squeeze a full 1920 x 1080 picture into a 25Mbps stream, recordable to inexpensive MiniDV tapes. DV uses intraframe compression, so each frame is a fully independent picture, allowing much better motion capture. DV also uses a superior 4:1:1 color space while HDV encodes via a truncated 4:2:0 color space.
The inherent weaknesses of HDV have led many networks to deem the format sub-standard for broadcast, but it is still the best high definition format available on the consumer camcorder market. Most consumers find the stunning resolution of HDV trumps the superior motion handling of DV. A professionally lit HDV interview (or any HDV shot without too much detail or motion) can look nearly as good as footage shot in a professional HD format on a $20,000 camera. AVCHD, a new HD format that uses H.264 compression was introduced in 2006 and compresses video even more aggressively than HDV. Our tests of Canon's UX1 (Review, Specs, Recent News, $729.95) and SR1 (Review, Specs, Recent News, $1119.99) last fall show that while AVCHD video is very sharp, it suffers from grain and artifacts much more than HDV compression. The wildcard in the consumer high definition arena is a new MPEG-2 format developed by JVC, the MPEG Transfer Stream codec, which appears for the first time in the Everio HD7 (Review, Specs, Recent News, $1529). MPEG Transport Stream compresses video at up to 30Mbps, and may rival or even outclass HDV compression.
Media (6.0)
Like other HDV camcorders, the Canon HV20 records to MiniDV cassettes, the same inexpensive and widely available format used by standard definition DV camcorders. MiniDV cassettes have a run time of 60 minutes in SP mode, but can hold up to 90 minutes of more compressed LP video. Unlike the DVD, memory card, and HDD formats, MiniDV tapes are linear media so moving clips to a PC from tape is a real-time process. For anyone serious about the quality of his or her video, HDV recorded to MiniDV cassette remains the best consumer HD option available. To date, consumer non-linear video formats do not support the highest-quality video compression codices for high definition (HDV) and standard definition (DV).

New camera: HDV or AVCHD??

Hi
b Q1: I am looking for a HD camera, I've used DV until now. I'll also upgrade to CS4. But which camera should I go for, or more specific, which format: HDV or AVCHD? Any camera suggestions (in the range of 1000-1500 USD (or about 10.000 NOK)
I have read a lot about the time issues using AVCHD, as well as other problems using this format. But it seems that, at least for someone, it does work.
About my usage:
- editing is just a hobby for me, so long rendering/exporting time is not a problem, as long as the(simple) editing works fine (that I preview transitions, added text, and some other "simple" effects without need to render first)
- for me would a HDD based camera be more convenient than a tape based HDV camera (that is why I "hope" to get a avchd camera instead of HDV)
b Q2: I have a Core 2 Duo 2,4 GHz, 2 GB DDR2 ram three disk system now, but will do some upgrades if neccessary (eg. 3xRAID 0, Quad core, some more ram)
b Q3 Which process is time consuming using AVCHD? importing to Premiere (but I guess you do not have to recode the files?), editing, and/or rendering/exporting to Blue ray?
b Q4 For those of you using AVCHD, and are happy about how its works, what kind of camera and system do you use?
Thanx
Nic

Hi,
my inputs are:
Q1:
if you like a nontape workflow --> Go for AVCHD
Why not using Premiere Elements 7 for your hobby? everthing is perfectly supported in the first round..
Q2:
With a reasonable Q6600 system you can play 2 AVCHD streams nearly readtime today, i.e. editable both in PPro CS4 and APE7
Q3
In my case to apply/render a redgiant filter to a clip is even more time consuming as to generate a BD, never was a problem for me
Q4
AVCHD isn't evil, it's only another animal to tame.
I use a Sony CX6E camcorder (memorysticks up to 32 GB), a monopod, a Zoom H2 for audio (forget the 5.1 ideas with cameras which even don't have limiter for the internal mic). If you would like to have some manual control I would suggest to look the Panasonic AVCHD consumer line.
My next investment will be most probably a Panasonic HMC151E (AVCHD)or a Sony FX1000 with a recorder attached --> both at least 200 % of your budget; in any case you touched only the surface of all components needed for this "new world" :-))
hber
SW Vista Ultimate 32 bit, Cubase SX 4.5.2, Triton Le, Adobe Master Collection, Izotope Ozone 3, Reason 4, Native Instruments Massive, Battery 3, VSL Vienna Suite, HW Intel D975XBX2, RME HDSP9632, Quad Q6600, 3 GB memory, Marvell 61xx 1 TB Raid 0 storage, GeForce 7600 GS silent, ext equipment MX200+166XL, Yamaha N12digital 5.1 mixing studio

Ingesting HDV and AVCHD in same project - workflow?

Whats the workflow with ingesting HDV and AVCHD into same project? Im guessing convert both to 'Apple intermediate codec' i think this is straightforward for avchd as is in prefs pane of log and transfer, but how do i do this for hdv?
Also set the avchd to record at 1080i or does it not make much difference once captured / pro ressed up.?

Bring both in as ProRes. Much more processor efficient.

Do HDV or AVCHD keep track of Date/Time like miniDV?

Do HDV and AVCHD have the time and date stored like miniDV does? I've done some searching and read through the HDV article on wikipedia and don't see this mentioned.
Thanks.

Anyone with any more info on this? According to what Tominlowa says it looks like the date/time info is stored on the AVCHD camera either in the video file or accompanying index files. I wonder how this works with HDV? Maybe I should be keeping manual logs when I shoot footage so years from now I will know what the date of my footage is.
Thanks.

What's better?

Hey there everybody! I have an iMac G5 and a 32 inch Sony Bravia. What's better for video out:
Mini-DVI/VGA adapter to VGA cable to TV
or
Mini DVI/DVI adapter to HDMI/DVI cable to TV?
If there is a difference, will it be noticeable enough to spend the extra money for the extra cord?

OMG! I just found this! Mini DVI to HDMI adapter at Future Shop!
http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/product/startech-startech-mini-dvi-to-hdmi-video- adapter-cable-mdvihdmimf-mdvihdmimf/10155701.aspx?path=8c4cd7f1a46c9ed096fa9c61f 5a309b2en02
Would that be my best bet?

What is better: Builder 2 oder Plug In

Hi guys!
As i couldn't find much about that, here is my question.
Maybe it is interesting enough for some experts to have smal
discussion.
What is better to use: builder or th plug-in.?
I don''t really need the to have a design view, so pure code
would be enough for me. And what I hate about the builder is the
performance when compiling large projects. Is this better if you
use Eclipse (which version) together with the plugin. Can you have
both installed and use the same project workplace to "share" the
projects, depending on what you want to do?
What gives me the best performance for writing, compiling,
debugging?
THX

See iPhone. See iPhone charged to 100%. See user using iPhone. User opens an app and uses it. When done user goes into recently used list and "closes" app. User does this each time when using an app. User gets 145 texts. 71 hours later iPhone only has 8% battery charge. See the battery in red. User charges it.
See iPhone. iPhone is charged to 100% See user using iPhone. See user opening apps and never closing them on the recently used app list. See recently used list grow to 66. User gets 141 texts. User gets 2 more phone calls than last time. 71 hours and 1 minute later iPhone has 8% battery charge. See the battery in red. User charges it.
See user get only 1 minute difference in battery life. See user not bother to close apps anymore. See user also explain this is not exactly scientific. See user release Spot to chase down Dah-veed. See user and Jane get busy now.

What is better???--sockets question

I have a server that receives one client (one thread of them) per socket.
Is it better to have all in the same socket?
where is the bottle�s neck? in the processor or in the bandwith?

ok
and what is better for my server:
1) receive each client in a different socket
2)receive all clients in one socketAFAIK you would need a new port for each server socket. How then can your clients know which port to connect too? Therefore I think (2) is the proper solution.
For a general implementation of a tcp server, have a look at my solution at http://www.ebi.ac.uk/~kirsch/monq-doc/monq/net/TcpServer.html . You can download the code by following the link at the bottom of that page. Comments/questions welcome.
Harald.

What is better for security? WPA2 or Access control

I have a Airport express and 2 computers; a Mac and a PC.
When it come to securing your wi-fi connection so you don't get unauthorized clients on your network.
What is better
A- Just using encryption like WPA2 or some other password based system or
B- Just entering the "Airport ID" (MAC) of the computers I want to authorize in my network on the Access control panel.
Seems to me like the later is easier on the clients since they don't need a password or anything, It's completely transparent for the client. And I believe encryption slows down the connection a bit and create overhead for the computer. But maybe I don't have the full picture of the situation.
Is there anybody who can illuminated this subject for me?
thanks
PowerBookG4 Mac OS X (10.3.9)

WPA2 is virtually uncrackable only really vulnerable if you use a real word as a password.
When using access control, MAC addresses are sent unecrypted can be read and spoofed and therefore do not add any security.
Unfortunately "Closed" networks, MAC access control lists, and reduction in transmission power are all more "feel good" security rather than real security. All these various approaches are dated and mistakenly lead to overconfidence.
WPA is your friend if you value wireless security.

What is better when converting analog video for FCE, Canopus100/110/300/or5

All,
What is better when converting analog video for FCE, Canopus100/110/300/or500? I have a new MACPRO with FCE HD and I wanted to convert some of my older video that was recorded on a HI8 Camcorder... Thanks.

I have the ADVC-100 (older model) and ADVC-110. They are identical except that the ADVC-110 does not come with an AC power adapter. Currently sells for about $220USD. If all you need to do is convert from HI8 tapes, the ADVC100/110 will do the job quite nicely.
The ADVC300 adds some enhancements for video signal cleanup, but at a higher price. Currently sells for about $450USD. The ADVC500 is overkill for home use.

What is better ti use entourage or my .mac account to vidoe chat?

What is better to use entourage or my .mac account to video chat?
How do I add a buddy into my entourage buddy list?
Message was edited by: fotomike

Entourage is a Microsoft application and is probably Linked to MSN for Mac.
I have Office:Mac 2000 and this version of MSN does not Video.
9:24 PM Tuesday; December 18, 2007

What is better Mac Mini or Mac Pro and 4K 40" screen or iMac 5K for work with Exel

I am working on Macbook pro retina for around 16 hours a day, it is ok but the screen is to small. I am opening about 25 - 30 EXCEL windows, 20 - 25 safari windows at the same time. Excel windows are small, they only show 40 rows and S column Now I am considering buying iMac 5k ( but the screen is only 27", however a very high resolution but I think that fonts and digits displayed may be too small ). I am also considering Mac Mini or Pro with 40" 4K TV ( 4k computer monitors are 27 - 31" , so better idea would be purchasing iMac 5k ) . The problem is that 40 - 42" TV don't have Display Port ( I can't find it anywhere )
Please help me to choose what would suit my needs better. I need large screen to work comfortably with an Excel sheets. What is better? Mac Mini or Mac Pro and 4K 40" screen or iMac 5K for work with Excel ?. The other problem I have is that when I spend 16 hours at work with retina macbook , my eyes are ok. Using the 30'' Dell screen 2560/1440 my eyes are tired after 2 hours.
Thanks for your help on advance
Best regards
David

Currently you can only get 4 K at 30 Hz via HDMI. Some users have reported jerky curser movement because of the 30 Hz.
I would go for the 5K iMac. You can add a second screen at 4K.
FaceTime HD camera
Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 3840 by 2160 pixels on an external display
Support for extended desktop and video mirroring modes
The Mac Mini supports:
Support for up to two displays at 2560 by 1600 pixels, both at millions of colors
Thunderbolt digital video output
Native Mini DisplayPort output
DVI output using Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter (sold separately)
VGA output using Mini DisplayPort to VGA Adapter (sold separately)
Dual-link DVI output using Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI Adapter (sold separately)
HDMI video output
Support for 1080p resolution at up to 60Hz
Support for 3840-by-2160 resolution at 30Hz
Support for 4096-by-2160 resolution at 24Hz
The 2013 Mac Pro can use three and more displays:
Mac Pro (Late 2013): Using multiple displays - Apple Support
I would go for multiple screens

What is better hdv or avchd?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for