Workflow for dv 480p to HD up-conversion & weird ways to do it? Thoughts?

Question

Hi,
I'm preparing to output my dv feature film 92 minutes long (720x480p, 4:3, letterboxed, not anamorphic), and want to put it into various formats. I don't think I can afford a teranex upconversion but was wondering:
1. If I output using a kona and capture can I a.) do the settings so I can open the film in widescreen? b.) In that case is it unnecessary to do a render and then letterbox that render...can I simply output it and have the kona software letterbox? c.) Would it be best in a professional setting to output to hdsr and then output from that to hdcam and digibeta copies and d.) downconvert back to dvd from there (with the advantage of the widescreen if I so desired instead of doing the dvd from my original work)?
2. I am cheap and always find weird solutions...HAS ANYONE HEARD of ANYONE doing something so nutty as taking their 480p dvd (or possibly a direct output of the project through hdmi) and putting it through a high end television up-resolution dvd player such as the oppo 970hd and capturing the video output back into fcp as 720p or 1080p? Quite frankly, why wouldn't this be possible? Why would it look any better or worse than upresolutioning a 480p through anything short of a teranex from what I'm reading out there?
3. I've been told if I get a kona or do anything involving output and then recapturing a QT I might want for use for blu-ray (where I have to output from one mac, and go into another that also has fcp) I'd need another mac to do the capture...If I wanted my own system, I was told an intel mac mini would have enough power to recapture...no reason for it NOT TO...HAS anyone recaptured an HD QT on a mac mini that they put fcp on?????
I know I'm going to get a lot of flak for asking these questions, hate letters, "you're a bimbo", whatnot...BUT REALLY HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY done 2 or 3? And comments on 1 appreciated
THANKS

Answer 1

Slow down buddy...you're firing off way too many questions. And please use punctuation and capital letters...reading your posts is challenging. If you go to NYU, please write as if you are delivering a term paper. I hope this isn't how you deliver term papers.
but here it's scarier as I'm talking going 4:1:1 to 4:2:2...
Yeah, well...I capture HDV as ProRes all the time. That is 4:2:0 to 4:2:2. It doesn't add anything, it doesn't make things look worse. Just carries it over. You have less falloff when color correcting 4:2:2 converted from 4:1:1 then if you color corrected 4:1:1 directly, but that's about it.
When I talked to a technician there who is the only one of two in my wanderings in the last few weeks who isn't an idiot I said has ANYONE come in who is an fcp person asking IS THIS POSSIBLE...he said no I said why do you think that is...he said...because people aren't aware the technology is this good...no one has bothered yet I live in NYU film school land?
It isn't possible as this is NOT how it was designed. Really, no professional I know of would try that...waste of money trying to figure it out. If you want you can try. See if they will loan you a floor model to do this. Just isn't worth my while to test. Not when there is gear that is designed for this and will to a PROFESSIONAL level conversion, not consumer.
in this lhi is it equivalent to the kona 3 in performance and does it use the same software when going from sd to hd?
Yes, and yes. But it is HARDWARE upconversion...similar software interface. This is the card I asked AJA to make for years. They finally heard me.
And when you say the mxo2 is now able to as well do you mean there's software that will do as good a job upresing as the aja?
HARDWARE. The MXO2 upconverts via hardware. Different software interface...easier in fact. And yes, it does a BANG UP job. I have done this both with a Kona 3 and MXO2. I like the results from both.
is the studio compressor going to give you acceptable competitive up-res compared to the hardware options?
It is decent. You can tell the difference, but it does a good job. I would opt for the capture cards first, but lacking that ability (I have footage often that has no tape masters anymore...lord knows why) I use Compressor and it looks pretty good. Gotta make sure all the Frame Controls are set to best.
but I find it hard to believe you can do them and not have to tweak the contrast/color a bit after
Well, it will still look like scaled SD. No way to make it look like HD original. It is softer, and there are more artifacts, but that is because you blew up something to 10 times it's size...there will be issues. Even via hardware, but they can mask the noise better.
As well, is there any preference in broadcast deliverable these days for 720p/1080p or 1080i?
Mainly 1080i 29.97 and 1080psf 23.98. A few places take 720p59.94. But it varies from network to network. There is no standard...which stinks.
if my project was shot in progressive is it best to just leave it there and would you opt to just go to 720p from a 480p project for a general master and just ignore the 1080p format altogether at this point?
If you have no deliverable requirements then stick to SD. No reason to upconvert. However, if I was required to deliver an HD master, and was provided no requirements, I would go from 480p to 720p or 1080p...not go interlaced. But, that is all up to the client. What they want, I give them.
Of course I totally blanked on blu-ray which does have to have the 1080p codec first before going to the h.264 or am I wrong? I read in any case you can blu-ray burn mpeg2?
I have zero experience with BluRay. But blowing up SD to make a BluRay disk makes no sense. Why deliver a high def DVD of SD material? I think an standard SD DVD would look better...especially given the upconvert capabilities of modern DVD players. My HD DVD upscales VERY well.
Shane