hd camcorder to dvd

[edong]

I'm thinking of buying an HD camcorder. If I transfer the video to DVD, is it possible to have at least the quality of DVD Hollywood movies? What hardware and software(including free ones) do I need to accomplish that? I wonder if DVD recorder can do that. I'm not really excited about those HD DVDs. If I can have that Hollywood movie quality using ONLY basic transfer to a regular DVD, I will be more than happy. The truth is sometimes, I can not distinguish the difference of quality between an HD broadcast and DVD movies. Maybe it's my eyes.

Thanks.

[MozartMan]

I'm thinking of buying an HD camcorder. If I transfer the video to DVD, is it possible to have at least the quality of DVD Hollywood movies?

Yes.

What hardware and software(including free ones) do I need to accomplish that? I wonder if DVD recorder can do that.

Yes, DVD recorder can do that.

I have Sony HDR-HC1 HDV camcorder and JVC M10S dvd recorder. I transfered HDV video from HC1 to DVD using JVC via FireWire.
Quality is great. Downconversion was done inside HC1.

But I achieved much better quality when I transferred HDV video to PC in its original HDV format (via FireWire) and then re-encoded to SD MPEG2 using Sony Vegas.
Unfortunately, Vegas is not free.

[BJ_M]

hdv - though not bad , is nowhere the quality of "hollywood" movies

though with a sony f900 cinealta or better - it is "hollywood" quality for the most part

[MozartMan]

hdv - though not bad , is nowhere the quality of "hollywood" movies

I saw some "hollywood" dvds that looked like crap compare to HDV in terms of video quality.

[BJ_M]

that would be in the transfer - and true , a bad transfer would look worse or equal ....

but a hdv is lower resolution, with lower quality optics , low low bandwidth storage than 35mm film or true HD video cameras -- hdv is sort of a quasi hd done with trick processing and such ... dont get me wrong - im not saying it is crap , but it is no where even close to the quality i see on true HD and film .... not by a long shot ...


also - things like proper lighting, tripods and lens go a long way to making hollywood movies look 'pro'

[MozartMan]

Ok, I give up.

[edong]

thanks, mozartman. it'll help my decision.

thanks bj_m for those pictures. i'll get a second mortgage for my house first.

[BJ_M]

125,000$ to 225,000$ what is pictured there ....


be good for some shots at the beach

[Nelson37]

Very important distinction being missed here - Hollywood *DVD* Movies. Much of the original quality is already lost in that format. One must also keep in mind what is realistically achievable, $100,000 and up cameras are an interesting curiosity, but represent an item which simply does not exist in the real consumer world, at least for 99.99% of us.

Will you get HD quality, no, but will an HDV camera's output, when carefully processed, in terms of image quality alone, be reasonably close to what you typically find on a DVD? I honestly do not know, not having access to such equipment. What I do know is that this is the best you will currently be able to achieve in the real world. The few samples I have seen of HDV output were pretty impressive compared to standard consumer camcorders.

If the budget is achievable, I see no viable reason NOT to go with the HDV, SFAIK nothing coming out soon which will surpass this.

[edDV]

Image resolution is only one of many factors that make a "Holllywood" quality movie. A professional shoot has every detail planned and lighted. Even scenes in bright sunlight have massive lights to control contrast. The camera is a factor but maybe contributes 30% of the difference (e.g. Sony HDCAM SR vs say a VX2100). The rest is set control, lighing, camera support and control of scene motion.

It isn't fair to compare home camcorder shoots to Hollywood films. A closer comparison would be your 6:00 news field shoots or low budget cable magazines. There they are using camcorders in the $6,000-30,000 range and one key light or a key and a fill. If they are shooting available light, it will look alot like a home movie.

For standard DVD quality, the basic rule of compression is the higher the quality of the original acquisition, the better the compressed result will look. Professional film and TV show production are shot with MPeg compression in mind. Camera supports are rock solid. Pans and zooms are done with linear motion paths to ease the job of encoder motion estimation.

Almost nothing is hand held.

Typical set.

[Nelson37]

ED, I understand what you are saying, and this is all good information. However, much of that is simply not possible for the average Joe.

As much lighting as possible, as stable a camera mount as possible, as few pans and zooms as possible, the best resolution camera and lenses you can afford, the best post-processing methods you can achieve. This is all Joe can do. Would 27 lights and 52 assistants be helpful, sure, but it just ain't gonna happen.

Shoot a stationary building on a bright sunny day with properly adjusted focus and white balance while using a tripod and a HDV camera, encode with multi-pass using maximum bitrate, and while Spielberg could probably beat that on a DVD output, not by much IMO.

Joe can, and should, use as much of Spielberg's technique, methods, and equipment as is realistically feasible, but there is much that Joe will never be able to do, unless he hits the Lottery, and even that would run out fairly soon.

[edDV]

ED, I understand what you are saying, and this is all good information. However, much of that is simply not possible for the average Joe.

As much lighting as possible, as stable a camera mount as possible, as few pans and zooms as possible, the best resolution camera and lenses you can afford, the best post-processing methods you can achieve. This is all Joe can do. Would 27 lights and 52 assistants be helpful, sure, but it just ain't gonna happen.

Shoot a stationary building on a bright sunny day with properly adjusted focus and white balance while using a tripod and a HDV camera, encode with multi-pass using maximum bitrate, and while Spielberg could probably beat that on a DVD output, not by much IMO.

Joe can, and should, use as much of Spielberg's technique, methods, and equipment as is realistically feasible, but there is much that Joe will never be able to do, unless he hits the Lottery, and even that would run out fairly soon.

Obviously but when one expects Hollywood results by simply buying a slightly more expensive camera, that impression needs correction.

Proper exposure, stable camera mounts and encoding bitrates are more important than buying a more expensive consumer camera. Skill beats Visa cards any day.

[edDV]

An example of a low budget independent "film" production done with skill, not throwing money at a camera. Note that they put more money into renting the lights than the $200/day Sony PD-150 SD camcorder.



PS: I just though this up so I will time document it here.

"The Director's job is to specify the scene and manage the various talent, the Director of Photography/Cinematographer's job is to direct the pixels."

[BJ_M]

lights AND a good tripod ...

good stable support with a good fluid head can really help a lot of 'home' productions