HD Camcorders not lossless?

[zeek543]

I think I'm correct in saying (from what i have read online) that the DV format is not a completely lossless codec, correct? However, it does seem to do a very good job with the right equipment.
But then there is HDV; My understanding of this codec is that it is a form of Mpeg-2 that has biterates of 15mbps, correct? So since it is mpeg2, does it have the same issues of regular DVD compliant mpeg2? For example: motion blurring, macro blocking, etc... especially at a bitrate too low for some high motion subject matter.

-So if I want to buy a high quality consumer level HD camcorder, do i need to worry about HDV not being a good enough codec to record high motion activities? Is there another codec that is used in some camcorders?
I would hate to spend $1,000 on an HD camcorder and be editing its footage on a camcorder, only to notice macroblocks and motion blur. Any links or information or opinions about this subject are more than welcome! Some of you at this forum seem to be very informed about this sort of thing. Thanks! hope I got my concerns about HDV and HD camcorders across...

[JimboS]

I think you read to much about "codecs".......
There is a vast differance between SD and HD......
Camcorders , that are HD do very well...
They can also do SD..
HDD cams just do what you have to do with a computer......put it in DVD form.......
Recommend checking out ..
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/

Your computer must be high power and the right software to "do" HD..
The HDD cams do it for you...

[Cyrax9]

zeek543, HDV is MPEG-2, but it's very good MPEG-2; I've seen footage shot in HDV and it looks excellent. I've seen footage shot in DVCProHD and it looks excellent too. DVCProHD downsamples the video and lowers the resolution, then upscales it back to HD, technically this isn't "true" HD and should be considered "lossless" but it isn't. HDV overcompresses in MPEG-2, but keeps the original resolution instead of downsampling. Both formats "compress" the video to some degree, they just use a different method of achieving the same goal.

If you want to see some footage shot in HDV check out web.mac.com/thediscounts -- you might not be able to play the videos if you don't have a Mac, but you should be able to view the still images from the HDV camera even on a PC. Having seen clips of this projected on a 50" screen, I can honestly say HDV looks great -- the work on that website is done by friends and fellow students of mine, and I've even had the honor of getting to look over their HDV Camera, I can honestly say that it's amazing compared to standard DV video even with the additional compression. If you really want to avoid MPEG-2 you're going to have to "go pro" and get the Panasonic HVX200 which, to the best of my knowledge, is the only camera of its kind that shoots DVCProHD which is the industry standard.

One final note, current "consumer" level HD cameras do have extensive macroblocking issues that are much more apparent than older HD Cameras. That website I linked you too used what is considered to be a "consumer" level HD camera, but it was an early model, made by Sony, with many professional features -- in fact I think it lacked about two truly "professional" features that would've placed it in the "prosumer" category. Sony discontinued the camera (I can't remember the model number, it might have been the FX1) and put several of the features on it in their "Professional" cameras while subsequently removing them from their "consumer" cameras. Definitely look for something with a CMOS chip in it -- I've said this before, but I'll say it again, one CMOS chip rivals 3-CCDs in a camera, I'd love to see 3 CMOS chips in action. Having seen one person shoot a film on a Panasonic HVX200 in DVCProHD and one person shoot a film on a Sony HDV camera, I can honestly say that there's not too much of a difference. The biggest difference is that DVCProHD is actually "too good" meaning that its "harsh" digital look is more pronounced, and as a result, most people wind up throwing a "film filter" such as magic bullet over their videos to make it look, as my friend put it, "less digital." The end result is that DVCProHD looks like it's actual film and works great for dramatic work, be it in short films or actual hollywood productions. If you're shooting a soap opera you usually wind up NOT using said filters and trying to keep that "digital" look of something shot on tape. With HDV the "digital look" is less apparent, but minor filtering can still make something look more cinematic -- no filtering gives you a "digital Reality TV" look. If all you're shooting is birthdays and holidays, and you're just toying around as a hobbyist, HDV is more than adequate for you. If you don't own or plan on purchasing any HD equipment, you could even get away with SD footage. If you're a serious hobbyist, or plan to do professional work or freelancing in the future, or are planning on taking production courses, HDV might not be the right format for you and you might want to go with DVCProHD and plan for the future. However, since you said you're looking for a consumer camera, I'm assuming you're a hobbyist, in which case you should have no problem with HDV. If your hobby turns into a professional job (as mine has started too,) you may find yourself wishing you had bought a different camera in the future. Looking back I'm almost wishing I bought a consumer HDV camera over my Professional DV camera since there's just so much more I could be learning with HD at any level.

Having started to truly learn the "professional" aspect of video production, I'm slowly learning that in the end all of you're (by you're I mean anyone's) technical knowledge means nothing. What makes or breaks a video is the story you tell with it, whether it's shot on 4K film, or VHS tape. True story: The original Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoons were shot on VHS -- they're still popular today among the 20 and 30-somethings who grew up with the show as children. Why? The story was good. The film "The Fugitive" was shot on S-VHS, and is still well known. While I wouldn't recommend shooting anything on VHS, and I'd even be wary of S-VHS in this day and age for anything other than back-up or restoration purposes, I can honestly say that if you're videos are interesting, it doesn't matter whether you shoot it in HDV or standard DV, 4:3, or 16:9, as long as the story behind it is good, and yes -- even birthdays and holidays can be turned into a story. Whether you compress with DivX or XviD, or h.264 (aka AVC) is irrelevant -- they're all popular codecs, when you're shooting on Super-8 film with sound and transferring it to Windows Movie Maker you should probably start worrying. As long as you have a good camera and a respectable editing program you'll be fine. Half of the videos I see on YouTube (excluding the copyrighted material they're still taking down,) isn't shot in HD, it isn't even shot on DV -- a lot of it looks like it was shot on a VHS camera. Some of those videos are still good though. Why? Because they can be informative, some show a difference in two versions of the same thing, some are comparisons of products from country to country, and some are simple how-to's. Granted these people won't be winning an emmy anytime soon, and the bad outweighs the good the vast majority of the time, but the good stuff is good regardless of what it was shot on.

[pijetro]

Mpeg-2 that has biterates of 15mbps, correct?

Actually..It's the same as DV..25Mbps..
That's the advantage of getting to fit one hour of HDV onto a standard MiniDV tape..

I would hate to spend $1,000 on an HD camcorder and be editing its footage on a camcorder, only to notice macroblocks and motion blur.

Although i don't have any direct experience with your situation, i would opt with this...

Stay with an SD camcorder that has a superior lens and manual controls, and you know it can be edited comforatably on a PC or Mac..
Right now, HDV has a bit of a burp in the learning curve for software an hardware managability.

As far as macroblocks and motion blurs, i have a hard time believing that HDV camcorders would be able to sell with any success...Especially if these issues were common (which i doubt)...


Good luck!!!

[guns1inger]

As far as macroblocks and motion blurs, i have a hard time believing that HDV camcorders would be able to sell with any success...Especially if these issues were common (which i doubt)...

I wouldn't. 90% of so-called HD televisions are complete crap, with low picture quality, sub-HD resolutions and obsolete connections. And they sell like hot-cakes. The average domestic consumer would not know quality if it bit them hard on the arse.

The number of people who have boasted about their wonderful new 50 or 60 inch HDTV, and then shown me some cheapsh*t, low res, colour banding abomination . . . . .

Success isn't about quality (if it was, no-one would ever have heard of Angelina Jolie). It's about convincing people they have to have it, whether it is good or not.

[Soopafresh]

"Success isn't about quality (if it was, no-one would ever have heard of Angelina Jolie)."

How DARE you !

The only recommendation I'd make is to stay clear of the AVCHD cameras, just because the media is difficult to work with.

[racer-x]

I love HDV, and haven't shot SD since I got my Canon HV20. I can't speek for all cameras, but macroblocking is non-existant in my camera, provided you maintain a high enough bitrate..........

HDV isn't for everyone. It's a little more difficult to deal with and you need a PC with plenty of power. If you lack the skills, stay with SD. If you are a video enthusiast, then HDV is the obvious choice. It's that simple.....................

[JohnnyMalaria]

DVCProHD downsamples the video and lowers the resolution, then upscales it back to HD, technically this isn't "true" HD and should be considered "lossless" but it isn't. HDV overcompresses in MPEG-2, but keeps the original resolution instead of downsampling. Both formats "compress" the video to some degree, they just use a different method of achieving the same goal.

DVCProHD uses the same compression scheme as DV. In fact, hardware implementations simply use four DV codecs in parallel. The data rate is 100Mbps. It doesn't use any interframe compression and the sampling is 4:2:2. So, even though the native frame size is smaller than HDV, the color detail is much better.

Personally, I will never buy any HDV equipment and will wait until I can afford a DVCProHD camcorder.

MPEG2-based formats are simply not a good idea for recording unless you can be sure to make edits at the start of each GOP.

[pijetro]

Johnnymalaria wrote:

Personally, I will never buy any HDV equipment and will wait until I can afford a DVCProHD camcorder.

Patience young Skywalker..
With the cost of eSata raid cards, and external raid arrays, i figure in a few years, full uncompressed HD will be in the reach of many enthusiasts....Including people like me..

In fact, i believe it so much, that i haven't upgraded in the past four years in anitcipation of this moment

[zeek543]

well...great stuff so far, very informative. FYI, I am simply a new hobbyist with digital video. I would like to begin filming, but I need to make an educated decision on which camcorder to buy. I love how HDTV looks. I have been lucky enough to watch several different HDTVs and see many many many shows and events broadcast in HD. It simply blows away SD. I had looked at the Canon HV10, I like it, the price is great right now on it...but i'm afraid that if/once I have purchased it, I will find out that the only great thing about it is the fact that it is the cheapest HD camcorder available.
I guess what I really would like to know is:
1) Is now a good time to buy a HD camcorder?
2)What is the best HD camcorder for about 1000 or less dollars?
3)Is the HV10 and good one? or would the HV20 be a better buy?

(Would I miss not having HDMI out put?)
Also, analog to digital conversion would be a big plus for me!

-On a side note, would this cameras be able to record HD output via Component from a gaming system such as Xbox360?
(thats not a big deal , i'm just curious if that is a capability of HD camcorders)


Thanks again, and please, keep the info and opinions coming! I am learning a lot from all of your comments. Give me guidence!

[edDV]

DVCProHD downsamples the video and lowers the resolution, then upscales it back to HD, technically this isn't "true" HD and should be considered "lossless" but it isn't. HDV overcompresses in MPEG-2, but keeps the original resolution instead of downsampling. Both formats "compress" the video to some degree, they just use a different method of achieving the same goal.

DVCProHD uses the same compression scheme as DV. In fact, hardware implementations simply use four DV codecs in parallel. The data rate is 100Mbps. It doesn't use any interframe compression and the sampling is 4:2:2. So, even though the native frame size is smaller than HDV, the color detail is much better.

Personally, I will never buy any HDV equipment and will wait until I can afford a DVCProHD camcorder.

MPEG2-based formats are simply not a good idea for recording unless you can be sure to make edits at the start of each GOP.

I agree except DVCPro-HD at 4x the bit rate is only practical recorded to hard drives in the Sub $10k class.

For others, some background

Broadcast pros put a premium on frame by frame capture (similar to DV format) over resolution. That is because they intend extensive editing and filtering before distribution.

Lets go up the hiearchy of HD formats (leaving out AVCHD for now)

HDV @25Mb/s is MPeg2 4:2:0 1440x1080 for 1080i or 1280x720p
The high resolution sounds good but is at the cost of higher compression and longer GOPS.

XDCAM HD is the serious low Pro standard designed for corporate, news gathering and mid level advertising. Like HDV it uses MPeg2 4:2:0 1440x1080 and GOPS. Provisions are made for editing at each speed. Unlike HDV, XDCAM records to Blu-Ray DVD or hard drive. It comes in three switchable standards:
LP @18Mb/s for 120min/ BD layer
SP @25Mb/s for 90min / BD layer
HQ @35Mb/s for 60min / BD layer

DVCProHD @100Mb/s 4:2:2 uses 1280x1080i or 960x720p (1440x1080i and 1024x720p for PAL)
DVCProHD is an alternative to HDCAM for TV Series, high end advertising and digital movie production. For these applications it is famous for Varicam (variable frame rate). It can also be used for distribution. All frames are recorded in each format (No MPeg GOPs) and compresses ~7x.

HDCAM @ 144Mb/s 4:2:2 1440x1080 for 1080i or 1280x720p is the long time standard for HD broadcast distribution and production. It uses in frame compression ~7x

HDCAM-SR @440Mb/s or 880Mb/s 4:2:2 YCbCr or 4:4:4 RGB 1920x1080p is the high end production tape format for TV series and digital movies. Frame compression is ~3x.

[edDV]

well...great stuff so far, very informative. FYI, I am simply a new hobbyist with digital video. I would like to begin filming, but I need to make an educated decision on which camcorder to buy. I love how HDTV looks. I have been lucky enough to watch several different HDTVs and see many many many shows and events broadcast in HD. It simply blows away SD. I had looked at the Canon HV10, I like it, the price is great right now on it...but i'm afraid that if/once I have purchased it, I will find out that the only great thing about it is the fact that it is the cheapest HD camcorder available.
I guess what I really would like to know is:
1) Is now a good time to buy a HD camcorder?
2)What is the best HD camcorder for about 1000 or less dollars?
3)Is the HV10 and good one? or would the HV20 be a better buy?

(Would I miss not having HDMI out put?)
Also, analog to digital conversion would be a big plus for me!

-On a side note, would this cameras be able to record HD output via Component from a gaming system such as Xbox360?
(thats not a big deal , i'm just curious if that is a capability of HD camcorders)


Thanks again, and please, keep the info and opinions coming! I am learning a lot from all of your comments. Give me guidence!

We are coming into the third or forth generation of HDV camcorders depending on how you count. You should read everything written at Camcorderinfo.com as a start especially their HC-7 HD-20 etc. $1000+ shoot out.
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/The-Great-HD-Shoot-Out---Canon-HV20-Sony-HDR-HC7-...JVC-GZ-HD7.htm

It comes down to how the camcorder is going to be used. Most consumers just shoot a few clips and are happy. The HD-10 is for that person.

If you need to produce something serious that needs approval for payment by others ("Everybody is a critic") then you will quickly learn the limitations of these camcorders. Two huge issues are low light performance and audio flexibility. In most shoots, audio will be a major issue.

I think none of these consumer camcorders record external HD Video. Some will record SD to DV 480i format. Baseband HD recording is mostly done with computers, not camcorders.


PS: After some experience you learn the tech side is 40% about exposure (lighting), 40% about audio and 20% about other camcorder issues.