Video Shoot in HD but when burned to DVD not HD anymore?

[Andreq]

Hi all,

I just want to confirm something. Recently, our company engaged a videographer for a short commercial shoot. The person explained that yes, he shoots in High Definition but when the clip is burnt onto the DVD, it is no longer in HD. He mentioned that the equipment needed to do that costs a lot so to keep costs down for now, it will not be in HD.

I dunno much about videos... But I'm thinking:

1. Is there an advantge to shooting in HD in the first place then?

2. All those consumer HD videocams by Sony, Canon, etc in the market today. They promise HD shoot. So does that mean by the time I copy the videos into the DVD, it is also no longer high definition?

A bit confusing here....

Anyway, to enjoy HD viewing, the TV or screen has to be HD also right? Else it's no different with shooting in the "normal" non-HD video cam?

Hope someone could kindly enlighten me! Thanks.

 

[CT 3833]

1. Is there an advantge to shooting in HD in the first place then?

definitive there is advantage in shooting HD, because you can view them on TV in HD format.

2. All those consumer HD videocams by Sony, Canon, etc in the market today. They promise HD shoot. So does that mean by the time I copy the videos into the DVD, it is also no longer high definition?

When you copy to DVD, they are no longer in HD format. But they are still in DVD format, so the resolution and sharpness willl still be better than those taken by non HD camcorder.


For SONY users, one solution would be to sotore all the clips into the SONY playstation, when playback on TV, it is played at HD format.

 

[lwm]

When you copy to DVD, they are no longer in HD format. But they are still in DVD format, so the resolution and sharpness willl still be better than those taken by non HD camcorder.

Not true, it is possible for normal DVD to store HD content. One example is to burn m2t files on DVD which can be played on a PS3 in HD.

 

[jaegersing]

Not true, it is possible for normal DVD to store HD content. One example is to burn m2t files on DVD which can be played on a PS3 in HD.

Yes, but that's not really a "normal" DVD that would play in a "normal" DVD player. It will be great when everybody has the capability to playback HD content, but I think it is not going to happem so quickly.

 

[visualise]

Hi if you would like to keep the HD content all the way, you need
1) The end product to be burnt onto Blu Ray Disc or kept on a high res digital video format
2) A full HD tv with a Blu Ray player to playback the Blu Ray Disc.

As for shooting in HD then burning a normal SD DVD, the end quality should be slightly better than normal if the videographer knows what he's doing. However, not just any HD camera will result in excellent video footage. The operator must be capable as well.

I am setting up a full HD workflow for my company. Prices of HD tvs have dropped tremendously, and Blu Ray players are a bit more affordable now ($600?). It would not cost a lot for a company to have a HD display video playback in their office or at an event.

regards

Isaiah
www.visualise.tv

 

[lwm]

Hi if you would like to keep the HD content all the way, you need
1) The end product to be burnt onto Blu Ray Disc or kept on a high res digital video format
2) A full HD tv with a Blu Ray player to playback the Blu Ray Disc.

As for shooting in HD then burning a normal SD DVD, the end quality should be slightly better than normal if the videographer knows what he's doing. However, not just any HD camera will result in excellent video footage. The operator must be capable as well.

Why do you need a full HD TV? A HD ready TV is good for HD video.

Burning m2t files onto a normal DVD will be more than "slightly better than normal" if you as compare with SD video. The video will still be in HD as those are "raw" video direct from the camcorder.

 

[garrett09]

Why do you need a full HD TV? A HD ready TV is good for HD video.

Burning m2t files onto a normal DVD will be more than "slightly better than normal" if you as compare with SD video. The video will still be in HD as those are "raw" video direct from the camcorder.

Can i say then the video is almost in HD but with a much much shorter duration as comapred to a Blueray DVD?

 

[lwm]

Can i say then the video is almost in HD but with a much much shorter duration as comapred to a Blueray DVD?

The video is as good as you play the miniDV from the camcorder to the TV through HDMI, just that due to SD DVD can only holds 4.7GB, only about 20 minutes can be stored on each DVD.

 

[engr]

Hi Andrez, welcome to the world of HD. First of all, let me help u understand how to see the diff of HD, HDV or SD. If u have a 42" LCD TV, u will notice that some broadcast programs look very grainy or "bad" in a way as compared to what u see at shopping center TV demos.

That is becuz HD TVs can display a lot of resolution and thus, anything that is lower res will not look "good" A DVD can look very good on CRT TV but may look bad on a large LCD TV from the same DVD player. As for broadcast, a lot of programs still not in HD like in Korea or Japan.

As for media, your VG is right to say it is a little expensive at the moment to burn a blueray disc. Even if he can do it, will yr coy be willing to shell out $ to buy the Blueray player at this moment?

For now, the best media is still DVD. As for m2t raw format, that is a compressed mpeg2 codec for HDV (1440x1080), which I think yr VG shot in probably. PS3 will work fine but common DVD players cant play that.

If he shot in HD (1920x1080), it will be the same problem. So how does this match with the consumer handheld "HD" cameras? Those are mainly H264 mov or AVCHD format. Meaning they are highly compressed and difficult for editing. Even if they can be edited with the right
software, the final quality cannot be compared to HD. HDV may be slightly better but those medium size cams will have more vibrant colours as compared to a small cam. U cant defy the law of physics that large glass/lens get more light, n bigger CMOS/CCD give more depth in colour.

In short, I think u didnt get cheated unless u really paid a few times more for it. Itz hard to quantify exactly actually. Video work is like art! What u can do is to ask for a WMV-HD 720p or H264 mpeg4/mov depending on what NLE he is using. This is in additon to the DVD. Hope this helps!

 

[cibs]

Andreq:

TV: 320x240 pixels
SD: PAL - 720x576 (4:3) or 960x576 (16:9)
SD: NTSC - 720x480
HDV: 1280x720i
HDV: 1440x1080i
HD: 1280x720p
HD: 1920x1080p

DVD capacity = 4.7gb
DVD-DL capacity = 8.4gb
BLD (BluRay) = 25gb
BLD-DL = 50gb

Watching a SD PAL/NTSC film on CRT TV would show very sharp images because the resolution of the images are twice that of TV. Its the same concept as looking at your 5mp pix at 25% of its dimensions. However, viewing the same 5mp pix at 100% would soften things a fair bit, let alone looking at it for 200%.
Same with watching SD movies or Astro movies on LCD screens. The lower res images have to be extrapolated and mapped onto the larger surface area. That's one thing.

Second thing is to watch a full length one hr movie at SD resolution (720x576) on a DVD player would require approx 4.7gb of space on that disc and this data is read of the disc at a rate between 5.5-9mbits per sec. Now a HDV/HD movie of the same time would obviously require more space and because of the larger pixel counts, the data rate that the disc player would read off the disc would be anything from 19mbit to 25mbit/sec. Most DVD players are only designed to read up to DVD. Reading higher bitrates require special players with higher data rate processing capabilities (e.g BluRay or HD-DVD players) in order to convert and output the data on your LCD. Make sense?

Lastly, its usually always better to record at a higher resolution and to downscale it later because:
1) more information captured hence better editing leeway for color corrections (assuming all other things equal e.g codecs)
2) allows leeway in case we need to crop a stream for editing
This, of course, takes additional steps in the workflow and capturing and editing HD takes considerably more CPU power than SD.
Even if your videographer gave you HD footage, you wouldnt be able to play it on normal DVD players unless you had Blu-Ray and he authored your footage as a Bluray footage (which incidently, I charge $1800 additional just to produce a BLD master and $90 per additional copy) so I dont think he/she cheated you. He/She just wanted you to view your footage conveniently on the most accessible format. Nobody is yet distributing BLD footage outside of the cinema/film/movie industry yet because the players are still comparatively expensive and so are the discs.

PS: The equipment i.e e.g. Lacie BluRay writer costs around S$1500-2000. At the end of the day, its boils down to your contractual agreement. If he said he will supply you HD footage, then he should regardless of whether you can play it or not. if not, its assumed that most HD/HDV footage is downconverted to SD for the normal consumer.

 

[jaegersing]

TV: 320x240 pixels
SD: PAL - 720x576 (4:3) or 960x576 (16:9)
SD: NTSC - 720x480
HDV: 1280x720i
HDV: 1440x1080i
HD: 1280x720p
HD: 1920x1080p

I agree with the point about DVD data rates, but I think the video resolution part is not so accurate.

SD TV signal is 625 line (PAL) or 525 line (NTSC), with 576 and 480 active lines respectively. Since this video is analogue, horizontal resolution is determined by the screen design, but should easily be higher than 320 lines.

SD PAL, assuming you mean DV format since you are quoting DV resolution, is 720x576 (PAL), 720x480 (NTSC) whether it is 4:3 or 16:9. Only place I have seen 960x576 is on the Canon XL2 sensor, and this is scaled down to 720x576 when it is recorded to tape. It has to be to comply with the DV specification.

And HDV 1280x720 should be progressive, not interlaced.

Also, watching a higher resolution video on a lower resolution screen does not always give sharper pictures, because of aliasing artifacts and moire effects. Anyway an SD CRT TV is not lower res than SD unless it is a very cheap TV or one with a very small screen.

 

[engr]

Hi Andreq, the experts have appeared. I hope u r not more confused than the inital state by now

 

[cibs]

I agree with the point about DVD data rates, but I think the video resolution part is not so accurate.

SD TV signal is 625 line (PAL) or 525 line (NTSC), with 576 and 480 active lines respectively. Since this video is analogue, horizontal resolution is determined by the screen design, but should easily be higher than 320 lines.

SD PAL, assuming you mean DV format since you are quoting DV resolution, is 720x576 (PAL), 720x480 (NTSC) whether it is 4:3 or 16:9. Only place I have seen 960x576 is on the Canon XL2 sensor, and this is scaled down to 720x576 when it is recorded to tape. It has to be to comply with the DV specification.

And HDV 1280x720 should be progressive, not interlaced.

Also, watching a higher resolution video on a lower resolution screen does not always give sharper pictures, because of aliasing artifacts and moire effects. Anyway an SD CRT TV is not lower res than SD unless it is a very cheap TV or one with a very small screen.

Correct. Sorry, was just listing them down to illustrate the differences in digital resolution.
Everything converted for layman terms.. heheheh

 

[vince123123]

Hi, can I ask something about HD and SD.

From your comment, is it then true that if we want to watch predominantly SD, we should actually get a CRT non-HD screen as watching SD on a HD screen will be a bad viewing experience? That seems to be my own personal experiences as well.

Or is the issue only that of screen size - ie watch on large screen with SD = lousy, and since CRT are usually smaller, SD is okay. However, I notice that even on a 37" HD screen, SD output looks much worse than say, on a 29 or 30" CRT (almost comparable size).

Any advice would be appreciated.

That is becuz HD TVs can display a lot of resolution and thus, anything that is lower res will not look "good" A DVD can look very good on CRT TV but may look bad on a large LCD TV from the same DVD player. As for broadcast, a lot of programs still not in HD like in Korea or Japan.

 

[engr]

I cant be sure of a detailed explaination. I think it depends a lot on the LCD TV's capability. I do notice that Samsung LCD TVs in SG which are HD ready, looks real bad when broadcast from Channel 5/8 is played. I'm in Korea now where they have HD signals. A MBC/SBS/KBS drama looks superb even on a HD ready 40" LCD. The details in the hair is incredible. I'm really impressed so far.

 

[lwm]

Generally a plasma TV handles SD signal better than a LCD TV. Quite a number of videophiles still opt for plasma when buying a HDTV.

 

[VKMobile]

just curious, would a consumer based entry level HD camcoder better than those super pro but SD video cam?

I am thinking of engaging somebody to shoot my wedding but i doubt they have the most advanced HD equipment. Since HD camcoder is so cheap now, shall I just buy 1 and then pass to them to shoot? Would it be better in terms of quality? They should be able to re-use other stuff like the light, etc right?

I think DVD can still hold 720p, but the resolution is in 4:3 but playback is 16:9

 

[lwm]

just curious, would a consumer based entry level HD camcoder better than those super pro but SD video cam?

I am thinking of engaging somebody to shoot my wedding but i doubt they have the most advanced HD equipment. Since HD camcoder is so cheap now, shall I just buy 1 and then pass to them to shoot? Would it be better in terms of quality? They should be able to re-use other stuff like the light, etc right?

I think DVD can still hold 720p, but the resolution is in 4:3 but playback is 16:9

A consumer HV20 can look like this :bsmilie:

I'm not familiar, but a pro cam will work better in low light condition, and have more controls on the shooting.

Don't quite understand your last sentence.

 

[di0nysus]

Or is the issue only that of screen size - ie watch on large screen with SD = lousy, and since CRT are usually smaller, SD is okay. However, I notice that even on a 37" HD screen, SD output looks much worse than say, on a 29 or 30" CRT (almost comparable size).

I've also seen poor quality of CH5/CH8 (using SCV analogue) on HD-Ready LCDs. SCV recommends upgrade to digital decoders for better results. (more $$$)

 

[VKMobile]

A consumer HV20 can look like this :bsmilie:

I'm not familiar, but a pro cam will work better in low light condition, and have more controls on the shooting.

Don't quite understand your last sentence.

SD Pro cam vs Consumer HD Cam, just the pixel count is losing by a huge margin, how would it still look nice on HD panels? Please convince me......

my previous last statement, I meant DVD can still hold 16:9 picture but squeeze into 4:3 resolution.