Posted 11 June 2005 - 11:41 PM
Posted 12 June 2005 - 01:04 AM
Just my own take on this - involves spending a little bit of money, but you could be editing on Final Cut or Avid DV or Premiere etc., if you got yourself a computer with a video capture card (s-video and/or composite). It'll make your DVD production real easy (if you're distributing on DVD) and once it's on the computer, you can upload it to indpendent film sites etc. You probably already know this - sorry if I'm beating a dead horse!
All depends on what output the S-VHS camera can support. You'd still get the good ol' S-VHS look but the editing capability/flexibility of a professional editing suite (color correction, image transformations etc.)
Otherwise, I know that my old high school used the old Panasonic AG Proline series decks - don't know how much they cost, but they've been running for about 5 years now and I don't recall them ever being out of service.
Hope this helps,
Posted 12 June 2005 - 01:29 AM
Posted 12 June 2005 - 10:51 AM
Ive only used the RCA video and monitor jacks on it. S-VHS would be a great way to go for me if I can.
Posted 12 June 2005 - 12:07 PM
Posted 12 June 2005 - 02:24 PM
The thing to remember is most home editing software is engineered for miniDV and Firewire and may not (or may?) be equipped with the proper codec's and interface to digitize from S-Video.
Premier may still support analog capture as I do recall cutting some Hi-8 on there back in the late nineties, but couldn't recommend it today with the current slew of miniDV equipment available. What you'd save on a camera, you'd likely spend on editing hardware.. And, even then it won't necessarily work right. Editing video on a home computer can be a real doozie!
Anyways, best of luck to you in your endeavors.
Posted 12 June 2005 - 11:07 PM
Edited by Aphix, 12 June 2005 - 11:08 PM.
Posted 13 June 2005 - 01:28 AM
SVHS is an old format, while they still make camera for it, and they are cheap, but you will run into some trouble in editing.
Unless your doing a linear editing (tape to tape) youll have some problems in getting the footage into the computer for the NLE.
My advice is this: Since you said something about buying from Ebay, look on ebay for a good minidv camera for under $200.00! If Circuit city has them new for that, Im sure e-bay will have the same model...
Circuity city has the Samsung SC-D353 new for $285.00 online (http://www.circuitci...hoppingcart.jsp) or If you wanna buy used from e-bay: http://cgi.ebay.com/...7522824264&rd=1 pretty good camera for $102.00 in MiniDV... However, as Im sure you know prices on Ebay change all the time, so its best to check for yourself.
I would not buy any camera under a MiniDV for any kind of movie work. The way I see it is $200 is not to much to pay for a camera, since if you go analog you'll have to find someway to capture the footage into the computer, then you have two options: Either have software that can capture analog, or run the analog through another program to get a complete file in Quicktime or WMV format, then load that file into the NLE.
Again, It's just more difficult to go analog, and in the $30 dollars you saved from shooting analog you will might as well have paid yourself $500 for all the time and extra trouble it took to get the footage to the computer.
NOTE: You may also check into Digital8, which is the digital version (complete with firewire) of the Hi-8 analog format. While the resolution is still only like 200 lines of resolution compared to MiniDV's 525 (us) and 625 (uk), it might be a medium point in your problem... Digital8 cameras are somewhat cheaper than MiniDV... But its still unlikly you'll find any new camera for under $200, even in SVHS... E-bay may have some Digi8's for $100-$150 used though....
Just my advice, GOOD LUCK!
Posted 13 June 2005 - 06:06 AM
> Unless your doing a linear editing (tape to tape) youll have some problems in getting
> the footage into the computer for the NLE.
Why? It's done all the time. Probably the easiest way to do it is with a firewire convertor, so it might be more expensive and not look as good in the end, but I can't say you'd have any "problems" making it work.
> You may also check into Digital8, which is the digital version (complete with firewire)
> of the Hi-8 analog format. While the resolution is still only like 200 lines of resolution
> compared to MiniDV's 525 (us) and 625 (uk)
No. This betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how video systems work.
What I think you're trying to refer to is the usual way of measuring video resolution, which is in vertical lines. All DV formats - and Digital8 is a DV format using the same codec as miniDV - will resolve up to 720 vertical lines of information as a tape format, depending heavily on the rest of the picture's content. The camera may or may not resolve to that level - most D8 cameras are or were rather shoddy - but it'll be a hell of a lot more than 200 lines.
When you compare this to the 525/625 line counts, you're referring to the number of scan lines in the picture. This is constant across all formats within a given standard; NTSC devices always scan 525 lines, irrespective. VHS does; Digital Betacam does. If it doesn't scan 525 lines, it isn't NTSC.
Posted 13 June 2005 - 10:44 AM
And while you do say its easy to get the footage into the computer in analog... it may be, however note you will have to buy a "converter" which will add on to the money that you have to spend...
I just dont see why you would pay the same for an analog system that you could for a digital one... analog is a pretty much dead format these days..
The sound is better, the picture is better, it has more resolution, the tapes are better, most of the times the lenses are better, analog loses picture quality everytime you view it / play untill it's digitized, ect, ect, ect... I could go on about more of the let downs to analog...
My feeling is this: save the extra $50.00 to shoot digital instead of analog (if its even that much more, which in the end I doubt)...
Edited by Landon D. Parks, 13 June 2005 - 10:48 AM.
Posted 13 June 2005 - 01:20 PM
> MiniDV is better resolutionand picture quality than Digital8...
No, it isn't. As a tape format it's exactly the same thing.
> I know that for a fact.
Despite the fact that you're clearly incorrect on this point, let's humour you for a moment: exactly how do you know this?
Posted 13 June 2005 - 01:21 PM
No doubt you can find better MiniDV than D8 cameras, but that is merely a decision by Sony to segment the marketplace.
Posted 13 June 2005 - 02:21 PM
And the intial output image will look very good--like many prosumer MiniDV cams
The question you should be asking yourself how can you minimize the deterioration
Of image quality in the post process--any analog copy will have generational loss.
Any copy that you make for editing will suffer an image loss
This is what makes S-VHS an unsuitable format for filmmaking..
It just not good for the archives at all.
If you can figure out a way to digitize the footage without losing image quality...
Perhaps you might have a chance as making good use of SVHS...
But I'm sure it'll make it just as expensive as MiniDV.
If you don't mind all the headaches recommend you use MiniDV...
You can probably rent a XL2 for the price of getting of a good SVHS camera.
Posted 13 June 2005 - 05:28 PM
Posted 13 June 2005 - 07:58 PM
Yes, quality differed from miniDV camera to MiniDV camera. Not in the resolution or compression areas, but in the lense / features areas.
The cheaper MiniDv camera will have less features than a more expensive one. You will also find the optics not as great as in some high model cameras. I know the Canon I was gonna buy once (forgot the model #) was like $550.00 and had Carl Zeiss lens, with a wide angle converter included. It also had more than enough features to edit your movie right in the camera.
The one I ended up getting thoough was the Pansonic, which was $200 (thats all I could afford) and it did well, very well in fact. I dont make use of the "in-camera" features to much, so that was not a problem. And the lense included with the Panasonic was fairly good, although I don't think it was a Zeiss lense...
Moral of this story: If possibe go MiniDV, maybe Digi8 (which I THINK will limit you to Sony cameras)... VHS and SVHS are so old now, that there more trouble then they are worth.
PS) Something tells me most of the older SVHS and VHS camera's have much less pixels than the newer MiniDV cameras, and also the CCD may not be as good as in the newer cameras.. Thats not to say they still dont make SVHS cameras, cause I think they do...
What I'm trying to get over here is this: A new SVHS camera will run just as much as a lower end MiniDV camera, which will be just as good if not better than the SVHS camera.
Is anyone wanted to argue that SVHS is just as good as MiniDv??? Cause I'm ready to fight it to my death bed!
Edited by Landon D. Parks, 13 June 2005 - 08:00 PM.
Posted 13 June 2005 - 08:03 PM
The prosecution rests.
Posted 13 June 2005 - 08:39 PM
Edited by Landon D. Parks, 13 June 2005 - 08:41 PM.
Posted 14 June 2005 - 02:04 AM
Edited by Brian Wells, 14 June 2005 - 02:07 AM.