http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ Videomaker Community Forums » Tag: HD - Recent Posts en Wed, 15 Feb 2012 07:36:17 +0000 http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/best-camcorder-less-than-2k#post-74773 Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:18:18 +0000 Ian James Smith 74773@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> I am becoming a considerable fan of my Panasonic HDC SD-900, due to its great image-quality; but then, my speciality is natural history, so instead of basketball players screaming up-and-down the court, mine is likely to be crabs, creeping over mudflats ahead of an advancing tide. Also, the SD-900 is not one for 'big-hands' in my experience. And just for the benefits of converts, like myself. If ever carrying this camcorder tripod-mounted, 'between-shots', slip a rubber band around the flip-out screen to secure it to the camcorder body, since, somewhat incomprehensibly, this device has no positive lock, and the implications of it getting caught-up in an overhead branch, don't bear thinking-about.</p> <p> Anyway, you've already made your purchase; so why am I telling-you-this?</p> <p> Cheers,</p> <p> Ian Smith - Dunedin, New Zealand.</p> <p> </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/best-camcorder-less-than-2k#post-74756 Tue, 14 Feb 2012 07:05:16 +0000 MediaFish 74756@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Charles - I have 30 years experience in shooting sporting events everything from game film to player evaluation film with many game films that have been used to put the player into a college program.  One of the things I have found is that at many of the basketball games I film it is hard to use a tripod in the stands.  The last few years I have been using a mono-pod with much success.  </p> <p>The one thing I tell those who want to film their child's games is that you actually don't really get to watch the game like you think you will.  You need to be watching the camera monitor while recording (i use the monitor rather than the eyepiece).  You need to be able to anticipate the action of the game.  Following a player many times will miss the actual action - you need to become very good at leading the player and anticipating the game.  No need for continuous filming unless you like cutting in post production.  No need to film timeouts or if the ball gets knocked out of bounds (except for the throw in).  Keep the shot wide enough to see the play that is being run but tight enough to see the players numbers - this will come with practice.  SO keeping this in mind you want a camera that has a wide-to-zoom rocker that is easy to get to and easy to use.  You want to be able to gradually zoom in and out without having the zoom or open to wide be a distraction in your recording.</p> <p>Something else to consider is depending on the equipment you use, what format you record in battery life becomes an issue.  You want to make sure you have a backup charged battery with you.  Don't plan on being able to plug in to a power source.  Also make sure you have plenty of media to record to, not only enough to cover the game but a few backup media cards.  The worse thing that could happen is your card goes belly up and no extra card.  I learned this very very early on with tape.  I brought two cassettes certainly enough to cover a football game - sure if one of the tapes don't go bad.  So make sure you have both backup charged battery and extra media cards with you.</p> <p>Feel free to drop me a PM if you have questions.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/best-camcorder-less-than-2k#post-74750 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:51:41 +0000 vid-e-o-man 74750@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>&nbsp;Charles, I haven't any experience with the camera you have chosen but I have heard good things about it. I can give you some info from my experiences shooting my son's basketball games as well as other paying gigs doing same. From my experience, I tried to get to the games early to get a spot as near to center court and at the top level fo the bleachers. Using a tripod (with fluid head if possible but not necessary) will give much better results and save on shooter's fatigue. Set tripod as high as possible to shoot over the crowd. You may have to stand on the top bench seat to see the screen. I tried to shoot from court level but you have to choose one end (offense or defense?) or enlist another camerman. One things that I had to teach myself was to have the camera follow the action and not just my head turning to follow the ball. Start with lens on wide angle and as skill develops you can tighten in on the action. You will probably have to suppress your urge to cheer (or at least inappropriate remarks to the refs). Good luck with your shooting you will probably have a great highlight reel. Keep shooting.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/best-camcorder-less-than-2k#post-74714 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 00:40:38 +0000 Brian Katz 74714@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>[quote] Thanks.  I ended up with the Canon XA10.   [/quote]</p> <p> </p> <p>Is it the best Cam , would you like it to recommend it to other also??</p> <p> </p> <p><a href="http://www.homemoviedepot.com/services/film/">convert 8mm to DVD</a></p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/best-camcorder-less-than-2k#post-74704 Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:56:08 +0000 kingcharles3 74704@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Yes, I'll be happy to do that. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/best-camcorder-less-than-2k#post-74685 Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:10:35 +0000 EarlC 74685@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Charles, once you've put that Canon through its paces would you be so kind as to come back here and share your personal (objective, if possible ;-) evaluation. I always appreciate hearing from someone with information direct from the trenches regarding the many cameras available. I think others would as well.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/best-camcorder-less-than-2k#post-74678 Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:53:26 +0000 kingcharles3 74678@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Thanks.  I ended up with the Canon XA10.  </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/best-camcorder-less-than-2k#post-74472 Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:29:49 +0000 Bill Bruner 74472@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Charles - most of the prosumer (and some of the pro) camcorders that might meet your needs are small (e.g., <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Canon-G10-Camcorder-Internal-Memory/dp/B004HW7DZM?tag=battleforthew-20">Canon HF G10</a>, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Canon-XA10-Professional-Camcorder-Internal/dp/B004HW7DY8?tag=battleforthew-20">Canon XA10</a>). If you need a camera for big hands, though,I suggest the pro Panasonic HMC-40 for <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Professional-AG-HMC40-Camcorder-Optical/dp/B002I9S9PE?tag=battleforthew-20">$1690</a> - or its big brother, the shoulder-mounted HMC-80 for <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-AG-HMC80-AVCCAM-Shoulder-Mount-Camcorder/dp/B0045JA8F4?tag=battleforthew-20">$2076</a>.</p> <p>Good luck with your decision,</p> <p>Bill</p> <p><a href="http://hybridcamerarevolution.blogspot.com">Hybrid Camera Revolution</a></p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/best-camcorder-less-than-2k#post-74420 Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:47:35 +0000 kingcharles3 74420@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I am looking for a camcorder to record my son's high school basketball games.  Here are some of the features I'm looking for:  a) wide angle lens;  b) that takes good quality videos in low light; c) records in HD;  d)) records onto a card and/or internal memory; e) a large, easy to see LCD; f) a relatively big camera for my big hands;  and g) less than $2k. What do you pros and serious amateurs recommend, please?  </p> <p>Thanks in advance.  Charles.  </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/trouble-editing-hd#post-74359 Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:09:35 +0000 hunterhimself 74359@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>maybe try compressing your footage so your computer can handle it.  If you are going to compress the video for web in the end this might be a good idea.  This would also be a free thing to try, unless you are looking for a reason to upgrade?</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74165 Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:53:43 +0000 birdcat 74165@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Earl brings up a very good point - If you're gonna do the "Ken Burns" effect, you want to be able to zoom in without losing resolution.  You just need to be careful because some NLE's are not very good at down-resing high-res files (like 16 mpx, considering HD is only 2mpx) and you can get some problems (like flicker).  If you are having problems with the high-res stills, you might want to use something like PhotoShop to down-res them to something like 3-4mpx first.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74162 Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:59:29 +0000 Don 74162@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>another place where image size for stills matters is when cropping or panning or applying Ken Burns styled motion to a still image...</p> <p>I always prefer 6 to 16 mp stills off my d-slrs for adding into my video projects.</p> <p>This way I have endless options in post.</p> <p>one example, is using an ultra wide still of a static scene and panning across it in final cut as opposed to panning it with the video camera... much easier for say a wedding production where you need your video camera to remain framed and focused for the close up on the bride and groom, but want a pan of the whole church for a cutaway...</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74157 Mon, 23 Jan 2012 09:52:12 +0000 EarlC 74157@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Notwithstanding the print resolution of my stills, I always scan stills at 150-to-300 dpi, primarily because one or more of them WILL get printed as I use them for insert sheets and DVD/CD cover art. My other purpose for scanning at print resolution is to provide me with enough image information that I can zoom in on many of the images, starting from a full-frame or partially cropped area, getting close to and isolating a specific point of interest, or person in a group. Not too swift, trying to do that with a 72 dpi image. I used to setup my NTSC SD framing in Photoshop but now have a program that handles that for me so I don't have to worry about computer &amp; print square pixels vs TV rectangular pixels. Just some more stuff to think about in working with stills in a video project, or photo montages.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74145 Sun, 22 Jan 2012 16:57:10 +0000 Charles Schultz 74145@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Interesting facts Birdcat and I also work in print so I always shoot at 300 with my stills.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74144 Sun, 22 Jan 2012 11:38:00 +0000 birdcat 74144@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>DPI/PPI is irrelevant in video - It is used only in print work.  Video is based on pixels only, no per inch.  Images for video should be sized using 72 DPI - 72 DPI and 400 X 300 is the same as 144 DPI and 200 X 150 - both equate to 28800 X 21600.  NTSC SD is 720 X 480 and HD is 1920 X 1080 or 1280 X 720.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74139 Sun, 22 Jan 2012 03:51:45 +0000 Jaimie 74139@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I have fought the battle of putting stills in video a number of times and have come to the conclusion that dpi doesn't matter.</p> <p>In still printing, you know the size of your output format and would normally scale your final to 300 dpi which has become sort of a standard.  Of course, you're not stuck with 300 dpi, but let's use it for discussion's sake.  For example, if your output will be an 8x10" print, at 300 dpi your file would be 2400x3000 dots or about 7.2 megadots or megapixels whatever you like to call it.  Assuming your printer and paper can support that resolution, that will give a darn nice looking photo.</p> <p>But, in video, you don't know the viewer's screen size, or even it's resolution.  What you do know is your project's resolution.  Let's say it's 1920x1080, a common standard.  Notice that is only about 2 megapixels and that's as good as it gets!  To see what the displayed dpi is, calculate the screen dimensions for the desired screen size and divide the width by 1920.  That tells how "thinly" the pixels must be spread to fill the screen area.  These are: 32" diagonal screen is about 28" wide by 16" high which gives about 69 dpi; a 40" diagonal screen gives displays about 54dpi and the whopping 80 incher comes in at 35dpi.  What a shocker and that's HD!  The numbers are all approximate because TVs don't necessarily display all the pixels (hence the "safe areas" in Premiere).</p> <p>TVs uses various smoothing tricks to make the picture look better than these numbers might indicate.  But then, too, viewers don't usually sit a foot away from an 80" screen.  All that said, what's the bottom line?</p> <p>My personal experience is that a 3 to 5 megapixel photo scales nicely in Premiere.  If you give it a 50 megapixel photo, it sometimes coughs up a hairball. </p> <p>But wait, there's more.  Close-up photos with few details look better on screen than long views filled with fine details.  I have also noticed, especially when you edit in HDV, but reproduce on a standard DVD, that making the photo move slightly improves its appearance.  I often have the photo "swell" about 10% or move a small amount.  This seems to result in cleaner edges.</p> <p>That's it for now,</p> <p>Jaimie</p> <p> </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74137 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:19:32 +0000 WSanford 74137@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> When its higher I just scale down and never had adverse effects from that. I agree, upresing is a bad choice. Most of the time though, I don't pull out the still to get a high res RAW image and just pull a frame grab if I need a still to use. I shoot progressive and the 72dpi is usually enough. With that said, I agin have only seen a difference in close up high detail images and on my still cam a lower quality has been enough, 150-240dpi has been more than enough and I've never needed 300dpi. It just never made any improvement.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74129 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:27:59 +0000 Brad Shirakawa 74129@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>So if I understand this, the ppi could be a little on the high side, say 150 on an image that measures 2900x1200 or so, for use in HiDef video...but 72 is probably ok?  I have no intention of upconverting 72 to 300, but thanks for that advice.  Many thanks!</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74128 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:27:24 +0000 signmax 74128@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> Hi,</p> <p>Consider that a photo or image has 2 factors: canvas size and picture size normally both factor are equal. In HD the picture and canvas are 1920 x 1080 pixels at 72 dpi.</p> <p>What is DPI (dots per inch) more dpi more quality in but the quality can cause problem as example computer screen can use 72, 96 or 120 dpi. but to print a high quality on common printer you need at least 150 dpi or 300 or 600.</p> <p>You cannot use a 300 dpi and reduce to 72 and after go to 300.</p> <p>What you can do?</p> <p>Your screen is 1920 x 1080 a full screen picture can be reduced or fit to 1920 at 120 dpi.</p> <p>A PIP picture may be 50% of the height 540 pixel can be reduced to 540 at 120 dpi.</p> <p>Use PhotoShop or any good drawing program to rescale your picture or photos.</p> <p>Regards,</p> <p>YR</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74126 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 05:24:02 +0000 Charles Schultz 74126@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>If you have it in 300 PPI go with it but don't try to take a 72 PPI and uprez it to 300 it will look like crap, for a lack of better terms. </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74120 Fri, 20 Jan 2012 19:26:46 +0000 WSanford 74120@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p> Many of times I've taken frame grabs to work with that go back in the video and even HD is always 72dpi. Sometimes I can see a difference in quality going higher but not always. You don't always have to hit the print demands of 300 either, sometimes just a jump to 150 is all you need. Its something you have to play by ear/eye and how much you influence detail with it. I wouldn't mess with it on a close up with tons of detail.</p> <p>I shoot in RAW with my still cam, so everything I work with is usually 240 dpi to begin with.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/resolution-for-still-photos-in-hd-video#post-74119 Fri, 20 Jan 2012 19:07:04 +0000 Brad Shirakawa 74119@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I've seen recommends for pixel sizes for still photos imported into <strong>HD video</strong>, but not the PPI.  So if I import a still photo in Premiere at around 1980 x 1200 or so, <strong>what PPI</strong>?  72?  300?</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/gigabyte-to-hour-of-hd-footage-conversion-ratio#post-73877 Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:44:04 +0000 Joseph Dellwo 73877@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>Back when there was basically one major digital format, DV, being used for everything from a little single chip home camera all the way up to professional DVCPRO and DVCAM field cameras it was easy to calculate space.  One hour equaled 13gb on your hard drive.</p> <p>But today, there are dozens of HD file formats and each one is a little bit different.  The Canon 550d uses an H.264 .mov file type.  I have a T3i (600d) and used it to shoot a commercial on a single 16gb card.  I shot a couple of hours of video total at 720p 60 and had room to spare.  </p> <p>I also have a Canon Vixia that shoots AVCHD and that same 16gb card has gotten me through weddings plus the reception with ease.  But again, I'm comparing oranges to tangerines.  The files are similar but not the same.</p> <p>I would recommend you set up your camera and hit record for 10 minutes.  Figure out how big the file is and do the math.</p> <p>Since you're getting paid for this gig - put some of that money into a handful of 16gb class 10 cards.  I use Transcend cards purchased off of Amazon and have had no trouble with them.  They are extremely affordable.</p> <p>Also, come up with a data management plan that includes backup storage.  Like EarlC suggested, don't put all your proverbial eggs in one basket or you might find yourself with no eggs at all.  I always have two copies of my video.</p> <p>Finally, do remember the individual file size limitations on the HDSLRs.  You don't want to find yourself in the middle of the best soundbite of the day when you hit the 12 minute mark.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/gigabyte-to-hour-of-hd-footage-conversion-ratio#post-73873 Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:13:50 +0000 Kenkyusha 73873@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>One thing to keep in mind- it has been recommended that you not ever exceed 90% of a card's capacity.</p> <p>Even though&nbsp;HDD prices are sky high (due to the flooding in Thailand), card prices have stayed stable or have&nbsp;dropped, so it's a better bet to use more cards than max out fewer.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/gigabyte-to-hour-of-hd-footage-conversion-ratio#post-73863 Sun, 08 Jan 2012 19:23:57 +0000 EarlC 73863@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>The rough calculation gives you about 3 minutes per GB. There are a bunch of variables and I'm sure the more informed here will chime in about that.</p> <p>It is also possible you might want to go with 16 GB cards as they are more affordable and you'll lose less footage if a card is corrupted, compared to losing 32 GB of content if the big one goes south.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/gigabyte-to-hour-of-hd-footage-conversion-ratio#post-73855 Sun, 08 Jan 2012 17:41:16 +0000 Grant 73855@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I have recently been hired for my first gig to actually make money using my camera. I am going to be recording a series of interviews, roughly 12 hours of footage in total. So what I am curious is how many hours of footage can I shoot onto a 32 gig card at 1920 x 1080 at 24 fps with my canon 550d?</p> <p> </p> <p>Any help is so greatly appreciated!</p> <p> </p> <p> </p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/trouble-editing-hd#post-73433 Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:29:52 +0000 Kenkyusha 73433@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>In addition to increasing your RAM, Premiere uses GPU acceleration so having a compliant video card is also helpful.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/trouble-editing-hd#post-73429 Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:42:18 +0000 Cville 73429@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I have been editing video from the 60d in vegas pro with no problem.  My computer is a couple of years old but is an amd quad processor with 16 gig of ram.  running 64 bit version.  was using vegas pro version 10 but recently upgraded to vegas 11</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/trouble-editing-hd#post-73427 Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:10:03 +0000 jackwolcott 73427@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>There's nothing wrong with Sony Vegas. The newness of your computer isn't particularly relevant, either. What matters is how much RAM it has, how fast the hard drives are, etc. </p> <p>HDV and AVCHD are extremely computer intense formats. What many of us do -- I'm a Vegas user, too -- is create an intermediary file, using a utility called NeoScene, and there are others as well. This will allow you to work with .avi files, then translate them back into a hi-def format if you want to create a Blue-ray DVD.</p> <p>I suggest you go over to the Sony Vegas editor's forum and search the archives for threads that discuss slow response on playback and ways to eliminate this. You'll find a great deal of information and, once you've joined the forum, lots of help with Vegas or Movie Studio from forum members using these programs.</p> http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/topic/trouble-editing-hd#post-73413 Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:53:09 +0000 leora 73413@http://www.videomaker.com/community/forums/ <p>I recentl bought the canon eos 60d and i love it!! however when i go to edit the HD videos the playback lags making it impossible to edit. I usually use sony vegas so i downloaded a trial of adobe premiere and it still had the same problem. my computer is fairly new. Please help! </p>