- This topic has 14 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 14 years, 1 month ago by Anonymous.
- May 30, 2006 at 2:14 PM #43423AnonymousInactive
Check out the link below from our buddies "The Videoguys"
The New Blu-Ray drives are out.
Who’s going to get one? 😯
- July 18, 2006 at 1:55 AM #182304DouglasFirParticipant
[quote="compusolver"]Shucks, the disks are a double-sawbuck each! Shoot, I burned three dozen DVDs today – that would have cost over seven hundred smackers!![/quote]
I know sometimes it’s nice to be on the cutting edge of technology but this is one time I’ll be glad to site back and wait a while for the prices to drop!
I think I’ll be sticking with regular DVDs for the foreseeable future! 😀
- July 18, 2006 at 10:29 AM #182305AnonymousInactive
I remember several years ago, when I bought my first CD burner for $400. It was a 4x drive. I vaguely recall paying about $100 for a 25 pack of CD-R’s. Today, the guy who runs the computer store down the road gives them away because they’re worthless to him, and you can buy 100 48x or better CD’s for under $10 in places.
Just a few years ago, I dropped a whopping $650 on my state of the art 2x/4x capable DVD +/-R drive, and almost $100 for 10 DVD-R’s. I saw an ad in the paper on Sunday for a 16x DVD burner for $29, and I can buy DVD’s for about a quarter each.
Sure, I COULD drop a grand on this burner (which takes 45 minutes to burn one disc!), and spend another grand on enough disks to maybe get me through a month. But I’ve already made that mistake twice in my life. Besides, in my mind, I still have to deal with the issues that:
1 – There’s still no guarantee that blu-ray will emerge as the consumer standard, and it wouldn’t be the first time that a superior product invented by Sony took the wayside to a more affordable solution. Can we all say "Beta"?
2 – I still don’t think it’s the right time for event videographers to move into High Def. For Television broadcast or "prerecorded" stuff such as promo videos, etc, hi-def is quickly becoming a must have. But the vast majority of my work is live event videography, where there’s usually not a makeup team that will prepare those on the video with the intentions of being filmed. This means that unlike staged events, whre the intent is to produce a video, the bride/groom/others will all be in "normal" makeup (or lack thereof) which means that all Hi-def is going to do is make every single wrinkle, blemish, and mark stand out.
3 – High definition video cameras are still being perfected. It can take years before a product is debugged. Like software, cameras are usually pretty rough in their first edition, and need to be updated. That’s why Sony didn’t stop with the VX-2000, and Canon didn’t give up the XL-1 or the GL-1. On all three of those cameras, serious performance improvements were made, and it wasn’t even very long before their updated counterparts started production. We’re still early in the pioneer era of hi-def. People are trying out new things, coming up with new concepts, and not for another year or two, in my mind, will the hi-def field become one that I would be comfortable entering into. Sure, I can drop $10,000 today to get all the cool hi-def stuff. But what’s thepoint? None of my competition are doing hi-def yet. None of them want to from what I can tell. And next year, the price on all this stuff will drop substantially, moreso in another year when the next generation of hi def cameras come out.
Plus, if I spend $20,000 or better today to upgrade to hi-def, it will be a big financial hit to my business. But here’s the rub. When the other competitors see that On a Roll has gone hi-def, they’re going to do the same if only to keep up with the competition. I’ve seen them do it before. Heck, I’ve done it myself before. But if they wait a year, they might only pay $10,000 for what I’ve spent $20,000 to get this year, which means that unless I make an additional $10,000 this year by switching to hi-def, I’m the loser in the local area.
4 – Finally, every minor glitch is accentuated in high definition. the camera gets slightly bumped, and it’s astoundingly obvious. minor issues that are easy to fix in post now could become monsters that give me editing nghtmares. I’m not really ready for that challenge yet, personally.
I’m not against high definition. Quite the opposite. I would love to have hi-def gear now, and I do believe it will be the future of video. Until we can figure out how to record and display video in true 3-D, hi-def will be the most impressive thing we can have. I think in a few years, I’ll likely switch to high definition, once the technology stabilizes more, and the prices drop. But for today, my plain old DVD burners and affordable disks are the way I’m going.
Plus, there’s NO WAY my wife would EVER let me spend $1000 on a disc drive! 🙂
- July 18, 2006 at 11:18 AM #182306AnonymousInactive
I have to say that as far as I’m concerned anyway, you hit it all on the head. Very well put! I too am thinking that maybe by 2010 (give or take a year) that Hi-Def will be the norm. I have to say that I can’t wait either. All I have to do is watch a standard show on my 53" HD DLP and then a HD show and the difference is absolutely amazing.
OK… I do have to laugh pertaining to your comments about make-up. It is true because when I watch HD shows on my big screen, you can actually see the pores on people’s faces not to mention every little wrinkle. All of the big NLE’s companies will have to come up with a new filter. They’ll have to call it the "Wrinkle Blender" X-D
- July 18, 2006 at 4:01 PM #182307
Looking at the market research only about 10% of people own HD sets right now. By 2010 depending on who you believe it will be between 50-60 %. Blu-ray and HDDVD don’t offer enough more than that of DVD so people will probably not be as compelled to buy them. The only two things that they have over current DVD is space and interactivity. As far as space goes with the new codecs the data-rate is the same or only slightly higher than SD DVDs. So current DVDs could work fine for HD. On the interactivity side first off most HD disks will not take advantage of these options(especially since the person authoring the disk will have to learn a customized java script to do anything more than dvds can do now). Just look at current DVDs. How many of your disks take advantage of the interactivity features of the format. Moral of the story DVD was a gigantic leap over VHS and it still took 3-4 years to really take off and these formats just don’t have the revolutionary leap over DVD. Since one will eventually win over the other though my money is on HDDVD as it will have the ability to have a layer with a SD version of the film that will play in normal red laser dvd players and then (once you upgrade to a HDDVD player) will utilize the other layers on the disk which will contain the HD version. This is a much more consumer friendly option. Future and past proof this is good. Blu-ray may have more space but consumers (who will ultimately decide the victor of this format war) will go with the option that most benefits them which if Toshiba can implement this forward/backward compatibility by putting both the SD and HD version on one disk HDDVD will win the war. But it is anyones game right now so I wouldent waste my money on any burner unless you have the need to burn large ammounts of data to an optical disk. Other wise wait.
- July 18, 2006 at 4:37 PM #182308AnonymousInactive
But you’re right about one thing – it’ll all be market-driven. When clients start wanting HD, I’ll deliver HD.
And there it is. Once again, Hank sums up in about a dozen words what I spend a dozen paragraphs on. 😀
I’ve been in video production for a decade, and specifically doing wedding videos here the last almost 4 years now. I can count on one hand the number of people who have asked if I did HD. And ultimately every single one of those people were still happy to book me after I told them "no".
Just to break even, without even turning a profit on going HD, I would need to have someplace in the ballpark of 20 weddings which insisted on HD. So far, I’ve yet to encounter one.
I’m sure in a few years the requests will build, and I’ll give in to the evil underlords of tecnological advancement, but until then I’ll keep clutching onto my SD gear for dear life.
- July 20, 2006 at 3:43 PM #182309
I by no means meant that a current SD DVD player could output a HD file. I was speaking of file size not resolution ability. I cant seem to find the article that I was did however find one that said currently the US has 17% (which does sound a bit more realistic than what was stated in the last article i read) market saturation with HD sets. Really 1k is not that bad for a new tech like HDDVD or bluray. HDDVD players are actually selling for as little as $500. DVDs cost 1000 at least when they came out and $1k was worth even more then. Don’t get me wrong I often burn DVD backups of my favorite projects and would love to be able to put more data on a single disk, but personally I think that the real reason that these new formats are coming is that DVD sales growth is falling off and the studios want everyone to buy another copy of their favorite movies.
- July 21, 2006 at 6:00 AM #182310AnonymousInactive
I wouldn’t argue with you that $1,000 is a good price for new technology. I remember paying almost $4,500 for a Mac Performa 630 CD (yes, 630, not 6300!), which had a speedy 4x CD-Rom drive, a 260 Megabyte hard drive, and a whopping 8MB of ram (expandable to an unheard of 64MB. IT even came with an amazing 2400 baud modem! 🙂 Now, just a hair over a decade down the road, you wouldn’t be able to give that piece-o-garbage away! Believe me, I tried!
What I’m saying is not that it’s a bad price for new technology, but that it’s a waste of money right now.
Okay, so 17% of American homes have HD. Great. How many of those homes have a Blu-Ray player? Answer: not so many. And besides that, there ‘s still some momentum behind the alternative HDDVD format. You could drop $1000 on this unit, and next year, HDDVD becomes the standard thanks to clever marketing, and all of a sudden, you have a $1000 paperweight. You then may as well go toss it in the box in the back of that Edsel in your garage where you keep your old Betamax VCR gear, dvorak Typewriter, and Polavision movie camera, just in case it ever gets used again.
The book is still being written on HD, and while the ink is still wet on the pages, you can expect to pay quite a price for this potential failure. And the time will come, as more and more people get into HD and want a solution for recording, when the battlefields that Betamax and VHS fought upon years ago will be revisited, this time by the HD platforms.
And besides all of that, Television studio quality HD is still light years beyond any HD camera on the market. For now, it seems that prosumer HD is stalling out at one step below true HDTV quality, most likely due to difficulties in making the technology fit onto a small handheld unit. But that too will eventually change, and today’s HD cameras will lose value faster than these overnight startups people get suckered into investing in.
Ultimately, the best advice is to wait. Let the market develop. It’s not even a newborn yet; it’s barely in the fetus stages! You don’t go spending thousands of dollars on a car, business suits, and office equipment for your child the same week that your wife tells you that she’s pregnant, do you?
HD is an amazing technology, one that will rock the world when it gets standardized and the market settles on how to deliver it. But right now, it’s still in the birth canal. Let’s wait until this kid is born before we go spending our life savings on a guess of what he might look like as an adult. 🙂
- July 21, 2006 at 6:08 AM #182311AnonymousInactive
I think that the real reason that these new formats are coming is that DVD sales growth is falling off and the studios want everyone to buy another copy of their favorite movies.
The main problem, though, is that both main HD formats are supposed to be backwards compatible with DVD, so the only reason you would ever want the format for movies would be if they start releasing hi-def" versions (which will eventually happen, no doubt). But honestly, except for my very favorite movies, like "It’s a Wonderful Life" for example, I have rarely bought a DVD version of something I have in VHS. If I really want to save it on DVD, I dump the video onto my computer and burn the movie onto a DVD-R
Besides, in full true HD format, a DVD just can’t hold enough video to be useful for long, wheras new technologies will be useful into the adulthood of HD, depending on which format survives.
- July 21, 2006 at 9:58 AM #182312AnonymousInactive
Very true, a daring pioneer could potentially make tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or who knows? Maybe millions by selling agressively and pioneering the market. But on the flip side, he could find his business bankrupt altogether. It’s like the stock market. If you’re agressive and smart, you can make millions, but even the best ones can suddenly lose everything just as fast. It’s a risk.
I’m more into stability. I would rather be the guy who plods along and picks up the 30 weddings that didn’t go with the High Def videographer because they couldn’t afford it, than to pick up the one or two people who could.
Plus, I have a serious medical condition that prevents me from selling someone on a potentially volatile format known as chronic conscience disease (CCD). I tried to get that stupid conscience removed twice, but it just grew back and split into more. Now I’m 3CCD’ed 😀
But seriously, I came into the realms of video production just after the whole betamax thing finally breathed it’s last, and I remember a lot of people who had to spend a lot of money converting their beta tapes to VHS because they were sold on a format that yes, was superior, but was also so poorly marketed that it was almost doomed to failure from the get-go. Today, I just couldn’t bring myself to film a hi-def wedding, because while blu-ray looks like it will emerge the winner, so did betamax at one point. Even if you buy the couple a blu-ray player to watch their wedding on, if two years from now everyone has HDDVD, and all of the new movies are coming out on HDDVD, they’re going to have a wedding video that will only play on one device, and they’ll either have to keep that extra device with their electronics, or store it and bring it out. I’m a capitalist in major ways, believe me, but I just can’t bring myself to do it.
I won’t look down on someone who gets the idea. If they want to spend the money, that’s their choice as a business. Just so long as they don’t try doing it in the Minneapolis/Central MN area, I’ll be fine. 😀 The last thing I want is to go out and spend $20k just to keep up with the Joneses. Or maybe all of my competition SHOULD go high def! They can have all four couples who would want that service at the exorbanent prices. I’ll take the other 95% of the weddings out there! 😀
- August 5, 2006 at 4:25 PM #182313DigitalVideoParticipant
I just finished editing a 31 minute video in HD and the file size was 9.4 gigs. I guess I could offer 4 High Definition DVD disk set for 1 hour of video. I’m burning it right now as a dv video.
After this I’m going to put together a High Definition 5-10 minute recap of the ceromony. I guess the file size will be around 3 or 4 gigs.
(I hope I read the manual right on how to burn HD video in the highest quality)
- August 8, 2006 at 11:19 AM #182314AnonymousInactive
😯 Holy cow!
31 minutes @ 9.4 Gig’s?
What disks are you using?
Also… are you using any kind of compression Codecs?
- August 13, 2006 at 6:20 PM #182315
Yea 9.4gigs is probably in the native hdv codec. If you were to try the AVC codecs that will be used on HD disks that number will go down. Don’t get me wrong I am all for a larger format. I just think it is a bit unusual that the new formats come right when DVD sales start to level off. I question the motives not the technology.
- August 14, 2006 at 8:55 AM #182316AnonymousInactive
New technology takes a little time to iron out. Right now everything is moving so fast and everyone is trying to be the first one out there and in
mind hast makes waste.
At some point in time, this will all settle down and they’ll have it all figured out. They always do! I… for one can afford to wait though.
- August 22, 2006 at 6:57 AM #182317DigitalVideoParticipant
Sorry it took me so long to get back. I was editing in Liquid 7. The compression I choose was Sony HDV2 1440 x 1080 1080i mpeg 2 for Sony equipment.
JVC in Liquid is HDV1 1280 x 720
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.