We already know that encoding keeps artifacts at the expense of the rest of the picture.
At the moment I'm testing 19mb/ 32mb /45mb MPEG 2 stream using HDCAM material. The client would prefer to shoot 4:4:4 or at least 10-bit 4:2:2 to improve quality! Even though the distribution is going to be 19 or 32mbit sec!
Why? Because even on a 1k x 1k display he can see a difference between compressed (HDCAM) and uncompresssed 4:2:2, as the encoding keeps the noise.
I can't use +3db on the f900 with this client as the noise becomes more noticeable after encoding!
Another example, a little rain on the lens of some HD aerials, not a distraction on a 24 inch CRT but becomes much more noticeable after encoding and frankly makes the shot virtually unusable. Barely saw the rain when monitoring in the air on the 600 line LCD HD monitor.
So keeping lens clean with 1/3 inch imager on HDV will be crucial.
However, the block shaped pixelated artifacts have been dramatically reduced from earlier HDV cameras. We had to look very hard to find any in our test.
Encoding to Windows Media 9 is a reasonable way of testing how HDV focus issues, camera wobble and compression issues could look via HD transmission.
Can I edit HDV "native" and maintain quality
Yes you can edit HDV native in FCP if you don't do a mix or colour grade. But once you do a mix or grade it becomes uncompressed.
But you could do a "cuts only" edit in your office and keep it native.
What effect will MPEG4 have on HDV pictures?
In respect of transmission, MPEG 4 has the same if not more artifacts than MPEG 2, as it is designed primarily to reduce bandwidth, so the encoder will keep even more of the artifacts from recording, more of the dust on the lens, flare and softness!
Can I use HDV for features!
The jury is out on how pictures from Z1E will transfer to film. Experience has shown that many artifacts that are visible on a HD monitor disappear when transferred to film whilst others become more apparent. On a large screen the picture will look very much softer than an f900 or Varicam.
Standard def programmes use DV so the HD channels will accept HDV?
The same rules for use of DV in SD environments do not apply at the moment, as HD channels demand quality product.
A "glorious wide shot" works really well on HD and is often held for 50pc longer than SD. It may be Ok on HDV...if you don't pan!
Discovery Channel HD Home Theatre is not accepting HDV at the moment.
Can I shoot as a one-man band with a Z1 and make wonderful HD programmes!
There will be opportunities, but the more remote and exotic the location the more anticipation the HD home cinema viewer will have.. A tripod is easier on the shoulder and will help the transmission encoder. Hand held is a challenge to watch on a 42 inch screen, the Z1 is not well suited to hours of hand holding. The one man band will need a tripod!
In two years time when HDV2 codec at 50mb is with us and the Kinetta is churning out uncompressed pics will anybody be remotely interested in a HDV stock footage?
The definition in high definition comes from a high quality lens low compression recording and good monitoring. The best camerawork and content suffers more on HD than SD if it has distracting artifacts and is out of focus or wobbles. If you shoot HDV then you are starting out with a softer picture.
If you are going to do a HDV test, shoot your subject then put the rushes through your production route and look at it on a large screen.
HDV! Traps ahead and maybe a few fast bucks to be made, good luck!
Z1E Specification - short
