Topic: Need opinions/advice on hard disk cameras

[mmadd29]

Using WinDV to capture and edit in Adobe 6.5 has worked well, although the capture is in real time.  I tried to use the footage from someone with a hard disk camera, and Adobe kept crashing.  I had to convert it to an avi file, then all was well. 

My questions are, who uses a hard disk camera to record?

I assume I need to buy Adobe CS4, which I would believe could handle the .mpg format?

I have heard that AVCHD is a pain in the a$$, is this true?

Thanks in advance

[KurtMichaels]

Hard disc cameras were a valid option for a while, but I'd say their days are over. Flash memory has become cheaper and camcorders today come with plenty of it. A camcorder I'd recommend (not based on personal experience though, but un-biased tests and forum postings) is the new JVC HM400. Comes with 32 GB memory, enough for almost 3 hrs of highest quality setting AVCHD video. The more expensive Canon competitor comes with 64 GB. So I'd say buy another 32 GB memory card and you're set.

AVCHD is in it's third generation now and has matured. I'd say the first two generations where inferior to HDV of lets say a Canon HV20. The codec in the mentioned JVC cam is full 1920x1080 HD (unlike HDV in the first <1000$ 2007 HD camcorders). The AVCHD codec looks better now then comparable HDV footage. The JVC HM400 as far as I read is great for daylight shooting - good sharpness, no zealous gain, no over-saturated colors. In low light not so good. I read it has a unique consumer camcorder feature where you can deactivate the gain - I wonder if that improves concert shootings, where you always have the problem of the camcorder pumping light levels up and down.

Not sure if you really need Adobe CS4. On the Mac iMovie or Final Cut Studio bring the footage onto your computer, but I guess you're on Windows. AVCHD is still a pain in terms of CPU use, so you will need a decent computer. Some people say AVCHD is a pain because one wouldn't edit it directly but rather recode it into some intermediate codec first. True, but that's what I'm doing with HDV right now, too. In case you're on a Mac I got a little secret hint for you: Toast 10, little burning app, does the conversion from AVCHD to all QuickTime codecs ... 100+$ app.

.avi is just a container, so that doesn't say much.

Looking at the AVCHD codec I would rather ask myself if you need progressive framerates (24p) or if you can live with interlaced (60i). The mentioned JVC camcorder lacks progressive shooting, which might be a no go for you. Now 60i has it's benefits, converted well it might look better then progressive footage thanks to the better temporal resolution. So read up on the good ol' pull down.

[mmadd29]

Thanks for the explanation.  I'm on Windows.  I already know Adobe 6.5, so CS4 shouldn't be drastically different.  Shooting shows I always figure good low light is needed.  With 3CCD the colors at low light should be better, because of having three chips.  I have a ton of research to do.....

[mmadd29]

I just took footage from a friends camera.  It is a JVC, with a 60GB hard drive.  Getting the files is easy, the problem is that they are in .mod format.  I used the software from the camera to convert it to an avi file.  The result looks horrible.  I played the video from the camera on my TV and it looks great.

After screwing around with this crap, I came to the decision that buying another used high quality MiniDV camera is the way to go.  Having to capture video in real time far out weighs screwing around with these crazy camera formats, IMHO.

[willndmb]

Hard disc cameras were a valid option for a while, but I'd say their days are over. Flash memory has become cheaper and camcorders today come with plenty of it. A camcorder I'd recommend (not based on personal experience though, but un-biased tests and forum postings) is the new JVC HM400. Comes with 32 GB memory, enough for almost 3 hrs of highest quality setting AVCHD video. The more expensive Canon competitor comes with 64 GB. So I'd say buy another 32 GB memory card and you're set.

AVCHD is in it's third generation now and has matured. I'd say the first two generations where inferior to HDV of lets say a Canon HV20. The codec in the mentioned JVC cam is full 1920x1080 HD (unlike HDV in the first <1000$ 2007 HD camcorders). The AVCHD codec looks better now then comparable HDV footage. The JVC HM400 as far as I read is great for daylight shooting - good sharpness, no zealous gain, no over-saturated colors. In low light not so good. I read it has a unique consumer camcorder feature where you can deactivate the gain - I wonder if that improves concert shootings, where you always have the problem of the camcorder pumping light levels up and down.

Not sure if you really need Adobe CS4. On the Mac iMovie or Final Cut Studio bring the footage onto your computer, but I guess you're on Windows. AVCHD is still a pain in terms of CPU use, so you will need a decent computer. Some people say AVCHD is a pain because one wouldn't edit it directly but rather recode it into some intermediate codec first. True, but that's what I'm doing with HDV right now, too. In case you're on a Mac I got a little secret hint for you: Toast 10, little burning app, does the conversion from AVCHD to all QuickTime codecs ... 100+$ app.

.avi is just a container, so that doesn't say much.

Looking at the AVCHD codec I would rather ask myself if you need progressive framerates (24p) or if you can live with interlaced (60i). The mentioned JVC camcorder lacks progressive shooting, which might be a no go for you. Now 60i has it's benefits, converted well it might look better then progressive footage thanks to the better temporal resolution. So read up on the good ol' pull down.

+t
i'll be checking with you on my next camcorder purchase

[Visionair]

I started videotaping a while back and did a lot of research on what type of HD camcorder is the best to shoot, capture, edit and make a dvd of the result.
I have visited several forums and did a lot of reading.

To make a long story short, the same experiences come forward each time:
- Avchd is still a pain in the ass to work with on pc. If you want to edit this format and make a dvd of it you must have a very powerfull pc (dual core +)
Also, if you are shooting on HDD or cards remember that if you want to store your vids you still have to put them away on dvd's, HDD's or whatsoever.

- As far as experienced users write, HDV quality is still prefered to avchd.
HDV shot footage on a mini dv can be exported as SD to your pc and edited just like SD tapes before. Though this will give you a much better picture then shooting in SD and capturing in SD. The tape is also your storage medium.
Once you have edited your tape on your pc you can write back to tape or make a dvd out of it.

In short.
It all depends on what you want to do with your footage. If you want to record, and watch it on your HD tv (from cam using HDMI) and delete it afterwards you can easily go with avchd. If you want to edit your stuff most people prefer HDV.
With HDV you still have to swap tapes over 60 minutes.

Once again I'm not a long time experienced user but the above is what I read over and over again. I decided to upgrade to HDV myself.

Grtz

[mmadd29]

I absolutely agree.....

I was able to use .mod files from a friends camera.  I had to convert to .dv files with MPEG Streamslip.  Adobe was a little jerky on them, but the render and DVD came out fine.  HDV is the easiest, and best quality, even if the drawback is real time capture.

I have been doing video for about a year, and have read alot also, and came to the exact same conclusions as you.

Thanks for the input

[phanophish]

I just went to HD video when we purchased a camcorder when my daughter was born.  I've since played around with pretty much all of the NLEs and I have to say Sony Vegas 9 wins HANDS DOWN.  It is easier to use and most importantly preforms much better than all the other NLEs I tried.  Save yourself the hassle and skip right to it.  One particular bonus is you can natively import FLAC audio files right to the timeline.   I run a Canon HF-11 and it records the AVCHD and I love it.  Quality is great, low light is pretty good and it has 32GB of build in memory.  No hard drive with moving parts and you can also slip in a SDHC card for even more capacity.   I'm just finishing up a YMSB DVD that I hope to post soon if you want an idea of the results.   

[guitard]

I author DVDs for a friend who shoots with a JVC cam.  As someone previously mentioned, the format is .mod files.  I like to work with Sony Vegas, but it doesn't recognize the .mod files.  So I drop them into Womble MPEG Editor, do whatever minor edits I need, and save them as .mpg files.  It writes the files without re-encoding, and Vegas accepts them without a problem.

[mmadd29]

I do think a move to Sony Vegas is coming.  I have been using Adobe 6.5 since I bought it almost 8 or so years ago.  I downloaded the trial of CS4, to see what new features, and how different it was.  I was never able to get it to run stable on either my desktop or laptop.  My machine specs are well over the minimum requirements. 

I then spoke with someone who does this for a living, and they told be Adobe has always been known for buggy software.  He also recommended Vegas.

thanks for all the input

[mmadd29]

BTW, which version of Vegas would I need.  Movie Maker is about $70, pro is about $500.  The price doesn't matter to me, it's having the correct tools.

[phanophish]

I'm running 9 Pro.  Not sure the limitations on the consumer level app.  I think they have a 30 day trial for both so I'd DL them both first and try.  The really nice multicam functionality is what sold me.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQdz5EHv120

[jonicont]

If you're doing any multicam stuff, then Vegas pro is it.  Here's a 6 cam HD show. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGXOXe04HfM

Done with version 8.  Just upgraded to 9 a few days ago.