Camcorders can't compete with GH1, here's why.

Started Mar 4, 2009 | Discussions thread
linuxworks Forum Pro • Posts: 18,937
Re: Camcorders can't compete with GH1, here's why.

LizaWitz wrote:

linuxworks wrote:

short answer: the output of digicam video is HIGHLY compressed
non-source data and makes it cumbersome to do edits.

Maybe under linux.

you TOTALLY miss what I'm saying. this is not about platforms, its about lossy compression and editing things like that 'in place'.

Not really under OS X. I just drop my footage
onto the hard drive, iMovie indexes it quickly to give me fast
scrubs, and I cut my movie together.

I see. so you don't UNDERSTAND what is going on and that things really are expanded, edited and re-compressed. you are not bothered by that but those that want to have QUALITY edits are bothered quite a lot.

audiophiles never want to 'edit' mp3 files - they want the source (.wav) and then they can do proper edits at the lossless stage.

that is impossible on a heavily compressed format. this hd format is a 'finalized' format and not really suitable for editing like DV is.

This camera will add a step to go from AVCHD to MPEG4, but it will be
lossless and I can edit it as is.

its not lossless. even mpeg (the older DVD style format) is lossy. the higher layer compressors are more efficient but they also throw away a lot more of the data (hence its more lossy).

Editing uncompressed would be really cumbersome and expensive, and
not really gain you much in video quality.

I'm laughing over this one!

no one will use flash-card based 'video cameras' for anything serious.

You're really not familiar with the market, it seems.

the toy camera video wannabe market? nope. no desire to play around with compressed 'native formats' that exist ONLY because camera companies want to put high density data (movies) on things that were never designed for movies (flash cards). flash works ok for stills but its horribly bad for video. the only way you can manage it today is with HIGH levels of compression.

if you used tape like DV you'd have none of the problems of low density (short record time) flash cards.

the storage problems should be fixed first. they weren't. they wanted to cram 'video' into flash cards. I find this an amateurish design and only a stop-gap until something more PROPER is used for movie storage. and I insist that the video format be more directly editable.

(one ref that is useful: there are a few 'direct' mpeg video editors like womble and video-redo. I use video-redo and it 'knows' about mpeg frames and does frame accurate editing. its pretty special and not many programs do this well. its even HARDER in the higher layers of compression. this is the reason I'm slamming this video format as a 'camera original' format. its simply a bad technical choice. its like recording a concert direct to mp3. no one in their right mind does that! they record to wave and edit down and compress down LATER in post. not at record time!

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
0lf
tko
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow