Question on 1440 versus 1920
by Hodge999
on
May 28, 2006 at 3:14:31 am
I've read lots of discussion on the new HD XDCAM and I'd just like to know one more thing. Should potential buyers be concerned that the XDCAM doesn't shoot the full HD res of 1920, but 1440. Do Broadcasters care? Will future cameras economically shoot 1920x1080? It's tough to invest money into a camera that doesn't shoot full resolution HD.
Re: Question on 1440 versus 1920 by tony salgado on May 28, 2006 at 3:45:50 pm
No this is not a problem for some broadcasters considering that dvcproHD 720 does not record full raster also (720x960 instead of 720x1280). If you were doing a film out and wanted maximum horizontal resolution then this is a major concern.
If you are really concerned about full raster maybe you need to consider HDCAM SR which can record 10 bit 1080x1920 but given the huge difference in price point between the 1/2 XDCAM HD and HDCAM SR you may be willing to live with the quality differences.
FYI you can still use camera heads such as the F900, F950 in 1080 mode or even the varicam in 720P mode to record full raster for each respective mode to an external HDCAM SR vtr because the CCD sensor in these cameras can output full raster but the onboard vtr's do not record full raster.
Re: Question on 1440 versus 1920 by Thomas James on May 29, 2006 at 4:40:54 am
I don't think that broadcasters want full raster HD because the higher the resolution the more compression artifacts that are generated which tends to make the footage unwatchable. The new AVCHD format supports full raster HD but uses a more efficient MPEG-4 compression. Over the air broadcasters are commited to MPEG-2 compression and they can't change this format unless the government wants to give everyone a free set top box that can decode MPEG-4. For fast action sports I think limiting the resolution to 1280x1080i makes a lot of sense and this is the resolution Panasonic supports.
Re: Question on 1440 versus 1920 by SydneyS on May 29, 2006 at 6:25:02 am
What's the difference between that and regular HDCAM? It is technically 1440 X 1080 as well, (4:3, or thereabouts...) They're both corrected to 16:9. I think there are around 700,000 more pixels in an HDCAM CCD than in a HD XDCAM, but is it not the same basic concept?
Re: Question on 1440 versus 1920 by Michael Brennan on May 29, 2006 at 9:15:11 am
Hi Sydney,
Some commentswhere subjectivity comes into play as well as some facts.
1920x1080 ccd looks better on screen than 1440x1080 than 1280x720.
BBC production and transmission of "Planet Earth" is a fine example of this. The difference is clear even on SD transmission between the HDCAM, (aerials) Varicam most of the wildlife and film (wildlife where the cameraman had to camp out for months)
There are many more broadcasters transmitting 1080i than 720p. Unless you are shooting 60p for 60p transmission the higher res formats and cameras look better than 720p cameras at 24/25/30p.
As we speak several new LCD factories US$13Billion are being constructed or opening.
All of these factories will exclusivly make 1920x1080 displays on 42 inch and above.
XDCAMHD is very low res and gets lower in P mode due to internal processing
There is no 1920x1080 ccd and 1920x1080 recording camcorder, new NGC23 with SRW1 aside.
In respect to artfacts on transmission noise is the big killer as compression keeps the noise.
