OK all things considered Flash or tape for HD recording and editing
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
If you have anything recent (computer and editing software) you shouldn't have any issues with editing / using flash. If you're on old stuff and don't plan on upgrading that anytime soon. Then go with tape. Or laserdisc, betamax, 8 track, ..........
The real question is SDHC or SDXC flash? Or any of the dozen plus current options for memory card types. Tape is on the way out, but still useful if you plan on having the camcorder blown up on re-entry or run over by a truck and still be able to recover something from the recording.
The real question is SDHC or SDXC flash? Or any of the dozen plus current options for memory card types. Tape is on the way out, but still useful if you plan on having the camcorder blown up on re-entry or run over by a truck and still be able to recover something from the recording.
Not if you can't buy another camcorder to read the tape back, it isn't.
There are already multiple users on this forum that are coming to the realization that without a camcorder to read the tapes back (or access to one), you're pretty much out of luck. Here's an example:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1229276
A HDD or flash-based memory doesn't have this kind of tight coupling with the recording unit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow_7 /forum/post/18199240
Tape is on the way out, but still useful if you plan on having the camcorder blown up on re-entry or run over by a truck and still be able to recover something from the recording.
Not if you can't buy another camcorder to read the tape back, it isn't.
There are already multiple users on this forum that are coming to the realization that without a camcorder to read the tapes back (or access to one), you're pretty much out of luck. Here's an example:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1229276
A HDD or flash-based memory doesn't have this kind of tight coupling with the recording unit.
and doesn't ever degrade
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericjut /forum/post/18199984
A HDD or flash-based memory doesn't have this kind of tight coupling with the recording unit.
and doesn't ever degrade
Joined
·
734 Posts
I am not a fan of HDD either.
Try doing this with tape or HDD:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/8509619.stm
"Cruise photos intact after camera hauled from seabed
The woman seen posing on the QM2 with the QE2 in the background
A woman can be seen on the deck of the QM2, with the QE2 behind
A trawlerman is trying to trace the owner of a digital camera after it was hauled from the Atlantic seabed in his nets with the photos still intact.
Benito Estevez believes the camera was dropped overboard from the QM2 cruise liner in the middle of the Atlantic.
The camera's memory card revealed five photographs, including a woman posing on the deck of a ship, with the now out-of-service QE2 in the background.
Mr Estevez, of Spain, is now trying to trace the people in the pictures.
US tourists
The QE2 made its last ever voyage to Dubai in November 2008.
BBC South Transport Correspondent Paul Clifton says the ship the woman is posing on is the QM2, and the two liners sailed together from Southampton to New York in October 2008.
A man is seen in one of the photographs wearing an Oxford tourist hat
The couple may have been US tourists returning home after visiting Britain
It was the QE2's last ever transatlantic round trip between the two cities.
Mr Estevez caught the camera in his nets off the west coast of Europe, so the camera was probably lost in the early days of the crossing.
It may be that the couple are from the US, as one picture shows a man wearing a woolly tourist hat from Oxford.
Cunard, the shipping company that owns the QM2, said no-one had reported a lost camera and the firm had not been able to trace the people in the pictures."
Quote:
Originally Posted by dustindu4 /forum/post/18200041
and doesn't ever degrade
I am not a fan of HDD either.
Try doing this with tape or HDD:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/8509619.stm
"Cruise photos intact after camera hauled from seabed
The woman seen posing on the QM2 with the QE2 in the background
A woman can be seen on the deck of the QM2, with the QE2 behind
A trawlerman is trying to trace the owner of a digital camera after it was hauled from the Atlantic seabed in his nets with the photos still intact.
Benito Estevez believes the camera was dropped overboard from the QM2 cruise liner in the middle of the Atlantic.
The camera's memory card revealed five photographs, including a woman posing on the deck of a ship, with the now out-of-service QE2 in the background.
Mr Estevez, of Spain, is now trying to trace the people in the pictures.
US tourists
The QE2 made its last ever voyage to Dubai in November 2008.
BBC South Transport Correspondent Paul Clifton says the ship the woman is posing on is the QM2, and the two liners sailed together from Southampton to New York in October 2008.
A man is seen in one of the photographs wearing an Oxford tourist hat
The couple may have been US tourists returning home after visiting Britain
It was the QE2's last ever transatlantic round trip between the two cities.
Mr Estevez caught the camera in his nets off the west coast of Europe, so the camera was probably lost in the early days of the crossing.
It may be that the couple are from the US, as one picture shows a man wearing a woolly tourist hat from Oxford.
Cunard, the shipping company that owns the QM2, said no-one had reported a lost camera and the firm had not been able to trace the people in the pictures."
As long as there is a demand, there will be a manufacturer. Now that doesn't mean R&D and NEW models. But can you still buy 8 track players? How about cassette players? Sure you can't just walk into walmart and pull them off the shelf anymore. But you can still get them to a degree. As a former Y2K programmer modifying 1970's and 1980's code in 1998 and 1999. (and 386 with a 7" monitor)
Tape can be shaken violently and not break. It can be cut in half and still be of use. Cut a hard drive or flash card in half and see if you can still say that. Drop a tape and a hard drive from the empire state building and see which is still usable.
Tape can be shaken violently and not break. It can be cut in half and still be of use. Cut a hard drive or flash card in half and see if you can still say that. Drop a tape and a hard drive from the empire state building and see which is still usable.
It can also deteriorate quickly under improper storage conditions, be wiped with a strong magnet, is damaged by water, etc. There was a weird example on the Internet yesterday about a flash memory digital camera that was lost off a ship and recovered from the water. All the pictures were OK and the finders were trying to identify the person to give the photos back.
Can you list pros and cons for each media as opposed to a few supportive examples on tape alone? I don't think anyone here has tried to post an entirely objective comparison...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow_7 /forum/post/18202092
As long as there is a demand, there will be a manufacturer. Now that doesn't mean R&D and NEW models. But can you still buy 8 track players? How about cassette players? Sure you can't just walk into walmart and pull them off the shelf anymore. But you can still get them to a degree. As a former Y2K programmer modifying 1970's and 1980's code in 1998 and 1999. (and 386 with a 7" monitor)
Tape can be shaken violently and not break. It can be cut in half and still be of use. Cut a hard drive or flash card in half and see if you can still say that. Drop a tape and a hard drive from the empire state building and see which is still usable.
It can also deteriorate quickly under improper storage conditions, be wiped with a strong magnet, is damaged by water, etc. There was a weird example on the Internet yesterday about a flash memory digital camera that was lost off a ship and recovered from the water. All the pictures were OK and the finders were trying to identify the person to give the photos back.
Can you list pros and cons for each media as opposed to a few supportive examples on tape alone? I don't think anyone here has tried to post an entirely objective comparison...
You can list pros/cons in the debate over Blu ray vs HD DVD, it still doesn't change the fact that the industry has decided what the standard will be going forward.
You're going to get a max of 1440x1080i on tape and they aren't going to be updating that with a new tape design. Further, editing is already "real time" with a strong but affordable computer, this will only continue to become less of an issue going forward, whereas tape still requires a conversion before editing.
-Suntan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Gull /forum/post/18202421
Can you list pros and cons for each media as opposed to a few supportive examples on tape alone? I don't think anyone here has tried to post an entirely objective comparison...
You can list pros/cons in the debate over Blu ray vs HD DVD, it still doesn't change the fact that the industry has decided what the standard will be going forward.
You're going to get a max of 1440x1080i on tape and they aren't going to be updating that with a new tape design. Further, editing is already "real time" with a strong but affordable computer, this will only continue to become less of an issue going forward, whereas tape still requires a conversion before editing.
-Suntan
Joined
·
1,168 Posts
this is not the only example I can think of, but the best video I have ever made, the one I put most of my time in to. I mastered it to Mini DV. I never even watched it from the tape, so it was only used for recording, never for playback. Until I went to copy the master to my hard drive. Yep... drop out. So now I have to take the time to repair the drop outs, by re-editing. MiniDV sucks. The only reliable tape formats were 1'' (resolution sucks), BetaSP and Digital Betacam and HDCAM. They are ALL dead formats.
I think THIS would really help things along.
http://www.gizmag.com/compactflash-5...ication/14302/
144 PB capacity Compact Flash card.
I think THIS would really help things along.
http://www.gizmag.com/compactflash-5...ication/14302/
144 PB capacity Compact Flash card.
dude give me a break, you going to toss your camera off the side of the cruise ship and have it returned to you by a fisherman?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepster returns /forum/post/18200625
I am not a fan of HDD either.
Try doing this with tape or HDD:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/8509619.stm
"Cruise photos intact after camera hauled from seabed
The woman seen posing on the QM2 with the QE2 in the background
A woman can be seen on the deck of the QM2, with the QE2 behind
A trawlerman is trying to trace the owner of a digital camera after it was hauled from the Atlantic seabed in his nets with the photos still intact.
Benito Estevez believes the camera was dropped overboard from the QM2 cruise liner in the middle of the Atlantic.
The camera's memory card revealed five photographs, including a woman posing on the deck of a ship, with the now out-of-service QE2 in the background.
Mr Estevez, of Spain, is now trying to trace the people in the pictures.
US tourists
The QE2 made its last ever voyage to Dubai in November 2008.
BBC South Transport Correspondent Paul Clifton says the ship the woman is posing on is the QM2, and the two liners sailed together from Southampton to New York in October 2008.
A man is seen in one of the photographs wearing an Oxford tourist hat
The couple may have been US tourists returning home after visiting Britain
It was the QE2's last ever transatlantic round trip between the two cities.
Mr Estevez caught the camera in his nets off the west coast of Europe, so the camera was probably lost in the early days of the crossing.
It may be that the couple are from the US, as one picture shows a man wearing a woolly tourist hat from Oxford.
Cunard, the shipping company that owns the QM2, said no-one had reported a lost camera and the firm had not been able to trace the people in the pictures."
dude give me a break, you going to toss your camera off the side of the cruise ship and have it returned to you by a fisherman?
I am by no means a fan of tape. And back when storage was mostly unreliable and $5 per 1GB it was the right choice(or $5 per BYTE / 1960's mainframes). It's still a good choice for backups assuming precautions (3 copies, one to use, one to store, one to store OFF site). But mainly because of costs to size to weight considerations. Granted that flash has caught up in many regards, except for costs. And flash has advantages, no moving parts, and reusable several thousand times (but not indefinitely).
Most of the mediums don't handle environmental conditions well. Or powerful magnets in proximity. Some are slightly better than others, but all will fail with enough exposure.
One other consideration. You can run tape faster for higher bitrates. With flash you have to reinvent the wheel and pay the piper too. With tape you just use a faster motor. Which could be the same motor. Not that there's any video gear that exploits this feature. But there's tons of audio gear that does.
Most of the mediums don't handle environmental conditions well. Or powerful magnets in proximity. Some are slightly better than others, but all will fail with enough exposure.
One other consideration. You can run tape faster for higher bitrates. With flash you have to reinvent the wheel and pay the piper too. With tape you just use a faster motor. Which could be the same motor. Not that there's any video gear that exploits this feature. But there's tons of audio gear that does.
The resolution issue is actually very important. I had a Sony HC-7 which was mini-DV at 1440 x 1080i. I traded up to a CX12 which was 1920 x 1080i. I would never go back to the former resolution having had the CX12 and the CV500V at the higher resolution. I thought the HC7 was good at the time but the higher resolution and pixel counts do make a noticeable difference. So if all mini-DV are still at the lower resolution, that would be the deciding factor for me right there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suntan /forum/post/18202778
You can list pros/cons in the debate over Blu ray vs HD DVD, it still doesn't change the fact that the industry has decided what the standard will be going forward.
You're going to get a max of 1440x1080i on tape and they aren't going to be updating that with a new tape design. Further, editing is already "real time" with a strong but affordable computer, this will only continue to become less of an issue going forward, whereas tape still requires a conversion before editing.
-Suntan
The resolution issue is actually very important. I had a Sony HC-7 which was mini-DV at 1440 x 1080i. I traded up to a CX12 which was 1920 x 1080i. I would never go back to the former resolution having had the CX12 and the CV500V at the higher resolution. I thought the HC7 was good at the time but the higher resolution and pixel counts do make a noticeable difference. So if all mini-DV are still at the lower resolution, that would be the deciding factor for me right there.
I agree when people say how flash/AVCHD camcorders are more convenient, less bulky and easier to transfer to computer...
It should be noted that these mts files from extended shoots need to be joined later and, if any coloring or other fx need to be added; the large, joined mts files might crash your editing program. Even if you can import the files in; the render, with added fx, may take days.
If you plan on making casual, short videos or like a 5 minute music video; these HD flash cams are perfect for that.
HDV/mini-DV tape is a better choice if you plan on shooting long events where you can swap out the one hour tapes and then later capture each tape.
With the new, larger capacity flash cards coming into play; how long will the AVCHD format, with a ceiling of only 24mbps, remain relevant?
It should be noted that these mts files from extended shoots need to be joined later and, if any coloring or other fx need to be added; the large, joined mts files might crash your editing program. Even if you can import the files in; the render, with added fx, may take days.
If you plan on making casual, short videos or like a 5 minute music video; these HD flash cams are perfect for that.
HDV/mini-DV tape is a better choice if you plan on shooting long events where you can swap out the one hour tapes and then later capture each tape.
With the new, larger capacity flash cards coming into play; how long will the AVCHD format, with a ceiling of only 24mbps, remain relevant?
As long as Blu-ray is the standard format, which should be a minimum of 10 years. 24Mbps is the ceiling of blu-ray. Blu-ray won't be replaced until 3DTV storage requirements exceed BD capabilities
Quote:
Originally Posted by xfws /forum/post/18204002
With the new, larger capacity flash cards coming into play; how long will the AVCHD format, with a ceiling of only 24mbps, remain relevant?
As long as Blu-ray is the standard format, which should be a minimum of 10 years. 24Mbps is the ceiling of blu-ray. Blu-ray won't be replaced until 3DTV storage requirements exceed BD capabilities
First, I'm not sure why HDV would be recommended for long events. If anything, flash/HDD AVCHD cams are MUCH more convenient for this kind of use.
Example 1: Wedding ceremonies tend to last more than 63 minutes. HDV won't get you further, which means that you'll have to stop the camera and lose almost a minute of precious moments swapping a new tape in the cam. AVCHD cams will breeze through a 2 hour event without losing one frame.
Example 2: I've recently shot a 5 hour class with my HDD-based AVCHD cam (non-stop). Now try to do that with an HDV cam.
Secondly, I don't know which AVCHD cam you're using, but the AVCHD Sony cams I've used in the last 3 years had no problem stitching the partial MTS files into M2TS as part of the transfer operation with PMB. And, I've never had any color or crash problems that were related to that stitching operation. If you did, it's most probably due to the software solution you're using... not the AVCHD format nor the camcorder.
Finally, your argument about the 24Mbps AVCHD limit is flawed. HDV/miniDV format was limited by the 25Mbps bandwidth limit of the tape medium. That AVCHD limit is only limited by the specification of the AVCHD format, which can be rev'ed up anytime by Panasonic and Sony, like they did recently to include AVCHD Lite. There is basically no real ceiling to the H.264/AC-3 formats (ok... it's something like 250Mbps), so technically, AVCHDv2 could have a 50Mbps or even a 100Mbps limit if they want to. OTOH, the miniDV limit of 25Mbps will stick forever.
It's also worth noting that 25Mbps MPEG2 (HDV) is more or less equal to about 12Mbps H.264 content in term of compression effectiveness and PQ (google H.264 vs MPEG2 for many white papers to proove that fact). So in theory, 24Mbps represents already a serious amount of bandwidth for H.264, rivalling bluray PQ. In practice, the on-board H.264 encoders in today's camcorders aren't utilizing the bandwidth as efficiently as they could, which means that over the next few years, you could still be stuck at 24Mbps and still see major PQ improvements because of the better H.264 encoder iterations put in the future cams.
Bottom line, even if AVCHD bites the dust in the next few years (I still think we have a few years ahead of us), the H.264 compression technology isn't going anywhere for at the least 10 years. The only thing that could dethrone it will be H265, which they're not even done spec'ing last time I looked.
Tapes, and MJPEG and MPEG2 compression technology for consumer HD capture/playback are in their coffin already, with the last nail being hammered as we speak.
Example 1: Wedding ceremonies tend to last more than 63 minutes. HDV won't get you further, which means that you'll have to stop the camera and lose almost a minute of precious moments swapping a new tape in the cam. AVCHD cams will breeze through a 2 hour event without losing one frame.
Example 2: I've recently shot a 5 hour class with my HDD-based AVCHD cam (non-stop). Now try to do that with an HDV cam.
Secondly, I don't know which AVCHD cam you're using, but the AVCHD Sony cams I've used in the last 3 years had no problem stitching the partial MTS files into M2TS as part of the transfer operation with PMB. And, I've never had any color or crash problems that were related to that stitching operation. If you did, it's most probably due to the software solution you're using... not the AVCHD format nor the camcorder.
Finally, your argument about the 24Mbps AVCHD limit is flawed. HDV/miniDV format was limited by the 25Mbps bandwidth limit of the tape medium. That AVCHD limit is only limited by the specification of the AVCHD format, which can be rev'ed up anytime by Panasonic and Sony, like they did recently to include AVCHD Lite. There is basically no real ceiling to the H.264/AC-3 formats (ok... it's something like 250Mbps), so technically, AVCHDv2 could have a 50Mbps or even a 100Mbps limit if they want to. OTOH, the miniDV limit of 25Mbps will stick forever.
It's also worth noting that 25Mbps MPEG2 (HDV) is more or less equal to about 12Mbps H.264 content in term of compression effectiveness and PQ (google H.264 vs MPEG2 for many white papers to proove that fact). So in theory, 24Mbps represents already a serious amount of bandwidth for H.264, rivalling bluray PQ. In practice, the on-board H.264 encoders in today's camcorders aren't utilizing the bandwidth as efficiently as they could, which means that over the next few years, you could still be stuck at 24Mbps and still see major PQ improvements because of the better H.264 encoder iterations put in the future cams.
Bottom line, even if AVCHD bites the dust in the next few years (I still think we have a few years ahead of us), the H.264 compression technology isn't going anywhere for at the least 10 years. The only thing that could dethrone it will be H265, which they're not even done spec'ing last time I looked.
Tapes, and MJPEG and MPEG2 compression technology for consumer HD capture/playback are in their coffin already, with the last nail being hammered as we speak.
The 24Mbps limit is AVCHD, not bluray. Bluray 1x is defined as 54 Mbps, and I've seen plenty of blurays authored with more than 24Mbps average bitrate.
Also, while standard dual-layered blurays are 50GB, the format itself supports up to 200GB (8 layers), with more technoly on their way to extend that limit. I'm not sure 3DTV will have a say in the death of bluray. But I would expect quad-HD might... I don't anticipate that format to be very popular over the next 10 years though, with most movie and TV studios as well as theaters still in the digital/3D curve.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dustindu4 /forum/post/18204137
As long as Blu-ray is the standard format, which should be a minimum of 10 years. 24Mbps is the ceiling of blu-ray. Blu-ray won't be replaced until 3DTV storage requirements exceed BD capabilities
The 24Mbps limit is AVCHD, not bluray. Bluray 1x is defined as 54 Mbps, and I've seen plenty of blurays authored with more than 24Mbps average bitrate.
Also, while standard dual-layered blurays are 50GB, the format itself supports up to 200GB (8 layers), with more technoly on their way to extend that limit. I'm not sure 3DTV will have a say in the death of bluray. But I would expect quad-HD might... I don't anticipate that format to be very popular over the next 10 years though, with most movie and TV studios as well as theaters still in the digital/3D curve.
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Join the discussion
AVS Forum
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
Join now to ask and comment!