#Video Question?
23 messages in this thread
Here's a question for you video experts:
I have a consumer SVHS camcorder and I have recently aquired a 3/4"
Umatic deck (VO-4800). My standard method for outputing flcs to video tape has
been to output from my Magni to the SVHS camcorder. With that SVHS "master" I
then make VHS dubs on another standard VCR.
* Would I get better quality if I went from Magni to 3/4" for masters?
And what about live video: if I used the camcorder but recorded the video on
the 3/4 machine? Would that be better than SVHS or VHS?
Thanks,
Alec Jason
Alec:
>> SVHS vs. 3/4"
What you will find is that for first generation, SVHS is a higher quality,
especially better than 3/4", as opposed to 3/4"SP. However, as soon as you
make a dub, the 3/4" holds up better.
So if you were making a master to dub from, use the SVHS. If you will be
editing, use the 3/4".
Greg Pyros
Greg,
Thanks for the info. So the SVHS master is better quality than a 3/4" master.
That's what I wanted to know.
Thanks again,
Alec Jason
Alec,
PMJI, >> So the SVHS master is better quality than a 3/4" master. <<
If its standard 3/4" not 3/4" SP, SVHS is a better master tape. But there are a
couple of other factors. One of which is that if your first generation is SVHS
but you change formats you get a big loss in quality. If you plan to edit with
3/4" then its better to stay with that format, and if you plan to edit with
SVHS its also better to stay with that format. Standard 3/4" will hold up
better after multiple generations than SVHS but SVHS starts off better. It
really depends on what your final format is going to be. But if your just
concerned about the best master quality SVHS is better.
-JE
JE,
TYFJI (Thank You For Jumping In) !
Okay, I understand that SVHS is better as a master. But since you know this
video stuff:
Is the SVHS master (recorded from a Magni) still better when I'm not using a
high-quality SVHS deck but a standard consumer camcorder? (So, we're not just
comparing formats but the cheapo camcorder vs. the formerly broadcast quality
3/4" Umatic deck.)
Alec Jason
Alec,
>> Is the SVHS master still better when I'm not using a high-quality SVHS deck
but a standard consumer camcorder? <<
SVHS has better specs overall than 3/4" in terms of bandwidth and resolution.
The weakness of a camcorder is usually in the playback section not in the
recording section. You can take a look at the specs of individual camcorders
but they are fairly uniform for SVHS. Resolution is typically 400+ lines and
the bandwidth is higher. In higher end pro-sumer decks the heads and the
transports are more rugged. The point being that the specs should be fairly
close and that its in other areas that account for the difference in cost. Like
the playback won't look as clean.
Another point that needs to be clarified is the terminology "master". Actually
a "master" tape, is the first generation "complilation" tape, also known as the
"edited master". Sometimes however people refer to the "first generation source
tape" as the "master tape" but actually its inaccurate.
So the question is, is 3/4" first generation source tape better than a consumer
camcorder 1/2" SVHS first generation source tape?
And the answer is technically yes. They do look different however, just as Beta
SP looks different than 1". If you're using the SVHS to show what kind of work
you are capable of, it should prove acceptable especially on a first generation
tape. Many people send out SVHS tapes to Ad Agencies and the like to show what
they can do, and many of these tapes have been "mastered" on Beta and dubbed to
SVHS for distribution.
-JE
I agree with all you stated from the spec point of view. I would like to add
to some of what you stated from a user of these formats point of view. I do
all my personal acquisition on SVHS and Hi8. I edit on 3/4 Umatic and
3/4Umatic SP. I have SVHS source decks and Hi8 source decks into the 3/4
Umatic editors. I have the UVW 1800 but have not used it in the editing
environment yet enough to comment.
My general recommendation to budget minded customers is to shoot on SVHS or Hi8
with the strongest camera and lens possible (affordable). Edit either directly
to 3/4 Umatic or Umatic SP. (Very little difference when the distribution is
anything less than broadcast.) If the 3/4 is going to be dumped to VHS for
distribution then save the money and edit to the 3/4 Umatic. If going to Cable
or local broadcast station then go with Umatic SP. I don't edit SVHS even
though I actually can with my SVHS deck I think the chroma banding on solids at
three generations down is unacceptable. The edited master of SVHS looks fine,
but falls apart after the master is dubbed to lesser format for distribution.
The only time I ever recommend editing on SVHS is when the edited Master is to
be the distribution tape. There is one facility here in town that does this
with SVHS. It's a race track. They shoot SVHS, edit SVHS and air the master,
no safety dubs! So, design the editng process with the distribution format in
mind.
Another rule in multiformat editing is that if you must cross format then have
the strongest links of your chain in the front end. eg. Start with the best
possible lighting then the best possible lens, then the best possible camera
head, etc. With animation recording use the highest resolution at the highest
signal to noise ratio with component recording. If one puts more emphasis in
these areas of acquisition his results will most likely be better with lower
formats in edit than acquiring with a camcorder with single key light and then
attempting to edit to beta SP.
PS: We did the shoot last Thursday and it's a long story! I'll tell you about
it later. Right now I've got to get back to work. I bought the Fast VM last
Friday and have all these different decks all apart in redesigning my edit
suite around this new toy. I just bought a couple hundred $ worth of cables
and parts to set up for Y/C editing. I'm now broke! <G>
Don,
>> The only time I ever recommend editing on SVHS is when the edited Master is
to be the distribution tape. <<
I agree, as my basic principle is to stick with the format that is going to be
your end product as that will establish the overall continuity and look of the
piece.
And I also agree that budget minded customers shoot on SVHS or Hi-8 with the
best camera/lens available. As a caveat however I would say that beware format
changes as they can really kill what would otherwise be a clean production. In
other words if you're going to shoot on SVHS, then shoot everything on SVHS and
if you plan to edit it all on 3/4", know that from the outset. Yes you can
break the rules and make it work but more often than not its going to cause
more problems, bigger headaches and cost more as a result.
-JE
John,
When I use the term "master" I am referring to a tape made directly from my
computer, through the Magni, to the SVHS camcorder which, I guess in video
terms, is both the "source" and the "dubbing master."
Thanks for your help.
Alec Jason
Alec,
I made the point about "master" as a clarification, I just wanted to be more
explicit. In the way you are describing it, it is going to be your "dubbing
master", or "master" tape, and might even be your "edited master" if you do
in-camera editing. Just so there's no confusion and you don't get challenged on
your terminology is what I was trying to avoid. 🙂
-JE
While your on this terminology kick — Do I have it correct?
Original–
work tape– 2nd gen. (can be cuts edits for A/B roll)
Master– 3rd generation (finished program)
Safety dubs– 4th generation- can also be distribution for low numbers
Distribution– 5th generation — VHS copies in large numbers
With once in a lifetime shoots this is the way I work it.
With routine stuff I might dispense with the work tape if I don't need fancy
A/B roll stuff.
Hey I wasn't on a terminology kick, just didn't want you to jump in there and
give me heck! <G>
Original -> or Source Work tape -> prebuild (can also be a dub of source for
match frame edits) Master – > Could be 2nd depending on how you do your build.
Saftey dubs – 3rd or 4th Distribution – 3rd or 4th could be made off the master
if you have a safety.
But that depends on how important that master is to you.
I take it once in a lifetime means you don't plan to have to rework it.
Sounds good to me, but this is all pretty standard stuff, no?
-JE
Once in a lifetime footage is footage that can't be reshot, If the deck eats
the tape the project, and your business is gone forever.
Standard stuff, yes! I was just trying to point out that standard stuff
generally has too many generations for SVHS editing ie more than two
generations <G>
If you could get your hands on a used BetaSP deck you would be doing yourself a
tremendous favor. There is no comparision in the quality but even used Beta's
are pretty expensive. I've always had a lot of luck with buying used
equipement (through an acutual used machine broker, not an individual
production house or TV station.)
A lot of what you need depends on the application that you intend to use your
animation for. I deal with a company in Louisiana that would be able to give
you some great advice. They are the most hitech, innovative company I have
ever seen. For example, Microsoft called them for last November's COMDEX to
borrow a Windows NT multi-processor server since this company was the only
company to actually have a fully running system working properly. Their head
technical guy is unbelievably brilliant. Our company just recently made an
agreement with them for them to do some custom multi-media authoring for us.
If you want their name and contact, drop me a note and I will send you a
private message. I just would feel kind of funny leaving their name and
address in a public area without asking them first.
Kenny,
Thanks for your response. I should have known that some of you video fanatics
would see the "3/4" in my message, feel so horrified that anyone would stoop
that low, and feel compelled to drag me into the modern world of BetaSP!
I am aware that BetaSP is far superior to 3/4" and all that. I just got the
3/4" inch deck because I need it to work with several dozen old 3/4" source
tapes I have from videos I've produced over the years. I don't need BetaSP and
don't plan to get one — even a used deck.
Thanks for suggesting your knowledgeable friend but my question is really a
simple one and I've already got some good answers.
Alec Jason
While Beta SP is certainly better than 3/4 Umatic, don't let anybody talk you
into a format just for that reason. The best format for any business is the
format that your customers want. I now have beta SP here and I still get 90%,
no- 98% requests for 3/4 Umatic. You see, most of my clients use it, most of
my clients don't have beta SP, the cable companies in the area have 3/4 Umatic,
not beta. two of the five TV broadcast stations have 3/4 Umatic but only just
have beta oxide. So, the bottom line is I only have 3 TV stations and 3 post
houses that can use my beta SP. Two of those post houses have their own Indy's
with soft image and wouldn't require my services anyway. The other post house
has a Toaster but they don't get involved with animation too much.
How do I feel, now about beta SP? It's great for making B-roll without hardly
any loss. I like having the format because it puts me in the running for those
jobs that require the format. I got lucky and landed a beta SP spec job the
first week I had the deck that paid for a third of the investment. I then
landed two other jobs right after which paid for another third. Since that
first week I haven't done any more work specifically requiring beta SP. I get
work in every day for 3/4 Umatic. I do not regret having bought the beta SP
but would never give up my 3/4 Umatic unless I decide to go out of business.
<g>
Don(a video fanatic that lives in the real world of business survival) Landis
and, I refuse to become a beta SP snob!
Don,
>> a video fanatic that lives in the real world of business survival. <<
That may be but apparently you didn't follow the thread very closely. I said
3/4" SP not Beta SP! O.K. Alright, already! Nobody was trying to talk him into
Beta SP. My point was that 3/4" wasn't as good as SVHS but SVHS wasn't overall
as good as 3/4" SP. (You have heard of that format, haven't you.<g>)
-JE
>> My point was that 3/4" wasn't as good as SVHS but SVHS wasn't overall as
good as 3/4" SP. (You have heard of that format, haven't you.<g>)
Over simplified — yes I'll go along with that but only for two generations.
Go to 3 generations and I'll say the 3/4 Umatic is better than SVHS. That's
why I generally always cross over the SVHS in the second generation to 3/4.
Of course I've heard of the 3/4 SP Didn't I say I use it here? Last time I
checked a BVU-950 was SP. However, few clients call for it over regular 3/4
Umatic. My SP package is a BVU150, BVU800 and BVU950. and I B-roll with the
VO-5850. <BG>
>> Oversimplified. << Of course. If I had my way everyone would be using Beta
SP. But in your message to Alec you said don't let anyone sell you on Beta SP,
I just wanted to clarify that there were two types of 3/4". And technically the
specs on SVHS are significantly better than standard 3/4". I don't know that I
agree with going to 3/4" but if it works for you then as another perspective I
feel its important for you to bring it up. Personally given the choices
involved I'd use SVHS for acquistion and 3/4" for mastering. But even though
3/4" SP is better I can understand why you'd edit 3/4" as it doesn't smear like
3/4" SP can with multiple generations. And these are the ins and outs of video
editing which are really a pain to have to explain, because while technical
this is better actually you want to do that because. Which is why I hate
industrial and stick with Beta SP. I don't like the compromises and the
problems that can result. I don't have time for it. But we're dependent on
different aspects of this business. I'm not critical of your approach, it just
doesn't work for me. It would in fact drive me bonkers, and I have to save what
sanity I have to deal with unreasonable requests. <g>
BTW I don't try to sell people on anything, just try to point out the pluses
and minuses. I do have some biases but I also make that clear. But then you
know that. <g>
Last I heard you were using a 5850 with a Hi-8 and an SVHS deck, so I don't
know where the 800 and 950 came from. You were using the 5850 for frame by
frame with a diaquest. Then you got the PAR and then the UVW. FWIW.
-JE
>> It would in fact drive me bonkers, and I have to save what sanity I have to
deal with unreasonable requests. <g>
Thank you John for your wonderful understanding of my approach. I appreciate
your reasoning as well but since I worked my way up fron VHS editing in 1985 to
Beta SP today I have learned the particulars of many formats and have quite the
interformat facility. It doesn't drive me bonkers because when it comes to
this stuff and my clients background I generally know much more than they so
they trust me to decide. At this level of the market the clients are only
concerned about when they can get their VHS tape to show. You are right about
the beta SP clients. The limited experience I've had with this market is that
they know what they want and do specify it in the specs. The job I did for the
Chamber of Commerce speced Beta SP with Component recording of the animation to
follow their story board.
Your familiarity with my studio equipment has been limited to most of my
discussions of animation which, in the past (BP) was limited to the 5850 and
the diaquest setup. In video editing I have a number of systems in the rack.
Start with a Beta 1 editor, 3/4 top loader which I just junked to make room for
the beta SP; the BVU series and the Abner Paltex, the umatic is fed with a
VO5600 and a Hob Knob kit. The Hi8 is an EVO9800 which I'm getting a
modification to convert to Y/C 3.58 soon. The new beta SP editing is now, as
of yesterday, being controlled by the Fast VM. I've ordered a special 33Pin to
9 pin converter for the Fast VM to control the sony parallel stuff. Multi
format editing is a way of life around here.
Hey Don,
Don,
You're makeing it work for you, so the next time there's one of these
interformat questions, you can field it. <g> I know enough to keep myself and
other's out of trouble, but I'm sure you know tricks I wouldn't even consider;
partly because of the market, and partly because of the potential
complications. It works for you and you've got a market for it and as a result
you've been able to build your business. Can't ask for more than that, now can
you. 🙂
-JE
Good for you, Don!
Just for the record, I only produce forensic animation. I don't do any
"broadcast" animation. My only interest in the differences between 3/4 Umatic
and SVHS was because I happen to have both machines available. There is
absolutely no requirement for BetaSP in this field. If I won a BetaSP deck, I'd
be delighted because I'd immediately sell it and buy more important gear.
You're an oddbalI, Don: someone who really knows video and who still remains
rational about the subject! I have produced video documentaries for many years
and I learned something about techo snobbery along the way. One point that gets
completely forgotten along the way is that a video is produced for viewers, not
for video editors, engineers, techs, or other techno-fanatic-snobs. If you
listen to those people, you would be convinced that anything shot and mastered
on anything less than BetaSP is absolute crap and completely unwatchable.
The truth is that viewers (or consumers) do not care what format is used. They
only know if what they're watching is clear and "understandable." I could
happily shoot a video today using 3/4" Umatic and be quite content with the
result — if the scenes were WELL LIT and the camera professionally handled. I
would, however, like to master on Beta or D2.
So, yes, we agree. Thanks for your observations.
Alec Jason
>>You're an oddbalI, Don: someone who really knows video and who still remains
rational about the subject!
I deal with people every day who are in the buying capacity of video. These
buyers will spend most of their time discussing content and story. Bring up
the subject of formats and most will just give you a blank stare. I've learned
to just eval the client and try to match the appropriate format for their
budget. Like you said get into this with editors and engineers who spend
someone elses money and the whole center of discussion changes. With saavy
buyers who do know the format differences either you have what they want or
they go to someone who does. In my market these saavy customers are very few.