Wake 101
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Video and Photography

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (mrm2083)      Join Date: Nov 2005       12-08-2006, 11:41 PM Reply   
I am looking at getting the sony HDR-HC3 high def camcorder. It will be used about 80% for shooting wakeboarding. I was actually just gonna go for a sony DVR-HC46 and spending half the price but I was watching Encore and the differenece between those really nice looking shots (I'm guessing those are on high def) and the regular shots just really seems worth it. I heard something about high def being bad for action sports? Is that footage in encore high def cams? How is the sony high def, worth the money? Is the editing on final cut pro 5 and imovie HD good with high def?
Old     (scott_a)      Join Date: Dec 2002       12-08-2006, 11:51 PM Reply   
I'm pretty sure that the footage you saw was actually 16mm film, not HD.
Old     (dakid)      Join Date: Feb 2001       12-09-2006, 12:41 AM Reply   
where'd you hear that hd is bad for action sports?

and yeah, encore was shot on 16mm film. i'm pretty sure you can edit hd on fcp, but i doubt you can on imovie.
Old     (mrm2083)      Join Date: Nov 2005       12-09-2006, 6:36 AM Reply
-something aboutthe pan making it bad for fast moving objects

Anyways I thought someof those lake powell scenes were high def because they are just such better quality than than the rest of the stuff. Is there any wake video shot in high def so I could see the difference? Joe I take it you are a fan of high def? Also I love how in the new expo podcast for liquid force they do that super slow mo, I was reading up on the camcorder I want and it says it has sony smooth slow record which records at 240fps instead of 60fps for 3 seconds, seems like the expo podcast?
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       12-09-2006, 7:57 AM Reply   
I'm about 99% sure those slomo sequences in that LF piece were shot with a Panasonic HVX200 @ 720 60p. 60 true progresssive frames per second lend themselves a lot better to slow/stop motion then 60 interlaced (60i) frames (30fps) like the Sony you mention.

The other issue is the format the Sony records to, HDV. HDV is a high compression format that uses a method where an "I" frame is recorded followed by 15 "GOP" (group of pictures) frames. The I frame contains full image information and the following 15 frames only contain information about the changes from the last I frame. Obviously for static shots this doesn't stress the codec but when you shoot high motion or pan the cam quickly the ability of the codec to accurately record the image properly get's stressed. HDV is also a 4:2:0 color based codec so color isn't sampled as well as Panasonic's DVCPro HD (4:2:2) or even DV which is 4:1:1.

Does this mean an HDV cam is incapable of good fast action video? Not really, in fact I've seen some good HDV based action video lately so I've just ordered a Canon HV10 which I'm going to experiment with.

I looked at Sony but opted for the Canon for the following reasons:

Image stablization: Canon uses optical, sony uses electronic. All reports say the Canon's is way more effective.

AutoFocus: The Canon has instant focus and a good focus assist mode, the sony's is conventional and they removed the focus assist the HC1 had. Focus is critical with HD whether manual or auto is used.

Sensor: the Canon uses a CMOS sensor and features a full 1920 X 1080 grid which literally provide resolution on par with their XL H1 (I know it sounds impossible but it's true). The Sony is using a high degree of builtin contrast and sharpening to achieve their final image.

Exposure: Neither cam provides true full manual control but the Canon at least allows separate control over shutter and aperture.

Biggest downside to the Canon is no audio inputs (which I don't care about) and no HDMI out. However the Canon has 3 channel component out which I've found provides equal quality to HDMI. The Sony appears to be better in low light, another feature that doesn't matter to me.

I saw that slo mo feature on the sony but if the HDV codec is limited to 25 mbs and is pushed at 30 fps how is it going to record accurately at 4 times that? I guess I'd have to see the video to make a call on that. Plus 3 seconds isn't enough to do anything with. (You can't record normally and then switch in real time to the slomo mode and back)

I have not been a big fan of HDV but the thought of replacing 8K worth of HVX200 with a $1000 unit makes it worth a try even if there are compromises and work arounds.

Anyhow here's some great reviews on both the Sony and the Canon and a link to some demo footage Canon has posted from the HV10.

iMovie will edit HDV but you need a lot of storage and a fast processor because it doesn't do it natively like FCP.

Old     (scott_a)      Join Date: Dec 2002       12-09-2006, 9:44 AM Reply   
interesting...looks like Canon might be borrowing technology (CMOS) from their d-slr cameras and putting it into their camcorders?

The camera Justin uses that shot that SUUUPER slow-mo that you saw in The Truth is actually a high speed (slow-mo) camera. It can shoot something like 100,000 frames per second, and sends individual TIFF files directly to a tethered computer (which you MUST have given the large amount of data transferred!). If I recall correctly, all the shots are about 10,000fps because at 100,000fps there is basically no movement in the wakeboarder. I STILL can't wait to see what Justin does with it.
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       12-09-2006, 12:31 PM Reply   
WOW that's impressive technology. I wasn't positve it was an HVX although I heard he was using them but I could tell it wasn't shot on film.

What kind of computer can capture at that rate? Even if he was shooting standard def sizing 10000 tifs a second is the equivalent of what, 3 gigs or so a second? Plus I doubt he's capturing at 720 X 480. I know the vipers capture uncompressed 4:4:4 RGB video but not at those framerates. Pass on any info you know about that rig, that's the first I've heard of anything like that.
Old     (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       12-09-2006, 12:51 PM Reply   
I'll bet this is it:

looks like around 1000 fps at a 1 mp resolution. The super high rates decrease the image size quite a bit. Looks expensive!
Old     (scott_a)      Join Date: Dec 2002       12-09-2006, 1:00 PM Reply   
A quick google search came up with this:

I really don't know which model Justin used in particular, but you get the gist of the technology...

p.s. you have mail...

(Message edited by scott_a on December 09, 2006)
Old     (isler)      Join Date: Apr 2003       12-09-2006, 2:31 PM Reply   
Like Scott, I don't know the exact model camera Justin was using. However, it was one similar to the one Scott linked above. I believe he shot at between 500fps and 1000fps. Also, since the resolution is above SD video res, it's possible to pan-and-scan within the slow motion shot, which he does.

It will be interesting to see when the Red camera ships (, and how the slow-mo looks out of that. It can do 60fps at 2540p, and 120fps at 2K or 1080p (still at 4:4:4 RGB).

Justin shot a bit on the DVX I believe, as well as the HVX. But the super slow-motion stuff was all done on an industrial high speed camera.


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 9:42 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home


© 2016 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us