Frage von Johel:
Hi folks,
can someone help me in choosing a camcorder?
The recordings are in Europe and North, Central America will be shown (TV), ie, that both NTSC and PAL format .....
Is it better to buy a device that takes both formats or rather want to convert again. Price range up to 3000 ¬
Thank you
Johel
Antwort von PowerMac:
FX1/Z1 or HVX200
One film in HD, as frames and then you can very easily convert it to NTSC / PAL. Mathematically, the better ASLS forth between NTSC and PAL and her.
Antwort von beiti:
There are DVD players that can output PAL as PAL and NTSC and PAL. However, this is a very primitive, jerky standards conversion, and not recommended.
I see two possibilities, depending on how and where the films are presented.
If you own the film solely with vorführst own equipment, you can rotate it in NTSC. In North America, Japan is the standard, and with the most modern European equipment can play NTSC as well. Conversely, it would be difficult to play the NTSC-PAL territory, it is possible, but synonymous, when the devices are carefully chosen.
When DVDs "among the people" to be placed, they must meet each of the customary norm, because you never know whether all the addressees are equipped to play a foreign standard. In this case, I would in turn improve the PAL and NTSC for North America to convert. This rule change should be of good quality, for example, with Canopus ProCoder.
A little trick would still make the necessary Advertisement (vsbewegte title fonts) for each standard to create separate, because they (by the standards conversion synonymous high-quality) would be a little jerk. So first, the film works to finish without a title, normwandeln then, then add the titles separately for each standard version.
Antwort von Johel:
I thought maybe in DV and not HD, since austrahlen some stations, no HDV. It has not yet been so matured properly (told me)
The camera does not have to be new.
Is the conversion of NTSC / PAL such a big problem?
Antwort von Axel:
Rule of thumb: For International twist equal to the original DVD in NTSC. For international TV of convert Pal to NTSC.
Antwort von PowerMac:
I thought maybe in DV and not HD, since austrahlen some stations, no HDV. It has not yet been so matured properly (told me)
The camera does not have to be new.
Is the conversion of NTSC / PAL such a big problem? You have not grasped the idea. You take on HD with what is best for Z.. On average, you count down to one each NTSC and PAL version, both of which look pretty good. Better than any DV camera. Would you convert of PAL DV to NTSC, they would look out grottig. HD is just and expedient means, not an end. The goal is SD. Purpose, it is when the transmitter are fully ready. Then you produce music, but quite a few years and are experienced in HD.
Antwort von beiti:
You take on HD with what is best for Z.. On average, you count down to one each NTSC and PAL version, both of which look pretty good. Better than any DV camera. Would you convert of PAL DV to NTSC, they would look out grottig. I do not know. Even if you can runterrechnen of HD remains the main problem of different frequencies. If you have any software that interpolates the clean-between, here comes out the same crap as in the direct convert to SD.
There is still the solution of 25p, 25p, and where to turn for NTSC at 23.97 fps with pulldown converts. I have tried synonymous times. Then, while leaving the standard conversion, as such, hardly any traces, but 25p of jerky stop already naturally very strong. In addition, the sound in the NTSC version of a half audio sounds deeper. The bottom line is no good solution.
Is the conversion of NTSC / PAL such a big problem? Yes. There is problem that you have to make 50 half-frames per second, 60 fields per second, ie, the software has to invent intermediate.
With a good software (Canopus ProCoder Express, I have already mentioned it) is that to some extent. PAL to NTSC, it is generally better than the reverse, because the higher PAL Resolutionhat. ProCoder intermediate calculated by proportional transition. When fast movements in the Picture, a minimal judder remains, and if one individual closely, one sees some double contours. In essence, the result is very palatable and not significantly worse than the originary NTSC (in any case seen worse than originary PAL).
@ Johel
If you tell us precisely what you have with the recordings before, we would rather find a customized solution for you. Do you want to distribute it on DVD? Or send s.Fernsehsender? I have you might not have understood. Choosing the right camcorder has so many more aspects than just the norm.
Antwort von Johel:
So absorb and convert PAL to NTSC??
Have to find her a tip for me where I need a (new software / gebrauch) camcorder, editing system and the cheap Canopus ProCoder Express??
Antwort von PowerMac:
You take on HD with what is best for Z.. On average, you count down to one each NTSC and PAL version, both of which look pretty good. Better than any DV camera. Would you convert of PAL DV to NTSC, they would look out grottig. I do not know. Even if you can runterrechnen of HD remains the main problem of different frequencies. If you have any software that interpolates the clean-between, here comes out the same crap as in the direct convert to SD. (...) That is not exactly true. It can tell you each cutter. The Walk Of hanging from several factors:
s.Anfangsauflösung to target resolution. With HD-> SD (NTSC / PAL) which is clearly better. NTSC-> PAL or vice versa, it is always bad. (Try five eggs into six hens.)
b) Frequency of 50i/25PsF -> 60i/30psf is obviously a problem. But, one has to interpolate a higher Resolutionkann better one! Interpolation of intermediate images looks at low dissolved material always mushy. For HD, it is convenient mathematically calculated by much more information useful to intermediate.
c) And of course 25 @ 24 is synonymous still possible. By drawing on progressive or deinterlace well, then it slows down a bit and then packed with 3:2 pulldown in 60i. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=69100
Moreover, one can be both a 60i camera take as synonymous one 50i camera. Is the question of whether you prefer 60i-> 50i or omit information they prefer extrapolate of 50i-> 60i. Both have advantages and disadvantages. Especially different for HD 60i and 50i is compressed (frequency resolution = * buckling) stress range
Antwort von Johel:
Thank you for your willingness to
The recordings will be sent s.Fernsehesender.
Johel
Antwort von beiti:
Yes, of course, true that one has when Runterrechnen of HD to SD more reserves and improve the bottom line is synonymous SD video gets in both standards. (Depends of course, synonymous of starting the software, runterrechnet with the man.)
However, I wonder what is the best Johel / bezahlbarste solution. In the budget up to 3000 euros would be a FX1 is in there, but I do not know if the budget still goes for necessary accessories. Moreover, we do not yet know whether Johel wants to work in 4:3 or 16:9, for HD even more suitable for the latter.
Good of PAL converted to NTSC DV does not look definitely out mushy. In quiet scenes is limited to the loss in quality at the lower resolution, only in moving scenes, the disadvantage can be seen, but this will happen (perhaps to a lesser extent) synonymous with Transform of 50 Hz to 60-Hz HD-SD.
Antwort von beiti:
The recordings will be sent s.Fernsehesender. Okay, then the rule change is inevitable. Then PowerMacs HD version would actually be a good idea (unless you need not necessarily 4:3-format).
, There is the practical question, come on what disk the films to television stations. DVD will not meet its demands, can play DV, and you were only in the norm of the camcorder.
Antwort von PowerMac:
He's just right for small budgets:
http://www.sonybiz.net/...
Antwort von beiti:
"Low budget" is a broad term. It would certainly be cheaper to buy in addition to PAL-NTSC camcorder, an inexpensive camcorder to which one can play the finished transformed video.
But since Johel the thing very mysterious terms, we therefore neither type, length, and budget of his planned films yet know about his prior knowledge of knowledge that can only speculate. We know the budget for the camcorder (3000 euros), but under (semi) professional camcorder shooting conditions would indeed constitute more than half of the investment.
So, if you know precisely what are the channels for which are cassette formats accepted there, how high the quality s.The films and how much money is a whole can be spent on acquisitions, one can consider a specific workflow. So far, we are merely speculating around.
Antwort von Anna8543:
Hello, folks!
In this regard, I ask myself now:
Why the BBC has said 150 copies of the model Sony170 Pal
purchased? Still not too long ago?
They'll buy any scrap!?
Is the HD-ready? (NO)
Greetings
Guest
Antwort von PowerMac:
Hello, folks!
In this regard, I ask myself now:
Why the BBC has said 150 copies of the model Sony170 Pal
purchased? Still not too long ago?
They'll buy any scrap!?
Is the HD-ready? (NO)
Greetings
Guest What this has to do with the subject? Nothing! Has anyone here said that the PD 170 was crap? No! Converts the BBC with content in order to NTSC? No!
Entirely by s.Thema.
