64t clip on You-Tube. Nice stuff!

[richard p. t.]

Here's a nice clip. Shot on 64t super 8 and processed by Nano. Its a nice telecine job - Video 8 broadcast in Sydney have australia's only Rank machines for s8. Looks better than some I had done through there recently. Must be the difference between mini-Dv and digi-beata.



http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... rch=Search

[jb17kx]

Nice little plug for yourself there... Heh.

I presme that I am supposed be searching for "Private Lawns, angus and julia stone"...

As to the difference between Mini-DV and Digibeta, it almost certainly is. The BBC use Digibeta to store new programs and films of their Spirit telecine...

[Patrick]

Nice work! Clever videoclip, and I like the song too.

[paul]

Yeah nice work and good song! Simple ideas are great!

Paul

[Angus]

Yeah I think 64T looks best when used to create a certain atmosphere....its not for everyday daylight use however. Nice footage, good steady transfer...shame about the youtube bandwidth but nothing you can do about that!

[aj]

.
.
.
shame about the youtube bandwidth but nothing you can do about that!

Euh, post it somewhere else?

Depends on your possible audience from elswhere but this forum brings only some 30-50 viewers. Easily served from standard provider accounts.

[mattias]

cool clip. i don't see what's so fantastic about the quality though. if you see any difference at all between digibeta and minidv at this res you must have super powers, and even if you see a side by side at full res the difference is very subtle. most people think dvd's look fantastic and those are not even close to minidv quality for example. not to mention tv broadcasts which are even lower quality. digibeta is a great format but it won't make your footage look any "better".

/matt

[morales72]

Nice, cool, simple video that goes along with the song. I really dug it.
I am not E64T's advocate, but most of negative critics about it are based on outdoor shots. This clip shows it can be a decent stock too.

Thanks for sharing.

Best regards,

El Morales

[Scotness]

I agree - the stock looks good - oviously well processed!

Richard how's the capture set up going?

Scot

[richard p. t.]

. most people think dvd's look fantastic and those are not even close to minidv quality for example. not to mention tv broadcasts which are even lower quality. digibeta is a great format but it won't make your footage look any "better".

/matt

I'm trying to get a handle on the digital world. Corect me if I am wrong, but say I shot using a broadcast quality camera, and recorded the footage on both digi-beata and mini-dv (o.k. there might be issues with connecting the two - SDI camera to firewire recorder ... but I don;t know). Then edit both tapes - using a pc for the mini-dv and a broadcast set up for the digi-beata. I then dump both end results to dvd. Surely the footage recorded on the digi-beata would look better ... and I would have thought a whole lot better.

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Surely the footage recorded on the digi-beata would look better ... and I would have thought a whole lot better.

I would say: It depends.

On what I hear? On how much you need to tweak the colors and image with digital effects in editing. If all you need to do is cut the footage (ok, some "normal" color corrections also) I don´t think there would be that much of a difference really. If there would be any difference at all...

[mattias]

Surely the footage recorded on the digi-beata would look better

slightly.

and I would have thought a whole lot better.

far from it.

an example coming soon.

/matt

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

far from it.

an example coming soon.

/matt

Hey, compress both to mpeg2 and then make a comparison.
Would be interesting.

(also, he said the film would end up on DVD...)

[mattias]

It depends [on] how much you need to tweak the colors and image with digital effects in editing. If all you need to do is cut the footage (ok, some "normal" color corrections also) I don´t think there would be that much of a difference really. If there would be any difference at all...

yes, here's the example i promised. i took an image from a 5 megapixel camera, resized it to 720x576 pixels and saved one copy as uncompressed and one as dv, then opened both and saved again as 50% jpeg, approximately the same level of compression as dvd. there's a difference between them for sure, but you have to look for it and unless you have them side by side i don't think you can tell which is which.

from uncompressed:

from dv:


/matt

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Wait a minute... I know those two guys!
What are you doing with that videocamera? I can´t scan the miniDV tape, now can I? ;)

In reality, there is no difference in quality. (if viewed on a TV, moving images and all). At least no difference that would be noticed.