Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: "David Ruether" <d_ruether@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 14:23:12 -0400
"Steve King" <steveSPAMBLOCK@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:h80k05$ko5$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Smarty" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:h7v25a$si9$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| "David Ruether" <d_ruether@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| news:h7ub3t$6h8$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
BIG SNIP|
You guys are no longer amusing;-)
Why don't you both just agree to this: AVCHD is today becoming more popular
in acquisition and distribution. This file format can be difficult for
users with older, less capable computers. It can be conveniently edited
only by higher horse-power computers. Some NLE software does a better job
with AVCHD than others. Some software must transcodes the files to toher
formats before editing, which may or may not affect the quality depending on
the users purpose and opinion. Some cameras record HD video on tape based
systems that have their own advantages and disadvantages.
Steve King
Hey, I agree completely with the above - and it is essentially what I
have tried to point out when appropriate to help beginners or others
on relatively tight budgets (as indicated in their posts) avoid unpleasant
discoveries when it comes time to editing AVCHD. I also intend my
posts to show an easier route *for now* for HD (HDV) that even has
some additional advantages (but, all this will of course, change with time
and the maturing of both hardware and software to the point where they
are cheaper and more practical to use with AVCHD than now). I do
this in the face of the often rude, deceptive, and persistently irrationally
angry posts from "Smarty" attacking me, who also tends to ignore the
specific levels and needs of posters in a thread while offering advice that
is still impractical for most to follow. BTW, I have often made it clear
that if I make a *factual* mistake (and not just express an *opinion*
that is different from "Smarty's"...;-), I am more than happy to receive a
correction (especially if it is backed up with a reliable factual citing, and
not just a claim) since this is a type of exchange that we can all learn
from here. Also BTW, I'm all for 24 Mbps AVCHD when it really finally
becomes practical and pleasant to edit it without needing to cobble
together expensive hardware and software to do it. When 24 Mbps
AVCHD is as easy to edit as HDV is now with standard relatively
inexpensive off-the-shelf computers and good under $100 NLEs, I will
be waiting in line to buy into this format and make the switch - but
meanwhile, I just want to make HD videos without struggling with the
format...
--DR
.
- References:
- Standard definition or HD
- From: j.
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: David Ruether
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: David Ruether
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: j.
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: David Ruether
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: David Ruether
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: Smarty
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: David Ruether
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: Smarty
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: David Ruether
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: Smarty
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: David Ruether
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: Smarty
- Re: Standard definition or HD
- From: Steve King
- Standard definition or HD
- Prev by Date: Re: Standard definition or HD
- Next by Date: Low cost AVCHD editing / disk creation for 24 mbit/sec AVCHD camcorders
- Previous by thread: Re: Standard definition or HD
- Next by thread: Aspect Ratio
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading