|
Author
|
Topic: dv vs. 8mm
|
jstern
|
posted 02-05-2000 03:54 PM
I am writing a short speech for English on this topic, comparing the two formats and why someone would need DV instead of 8mm, vice-versa.I'd like to credit this board in my "Works Cited" page, but am not sure what sort of entry to use. Any ideas? (Especially Webmaster Dale or a moderator) Josh |
funkymunkey
|
posted 02-05-2000 04:19 PM
Where to begin? If you're talking about MiniDV, here are some suggestions. DV is a totally digital format, whereas 8mm is an analog format. Therefore, DV is especially suited for non-linear editing. Also, DV can handle multiple transfers without quality degeneration (provided you are using digital equipment). MiniDV offers up to 500 lines of horizontal resolution, whereas 8mm tapes offer up to 240 lines of horizontal resolution (Hi8 = 400 lines). MiniDV tapes can record anywhere from 10 minutes to 3 hours SP; 8mm tapes can record anywhere from 10 minutes to 2 hours SP. MiniDV is of course more expencive than 8mm. However, 8mm (and Hi8) are still more common than DV (at this point in time). That's about all I can give you.Onto the second question. What format of writing are you using? I will assume MLA. When citing any online work in an MLA Bibliography the format is as follows: title. author (if known). date published (if known, else use date found). <URL> To cite me: dv vs. 8mm - likeastory boards. David Yee. Febuary 5, 2000. <http://www.likeastory.com/boards/Forum18/HTML/001392.html> Hope this helps. 
[This message has been edited by funkymunkey (edited 02-05-2000).] |
NJRFilms
|
posted 02-05-2000 07:42 PM
There really is no compairson between DV and 8mm! A better topic might be DV vs. 35mm. DV is just so much better! (Thats helpful, eh) But funky gave you all the facts you really need to know. |
jstern
|
posted 02-06-2000 11:28 AM
Thanks for the input.Actually, the essay is more about "should you wait to buy DV until it becomes more affordable or just buy a Handycam now?" funkymunky, I am using MLA format. I wasn't sure what to do because this IS a website, but its sorta different. I'll post the speech on the next post, critiques welcome. Josh |
jstern
|
posted 02-06-2000 11:30 AM
Currently, an average Digital Video (DV for short) camcorder is one thousand dollars. This is relatively more expensive than the VHS format and its variants, priced around 400 dollars. To some, DV and VHS aren’t comparable. Today I will discuss whether a consumer should wait to buy a camcorder until DV becomes more affordable, or just buy a VHS or 8mm camera now.
Most camcorders in a Circuit City are 8mm and Compact VHS cameras. These cameras use analog signals to record video. As analog tapes are copied and taped over, the image quality will worsen. When comparing 8mm footage to the local news, a major difference is noticed because the average 8mm camcorder’s active horizontal lines is significantly less than an industrial quality camera’s.
By comparison, the newer DV cameras use a tape almost the same size as 8mm tapes, but possess image quality which rivals that of television studio cameras. The DV format takes advantage of about 500 lines of horizontal resolution while the 8mm format uses only 240 lines. When copied or taped over, there is no loss of image quality. DV cameras accomplish this because, as the name implies, the format is entirely digital. The light coming in through the camera lens is filtered through a CCD, which converts it directly in to “ones and zeros,” and then records it on the videocassette. Digital data can be copied over and over forever, with no loss of quality.
Clearly, a DV recorder is way superior to an 8mm or VHS recorder. But is it a better buy? Is it worth an extra 600 dollars just for a better looking picture?
The answer is: it depends. Someone interested in buying a camcorder is either a parent who wants to tape family get togethers, soccer games, and karate tournaments, or they are a low budget director.
The director should wait until DV becomes cheaper, or just save up some more money. As frugal as he may be, most moviemakers want the professional qualities of DV even if it is extra money.
The parent, whose needs for the camcorder will only extend to the camera’s record button, should go ahead and jump on the sinking ship of 8mm.by Josh Stern, 2/5/99 |
jstern
|
posted 02-06-2000 11:32 AM
Currently, an average Digital Video (DV for short) camcorder is one thousand dollars. This is relatively more expensive than the VHS format and its variants, priced around 400 dollars. To some, DV and VHS aren’t comparable. Today I will discuss whether a consumer should wait to buy a camcorder until DV becomes more affordable, or just buy a VHS or 8mm camera now.Most camcorders in a Circuit City are 8mm and Compact VHS cameras. These cameras use analog signals to record video. As analog tapes are copied and taped over, the image quality will worsen. When comparing 8mm footage to the local news, a major difference is noticed because the average 8mm camcorder’s active horizontal lines is significantly less than an industrial quality camera’s. By comparison, the newer DV cameras use a tape almost the same size as 8mm tapes, but possess image quality which rivals that of television studio cameras. The DV format takes advantage of about 500 lines of horizontal resolution while the 8mm format uses only 240 lines. When copied or taped over, there is no loss of image quality. DV cameras accomplish this because, as the name implies, the format is entirely digital. The light coming in through the camera lens is filtered through a CCD, which converts it directly in to “ones and zeros,” and then records it on the videocassette. Digital data can be copied over and over forever, with no loss of quality. Clearly, a DV recorder is way superior to an 8mm or VHS recorder. But is it a better buy? Is it worth an extra 600 dollars just for a better looking picture? The answer is: it depends. Someone interested in buying a camcorder is either a parent who wants to tape family get togethers, soccer games, and karate tournaments, or they are a low budget director. The director should wait until DV becomes cheaper, or just save up some more money. As frugal as he may be, most moviemakers want the professional qualities of DV even if it is extra money. The parent, whose needs for the camcorder will only extend to the camera’s record button, should go ahead and jump on the sinking ship of 8mm. by Josh Stern, 2/5/2000 |
ebrigman
|
posted 02-07-2000 08:49 AM
doesn't the quality of the image also edpend greatly on the camera and not just the recorder... for instance 3 1/2" CCDs as opposed to 1 1/3" CCD |
funkymunkey
|
posted 02-07-2000 03:32 PM
Yeah, it does depend on the CCD, but that's not the point of the speech.jstern, very well spoken. I liked the use of "ones and zeros" to describe the dv capture. | |
