Film transfer to DVcam or Minidv

[Guest FilmmakerJack]

Hey, I was wondering, after I get my film processed, is there any difference if I get the film transfered to Minidv instead of a DVcam? I see both options and wonder what the difference is.

[Ashley Dean Myles]

Quality. I'd still prefer a Beta SP transfer to miniDV anyday.

[Alvin Pingol]

FilmmakerJack,

 

The MiniDV and DVCAM tape formats employ the same compression scheme and ratio (5:1, or 25Mbit/sec). Images should be identical from either format, though risk of dropouts is a bit less with DVCAM, as it is a more robust format.

[Guest FilmmakerJack]

Ohhh okay. Thanks, that really helped a lot. So it would be in my best interest to go with the DVcam tapes then?

[Jeremy Russell]

If you have the option to transfer to BeatSP, then do it, and transfer it to MiniDV afterwards if you have to. I guess it all depends on how sensitive the material you are transfering is. Is it your thesis, is it a tv commercial? Is it test footage? A lot of times, you can't get a student rate when you transfer to BetaSP, but I think that only applies to a supervised scene-scene transfer, not a one light or a best light. If what you are transfering is very important, go BetaSP.

 

In any respect, you want to make sure that the digital image that you end up with is perfect and is exactly what you wanted, dvcam, although not BetaSP, should be trusted over minidv.

Edited April 29, 2005 by Jeremy Russell

[Frank Barrera]

The safest thing to do is to always get a BetaSP copy as your master. (Some will argue for a DigiBeta but we low budget folks have a better chance of knowing some small time producer who owns a BetaSP deck that we might use if further dubbs are needed.) At the same time have the lab bump a copy on MiniDV or DVCam. Those little tapes should make anyone a little nervous. You can sleep better knowing that if anything ever happens to the "little" tape you always have a beautiful uncompressed master with the BetaSP.

 

Good luck

 

FB

[John Pytlak RIP]

The safest thing to do is to always get a BetaSP copy as your master. (Some will argue for a DigiBeta but we low budget folks have a better chance of knowing some small time producer who owns a BetaSP deck that we might use if further dubbs are needed.) At the same time have the lab bump a copy on MiniDV or DVCam. Those little tapes should make anyone a little nervous. You can sleep better knowing that if anything ever happens to the "little" tape you always have a beautiful uncompressed master with the BetaSP.

 

Good luck

 

FB

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And of course, keep your film originals. Stored properly, they will outlast any tape format. B)

[John Ealer]

Personally, if you're on a tight budget, I would skip the BetaSP step proposed in this thread unless you're doing some compositing shots and think the analog component nature of BetaSP will yield better results.

 

DVCAM is a wonderfully robust format, don't master to miniDV unless you're really in a bind $$$-wise. (DVCAM has 15 micron track pitch compared to miniDV's 10 microns, which means that it's less prone to drop-outs, and, of course, has 1/3 less run time on a given sized cassette than miniDV.)

 

J

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

Speaking of which I have my 16mm neg in a can in a basement which is used as a machine room, so it's air-conditioned down to "chilly" year-round - so it's probably cool enough, if not damp enough.

 

Phil

[John Pytlak RIP]

Hi,

 

Speaking of which I have my 16mm neg in a can in a basement which is used as a machine room, so it's air-conditioned down to "chilly" year-round - so it's probably cool enough, if not damp enough.

 

Phil

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Store film "cool, dry, and vented". See SMPTE Recommended Practice RP131.

 

If you store film in sealed containers like film cans, use Molecular Sieves to adsorb excess moisture and acidic vapours.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

So where do I get a molecular sieve from?

 

Phil

[Chris Burke]

If you have not already done your telecine session, then may I suggest that you telecine direct to a hard drive. If the lab or where ever you are doing the transfer, has the ability to go to hard drive, then do it. If they can, have them transfer to the highest quality that your editing system can handle. Then make an offline from that. You can bring the finished project file and the online res material to a post house and have them assemble and do a color correction. I don't know how long your film is but, I am about to follow this route for a 8 minute short.

 

 

Good luck.

[Alessandro Machi]

BetaCam SP is actually compressed, but it's a very mild compression.

 

I agree that BetaCam SP and then making a dub from it to dv is probably the ideal scenario.

 

One thing I don't like about DV is that I don't trust it's reliablity when you need to use it in non-firewire situations. I have access to a DSR-40 and in the composite, component or YC mode it's proved to be less than stellar.

 

In component mode the DV-CAM DSR-40 that I had access to produced a couple of intermittent thin lines of black in the top of the screen. Actually almost unnoticeable because it's on the edge of TV safe, but it's there. Then to top it off, rewinding a tape and hitting play creates THREE slightly different picture playback settings!

 

BetaCam SP is an incredibly logical archival format for the near future.

[Guest]

"So where do I get a molecular sieve from?"

 

Only Lex Luther and other super villians have access to these.

 

Richard

[John Pytlak RIP]

Hi,

 

So where do I get a molecular sieve from?

 

Phil

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Molecular Sieves are available from Kodak FPC:

 

http://www.fpchollywood.com/5150.html

 

http://www.fpchollywood.com/support-molecular-sieves.html

[Matt Pacini]

I'd disagree on the BetaSP suggestions, because if you're editing on computer, you're losing quite a bit of information when you digitize it, whereas with the DvCAM or MiniDV, you're not losing a generation.

 

Also, MiniDV tapes are tiny, but DVcam tapes are not tiny.

 

Matt Pacini

[David Mullen ASC]

Also, MiniDV tapes are tiny, but DVcam tapes are not tiny.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sure they are -- there are tiny DVCAM tapes. What do you think the PD-150 camera uses? My Sony DSR11 DVCAM deck takes both the large and small DVCAM tape sizes.

[Alessandro Machi]

I'd disagree on the BetaSP suggestions, because if you're editing on computer, you're losing quite a bit of information when you digitize it, whereas with the DvCAM  or MiniDV, you're not losing a generation.

 

Also, MiniDV tapes are tiny, but DVcam tapes are not tiny.

 

Matt Pacini

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

The idea that playing back an analog tape is somehow a generation loss mystifies me. Some people believe this but it's really not the case. The generation loss occurs when one copies an analog tape to another analog tape. If the encoder on the digital deck is "good enough", than the digital copy should not diminish the quality of what is on the BetaCam SP.

 

The reason DV-CAM is preferred over mini-dv is because the tape moves faster, which allows the same information to be spread out over more tape area. The most cost effective way Digital method would be a mini-dv tape recorded at DV-CAM speed.

 

But BetaCam SP is probably a better archival format and really has a ton of functionality and flexibility in its use.

[Matt Pacini]

BetaSP is nice, IF it's your final master, which this is not.

 

Unless he did a final cut on his negative he is having telecine'd, and it is now PERFECT IN EVERY WAY (doubtful), then that BetaSP tape is gonna have to be edited, either by digitizing it into his computer, or editing in a video suite, either of which creates a generation loss.

 

Not to mention, if he goes that route, then the quality of his digitized copy is dependent on him having a quality (expensive$$$$) card to digitize analog video, whereas a firewire cable is going to set him back maybe $15.00 or so.

 

Matt Pacini

[Alessandro Machi]

They keep improving the DV codecs, it's one of those dirty little secrets that is bragged about after the fact but kept quiet while they are working on the actual improvement.

 

Bottom line is DV compositing has long been considered inferior to betacam sp compositing and only recently have the DV compositing codecs "improved". Just because the DV codec can't absorb the full range of betacam sp quality isn't the fault of betacam sp.

 

What is cool about the DV format is that it is an incredibly efficient format in terms of the mb per second versus what is needed to transcode betacam sp, and the tapes are smaller (although less robust over the long haul), but that doesn't mean that DV is a better quality format, just a more efficent format.

[Alvin Pingol]

Molecular Sieves

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Will silica gel packets suffice?