<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What I really want&#8230;</title>
	<link>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 03:06:24 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Eugenia</title>
		<link>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4222</link>
		<author>Eugenia</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 23:02:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4222</guid>
		<description>JrezIN, you really don't get it.

&gt;all you need is a pullup away…

Yes, a freaking pullup that costs an extra $250 to do properly. There is *NO* NLE below $1200 that does the right kind of pullup *directly* on the capture for this kind of footage. I have to either buy After Effects (which I don't like), or I have to buy NeoHDV which costs $250 (and as soon as Canon's AVCHD camcorders start recording in 1920x1080 instead of 1440x1080, then you have to buy NeoHD which costs $600).

It really pisses me off when people who think they know everything, like these on the DVinfo forum think that it's an "easy feature to fix". It's NOT an easy to fix because the sub-$1200 NLE market currently doesn't support it. Currently, I have to do &lt;a href="http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/07/13/canon-hv20-24p-pulldown/" rel="nofollow"&gt;ALL THIS&lt;/a&gt; to go around the pullup problem. It is a PAIN IN THE ASS (it takes 5 hours to remove pulldown on a 60min footage) and therefore it's unacceptable. If they had a menu option to keep 24p in 60i or not, that would be ok for both consumers and prosumers. But they don't. I don't buy the argument that "consumers will fuck it up". There is always the "reset all options" menu option if they do.

And regarding your consumer and hobbyist point, read my post again. This is why I wrote that what I want is a HOBBYIST ARTIST camcorder for $2000, and not a consumer or a semi-pro one. I want a cheap camera GEARED towards the cinematic look and features (which means DOF, but not much zoom). Canon and Sony offers nothing like that so far and Panasonic DVX/HVX series are too expensive and too complicated for what I really want. Only JVC came close to what I want, but they fucked it up on the 3 points I made above.

Sorry for writing in an angry manner, but people really don't get what a huge pain in the ass HV20's 24p pulldown removal is. But instead they all have an opinion about it. :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JrezIN, you really don&#8217;t get it.</p>
<p>>all you need is a pullup away…</p>
<p>Yes, a freaking pullup that costs an extra $250 to do properly. There is *NO* NLE below $1200 that does the right kind of pullup *directly* on the capture for this kind of footage. I have to either buy After Effects (which I don&#8217;t like), or I have to buy NeoHDV which costs $250 (and as soon as Canon&#8217;s AVCHD camcorders start recording in 1920&#215;1080 instead of 1440&#215;1080, then you have to buy NeoHD which costs $600).</p>
<p>It really pisses me off when people who think they know everything, like these on the DVinfo forum think that it&#8217;s an &#8220;easy feature to fix&#8221;. It&#8217;s NOT an easy to fix because the sub-$1200 NLE market currently doesn&#8217;t support it. Currently, I have to do <a href="http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/07/13/canon-hv20-24p-pulldown/" rel="nofollow">ALL THIS</a> to go around the pullup problem. It is a PAIN IN THE ASS (it takes 5 hours to remove pulldown on a 60min footage) and therefore it&#8217;s unacceptable. If they had a menu option to keep 24p in 60i or not, that would be ok for both consumers and prosumers. But they don&#8217;t. I don&#8217;t buy the argument that &#8220;consumers will fuck it up&#8221;. There is always the &#8220;reset all options&#8221; menu option if they do.</p>
<p>And regarding your consumer and hobbyist point, read my post again. This is why I wrote that what I want is a HOBBYIST ARTIST camcorder for $2000, and not a consumer or a semi-pro one. I want a cheap camera GEARED towards the cinematic look and features (which means DOF, but not much zoom). Canon and Sony offers nothing like that so far and Panasonic DVX/HVX series are too expensive and too complicated for what I really want. Only JVC came close to what I want, but they fucked it up on the 3 points I made above.</p>
<p>Sorry for writing in an angry manner, but people really don&#8217;t get what a huge pain in the ass HV20&#8217;s 24p pulldown removal is. But instead they all have an opinion about it. <img src='http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JrezIN</title>
		<link>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4220</link>
		<author>JrezIN</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4220</guid>
		<description>"&lt;i&gt;true 24p (not wrapped in that stupid 60i stream)&lt;/i&gt;"

Sorry, I really don't get this problem with 24p under 60i when all you need is a pullup away...
Sure, it sucks that they didn't have a interface designer capable enough to wrap the 24p switch under the camera's interface with the proper warnings to costumers who don't know what it is exactly... but... there's SO MANY problems besides that... quality issues, too much compression, bad color steps... well... there's so many problems that can't really be solved so easily that maybe should get more attention them this one...

...I don't won't to offend, but in the dvinfo thread this simple point made the rest of the discussion that could be very useful, about prosumer and hobbyist products, simply fade away... I agree with you that taking features away just sucks, even if someone else has very good points about how costumer (average joes?) usually f*** around with this features, in the end it's really just a bad excuse for bad interface design...

I do work in motion pictures industry... and I'm actually a designer too... I like your posts about this hobby of yours, but as you are learning, just try to not bother so much with stupid things that can actually be solved, and try to learn more about this complicated, but still great, work of motion pictures... I'll see that there's so much things to know (and bother) that isn't worth to spend your time repeating yourself when you could be doing some amazing work! =]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;<i>true 24p (not wrapped in that stupid 60i stream)</i>&#8221;</p>
<p>Sorry, I really don&#8217;t get this problem with 24p under 60i when all you need is a pullup away&#8230;<br />
Sure, it sucks that they didn&#8217;t have a interface designer capable enough to wrap the 24p switch under the camera&#8217;s interface with the proper warnings to costumers who don&#8217;t know what it is exactly&#8230; but&#8230; there&#8217;s SO MANY problems besides that&#8230; quality issues, too much compression, bad color steps&#8230; well&#8230; there&#8217;s so many problems that can&#8217;t really be solved so easily that maybe should get more attention them this one&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8230;I don&#8217;t won&#8217;t to offend, but in the dvinfo thread this simple point made the rest of the discussion that could be very useful, about prosumer and hobbyist products, simply fade away&#8230; I agree with you that taking features away just sucks, even if someone else has very good points about how costumer (average joes?) usually f*** around with this features, in the end it&#8217;s really just a bad excuse for bad interface design&#8230;</p>
<p>I do work in motion pictures industry&#8230; and I&#8217;m actually a designer too&#8230; I like your posts about this hobby of yours, but as you are learning, just try to not bother so much with stupid things that can actually be solved, and try to learn more about this complicated, but still great, work of motion pictures&#8230; I&#8217;ll see that there&#8217;s so much things to know (and bother) that isn&#8217;t worth to spend your time repeating yourself when you could be doing some amazing work! =]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugenia</title>
		<link>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4217</link>
		<author>Eugenia</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 20:56:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4217</guid>
		<description>The best time for photography and videography is right when the sun rises and sets. All other times are not as ideal, so you will have to get up early to get good light.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The best time for photography and videography is right when the sun rises and sets. All other times are not as ideal, so you will have to get up early to get good light.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ivan</title>
		<link>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4216</link>
		<author>Ivan</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 18:38:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4216</guid>
		<description>Eugenia,
I meant real, natural light. You know, one day everything looks grey and boring, and the next day, with the sun shining, all of a sudden, the same scenery is like a magical place from a storybook. That's something money can't buy. It reminds me of Giverny, where Monet's gardens and waterlily ponds are. I was there when the light was magic, but that was in the days before digital photograpgy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eugenia,<br />
I meant real, natural light. You know, one day everything looks grey and boring, and the next day, with the sun shining, all of a sudden, the same scenery is like a magical place from a storybook. That&#8217;s something money can&#8217;t buy. It reminds me of Giverny, where Monet&#8217;s gardens and waterlily ponds are. I was there when the light was magic, but that was in the days before digital photograpgy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugenia</title>
		<link>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4205</link>
		<author>Eugenia</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Sep 2007 19:38:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4205</guid>
		<description>Ivan, good flash light is not part of any camcorder. You have to buy real lights if you need that. As for better low light performance, that's a hard problem, but yeah, some cameras are better than others on that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ivan, good flash light is not part of any camcorder. You have to buy real lights if you need that. As for better low light performance, that&#8217;s a hard problem, but yeah, some cameras are better than others on that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ivan</title>
		<link>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4204</link>
		<author>Ivan</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Sep 2007 18:06:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4204</guid>
		<description>What I want is good light. That's something money can't buy, but it really makes the difference.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What I want is good light. That&#8217;s something money can&#8217;t buy, but it really makes the difference.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugenia</title>
		<link>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4199</link>
		<author>Eugenia</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Sep 2007 08:26:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4199</guid>
		<description>Yeah, the RED is nice, but it's not a practical solution for prosumers and hobbyist artists. It's just the evolution of the pro/indie world instead.

But I agree with you on the Pro PocketCam they want to release. I am very curious about this too, but they haven't let anyone spill any info about it yet. No one knows anything about it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, the RED is nice, but it&#8217;s not a practical solution for prosumers and hobbyist artists. It&#8217;s just the evolution of the pro/indie world instead.</p>
<p>But I agree with you on the Pro PocketCam they want to release. I am very curious about this too, but they haven&#8217;t let anyone spill any info about it yet. No one knows anything about it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andreas</title>
		<link>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4198</link>
		<author>Andreas</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Sep 2007 08:21:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/09/30/what-i-really-want/#comment-4198</guid>
		<description>What I really want is &lt;a href="http://www.red.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;. Unfortunately I cannot afford it for the moment but better times will come.
I am still amazed from the price that they offer it. I am very curious also about the specs/price of the &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RED_Digital_Camera_Company#NAB_2007_appearance_and_Peter_Jackson.27s_short" rel="nofollow"&gt;Professional Pocket Cam&lt;/a&gt; they plan to release.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What I really want is <a href="http://www.red.com/" rel="nofollow">this</a>. Unfortunately I cannot afford it for the moment but better times will come.<br />
I am still amazed from the price that they offer it. I am very curious also about the specs/price of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RED_Digital_Camera_Company#NAB_2007_appearance_and_Peter_Jackson.27s_short" rel="nofollow">Professional Pocket Cam</a> they plan to release.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
