Hey Guys, I'm a a new member here and a photographer turnin film maker. You see, i just managed to get hold of a SONY DCR-TRV340E from a friend which is a Hi-8 Camcorder.

i've written a script which i plan to shoot. Now, the question is, will you suggest me to shoot with this cam. i mean, it's got pretty int features in the P and D section. i've also got an intelligent accesory mic. what about the output as a whole? The picture quality and stuff. Anybody have any experience with this? Caus i wanna make this look as professional as possible with a minimum budget.

REPLY!! URGENT!!!

In terms of quality, you probably won't get what you want. It's a 1-CCD camcorder, which means there's just one color sensor, as opposed to 3 (which separates the three primary color groups and integrates them to make a better looking picture). If you don't have a very big budget and can't afford to buy or rent a 3-CCD camcorder (like a Canon GL1/GL2, Sony DCR-VX 2100, or a Panasonic AG-DVC30 or something similar), then you will have to make due with what you got. Those cameras are a couple thousand dollars a pop, so it may take some saving up to get. But believe me, when you get one, it is SO worth it.

For now, just practice with what you have. It's not like this movie will be going to sundance or cannes. As long as you are practicing and making progress and developing your skill, then the type of camera is not as important.

Like with ANY camcorder made since the mid 80s, the quality depends more on you than on the actual camcorder. Sure, 3 chips are better than 1, but if you light your scenes well a hi8 cam will work fine. I think it's 500 lines of res, I heard it's even better than minidv. I use a ZR40 which has a crappy 1 chip, interlaced horizontal smear...ghastly...but if you use what you have well the equipment isn't the most important part
good luck

Hi8 has 400 lines of resolution. I used to use it before getting my GS400, Hi8 is a slightly warmer image than MiniDV, but not s crisp. However if you spend more time working on your lighting it should work. of course as far as post. production goes, digital is better.

Yeah, I think things can look their most proffessional when u have only ****ty equipment, and a less than prefferable camera, that way, when things work out well you can see the effort, unlike other types of films that just hide behind their technology and high tech equipment to do all of the work for them and therefore lack any real creativity

quote:

---

Originally posted by ZombieTurnip:
I heard it's even better than minidv.
good luck

---

I dare you to compare the same footage recorded from a Hi-8 and a DVX100a on a television.

abishek - make sure you light your scenes in the best way possible. It won't look as good as if it were on digital, but pretty close to it. Good luck.

I dare you to compare the same footage recorded from a Hi-8 and a DVX100a on a television.
-Trespasser

Do you really think I'm so stupid to think any 1 chip camera is better than a 3 chip 24FPS progressive scan model going for roughly $4,000? We're talking about magnetic tape.

I dare you to compate the same footage recorded from any decent Hi8 camera and any consumer grade MiniDV camera (think ZR series) on a television.

It's the scientific method hard at work, we're comparing media as the variable and keeping equipment quality constant as the control.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ZombieTurnip:
I dare you to compate the same footage recorded from any decent Hi8 camera and any consumer grade MiniDV camera (think ZR series) on a television.

---

i have. the ZR40 far surpassed the TCR-80 or whatever my old hi8 was in sharpness, video quality, etc, but NOT in color. hi8 had really good color and I don't know why. Luckly this can be easily fixed in post.

I give up. My point was that it's the technique and talent of the people using the equipment that matters more than the actual cameras. Someone with talent could use a pickup tube and make a good movie.

In my experience, the MiniDV format surpasses the Hi-8 format in sharpness and color rendition, which are large factors that contribute to the picture quality. I know (in theory) the picture quality is visualy exactly the same as that of a standard Hi-8, however MiniDV has one feature that I have as of yet to see on a Hi 8 camcorder: Progressive Scan frames. This feature gives your videos a much more professional look when watched on a television monitor, as it appears quite similar to motion picture film.

thanks a lot guys. i think i'm gonna stick to the Hi-8 for a start. Play around with the lights. Then, when i got enough dough, i think i'll try out a MiniDv.

what about coverting to Dv format from Hi-8, does that help?

also, what kinda lights due you guys suggest or these situations on Hi-8.

1)for outdoor closeups
2) i wanna make the entire screen go white (really white) like some thunderbolt. any ideas?

i'm sure i'll come up with more intriguing questions. bare with me.

lots of replies,

zombie, i understand your point completely and you are quite right.

trespasser, mini-dv is not exactly the same picture quality in theory, in theory it has many more pixels and no storage and transfer degradation.

sai, no converting hi-8 to DV won't make it better. a good rule to keep in mind is that can never make something better by converting it to a higher quality format. with the possible exception of 35mm blowup, and i have no clue how they do that.

for outdoor closeups the natural sunlight should be more than bright enough, your main problem will be that the shadows are too dark and the light is too bright. for this people use a reflector to bounce some light up into the actors faces. filming on grayish days helps too.

i'd make the screen go white in post, but if you don't want to do that just aim your brightest light right at the camera. do it only for a second though, as it could damage the CCD.

Wtih the right capture hardware, you can make the hi-8 video seen like film. I use a dazzle. It gives it grain, thus beautiful film-like video.