Re: [Frameworks] 16:9 vs 4:3

From: Flick Harrison <>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 16:18:27 -0700

That's funny - Edwin - I started out in Hi8 and when DV tape arrived we thought it was dropped out of heaven. You could copy and edit it a million times and never degrade?!?

The sound on Hi8 was so shitty... so very very shitty... like you had a towel stuffed into a tin can inside your speaker...

DV looks "like shit" only if you compare it to HD, and if "like shit" means "doesn't look like HD." I have a hard time going backwards in format epochs, but after I re-orient I always grow to love it again.

Hi8 had such a beautiful texture from the barely-discernible degradation, even after doing an expensive online edit from your camera original to a betacam master in a pro suite... desaturation, aliasing, and oooh the grain. It actually took away the live-news immediacy of video, and when DV came out it was suddenly easier to shoot video but harder to make it look like narrative drama.

DV meanwhile was fun for docs, because it looked crisp and clear and the saturation was great, the recorded tape looked identical to a live feed, but it had a cheap edginess (maybe it was due to the pixel aspects you mentioned) that said: "independent." I loved the colours on my Canon XL-1 and the stereo mic on that baby has never been matched.



FrameWorks mailing list
Received on Sun Oct 30 2011 - 16:35:14 CDT