Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Our Archives > General Archives > Digital Video & Audio Archives > "Progressive Scan", a necessary camcorder feature?

 
"Progressive Scan", a necessary camcorder feature?
Thread Tools
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Status: Offline
Dec 23, 2001, 11:44 AM
 
Regarding digital camcorders, is the progressive scan feature really worth the extra $$$? Would you recommend it?

I have never seen an image comparison. Could someone post a couple of iMovies that would allow me to see the difference between progressive scan and interlaced scan video?

I have a cable modem, so no need to worry about the file size -- eh, within reason.
"Last time the French asked for more evidence, it rolled through France with a German flag." - David Letterman
     
<Canon fanatic>
Guest
Status:
Dec 23, 2001, 03:46 PM
 
Yes! Yes! Yes! Progressive or Movie mode is THE prefered format for anything
distributed on a computer. Unlike your ordinary TV, computers (and their screens)
show full images at a rate of 25 (PAL) or 30 (NTSC) fps.

Most cameras (SONY, Panasonic and other consumer brands) do not have true
progressive scan mode as an option. Only Canons mid and high end prosumer
models have this feature. The Sonys TRV-900 emulates it poorly and its almost
impossible to use.

So if your making DVDīs, webmovies or VCDs. you will be better off with a Canon.
If all you want to do is plug your camera into your VCR or TV, then you really donīt need to spend the extra cash.

In addition to being able to simulate a 16mm movie camera (when using progressive mode) you will also be able to get decent sittl images from your camera when using
this option.

One of the most outstanding cameras for the prosumer level is without a doubt the Canon GL1. Unchangable lenses withstanding, it kicks butt and produces broadcast quality imaging with great color and focus (fully adjustable even in AF mode).

Hope this helped you along the way...

Canontonic
     
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Seattle
Status: Offline
Dec 24, 2001, 01:37 PM
 
Progressive scan will appeal to you if you plan on taking video of quick moving objects ie the swing of a bat at a baseball game or someone running...basically any sport. However if what you record is fairly basic then it might not be too appealing at the additional price increase.
http://hmurchison.blogspot.com/ highly opinionated ramblings free of charge :)
     
<Confused and mixed up>
Guest
Status:
Dec 28, 2001, 09:46 AM
 
No, it is actually the other way around. If you record something in motion, you should
use the default video mode (fields). Only then will your camera be able to capture reasonable motion. Progressive scan works best with slow to medium fast motion.

But in any case, opting for a cheaper camera really just tells you how seriously you take the concept of videography. No pain, no gain...:-)

At the end of the day though, its really the photography, editing and postproduction that determines what the viewer will experience.

Remember, your buddies or family are not objective!
     
 
   
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:22 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2011 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.7 © 2000-2011, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2