Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Hybrid Still/Movie/MP3 Digicams

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 1, 2007, 8:55 PM   #461
Junior Member
 
kuya_ed2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18
Default



another underwater video taken :-)



http://www.viddler.com/kuya_ed2007/videos/2/
kuya_ed2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2007, 3:21 AM   #462
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

U forgotto check publicwhen loaded
fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2007, 10:16 AM   #463
Senior Member
 
adric22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 359
Default

You know.. It is funny to me, reading these posts about the Go-HD. I still haven't actually tried one of these things, but it seems to me all the things people complain about with these things are things that wouldn't bother me at all, while ironicly the thing that bothers me the most doesn't bother anyone else.

For example, noise while recording doesn't bother me too much. I've noticed that 19 out of 20 videos I take never even use the soundtrack. Most often I am editing video together and very rarely do I actually use the sound from the camcorder itself. The fact that the zoom makes noise on the soundtrack is a double-no-brainer for me. First, as I mentioned, I would probably not even use the sound track. Second, I rarely use zoom while taking video. As I've mentioned before, it is very unprofessional to use a lot of zoom action in videos. Sometimes there are scenes where zoom is good to use, but onlya slow zoom. If the camera isn't capable of doing slow-zoom then you just get another shot close up and combine the scenes in the final edit with a smooth transition. So from these perspectives, the issues most people are having with the Go-HD would be irrelevant to me.

The one issue that WOULD be relevant to me, nobody else seems to care about - which is the poor framebuffering causing the bent-looking videos duing motion. During horizontal pans, everything gets slanted. During vertical pans, the image gets a "squashed" look or a "stretched" look depending on which direction you are going. If, god forbid, you attempt to walk while taking video the image just distorts everywhere. This is totally unaccptable to me for anything that costs more than $100. unfortunatly, this trend seems to be getting more common. The first time I saw a device do this was a webcam back around 2000. Then more and more cheap webcams kept comming out like this, where the more expensive webcams would still have still images with a proper framebuffer. But now days, the most expensive webcams that are 1.3 megapixel and cost $150 have the same problem. Nobody seems to care, and the manufacturers know it. However, so far, no tape or DVD based camcorders are exhibiting this issue - yet.
adric22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2007, 4:11 PM   #464
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1
Default

Has anyone of you ever succeeded in converting the recorded MOV files into a single movie file which contains multiple scenes?

I bought the GO-HD because I wanted it to replace our old DV camera. My idea was to record scenes in the same manner we used to do it with the DV and then - when the storage is full - do a single-step conversion to DVD format.

After experimenting with many different video editing softwares I still haven't found an easy-to-handle tool which allows me toproduce a single file from hundreds shortMOV files, which can then be converted to DVD format.

There is some programs like SUPER C which can do batch convert. Yet they do not merge the separate files. You could merge the files afterwards using Movie Maker, but I feel Movie Maker is a little buggy, and it often crashes with my SUPER C converted files.

Can you suggest a different software?


Typisch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2007, 4:27 PM   #465
Moderator
 
fishycomics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC NY
Posts: 9,621
Default

As I already mentioned this in a previous thread.

Aiptek muvee4

Aiptek presto videoworks 6

were an Aiptek previous and still given with the hybrid?


As you see in this quick Demo

http://media.putfile.com/1-41-56



that you can drop & drag your .mov H264 files in, and save as dv-avi, then you need to Burn to a dvd disk?

I preferre to use presto videoworks 6, Ulead video studeo 8 se, and Super-C with win moviemaker?

Super is up to date and you stil need to edit in Super as it will leave some white out on the end

again I mentioned andcannot find my thread. I did an excellent presenttion, while all overlooked it? it is super helpful. as most here hardely give away what they use at times?

"one member mentions he goes into the files ofwindows which I preferre to leave alone.

fishycomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2007, 4:29 PM   #466
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 296
Default

So far I have found that only Nero Vision (the latest version) will accpet the MOV files without conversion. Unfortunately even the latest version still clips the frames putting vertical black bars on the right and left. This even after an email exchange with Nero on the problem even providing them clips.

For other NLEs I usually convert the files using Mencoder with the setting I've posted in this topic elsewhere. These files work in a variety of video editors including Ulead's Media Studio Pro, Sony's Vegas Movie Studio, etc. There are also some GUI's you can use to batch encode using Mencoder (links posted in this thread elsewhere).



hdguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2007, 4:33 PM   #467
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5
Default

I have to agree with adric22on the horrid image distortion when panning with camera.

I just returned from 3 weeks vacation to Serengetti, Londo and France. The image clarity and sharpness is wonderfull but any movement of the camera resulted in distorted video. Panning shots are almost out of the question unless it is done a painfull slow speed.

many of the videos are distorted and bad to look at.

I am hoping that out of the hours and hours of video I can get enough footage to make a decent home movie.

I can however, confirm that GO-HD is a durable machine.. I dropped the camera twice during my trip on concrete sidewalk from my belt bag and it is still working!:?

Now to find software to get this video to DVD.


capoeta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2007, 6:57 PM   #468
Junior Member
 
kuya_ed2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18
Default



sorry i already change thanks



http://www.viddler.com/kuya_ed2007/videos/2/
kuya_ed2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 2, 2007, 9:05 PM   #469
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,084
Default

adric22 wrote:
Quote:
You know.. It is funny to me, reading these posts about the Go-HD. I still haven't actually tried one of these things, but it seems to me all the things people complain about with these things are things that wouldn't bother me at all, while ironicly the thing that bothers me the most doesn't bother anyone else.

For example, noise while recording doesn't bother me too much. I've noticed that 19 out of 20 videos I take never even use the soundtrack. Most often I am editing video together and very rarely do I actually use the sound from the camcorder itself. The fact that the zoom makes noise on the soundtrack is a double-no-brainer for me. First, as I mentioned, I would probably not even use the sound track. Second, I rarely use zoom while taking video. As I've mentioned before, it is very unprofessional to use a lot of zoom action in videos. Sometimes there are scenes where zoom is good to use, but onlya slow zoom. If the camera isn't capable of doing slow-zoom then you just get another shot close up and combine the scenes in the final edit with a smooth transition. So from these perspectives, the issues most people are having with the Go-HD would be irrelevant to me.

The one issue that WOULD be relevant to me, nobody else seems to care about - which is the poor framebuffering causing the bent-looking videos duing motion. During horizontal pans, everything gets slanted. During vertical pans, the image gets a "squashed" look or a "stretched" look depending on which direction you are going. If, god forbid, you attempt to walk while taking video the image just distorts everywhere. This is totally unaccptable to me for anything that costs more than $100. unfortunatly, this trend seems to be getting more common. The first time I saw a device do this was a webcam back around 2000. Then more and more cheap webcams kept comming out like this, where the more expensive webcams would still have still images with a proper framebuffer. But now days, the most expensive webcams that are 1.3 megapixel and cost $150 have the same problem. Nobody seems to care, and the manufacturers know it. However, so far, no tape or DVD based camcorders are exhibiting this issue - yet.

Well zoom noise doesn't really bother me either since if you are using it correctly (ie not all the time) then it's a minor nuisance. The problem I had was one of constant background noise in the audio which is totally unacceptable. It was obviouslly a fault and I like to keep the original soundtrack and generally have no interest in background music for my personal recordings as for me, the thing that places a video above a photo, is not just the fact that it is a moving image, but that the original voice or sounds add that extra missing dimension.

I'd much rather have a lower resolution mpeg4 camera with decent audio any day over a higher resolution silent super 8 camera. I am glad I took what little I did with the old super 8 camera I had, but it looks surreal to me without audio.

I do agree that the lack of a frame buffer is a problem and it's inexcusable but, on looking back at my past videos I have found that it really isn't noticeable unless you do a fast pan which in itself is a problem with these cameras anyway in that you end up with a blurred image. I find the compression of the image if you pan vertically much more noticeable but I rarely do those unless of course I am looking at a tall building.

It may just be a case that some are more sensitive to it than others which could explain why most don't seem to complain. Even when I have shown them to an audience I have never heard anyone complain about 'bent' video

A classic example of some people being more sensative than others is camera 'shake'. A friend of mine says his wife is very sensitive to this and any camera shake at all gives her a headache, whereas it doesn't bother me at all. I also knew of someone else who had this problem. Of course if you start to jog the video around then yes it will get on my nerves to, which is why I try and keep the image as still as possible.

In fact I think when someone gets their first camcorder, they should try and use it with any image stabilisation off, to get used to trying to keep any movement to a minimum. That way once you start using the stabiliser, the camera only has to cancel out minor movements since a lot of novices overestimate the ability of an image stabiliser, especially the weaker digital forms.

rgvcam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2007, 4:32 AM   #470
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4
Default

Just some questions:
Is it possible to use the GO-HD with a monopod or a tripod?
Is it possible to use a standard SD card or SDHC is necessary?


Thanks for your answers

zsound is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting 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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:00 PM.