Hey Jen I shoot in 1080i but I have to render down to 960:540 resolution becuase I can't
even run it in full! I have 1080i footage if needed but otherwise I am perfectly happy with
(960:540) for internet sharing. it may not be technically HD when i do that but I know its
not DV!



--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jen Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kyle,
> When you say you are a "High Def videoblogger", do you mean that you
> are broadcasting movies that are 1080i or 720p (ie: either 1920x1080
> pixels or 720x480 pixels)?? I'm fascinated with the way this term,
> "high-definition" is getting used (well, or mis-used)... I keep hearing
> a radio station in Philadelphia brag about how they are broadcasting in
> "High-Definition radio" and I see these Kodak disposable "HD"
> still-cameras in the drug stores, and I have no idea what either one of
> those things is supposed to mean. (Well, other than misleading the
> public by using a term most people don't understand technically and
> sounding really cool as a marketing ploy. I get that -- but are those
> companies really that willing to lie?)
>
> Technically, if you've shrunk your video down to anything less than
> 720x480 progressive scan or 1920x1080 interlaced, then it's not HD. If
> it is that big, then what happens to people with screens that are
> smaller than that? (I can't watch your videos, cause I don't have QT7,
> and my 2003 computer isn't fast enough anyway).
>
> And I don't mean to be picking you Kyle -- I truly am fascinated with
> how the words "high-definition" are getting used, and what they mean to
> people.
>
> jen
>
>
>
> On Aug 18, 2005, at 4:40 PM, kylefasanella wrote:
>
> > Hey guys I have my newest High definition video blog relesed.
> >
> > http://vilekylefasanella.blogspot.com/
> >
> > does anyone know if I am the first High definition video blogger or
> > not?
> >
> > PS make sure you have quicktime 7 for the footage! and a decent
> > computer doesn't hurt.




YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to