The HM100U is a 1/4″  3CCD handheld camcorder with integrated lens, while the HM700 big brother sports 1/3″ 3CCDs in a compact shoulder mount form factor with a nicely spec’d removable Canon lens. Which, by the way, is actually included with the purchase of the camera!

 JVC’s new camcorders are unique as they are the first, as far as I know, to provide an option to record in Apple’s Quicktime format. Pretty cool for Final Cut users who can instantly begin editing the recorded .mov files, but if you don’t use a Mac, they can also record to an MPEG-2 file format for use with every other major NLE.

 Both also have the ability to record MPEG-2 Long GOP at a max 35Mbps to dual SDHC memory cards. That’s right… SDHC! Prior to these new camcorders, the only solid-state format that recorded 35Mbps MPEG-2 was Sony’s XDCAM EX format, which records onto pricey, proprietary SxS cards. JVC also sells the KA-MR100G, an external SxS Pro recording module, which can be used in conjunction with the larger HM700 camera and allows simultaneous recording onto SDHC and SxS.

 Other specs to be noted, the HD700 has HD/SD-SDI out and variable frame rate recording. And audio on each camcorder is recorded in uncompressed LPCM at 16bit/48Khz with balanced XLR inputs.

 JVC is also touting the use of a newly designed 1080p Digital Processor, a JVC original 35Mbps MPEG-2 Encoder, and a recently developed, advanced CCD sensor block, “with resolution comparable to cameras with larger sensors.” Their words in those quotations, not mine. JVC is also surrounding their new CCD with terms like “Diagonal Offset” and “Adaptive Pixel Correlation Technique” which sound like interpolation. Until we see some resolution charts, though, that don’t mean this here sensor ain’t gonna rock. JVC has a history of innovation, but we’ll have to wait to find out.

 I like the fact both cameras offer a low-cost, solid-state format option. The smaller, more affordable HM100U is not compromised on audio and HD recording when compared to the larger and pricier HM700. JVC did a good job dividing camera features among the two different price-points. I think they circumvented the majority of user-end aggravation that come with compromises in lower model purchases.

 But moving up to the HM700 does open the door to some much coveted options, such as HD-SDI out, variable frame rates, and a removable lens to name a few. Typically to get these features, one would find themselves staring down the barrel of Sony’s SxS or Panasonic’s P2 line of cameras. But here is another excellent move on JVC’s part. The use of SDHC on the HM700 allows one to buy into a more full-featured package without locking them into the costly proprietary systems of SxS or P2. Using SDHC means the overall cost of the HM700 is much less than what street prices indicate, since buying something comparable to the HM700 from Panasonic or Sony would incur an additional investment in their high-priced (and reasonably so) solid-state media.

 Of course, the aforementioned high-end formats from Panasonic, Sony, and others are still available through the HD-SDI out on the HM700. One can still float between P2/SxS/AVCCAM/Uncompressed using external recorders that are available now or will be later this year. No more frustrating moments when cruising Craigslist for gigs with your trusty EX-1 in your lap and all you see are requests for P2 shooters. (And versa vice, of course!) It’s the ultimate agnostic camera, with a cheap, universally accepted, MPEG-2 format recorded on cheap, universally accepted solid-state memory cards.

 So bottom line, it looks like the GY-HM100U is a solid, professional little camera. The GY-HM700, though, is even more interesting with its options, flexibility, and pricing, especially set against the backdrop of other comparable solid-state cameras. Yes, it’s exciting times in the world of acquisition, and the choices keep getting more diverse and better! JVC has always been a viable alternative to Sony and Panasonic, but any gaps, perceived or real, are closing in fast!

 The ones I find extremely interesting are the AG-HMR10 handheld, battery-operated, AVCCAM field recorder/player with HD-SDI in/out and the AG-HCK10 compact, multi-purpose camera head. So far I haven’t seen or heard any buzz on these two, and Panasonic seems content with just slipping this announcement in between the stacks of others. I imagine it’ll be a sleeper hit in forums though.

 More discussion on that later, but for now, read the links to the releases below! Cool stuff!

• Panasonic Debuts AG-HPX300 P2 HD Camcorder, World’s First Affordable 10-bit, 4:2:2 Camera
• Panasonic Announces Availability of the AG-HPG20 P2 HD Portable Recorder/Player Featuring AVC-Intra Recording
• Panasonic Debuts AJ-HRW10 Rapid Writer P2 Workflow Tool
• Panasonic Announces Availability of AJ-PCD35 P2 Memory Drive with PCI Express Interface for Super Fast Content Transfers
• Panasonic Expands Professional AVCCAM Product Line with Compact HD Recorder and Multi-Purpose Camera Head
• Panasonic Introduces Full-Featured AJ-CVF100G Color Viewfinder for High-end P2 HD and DVCPRO HD Camcorders
• Panasonic Offers Free AVCHD-to-DV Transcoder Update, Available at WWW.PANASONIC.COM/AVCCAM

 Where should I start looking?

 Of particular importance to me is where I shall find my hourly entertainment fix on the 21st century time ripper that is the internet. Let’s go through a list of some of my favorites!

• hulu
• youtube
• wikipedia
• sluggy freelance
• omega13 (I know, I know… drop it already)
• rooster teeth
• pandora
• vimeo
• viral video vault
• dvxuser
• Prolost

 This is not, by far, a comprehensive list. Just some sites I frequent to mercilessly kill time. You may notice a pattern though, as there’s a categorical slant towards video and films. (Of course.) One might conclude that’s just what I like, which is true, but that’s only half the equation. A deeper study would indicate a problem with online distribution itself, which even the most successful online movie/video destination runs smack, headlong into.

 Which brings us back around to, where should I start looking?!

 Yeah, I have my favorite sites. But more are probably out there I would equally enjoy, yet haven’t a clue as to their existence. Even if YouTube was the only website I ever punched up… holy crap! There’s like what, 30,000 videos uploaded daily! Now Hulu is a little more simple, but mainly because it’s owned by NBC|Universal. Their mission statement is, “…to help people find and enjoy the world’s premium video content…” Premium, of course refers to the same junk the Networks and Hollywood have been flinging at us through television and movie theaters since not long after the advent of mass media.

 Well, ok, not all of it is junk, and actually a large portion is quite good. There are also some excellent web only series to be found on Hulu. Namely Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog and Star-Ving.

 But the point I’m failing miserably to make is, with the online access explosion of video and movies, the best content available no longer comes soley from the media super-conglomerates such as NBC|Universal, Time Warner, Viacom, The Walt Disney Company, etc. At the moment, they’re the easiest to find, but their top-down pyramid of distribution is getting stretched flat by the centrifugal pull of the internet.

 Furthermore, we the audience, can create our own entertainment with the same production values associated with Hollywood and The Networks.¹  And, as computers become faster, storage becomes bigger, bandwidth- wider, access- more convenient, media creation tools- cheaper, and the end-user experience- effortless, (whew…) there are going to be many, many, many options that are mindbendingly phenomenal by today’s standards.

 One could hope the seemingly inevitable and significant increase in “amateur” production value (that is not an oxymoron, I promise) would mean that asking, “Where should I start looking?” will become a non-issue. Another way to say it, if everything’s at least decent, you can just watch/listen/(feel?!) whatever you stumble across first. (Just a quick reminder, I am still talking about the web.)

 But that’s probably not going to happen. Most people, when confronted with a myriad of excellent choices, become more discerning. Not necessarily in a negative way, either, but with increased awareness of what they prefer. They develop a taste, a style, an idea of what they actually want!

 So herein lies the beautisity of it all… as technology advances, people will increasingly be able to get entertainment that’s designed, intentionally or not, almost exclusively for them! Old demographics will shrink, new communities will emerge, and culture will expand. And all because there will be newer, better, and more distinct artisitic foundations to build these microcieties on.

 Ok, so the world is going the way of the prosumer (pick your flavor/s). All this means is, the problem of “where to look” is actually a problem of how to match an extremely narrow and specific audience with an extremely niche piece of content. And when I use the word match, I envision a meet-in-the-middle situation.

 [Que Heavy Metal soundtrack] But what forces of the internet hold sway over such chance occasions? What all-powerful spirits can draw two parties, unaware of either’s existence, together on the infinite digital plains?! 

 Well, search engines of course. That is, aside from glowing green orbs of evil.

 But search engines are a heavy topic, Doc, and one I’ll have to save for another post. Just remember, whoever figures this out will completely alter the entire media landscape forever, as well as save the universe. So in that sense, maybe the solution is not unlike The Fifth Element… It must be found!

¹ On a side note, I think I’m going to start a band called Hollywood and the Networks! It sounds so awesome! Well the name does, but the would-be band… probably not so much. Get it? We’re Hollywood and the Networks, and we suck!

 Lot’s of interesting thoughts and questions abound. And so I end this short post with what is, perhaps, an indication of what a legend from the future’s future will be like.

 But damn it Jim, I’m a broke indie filmmaker genius, not a non-broke indie filmmaker genius!

 Or maybe it’s a broke indie filmmaker non-genius… Anyway, what I’m getting at is despite these latest offerings, I still don’t see the camera system I want near the price I can afford. There’s even conjecture about whether the fixed-lens Scarlet will still be fully shootable out-of-the-box at the originally stated $3,000. But again, these “new” cameras aren’t even shipping yet, so the only thing to do is sit back and wait to see what Red actually does with them. (Which is usually surprise us!)

 But back to my point, which revolves entirely around the present fact, I might not be able to afford to go Red. And this is immensely aggravating. For a number of factors, I’m financially forced to consider other options, despite the fact I love the Red camera and modular concept.

  My predicament, you see, begins with, “I’m in a bad, insatiable need of a sexy DSLR.” So I perused the usual fare of Nikon and Canon based systems. I have a small preference towards Nikon, but nothing I couldn’t break from. Of course, the $3,000+ high-end bodies looked very enticing, but I was hoping to put that kind of cash towards a Scarlet. The $1,500 price range was the ceiling for any DSLR purchase. This put my budget for both at around $4,500 (spread out across five years) to have an eventual pro worthy motion and still pair I would be happy with for the rest of my life.

 You probably think I’m kidding about the “rest of my life” part, but the strategic thinker in me is not joking in the least bit. I’m rather spartan in my wants, and as a matter of fact, I could spend the rest of my life making great movies with my DVX and I would be happy. I’m still seriously considering this. Aside from an appreciation of photography, I want a DSLR for compositing reasons, as it would complete my DVX filmmaking capabilities. (Note: I also have other reasons why I don’t want to continually buy new things forever, but that’s a future-of-economics/capitalism/consumerism/sustainability topic!)

 But to get back on track, I was looking for a nice DSLR when models began popping up that could shoot HD video, and even more exciting than that, Red Digital Cinema announced their DSMC. At the time, the DSMC appeared to be a camera line unique from Scarlet, Red One, and Epic. Most people assumed, as did I, it would be a DSLR competitor, with some rockin’ motion camera features, but still something aimed at photographers that would compete with other DSLRs with motion capabilities. On top of the DSMC announcement, there was a general consensus the new Scarlet and Epic were going to be even more modular than the Red One, as deduced from several posts made by Red on RedUser.net.

 This sounded like a potential answer to my dilemma of burning DSLR desire. The possibility of getting an all-in-one still and motion package that had upgradable features and components was perfectly in-line the pragmatist that I am. I hoped I could get from Red, a full-frame 35mm (or at least Super 35) DSMC still camera with limited motion capabilities. As time passed, I would just upgrade the frame-rate and compression specs until I had an all out filmmaking machine that would not stop until I was dead! And if I didn’t die, I would keep upgrading until I could use it to create a fully-immersive/3D/holodeck experience!

 More importantly, though, I hoped the DSMC would be competitively priced against high-end DSLRs, which I imagined would be around $4,000. Due to a narrow margin of specs and price-point between the could-have-been DSMC and the would-be Scarlet, I figured this was why Scarlet and Epic were being redesigned.

 Well, I was wrong, and not, at least for the time being, in my favor either. If Red’s entire camera line were available today, the list below would be my current options with the aforementioned $4,500 budget. (Please note I’ve tried to be conservative in my pricing guesstimations.)

 Option 1

1. I go over my budget and spend an upfront $7,000 for just the S35 “Brain.”
2. How to afford things like lenses and other Red modules to make the camera even usable, I’ll just let the Feds worry about.
3. But at least I’ll have a single, upgradable long-term solution to do motion and stills.
4. Overall cost for my needs would be between $10,000 to $15,000.
5. The overall cost is mostly a one-time fee.

On the speculative side of things, I wonder if RED’s dslr replacement, the DSMC, is going to be marketed in place of the the old Scarlet design.

In other words, the DSMC would sell at the $3000 or less price-point. I’m thinking probably less in order to better compete with Nikon, Canon, and Panasonic. (Ooh, here’s another from Panny. Hey why not?!)

The DSMC would first-and-foremost be a still camera, but with uberslayer digital cinema functionality. This would be an easier bout than with the Scarlet_ver.1 against the dslrs’-with-video that are emerging.

And then, the new Scarlet_ver.2 could be positioned between Ye Olde Scarlett/DSMC and the Red One. The full-on still imaging capabilities of the DSMC could easily be integrated into Scarlet, Red One, and Epic, but the primary purpose for these cameras would be for digital film.

Starting from the least expensive, the line-up would be DSMC – Scarlet – Red One (Two?) – Epic.

In this hall of camera valhalla I could see how, even if you owned an Epic, you would still want a DSMC or even Scarlet for that matter.

Another random thought, I wonder if the DSMC and the Scarlet could be flipped in this theoretical product line. Interesting…

Anyway, all of this is merely a fast and dirty spec’ing deluge, but I am curious what others think. I’m not looking to lobby a serious discussion of course, just someone to take long walks in the rain wit- er, I mean, uh…

Whew! Got a little sidetracked there. But as I was saying, I’d like to hear from others. Especially those that actually climb down the bottomless pit of the the internet to read the crap we chunk down here. Especially the ones that never ever leave a comment. Hmm… Maybe we’ll even do a survey.

Ryan?

The thing about the Scarlet was that it was going to be a 3K HD camera aimed at the independent filmmakers specifically.  The ones that can’t exactly shell out the $20,000 for the RED One, or the additional $30,000 for its lens packages.

The Scarlet may well be a lot more interesting than that.  Over the last several months RED has been showing off prototype renders, and specifications, and promises of a product in 2009.  However, almost a month ago, RED chief Jim Jannard made a post to the Scarlet User Forums announcing that almost everything about the Scarlet has changed.  They had apparently gone back and re-factored their design decisions  “because the market has changed and we have discovered a lot of things in the process. We have a new vision.”

This is exciting and scary.  In later posts Jannard reassures contributors that the timeframe isn’t pushed back, that they’re catching this at the last minute.  He also assures that this is the right decision for RED, and ostensibly those of us who are still salivating over the camera.  But the original price point of the camera was at about $3,000 — not a cheap camera by modest expectations, certainly compared to the HV30; but incredibly powerful in comparison to the indy film workhorse the Panasonic DVX-100 (of which my collaborator Trey personally owns two, by the way).  So even if the price goes up, it’s unfortunate, but ultimately worth it.

The question is what caused this refactor?  Lately the biggest splash in high def video acquisition on a budget has been the latest Digital SLR cameras from Nikon and Canon.  The Nikon D90, as well as the Canon 5D Mark II, both feature huge sensor sizes and the capacity to shoot high definition video.  These are not without caveats, however, since both Nikon and Canon imposed certain limitations in their hardware — the Canon only shoots 30 frames per second, and the Nikon camera has no microphone inputs.  Both cameras suffer from inherent “issues” with their CMOS sensors refresh ratethat never affects a still camera, but makes video the proverbial “Jello-cam”.

All this being said, though, I’m looking forward to it.  The competition between RED, Nikon, Canon, and others mean that the shape of photography and filmmaking are coalescing, and as both Trey and myself are always predicting, it’s going to be an amazing outcome.

The Red can deliver amazing picture quality, to be sure, and the Scarlet is expected to deliver similar performance for low-budget, independent filmmakers.  Although a Red kit can be had for $30,000 (a far cry from the $500,000 and up of a traditional digital cinema camera) even the pro cameras won’t magically make a beautiful film.  The skill, but more importantly the vision, of the filmmaker is what sets a mediocre video on YouTube from Doctor Horrible’s Sing-Along-Blog.  The technology is just a component in a larger puzzle.

So why, again, are we excited about these cameras and the technology?  Well, right or wrong, we think we can use these cameras to make something special.  To be able to make something people will enjoy.  The technology is bringing the playing field to everyday people like us, in much the same way that the printing press made paper distribution a feasible option in 1440, and the advent of web-publishing and blogs brought that to anyone with a computer.

It won’t happen immediately, but within the next five to ten years the landscape of the media will have changed dramatically. In much the same ways that blogs and websites have altered the newspaper and magazine industry, the rise of high-quality, citizen media production will alter how entertainment and news are presented and consumed.

And I, for one, can hardly wait.

But what kind of mass hysteria are we talking about here?

Well first off, anyone thinking in a film-is-dead state of mind (as opposed to a New York State of Mind?) is off base. Other (and better) digital cinema cameras are already carpet bombing chemical-based film. And despite this binary barrage, analog cinema is never going to completely go away (nor should it). Digital filmmaking isn’t a study in necrofilmdeathrotology, it’s about accessibility. An off-the-shelf, IT based workflow allows for an easier, more forgiving, and very attainable movie-making experience/attempt. Scarlet capitalizes on this with its own inherent features and abilities, all extremely well designed around the aforementioned workflow, as evidenced by the Red One. Still, the key factor with Scarlet is not going to be how technically easy it is (by comparison) for Indiana Amateur to create their 3K (or maybe 4xHD) sci-fi historical docu-drama epic called, The Amazing Adventures of Leonardo Da Vinci: Time-Traveling Vampire Hunter Extraordinaire.

A case study, if you please…

Several years ago, I was working on a doomed short film (Ryan and I were the writers/directors of course), during which I was introduced to the now infamous (that means more than famous) Panasonic DVX100 camera. I liked it so much, I bought two. (I actually did buy two of ‘em!) The DVX100 had a major impact on filmmaking, in much the same way Scarlet will.  Basically what happened, Panasonics legendary camera strode up to the palisade surrounding the film industry and blew a hole straight through it. A new “door” was opened for a lot of creative people, who otherwise would not have had a chance to enter this world. It was a milestone that created a whole new community/breed of independent filmmakers with a DIY attitude and ideology harkening back to the early days of punk. It’s this upstart community that created the market bed for companies like Redrock Micro, RP Lens, LS Design, and others. Arguably, even Red Digital Cinema. As a matter of fact, a lot of people who cut their teeth on the DVX100 are now flexing their creative muscles with the Red One camera. All of this happened because the DVX was accessible, therefore attainable. Why? Did I mention I bought two?

It was cheap.

At the time, around $3500 out-of-pocket. I’ll let whoever reads this to extrapolate the number of units produced, what the rental fees were, etc. So how much will the Scarlet be? Even less than the DVX100 was, but it won’t create a new generation of filmmakers. It’s going to create a whole new industry.  Scarlet is going to be a mushroom cloud of a landmark.

And the Meek Shall Inherit the Theater

Your home theater that is, at first, but then you local theater as well. The technology is here to totally bypass Hollywood, the Networks, and every major Distribution company there is. Communities will make movies, not companies. People won’t fight to get into the media industry, they will bethe media industry, far outnumbering all of the Hollywood/Networks/Distro Triad. Everyone with a Scarlet is suddenly a high-end production house, and the web is one wide, direct, and free distribution pipeline. In a year or two, an individual will be able to easily stream full HD content off the web and onto their TV. After that, local theaters, both independent and corporate, equipped with digital projection (one way or another) will begin screening locally made films, as it will be the only way to bring people back to the movie hall. There will be so many choices for your entertainment, that you will truly be able to pick and choose exactly what you want to experience. The top-down pyramid flow of culture will exist no more. And everyone will live happily ever after…

Or maybe not.

This is all just speculation. Who really knows what’s going to happen with Scarlet or any future technology with the potential to opens doors and builds bridges. And it’s the potential that has everybody excited. I think there’s a good chance Scarlet will push things in this direction, but there are some missing ingredients. Like, how do you squeeze a 4K film experience into your living room? RDC has hinted they’re working on that too, and I wouldn’t be surprised if there are others as well.

So, I think I’ll end this post now with an analogy that’ll get the gist across. If the DVX100 was Bob Dylan’s All Along the Watchtower, then I think Scarlet is going to be the Jimi Hendrix version. I’m not sure what this means exactly, but hey, it’s freakin’ awesome!